British Court Says "God is a Racist"

1. 60

   kephriraposted 12 years ago

   In Britain, as in many other countries, it is illegal for any organisation to discriminate based on race, and Jewish schools have fallen foul of this law because they only accept Jewish people, and they define whether or not you are a Jew in the Orthodox manner - based on whether your mother is Jewish rather than based on your actual beliefs or religious observance - which British courts have recently rule to be racial discrimination and therefore illegal. See the full story on the BBC new wesbite here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8325901.stm
   
   The chief Rabbi in Britain has complained that this basically amounts to an accusation that God is racist.
   
   Personally I can't help thinking that the whole 'chosen people' thing, along with a religion that defines its membership by enthnicity, really is quite racist, and that the Jewish God must therefore be a racist. But I know this will be a massively controversial thing to say, so please let everyone know your opinion about this.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      SimeyCposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I'm going to be a lot more controversial! I think that the world without religion would be a lot more safer and peaceful - most wars are due to religion, and if you simply look at Hubpages, most 'hateful' arguments are down to religion.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I'm inclined to agree with you.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Jimi the greekposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                It is true according to the scriptures, the Jews were the chosen people but it was to promote God, no their kinship. The controversy stems from our own confusion but the scriptures are clear. At the time of the covenant, God had made clear that those outside the camp of circumcision too may enter. When witnessing to others, you don’t look at the color of the skin or at least you shouldn’t. Paul described circumcision as inwardly, the heart while outwardly, being the flesh. If you decide to put anyone other than God on a pedestal, that’s your business. Some say Jesus was black, so what? Love is not measured in kinship but by what's in your heart. In other the words, the law nor does the bible serves a defense to nepotism in regards to the flesh. You don’t blame God for the wrong doing of man (i.e., “God is a racist”). The Gentiles blaspheme the name of God through the Jews, said Paul. Let the law judged them, not you. For God marked Cain’s head for those who sought to kill him sevenfold the same. Vengeance is the Lords. Be like Jesus forgive them for they know not what they do.
            
            Thank you and God bless

            replyreport
            1. 52

               (Q)posted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Is that the reason god gave men foreskins, so they could hack it off to become a member?

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Theres a certain symmetry there isn't there. Hack off part of your member to become a member.

                  replyreport
                  1. 52

                     (Q)posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     I'm glad somebody got that. Well spotted.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Jimi the greekposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Marvel not, Jesus said unto Nicodemus who too thought man must re-enter the womb of his mother to be born again, a carnal thinker. Go to "Why did God harden Pharaoh's heart" for answers.
                        
                        God bless

                        replyreport
   2. 61

      mohitmisraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Man differentiates , not god,

      replyreport
   3. 60

      prettydarkhorseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I dont think that it is racial discrimination per se, it is just a rule of the school officials not to allow other non Jewish (according to their definition -- by blood -- the race of the mother). Are these not the same with other schools in britain where they check economic situation of the parents before they alow their chidlren to enroll in such exclusive schools, then the British government should also take a look at these schools too.
      
      If we take the definition of racism, to some extent the policy of the school is racist indeed,  but then the government should take into consideration other academic instituion in britain which clearly delineates those who haves and have nots.
      
      How about exclusive school for girls, for boys etc.....they should also a a look on that to be consistent. Sometimes schools need to be exclusive and we have an option to choose what school is best for our children.
      
