Is Secularism the best path for Christianity?

Denerick

Do you think that Christianity is better off in a secular society? It may sound like a paradox, but I honestly believe its the most rational path for the religion in the years ahead.

1) An established church rarely has, and rarely will be looked favourably upon by history, due to the very obvious human tendency to get corrupted by political power.

2) An eccleiastical hierarchy holding a dominant position within society only helps to make that hierarchy more aloof from the population at large - ie, the average Catholic Bishop.

3) It allows Christian churches the freedom of their own conscience, loosening restrictions from the top.

4) Most importantly it allows ordinary individuals the choice to make their mind up on whether they accept Christianity or not, and escapes the somewhat distatesful indoctrination of children in the past. I think a more thoughtful (Yet smaller) version of Christianity, based on personal spiritual exploration is infinitely more valuable than a herd of drones buying into dogma, loathe to think for themselves. This is probably where the problems of the modern Roman Catholic church stem; they have always been determined to 'rule' in a top down fashion, whereas it is clearly far better for a church to be grass roots, encouraging theological debate from laymen and curiosity in the general population. This will tend to leave Christianity in a more honourable position in the 'marketplace of ideas' than the present one where thousands come out of school with confirmations and communions but little understanding of what Christianity actually means and little inclination to actually follow through on their faith as they grow older.

antiskeptic

Denerick wrote: »

Do you think that Christianity is better off in a secular society? It may sound like a paradox, but I honestly believe its the most rational path for the religion in the years ahead.

I'm not sure it matters all that much. God does battle (via his Church/body) with the lies of Satan as they manifest and influence the individual. Satan's activity manifests through both false Religion (whether Christian labelled or not) and Secular irreligion. They are but two sides of the same coin and, having the same motivator at root, are the same problem to be dealth with. I can't see any material difference in dealing with the one as with the other.

4) Most importantly it allows ordinary individuals the choice to make their mind up on whether they accept Christianity or not, and escapes the somewhat distatesful indoctrination of children in the past.

Following on from above. Christianity isn't something accepted or not (as if it's a philosophy one ponders before deciding to attach oneself to it). Christianity is something that occurs due to supernatural action by God on an individual which tends towards a result where that individual concludes their need for a saviour God. Whether the canvas on which that transaction takes place is a secular one or a religious one is transcended by the mechanism of salvation.

Your post supposes Christianity just another philosophy that must work to make it's way in a marketplace crowded with competing philosophies. This ignores salvation a work of God exercised unto all men at all times with a view to Gods eternal purpose regarding mankind. No marketplace can interfere with that goal.

Denerick

antiskeptic wrote: »

Following on from above. Christianity isn't something accepted or not (as if it's a philosophy one ponders before deciding to attach oneself to it). Christianity is something that occurs due to supernatural action by God on an individual which tends towards a result where that individual concludes their need for a saviour God. Whether the canvas on which that transaction takes place is a secular one or a religious one is transcended by the mechanism of salvation.

'Where the individual concludes their need for a saviour' - why should a child be forced to listen to religious lectures at the age of 5,6,7,8, etc.? This isn't an individual choice, its education. Unfortunately our education system rarely fosters the principle that skepticism should be encouraged - in other words, people should be encouraged to think for themselves. This is difficult to reconcile with the fact that the authoritive figure (The teacher, often lacking in mental capacities themselves) insists that there is only one true Christian God (Depending on your sect, he's either a Catholic or a Protestant God :P)

Your post supposes Christianity just another philosophy that must work to make it's way in a marketplace crowded with competing philosophies. This ignores salvation a work of God exercised unto all men at all times with a view to Gods eternal purpose regarding mankind. No marketplace can interfere with that goal.

The marketplace of ideas does not compete with that. Individuals are free to make that choice, to 'decide' that they believe in God. If God is salvation, then individuals are free to make that conclusion whether its taught in school or not.

Antbert

I think if there were the case there'd be a lot less ranting in the Atheist forum. Then what would I do with my time? My obvious atheistic reason for wanting a secular society aside, I think this would benefit Christianity in that it would come under a lot less fire from non-Christians. But I also think you're right from your own point of view.

antiskeptic

Denerick wrote: »

'Where the individual concludes their need for a saviour' - why should a child be forced to listen to religious lectures at the age of 5,6,7,8, etc.? This isn't an individual choice, its education. Unfortunately our education system rarely fosters the principle that skepticism should be encouraged - in other words, people should be encouraged to think for themselves. This is difficult to reconcile with the fact that the authoritive figure (The teacher, often lacking in mental capacities themselves) insists that there is only one true Christian God (Depending on your sect, he's either a Catholic or a Protestant God :P)

99% of people who say they believe in Evolution believe so because they've been told so. Such is education. But whereas there is nothing in the secular world that works to correct this imbalance regarding the means whereby the populace arrives at that opinion ( ie: indoctrinated) the gospel of God sideskips the problem of cultural Christianity altogether. Whether indoctrinated Catholic in Ireland or Atheist in Soviet Russia matters not to God.

