What ever happened to the NO ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ten-commandm … 00530.html
Focus on Louisiana:
The creepy conservatives have found a way to force us all to adhere to their religious values. Is this a precursor to what can be expected if Trump wins another term?
Why do they insist on inculcating impressionable children with their values? Not everyone subscribes to the same faith. The "Ten Commandments" is a product of Judeo-Christianity and has nothing to do with the Constitution. Why can't they simply keep their religion and its concepts at home? Can someone answer that?
I thought that this was all settled in the early 1960s, but obviously conservatives never really evolve and were not satisfied with the SC decision at the time and the Louisiana
Republicans are counting on the current right wing tribunal AKA, Supreme Court of the United States to violate their vaunted principles of original intent and strict constructionism, going against established law in area as critical as this, to have this incredible concept confirmed.
What's next, mandated prayers, moments of silence in public schools?
Please, Don't run from me on this, do any of you see a problem?This trend repeats itself every generation. Freedom of religion does not give one person the right to impose their religion on others. But it sure gets a politician's name in the paper and energizes those he hopes will vote for him/her. It is a cheap shot and cheapens his religion, but its effectiveness makes it irresistible to some.
Thank you, Kathleen for your response. I know that we have always had forces of religious intolerance just beneath the surface, but they have been contained until now. Promoting the 'old time religion' is like kissing babies for politicians. I would have hoped that people would be smarter than this.
I find this to be a very disturbing development.
I hope it makes to the Supreme Court and they rule against it like in Kentucky. Isn't there something or another about losing federal funding for schools if there isn't separation of church and state in schools?
I think that comes to play for schools that discriminate and use public funds, from what I hear anyway. Religious schools are not generally publically funded, this is a way to get the camels nose under the tent. In the past this would have been shot down, but with the composition of the Supreme Court these days, I can even be sure of that.
My perception from across the pond is that in contrast to the UK, religion seems to be such an important and integral part of the American social cultural society; so in Britain (excluding Northern Ireland) as we don’t have the issues you’re facing, following this forum is educational for me, as I learn a little more about American politics and culture.
Only 3.2% of Brits attend church, how does that compare to Americans?Of course, it depends on what religion you desire to know about. There are more than Christians such as Jews, Hindu, Muslim, and etc. According to a Gallup Poll for 2021 - 2023 21% attended church services weekly. However, attending church services does not speak to belief in God. That is a different matter.
Don't forget in our vast country of fifty states within regions it is definitely a regional or state thing too. Some states are more religious such as conservative states. There is the southeast states and the bible belt.
If curious the following link is to the Gallup study showing ten different categories for religions including 'Other'.
Church Attendance Has Declined in Most U.S. Religious Groups Published Mar 26, 2024.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/642548/chu … roups.aspx
Curious doing some exploring about the UK and religion I discovered a report from the 2021 census about religion in England and Wales. It showed a decline in Christianity between 2011 (59.3%) and 2021 (46.2%). The report shows other religions too.
Religion, England and Wales: Census 2021 by the Office of National Statistics
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation … census2021
For a deep dive into Religion worldwide Ipsos published a report May 2023. Interesting. Plum full of graphics.
GLOBAL RELIGION 2023
Religious Beliefs across the world. A 26-country Global Advisor Survey
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/fil … ntries.pdfThanks for all the links; yeah, I was aware of the UK Censuses and the continuing decline of religious faith in Britain (not including Northern Ireland) since the 1960s. One thing that does strike me is that while a high percentage of Christians in America regularly attend church; hardly anyone who is religious bothers going to church in Britain – of course it’s a different picture in Northern Ireland.
As with America, there are regional differences across the UK, for example, while 4.8% of people in Wales regularly attend church, in England its only 1.7%. In contrast to Britain, 79.7% of people in Northern Ireland are Christian, and 32% of Protestants, and 46% of Catholics in Northern Ireland regularly attend church. So in a sense, Northern Ireland’s is the UK’s equivalent to Americas Bible belt!
The big impact of such low church attendance in Britain is that a high percentage of churches and chapels are being sold off by the churches and repurposed for other uses.
An interesting fun fact: There are more pubs in Britain than churches e.g. 46,800 pubs and 38,500 churches.
Yep, familiar with the Bible belt in America, it often featured in American films and documentaries; particularly the Amish, who are world renowned and world respected.Much of that is because you don't have freedom of religion in the UK.
U.K. Stifles Prayer with Public Spaces Protection Orders
https://adflegal.org/article/uk-stifles … ion-orders
Some teachers ‘self-censoring’ to avoid causing religious offence, poll finds
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/b … 50158.html
Lack of freedom of religion is one of the reasons people left England and started the United States.Lack of freedom of religion is one of the reasons people left England and started the United States.
-----
The religious intolerance found in our society today may well be a reason we should go back.No, Europe is far less tolerant of Christians than the United States.
In England, a Christian can get arrested for not making a sound and silently praying outside an abortion clinic. Not making a sound. It happened twice.i will call on Arthur to clarify that with me as to its veracity.....
I'm almost certain that these people were arrested for violating a buffer zone, not for praying. Hopefully Arthur will weigh in.
Am I the only one who can do research on the internet? Just asking.
"Video showed Christian campaigner Isabel Vaughan-Spruce being confronted by police outside the BPAS Robert Clinic in Kings Norton, Birmingham, in February.
Officers from West Midlands Police told her 'engaging in prayer' was 'the offence' after she insisted she was 'not protesting'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … ogise.htmlA West Midlands Police spokesperson said: "Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, aged 45 from Geraldine Road, Malvern, was arrested on December 6 and subsequently charged on December 15 with four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO)."
She was later charged with breaking a Public Space Protection Order, said by Birmingham City Council to have been introduced to ensure "people visiting and working there have clear access without fear of confrontation".
Maybe she should have just followed the law and prayed outside of the buffer zone rather than inside of it.
It's clear that it doesn't matter what happens within the buffer zone, whether you are praying or muttering incoherently to yourself, you're violating the law.
Daily Mail is a source with low credibility.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/m … d-25794626What was the crime listed on the arresting report? I don't think it was praying.
Woman arrested for silent prayer outside abortion clinic notches legal win but still faces potential charges
https://www.foxnews.com/world/woman-arr … al-charges
Except that's not why they were arrested. When producing such "evidence" one should put all the cards on the table - in this case, which law was violated, because that's what they were arrested for.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you’re still harping on about Isabel Vaughan-Spruce’s anti-abortion campaign in England; with her continued attempts to cause harassment to pregnant women outside abortion clinics.
Your first link is an article by the Alliance Defending Freedom group; an American Conservative Christin group who are anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ: Need I say more!
For example 1: In that link the article says the UK “is heavily restricting both free speech and religious exercise through ordinances called ‘public spaces protection orders’: The buffer zones are only 150 metres (164 yards) around abortion clinics – if the likes of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce wish to peacefully protest against abortions then they can simply do so legally by stepping outside of the buffer zone.
For example 2: the article states PSPOs “…. are deliberately used to silence and sanction people who hold pro-life convictions.” Which is nothing more than right-wing Christian propaganda: If such people wish to peacefully protest against abortion; then do so outside of the 150 yard buffer zone.
Apart from which the article is an over dramatization e.g. it makes it sounds as if the freedom to protest is restricted across the whole of the UK, but in reality such PSPOs only cover such a small area (typically 150 metres), and exist in only 5 of the 76 cities in the UK – So it’s not widespread, as the article would have you believe.
As regards your 2nd link: Read the article more carefully – it was only 16% of teachers who are mindful not to cause religious offence; and it wasn’t about religion in general, it was specifically about sensitive areas of religion e.g. the example given in the article of a teacher who showed a picture of the prophet Muhammad: And we all know what happened when a French magazine published a picture of Muhammad: https://youtu.be/mpvz7w6ilNk
So your claim that the UK “…don't have freedom of religion…” is crap: FYI, it is a legal requirement under British law that ‘all’ schools teach one hour of religion each week; albeit the parents also have a legal right to withdraw their children from such lessons if they so wish.
Also, there is nothing stopping anyone in the UK to attend any church of any religion of their choice, if and whenever they wish.
FYI: My closest friend is a gay Catholic Priest, and he’s not restricted in any way in his religion. In the photo below he’s the one in the back row, on the far right with a black hat and glasses; and standing in front of him (slightly to his right) is my wife in a mauve fleece. I took the photo just after I and my Priest friend finished doing restoration work on the roof of his archbishop’s chapel.
Thanks for the picture it proves nothing.
This is from Christian Concerns.
The UK is one of the most intolerant European countries towards Christians according to a new report from the Observatory of Intolerance Against Christians in Europe (OIDAC).
The report identifies the UK, France, Germany, Spain and Sweden as the top five countries driving what it describes as a “rising phenomenon” against Christians.
It reveals the UK as the number one country in Europe for having the most cases of legal prosecutions for alleged ‘hate speech’.
Furthermore, it suggests that violence against Christians has risen in the UK in the form of vandalism and severe arson attacks on Christian buildings and even physical assaults. It concludes that there is a strong social hostility and at the same time indifference or even a bias from public authorities.
Also revealed is the concerning statistic that anti-Christian hate crimes rose by 70% in Europe between 2019 and 2020 following a decline in freedom of conscience, expression and parental rights for Christians across the continent.
The report states that discrimination has continued to escalate during the pandemic with disproportionate bans on public Christian worship and downgrading churches to non-essential services.
From extensive questionnaires and in-depth interviews, the report finds that education, church, politics and the workplace are the four key areas of Christian life most affected.
