You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I’ve neither the time, inclination or brain bandwidth to devote any significant effort to it) is that most normal people of faith/no faith aren’t the card carrying evangelists for their cause that some on the other side of the fence think they are.
^ Exactly this.
OMG (ironic acronym), this is like a doorstep argument with a jehovah's. Can everyone who seriously questions whether god is real, have a word with themselves, please? god is a character based on historic fables. The entity in question is fictitious, ok?
Which leads to ...at one point there has to have been a first for everything
Without wanting to seem argumentative to anyone on this thread, it seems there’s a chasm between what people “think” is taught/goes on, and the real life reality of it.
At the moment the push from some faith groups is to control the curriculum and excuse parts of it.
In other (developed) parts of the world
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/11/the-right-to-expel-children-from-school-isnt-about-freedom-its-about-cruelty
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/oct/15/labor-to-move-to-prevent-gay-teachers-being-sacked-from-religious-schools
Check the date those were 2018
In the US they want to stop teaching Evolution, in places they want to ignore things that they do not like.
There is a point to taking stand and making sure that reality is taught as such and religion studied
I’ve said this many times before, but with any demographic it’s a shouty extremist minority that give the rest a bad name.
I agree. Many atheists feel the same way about the New Atheism (i.e. blanket statements like "religion poisons everything").
Not convinced about this in a practical setting
Obviously practice varies (look at mostly Catholic Italy and their birthrate to see that not all church positions are followed by the flock) but the official position is its theistic evolution. Theistic evolution isnt evolution. Its just admitting the evidence isnt in their favour and then fudging the results.
I went to a Catholic school as well. First few years it was sensible but in the final year a proper god botherer took over and the position became less balanced. The previous headmaster took the approach so long as you showed what he considered to be Christian virtues he wasnt overly fussed about what your position on religion was. A position I was semi impressed with at the time and as I have got older only got more so.
Likewise at 6th form the biology teacher was a creationist but never let that interfere with what he taught. It only came out in side conversations and never directly in his teaching.
Whilst confused about how he managed to balance the two I admire his approach.
In both of those cases I think they were both supporters of secularism (why is it people confuse secularism with atheism?).
Ok ...the martians arrive tomorrow to discover we are all following a deighty of some sort.
Reckon they would have a definitive answer?
jj
time is short so I'll just say....
Wow you really are full of it.
I've just spent a few weeks on a pro/anti Scottish independence thread and pretty much everyone there had more humility and self awareness than you.
Good luck with the big words.
Google ad hominem for useful information on how not to proceed.
OMG (ironic acronym), this is like a doorstep argument with a jehovah’s. Can everyone who seriously questions whether god is real, have a word with themselves, please? god is a character based on historic fables. The entity in question is fictitious, ok?
The problem is Jim its you on the doorstep. I have no doubt in my mind that God does not exist, but have you really written that post thinking you have converted anyone?
Anyway. Modern thinking is that the two aren’t mutually exclusive.
Of course they are not. It is perfectly possible to accept evolution as a robust science based theory whilst having faith in a religion. Frankly, I've no idea how, but apparently it is possible.
To be fair evolution is just a theory
Be careful with "just a theory". We are not talking hypothesis here.
so it was all from 'the big bang'?
Mike, the links you provide are as heinous an indictment of Australia's political leaders as it's religious ones.
They are, but it's been driven by the religious ones. Remind me which ones are preaching hate?
To be fair evolution is just a theory
Be careful with “just a theory”. We are not talking hypothesis here.
What is the alternate theory? what is the evidence against evolution?
so it was all from ‘the big bang’?
That would seem to be a reasonable conclusion.
What is the alternate theory? what is the evidence against evolution?
I'm not aware there is any.
I was initially sceptical about evolution, but then I tried internet dating.
There is definitely a link between physical unattractiveness and the inability to get a girlfriend and reproduce, so maybe that Darwin bloke was onto something after all.
How the hell am I expected to go forth and multiply with a face like a welders bench?!