      In the Philippines, there are lots of exclusive schools for certain religions, but they are more lax, they define membership by belief not blood.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         If it was donen as you say it is done in the Philipine then that would be fine - other faiths run schools in the UK and it isn't a problem because they do it like that and so it isn't racial discrimination - which is both morally wrong and illegal.

         replyreport
      2. 63

         Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Hi pretty, in the Philippines, does the government have a say in who is Catholic or Protestant? Or whether that group is racist?

         replyreport
         1. 60

            prettydarkhorseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            hi flightkeeper. No indeed. The government is usually subservient to the churches as the people in certain church/beliefs tend to vote public officials by block.As much as possible they dont want to meddle with the church laws and rules.

            replyreport
   4. 67

      ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Are the non-Jews in Britain really missing all that much by not being accepted into Orthodox Jewish schools?  Do you really want to be taught by Orthodox Rabbis?  So long as they are not ethnically cleansing anyone, what does it matter who they allow and don't allow into their schools?  Locke must be spinning in his grave right now.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         The issue is often with people who think of themselves as Jewish, but where Orthodox Rabbis don't agree.
         
         For example, the child in the case brought to the Court of Appeal (the case was then appealed to the House of Lords) was the child of a Jewish father, and a mother who had converted to Judaism, but in a non-Orthodox synagogue. So the Orthodox lot didn't recognise the mother as being Jewish, and therefore said the child wasn't Jewish either.
         
         In the article, it gives another example:
         
         "And another parent in a similar position, David Lightman, also feels vindicated. He says: "My wife keeps a kosher Jewish home, we go to synagogue as a family, my daughter teaches in the Hebrew classes. How dare they question our beliefs and our Jewishness?""

         replyreport
   5. 69

      EmpressFelicityposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      All it amounts to is that this legislation is being used to do the precise opposite to what it was supposedly intended to do.  In other words, it's being used as a tool for discrimination rather than to combat discrimination.  A case of "function creep", if you like.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Looks like the US isn't the only nation suffering from "judicial activism".

         replyreport
         1. 81

            LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Nothing to do with judicial activism. It's the Race Relations Act 1976, which is a statute.

            replyreport
            1. 63

               Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               So LondonGirl, you think it's appropriate for the gov't to define to the Orthodox Jews who can be considered an Orthodox Jew?

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  For state-funded schools? I'm not sure, but I'm not hugely anti.

                  replyreport
            2. 67

               ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               So's our Equal Employment Opportunity Act, which has been abused to a fare-thee-well.  Besides, I don't know of too many people clamoring to become Orthodox Jews, do you?

               replyreport
   6. 67

      Make Moneyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Here's a comparison.  My parents could not afford to send me to Catholic high school, only public high school was funded by the government at the time so that's where I went.  But seeing there is a fairly large population of Catholics in Canada, who are tax payers too we finally got our high schools funded as well, with the consideration that the schools would be opened to everyone, not just Catholics.  Now some non-Catholic families send their kids to Catholic high schools because they believe they will be getting a better education than in the public high schools.
      
      But unless the British government wants to start to fund the Jewish schools, which would have to get passed in government with possibly a lot of opposition, seeing the Jewish population is not large then I can't see how the government could mandate to open the Jewish schools up to everyone.  If that's the case, then like someone else said they'd have to make the higher priced schools affordable to everyone too.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         These ARE state schools!

         replyreport
         1. 67

            ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            So why are non-Orthodox Jewish Britons paying for those schools?

            replyreport
            1. 81

               LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Because lots of state schools are religious - mostly Church of England, but also some Catholic, Jewish, etc.
               
               My other half, for example, went to Holy Trinity Primary School, before being sent to a Jewish public school (parents pay). My brother went to All Saints' Primary School. Our nearest primary here in London is St. George the Martyer. All these are Church of England schools.
               
               In the English state school system as a whole, there are about 7,000 Church schools, 40-odd Jewish schools, and a total of 10 Muslim / Sikh / Hindu schoos.
               
