[Closed] "I am a practising member of the Church of England and so forth"

Some people who called themselves Christians somehow managed to persuade themselves that slavery was OK - because they're black and that's their purpose in life or something.

Not sure how being a Christian helps guide on the Brexit thing though staying in must surely be better for people globally.

BTW, those that think following a religion implies some sort of lack of intelligence are deluding themselves to help justify their position.

Yesterday, I visited a Quaker meeting house, a Roman Catholic church, a Methodist chapel, a mosque, an Anglican church, a Sikh gurdwara, and a Buddhist centre.

The relentless drudgery of the religious iconography salesman.

BTW, those that think following a religion implies some sort of lack of intelligence are deluding themselves to help justify their position.

its true that generally religion increases as IQ decreases, but there's obviously a lot more factors at play

at an international level its more about income and education really
(although intra nationally- thats just like brexit- so theres probably a healthy overlap between the 2!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence

perchypanther - Member
Yesterday, I visited a Quaker meeting house, a Roman Catholic church, a Methodist chapel, a mosque, an Anglican church, a Sikh gurdwara, and a Buddhist centre.

hedging your bets?

Yesterday, I visited a Quaker meeting house, a Roman Catholic church, a Methodist chapel, a mosque, an Anglican church, a Sikh gurdwara, and a Buddhist centre

Unluckiest Jehovahs Witness ever!

Is no-one seeing any more sinister side to this?
In the present global situation, I'm not sure that it makes any sense whatsoever for a leader to identify with a particular religion, unless they are deliberately trying to be divisive..

In the present global situation, I'm not sure that it makes any sense whatsoever for a leader to identify with a particular religion, unless they are deliberately trying to be divisive..

Well now they have the snoopers charter they'll be working out the religion of everyone in the UK and starting a list........

Is no-one seeing any more sinister side to this?
In the present global situation, I'm not sure that it makes any sense whatsoever for a leader to identify with a particular religion, unless they are deliberately trying to be divisive..

CofE sinister? I always thought it was the fluffier side of religion for people who just like a sing-a-long on a sunday morning.

Don't you lot get bored of posting the same shite over and over again?

Don't you get bored of complaining about it?

saying 'I talked to god and he agreed it was a good idea to put billboards on lorries telling immigrants to go home' is no different to simply having thought of it yourself.

In and of itself you're absolutely right. However, it's not that simple; if she's claiming "god agrees with me" then it may well add additional weight to her policies with those who believe in that sort of thing. Which, y'know, is one of the points of religion, the leverage of power / authority over the masses.

In the present global situation, I'm not sure that it makes any sense whatsoever for a leader to identify with a particular religion, unless they are deliberately trying to be divisive..

Big in America, innit. I doubt very much that an openly atheist candidate would ever get voted in as President, there's a large contingent of the US that would never want to be ruled by a godless heathen.

aren't we a bit more developed than the US as a nation though? 🙁

I reckon she's up to mischief

If Christianity really did affect her politics as suggested above then she'd not be quite such a nasty Tory...

Exactly. I am non-religious but more of a christian that any Tory.
If everyone in this country had a truly christian attitude it would be the best place to live in the world.

'I talked to god and he agreed it was a good idea to put billboards on lorries telling immigrants to go home' is no different to simply having thought of it yourself.

People have been using religion to justify evil acts since year dot. It's one of the reasons they get away with it.

yunki

I reckon she's up to mischief

God told her to say that, so she could use her snoopers charter to monitor everyone who objects and put them on "the list".

Incidentally, god told me I should marry Jennifer Lawrence. He told me she'd be unhappy about it first but if I persist she'll eventually give in.

Yes, god is a he. Sorry women, get off the internet and get back to your washing dishes.

[i]@sesomah77...you are correct. I am using my own belief system. It's called logic, reasoning and evidence based knowledge. Something a group of people chanting in an old building and believing in an ancient book clearly aren't practising. 😀

edenvalleyboy - Member
[i]@sesomah77...you are correct. I am using my own belief system. It's called logic, reasoning and evidence based knowledge.

It really isn't, based on the evidence provided, you are projecting your own bias on to Mrs May.