How the hell am I expected to go forth and multiply with a face like a welders bench?!
Donate at the bank
I suspect handybar is more interested in the act than the result.
might be of interest to Some of you
I suspect handybar is more interested in the act than the result.
$$$$ then
and welcome to your 'inventor' of the 'big bang Theory' ... yep a Catholic priest :O
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre
Mike, when a thread on religion crops up do you and others feel the need to search up online to find where religion has ****ed up or done something reprehensible?
Do religious zealots do the same and come back saying global warming and the atomic bomb are the fault of scientists?
There can be conflict amongst religious groups, however religious belief is so prevalent to billions around the globe that exposure to it and more importantly a tolerance of it is what is required. Lets not add more intolerance to the mix.
Indeed, there is a long history of science and mathematics within "religious" structures. Science is based on fact, religion on faith, hence they can co-exist.
There can be conflict amongst religious groups, however religious belief is so prevalent to billions around the globe that exposure to it and more importantly a tolerance of it is what is required. Lets not add more intolerance to the mix.
I'm happy to be tolerant, I'm happy to live and let live, I do that a lot. It's a shame that religion is one of those things that objects to tolerance in many cases, lobbies parliaments and legislators to preserve their tiny view on life.
ike, when a thread on religion crops up do you and others feel the need to search up online to find where religion has ****ed up or done something reprehensible?
No need to dig stuff up it just keeps coming up
If you are religious don't have a problem with me have a problem with the leaders and those using the magic faeries against their wishes
God is a benign drunk and the world is his hangover.
Peter Cook.
Believe what you like (FWIW I know/think all god's are false). As long as you keep it to yourself and don't push your belief on others I don't care what you believe.
But as a teacher, religion has absolutely no place in education other than as a 'some people believe this' piece of sociological information.
Mike,
after saying I am tolerant
If you are religious don’t have a problem with me have a problem with the leaders and those using the magic faeries against their wishes
Why be so facetious at the end?
The earliest examples of religious belief date back to 5000BC which is 20% of the way back to when there was another species of human on the planet. Hinduism dates back 4000 years, Judaism 3000 yeas, Christianity 2000 years and Islam 1500 years. If anyone thinks they can turn back that kind of tide based on a couple of sentences on a mountain bike forum in 2019 they are either an idiot or a blind zealot of the highest order.
Not at all but those are zealots who ware forcing their beliefs onto others rather than being tolerant. They are inflicting their views on others as they (generally the old white majority) are fighting hard to preserve what they remember not what the world wants to be,
The will of the Australian parliament can stand up to it.
By the same account a school can still hold a play based on Darwinism with minor changes. The OP talks of parents removing their children from the play. It could have still been held. Minor changes could have still seen the play go ahead with healthy debate on both sides IMO.
Mike, based on how humans have evolved are you being a zealot?
So which is the one true religion? Which am I offending the most?
Take the Hippocratic Oath as a guide - First Do No Harm, I don't see Christianity of delivering on this, at each judgemental step they harm people they judge people against rules that are so far from modern life it's laughable.
I've known Christians unable to marry in their local church , people shunned for they way they are,people pushed away for not conforming all due to the reading of a badly translated bit of fiction. Call me what you want but I welcome all and respect your right to exist and believe right up until the point it infringes on others(withing legal and actual moral lines) I don't see the major christian religions abiding by this in the slightest, there is a huge body of evidence showing how they are discriminating, ignoring their own rules and covering shit up as it suits them. The catholic church is one of the worst multinationals out there. Ruthless to obtain a profit and customer base
The will of the Australian parliament can stand up to it.
To add they can unless they buy a majority of people, which you know would be immoral...... absolute ****ing ****s the lot of them
The catholic church is one of the worst multinationals out there. Ruthless to obtain a profit and customer base
You completely and utterly miss the point mike. I am not a Catholic.
You should use that sentence to convince the 1.2 billion citizens of this planet that are Catholic.