               About 7% of children go to public / private schools.

               replyreport
               1. 67

                  ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Heh, some historian I am.  I forgot about the Anglican Church.  That's why I'm glad our Founders put in our First Amendment.  It was the established Church of England and their experiences with it that inspired them to do it.  I suppose that's why it seems kind of strange to have a government supported church, at least to my eyes.

                  replyreport
         2. 67

            Make Moneyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Oh I see.  In that case in my opinion the Jewish schools should be opened to everyone then.

            replyreport
   7. 0

      Madame Xposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      What a load of PC crap.

      replyreport
   8. 61

      chukra Gposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      and what you are getting by spreading this kinda forum, ticket to heaven??? why spreading msges that can provoke hateness.dnt wry i'll  book a bussiness class ticket for you to heaven for supporting god and spread the hate.

      replyreport
   9. 60

      Jimi the greekposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Forgive them Lord for they know not what they do (generally speaking).
      
      God bless.

      replyreport
   10. 59

       seyiariposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       God is not a racist . here what peter said in he bible .
       Act 10:34  Then Peter opened his mouth and said, Truly I see that God is no respecter of persons;
       Act 10:35  but in every nation he who fears Him and works righteousness is accepted with Him.
       
       i think this will tell you that God is not a racist.Thank you

       replyreport
       1. 59

          Bovine Currencyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Have a closer look,
          
          Death to Followers of Other Religions
          
              Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed.  (Exodus 22:19 NAB)
          
          
          
          Kill Nonbelievers
          
              They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.  (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
          
          Source: The Bible (Research compliments to http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm)
          
          
          The 'God' of the bible IS a racist.

          replyreport
   11. 59

       Google Galposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Well maybe their Gods are Racists

       replyreport
   12. 64

       AdsenseStrategiesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       The "Jewish God" is not a racist because he does not exist.

       replyreport
   13. 59

       Bovine Currencyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       The Jewish are racists? Nooooooo

       replyreport
   14. 70

       MikeNVposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Your headline is NOT backed by your Argument.  As you refer not to God but to a Jewish God.
       
       

       replyreport
2. 72

   Pearldiverposted 12 years ago

   I agree ... SimeyC... But then with that 100 stuck on your forehead... You can pretty much demonstrate your point anyway you wish... Good on You

   replyreport
   1. 90

      SimeyCposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      LOL thanks! Just having the 100 on my head doesn't mean I actually make sense when I write - it just means I can write a lot LOL and can get traffice to my hubs!

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Pearldiverposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Don't Be Too Humble in Public

         replyreport
3. 48

   HealthTipposted 12 years ago

   Most wars and arguments are down to people, religion is just the banner they use to justify it. Without Religion I am sure wars and arguments would continue  !

   replyreport
   1. 60

      kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      and so would racism - but is that an excuse to allow religious organisations to be institutionally racist?

      replyreport
      1. 63

         Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Jewishness was never looked as institutionally racist before. This is fairly new.  I look at this as another way to attack Jews in Europe and this is disgusting.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            It seems strange to claim that the application of anti-racism laws could be a racist act.

            replyreport
            1. 63

               Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I guess if you see Jews as a race it would seem that way to you.

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Orthodox Jews most definitely see being Jewish as a matter of race!

                  replyreport
                  1. 88

                     livelongerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     And yet even they allow conversions. You really can't convert to another race.

                     replyreport
            2. 64

               ceciliabeltranposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Oh please, it's not religion that's racist. It's people. Without religion, we would be fighting about other things. It's hardwired in our lower brain. Family is safer than non-relatives. Animals behave this way. But we do have the ability (a fairly recent one at that) to rise above that and become altruistic.
               
               The Jews (I'm not one) are merely preserving a tradition that has been passed on for ages and it is their pride to do so, the source of their identity.
               
               Muslims need to pray 5 times a day to affirm their devotion to their conception of Gd.
               
               Christians promise to love one another. All these are good things...I mean, guys. No religion didn't actually spare the Chinese and the Russians from conflict. People will use any excuse to feel superior, superiority gives you the illusion of safety. People are doing this. I mean the whole "chosen" thing is a concept perpetuated by people and only people who bother to care, care about this. I don't care if the Jews believe they are chosen. I have a fairly good idea of what that means historically, it means they have to suffer to preserve a set of teachings from infiltration. I'm not lining up for that, so let them take that responsibility. As for me, I'm just going to enjoy the fruits of their labor, namely the judicial system, modern civilization as we know it, monthly horoscopes, kosher (chemical-free) food and so on and so forth.
               
