Dear Yuyutsu,

Thanks for the link, I think it explains where you come from. I am not sure if I remember Ramakrishna - I fist heard about this approch to religion, or perenial philosophy, during my stay at UC Berkeley in the seventies of the last century, when these things were “in”.

I appreciate that quote you gave. I have nothing to add to it as it stands, except perhaps to point to a wider context:

“The Western attitude is expressed by the words of Yahweh on Sinai: ‘You shall have no other gods before me; in the Bhagavad Gita the incarnate god Krishna says, ‘Whatever god a man worships, it is I who answer the prayer’” (Encyclopaedia Britannica).

I think these can be seen as two complementary ”models”, ways of seeing God, although - if I may say so - it was the cultural adherents of the jealous Yahweh in the West (and their descendants to keep our atheist friends happy), rather those of the all-embracing Eastern model that brought us Enlightenment, modern science and technology that today we all profit from.

Though throughout its history Christianity used to overemphasize the “jealous” aspect, I think what is here quoted as having been said by the incarnate god Krishna, could have easily been said also by the non-fictional Jesus, seen by Christians as the incarnate God.

Dear AFA David,

You asked me for a quote. You wrote: “I know you are honourable in your efforts to have religion and atheism draw closer where there are perceived mutual ties. However, the AFA is an organisation, not an individual and it does not share that opinion. There can be no common ground as it considers supernatural edicts that have no basis in sound evidence should not be used to govern populations.”

What drove me up the wall was the phrase: “There can be no common ground…”

I have lived in the United States for many years before I came to Australia. One of my good friends is Jim Noonan, a practicing Catholic. Jim has been arrested many times for his protests against militarism. Jim apparently believes in what I think is nonsense, but nevertheless he is inspired to protest against inhumanity, the exploitation of workers, corporate malfeasance, the School of the Americas in Georgia where the US has trained Latin American military death squads etc. I have joined with him in some of those protests. We have considerable common ground, and I hope to see him later this year. I have other religious friends with similar common interests.

Roger Williams, a Baptist preacher, was the first man to use the phrase, “separation of church and state” and worked for it. In 1636 he founded Providence Plantations which later became Rhode Island. PP had complete separation of church and state and allowed all views concerning religion including those who rejected it.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State was founded in 1947 as Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State (POAU) maintains that government support for religious education would violate church-state separation. Its current head, Barry Lynn, is an ordained minister. They favour separation in other areas, and I have been a member.

They may have been inspired to those views by unsubstantiated supernatural edicts, but we share those views. That is our common ground. It is more important to me what is done than why it is done or what mumbojumbo they follow.

David f,

How about I analyse that quote for you as you seem incapable of understanding it more than reading into it what you want to believe.

“I know you are honourable in your efforts to have religion and atheism draw closer where there are perceived mutual ties. “

This sentence praises you for your attitude to ‘individuals’ for their ‘common humanity’ no matter their world view.

“However, the AFA is an organisation, not an individual and it does not share that opinion.”

This sentence states that the AFA is as an organisation and not an individual. It does not speak of individuals because of that. It can only have concern for other-organisations. Those organisations are religious and the AFA brings to light the problems within them.

“There can be no common ground as it considers supernatural edicts that have no basis in sound evidence should not be used to govern populations.”

This sentence states that there can be no common-ground between the AFA organisation and religious-organisations when supernatural edicts are used to govern people.

Individual religious people may have some similar goals as those of the AFA. Unless they join together as a visible body and fight against the bigotry of their own religion, they can be of no assistance to the AFA. This has not happened.

And as I clearly pointed out, the elephant in the room is that in Australia there (are-few-if-any) religious organisations, large body of religious people or any kind of push by religion to remove religious indoctrination from state schools. Students are the basis of an on ongoing democratic system, some end up as politicians. This point is not negotiable.

You may wish to live in a comfortable-world where everything is nice on the peripherals but the AFA lives in the world where the deciding alpha factor of common-ground between it and religion does not exist.

It will be a sad day if the AFA ever succumbs to compromise on this matter. Your cries of disenchantment are more suited to whose personal lives are disadvantaged by the AFA stance. We understand that position.

David

Dear AFA David,

You wrote: “And as I clearly pointed out, the elephant in the room is that in Australia there (are-few-if-any) religious organisations, large body of religious people or any kind of push by religion to remove religious indoctrination from state schools. Students are the basis of an on ongoing democratic system, some end up as politicians. This point is not negotiable.”

The point is not negotiable with me either. I will not compromise on that issue. However, as I pointed in my last post Americans United for Separation of Church and State shares that position. Its current head, Barry Lynn, is an ordained minister, and AU was founded by Protestants.

Australia and the United States are two different countries. For all practical purposes I am on your side here since I have found no religious groups and few non-religious groups who support the separation of church and state. It is different in the United States because the founding fathers had a great respect for the principle. That respect is shared by many religious and non-religious people.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10790 will point to an essay in olo I wrote on the separation in the US.

Let’s switch to something else. I have a great respect for David Hume, the Scottish philosopher. He wrote, “If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.”

He rejected religious mumbojumbo. He also wrote, “Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.”

We can point out that the religious are driven by unsustainable supernatural edicts. I believe with Hume all our positions are based on passions which we use reason to justify. I feel strongly about separation of church and state yet I cannot say why I feel so strongly.

Dear David F.,

I saw recent documentaries showing that young ultra-orthodox Jews admire soldiers. You see them going on a hike with soldiers (in an area close to the Lebanese border, so it's unsafe to go without military escort) and looking at the soldiers with wide eyes. They know the names of all military units, their history, the names of their commanders and what weapons they have. When the soldiers are fighting, they hold special all-night study-vigils for each fighting unit. Those youngsters expressed desire to serve in the army, but their Rabbis forbid them because they might see women, or even worse, hear them sing.

Yes, there are a couple of segregated units for the ultra-orthodox, but the Rabbis don't trust them enough and indeed in one such unit, 20 out of 60 soldiers left the orthodox life-style. Last month there was an incident when the agreement between the Rabbis and the army was broken as ultra-orthodox soldiers were made to listen to a lecture by a female soldier in a navy base. Earlier, 4 ultra-orthodox soldiers were expelled from an officer-training course because they refused to remain in a compulsory social-evening at their base when a woman was about to sing.

So I looked again, and found in a May 2012 survey, that it's only 42-45% of the ultra-orthodox that want to serve in the army. Still the vast majority would have liked to work if they could. 40% admitted that they discussed with their parents the possibility of secretly studying English (as 2nd-language) and maths because they believe that not-studying these subjects will hurt their employment prospects.

Changing the subject, your last post contains a great insight:
<<Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions>>

- I have my reservations about that statement, but suppose it were always true and I had such an employee, then I would surely sack him/her!

Passions are born of the genes, and when I read in scripture about devils, daemons and monsters of sorts, I wonder whether 20th-century scientists were the first to discover and enumerate them.

david f,

I’m certainly pleased we have reached some kind of détente in our discussion. It was unexpected that it should persevere for the time it has. It was only the ‘hating a god’ statement that induced me to initially write.

I think we can leave it here with not permanent bruises remaining on either of us or anyone else for that matter.

I won’t answer your latest post as it will lead to more discussion and I am a bit pressed for time, as much as you have brought up some interesting comments about the American experience. Maybe Australia will emulate the good parts of it someday.

Au revoir

David