If you convince 1/6th of the planet of their ills, come back in a couple of minutes to let me know how you got on please.
If you could also add an analysis of how that affects a play on Darwinism I would be very grateful because I cant be arsed.
God or evolution both involve a degree of faith
Evolution is a scientific theory. You can't prove it's true (like any theory) but you can do objective, repeatable scientific studies and experiments to test if the theory is false. If you don't get a lot of evidence that it is false, you might tend to assume there's a decent probability that it is true. Faith doesn't really have a lot of bearing on probability.
God doesn't involve "a degree" of faith. God is completely dependent on faith.
If you believe in God, then he exists for you, and that's the end of the story. If you don't believe, God has no substance, and falls apart like a house of cards.
Believe or don't believe. It's as simple as that.
Some people will explain God as a concept that represents the spiritual aspect of human consciousness; giving a name to something that is innate in the human brain. I can understand that as an intellectual exercise, but the idea of God as a supernatural entity that has an independent existence? Sorry, a'm oot!
Jeebus...
this is all getting a bit complex for a discussion over whether little Jimmy's imaginary friend is real (spoiler:no) and whether little Jimmy's going to go apeshit if you point out the truth (spoiler:**** yeah.. like you wouldn't believe xo))
I just love the people who think that Prof. Dawkins doesn't have the intellectual fortitude to tell you that mummy/daddy/nanny might have been making shit up.
If anything he's been giving you too much credit.
Noone cares whether your imaginary friend is nice or nasty or weird or lovely or diabolical, whether he has inspired you to greatness, or just justifies your failures and offers you a sympathetic ear inside your head.
The point is that he/she is imaginary. Doesn't exist, never did, never will.
Grasp that, take a walk, see that it makes sense, and then go out and be awesome to one another.
Cold hard science says that everyone you meet is just a temporary accumulation of stardust.
But a lot depends on perspective.
Others say that maybe we are the Universes way to know itself.
In many ways each person, or animal you meet is a miracle greater than any in your holy book.
It's a wonderful world, so why waste your life on pish, lies and philosophical notions that predate the idea of washing you hands after you have a dump?
No atheist on STW ever floated an argument of “yes, but Dawkins says…”
I am not sure this is true, the OP was very keen on Dawkins and Hitchens ma.
Take the Hippocratic Oath as a guide – First Do No Harm, I don’t see Christianity of delivering on this, at each judgemental step they harm people they judge people against rules that are so far from modern life it’s laughable.
I’ve known Christians unable to marry in their local church , people shunned for they way they are,people pushed away for not conforming all due to the reading of a badly translated bit of fiction. Call me what you want but I welcome all and respect your right to exist and believe right up until the point it infringes on others(withing legal and actual moral lines) I don’t see the major christian religions abiding by this in the slightest, there is a huge body of evidence showing how they are discriminating, ignoring their own rules and covering shit up as it suits them. The catholic church is one of the worst multinationals out there. Ruthless to obtain a profit and customer base
So you have met some bad immoral people who identify as Christians, wow that's a surprise - it's a good job there arent immoral atheists then! You can't tar everyone with the same brush, who is being judgemental here? Have you been to every church on the planet? have you seen how some churches actually are very accepting (mine has a good mix of ex cons, addicts etc and there is no judgement on people's past lives because after all none of us are perfect!) Many are focussed on purely helping people (love Thy neighbour is the greatest commandment) You perhaps need to investigate a little further, you probably wouldn't need to look too far to find some of these religious organisations are actually doing some good.
And evolution is just a theory. Show me proof or evidence that slime turned into humans. You could show me evidence that species have adapted to their environment and I will accept that, but that is a long way off evolving entirely new features and a fish becoming a walking warm blooded mammal for example. Yes we have fossils of lots of different species/organisms, none of those prove the transition that would be required so it could be assumed these have always been separate species in their own right (i.e. evolution isn't true) since there is no actual hard evidence to prove otherwise... Just in the same way you assume evolution is true because again there is no hard evidence to prove otherwise. I don't have any evidence to suggest that aliens don't exist but doesn't mean that they do.