The marketplace of ideas does not compete with that. Individuals are free to make that choice, to 'decide' that they believe in God.

My point was that you seemed to be supposing the position of Christianity influenced by the characteristics of the marketplace in which it exists (for example, the suggestion is that Christianity could be subdued if a Totalitarian State clamped down on the Marketplace of Ideas - amongst which, Christianity. Whereas I was suggesting Christianity immune from such movements. And so the canvas: Religous or Secular is irrelevant to Christianity.

PDN

I strongly believe that a secular society is the best environment for Christianity.

Christianity has, in my opinion, always been at its best when it operates as a minority counter-cultural force. Church history indicates that Christendom (where the Church dominates culture) tends to produce shameful disortions of the Gospel.

Excelsior

What pdn said, only more long-winded, no doubt!

Twin-go

PDN wrote: »

I strongly believe that a secular society is the best environment for Christianity.

Christianity has, in my opinion, always been at its best when it operates as a minority counter-cultural force. Church history indicates that Christendom (where the Church dominates culture) tends to produce shameful disortions of the Gospel.

Are you saying it operates best as a cult? I think stance is one that may well lead to Christian Fundamentalism and the all the dangers that would bring.

PDN

Twin-go wrote: »

Are you saying it operates best as a cult? I think stance is one that may well lead to Christian Fundamentalism and the all the dangers that would bring.

Not if we use the word 'cult' in its usual pejorative sense - denotiing something that is deceptive, manipulative or spurious.

But I think it operates better as what society at large would see as a sect, rather than as a dominant monstrosity with a co-mingling of ecclesiastical, political and cultural power.

'Fundamentalism' is another word that has been distorted from its original meaning to become a weasel word. Originally it simply denoted in the fundamental truths of the Christian faith.

homer911

PDN wrote: »

I strongly believe that a secular society is the best environment for Christianity.

Christianity has, in my opinion, always been at its best when it operates as a minority counter-cultural force. Church history indicates that Christendom (where the Church dominates culture) tends to produce shameful disortions of the Gospel.

Sorry PDN, I'm going to disagree. I believe your view is highly tainted by the extremes we see in Irish Society and in some American societies. Personally I would hate to think of my kids growing up in a society where Christian Faith has no part in, or influence on, how they live their lives. If society has no moral compass from Christianity where is it to come from? Nature abhors a vacuum. Secularism wont provide it!

Yes Christianity has been given an extermely bad wrap over the years due to the extremes of Roman Catholocism, but as a Protestant, I would prefer a society dominated by a "cleaned up" Catholic faith than by secularism.

I presume when you talk about society, you are also talking about our school system. I spend a significant chunk of money to send my children to a Protestant secondary school, where thankfully many of the teachers display a living personal faith in Jesus. You cant vote for secularism and then hope to bring your children up in a personal Christian faith. As parents we see relatively little of our children once they get to secondary school and to throw them into a secular society and expect them to come out the other side as committed Christians is like throwing sheep to the wolves.

So lets have a Christian Society that works - get rid of the paedophiles and adulterers, get rid of the priests and ministers who are not fit for the job and lets have a Christian Society that really is Christian

Denerick

homer911 wrote: »

Sorry PDN, I'm going to disagree. I believe your view is highly tainted by the extremes we see in Irish Society and in some American societies. Personally I would hate to think of my kids growing up in a society where Christian Faith has no part in, or influence on, how they live their lives. If society has no moral compass from Christianity where is it to come from? Nature abhors a vacuum. Secularism wont provide it!

Yes Christianity has been given an extermely bad wrap over the years due to the extremes of Roman Catholocism, but as a Protestant, I would prefer a society dominated by a "cleaned up" Catholic faith than by secularism.

I presume when you talk about society, you are also talking about our school system. I spend a significant chunk of money to send my children to a Protestant secondary school, where thankfully many of the teachers display a living personal faith in Jesus. You cant vote for secularism and then hope to bring your children up in a personal Christian faith. As parents we see relatively little of our children once they get to secondary school and to throw them into a secular society and expect them to come out the other side as committed Christians is like throwing sheep to the wolves.

