|
U-Know! Forum » Blasphemy law abolished |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
handofdave 3515 posts |
Mar 09, 2008, 21:10
|
||
|
Perhaps a lot of apprehension about religion lies in misnomers and misconceptions. There IS a strong tradition of debate and intellectual discussion in most faiths... unfortunately, we live in a time when the most strident and unbending strains of religion get the most press and have infiltrated the halls of power. I shouldn't have to remind anyone that secular thought can be just as self-deceiving as fundamentalism. Science has been guilty of promoting 'truths' and 'remedies' that later were proven fallacious. I fear that in the reactionary desire to banish religion, we might be embracing (with too little intellectual query or emotional distance) memes that will prove to be little better, or even potentially WORSE. I keep stressing in these posts that deal with this subject that we cannot draw blanket conclusions about religion based on the most egregious examples of its more strident and uncompromising members. The vast majority of the planet claims religious affiliation to one faith or another. Are we saying that most people on the planet are wrongheaded? (I grant you it's possible). More likely, most people are raised in traditions that include religion. It's more a case of cultural identity than ideological fervor in most of the world.
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Mar 09, 2008, 21:20
|
||
|
I am against state funding of religious schools. But at the same time I'm not going to tell a community that they can't build one and teach their kids how they choose. I do think it's important that there be benchmarks in terms of quality- kids need to get what they need to live in this world... and obviously, schools that do nothing but train their students to be Koran-regurgitating AK-47 wielding martyrs aren't carrying out a mission of education. I agree that people should, in a best case scenario, be able to choose a faith or none at all. In fact, in the western world, this is commonplace more than it is not. It's in cultures where religion is fanatical and militant that we see the tragic brainwashing and indoctrination that leads to generations of intellectually robbed and railroaded kids. And I do include the religious right wing in the USA... just watch 'Jesus Camp' for an example. Many, many people, in fact, more than not, raise their kids under religious tradition. I'm OK with that as long as they're allowed to ask questions and are allowed to leave that religion if they choose.
|
|||
|
shanshee_allures 2563 posts |
Mar 09, 2008, 21:24
|
||
|
handofdave wrote: Many, many people, in fact, more than not, raise their kids under religious tradition. I'm OK with that as long as they're allowed to ask questions and are allowed to leave that religion if they choose. Perhaps. But can a child choose not to have once been circumcised, for example? I mean if they reach adulthood and decide that's what they want... x
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Mar 10, 2008, 00:53
|
||
|
shanshee_allures wrote: handofdave wrote: Many, many people, in fact, more than not, raise their kids under religious tradition. I'm OK with that as long as they're allowed to ask questions and are allowed to leave that religion if they choose. Perhaps. But can a child choose not to have once been circumcised, for example? I mean if they reach adulthood and decide that's what they want... x That's probably the least of any concerns about lingering effects of indoctrination. You don't miss what you never had. Hell, I went for most of my childhood thinking what I had was what a normal one should look like. After I discovered I'd been circumcised, (not for religious reasons, just what they commonly did in the early sixties, I guess), it didn't bother me for a second. Female circumcision, on the other hand, is a really drastic procedure and I'd agree with you on your point. And, of course, the extreme religious variants, that twist minds into ignorance and hate- well, I suppose I'm not going to say that I wouldn't oppose some larger social intervention on those kid's behalf. But even there one runs into the problem of who is defining who and for what purpose. Israel is surrounded by people who preach that Jews ought to be wiped from the face of the earth.... clearly a majority intervention in that case wouldn't be to help anyone avoid religious bias, just to slaughter an entire people.
|
|||
Lord Lucan 2702 posts |
Mar 10, 2008, 10:32
|
||
|
The reason religious schools were brought up in this discussion is because during his time as Prime Minister, Tony Blair made it a personal crusade (natch) to increase the number of state-funded religious schools. This is contrary to the direction the majority of this country's citizens are moving in. It's also completely alien to our neighbours in Europe who are all moving in the opposite direction. France for example has had a separation of state and religion since the 18th Century. Basically Blair has made this an issue in this country. Personally I think it's a retrograde step and is not good for integration etc. How can comparative religion be taught in any school that has as one of its basic tenets that it teaches the 'one true religion'? How does that advance the pluralist and (relatively) tolerant society we are living in here? Religious indoctrination has no place in a state-funded school, in my opinion.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Mar 10, 2008, 12:09
|
||
|
"I think there's too much patent anti-religiousness on these boards sometimes" Ummm, I really feel like taking issue with that. What's "too much"? Anyone that criticizes the downside of religious belief is perfectly well aware there's an upside, presumably. But are they obliged to balance it out? I don't see why. Let those who support religion do that if they want. I think people who teach their kids creationism are a.) pretty ill informed and b.) doing their kids a disservice. I don't feel obliged to add "but they're entitled to their beliefs and are nice sincere people" yet that seems to be what you're asking posters to do.