Its not just a fringe of religious that attempt to thrust their views on the nonreligious and often succeed.
Any steps to allow dignity in death are opposed vehemently by the religious and so is a womans right to do as she wishes with her body.
This stinks.
Thatcherism wouldn't have been possible with "The selfish gene".
Has the OP lit a firework again and then failed to get away in time?
Has the OP lit a firework again and then failed to get away in time?
He's too busy touching himself as he's got what he was after.
Its not just a fringe of religious that attempt to thrust their views on the nonreligious and often succeed.
Any steps to allow dignity in death are opposed vehemently by the religious and so is a womans right to do as she wishes with her body.
The views for and against assisted suicide are not purely down to religious belief.
There is not a queue outside the door of Digitas made up of aethiest CERN researchers and rocket scientists.
Its not just a fringe of religious that attempt to thrust their views on the nonreligious and often succeed.
Any steps to allow dignity in death are opposed vehemently by the religious and so is a womans right to do as she wishes with her body.
The views for and against assisted suicide are not purely down to religious belief.
There is not a queue outside the door of Digitas made up of aethiest CERN researchers and rocket scientists.
The fact that abortion is illegal in just 26 countries and the majority of humanity believes in some form of god would suggest that mainstream religion can live in harmony with non religion.
Polarizing it and thinking you can convert believers is utterly futile.
Yep. There it is. Religion. Still busy poisoning everything…
Yep. There it is. Trolling. Still boring everyone…
A early man ideology to suppress and appease the masses in a time with primitive technology and scientific development. Seems we don't evolve much at a all . After 2000 years lots are still relying on a novel for everyday consolation.
A early man ideology to suppress and appease the masses in a time with primitive technology and scientific development. Seems we don’t evolve much at a all . After 2000 years lots are still relying on a novel for everyday consolation.
Give yourself a pat on the back and a gold star for being clever. Well done you.
athgray,
"pat on the back and a gold star"
Implying others are childish for dissing his imaginary fwend.
Sweeeeeeet 🤗
Maybe we need a new slogan to bring it back to basics.
ATHEISM. Existence matters.
The problem is Jim its you on the doorstep. I have no doubt in my mind that God does not exist, but have you really written that post thinking you have converted anyone?
I've no interest in converting anyone. I just have an overwhelming feeling to express my incredulity.
I wouldn't say God is malevolent, just an underachiever.
Woody Allen
Has the OP lit a firework again and then failed to get away in time?
Just woppit doing the usual woppiting, as he periodically does. This time followed by an injudicious email, possibly brought on by an over-refreshing lunch.
The school should have simply staged Charlie and the Chocolate Factory or James and the Giant Peach, not Darwin and his Crazy Theory!
A early man ideology to suppress and appease the masses in a time with primitive technology and scientific development. Seems we don’t evolve much at a all . After 2000 years lots are still relying on a novel for everyday consolation.
Is it a stretch to suggest somewhere in the region of 70-80% of the Earth population have unprovable beliefs based on religion?
We are in all likelihood friends, family and colleagues of people who think god exists. If these people feel that belief helps them through their daily lives then so be it, and hence religion must have some worth. These can be individuals that are surgeons conducting open heart surgery, or engineers developing the next generation of electric cars, or receptionists at an abortion clinic.
The school should have simply staged Charlie and the Chocolate Factory or James and the Giant Peach, not Darwin and his Crazy Theory!
From the sound of the article is seems in all likelihood that the school could and should have still had a play about Darwin.
We are in all likelihood friends, family and colleagues of people who think god exists. If these people feel that belief helps them through their daily lives then so be it, and hence religion must have some worth.
All good for you lot, just please lets keep it out of politics, law making, education and judging of people.
It's part of why there is a drive for people not to tick the CofE box by default on the census to get a better idea of who is actually religious and those that are not.
All good for you lot, just please lets keep it out of politics, law making, education and judging of people.