@sesosmah77...do you have faith/are religious etc?

[quote=jamj1974 ]
This is part of the issue. People's twisted view of scripture makes them believe their stupid, selfish, often intolerant and persecutive (Is that a word? If not, I have invented it.) actions are morally right and justified. Shame they don't apply their religious-based action approach when it comes to money lenders, being a good samaritan or turning the other cheek... Seems just a bit selectively applied.

Yip

[img] [/img]

BTW, those that think following a religion implies some sort of [s]lack of[/s] intelligence are deluding themselves to help justify their position.

@boardinbob.. excellent post.

edenvalleyboy - Member
@sesosmah77...do you have faith/are religious etc?

Nope, gave up going to chapel when I was 12, and old enough to start defying my parents (well my grannies wishes, my parents just took us because of tradition.)

My religion would lie somewhere in speculating the questions I asked earlier in the thread, ie, what is beyond the big bang, what's the point of the universe. There are theories there I'd believe in more than god, Ie some sort of multiverse theory. I believe god is a lack of understanding of physics.

Yesterday, I visited a Quaker meeting house, a Roman Catholic church, a Methodist chapel, a mosque, an Anglican church, a Sikh gurdwara, and a Buddhist centre.

It was for [url=

thing[/url].

It's a sad change in society that being openly religious is now socially acceptable.

Saddest thing I heard was an retired teacher talking about how she was hesitant to wear a cross or say she went to church due to the open hostility she got from strangers who liked to have loud conversations about her being stupid; apparently open hostility and aggression to someone with different views to yours is now OK.

I'm pleased to hear Mrs May is a practising Christian. It has a great moral ideology.

Now if she would just read the latest version of the manual and find the bit about how to behave to poor, the sick, and the oppressed it would be wonderful. At the moment she seems to be operating out of the Old Testament manual for genocide of "other" people.

As for science being superior, does that explain why we've had stuff like eugenics?

(I'm atheist)

epicyclo - Member
As for science being superior, does that explain why we've had stuff like eugenics?

Science doesn't provide a moral background. So your question doesn't really make any sense.

So your question doesn't really make any sense.

very much like Religion then 🙂

Half way and on a roll....

footflaps - Member
So your question doesn't really make any sense.
very much like Religion then

See here's the thing though, religion does make sense to some people, it gives them a sense of good well being and completeness, it gives them their guidelines, it can even give people their social lives and what not. Not in all cases obviously.

But, who am I to question that aspect of it, if it doesn't impact negatively on others? tbh, I struggle to see what is bad from that point of view.

Interesting the way this thread has gone, particularly as she referred to being a practising member of the Church of England, not to having a belief in God, which I find interesting.

I know plenty of people who go to church for the philosophy without taking everything too literally, although how you could take "love your neighbour" to mean "keep the darkies out and discriminate against the gays", I don't really understand.

I know plenty of people who go to church for the philosophy without taking everything too literally, although how you could take "love your neighbour" to mean "keep the darkies out and discriminate against the gays", I don't really understand.

Because their manual is so vaguely written / translated and self-contradictory that it can be used to support whatever world view someone already has.

I'd like to hope that 21st Century sermons are all rainbows and unicorns, maybe with the option of a free glass of red and a biscuit, but I suppose whatever they preach is down to the whim of the preacher.

We've done this topic to death before. The only abuse, narrow mindedness and bigotry I have seen comes the "anti-religious" posters. STW as a whole has effectively become an unsafe place for people of faith. As I said it's the very worst of the place.

Can you Report Post on the abusive posts please? I seem to have missed them.

See here's the thing though, religion does make sense to some people, it gives them a sense of good well being and completeness

So it's a bit like homeopathy/the placebo effect then and is equally as valid?

Can you Report Post on the abusive posts please? I seem to have missed them.

There Are None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See.

😀

(but tbf, this is a pale imitation of the norm)

I'd like to hope that 21st Century sermons are all rainbows and unicorns, maybe with the option of a free glass of red and a biscuit, but I suppose whatever they preach is down to the whim of the preacher.