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Mar 10, 2008, 12:14
|
||
As I stated, I do not support state-funded religious schools.
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Edited Mar 10, 2008, 12:49
Mar 10, 2008, 12:47
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: "I think there's too much patent anti-religiousness on these boards sometimes" Ummm, I really feel like taking issue with that. What's "too much"?. I get the feeling sometimes that there's a contingent here that claims that all religion, even the most mild, is the dominion of ignorant, stupid, or even evil people. Call me generous, but I can't condemn so many so blithely in good conscience. nigelswift wrote: Anyone that criticizes the downside of religious belief is perfectly well aware there's an upside, presumably. Well, then why not say so? nigelswift wrote: But are they obliged to balance it out? I don't see why. Let those who support religion do that if they want. As there seems to be nobody here doing that, perhaps I feel compelled to play devil's advocate (er, you know what I mean- haha). Chalk it up to my nature- I try to see arguments from both sides, if possible. It helps to clarify my own eventual conclusions. nigelswift wrote: I think people who teach their kids creationism are a.) pretty ill informed and b.) doing their kids a disservice. I don't feel obliged to add "but they're entitled to their beliefs and are nice sincere people" yet that seems to be what you're asking posters to do. I agree- Creationism taught AS FACT is a disservice. But what you're talking about is a SUBSET of religion. Listen, I obviously have to keep saying it- I'm not religious and I'm not advocating for religion. I'm advocating for PEOPLE who may have been raised under religion... They should not be condemned because their parents did so, and ought not be alienated or ridiculed. This just confirms their suspicions that the secular world is shallow and just as closed-minded as the worst of the fundamentalists. And WHY do some lump all religions together into one undifferentiated target of derision? That's intellectually lazy. The world isn't black and white. Even WITHIN the religions there's a myriad of subsets that frequently butt heads. Some religious people are willfully ignorant and some are quite open to new ways of thinking. Not all believe in the literal version of Genesis. Point is, religion is a fact of life, it's not going away, and the best way to deal with religious extremists is by persuading moderates to put distance between themselves and the lunatics. If we, as non-religious people, do what the fundies do, (claim absolute truth and denounce all other views absolutely- even the ones that AREN'T extreme), it only makes us look like hypocrites.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Mar 10, 2008, 13:36
|
||
|
"And WHY do some lump all religions together into one undifferentiated target of derision? That's intellectually lazy. The world isn't black and white. " I don't agree. It's ever so black and white and not even slightly gray. Either you believe there's an intelligent directing force with whom we can or need to interact, or you don't. Ergo, as someone who doesn't believe I have to think that all those who DO believe, be they cleverer and nicer than me or not are deluded and/or mistaken. And if their convoluted belief systems lead them to act beyond the simple religious precept Love Thy Neighbour I'm liable to say rather more than they're deluded and mistaken - as Mr Cope has. He seems a fine chap to me. A lot less harmful than anyone that gets their sense of what's right out of the small print of a holy book.
|
|||
|
shanshee_allures 2563 posts |
Edited Mar 10, 2008, 13:51
Mar 10, 2008, 13:44
|
||
|
Well, I've seen the jokes on Seinfeld, so I reckon that, for the most part, circumcision doesn't result inlasting pstchological problems for most. However, it still is deciding something for your child - as a result of your own beliefs (in the context of religious circumcision) - that is totally outwith the realms of 'redress'. They cannot denounce that at all, ever. Even if it turns out they never want to, I find that a bit unsettling. Just being utterly objective here Dave. We have to remember too that to a child parents are their 'state, their governement, their world. They get their morals, their laws, their boundaries, everything from us. So isn't there some similairy between a theocracy and a 'theocratic' upbringing? If we see problems can arise with one, why not the other? Not just talking radical fanatacis here, and neither are we when we see little bits of state legislation informed by religion creeping in. We resent it. Same thing IMO. As far as I'm concerned, my role with my child is to tell her what's harmful (to herself), and remind her not to hurt and do her best to always respect others, and that's about it. I don't rasie her in opposition to religion, it just isn't there. We don't live in an actively anti religious way. Secularism isn't 'atheism', but religion more or less views it as being so. As for the original message of this thread, about time I say. It has been accepted in law for years that religious types (loons as they may be) can cast us as sinners or infidels destined to roast or whatever. So if they want a level playing field, it's about time we can (if we choose to) parody or criticise their ways too, through art, through speech, whatever. x
|
| Pages: 6 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