               For the most part, my relationship with religion--all religions have been illuminating and rewarding. I don't go to church but studying their foundational ideologies has given me wonderful insights about the nature of humanity and the direction these ideas are taking us. Religion is only as perfect as we are. For as long as way of thinking is flawed, so will everything that we engage in, be it religion, politics or living in general.
               
               Have you ever seen debates in scientific communities and the practices of business entities? If you think religion is tough, man you haven't been reading the news enough.

               replyreport
         2. 81

            LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            It isn't a "way to attack" Jews. For example, my other half is Jewish, and thinks the Court of Appeal probably got it right (-:

            replyreport
         3. 0

            ryankettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I'm not quite sure how it is that you believe Jews are being attacked, do you know how English law works? It works on precedent. Jewish children are allowed to be schooled in Catholic schools and Quaker schools etc, why not vice versa? The only racism on show here is by Jewish people. Please bear in mind that this is likely to be a private school, so would you prefer it if the government removed all Jewish children from state schools and forced them into private Jewish schools? Didn't think so. Clueless idiot.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Chill Ryan, I'm as clueless about the average Britons life as most people are about the average American one.  Which is why LG is such a treasure.  I've learned so much from talking with her and say that I'm better informed about that jewel set in a silver sea.
               
               LG, is it beyond belief that current jurisprudence in Britain could open the door to certain parts of Sharia law?  The UN declaration of the rights of indigenous people, for example.  Maybe I'm looking too far ahead, but how long do a people have to be resident in a nation before they're considered indigenous?  Or before the intent of the law is perverted to other uses?

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Current jurisprudence? No. It goes completely against, for example, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the Common Law tradition of equality before the law.
                  
                  Thanks very much for your compliment!
                  
                  As John of Gaunt is supposed to have said, according to Shakespeare:
                  
                  This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
                  This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
                  This other Eden, demi-paradise,
                  This fortress built by Nature for herself
                  Against infection and the hand of war,
                  
                  This happy breed of men, this little world,
                  This precious stone set in the silver sea,
                  Which serves it in the office of a wall
                  Or as a moat defensive to a house,
                  Against the envy of less happier lands,--
                  
                  This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

                  replyreport
                  1. 67

                     ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     The Bard certainly had a way with words did he not?  I took a class one semester on the historical plays.  It was pretty ballsy for Shakespeare to write about the Queens antecedents as he did, but I suppose that's wonder of England. 
                     
                     I suppose it's old fashioned in this day and age but I believe it's our common heritage and it's love of liberty that is the last, best hope for humanity.  I still think both of our peoples are in danger of losing that unique perspective that has brought so much to the world and freed so many from the chains of tyranny.

                     replyreport
                     1. 81

                        LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        I agree with you - both about Shakespeare, and about the Anglo-Saxon tradition of liberty and the Common Law, both of which the USA and UK have in common.

                        replyreport
                  2. 60

                     kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Sharia law is already used in Britain - only in family and civic law (not criminal cases in other words) and when all parties agree before hand - but in these cirumstances it is already allowed to take precedence over general British law

                     replyreport
   2. 90

      SimeyCposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That's a fair point - religion is perhaps used to justify the war 'Kill the infadels' etc. - warmongers will find other ways to justify war.
      
      Religion is used that way though for many things - it the 'banner' used to spread hatred - in 99% of cases the religion does not condone or inspire the hatred...man does that all by himself!

      replyreport
   3. 61

      mohitmisraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Very true.

      replyreport
4. 82

   kirstenblogposted 12 years ago

   Is any of this surprising? A large part of religion seems to be a strong belief that my god is better then your god!
   