There will be a range of acceptable views within each denomination, and that will shift over time. Even in the same parish, there could be two priests with differing views.

molgrips - Member

May's faith is of no significance here. If she started making policies directly based on scripture then yeah, it would. But saying 'I talked to god and he agreed it was a good idea to put billboards on lorries telling immigrants to go home' is no different to simply having thought of it yourself.

If you believe that you had a conversation with God and received an answer then you are either a) schizophrenic or b) His prophet. Either way, you shouldn't be prime minister, you have other pressing business.

In this case though it's just cynical politicking. If you look at Theresa May's decision making, it's obviously not influenced by the word of Christ.

an unsafe place for people of faith

😆

Diddums.

Don't worry, all us unbelievers will be smited and you'll have the last laugh 🙄

There Are None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See.

... which is why we have a report button, so that Moderators don't need to be omnipresent.

If you look at Theresa May's decision making, it's obviously not influenced by the word of Christ.

It's obviously influenced by the word "Christ."

If you believe that you had a conversation with God and received an answer then you are...

You are of course [i]paraphrasing[/i]*

*making stuff up, that she didn't say.

As for belief in a higher being, who cares, about 70% of the planet do. Get over it. Science can't actually disprove it, so the "scientists" are up shit creek there. The absence of evidence isn't proof one way or the other. In fact, you could argue that belief in god is simply the filling of the void of not understanding the mystery's of the universe, and there seems to be an inherent need for humans to fill this lack of knowledge with something

....even when we know something to be true empirically....people fill their already filled void with faith. Humans will still be killing each other for religous reasons during the Third Earth-Mars War of 2652.

I don't know how May reconcilles her party with the direction of the CofE though, she strikes me as being cut from the same cloth as the kind of Catholic that disavows the pope for not being Catholic enough.

....even when we know aomething to be true empirically

True, however at the moment we know next to nothing about how the universe works. So it makes the assumption that 'god' in whatever form cannot exist more absurd.

If any scientist published a conclusion to such a complex problem, whilst admitting they knew less that a couple of percent of how something worked would be a laughing stock.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah religion is for sissy's blah blah blah prove it blah blah blah blah real men especially from the north don't need faith blah blah blah blah blah broken record.

First time I've dropped into one of these threads for a long time.

Same old same old. Numb nuts.

In starting this thread, I was more interested in how May being a practicing Anglican relates to her actions than the truth or otherwise of what she believes. (Not that we know what she believes; we just know that she's a practicing Anglican, whatever that means.)

I find reconciling the two things difficult, though I am party to the conflict involved in the cake stall at the local church Christmas Fair so am aware of how Christianity and being a dick can easily go hand-in-hand.

[url= https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=brexit&qs_version=NIV ]I'm also struggling to see how her faith will help with Brexit, as a quick search found nothing.[/url]

Same old same old. Numb nuts.

You can probably get some cream for that.

Whatever the universe is, in it's entirety, it's EXTREMELY complicated.

"god" is a simpleton's response to an equally extremely complicated query.

"Not only is the universe queerer than we suppose, it's queerer than we CAN suppose".

"god" is something that superstitious humans supposed existed as an explanation, not having the means to even start out on the first step towards trying to understand the universe around them. The scientific method and the enlightenment hadn't yet arrived to illuminate our little corner of things.

Most of the humans on the planet don't seem to have kept up with even the minimal progress made so far.

But progress HAS been made and every new piece of information takes our understanding further away from the primitive and silly idea of there being a "god" of some sort "behind" everything.

Which is nice.

Whatever the universe is, in it's entirety, it's EXTREMELY complicated.

"god" is a simpleton's response to an equally extremely complicated query.

"Not only is the universe queerer than we suppose, it's queerer than we CAN suppose".

"god" is something that superstitious humans supposed existed as an explanation, not having the means to even start out on the first step towards trying to understand the universe around them. The scientific method and the enlightenment hadn't yet arrived to illuminate our little corner of things.

Most of the humans on the planet don't seem to have kept up with even the minimal progress made so far.

But progress HAS been made and every new piece of information takes our understanding further away from the primitive and silly idea of there being a "god" of some sort "behind" everything.

Which is nice.

