David f

Thank you for the historical information, that was interesting. I will not attempt to defend the history of slavery in Christian societies, or of Christians at times in legitimising slavery, but I do take solace in the prominent role of Christians in finally abolishing it.

Ttbn

The fuss is about is whether religious schools and other institutions should be provided with full or partial exemption from legal protections against discrimination that apply elsewhere. For example, as a woman, I could never become a Roman Catholic priest, but excluding me from almost any other job on the basis of my gender would be illegal.

Teaching gay children that they are sinners destined for hell would be considered vile and harmful hate speech by many, and I guess would get a teacher in a state school sacked. But others think that is an accurate representation of what the Bible says , e.g.

“Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 6:9-10)

I agree with you that religious freedom means freedom to act in accordance with one’s beliefs, and as I indicated earlier, I think that freedom should be protected even though I fiercely disagree with some of what is taught in the name of religion

Canem

It depends on whether you look at “normal” from an individual or population perspective.

Most adults are between 150 and 190cm tall. Most have an IQ of 80 to 120. Most are right- handed. And most are heterosexual.

But in any largeish population, there are people who are exceptionally short or tall, people who are unusually intelligent or dumb, people who are left-handed (I’m one), and people who are homosexual.

So in one sense being left-handed makes me abnormal; but in a normal population about 10% of people are left-handed. Scientists are not exactly sure about its cause; genes and foetal development are candidates (like homosexuality). I don’t understand what you mean by homosexuality being “compatible” with our lives; no-one is trying to make straight people gay, and no-one is trying to make right-handed people left-handed (though in the past, in both cases, the reverse was sometimes true).

That some people are left-handed, and some are homosexual, and some are short, and some are clever, is just part of our human diversity.

The case of transgender people is more complicated, and I share concerns that some people have been encouraged to make permanent life-changing medical interventions at too young an age that they later regret. I also agree that parents have a role guiding children who are struggling with their sexual identity.

The “long march” of Mao was an actual long march. The phrase “long march through the institutions” was coined by German socialist Rudi Dutschke.

On whether the Bible is primarily a moral handbook, I’m a regular churchgoer who has studied theology and I have never heard or read anyone say that it is primarily a moral handbook, but encountered many preachers and theologians who argue it is not. Perhaps you could point to a recognised authority who argues differently?

Yes, there are different interpretations of Galatians and other texts addressing slavery. My contention, though, was that Christians were prominent in the abolitionist movements, and texts such as this were important in framing their thinking and arguments. Jankiewitz called it the “Magna Carta” of abolitionism.

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/232856898.pdf

No law whatsoever about religion can be made, neither for nor against, for the simple that no institution can ever define "religion".

Christianity (and/or any Church thereof), like so many other institutions, is not necessarily a religion and cannot be automatically and blindly considered as such: at times and for certain people Christianity indeed serves as a religion, but at other times and for other people it serves completely different purposes.

Without the ability to define religion, it is in the interest of every religious person (but not only them) to have as few as possible legal restrictions on behaviour by the state - because in a culture of restrictions, one can never tell whether their own religion will be in jeopardy, when they themselves will face the terrible choice of either turning their back to God or be eaten by lions!

In that spirit, states should never order parents what their children are to be taught. Parents should be able to teach their children whatever they want, either in person or by proxy(s) of their own choice. The above applies to both religious and non-religious values, because no law can possibly distinguish between the two.

But as Rhian mentioned, there is no reason whatsoever why a state should pay for the education of children in values that are not consistent with its own.

Similarly in workplaces: an employer should never be limited as to whom they employ or not. It is their money (assuming it indeed is) and they should be able to do with it as they want.

Same for the state, same for parents, same for workplaces, same for schools: he who pays the piper calls the tune!

http://fee.org/articles/antonio-gramsci-the-godfather-of-cultural-marxism/

I remember something about "Mao's Four Pillars Policy" of attacks on institutions- including Education, Health, Army/ Police, Courts others refer to these being necessary for a coup. But Gramsci seems to describe this above- though he doesn't refer to it as such.

People are not always what they seem to be. Recently our niece was telling us, whilst house sitting for a couple, very religious people, happy clappers on Sundays, wife works in pre-school, husband a professional at IT, 3 young kids, 2 cars, nice 2 story house, swimming pool, a dog and 2 cats, and plenty of dosh. The perfect middle class conservatives. Well, what did niece discover in a bottom draw by accident, porno DVD's and sex toys. She said; "Uncle I wouldn't have thought", I said; "Ah, it takes all kinds, people are both public, and private.".....Then she thought she would take the micky out of uncle; How much does a @!#%#@ cost? I said; "Go online girl and FIND OUT, I'm sure they have a deluxe model just for you, ha, ha."

Dear Paul1405,

You wrote,

"Well, what did niece discover in a bottom draw by accident, porno DVD's and sex toys."

What kind of accident could cause niece to find what people had in their dresser?