The report identifies secular intolerance and Islamic oppression as driving forces behind the discrimination which it says is “becoming more visible.”
It says that: “The negation of a public voice is mainly based on strong and sometimes even extreme opposition to Christian morals derived from core beliefs. In some cases, it does not stop at negation but goes even further towards a criminalisation of public or even private opinions.”
OIDAC conclude its report by calling on “international and civil-society organizations to contribute towards improving this situation by reporting and raising awareness about this phenomenon.”
The ‘terrorist’ chaplain
Launching the report at an online press conference in Vienna, OIDAC featured the chilling story of Rev. Dr Bernard Randall.
Dr Randall, now dubbed the ‘Terrorist chaplain’, is receiving support from the Christian Legal Centre after he lost his job as a school chaplain and was reported to the government’s terrorist watchdog for a sermon he gave which encouraged students that they shouldn’t feel compelled to believe LGBT ideology and identity politics.
The school where Dr Randall worked had invited an LGBT group into the Church of England school and had encouraged staff to chant ‘smash heteronormativity’.
Speaking to delegates, Dr Randall said: “It is sobering to read just how widespread discrimination and intolerance against Christians has become across Europe. My own case is just the tip of an iceberg, but it does show how bad things could get if this is allowed to continue. The direction of travel is extremely worrying. I’m grateful that OIDAC Europe and Christian Concern are standing up for the principle that freedom of conscience, and the freedom to express one’s beliefs openly, apply to everyone, including Christians. These principles are the foundation of a free society.”
Growing crisis
OIDAC´s director Madeleine Enzlberger, said: “This phenomenon can occur in various forms, such as vandalism – antireligious motivated attacks against churches and Christian buildings – or even anti-Christian hate crimes against individuals. But also, through the progressively restricting or contestation of fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, contractual freedom or parental rights.”
The Christian Legal Centre’s Roger Kiska, who is an expert on European Law, said: “A 70% rise in hate crimes across Europe is a chilling statistic, but sadly not a surprising one from the perspective of many Christians.
“We have seen free speech eroded in UK universities and parental rights violated through the UK government’s Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) programme. Yet, as the report identifies, government and civil authorities are sleepwalking through this growing crisis and are refusing to confront or recognise the impact radical secularism and intolerance of Christian beliefs is having on Christians.”
Andrea Williams, chief executive of Christian Concern, said: “The report clearly indicates that there is an unaddressed and concerning problem in Europe with intolerance towards Christians.
“We have seen the rising tide of discrimination in the UK for well over a decade. The number of alleged hate crime cases in the UK is disturbing and points to a policing of Christian beliefs in public and private.
“Discriminatory attitudes and actions towards Christian beliefs, which would have been shocking to many 10 years ago, are now becoming normalised.
“A society that eradicates Christianity becomes less free, less tolerant, less humane.”
Here is an article that asks the question if the UK is Anti-Christian
What are the facts?
There is no doubt about it that there are a growing number of worrying trends:
1. Christians being disciplined or taken to court for expressing their faith.
A Christian nurse suspended for offering to pray for a patient’s recovery.
A Christian school receptionist disciplined for emailing church friends about her young daughter being reprimanded for conveying to a fellow-pupil that Christianity is true.
A Christian foster carer struck off for allowing a Muslim teenager in her care to convert to Christianity.
A Christian British Airways worker, disciplined for not hiding a cross she had on her necklace.
Christian hoteliers charged with a public order offence for criticising Islam.
And so on …. Although it took place in America, it is likely to happen here: a young single Christian woman advertised in her church for a Christian roommate and was taken to court for expressing “an illegal preference for a Christian roommate, thus excluding people of other faiths”.
2. Local councils preventing Christians advertising Christian events.
Brighton Christian prevented from advertising a Christian event in her local library because the council does “not accept any material promoting a particular religious view point.”
Sunderland church prevented from putting up a church poster because it may offend other faiths.
Sunderland church banned from advertising the Women’s World Day of Prayer in libraries. (Local Sunderland Muslims and Sikhs criticised both these bans).
Churches in two areas prevented from advertising a meeting about Religion and Climate Change in libraries unless they removed the words “Christian” and “God.”
3. Minimising major Christian festivals
For some time certain councils have tried to ban the use of the term “Christmas” and to replace it with some rather silly secular term. A gvernment minister commented: “Can you honestly tell me someone has ever said to you ‘Merry Winter-ice’? No they have not. Winter festivals exist only in the minds of beanbag-sitting weirdos.”
A survey discovered that a third of schools were moving to a fixed Spring break, many of them not coinciding with Easter.
The C of E launched The Real Easter Egg which bears a hill with three crosses and has an explanation that Jesus was crucified on Good Friday and resurrected on Easter Day. But they have discovered that supermarkets are reluctant to sell them.
https://christianteaching.org.uk/is-bri … christian/Rev. Dr Bernard Randall was a school chaplain who in 2023 was dismissed for homophobia; which including preaching anti-LGBT ideology to college students.
OIDAC, OIDAC, OIDAC…. A small privately funded non-profit organisation in Vienna, funded entirely by private donations, and whose entire annual revenue is less than $75,000, which under Austrian laws they don’t have to publish any financial records; a small key organisation that is not accredited by the EU and don’t even get any mention in Wikipedia or other reputable sites: From what I can see, the OIDAC are just as homophobic as the American Alliance Defending Freedom group.
When you look into each example; all the examples from the OIDAC that you give have been taken out of context – which for an organisation like the OIDAC should be no surprise.
For example, your first example “A Christian nurse suspended for offering to pray for a patient’s recovery.” Refers to Caroline Petrie who in 2009 asked an elderly patient in her 70s (after she had put dressings on the woman's legs) if she would like a prayer; the elderly patient refused and subsequently complained to the NHS about the nurse’s actions.
The NHS takes all complaints seriously and rightly or wrongly suspended the nurse while they investigated the case; and after looking into the matter the NHS reinstated the nurse. If anyone complains to the NHS about anything, it would be irresponsible for the NHS to turn a blind eye to the complaints – whether the NHS overreacted or not in this case is another matter; but it was certainly not Christophobia.
Your second example “A Christian school receptionist disciplined for emailing church friends about her young daughter being reprimanded for conveying to a fellow-pupil that Christianity is true” refers to Jennie Cain, a school receptionist.
Jennie Cain was disciplined by her employer (the school) for sending emails to 10 Christian friends criticising her employer for reprimanding her 5 year old daughter at the school for frightening another pupil by telling her she would "go to hell if she did not believe in God.”
Obviously if a pupil scares another pupil by making such a comment then that is unacceptable behaviour that has to be nipped in the bud; otherwise, that child is going to grow up being a religious bigot.
Contrary to the OIDAC report, the UK is not intolerant towards Christians; in a secular society like the UK, anyone of any faith, whether that be Christian, Muslim, Jewish etc. can worship that faith in private or in church, as long as they don’t show religious bigotry (intolerance towards other religions), and as long as they don’t try to shove their faith down other people’s throats.
Moving onto your comment: “For some time certain councils have tried to ban the use of the term ‘Christmas’ and to replace it with some rather silly secular term.” – Yep, there are a few (not all) local governments in England who have tried re-branding Christmas as Winterval (an idea launched by Birmingham local government in 1998), in the mistaken belief that in a secular society where more than half the population are not religious Christmas offends non-believers, and Muslims.
North Yorkshire local government tried to ban Christmas because it believes the true meaning of Christmas had been “buried under an avalanche of commercialisation”.
But in almost all cases the proposed bans are cancelled following a flurry of complaints from local residents:-
• Most atheists are perfectly willing to tolerate what they see as a fairy story, especially if their own child gets to play Mary or Joseph in the school play, and
• The Muslim Council of Great Britain has made it perfectly clear where it thinks the followers of Islam in Britain stand, by adapting a famous, fashionable wartime poster to say: "Keep Calm, its Christmas".
So the reports of banning Christmas in Britain are a storm in a tea cup.
As regards your comment - “A survey discovered that a third of schools were moving to a fixed Spring break, many of them not coinciding with Easter.” That’s a misleading report; all schools take their spring break at Easter; but there are pressure groups within England and Wales who are lobbying government to change the rules.
As regards your last comment “The C of E launched The Real Easter Egg….” “…..But they have discovered that supermarkets are reluctant to sell them.”
Fact Check:-
• The Real Easter Egg was first launched by the Church of England in 2010.
• Yes, at first supermarkets were reluctant to stock it because they were dubious about whether it would sale.
• But after some coaxing supermarkets did take it on board and was selling the ‘Real Easter Egg’ until last year.
• This year the Real Easter Egg is no longer on sale in supermarkets, because there are additional costs by using Fairtrade chocolate meaning the Real Easter Egg cannot compete with the likes of Cadbury for shelf space.
The Launch of the Real Easter Egg by the Church of England 2010: https://youtu.be/_uiXdgAHXDw
Is the Real Easter Egg on sale in the USA?
Your claim that the UK is “Minimising major Christian festivals” is an over exaggeration.All your responses just confirms my belief and the belief of many Christians in the UK and around the world that the UK is an anti-Christian nation with the ability to FEELY practice the faith becoming increasing limited.
These examples are just a few of the hundreds I could list.
"school chaplain who in 2023 was dismissed for homophobia; which including preaching anti-LGBT ideology to college students."