I know this is going to make me seem all molgrips about this, but this somewhat ignores all of the intelligent people of faith.

and all the unintelligent ideas that even intelligent people can hold onto and justify to themselves despite lack of evidence...

we are - after all - a post-fact society... 😉

Lovely to see the usual suspects getting their "I'm persecuted because you dare to use rational thought to question my beliefs..." in after only a few pages 😉

Same old same old. Numb nuts.

Have you tried tipping your saddle forwards?

nealglover - Member

You are of course paraphrasing*

*making stuff up, that she didn't say.

Um, no, not at all- I didn't imply May had said this, I was responding to Molgrips. Which is why I quoted his post.

Even if he/she does exist he can suck my balls anyway.....atheism is so yesterday guys.....misotheism is where its at.

[img] [/img]

We've done this topic to death before. The only abuse, narrow mindedness and bigotry I have seen comes the "anti-religious" posters. STW as a whole has effectively become an unsafe place for people of faith. As I said it's the very worst of the place.

This is very true, and I say that as a person without religious faith. There also the most boring. I only dip in hoping someone has something new to say but no its the same old bores going around and around trying to out bore each other.
@cougar. Every time someone says or implies that a belief in God makes them a fool and stupid that's your abuse right there. 🙁

... which is why we have a report button, so that Moderators don't need to be omnipresent

Some seed falls on stony ground.

Every time someone says or implies that a belief in God makes them a fool and stupid that's your abuse right there.

I may be biased (though I try not to be), but it does seem to me that it's a minority of the non-theist people who take that approach, and we're all being tarred with the same brush and being judged on the merits of threads from years ago. Hell, even Mr Woppit's managed a comparatively restrained post today. (-:

Rightly or wrongly (and I'm willing to be convinced otherwise) the line in the sand I'm using is that it's abuse if it's an attack on the person but not if it's an attack on an idea. If I called you a fool for believing something, that is abusive; if I were to say that the belief itself was foolish, it isn't.

Any other way of looking at it is veering too close to censorship and thought police for my liking. Shall I hop onto a sports thread and delete any comments criticising another's favourite team?

This is why I've said time and again to use the Report Post link, then any abusive posts can and will be reviewed (by the team, not just me). Yet no-one ever does on these threads, not ever, they just occasionally jump into the thread to say how nasty the atheists are or accuse STW of bias. Whilst I occasionally might be opinionated as a User I do try to be as fair and impartial as possible as a Moderator, and I'm reasonably sure the others do to; there's no intentional bias, but religion doesn't get Special Privilege either.

Unsafe how?

Perhaps a bit of an overstatement?

jambalaya - Member
We've done this topic to death before. The only abuse, narrow mindedness and bigotry I have seen comes the "anti-religious" posters. STW as a whole has effectively become an unsafe place for people of faith. As I said it's the very worst of the place.

I don't have any issue with faith. I'm not interested in bashing belief in God or faith - as my posting history would indicate.

I have an issue with hypocrisy pertaining to religion. An issue with politicians publically asserting that their religious belief and personal relationship with god supports and validates their decisions and position - especially when these run counter to the prevailing morality explicit in their proclaimed religions narratives. Frankly it stinks.

When listening to May, should we remember that the devil can quote scripture for its own purpose...?

This is why I've said time and again to use the Report Post link, then any abusive posts can and will be reviewed (by the team, not just me)

Matthew 5:39

I know Hilary Clinton is an actual demon, but didn't realise that May was one too!

When listening to May, should we remember that the devil can quote scripture for its own purpose...?

I know Hilary Clinton is an actual demon, but didn't realise that May was one too!

As long as she is not the Gatekeeper - that's fine.

Princess Tony did it all the time.

Yes. He's a hypocrite too. If there is a god, I hope there is a special place in hell for him, W and his ilk.

Can you Report Post on the abusive posts please? I seem to have missed them.

We've had many threads and they've all gone the same way. Look at the inferences here on the first page that all religious people are bigots. Even had the nonsense that Fillon (just won right to challenge for French Presidency, he's Catholic) hates homosexuals, absolute garbage. Like many millions of French he was against Gay marriage but he has said he won't change the law, he voted against Maastricht but he's not going to take France out of the EU either)

As you know I am against reporting post after post, you've got better things to do. It's simpler just to stay away from these threads. They are in my view the absolute worst of STW. Far worse than the politics one's.