So how does it work to exclude religion from political debate when legislating for same sex marriage??
Do we believe in equality?
Yes
Good lets treat everyone equally
Do you have religious beliefs that you feel stop you treating everyone equally? Your Problem get over it.
Sorry but not got much time for that sort of objection.
A couple of people now have said that "evolution is just a theory." If this is you, you need to go and google "scientific theory" before typing further, as you're simply demonstrating your own ignorance.
"Theory" in scientific terms has a different meaning from that in general parlance. You might watch a film and have a theory about who the killer is; this is essentially a guess, that doesn't mean that evolution is a guess.
In science, this would be a hypothesis. Someone has an idea, that idea then gets tested. Either evidence supports this hypothesis or disproves it. Over time, as more and more experiments are conducted and more and more evidence is discovered, the more robust hypotheses become accepted as a theory. Eventually it becomes, effectively, fact, only it's still referred to as a theory because science isn't arrogant enough to state 100% that something is definitely, unequivocally true. There's always a chance that something might still pop up which contradicts a widely-held theory or offer a better explanation than the one we have.
The Theory of Relativity is a good example here. Science has spent a century trying to disprove it, without success. It is a demonstrable fact. Yet it's still "only a theory," and this is fortunate because we now know that it breaks at the quantum level.
The Theory of Evolution is one of the most robust theories we have. We can actually observe it in action, there's a real concern currently about the over-use of antibiotics accelerating bacteria into evolving into resistant strains.
Sorry but not got much time for that sort of objection.
I think perhaps I'd give concession for religion to be involved in that debate if the argument was whether or not to make same-sex marriage mandatory for all, which you'd think was the argument from the way some people react to it.
if the argument was whether or not to make same-sex marriage mandatory for all, which you’d think was the argument from the way some people react to it.
While simultaneously being a gateway to much much worse, I'm sure plenty of people are fighting the urge to marry their dogs at the moment
Because people who believe in organised religion are much more willing to put the beliefs others have imposed on them before their own life experience.
There's no evidence that same sex marriage causes any harm whatsoever. Deciding to oppose it for religious reasons in an abjugation of personal responsibility.
It says that you value the opinions of others over the evidence in front of your eyes.
I agree that this is a trait common to politics as well as religion - see anti semitism in the Labour party, racism and hatred of the poor and disabled endemic within the Tory party etc.
Many people buy into an ideology wholesale, without examining the finer points on an individual basis.
It seems to be a fundamental human trait, but that doesn't mean it should be encouraged, in fact quite the opposite.
From a couple of pages back,
And the argument that ‘well if God exists then who created God?’ (i.e he can’t exist as no one could create him) holds no water since scientist would have us believe that the universe created itself randomly out of nothing, a question Dawkins failed to answer in debate
Aside from the fact that you've got this backwards, which I'll get to in a minute, the wooly thinking here is the notion that Dawkins has to answer that question. The universe does not require our understanding, and whilst science strives to find answers, "we don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer to a big question.
Religion gets a foothold here because it can provide an answer without requiring a shred of proof, it can just make up any old story and no-one can disprove it. (Except when it can and then we see a lot of revisionism and back-pedalling, something something allegory something.)
For the "something from nothing" argument, this is the reason why "god did it" is a pretty unsatisfactory answer. We argue that the universe cannot always have existed or appeared from nowhere, therefore there must be a creator. But this just displaces the problem, we then ask "where did god come from?" and are told that he's always existed or appeared from nowhere.
In any case, current popular scientific theory (ooh, there's that word again) is not that the universe was created out of nothing, but rather a super-dense ball of something, so your original premise is (probably) wrong. (Where did that something come from? We don't know. And it's OK that we don't know, we don't need to fill in the gaps with supernatural fantasy.)
Keep it coming guys.
This all evidence to support my postulated hypothesis that “lots of people on the Internet are dicks about things they don’t understand “
There is little evidence to contradict this hypothesis thus far.
I think I might have a theory on my hands.