Interesting this happened when he was simply speaking about the passages in the Bible concerning homosexuals. These same passages about homosexuals are in the Jewish Torah. Have you ever hear of a Muslim in the UK facing the same charges? Do you know what the Holy Koran says about homosexuals? These passages are spoken about daily, yet NO Muslim is labeled "homophobic," that title is saved for Christians.
This is NOT homophobia...this is learning about what is written in a holy book. The Tora has been around for approximately 3,000 years, the Bible approximately 2,000 years and the Holy Koran approximately 1,000 years.
This is just one example. The freedom to practice religion in the US and UK is quickly dwindling.Biggest problem is that far too many feel that "FREELY practicing their religion" means forcing it onto others or, at best, making a tremendous nuisance of themselves so as to be "heard". I recall one person setting up a loudspeaker on a streetcorner in Vegas, right in front of a show scheduled to begin, and shouting into the bullhorn. This is not "practicing your religion"; it is forcing it onto others.
You are completely free to practice your religion; you are NOT free to force it onto me. I will tolerate your church bells, if used reasonably, but that's about all.The problem of course is what is the alternative?
People WILL find some form of Authority to follow.
People WILL find some faith to believe in.
The people who are capable of being independent, rational, responsible individuals even when there are no laws and no authority in place to direct them are fewer than you probably think.
Was this not evident during the Pandemic, how many people were wantonly willing to invade other people's freedoms and independence to force them to wear a mask... or get a vaccine... LONG after there was plenty of information suggesting those things would NOT stop the spread of the virus, and at best, helped protect the person wearing/getting them.
Our government is becoming that lunatic on the street shouting into the bullhorn, or haven't you noticed?
A government based on atheism, equity, pronouns, etc. welcome to your new god, your new faith, your new ideology, bow down and follow.The problem of course is what is the alternative?
People WILL find some form of Authority to follow.
People WiLL find some faith to believe in
------------
Well, Ken
(I) will decide what authority is legitimate to follow and (I) will determine where my faith goes or does not go.
I certainly do not trust rightwing type to have influence in my choices.
So, That is the alternative
Your response speaks volumes of your homophobic views.
We don’t live in the past; times has changed since the Old Testament was written – and regardless to what may be written in the Bible thousands of years ago by today’s standards homophobia crimes are ‘now’ both legally and morally wrong. I say ‘now’ because gay sex was still illegal in Britain until as recently as 2008, when all of Britain’s anti-gay laws were finally repealed.
Gay rights: Britain's changing attitudes https://youtu.be/_jEM6PS_Q10
And FYI it’s not just Christians who are prosecuted under the law for homophobic crime, people of all religions and non-religion are all treated equally under British law: And yes I have “heard of Muslims in the UK facing the same charges”, just three of the examples below:-
• 3 Muslim men convicted for gay hate leaflets in 2012
• 5 Muslims prosecuted for a homophobic video in 2013
• A Muslim Preacher (Omar Mohamad) convicted of homophobic crime in 2021
If you mean by “….the ability to FEELY practice the faith….” the freedom to practice homophobia and bigotry then that just confirms your stance on the subject.
FYI the Church of England doesn’t hold your views:
• In 2016 the Church of England changed its rules to allow its clergy (vicars/bishops etc.) to enter into same-gender civil partnerships.
• On 12th Dec 2023 the Church of England changed its rules to allow same-sex couples married in a registry office to have their marriage blessed in church.
The first same-sex couple to be blessed by the Church of England being two lesbian vicars, as shown in this short video: Church of England blesses same-sex couples for first time https://youtu.be/XYZYFRNA_o8
Advertisements in the UK for jobs or accommodation etc., stating that gays and lesbians are not welcome is on the same level of illegality and immorality as signs saying "blacks are not welcome here".Wasnt that guy that was convicted for homophobia back in 2012 just arrested because he called for gay people being killed? The other two guys walked.
I think that his point about the Christians arrested, like the guy that was talking against the LGBTQs, was that they had a much lower bar of prosecution than the Muslims. It is not unusual at the mosque for people to mention the crime of homosexuality. (At least in Morocco. I have no idea what takes place in the mosques of the UK as I have never been into one.) Passing out leaflets recommending that they be killed was a step too far.Yep, you’re right; it was a Muslim back in 2012 who “was convicted for homophobia”; namely “Passing out leaflets recommending that they be killed…” and as you said “Passing out leaflets recommending that they (homosexuals) be killed is a step too far.”
I don’t know what goes on in the privacy of British mosques either; but what is important is that Muslims (like everyone else) abide by the law of the land – and in that respect, in Britain, the Muslim community does.
In Britain, the Muslim community is represented by the MCB (Muslim Council of Britain), an umbrella body of Muslim organisations formed in 1994 that represents both Sunni and Shia Muslims.
On the question of homosexuality and same sex marriages; in 2003 the MCB (Muslim Council of Britain) lobbied the Government, opposing the Government’s policy on promoting homosexuality, and again in 2006 they lobbied the Government, opposing the Government’s policy on promoting same sex marriage:
However, later in the year (in 2006) the MCB held a series of private high level meetings with LGBT PRIDE, and in April 2007 (following those discussions) the MCB formally declared its support for the UK Government’s Equality Act, which outlaws discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation – releasing a statement that said: "the Muslim Council of Britain has begun to move towards accepting homosexuality".
Support the Muslim Council of Britain https://youtu.be/JCENchHkYh4
Good counter argument.
I would not be too cavalier in tossing aside the 'Old Testament' however, there is plenty in there that has been proven over and over again through the test of time and the fall of civilizations.Point taken: “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” may at times be appropriate, but at other times can be counterproductive.
Arthur, you have been an excellent representative for the 'mindset' of the UK, across the pond, so to speak.
I think there is some denial in both the UK and America that the world has changed, that the dominance of 'the West' over the world has come to an end.
That America in particular seems unwilling or unable to accept it, at least the current Administration, is what has put the world in the current crisis it is in.
BRICS is not going away, it is only getting stronger, with the inclusion of the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Iran they will now have a larger GDP than the G7... depending on what sources you use to reference that information.
What we see in the decisions and decrees of the UN is something I don't think the American body politic had ever considered, that they would one day be unable to dominate and control the direction the UN takes.
This can be seen today in the near totality of the UN standing against America in its support of Israel and may lead to such decisions regarding Ukraine and Taiwan in the future as well.
A significant portion of the world is divorcing itself from the Dollar and from 'Western' dominance, I don't know about the UK, but here in America we have the wrong people at the helm to steer us through these times and accept these facts.You raise some taxing questions which required a lot of thought (coffee breaks) and fact checking.
Note:
With reference to GDP, where you say “depending on what sources you use to reference that information.” yeah, GDP comes in different flavours e.g. ‘Nominal’(measures the economic output of a country using current market prices), ‘Per Capita’ and PPP (Purchasing Power Parity etc.
Articles don’t always clarify which GDP type is used; GDP is more useful in comparing national economies when talking about the G7, although GDP PPP per capita is most useful when comparing living standards between nations.
I note your emphasis on comparing the G7 with BRICS, but when slicing and dicing, it’s a more complex world than that; and the G20 and the EU are just as important; and the rest of the world’s economies shouldn’t be totally ignored.
The G7 is only 7 nations, Germany, Canada, France, Italy, Japan, UK and the USA; and the only reason the G7’s GDP is so high is because the USA has the highest GDP in the world.
The G7 (total population of 776 million people) according one data source accounts for 25.8% of Global GDP in 2023. However, in contrast the GDP (nominal) of the EU is only a fraction below the GDP of the USA, with China’s GDP (third largest GDP in the world) being just 64% of that of the USA.
Yep, the GDP of BRICS isn’t that far behind the GDP of the G7, but the GDP of the G20 (excluding the G7) is about 50% greater than the GDP of the G7; albeit the G20 includes both G7 & BRICS members, and countries that are not members of either trading block – so it makes for a more complex and dynamic picture.
Interestingly, GDP (PPP) put the USA, China and EU all on a par, as the three largest economies in the world:
• China = 16.4% of world GDP
• USA = 16.3% of world GDP
• EU = 16% of world GDP
And with more nations set to join the EU in the coming years, the EU will grow in size and population and have a larger economy; so it’s GDP will grow, and as it’s GDP is only just behind that of the USA; as the EU takes on more members, in all likelihood, within the next 10 years (if not sooner) the EU’s GDP will become larger than that of the USA.
The above are just some observations and thoughts; but moving onto your other points:-
Yep, as you say “….there is some denial in both the UK and America that the world has changed, that the dominance of 'the West' over the world has come to an end.” In my view IMHO, that denial comes predominately from right-wing nationalists who for some of the most extreme in Britain would like to see Britain return back to its days of the British Empire. Globalists have a more pragmatic view that Britain is just part of a big world, and that we all need to work together on a world stage.
Yeah, your next statement “That America in particular seems unwilling or unable to accept it….”, with the emphasis being on “….America in particular….” I think is correct in that Americans are far more patriotic than the English, and therefore far more inclined to be nationalistic?
In England, you almost never see the Union Jack (UK flag) flown: It’s only in the Protestant areas of Northern Ireland where the British flag is common place. In England you only really see the English flag (which is different to the UK flag) during the football season, other than that these days, when we’re travelling around England on holiday (vacation) we more commonly see the Ukrainian flag being flown. Of course, it’s a different story if you go to a Celtic nation, they more proudly fly their flags than the English fly the UK flag e.g. we often see the Cornish (Celtic) flag being flown in Cornwall, when we’re on holiday (vacation) in that area.