We've had many threads and they've all gone the same way. Look at the inferences here on the first page that all religious people are bigots.

Because their manual is so vaguely written / translated and self-contradictory that it can be used to support whatever world view someone already has.

And in the case of Christianity, selectively edited all through history.

Shall I hop onto a sports thread and delete any comments criticising another's favourite team?

I've been a good boy recently!!

We've had many threads and they've all gone the same way.

Historically sure, I was guilty of it myself at one point. But recently?

Dont stop yet, I predicted at least 8 pages....

Are you lot anti-Christ?

Is that the right description?

Or is atheist the right description?

But then atheist are people that don't care about what other belief is that right? i.e. do they go around condemning or anti-ing?

😯

People's twisted view of scripture makes them believe their stupid, selfish, often intolerant and persecutive (Is that a word? If not, I have invented it.) actions are morally right and justified.

If she were basing policy on scripture, then yes. But there's no evidence that's happening. People can base policy on Das Kapital, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, any book they like. In fact we all do. The books we read and the culture we absorb help to create our identities and guide our actions, regardless.

However, it's not that simple; if she's claiming "god agrees with me" then it may well add additional weight to her policies with those who believe in that sort of thing.

Again - IF she used that in debate - then you'd have a point. But she doesn't.

Are you lot anti-Christ?
Is that the right description?
Or is atheist the right description?
But then atheist are people that don't care about what other belief is that right? i.e. do they go around condemning or anti-ing?

Not here. Just sick of people espousing one thing and pursuing another.

I am however anti-May!

If she were basing policy on scripture, then yes. But there's no evidence that's happening. People can base policy on Das Kapital, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, any book they like. In fact we all do. The books we read and the culture we absorb help to create our identities and guide our actions, regardless.

No, not the same thing at all. She is clearly using religion in her background to set herself up as a morally upstanding person - despite acting immorally.

We are all influenced by our background and experiences, the difference is that we don't carefully state them on record in an attempt to influence large numbers of people and gain power.

jamj1974 - Member
Not here. Just sick of people espousing one thing and pursuing another.

However, I also belief in the walking dead or those with brain rot ... 😆

p/s. We are all influenced by one thing or another even believing in nothing is still a belief, but if you admit to brain rot then you do not have a belief.

If you believe that you had a conversation with God and received an answer then you are either a) schizophrenic or b) His prophet.

Says who?

I know this is going to make me seem all molgrips about this, but this somewhat ignores all of the intelligent people of faith.

I have my own trope - awseome 🙂

But yes. You (the militant aetheists) go on about inteligence being important, then you dismiss the intelligent responses to your arguments because they don't agree with you. How incredibly ironic.

She is clearly using religion in her background to set herself up as a morally upstanding person - despite acting immorally.

If you are saying this is a cynical ploy to get votes, then fine - that may be it. If Christian philosophy influences her politics then well, she hides it well.

But she still has not yet based arguments on scripture. If she did then she'd get torn to pieces pretty quickly, and not just by you lot.

But yes. You (the militant aetheists) go on about inteligence being important, then you dismiss the intelligent responses to your arguments because they don't agree with you. How incredibly ironic.

Speaking for myself... Militant? Certainly. Atheist? Not really.

Historically sure, I was guilty of it myself at one point. But recently?

Maybe not in fairness, I was so put off I don't normally open them. I did this one as it referenced the PM.

Oh my. A politics combined with religion thread on STW.......

Usual suspects in?

Check.

Predictable battle lines drawn and being defended to the last?

Check.

University Challenge on in a few minutes?

Check out.

dannyh - Member
Oh my. A politics combined with religion thread on STW.......
Usual suspects in?
Check.
Predictable battle lines drawn and being defended to the last?
Check.
University Challenge on in a few minutes?
Check out.

😆

University Challenge on in a few minutes?

The correct answer - Barton-Singer's a bright chap!! Not sure about Paxo's Don Quixote (aka Quicksoat)!!!