So lets have a Christian Society that works - get rid of the paedophiles and adulterers, get rid of the priests and ministers who are not fit for the job and lets have a Christian Society that really is Christian

What? Have you no faith in your children? Are they not free to make up their own minds? And here I thought that Protestants believed in a personal relationship with jesus - how is this to occur if teachers ram down propaganda in classrooms!??

Why can't people just read books? Good old fashioned time by yourself reading books and thinking? Why is this so abhorrent to people nowadays that they insist that their ideology, and no other, should be taught in schools?

Maybe I've seen The Dead Poet's Society one time too many for this authoritarian world!

Twin-go

homer911 wrote: »

Personally I would hate to think of my kids growing up in a society where Christian Faith has no part in, or influence on, how they live their lives. If society has no moral compass from Christianity where is it to come from? Nature abhors a vacuum. Secularism wont provide it!

So lets have a Christian Society that works - get rid of the paedophiles and adulterers, get rid of the priests and ministers who are not fit for the job and lets have a Christian Society that really is Christian

It is quite disturbing that you rely on the Church to provide your moral compass. Just because somebody does not have a faith does not mean the cannot be good people. Do you not trust yourself or your children to be good people with out Christianity?

Religion needs to be less of an influence on Irish society. By all means worship whenever or where ever you want. Read from the Bible and use it to guide you through life if thats what you want. But don't be so overt with it and force it on other people (including your children).

Religion should be a personal lifestyle choice and nothing more. It should have no more influence on Irish society than the Girl Guides or the GAA.

PDN

homer911 wrote: »

Sorry PDN, I'm going to disagree. I believe your view is highly tainted by the extremes we see in Irish Society and in some American societies. Personally I would hate to think of my kids growing up in a society where Christian Faith has no part in, or influence on, how they live their lives. If society has no moral compass from Christianity where is it to come from? Nature abhors a vacuum. Secularism wont provide it!

Who said Christianity has no part in a secular society? Christians can be a powerful grassroots influence in a secular society.

Btw, my view is more tainted by the last 1700 years of Church History than anything else. Irish society today, and that of the Southern US, is infinitely preferable to those societies where the Church held total sway - such as medieval Catholic Europe, or even Calvin's Geneva.

Yes Christianity has been given an extermely bad wrap over the years due to the extremes of Roman Catholicism, but as a Protestant, I would prefer a society dominated by a "cleaned up" Catholic faith than by secularism.

And there we will remain in total disagreement.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PDN View Post
I strongly believe that a secular society is the best environment for Christianity.

Christianity has, in my opinion, always been at its best when it operates as a minority counter-cultural force. Church history indicates that Christendom (where the Church dominates culture) tends to produce shameful disortions of the Gospel.
Sorry PDN, I'm going to disagree. I believe your view is highly tainted by the extremes we see in Irish Society and in some American societies. Personally I would hate to think of my kids growing up in a society where Christian Faith has no part in, or influence on, how they live their lives. If society has no moral compass from Christianity where is it to come from? Nature abhors a vacuum. Secularism wont provide it!

Yes Christianity has been given an extermely bad wrap over the years due to the extremes of Roman Catholocism, but as a Protestant, I would prefer a society dominated by a "cleaned up" Catholic faith than by secularism.

I presume when you talk about society, you are also talking about our school system. I spend a significant chunk of money to send my children to a Protestant secondary school, where thankfully many of the teachers display a living personal faith in Jesus. You cant vote for secularism and then hope to bring your children up in a personal Christian faith.

Yes you can. A secular society would not forbid Protestants or Catholics from setting up schools or educating their children. It gives them the same rights as do vegetarians. The key thing is that in a secular society Protestants and Catholics alike would be expected to fund their own schools themselves - which is how it should be.

As parents we see relatively little of our children once they get to secondary school and to throw them into a secular society and expect them to come out the other side as committed Christians is like throwing sheep to the wolves.

Our job as parents is to equip our children to know God for themselves and to learn how to be in the world, but not of the world.

So lets have a Christian Society that works - get rid of the paedophiles and adulterers, get rid of the priests and ministers who are not fit for the job and lets have a Christian Society that really is Christian

So how do you propose we 'get rid' of the adulterers in society? That sounds like exactly the kind of thing that makes me a secularist.