This short video encapsulates the British attitudes towards Brits quite well (the video also references America towards the end of the video):
Asking Brits Why They're Ashamed of Being British: https://youtu.be/3MHxFscqP-s
If one single country (like the USA) dominated the UN then it would be the United Nations, it would be the puppet of America; so I’ve got no gripe with America being side-lined by the UN when America is at odds with the rest of the world e.g. climate change, Gazza war etc.
In answer to your last question/statement, where you say “I don't know about the UK, but here in America we have the wrong people at the helm to steer us through these times and accept these facts.”
Yep, IMHO, “….we have had the wrong people at the helm to steer us through these times….” since 2015, but this coming Thursday (General Election on 4th July) that is about to change; as Labour is expected to have a decisive victory – footnote: credit, where credit due; the Conservatives did steer us through the pandemic by giving generous support to all ‘rich and poor alike’ which had the support of 80% of the population; but they screwed up big time on the economy with Brexit, which has divided the nation, family and friends.
I believe your response shows your total and complete lack of knowledge and understanding of the Bible.
I don't care about today's standards on homosexuality. This time was foretold about in the Bible. It's not surprising. The Bible was written over 2,000 years ago.
I believe a Christian, Jew, or Muslim should be free to share what their Holy book says about homosexuality without being fired from their job or facing any other consequences. The Holy Quran even says to kill homosexuals and the argument is to what method is meant.
I, and many thousands of Christians around the world don't consider the Church of England a Christian church.
Such places were foretold in the Bible, so it's no surprise. Did I say, it was written over 2,000 years ago?You don’t expect an atheist to care what was written in the Bible (or any other religious text) over 2,000 years ago do you?
But I do condemn people who are prejudice (biased, bigoted or intolerant) against others based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, gender, disability, or sexual orientation (including Trans), and homosexuals etc.
The Church of England is far from a fundamentalist religion, it’s very progressive. And yep, the Church of England was a bit of a joke here to. In my parents’ generation ‘official forms’ e.g. hospitals, schools etc. always ask you your religion, and in England, the Church of England was the default answer, because there was no option in those days for ‘no religion’. Of course, these days you get the ‘no religion’ option on official forms.
I believe that anyone of any religion should be free to share what their Holy book says; provided that doesn’t mean preaching hatred, and encouraging others to commit hate speech or heinous crimes.
Thanks for the reply. In my view the most revealing information was from;
GLOBAL RELIGION 2023 report.
Religious Beliefs across the world. A 26-country Global Advisor Survey
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/fil … ntries.pdf
One important element with it was they emphasized the compare/contrast of Gen Z with boomers. Revealing!!
For me having a world perspective is in a sense kind of like offering balance otherwise one may become nationalistic. There are 195 countries in the world that we live. Seven continents with regions within them.
Comparing the UK to the US is interesting, but for me that is as far as it goes . . . interesting. Usually when we discuss this or that I am researching that topic for Sweden and Scandinavia at the same time. That holds more importance to me. I just don't bring it up.
It is the same thing with here in the US. Yes, one can use the big box approach and lump everybody in it, but is it reality especially for the individual? For instance, today, I live in California a liberal state. Wilderness lives in Idaho a conservative state. GA lives I think in Maryland a kind of balance between the two. Cred lives in Florida a conservative state.
There are five major regions (Some say seven) in the US and fifty states to look at with most every topic. At times the likeness/differences are subtle and other times they are stark. And then comes along the compare/contrast of rural vs metro. That is even interesting when you compare the rural of West Virginia to the rural of Nebraska. Stark differences. Then compare/contrast those two with rural of Mississippi.
I am wandering . . . Oops!I absolutely agree “having a world perspective is in a sense kind of like offering balance otherwise one may become nationalistic.”
I had a look at the Gen Z with boomers in you link; and there is a lot of data there that would take a lot of digesting – I’m not sure what it reveals from just a cursory look (I wish I had more time to study it deeper): Do you draw any conclusions from it?
Likewise, living in Europe and not in America, comparing UK/USA is not more than an academic interest; whereas obviously for me European topics are of greater interest.
And likewise, we have distinctive regional differences across Britain, so on some matters if I lump everybody in Britain into one “big box” then I’m giving a soft focus view, rather than a sharp focus view e.g. there is a distinctive difference between southerners and northerners in England: The North/South divide – which goes back to the 8th century when Northern England was ruled by the Vikings (Daneland) and Southern England was ruled by the Saxons.
And then of course we have the big cultural and social, and political, distinctions between Anglo Saxon England, and the Celtic nations in Scotland, Ireland, Wales and Cornwall.
The North/South Divide In England: https://youtu.be/KNdVPQps5JM
• Northerners (north England) are blunt e.g. they say exactly what they think; and very friendly e.g. if they struggle to feed their family (poor) they would willingly share their meagre meal with a stranger in need.
• Southerners (south England) in contrast can be two-faced in that they all too often hide their true feelings for fear of offending others; and are less sociable and less friendly than northerners.
Where is the north/south divide? (Video made with British humour): https://youtu.be/ENeCYwms-Cc But as the video correctly points out the Midlands is not in the north or south, it’s in the Middle of England (and they have their own distinctive social and cultural society).
The one Celtic Nation in England is Cornwall, and this old video (made with British humour) shows exactly what the Cornish people think of the English:
Kernow (Cornish for Cornwall) https://youtu.be/-nN9I_7djgo
There’s also a brief reference to America tourists in the video; and the word Emmet in the video is a Cornish derogatory word for ‘English’):
Albeit, in 2014 (since the above video was made) the UK Conservative Government has granted the people of Cornwall legal protective status as a ‘national minority’; so that legally Cornwall can slowly progress towards more autonomy as the other Celtic nations in the UK have/and are doing – subject to the ‘will’ of the people e.g. Cornwall now has its own legally recognised Celtic language.
Cornwall: A Celtic Nation Trapped in England https://youtu.be/iet2TL0S_zc
Hi, Arthur, as for religion's importance. I have a negative attitude considering most of it just the opium of the people. We have million dollar cathedrals and preachers that are celebrities in their own right. Much of the evangelical movement in Christianity is just another rightwing political faction that hides behind Jesus and uses HIm, giving a false sense of their legitimacy.They consider Trump himself as some sort of Saint. When one examines the scriptures and compare them with the policies and position of the churches there is a complete disconnect.
They are the most despicable of the Rightwingers, because every position they take and every belief system they have have been ordained by Jesus and God as interpreted by some of the most corrupt people on earth.
While we have a high church going population, I don't see any better people on account of it.
Oh, here are some numbers for you
Two decades ago, an average of 42% of U.S. adults attended religious services every week or nearly every week. A decade ago, the figure fell to 38%, and it is currently at 30%.
I thank you for your comment.Yep, I am fully aware of what you’re saying; the picture you paint is the same perception we have on this side of the pond of “million dollar cathedrals and preachers in the American evangelical movement”.
What you may find fascinating to watch is this ‘full’ episode of where Derren Brown exposes the faith healing scam in the Bible belt in America.
Back ground info on Derren Brown: Derren Brown is a famous TV entertainer in Britain (an English entertainer, mentalist, illusionist, and writer); who is highly talented.
This short 3 minute video of Derren Brown using his mentalist skills on New Yorkers in America gives a taste of his talent in manipulating people’s minds: https://youtu.be/6PtiFvIhvA0
Derren Brown exposes the faith healing scam in the Bible belt in America (full episode) - At 42 minutes into the video is where the multi-millionaire preacher that Derren Brown is targeting gets the local police to warn Derren Brown off (all captured on film): https://youtu.be/iuP5uOI7XwcThanks for the links, I am ashamed at how gullible Americans can be sometimes. I only saw a portion, pretty elaborate scheme.
We wanted you to clarify something expressed lower in this thread as to whether British subjects can be arrested for praying.Readmikenow has a bee in his bonnet about PSPO (Public Space Protection Orders); PSPOs is anti-social behaviour legislation introduced by the Conservative Government in 2014, designed to deal with a particular nuisance in a defined public space, where the nuisance behaviour is having a negative impact on the quality of life for those in that public space.
PSPOs are sometimes used as a protection zone around abortion clinics to protect the ‘freedom’ of women who choose to have abortions from harassment by anti-abortion protestors: and of course, as Readmikenow is more interested in the supporting the rights of anti-abortion protestors rather than the rights of women who choose abortion, then quite naturally Readmikenow doesn’t understand the purpose of PSPOs to protect the public from nuisance behaviour.
Readmikenow’s gripe with PSPOs is that there have been a couple of notable anti-abortionists, notably Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, who deliberately and consistently makes her presence known in PSPO exclusion zones outside of abortion clinics in Birmingham. She is well known locally as an anti-abortionist campaigner, so by just being there (even though she only silently prays in protest), she causes a lot of distress (intimidation) to local women (who know who she is and what she stands for) at a distressful and emotional time of seeking abortion.
The PSPO buffer zone outside of the Birmingham abortion clinic is only 150 metres (164 yards); so if Isabel Vaughan-Spruce truly wanted to pray in silence, while not causing distress to those using the abortion clinic, she could simply do so outside of the buffer zone.
The only PSPO we have in Bristol is a dog control PSPO e.g. to encourage dogs owners to be responsible for keeping their dogs on lead in open public spaces where they would otherwise be a nuisance, and to make dog owners responsible for picking up any poo-poos the dog may make, and to exclude dogs from open air children places: Of course there are sensible exceptions to the Bristol PSPO order e.g. guide dogs and working dogs etc. are exempt from the order.
https://www.bristol.gov.uk/residents/cr … rders-pspoThat is what I thought, thanks for acknowledging that. This so called war against Christians in Europe the rabid American Right here refers to is just their own form of religious intolerance. They would prefer that the government mandates everyone to worship God in the exact manner the right wing Christians prescribe. I loathe this sort for their impudence and arrogance. Talking about the pot calling the kettle black. The evidence is before you, first hand.