   My feelings are more spiritual and I tend to think that my god is the same as your god and we have just given this force different names.

   replyreport
5. 63

   Flightkeeperposted 12 years ago

   This is the kind of situation that I would not want to happen here in the US, the government steps in to define what religious  practice is acceptable.
   
   Right now in the US gay activists are trying to redefine marriage to include same gender unions and this would be a problem for conservative religions.  The last thing I want is for my government to be involved in any religious practice whatsoever.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Some Muslims believe that it is their religious duty to destroy the west and either kill or subjugate all infidels. Just because something is based on a religious belief doesn't mean it shouldn't have to follow the same rules as the rest of society.

      replyreport
      1. 90

         SimeyCposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         The key word here is 'SOME' - there are billions of muslims in this world that have no desire to destroy or kill 'infidels' - it's the 'SOME' that spoil it for the rest. If you go back to the dark ages when British Knights were 'spreading' Christianity - it was exactly the same....

         replyreport
         1. 60

            kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I agree entirely, this wasn't meant to be an attack on Islam any more than the main topic of the thread was meant to single Judaism out as a bad or nasty religion. This was just a way of demonstrating my point with one of the most extreme contemporary examples.

            replyreport
      2. 63

         Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         It is a problem however when the rules are such that it is basic to a religion's identity.  You mention Muslims who believe their duty is to destroy the west; this is an extremist belief not a basic tenet of being Muslim is it not? Why include an extremist belief as part of Muslim identity?

         replyreport
         1. 60

            kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I don't see the distinction - whether something is a fundamental part of a religion or whether it is a fringe belief is just a function how many people believe it - not about whether it is right or wrong, acceptable or unnacceptable. In many cases things are a fundamental part of a religion simply because they have been around for so long - which often means that they are based on ancient moral systems which don't fit very comfortably  with modern values and morals.

            replyreport
            1. 63

               Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Well if you're not a practicer of said religion then you wouldn't necessarily see the distinction nor would those distinctions matter to you would they? And those reliefs would be there regardless of how modern things are.  The rabbi is right to fight this and he should.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  You're quite right, as I'm not a religious person myself I am looking at this issue objectively, rather than beginning with a fixed opinion and then arranging the facts to fit with that.

                  replyreport
                  1. 63

                     Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Well that's not quite true, you think of Judaism as institutionally racist. That's quite an opinion that you first started with.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        I didn't start with it, I ended with it. I wasn't going around with a belief that Jews were racist and then found this story and jumped for joy that I had ben proven correct. I just saw the story and then reached a conclusion based on the facts.

                        replyreport
                        1. 63

                           Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           So just to explore, when did you think of Judaism as institutionally racist? Was it after the British court said so?

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              After I saw the story on TV, then read about it online. Basically after I had looked at the facts and used reason and logic to analyse them. When did you decide that religion is always right whatever it says? Was it while you were being indoctrinated as a child?

                              replyreport
                              1. 63

                                 Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 No need to get defensive. And why would you think that i think religion is always right or that i was being indoctrinated?  My posts were about how the British government is involved with defining who belongs to what religious membership.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 60

                                    kephriraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                    OK, sorry, I did think I was being a bit nasty as soon as I had clicked to submit it. I didn't mean to be - I've actually been quite enjoying debating this with you.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 63

                                       Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                       Well all's good then.

                                       report
   2. 69

      Rhianni32posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Government should stay out of religious beliefs however some big reasons why they are wanting same gender unions is so they can enjoy the same tax and medical coverage benefits that have nothing to do with religion.

      replyreport
      1. 63

         Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I agree with that and actually most states in the US accord the status of civil union the same as marriage.

         replyreport
6. 61

   Helen Caterposted 12 years ago

   I stopped thinking God was real many years ago. Every war seems to be over some religion. Take Ireland for example as Health Tips will know more about than me. It makes me angry that if God actually exists he would surely not want this outcome. People who strongly believe in a God are pushy and seldom helpful to others. They judge even though they are taught not to. I am not saying all religious people are like this, just the ones I know. If the Jewish schools only allow Jews, then surely this could have a knock on effect where Christian schools only allow christians. It's a very selfish attitude, and not one that God, if he exists would like. Catholic schools can be the same, and I have known people to change their religion just to get their kids in a better school.