PDN

Twin-go wrote: »

It is quite disturbing that you rely on the Church to provide your moral compass. Just because somebody does not have a faith does not mean the cannot be good people. Do you not trust yourself or your children to be good people with out Christianity?

Religion needs to be removed from society. By all means worship whenever or where ever you want. Read from the fictional book and use it to guide you through life if thats what you want. But don't be so overt with it and force it on other people (including your children).

Religion should be a personal lifestyle choice and nothing more. It should have no more influence on Irish society than the Girl Guides or the GAA.

Moderator's Note
If you can't engage in a discussion in this forum without trolling or breaching the Charter then please don't bother.

This is your last nice informal warning.

Twin-go

PDN wrote: »

Our job as parents is to equip our children to know God for themselves and to learn how to be in the world, but not of the world.

Our Job as parents is to make all the information and arguments for all religious, agnostic and athiest ideas available to our children and let them make up there own minds.

homer911

You misunderstand me!

Denerick wrote: »

What? Have you no faith in your children?

I have lots of faith in my kids, but once they are handed over to a school, you are then relying on that school ethos to determine the teaching they will receive. I would not my children having secularist propoganda pushed down their throats - thats why choice is so important in our education system, even if you have to pay through the nose to get it!

Are they not free to make up their own minds?

Yes they are, but any caring parent who is a committed christian will do all they can to steer their children on the right path - to consider this indoctrination, brainwashing or propoganda shows your complete lack of understanding of the Christian faith and the power of devil

Why is this so abhorrent to people nowadays that they insist that their ideology, and no other, should be taught in schools?

I'm quite happy for non-Christian teaching in schools, but not to the exclusion of Christian teaching (refer to the original title of this thread) and not to have it "indoctrinated" by some atheist or cultural christian teacher. My children receive a broad education on many world religions and I'm happy they get that, but for some secularist to come along and at best to ignore religion and at worst to deny all faiths would be unacceptable

homer911

Twin-go wrote: »

Our Job as parents is to make all the information and arguments for all religious, agnostic and athiest ideas available to our children and let them make up there own minds.

This may be the job of a parent, but its not the role of a committed christian parent, which would include leading by example and guiding the child to make the right decision.

homer911

PDN wrote: »

Who said Christianity has no part in a secular society? Christians can be a powerful grassroots influence in a secular society.

Perhaps your understanding of a secularist society is different to mine! Lets agree to differ!

So how do you propose we 'get rid' of the adulterers in society? That sounds like exactly the kind of thing that makes me a secularist.

Apologies, re-reading this I sound a bit like a Nazi! - I meant that a Christian society should be lead by those who practice what they preach

PDN

Twin-go wrote: »

Our Job as parents is to make all the information and arguments for all religious, agnostic and athiest ideas available to our children and let them make up there own minds.

The word 'our' in my post referred to Christians since this is the Christianity forum.

If you want to discuss the job of non-Christian parents then there is a Parenting Forum where you can do that.

Twin-go

homer911 wrote: »

This may be the job of a parent, but its not the role of a committed christian parent, which would include leading by example and guiding the child to make the right decision.

And what is the "right" decision and is it right for them or for you?

Not going to mass is a sin and you will go to hell.
Sex before marraige is a sin and you will go to hell.
Contraception is sinful and if you use it you will go to hell.
All other religions are wrong and those people are going to hell.
You cannot question a priest............

Granted current views are somewhat more moderite but,

To me growing up and been forced to go to mass the above reasons left me with little choice but to "believe". As I grew old and begain to think for myself and research other religions. I found to me the were all wrong. There was not for me one true faith so I am now Athiest and I couldn't be happier.

homer911

Twin-go wrote: »

And what is the "right" decision and is it right for them or for you?

Not going to mass is a sin and you will go to hell.
Sex before marraige is a sin and you will go to hell.
Contraception is sinful and if you use it you will go to hell.
All other religions are wrong and those people are going to hell.
You cannot question a priest............

Granted current views are somewhat more moderite but,

To me growing up and been forced to go to mass the above reasons left me with little choice but to "believe". As I grew old and begain to think for myself and research other religions. I found to me the were all wrong. There was not for me one true faith so I am now Athiest and I couldn't be happier.

Clearly your experience of growing up was different to my own where questioning was encouraged and recognising that no matter what we have done or not done, we are ALL sinners and will be eternally separated from God if we dont trust in him.

As a Christian parent I would have to say the right decision for them. God stands at the door and knocks - its up to each one of us to open the door for ourselves, I cant open the door for my children. If they choose not to open the door, thats THEIR decision (although not one I would be happy with).