"most of it just the opium of the people"
Credance 2
"Religion is the opium of the masses"
Karl MarxAnd in many ways, Marx was right, it serves as the perfect diversion.
So, every utterance from Karl Marx, the man, is to be dismissed as you label him a communist. How many times have that term been used against Civil rights movement and labor movements throughout the 20th century? I think that it is a right wing club to pummel its opposition.
Am I a communist? No. But that does not mean that I prefer or prescribe to a laissez faire capitalist system current being pushed here. There is that fine discernment beyond conservative thought that does not consider that there is a vast gulf between "communism" and laissez faire, capitalism out of controlMarx’s critique of capitalism and capitalist society has shaped much of the social thinking in Western countries that led to the welfare state and extensive government intervention into economic affairs.
it served as the ideological banner that inspired the socialist and communist revolutions of the twentieth century beginning in Russia in 1917 and still retaining political power today in such countries as Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, China and much of Europe and America today.
In the name of the Marxian vision of a “new society” and a “new man,” socialist and communist revolutions led to the mass murders, enslavement, torture, and starvation of hundreds of millions of people around the world.
Historians have estimated that in the attempt to make that “new” and “better” socialist world, communist regimes have killed as many as, maybe, 200 million people in the twentieth century.
I suspect the efforts of the twenty-first century can top that.
Karl’s religious training was limited; at an early age he rejected all belief in a Supreme Being.
After studying for a time in Bonn, he transferred to the University of Berlin to work on a doctoral degree in philosophy. But he was generally a lazy and good-for-nothing student.
The money that his father sent to him for tuition at the University was spent on food and drink, with many of his nights spent at coffee houses and taverns getting drunk and arguing about Hegelian philosophy with other students.
He was the prototypical elitist snob of his time, unfamiliar with work, having no real drive, living off the wealth of his family.
Marx’s only real jobs during his lifetime were as occasional reporters for or editors of newspapers and journals most of which usually closed in a short period of time... he was, if anything, a pioneer of today's main-stream-media elite class, though, a failure at being successful even at this.
His political activities as a writer and activist resulted in his having to move several times, including to Paris and Brussels, finally ending up in London in 1849, where he lived for the rest of his life.
Marx, in essence, was a loser that despised those who had drive and determination to make something of themselves and/or improve the world.
Though Marx was “well off” thanks to the efforts of the family he was born into and even “Victorian” in many of his everyday cultural attitudes, this did not stop him from breaking his marriage vows and committing adultery.
He had sex enough times with the family maid that she bore him an illegitimate son whom lived under the same roof with his wife and his legitimate children.
Marx would not allow his illegitimate child to visit their mother in his London house whenever he was at home, and the boy could only enter the house through the kitchen door in the back of the house.
In addition, he had his friend, longtime financial benefactor, and intellectual collaborator, Fredrick Engels, claim parentage of the child so to avoid any social embarrassment falling upon himself due to his infidelity.
In all his research into the iniquities of British capitalism, he came across many instances of low-paid workers but he never succeeded in unearthing one who was paid literally no wages at all.
Yet such a worker did exist, in his own household.
This was Helen Demuth [the life-long family maid]. She got her keep but was paid nothing. She was a ferociously hard worker, not only cleaning and scrubbing, but managing the family budget. Marx never paid her a penny.
Marx treated her, and the son they had together, no better than 'masters' treated their 'slaves' a hundred years earlier.
Marx could be cruel and authoritarian. He treated people with whom he disagreed in a crude and mean way, often ridiculing them in public gatherings.
Marx had no hesitation about being a hypocrite; when he wanted something from someone he would flatter them in letters or conversation, but then attack them in nasty language behind their backs to others.
He often used racial slurs and insulting words to describe the mannerisms or appearance of his opponents in the socialist movement.
For instance, in an 1862 letter to Frederick Engels, Marx described leading nineteenth-century German socialist, Ferdinand Lassalle, in the following way:
The Jewish Ni---r Lassalle … fortunately departs at the end of this week … It is now absolutely clear to me that, as both the shape of his head and his hair texture shows – he descends from the N---os who joined Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or grandmother on the paternal side hybridized with a n---er). Now this combination of Germanness and Jewishness with a primarily N--ro substance creates a strange product. The pushiness of the fellow is also n--ger-like.
In Marx’s mind, the Jew in bourgeois society encapsulated the essence of everything he considered despicable in the capitalist system, and only with the end of the capitalist system would there be an end to most of those unattractive qualities.
Here is Marx’s conception of the Jewish mind in nineteenth century Europe, from his essay “On the Jewish Question” (1844):
What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Haggling. What is his worldly god? Money! … Money is the jealous god of Israel before whom no other god may exist.
Money degrades all the gods of mankind and converts them into commodities … What is contained abstractly in the Jewish religion – contempt for theory, for art, for history, for man as an end in himself … The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Jewishness.
This from a man that did not believe in any god.
Marx’s caricaturing description of the asserted “Jewish mindset” rings amazingly similar to those that were later written by the Nazi “race-scientists” of the 1930s.
Marx was also what some might label as a plagiarist. From 1852 to 1862, Marx worked as a European correspondent for the New York Daily Tribune.
Marx found it too burdensome to grind out the expected two articles per week, for which he was relatively well paid.
Instead, he spent his time participating in revolutionary intrigues and researching, reading, and writing for what became his famous work, Das Kapital.
During Marx’s decade of employment with the newspaper, Friedrich Engels wrote about one-third of his articles. Marx’s name still appeared on the by-lines.
Many found Marx’s personal appearance and manner off-putting or even revolting. In 1850, a spy for the Prussian police visited Marx’s home in London under the pretense of a German revolutionary.
The report the spy wrote was shared with the British Ambassador in Berlin. The report said, in part:
[Marx] leads the existence of a Bohemian intellectual. Washing, grooming and changing his linen are things he does rarely, and he is often drunk.
There is not one clean and solid piece of furniture. Everything is broken, tattered and torn, with half an inch of dust over everything and the greatest disorder everywhere …
When you enter Marx’s room smoke and tobacco fumes make your eyes water … Everything is dirty and covered with dust, so that to sit down becomes a hazardous business.
Another report on meeting Marx was given by Gustav Techow, a Prussian military officer who had joined the Berlin insurrectionists during the failed revolution of 1848.
In a letter to his revolutionary associates, Techow described his impression of Marx, the man and his mind. The picture was of a power-lusting personality who had contempt for both friends and foes:
He gave me the impression of both outstanding intellectual superiority and a most impressive personality. If he had had as much heart as brain, as much love as hate, I would have gone through fire with him despite the fact that he not only did not hide his contempt for me, but as the end was quite explicit about it …
I regret, because of our cause, that this man does not have, together with his outstanding intelligence, a noble heart to place at our disposal. I am convinced that everything good in him has been devoured by the most dangerous personal ambitions. He laughs at the fools who repeat after him his proletarian catechism, just as he laughs at [other] communists … and also at the bourgeoisie …
Despite all of his assurances to the contrary, perhaps precisely because of them, I left with the impression that personal domination is the end-all of his every activity … And [Marx considers that] all of his old associates are, despite their considerable talents, well beneath and behind him and should they ever dare to forget that, he will put them back in their places with the impudence worth of a Napoleon.
In short, Marx could have been a brilliant mind that helped humanity attain higher levels of enlightenment and achievement, if not for the fact that he was consumed by his own arrogance and loathing for all others.
Marx’s desire to destroy the institutions of society and his blood-thirst towards enemies in the coming communist revolution was captured in his plan of action, written with Engels, for the Central Committee of the Communist League in March 1850.
It reads like the literal playbook for what Vladimir Lenin did in undertaking the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.
He stated that the goal of the organization was “the overthrow of the privileged classes,” initially in cooperation with the petty and liberal “bourgeois” political parties. Marx warned that these democratic parties only want to establish a liberal agenda of reduced government spending, more secure private property rights and some welfare programs for the poor. Instead, Marx said:
Its our interest and our task to make the revolution permanent until all the more or less propertied classes have been driven from their ruling positions, until the proletariat has conquered state power and until the association of the proletarians has progressed sufficiently far – not only in one country but in all the leading countries of the world …
Our concern cannot simply be to modify private property, but to abolish it, not to hush up class antagonisms but to abolish classes, not to improve the existing society but to found a new one.
In the process of overthrowing the liberal democratic order that assumes power following the end of the monarchical rulers, Marx said that the revolutionary proletariat needed to form armed “councils” outside of the democratic government’s authority and control. This is the very method Lenin insisted upon in Russia in the form of “Soviets” after the abdication of the Russian czar in March 1917 and in opposition to the newly established provisional democratic government that replaced the Russian monarchy.
Marx insisted that the feudal lands were not to be turned into peasant-owned private farms. No, instead, they were to be taken over by the state and transformed into collective farms upon which all among rural population will be made to live and work. And all industries had to be nationalized under an increasingly centralized and all-powerful proletarian government, to assure the end of capitalism and “bourgeois” democracy.
Not so different from today's UN Agenda 2030 and the WEF's Great Reset... "you will own nothing and you will be happy"
You will have no choice, the alternative will be what it always is in a Communist/Socialist system, your death.Ken, I did not mean for you to have done the exhaustive research on Karl Marx that you obviously have. I am not in love with Karl Marx, but is EVERYTHING that he said wrong?