   replyreport
7. 60

   prettydarkhorseposted 12 years ago

   in addition, in GBritain are state laws always above  the church laws. In the Philippines, they clearly stated in the constituion that this should be the case, but it is the other way around in reality. The church has a way with the government, frightening the state with their voting by block capacity and for the government officials souls to be burned in hell, LOL

   replyreport
   1. 63

      Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think that would be normal in a country that is religious, meaning that the majority go to church regularly. 
      
      And it is funny to me that the gov't officials can be cowed by the church's threats of eternal damnation

      replyreport
      1. 60

         prettydarkhorseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         yes they are scared because the people vote by block according to the dictates of the top religious officials, and besides most of the gobvernment officials belong to the same religion too lol lol

         replyreport
         1. 63

            Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Unfortunately ours tend to talk with a forked tongue.  And they are very brazen.  The tears of contrition fall after they've been caught!

            replyreport
            1. 60

               prettydarkhorseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               lololol... thats very funny. I just think that the state should not interfere with the church but then they are the state in charge with the welfare of the people...it will be different here in the US because, it is a federal government...

               replyreport
8. 61

   Helen Caterposted 12 years ago

   I was enjoying that.

   replyreport
9. 78

   Eaglekiwiposted 12 years ago

   Hi prettyblackhorse
   
   God is Rascist an who said 'Only in America' now its 'Only in Britain' lol
   
   Besides everyone knows Jesus was black

   replyreport
   1. 60

      prettydarkhorseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      lololol....hi there, thats funny!!!!

      replyreport
      1. 78

         Eaglekiwiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         lol lol sorry couldnt resist, well he was olive skinned

         replyreport
10. 61

    sooner than laterposted 12 years ago

    It just means some judge was inspired by Dawkins.

    replyreport
11. 0

    sneakorocksolidposted 12 years ago

    I'm afraid england is about to be a muslum country.

    replyreport
    1. 88

       Nell Roseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       There are too many different religions in Britain for Islam to take over. And to be quite honest after 9/11, most muslim people in this country are trying to get the point across that they are not all bad. The thing is a lot of british find it hard to trust after something like that, so no, England will never be a muslim country. It will be a multi culteral one. But the majority is Christian.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          sneakorocksolidposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          I love GB! I was being a smartass about the islamics voting for sharea law in GB. My wife and I still say living in GB was the best time of our lives!

          replyreport
          1. 88

             Nell Roseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

             Then come back! we love the yanks!!!!

             replyreport
             1. 0

                sneakorocksolidposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                My son has a female penpal they have a pact. If they're not married by 30 they'll marry each other. He's going for a visit during his Spring break, shes planning quite a visit for him. We worry about it but they're 20 so what can you do?

                replyreport
       2. 67

          ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Islam is going to have to have it's version of the Enlightenment.  Once that happens you'll see the affectation for religious fundamentalism wane.  It won't go away, by any means, just look at the fundies here in the States, but it will wane.

          replyreport
12. 81

    LondonGirlposted 12 years ago

    It's very hard indeed to convert to Orthodox Judaism - it takes years and endless effort.

    replyreport
13. 90

    Bibowenposted 12 years ago

    If God is a racist, He would probably change if someone would just tell Him that He's not conforming to the standards we've set for Him.

    replyreport
14. 85

    earnestshubposted 12 years ago

    and from reading the bible, that sounds like a bloody good idea!

    replyreport
15. 85

    earnestshubposted 12 years ago

    As I am here reading I will just say Australia has the same or similar school system as England, we pay taxes for all schools of any denomination.
    It all works out OK.

    replyreport
    1. 63

       Mishaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       So, let me get it straight Ernest. You are content with paying taxes so they can brainwash children into Christianity and other religions, because you in turn can have fun with religionists on the forums? Right?
       