I would encourage you to continue your research and I pray that God would soften your heart. At least you are here on the Christianity forum, so maybe God is speaking to you now.

God is a gentleman. If you tell him to go away and stop knocking, he will, but he hasn't given up on you!

As regards being forced to go to church: We didnt go out last Sunday being just two days past Christmas (the first Sunday we have missed in a LONG time). My 15 yo son was disappointed not to be going to church! Maybe we are doing something right?

Twin-go

homer911 wrote: »

Clearly your experience of growing up was different to my own where questioning was encouraged and recognising that no matter what we have done or not done, we are ALL sinners and will be eternally separated from God if we dont trust in him.

As a Christian parent I would have to say the right decision for them. God stands at the door and knocks - its up to each one of us to open the door for ourselves, I cant open the door for my children. If they choose not to open the door, thats THEIR decision (although not one I would be happy with).

I would encourage you to continue your research and I pray that God would soften your heart. At least you are here on the Christianity forum, so maybe God is speaking to you now.

God is a gentleman. If you tell him to go away and stop knocking, he will, but he hasn't given up on you!

As regards being forced to go to church: We didnt go out last Sunday being just two days past Christmas (the first Sunday we have missed in a LONG time). My 15 yo son was disappointed not to be going to church! Maybe we are doing something right?

As this is the Christian forum I feel I cannot respond to your post without getting a ban from PDN .

I will just go back on topic and say for me Religion builds walls, creates conflict and restrains somewhat peoples creativity and imagination. If one chooses this path thats your choice. But to say it is the one true path and only those that follow it will be "saved" is just wrong.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

Twin-go

Plowman wrote: »

I'm not sure about this either, PDN. I would agree with homer911 above. I prefer it when society and its policies are influenced by Christian values rather than secular ones which are neither here nor there.

The problem I have is, if Christianity is simply a minority counter-cultural force, then what about the (presumably) non-Christian majority? Christianity may thrive as a minority and this may suit its believers, but what about those who must belong to the majority in order to facilitate the existence of the minority? Hopefully that makes sense - I think what I am trying to say, in the nicest way possible, is that wishing for a counter-cultural Christian minority seems a bit selfish.

Where is your backup for the statement that secular values are "neither here nor there". Religion should not have any influence on general society. Just look at the mess in the middle east for societies influenced wholey by religion.

Osgoodisgood

homer911 wrote: »

I would not my children having secularist propoganda pushed down their throats - thats why choice is so important in our education system, even if you have to pay through the nose to get it!

What sort of propaganda are you referring to? This is a genuine question btw, I'm keen to understand what a secular education system could do that would be so scary.

Yes they are, but any caring parent who is a committed christian will do all they can to steer their children on the right path - to consider this indoctrination, brainwashing or propoganda shows your complete lack of understanding of the Christian faith and the power of devil

The devil? I understood you until this point.

I'm quite happy for non-Christian teaching in schools, but not to the exclusion of Christian teaching (refer to the original title of this thread) and not to have it "indoctrinated" by some atheist or cultural christian teacher. My children receive a broad education on many world religions and I'm happy they get that, but for some secularist to come along and at best to ignore religion and at worst to deny all faiths would be unacceptable

But didn't you say that you pay for your children to be educated in a religious school? Why would "some" secularist want to deny you that right?

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

antiskeptic

Twin-go wrote: »

Where is your backup for the statement that secular values are "neither here nor there". Religion should not have any influence on general society. Just look at the mess in the middle east for societies influenced wholey by religion.

Non-sequitur. You've supported an position that Religion shouldn't have "any influence" in society by quoting the situation where Religion "wholly influences" the society. This is mixing your units.

Perhaps you could point to a success story on the wholly secular (atheistic) front? The obvious examples don't inspire much..

Osgoodisgood

Plowman wrote: »

What I mean is that wholly secular values in society can relegate religion to second place.

Which secular values are you referring to?

I prefer when legistation, etc. is influenced by Christian teachings. For example, our Constitution recognises Christianity (and other religions) and it acknowledges the Christian God in its Preamble.

Why is that good? Why does religion need such recognition and how does it benefit from it?

The US is a secular society (ostensibly, at least) with a secular Constitution, but the fervour of its nationalism sometimes is alarming and its religious discourse can have a reactionary tone.