And the argument that ‘well if My God exists then who created My God?’
When you go back to it and look critically if all these people around the world have their gods who created everything then it's either a whole Mr Benn dressing up game or a heap of sub contractors taking charge, so in any given place Your God could end up being nothing more than the David Brent of the deity world 🙂
This all evidence to support my postulated hypothesis that “lots of people on the Internet are dicks about things they don’t understand “
What like science?
As I said above you are welcome to your beliefs just keep them out of my life. The number of times I've missed the supermarket on a Sunday......
There’s no evidence that same sex marriage causes any harm whatsoever. Deciding to oppose it for religious reasons in an abjugation of personal responsibility.
Indeed.
This is one of the issues I have personally with organised religion. Certainly with Christianity, the bible is translated from a dead language, has different interpretations depending on who translated it (and can we trust the people translating not to have had their own agendas?) and is made up from a number of texts from different sources which often wildly contradict each other. (Case in point, in the original text "homosexual man" and "male prostitute" is the same word. How we choose to translate that tells very different stories.)
Whilst the book / religion itself may well be well-meaning as a whole (today), this ambiguity means that whatever world views someone might hold, positive or negative, there's probably a passage somewhere in the bible which they can cite to 'support' their opinion. Whilst I don't doubt that it can be used for good, it can also be used as a tool to empower bigots. (And yes, we're back to that 'vocal minority' argument I'm sure. But still.)
We know that gay marriage is a sin because it says so in the bible. Except, it doesn't, unless you're employing some very disingenuous interpretations of what's actually written.
What we really need is The Bible 2.0. Rip out all the bits that are incompatible with the modern world, the slave-beating and the pseudoscience, and make it clear which bits are supposed to be factual and which are allegorical. You'd have a best-seller on your hands, and it'd stop all these hoary old debates. The believers can get on with their believing, and the atheists can indulge in a bit of bum fun or have an abortion without some random stranger telling them they can't because a 1500 year old bit of parchment says it's wrong.
Do we believe in equality?
Yes
Good lets treat everyone equallyDo you have religious beliefs that you feel stop you treating everyone equally? Your Problem get over it.
Sorry but not got much time for that sort of objection.
Not many would object to that mike, however people do have prejudice based on their religion and prejudice for a variety of reasons and they bring them to bear on life and politics.
I would suggest that we all have something in out lives that keep us balanced, reasoned, and tolerant and for millions on the planet their belief in god is that thing. It certainly does not make them homophobic or racist. I know terrible acts are committed by people of religious belief. We have also seen atrocities committed against religion by societies without strong religious belief. If politicians can gain balance, reason and tolerance through a belief in god then of course they should bring their religion to the table.
Incidentally, on the subject of same-sex, er, sex and the bible, I looked into this a little while back. Rather than repeating myself, you can read what I wrote here if you're interested:
If politicians can gain balance, reason and tolerance through a belief in god then of course they should bring their religion to the table.
If politicians can't gain balance, reason and tolerance without a belief in god then they shouldn't be allowed to be politicians. Or for that matter, members of society.
The notion that without god we'd all be amoral rapists, thieves and murders is an absolutely terrifying concept to me. If that's actually true for some folk then it's a bloody good job that they've found religion instead.
I’m sure plenty of people are fighting the urge to marry their dogs at the moment
Ha ha ha that’s crazy (how does he read my mind?)
Cougar, I worded my point badly. I don't think people are only good because of religion. I meant that a belief system may be something that helps them perhaps to relieve stress battle depression, suppress anger or make them better in the same way a hobby might.
Athgrey
You miss the point. Both of those things are where the religious attempt to impose their beliefs on others
On dignity in dying the medical profession splits on religious affiliation and reproductive rights are continually under attack from the religious
Have your religion if you want. Do not attempt to deny me my rights because of your belifs
Athgrey
You miss the point. Both of those things are where the religious attempt to impose their beliefs on others
On dignity in dying the medical profession splits on religious affiliation and reproductive rights are continually under attack from the religiousHave your religion if you want. Do not attempt to deny me my rights because of your belifs
No, your cack handed polarisation is missing the point tj. You talk as if it is religious people against non religious. That is silly. Yes there will be people of religious belief against assisted suicide and abortion. There will be non religious people in the same position.