       You don't have to answer though
       
       Good night everybody

       replyreport
16. 81

    LondonGirlposted 12 years ago

    The odd thing is, we may have an established church here, and thousands of church schools, but religion is far less involved with politics in the UK than it is in the USA. In effect, rather than theory, there is far more separation of church and state.

    replyreport
    1. 85

       earnestshubposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       The same is true of Australia, and despite Misha's little joke it does work out fair.
       The Anglican church provides a mass of scholarships.
       My son, a Chinese atheist was a welcome member of our Anglican church choir.
       Religion does a lot of good work in education here.
       Like many other Melbournians we frequently walk through the beautiful St Paul's Cathedral and are welcome.
       In Australia you may expose people to religious beliefs, but I have never once heard of kids in these schools getting taught religion unless they choose to.

       replyreport
    2. 67

       ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       The idea of America as the New Zion is embedded in the early Colonial history of the US.  They sought the make the US into a shining city on the hill, a reflection of God's Will made manifest on Earth.  It's been mostly secularized now, but the genesis of that idea was religious in nature.
       
       We seem hyper-religious, my dear, because you sent us all of the crazy Puritans.  Ever read "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" by Johnathan Edwards?  Real fire and brimstone stuff. 
       
       He laid it on kind of thick.  During the Great Awakening, there were reports of people becoming so sure that they were beyond redemption, that they committed suicide.
       
       Although to be fair I think most of the difference comes from the relative nature of the religions of the US and the UK.  The UK is still very wedded to ritual and tradition, much like the Catholic Church.  Our Protestant sects fled here to get away from what they saw as the stifling influence of Anglican life and to worship God as they saw fit.  Massachusetts Bay set up their own little theocracy for a while, but thank God, our Founders were smarter than Cotton Mather and his ilk.
       
       Geez, LG, you sent criminals to Australia and got rid of your religious nuts by sending them to America. 

       replyreport
       1. 69

          EmpressFelicityposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Since the 1600s, the Church of England has become far more laid back, to say the least.  LG is right - by and large, religion doesn't permeate everyday life in Britain to the extent that it appears to in the US (at least if the number of posts in the religious forums on HP are anything to go by).

          replyreport
       2. 81

          LondonGirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Dear me, we didn't send them - they just went.
          
          Withrop et al certainly weren't believers in religious tolerance as I understand it - they just wanted religious oppression in their own special way.

          replyreport
          1. 67

             ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

             And that, in a nutshell, is one of the reasons we have the problems with religion that we do.  There's a subgroup of people who want it their way.  The funny thing is that atheists are just as determined as any true believer in getting "their way" to be the only way in the US.  First Amendment notwithstanding.

             replyreport
17. 85

    earnestshubposted 12 years ago

    Tenacious lot the fundies.

    replyreport
18. 85

    earnestshubposted 12 years ago

    I think all countries have the loony fundamentalists, but in America people listen to them on radio and give millions to television evangelists, Americans allow them to interfere in running the country and impose their crazy values on society. From the outside it has always looked very strange to me. Despite traveling heaps in the USA I did not meet these fundies.
    I have asked before, do they all live in some outback valley?

    replyreport
    1. 67

       ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Did you travel extensively in rural areas?  That's where most of them are.  If you traveled primarily on the coasts you'll find plenty of Progressives and Progressive ideas, that might be why you didn't run into any.
       
       Of course Progressives are now fleeing the States they made a dog's breakfast of, and are now moving to places like Wyoming, Montana and New Hampshire so demographics are shifting a bit.

       replyreport
       1. 85

          earnestshubposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Yes I did get out in the scrub a bit on two driving trips, but apart from one small air force town where everyone got drunk and toasted our Australian soldiers and told a lot of war lies, I must have missed it all!

          replyreport
    2. 59

       Valerie Fposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Maybe you did meet them but didn't notice because they all appeared so normal.
       