Its nationalism is downright scary and IMO unjustly casts religion as a cause of trouble when the penchant for paranoid zenophobia would be more than enough in its own right to arouse military fervour and jingoism.

Twin-go

Plowman wrote: »

What I mean is that wholly secular values in society can relegate religion to second place.

I would be happy if this happened.

Plowman wrote: »

I prefer when legistation, etc. is influenced by Christian teachings. For example, our Constitution recognises Christianity (and other religions) and it acknowledges the Christian God in its Preamble.

It should not acknowledges any God. It should be nuteral.

Plowman wrote: »

Saying that religion should not have any influence on general society (it seems to me, anyway) could make it more rigid and institutionalised rather than less. The US is a secular society (ostensibly, at least) with a secular Constitution, but the fervour of its nationalism sometimes is alarming and its religious discourse can have a reactionary tone.

The problem is that having a religion influencing general society/government excludes those that are not tied to that particular religion. Why should one group have sway over the country? Why should one religion be more important than the others. Religion drives division and excludes sections of the society.

The U.S. is an extream example and you can't really call it a secular societyYou just have to read whats on their currency ("In God We Trust") and the words in the Pledge of Alegence ("One Nation Under God").

philologos

It depends on what we mean by the term. I find a lot of people attach things to secularism that were never intended to be included in the definition. As such I always keep a healthy skepticism whenever the term is raised.

Do I think it is better when religion is free from the State? Yes, certainly.

However, in other countries the term secular has been used to restrict freedom of religion which is outwardly wrong.

I also believe that Christians have a right to speak out on political issues, and let their views be known to the Government. However, their views should be given no precedence over any other groups. Ideas should be assessed, and if they are reasonable they should be considered even if they come from Christians.

homer911

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

What sort of propaganda are you referring to? This is a genuine question btw, I'm keen to understand what a secular education system could do that would be so scary.

A secularist education system, as witnessed in the USA, leaves zero room for God - this doesnt mean God-neutral, it means God-negative.

The devil? I understood you until this point.

The Bible tells us to put on the full armour of God (Ephesians 6:13-17) to protect ourselves from the flaming arrows of the evil one (http://www.gotquestions.org/full-armor-of-God.html)

For spiritually immature children, its even more important that they be protected, and we as parents (and sometimes God-parents depending on your faith) have to fulfill this role until children are mature enough to stand on their own feet

But didn't you say that you pay for your children to be educated in a religious school? Why would "some" secularist want to deny you that right?

Would there be room for non-secular education in a secular society? and even if there was, would anyone be able to afford it? (dont get me started on the cutting of funding to protestant schools!)

Twin-go

antiskeptic wrote: »

Non-sequitur. You've supported an position that Religion shouldn't have "any influence" in society by quoting the situation where Religion "wholly influences" the society. This is mixing your units.

Perhaps you could point to a success story on the wholly secular (atheistic) front? The obvious examples don't inspire much..

I'm not really mixing my units. Up until very recently Ireland was wholly influenced by the Roman Catholic church. All our schools and hospitals been run by religous orders. Look at the problems that caused.

In the UK it is mostly influenced by the Church of England. Look at the problems that caused in Nothern Ireland.

Isreal majority influenced by Judasim look at the problems there.

As far as I can see Religion causes more problems than is solves and I'm not just atacking the RC church its all religions.

Denerick

A secularist education system, as witnessed in the USA, leaves zero room for God - this doesnt mean God-neutral, it means God-negative.

But Christianity is thriving in America! It is the most zealous Christian nation of the west. This kind of dis-proves your point somewhat. In America, religion is thankfully not taught in the education system, but this is only because they don't know 'what' they should teach; America is too diverse both from within its various Christian sects and other groups (Such as Jews) to teach only one faith at school. So what, you could have a Catholic education system in Massachussets and a Jewish one in New York? How would it possibly work? The secular system is simply the best compromise in that example. And it also has proven that Christianity is stronger than the average school wall.

Osgoodisgood

Jakkass wrote: »

However, in other countries the term secular has been used to restrict freedom of religion which is outwardly wrong.

Examples?

I also believe that Christians have a right to speak out on political issues, and let their views be known to the Government.
However, their views should be given no precedence over any other groups. Ideas should be assessed, and if they are reasonable they should be considered even if they come from Christians.

I concur with all of the above but I would add that Christians should have no greater or better access to the levers of government than any other group.

philologos

Twin-go: Presbyterianism is the biggest Protestant denomination in Northern Ireland. The Church of England are not involved in Ireland at all, rather the Church of Ireland is.