Religion has been the source or turmoil and torment over the last millennium. Is it really wrong to think that a certain amount of exploitation was associated with it?
European societies are more socialist than is the case here. But, I don't see democracy taking a back seat or large patches of economic deprivation. And, it is not related to Communism. Seems to work pretty well for them.
Even Trump says things on rare occasion that can be considered true.Marx's overall philosophy was about as wrong as it could be. But, like every other human that has ever lived, there were nuggets of gold in their life long verbiage. No man is 100% good; no man is 100% wrong.
A lot of folk ask themselves why it is that we have a Pride Month, have Transgenders now a protected minority, why they are forced upon children, why those "values" are being forced on their children.
I guess if you are Queer, or Trans, or a Pedophile these are things that you want... but if you are a devout Christian or Muslim or just a parent that doesn't want your child indoctrinated with BS... maybe you don't want this being shoved down your kid's throats, or in their school books, or in their classes.Good point. Is there any real difference between pushing Christianity and pushing the WOKE philosophy liberals are so enamored of? Not to me...one is as offensive as the other.
Hmmm...
One is a pillar of what the Nation was founded on...
The other allows men to beat up on women in sports and share their shower rooms. Allows for young children to be manipulated into getting hormones and operations they may regret as adults. Allows adults to prey on children for their own twisted sexual fantasies. Hmmmm...
Tough to decide which one is worse...We disagree but your partipation is appreciated, Ken.
Deleted
I listened to most of it, Ken. I stand by the idea that everyone is entitled to equal opportunity and have the aspiration to reach for the stars according to their desire and their ability to attain to the standard. There are women engineers, just because there may not be as many as men does not mean that women should not aspire to this profession if they are qualified. And standards do not have to be lowered to accommodate women, while there will not be as many women firefighters as men, some can and do qualify. So, it is unfair to disqualify people based on gender because we think that some sort of cultural standard automatically preclude women from certain professions and jobs, I don't buy it. There should be no such thing as people being eliminated from opportunity solely because they are a woman.
I guess that is where I stand in this matter.
Well, Ken, people also asked why do we have a Black or Woman's history months? As, after all, recognizing their contribution to American history and current life would have been considered "deviant" not so long ago. Everything was on the values of the great white father who invented everything and made America great, after all didn't George Washington cut down the cherry tree?
Religious establishment is explicitly forbidden in the Constitution. How are transgender forced upon children? They used to say the same thing about Black Children at one time.
Parents can control what books their children can or cannot read as long as a blue nose right wing parent does not attempt to apply his or her standard to every child.
Do you think that these evangelical Rightwingers would really tolerate tenets of the Koran in the same hallowed space as their "Ten Commandments" required in every public school classroom?
There is a difference in being compelled (captive audience) as opposed to being exposed to. That is tough one for your standard conservative to discern sometimes.
Calling myself a little theoretical expert in all aspects of hypnotic influencing -- which includes the mass brainwashing -- I can only observe the phenomenon as another cheap strategy of gaining power in the public minds. Organized religion has from ever maintained that indoctrinating tool for duping the masses, and politicians are "naturally" expected to use any tool available in the toolbox of influencing -- even if that clashes with the basic guaranteed freedoms.
They will gladly start a political war somewhere, then go to their church and pretend to be believers in "loving equally all human beings". As if Jesus would bless their kissing asses of the rich elite in whose interests are all wars.
So, what else is there to be expected form such people?
Why even be surprised?I forgot to mention: Please, everybody do me a big favor and don't respond to this comment either -- I couldn't stand the news of anybody finding something worth noticing in my comments. As a satirist, I can't but laugh thinking high everybody on these forums are so out of my league with their superior reasoning.
Thanks in advance. LOL.There isn't much that raises my ire more than seeing a handful of religious nuts trying to force their fantasy and mythology onto everyone else as actual reality.
This WILL be challenged, of course, and it will lose.We don’t agree on much, but we agree on this, your comment is appreciated.
Will it lose? This is another instance of reaping what Trump has sown. He has activated these extremists, emboldened them. This law came to be solely for the purpose of reaching SCOTUS. ,
“I can’t wait to be sued,” Gov. Landry said on Saturday.
Let's not forget Alito agreeing on tape at a historical society dinner that the country needs to be returned "to a place of "godliness" we know Uncle Clarence will be on board also.
This is where we are headed if Trump wins in November. Increasing extremism.
The ones pushing these commandments on kids are fervent supporters of Trump, who probably broke 8 or 9 of them. What's the plan for explaining to the third graders the act of adultery? They can use Trump as an example I suppose.
Louisiana comes in at #40 when it comes to the education of its children. I think they need the wall space for long division. But of course, kids can be sacrificed for a political cause.I might be surprised if it reaches SCOTUS, as the basis has been well covered already.
But it is interesting to see Trump once more blamed for something he had no part at all in."But it is interesting to see Trump once more blamed for something he had no part at all in."
He created a court that extremists are tripping over themselves to get in front of. I think they're feeling confident that this politicized court will overturn precedent. They certainly have shown their ability to parse law to the point of bending it toward their ideology.
The governor stating that he can't wait to be sued are the words of a partisan who expects that his judicial allies will let him trample the religious rights of those in Louisiana.He created a court that follows the law. If you wish something else then I'm sorry, for there are millions upon millions of US citizens that like the idea of a nation of laws.
Yes, I understand that there are people out there that will take Trumps words, actions and lack of either to mean whatever they choose for it to mean. We saw if in the Capitol riot, we've seen it elsewhere and we will see it again.
This is not unusual, for such people will always twist what is said into something that they think means they can do as they wish. Again, we have seen it before (with other speakers) and we will see it again.
Interesting discussion.
Louisiana is saying the 10 commandments have historical significance and the posters put in school will paid for by donations.
Watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7nVgkL0jUoWill others who gather donations to be able to hang posters also?
Well, Mike, thanks for dropping by. I would like an answer to Willows question, who else are free to gather donations to have their posters or placards placed for compulsory display in public schools?
We settled this over a half century ago. You are conservative why do you have to ram things down my throat or those of my children?
All this national heritage stuff is just another ruse to find a way to inculcate the values of always questionable religious beliefs into people whether they want them or not. Leave it to Fox News to water it down..... there are many ways to express the ideas found in the Ten commandment through a non-denomination secular fashion. Why insist on Moses' tablet?"I would like an answer to Willows question"
When I get questions like this my response is that you have access to the internet, so look it up. If you want me to do research, I will charge you my going rate.It's really not even a matter of research. If one group can privately fund posters to be hung in public schools, why shouldn't another be allowed the same opportunity?
Or is it just the government that decides which posters are allowed to hang?
On another note... The educational system in Louisiana is so bad that many kids can't even read them. But you know, Republican priorities..
Rev. Benjamin Cremer also accurate on Republican priorities..
“When I was hungry” you put up posters of the Ten Commandments in my classroom while making sure I didn’t get lunch at school"perhaps that is a ruse for the fact that you don't have an answer?
For the record, I'm one of the 30% - but I've changed churches. Please don't blame God for what people do in HIs name. I'm sure He is as disappointed in them as the rest of us.
Just for the hell of it for the curious where America and Americans stand on religion in public life and politics. Pew Research released a report March 15, 2024 on those topics and more. Plenty of graphics sharing different religions and denominations to gain perspective.
8 in 10 Americans Say Religion Is Losing Influence in Public Life
Few see Biden or Trump as especially religious
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/20 … blic-life/
The main topics are:
1. Religion’s role in public life
2. U.S. presidential candidates and their religious engagement
3. Christianity’s place in politics, and ‘Christian nationalism’
Particular to the Topic/OP is the following
16% of Americans want to stop enforcement of church-state separation
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/20 … _3-04-png/
Percent who say the federal government should _______ the separation of church and state
Enforce = 55%
Stop enforcing = 16%
Neither/no opinion = 28%Mike -- What if it's not about "limited freedom of practicing religion", but rather about people increasingly having second thoughts about religion?
And, as for those "homophobic" people, why not let people have a freedom to like and to dislike whatever they want, instead on imposing on them anything?
So what, if there are those who may think that homosexuality is "not natural because no other creature on earth is doing it" -- other than being someone's sexual preference?
I have no position about it, and don't really care what others do in their bedrooms, but objectively speaking, who are we to tell others how to look at it? Isn't "freedom" in the first place freedom to use our own minds -- or is it a "freedom to decide by whom to be brainwashed"?
Who the hell cares what one or another holy book is saying about it? The history is clearly showing that millennia of "practicing religion" has not created a harmonious coexistence on this planet -- on the contrary, we have just invented more sophisticated ways of hating each other.
And we hate each other because we deny each other's right to be who we are, to think freely, to be damn different like our DNA and our fingerprints are suggesting it.
We disagree about everything, from "ideal diet" to "ideal political ideology", to "ideal god", and we actually have over 4,000 religions, clearly telling the story of human inability to have a unified faith in anything at all.
And it may even be good this way, because evolution of consciousness cannot go on without the new challenging the old.
And while I don't care about sexual habits of people, I certainly find it ridiculous that people go out in the streets and parade about it. Have we ever seen "straight" lovers do similar advertising?
But O.K., now it's that satirist in me jumping into my writing.
So much I had to say on this topic of "religious and homosexual freedoms".In addition to my above comment -- I am not for intellectual anarchy, but for a cultural alternative in which authority, whether parental, academic, or political, is promoting rationality, not drilling into others' minds, commonly by use of fear, what's "the only way" to understand things.