       Regarding the original question, there is something fishy about it. Yes, everyone born of a Jewish mother is Jewish. However, while conversion to Judaism is not easy, it is possible to be an observant, Orthodox Jew in good standing without having been born to a Jewish mother. There are also Orthodox Jews of a variety of ethnicities. Banning Ethiopian or Yemeni Jews, or restricting enrollment to, say, Ashkenazi Jews of Russian descent would be racist. I wouldn't consider limiting enrollment to people born of Jewish mothers racist.

       replyreport
19. 81

    LondonGirlposted 12 years ago

    There are lots of faith schools - mostly Church of England, about 7,000 of them. And abou 40 Jewish schools. One significant difference, though, is that the church schools are allowed to select according to religious faith and behaviour, whereas the Jewish schools (or some of them, anyway) are doing it essentially by ethnicity. Which is the argument under the Race Relations Act 1976.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       '
       
       So what, exactly, is keeping the Orthodox schools from funding themselves.  Surely the community is able to do that.  That law does raise some sticky issues concerning religion.  What about Sharia law.  According to that belief, Jews and Christians are to pay a tax in order to practice their religion, or face forced conversion.  Would a massadra that teaches that be in violation of the Race Relations Act of 1976?  Or would they get a pass because they target religions and not races.  Or do they?  Islam has been called a religion for Arabs.  There are those who believe that only Arabs can be true Muslims.  Would those groups then be in violation of the Act?
       
       This is why too many laws are a bad thing and also why you can't legislate how people act towards one another.

       replyreport
20. 81

    LondonGirlposted 12 years ago

    I think the point I'm making is that a formal separation of Church and State isn't all it's cracked up to be in terms of the effect it has on political discourse.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Separation of Church and State is a vague statement that people have successfully changed from it's original meaning.  Also we have government intrusion into areas like education, which didn't exist during the time our Founders set up our government.  That is the true crux of the problem.  By allowing public schools we've limited the choices most people can make about how their children are educated and this has set up a situation in which every little group wants kids taught their way.  Without that "public option" people would be free to decide where and how their kids would be educated and you wouldn't see stupidity like the Kansas Board of Education effectively outlawing the teaching of evolution.

       replyreport
21. 81

    LondonGirlposted 12 years ago

    No, because they are not enforcing a system of sharia on non-Muslims.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       ledefensetechposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Even when the system of Sharia violates the rights of Muslims granted to them under British law?

       replyreport
22. 81

    LondonGirlposted 12 years ago

    Sharia law isn't the law, though. So their legal rights remain the same, and are unaffected.
    
    In addition, only (from memory) Jews and Sikhs are racial groups within the meaning of the Race Relations Act 1976. Muslims and Christians definitely aren't, as evangelical religions.

    replyreport
23. 60

    topgunjagerposted 12 years ago

    The chief rabbi is a douche=)

    replyreport
24. 81

    LondonGirlposted 12 years ago

    This case was heard over 3 days last week, and the Law Lords are likely to give judgment in December.

    replyreport
25. 60

    tobey100posted 12 years ago

    And we care what a British court says why?????

    replyreport
26. 0

    theonegoodmanposted 12 years ago

    No one is great without religiosity.
    
    This Rabbi who said that defining judaism on the ethnicity of the mother is racist is a moron.  This has been a long-standing feature of judaism and a way of defining judaism.  Remember, judaism is an ethnicity, a culture, and a religion, amongst other things.  God is not a racist.  The Biblical Jews were the chosen people, as stated in the old testament. 
    
    Whether they kept their covenant with the Lord of Hosts is another story entirely.
    
    And in conclusion, what is the big deal about only jews attending a jewish school?  Why not leave them alone to practice as they wish?

    replyreport