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

I also believe that Christians have a right to speak out on political issues, and let their views be known to the Government. However, their views should be given no precedence over any other groups. Ideas should be assessed, and if they are reasonable they should be considered even if they come from Christians.

Jakkas, Everyone in the country has a right to air their political views. But, Religious Organisations should be no more than a lobby group. For too long in this country the Church has had too much say in how the country is run. This needs to be stopped and our government and general society should be nuteral. Religion should be something practiced in ones own time and not be so overt as it is in our society.

philologos

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

Examples?

France - Forced removal of religious symbols in schools.
Britain - Restrictions against street-preaching.
Suspending a school secretary for asking her church community to pray for her after her child was disciplined by the school for telling her classmates about hell.
Suspending a school teacher for asking a child if she would like to be prayed for.
Suspending a nurse for asking a patient if they would like to be prayed for.
Turkey - Banning the wearing of headscarves at universities.

These are all unwelcome intrusions to freedom of religion, and have to do with personal religious belief rather than secularism.

Twin-go wrote: »

Jakkas, Everyone in the country has a right to air their political views. But, Religious Organisations should be no more than a lobby group. For too long in this country the Church has had too much say in how the country is run. This needs to be stopped and our government and general society should be nuteral. Religion should be something practiced in ones own time and not be so overt as it is in our society.

I disagree with this view to an extent. Faith should be as public as people want. It shouldn't interfere directly with politics, but this doesn't mean that individuals who are Christians don't have a right to share their views. Churches should have no direct interest in politics, especially not financially.

Religion isn't just to be "practiced in ones own time" it's something that defines people entirely.

Personally I think the US and Australia deal with faith in a far better way than we do currently.

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

Twin-go: Presbyterianism is the biggest Protestant denomination in Northern Ireland. The Church of England are not involved in Ireland at all, rather the Church of Ireland is.

Both come under the umbrella of Protestism. My point on how Religion Divisions affect society is still valid.

Excelsior

Twin-go wrote: »

Isreal majority influenced by Judasim look at the problems there.

Just so you know, Israel is a secular society who didn't even have a jewish values party until 1970... any attempt to pit the israeli/palestine or norn irish troubles at the door of religion is bound to fail for being retardedly simplistic.

Osgoodisgood

homer911 wrote: »

A secularist education system, as witnessed in the USA, leaves zero room for God - this doesnt mean God-neutral, it means God-negative.

I don't know what you mean. Can you give an example? Are you referring to situations like the Kitzmiller-Dover trial?

Would there be room for non-secular education in a secular society? and even if there was, would anyone be able to afford it? (dont get me started on the cutting of funding to protestant schools!)

Nobody is talking about compulsory closure of fee-paying religious schools such as the one you send your children to. Why would they want to do that?

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

I disagree with this view to an extent. Faith should be as public as people want. It shouldn't interfere directly with politics, but this doesn't mean that individuals who are Christians don't have a right to share their views. Churches should have no direct interest in politics, especially not financially.

Religion isn't just to be "practiced in ones own time" it's something that defines people entirely.

And herein lies the problem. As an Athiest I am not particulary offended by any religious symbolism or practices but, I am offended by the reactions of many followers of a relgion to others of different religions. Each claim to be the one true religion and as nothing can be substanciated. There is no proof for eithers stance, just faith. It is a vicious circle that can oly be stopped if religion is removed from society.

philologos

If you are offended, that's tough luck surely? People get offended every day of the week, it does not mean that peoples beliefs should be restricted. Numerous things could offend a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew, yet the law doesn't forbid people in expressing what could offend. It expects the people to be mature enough to deal with them for themselves.

Twin-go

Excelsior wrote: »

Just so you know, Israel is a secular society who didn't even have a jewish values party until 1970... any attempt to pit the israeli/palestine or norn irish troubles at the door of religion is bound to fail for being retardedly simplistic.

Do you think suicide bombers would do what the do if they where not promised 72 virgins in paridise? Yes their would be still conflict in these areas but by taking religion out of the equasion a least one less reson for the conflict. Israel in not secular as Jewish Law is reconised by the state.

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

If you are offended, that's tough luck surely? People get offended every day of the week, it does not mean that peoples beliefs should be restricted. Numerous things could offend a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew, yet the law doesn't forbid people in expressing what could offend. It expects the people to be mature enough to deal with them for themselves.

So are you not offended by what happened on September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington? Are you not offened by the Bali bombings? Are you not offended by Muslim Women been stoned to death for having an affair? Really?