It is rational that we have order, that we have an effective system of living together -- but it is irrational to brainwash, to demand that one system of ideas be followed sheepishly as a taboo.
That leads to parental, academic, political, and religious dictatorship, and then "freedom" is only a silly word invented by dreamers.
You and I may respectfully disagree with each other, but we don't have to hate each other because of that disagreement, or call each other names, or anything else being used on the current political battlefield of popularity.
That's irrational. And that damn war in Ukraine is irrational, as the US politicians are forcing Russia to use force since NATO military bases somehow "had to be" installed in the Russian neighborhood. And it's irrational that Palestine is not allowed to have their country, after just about any ethnical group in the world is having one.
Like, who is called upon, who is that "earthly god" to impose ANYTHING on anybody else?
We, humans are truly embarrassing ourselves when we are even mentioning the word "freedom". And I am not even claiming here to be right, but that's what my free mind is generating -- and anybody is welcome to disagree.The word "homosexual" did not appear in any translation of the Bible until the mid 1940s.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/documenta … christians
Please don't use God's Word for your own prejudices.The word did not appear there...but Leviticus 20:13 makes it very, very clear what the bible has to say about homosexuals. Without or without the modern terminology.
Well if we're looking at Leviticus as some sort of guide, let's not cherry pick.
Some Christians use Leviticus to vilify homosexuality.
If you go back to older versions, you find “If a man lies with a male as with a woman”, and, in the context of 500 b.c., when it was written, that line “man lies with a male” referred to an adult man and a young boy. It is the phrase the ancient Greeks used to talk about pederasty. And many bible historians agree that Leviticus 20:13 was intended to ban pederasty, not homosexuality between adults.
But for those who would like to interpret that passage in Leviticus to mean being a gay man is bad.
Leviticus also bans:
Eating fat, instead of saving it as an offering to the Lord (Leviticus 3:17)
Touching an unclean animal, or the carcass of an unclean animal (Leviticus 5:2)
Having sex with a woman on her period (Leviticus 15:24, Leviticus 20:28; this rule was considered so important, it was listed TWICE)
Reaping your field to the edges, instead of leaving some of your harvest for the poor (Leviticus 19:9)
Planting different seeds in the same field (Leviticus 19:19)
Getting tattoos (Leviticus 19:28)
Failing to treat foreigners in your land with respect and compassion (Leviticus 19:33–34: “the foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born”). Oh my!!
Selling land (Leviticus 25:23)
Charging interest or selling food at a profit to the poor (Leviticus 25:35–37)
The thing is, if you go into the street and ask a bunch of Christians “name 10 things Leviticus bans,” I bet most of them can’t do it.
So we have this religious book with a whole bunch of rules. Some invent all kinds of reasons why you don’t have to follow half the rules.
“Oh, that’s the old covenant, Jesus made a new covenant. But not for this one rule. No, this one rule, the one that matches a personal prejudice, this the rule we keep and must abide by. Not any of the others. It’s in the Bible! They scream.
Yeah, there's a whole lot in the Bible.I'm afraid you have the old testament.
How about the New Testament that was written in the time of Jesus?
Jude 1:7
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
1 Timothy 9:10
Many of the things you mentioned in Leviticus were changed by Jesus. It's the reason Christians don't have to eat kosher meals and more.
I could go on and on and on.
The Bible couldn't be more clear in its teaching that homosexuality is wrong.
It is a book that is followed by millions of people around the world and has been in existence for over 2,000 years.
Do the teachings about homosexuality in the Holy Quran bother you? It calls for very harsh punishment against homosexuals.
"Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.”My post concerning Leviticus was in response to Mike's citation of a particular verse .
That being said..
No television preacher has ever read the Bible. Neither has any evangelical politician. Neither has the pope. Neither have I. At best, we've all read a bad translation, a translation of translations of translations of hand-copied copies of copies of copies of copies, and on and on, hundreds of times.
These manuscripts were originally written in Koiné, or "common" Greek, and not all of the amateur copyists spoke the language or were even fully literate. Some copied the script without understanding the words. And Koiné was written in what is known as scriptio continua, meaning no spaces between words and no punctuation. So, a sentence like weshouldgoeatmom could be interpreted as "We should go eat, Mom," or "We should go eat Mom." Sentences can have different meaning depending on where the spaces are placed.
Many words in New Testament Greek don't have clear English equivalents. Sentence structure, idioms, stylistic differences, all of these are challenges when converting versions of the New Testament books into English. Koiné is ancient Greek and not spoken anymore. This is why English translations differ, with many having been revised to reflect the views and guesses of the modern translators.
The gold standard of English Bibles is the King James Version but that was not a translation of the original Greek. Instead, a Church of England committee relied primarily on Latin manuscripts translated from Greek.
It's sort of akin to the game of "telephone"
As far as the New testament goes, it certainly raises a problem for fundamentalists eager to condemn homosexuals or anyone else: If they accept the writings of Paul and believe ALL people are sinners, then salvation is found in belief in Christ and the Resurrection. For everyone. There are no exceptions in the Bible for sins that evangelicals really don't like.
So apparently, God doesn't need the help of fundamentalists/ evangelicals in determining what should be done in the afterlife with the prideful, the greedy, the debaters or even those darn homosexuals. Which could well be why Jesus cautioned his followers against judging others while ignoring their own sins. In fact, he had a specific word for people obsessed with the sins of others. He called them hypocrites.
I embrace what modern Bible experts know to be the true sections of the New Testament. Jesus said, Don't judge. He condemned those who pointed out the faults of others while ignoring their own. And he proclaimed, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.".
Neither the KJV nor the NIV says anything about "male". Both refer to "man".
But yeah, the bible has been said to say almost anything under the sun, depending on the speaker. And the Old Testament, full of "God's word" as instructions on how to live, is an abomination in itself.
The word used in the old testament was the word for rapist. In other verses the word meant men who preyed upon boys. Homosexuals today account for about 2% of all sexual assaults. Most are done by heterosexual men. How about we direct some of that righteous indignation at them.
Ecclesiastes 10:2
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of a fool to the left."A perfect example of how anyone can pull a verse out of context for their own argument.
How?
Most people in that time were right handed. When they wanted something done right they used their right hand. Most people couldn't use their left hand so it was considered foolish to use your left hand.
The right worked and the left did not.
The individual credited with writing Ecclesiastes; King Solomon.
Do you know any of the history of the book of Ecclesiastes?
It's a parable. That is a story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.
Whose idea was it to correlate the political meaning of left and right with their scriptural designations in the Bible?
It did not say in a universal way that Left is wrong and "Right" is correct, it is just relative positioning.
Just seems kinda dumb from its very inception.....It is a statement in the Bible.
Again,
Ecclesiastes 10:2
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left"
It's a parable. That is a story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.
Since the Ten Commandments is part of the Bible, it seems appropriate.
They are in Exodus 20:2-17Does the heart of the wise incline toward Nazism? What you offer is a wrong and irrelevant comparison.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/ … ocialists/
https://metafact.io/factcheck_answers/1470One thing the left and democrats have in common with the Nazis is they both embrace antisemitism.
That too is not true. By definition only the right winger can truly be anti-Semitic
The lie the Right likes to promulgate is that protests against Netanyahu's brutality and concern about excesses of the Israeli government in regards to the Palestinians that has been in focus for decades in the region, is anti-Semitic But, leave it to the Right to lie, twist and distort.This is from the left-leaning Chicago Sun Times
"Democrats have an antisemitism problem on the far left"
"From a disturbing indifference to Jewish suffering, to an inability to make obvious declarative statements about Hamas’ atrocities, to a repeated moral equivalency between Israel and Hamas — the latter of which explicitly wants to wipe Jews off the planet — to outright hostility toward Jews, the ugly invective is coming from some unexpected places.
Inside the Democratic Party, elected state officials and members of Congress have refused to condemn Hamas, and many have called for an immediate Israeli ceasefire, essentially demanding the IDF leave Hamas alone.
On college campuses, many of which are now infamous for “trigger warnings,” banning offensive speech and creating “safe spaces,” professors and students are trafficking in viciously antisemitic comments in support of Palestinians, with one national student group celebrating the massacre as a “historic win for the Palestinian resistance.”
In left-wing and mainstream media, a slew of commentators, hosts and reporters have pushed Hamas propaganda and anti-Israel sentiment.
According to Gallup, Democratic voters are also now more sympathetic toward Palestinians than Israelis, for the first time since it began asking the question.
This has all led to some soul-searching and exasperation among American Jews who once counted Democrats as supporters. Rabbi Joel Simonds says, “In these last few days, the silence is deafening, and it is hurtful and a betrayal on so many levels. It’s not going to change the way we look at justice. It’s going to change the way we look at our allies.”
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists … ns-se-cuppAnother crock? Antisemitism from the left is in response to the Israeli government's injustice to the Palestinians cause.
As a Democrat, I don't care for Hamas and its terrorist tactics and just as soon see it eradicated. But I am not giving the Isreali government a free pass in regards to fairly addressing the Palestinian question. The Rightwinger sees destruction of the Palestians in Gaza, Netanyahu, as its Final Solution" to a thorn in Israel's side for over 50 years. And quite frankly, I don't care what your "book" says about it.
Rightwingers must think that can deceive anyone?Prefacing my statement, I am not taking a position on this topic.
That said, the problem lies in that Israeli support and Palestinian support somehow managed to co-exist under the Democrats' umbrella.