How many people with a belief in God share a prayer with a loved one before they say goodbye in Switzerland?
How many women have relied on their faith to see them through the traumatic situation of having an abortion?
It is not a case of religion against the rest.
I have no belief in a god and agree that the people you describe should not hold away over policy however there is no need to tar everyone with the same brush.
@athgray Ah ok, fair enough. That makes more sense (and is somewhat less scary...!)
I've seen that argument before is all, so I perhaps jumped to conclusions. It's been argued that we need religion to give us morality. This may have actually been true a couple of millennia ago, but society has evolved (ho ho!) and I'd like to think that most people in the developed world know that it's unacceptable to be a bit murdery without needing a book to tell them so.
You talk as if it is religious people against non religious. That is silly.
I don't think that's what TJ means. Rather, it's the notion that (some) religious people want to dictate what others should do (religious and irreligious alike) because they believe their religion says so which he is objecting to. I think. It isn't - and shouldn't be - a case of us vs them.
Yes there will be people of religious belief against assisted suicide and abortion. There will be non religious people in the same position.
Whilst almost certainly true, it would be interesting to put some stats behind that. I'd wager that there's a strong correlation between the two.
Whilst almost certainly true, it would be interesting to put some stats behind that. I’d wager that there’s a strong correlation between the two.
I think think the arguments for and against assisted dying are far more nuanced than being based on religion.
I have heard views of politicians that are wary due to the potential for abuse due to the often vulnerable nature of those involved.
I was really referring to the abortion side of it, but yeah, that's a good point.
Even if your a non believer...religion can once in a while have heartwarming positives
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-cornwall-47176939
Oddly when you leave this mortal coil the majority seem to be sent off with some kind of religious ceremony..and are remembered somehow ( maybe the memory thing is a human conditioning)
Even if your a non believer…religion can once in a while have heartwarming positives
Or people being good people, happened to be in a church.
Oddly when you leave this mortal coil the majority seem to be sent off with some kind of religious ceremony
Personally I'd like to head off in a flaming long boat into the sea, while people finish the contents of my drinks cupboard. Any mention of religion, next place etc will be left at the door.
Athgrey
Dignity in dying does not equal doctor assisted suicide and the vast majority of those against it are religious even if they cite other reasons
The vast majority of religious doctors oppose dignity in dying and the vast majority of those who support it are secular
Oddly when you leave this mortal coil the majority seem to be sent off with some kind of religious ceremony
When my dad died a couple of years ago, the funeral involved some bloke in a frock (who had never met him) waxing lyrical about him. It's a laudable sentiment and all, but I didn't recognise the man he was supposed to be talking about at all. I found the whole thing a bit surreal TBH. When I go I think I'd want any tributes to be paid by people who actually knew me.
once in a while have heartwarming positives
Or people being good people, happened to be in a church
Well what else were they in the church for a spot of molesting..ffs
When I go I think I’d want any tributes to be paid by people who actually knew me
And maybe you will, however not everyone has that last request do they will it be a religious ceremony or down the the pub where the people you knew say the nice things?
Oddly when you leave this mortal coil the majority seem to be sent off with some kind of religious ceremony...
For most people that's custom and habit, not religious belief, though. Non religious alternatives are readily available (civil and humanist) and they are not wildly unusual these days. The last funeral I attended was a humanist ceremony.
And maybe you will, however not everyone has that last request do they will it be a religious ceremony or down the the pub where the people you knew say the nice things?
Choice is good, mmkay.
For most people that’s custom and habit, not religious belief, though.
Indeed. Certainly was in my dad's case, the only place he ever worshipped at served pints.
The last funeral I attended was a humanist ceremony.
Why am I not surprised.