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

PDN

Twin-go wrote: »

Israel in not secular as Jewish Law is reconised by the state.

I've often been struck at how the situation in the Middle East seems to create an ideological problem for atheists.

You have one nation that is, by a long way, the most secular State in the entire region. It also has a much higher percentage of atheists and agnostics in its population compared to any of the surrounding nations.

This secular nation is under constant threat from religious fundamentalists who attack citizens of the secular State and have vowed to wipe it off the map.

You would expect that atheists' sympathies would lie with the Secular state. But, and this is the rub, the secular state has a soft spot in the hearts of religious fundamentalists in another secular State (on the other side of the Atlantic). So, on the principle of "my enemy's enemy is my friend", most atheists I talk to are more inclined to root for the religious fundamentalists who are trying to wipe out the secular State.

Funny old world we live in.

philologos

Twin-go wrote: »

So are you not offended by what happened on September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington? Are you not offened by the Bali bombings? Are you not offended by Muslim Women been stoned to death for having an affair? Really?

You're making a jump here.

I think all of these acts are awful, but I don't think that Islam should be illegal because we have human rights, and freedoms of religion. This is a secular value.

If you want to get rid of religion, you aren't arguing for secularism but for state atheism.

Denerick

Twin-go wrote: »

So are you not offended by what happened on September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington? Are you not offened by the Bali bombings? Are you not offended by Muslim Women been stoned to death for having an affair? Really?

What a load of hyperbole. I agree with you on a lot of issues in this thread, but do get a grip. Those actions are hardly the fault of the abstract idea of religion. It is the fault of mortal man, doomed to be duped by whatever idle ideas of hatred grip his fancy. I could come back with the equally flawed argument like 'Are you not offended by Stalins Gulags? Mao's massacres!? Murderer!!!!'. Both arguments are equally retarded and have no place in a serious discussion in threads like this.

Fanny Cradock

PDN wrote: »

I've often been struck at how the situation in the Middle East seems to create an ideological problem for atheists.

You have one nation that is, by a long way, the most secular State in the entire region. It also has a much higher percentage of atheists and agnostics in its population compared to any of the surrounding nations.

This secular nation is under constant threat from religious fundamentalists who attack citizens of the secular State and have vowed to wipe it off the map.

You would expect that atheists' sympathies would lie with the Secular state. But, and this is the rub, the secular state has a soft spot in the hearts of religious fundamentalists in another secular State (on the other side of the Atlantic). So, on the principle of "my enemy's enemy is my friend", most atheists I talk to are more inclined to root for the religious fundamentalists who are trying to wipe out the secular State.

Funny old world we live in.

A very interesting perspective. I might have to knick it and pass it off as my own.

Twin-go

Denerick wrote: »

What a load of hyperbole. I agree with you on a lot of issues in this thread, but do get a grip. Those actions are hardly the fault of the abstract idea of religion. It is the fault of mortal man, doomed to be duped by whatever idle ideas of hatred grip his fancy. I could come back with the equally flawed argument like 'Are you not offended by Stalins Gulags? Mao's massacres!? Murderer!!!!'. Both arguments are equally retarded and have no place in a serious discussion in threads like this.

I don't feel that it is an exaggeration. Acts on 9/11 were done in the name of Allah. The Gulags where not in the name of athieism nor Mao's massacres. And I am shocked and offened by what has happened.

It's never religions fault, is it?
Good thing happens = God is great.
Bad things happen = It's the fault of mortal man.

Denerick

Twin-go wrote: »

I don't feel that it is an exaggeration. Acts on 9/11 were done in the name of Allah. The Gulags where not in the name of athieism nor Mao's massacres. And I am shocked and offened by what has happened.

It's never religions fault, is it?
Good thing happens = God is great.
Bad things happen = It's the fault of mortal man.

What is this 'religion' that you're talking about? Men and women have been moved to both good and evil deeds in the name of Christianity. They freed the slaves, helped the poor, worked on behalf of the downtrodden etc. etc. They have also been moved to great evil on its behalf. So what? Is that Christianities fault? If Christians misunderstand what it is they are supposed to do on this world, the problem lies in the misunderstanding. If they are moved to do good, even if it is as a result of misunderstanding, then more power to it. Do you see what I'm saying? You can't really attribute either good or evil to Christianity. Every action a good or bad person takes in the name of Christianity is the action of that person, not Christianity. Actions defy abstract ideas, ideas are incapable of action, only inspiration.