This is something that is now untenable, the Party is being required to stand firm on supporting one of the sides, which of course it does not want to do, that lack of commitment is costing them support from both sides who see the hypocrisy.
Just because something is in the Bible doesn’t automatically make it relevant in today’s society.
I disagree.
It has stood the test of time and is probably more relevant than most things written in "today's society."Only if you are religious, and only if you take the Bible literally.
I would respond and say only if you're able to see and understand the wisdom and knowledge the Bible possesses. People who read and know the Bible can see how things people do today were predicted thousands of years ago.
The Bible even speaks of atheists.You’re free to believe whatever you like provided you do no one else harm, and provided you don’t shove your beliefs down other people’s throats.
Not everybody subscribes to "your book", that is the problem with you right wing types, you are determined to have the precepts of this book, its centuries of varied and erroneous interpretation rammed down the throats of the unreceptive whether they want it or not. Case in point: Oklahoma discussing mandatory teaching of the Bible in public school.
I am not fooled, your sort remain tyrants at the core.Isn't that similar to how the democrats want to "ram down the throats" of everyone the transgender ideology, DEI ideology, Gay rights ideology, etc.
If the left wants to call tyrants, they need only look in the mirror.
I'll stick with the book that has been leading people for centuries.Isn't that similar to how the democrats want to "ram down the throats" of everyone the transgender ideology, DEI ideology, Gay rights ideology, etc.
------
So turn off your TV or turn your heads, the left is not compelling impressionable children with "their religion". The way the Right commonly behave, they can take their Ten Commandments and shove them where the sun don't shine....."the left is not compelling impressionable children with "their religion"
Oh good, then have all the gay celebrations and DEI teachings out of the schools. Remove all of the books from the schools that espouse such things.
Take it all out in the name of not compelling impressionable children.DEI is secular, is there something wrong with the concepts of diversity, equality and inclusion as part of our education, or is everything of value only available to white Anglo Saxon Protestants?
You already have a program to remove questionable content from public school book shelves. Narrow minded right wing oriented parents need to keep the concept of objectionable to apply to their own children and not to others.
Which one of these do the democrats finds so objectionable.
The 10 Commandments List,
You shall have no other gods before Me.
You shall not make idols.
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Honor your father and your mother.
You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet.The first 4 come straight from mythology that kids don't need to be told is true, factual and real.
The 5th is a good thing...if they deserve the honor. Some do not and demand it anyway, forcing it with violence if not given.
6th is a law throughout our nation and should be obeyed.
The 7th one comes from ancient law that, while still on the books in some places, is not enforced anywhere in this country and is usually legal anyway. As a philosophy it is great...while very often being ignored. Teachers, get your own act under control before teaching the opposite to our children.
Stealing is illegal, but we look aside and ignore it most of the time (99%?). Still, it is taught and should be.
Shouldn't tell tall tales about neighbors, or anything else, for that matter.
The last one is a good philosophy to live with."first 4 come straight from mythology"
What mythology?It's called the "bible" - a book created in about 300AD at the Council of Nicea out of a mishmash of ancient writings and verbal stories from the past. The council took the tales they liked, the ones that agreed with their philosophies (most likely embellishing or even creating as they went) and with the Roman emperor, and had it transcribed. The things they didn't like never made it past the cutting table, and Presto! We have "sacred scripture" created and written by God Himself.
You didn't answer the question.
What mythology?
" book created in about 300AD at the Council of Nicea"
Yeah.
I just don't see where it is mythology.I understand you don't. I understand that millions of people across the earth don't.
I also recognize that billions, past and present, DO think of it as mythology or, at worst, just a lie. Until the Romans "took it over" and put the strength of the Roman Empire into it, both the current and predecessor were both tiny, isolated religions.
We now consider religions of the past as mythology; the same fate awaits Christianity.As an aside remember there are new religions taking hold. Depending on source it is said there are 210 million Christians in the US (2021). Today there are 184 million NFL fans (2022). The 'religion' of the NFL is as powerful as the Christian religion.
They both have their dogma and doctrine. They both have their graven images. (The Vince Lombardi Trophy for the Super Bowl is one) They both have established long held traditions. Like denominations there are teams bearing differences and likeness with their leaders while do preach with a message in a sense. Worship is present as well. And, keeping to the OP theme there are established rules to live by while teaches or instructs on moral behaviors and principles to live by.That reminds me of a well known quote in Britain that says “The NHS is the nearest thing Brits have to a religion.
1. The first commandment could be construed as religious bigotry
2. The second commandment forbids image or representation used as an object of worship: The Muslim’s are fanatical about that in that images of their prophet Mohammed are prohibited by death; while Christian faiths go in the opposite direction by worshiping idols of their prophet on the cross, and idols of his mother.
3. Taking the Lord's name in vain is another way of saying "false believer" or "hypocrite." There seems to be a lot of charlatan preachers in America who practice false faith healing to line their pockets with wealth.
4. We find it a right pain, with shops closed on the Sabbath in southern France and Northern Ireland when we’ve been on holiday (vacation) there; Sabbath is still a day of rest in those parts of Europe – Different in Britain (excluding Northern Ireland) where the UK Conservative Government legalised Sunday Trading back in 1994.
5. Wilderness answered that one, to quote “The 5th is a good thing...if they deserve the honor. Some do not and demand it anyway, forcing it with violence if not given.”
6. Well, yep, “Thou shalt not murder”, goes without saying. The principle of not taking another person’s life existed long before the Bible. In fact, it is a fundamental concept found in various cultures and legal systems throughout history. So, the idea of not committing murder has deep roots beyond and before the Bible itself. Draco’s Law introduced in ancient Greece in 621 BC (a thousand years before the Bible was compiled) made murder a crime. Under Draco Law, the Athenians implemented legal methods for dealing with homicide that was set apart from the rest of their legal system, including separate courts, long-established laws, and rigorous procedures.
7. Wilderness summed up adultery. Not only is it legal in the Western world these days (it was legalised in the UK in 1857), there are, I’m sure, plenty of Christian politicians who regularly break this ‘commandment’.
8. As with murder; “Thou shalt not steal” - The principle of not stealing existed long before the Bible. In fact, it’s a fundamental concept found in various cultures and legal systems throughout history. So, the idea of not taking what belongs to others has deep roots beyond and before the Bible itself.
9. “Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbour.”, as with murder and stealing, is yet another ancient principle that existed long before the Bible.
10. As wilderness says “The last one is a good philosophy to live with.”Well, you're not a democrat.
I appreciate your input.
I don't agree with it, but I appreciate it.No, I'm not a Democrat; I'm a socialist.
Well, not everybody regards Sabbath Day as holy depending on which religion you prefer for example.
thou shall not commit adultery, I can’t think of a greater adulterer than Trump.
What if you don’t worship a God, there are many reasons to not believe such. Why does the right winger seem to know exclusively what and who we should be compelled to worship?
The last millennium has been inundated with violence and blood shed based upon different interpretations of bible. Jesus spoke a great deal about hypocrites and the right wing bible thumpers are its finest examples. I don’t believe any government has the right to compel its citizens to believe and be proselytized under the tenets of any religion. Period.
You never answered my question but danced around it, why can’t Islam tenets be prominently and compulsorily displayed in grade school classrooms?What are kids to do in school when they don't support gay pride events but are forced to participate?
"why can’t Islam tenets be prominently and compulsorily displayed in grade school classrooms?"
The holy Quran has a version of the ten commandments and they are almost identical to the Judeo/Christian version.
You might want to read about Muhammad's relationship with the Jewish people.
I don't think Muslims will complain about the ten commandments being listed in classrooms.
Amen.
Can we apply that truth to the second amendment while we are at it?
Related Discussions
- 69
First Lousiana and now Oklahoma. What/who's next? The Bible?
by Tim Mitchell 12 months ago
Back in June there was fervor of praise and also discontent about requiring all K-12 classrooms displaying the 10 Commandments. Louisiana law requiring the Ten Commandments in classrooms challenged in lawsuit published by PBS News June 24, 2024"BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — Civil liberties groups...
- 26
I am POed by nonstop rightwing incursion on church/state separation
by Credence2 7 months ago
"It has now been mandated that public schools in Oklahoma must incorporate the Bible into their curricula. The legislatures in Texas and in Florida have passed laws that allow schools to replace school counselors with untrained “chaplains.” These chaplains are not prohibited from proselytizing...
- 196
Indoctrination? Here is a example...
by J Conn 2 years ago
The Texas Senate just passed a law to put a copy of the 10 commandments into every classroom in the state. In terms of indoctrination, this not so subtle attempt to put their own religion in the faces of every child in the state is the literal definition of an indoctrination...
- 30
Why did the 'founding fathers' separate church and state?
by TessSchlesinger 5 years ago
They didn't believe in separation of church and state, which is why it's not in the constitution. There was a big debate about it. Jefferson did but he was out voted. Also most of them were Christians. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2546951/posts
- 186
Progressives: Don't be fooled, the GOP wants a national abortion ban
by Credence2 14 months ago
Republicans always want to take a mile when they are given an inch. Conservatives cheer with the overturn of Roe vs Wade, saying it was a victory for States Rights. So the Red States double down creating a Handsmaiden's Tale environment for its residents. But that has not been enough. Trump remains...
- 30
Should the Government Force Churches to Have Gay Weddings?
by Cassie Smith 13 years ago
A NJ judge ruled against a Christian retreat house that refused to allow a same-sex civil union ceremony to be conducted on its premises. The United Methodist Church, the owner of the retreat house, holds the view that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. The...