The Forum > Article Comments > Secularism and religious tolerance > Comments
Secularism and religious tolerance : Comments
By David Fisher, published 26/7/2010Secularism holds that a person’s religious belief or lack of same is no business of the government.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Page 10
- 11
- 12
-
- All
Posted by socratease, Monday, 2 August 2010 10:30:09 PM
| |
How can we transgress against civility? Let us count the ways.
Yes, Squeers, I transgressed against civility. There are many stimuli which can rouse one. In the particular case of homophobia taught in schools I thought of what I read about teenage suicides in Australia. Although I think people should have the right to end their lives at a time of their own choosing I hope it won't be necessary. I have read that one of the major causes of teenage suicides is the despair of a teenager with uncertain sexuality confronting that issue in a condemnatory atmosphere. Fundamentalist Christian attitudes toward homosexuality exacerbate that despair. The court case AGIR cited keeps it out of US schools. It is literally a case of life or death. AGIR was upset by the court case. I see it as a victory for reason and compassion. Posted by david f, Monday, 2 August 2010 10:44:06 PM
| |
Dear Socratease,
In a secular society people are free to practice and even try to spread their religion or opposition to religion. However, they are not permitted to peddle sectarian ideas in the public schools under the guise of education. Posted by david f, Monday, 2 August 2010 11:19:08 PM
| |
Dear David,
Either you haven’t visited our public schools recently or you are talking about an *ideal*secular society. But let me update you: there are a lot of authority figures in our educational institutions who are very much *permitted* to peddling their prejudices under the guise of education –and many of them don’t belong to any of the recognised religions. Posted by Horus, Tuesday, 3 August 2010 6:27:01 AM
| |
To those who enjoyed the 'serve' David gave me :) you might wish to examine this issue more closely when a new discussion thread come out if approved. I titled it
"The Deification of Man and the emerging Secular Theocracy" See if it get's past big brother Graham :) But this amazes me from David (a Jew) However, the mere statement , “Jews must be fought and killed.”, while loathsome puts nobody in immediate danger and must be allowed. We must differentiate between mere advocacy of actions and actual planning and carrying out of actions. I completely disagree with this, as it is absolutely 'waiting it's time' rather than the relatively benign statement David regards it as. I must say I often question Davids rationality in these situations, but I assign it to his desire to 'whack a Christian fundy' :) more than see reality. No offense intended David. One only need look at this video to see that it is much more than simply a benign statement which must be allowed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE Horiwitz "Do you agree with it?" Muslim Woman "Yes! ! !" "That" is the rubber meets the road, hard core real world where such values intersect with peoples lives. Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Tuesday, 3 August 2010 6:56:00 AM
| |
Dear AGIR,
I look forward to the new thread, but it might be 24hrs before I get a chance to respond. I can't imagine GY having a problem with it. On the other point; I believe in freedom of speech--if only we had freedom of thought to go with it! Posted by Squeers, Tuesday, 3 August 2010 7:34:24 AM
|
socratease