Fractelle,
Irrespective of your language, you are right that I rather clumsily expressed the simple fact that historical events should be seen and judged in their historical context. That and nothing else was meant by the “something similar about the Church”.

A person who claims the Earth is about 6000 years old is wrong, whether he/she lives today or lived during the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, in each case one would make different conclusions about the person’s intelligence.

As there is an “absolute truth” about the age of our Earth, there is also an “absolute truth“ about what is good and what is bad (the sense of which is in your genes, called “natural morals“ in Catholic terminology). It is just when one wants to pass judgements about the perpetrators, one ought to take into account the historical context. That is the difference between atrocities perpetrated by Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao on one hand, and those perpetrated by the Church and others in the Middle Ages.

I will not elaborate further on that since I am not a historian. There are many professional historians whose interpretation of European history more or less agrees with the way I see it, as there are those whose interpretation is closer to passing sweeping judgements that you and Shadow Minister seem to prefer. We both can learn from the historians whose interpretation we like, as well as from those whose interpretation we do not like.

George
Perhaps indoctrination was not the best word to use in this sense but basically we are all shaped by our early childhood experiences. I am not sure how many people would choose a religious path after the age of 15 or at the agreed point of critical thinking. There are some that will. I know people who have changed their outlook or views in adulthood one way or another.

As for secularism, it isn't perfect. One misgiving is that we might become too politically correct as to invite the ridiculuous. While I am not a fan of Peter Costello, his article in The Age highlights an important issue -that of religious schools to be able to choose teachers on the basis of their religious faith. Despite some of the minor distractions in his piece, I agree with the thrust of his argument. It does seem a bit ridiculous to dictate to a religious school that they cannot hire religious teachers.

In any case, many religious schools hire non-religious teachers in certain subjects because they are excellent teachers. A smart principal will hire on the basis of competency to attract families to their schools. Some Muslims schools have hired non-Muslim teachers in various subjects.

I suspect the legislation won't be passed anyway.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/the-legal-threat-to-christian-schools-20090728-dzzx.html

"One has nothing to do with the other. The church has a long history of religiously inspired torture and war mongering."

And you think that if the church was eradicated or no longer existed, that "religiously inspirsed torture" and violence would cease? Yes. But would torture and violence themselves cease? Of course not.

The problem lies in human nature, not religion!

Anyone who suggests otherwise needs to put some more thought into it; and if they still draw the same errant conclusion after said thought, I'll have to assume they're living in delusional deep seated hatred towards religion, as holding to that position would indicate a departure from any semblance of rational thought.

A rational view of the situation reveals that John Dickson was spot on when he wrote...."The slogan ‘religion-leads-to-violence’ finds plausibility today not through logic or the facts but through simple repetition."

http://www.publicchristianity.com/religious_violence.html

Dear Trav,

Professor Edwards of the University of Pennsylvania wrote "Torture" which is a history of the practice. It is not human nature. It is primarily cultural. In ancient times some civilizations practiced it as a normal part of their jurisprudence some didn't.

The ancient Greeks, Romans and Chinese practiced torture. The ancient Persians, Indians and Israelis did not. Western religion primarily derived its structure and practices from classical Rome after Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire in 371. Religious torture followed. The provision in English law that one cannot be forced to testify against oneself comes from the outlawing of torture. The provision in the US Constitution prohibiting "cruel and unusual punishment" also outlaws torture. The actions of the Bush administration allowing torture broke with past practices. Obama seems to be restoring the previous attitude.

Religiously inspired torture is not common to all religions. It is only common to religions which originated in cultures which accepted torture as a part of their jurisprudence.

I spoke too soon, a Court in America is now allowing a Priest in Texas to sacrifice goats at his home in the interests of religious freedoms.

This is the ridiculous - now some poor goat has to endure death and pain (possibly) for some warped human view of the world.

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/priest-allowed-to-sacrifice-goats-court-20090801-e4t2.html

I am surprised that religious freedoms would override animal cruelty in this instance but it is America.

I will add this to my misgivings about broader religious freedoms impacting on other rights already enshrined in law.

Pelican

That is distressing news and further indictment of the evil that occurs in the name of religion.

Davidf

Very interesting to note the influence of both culture and religion as to the incidence of torture as acceptable or not.

George

I adore words, I do not select them lightly, my use of the word "crap" therefore was for dramatic effect. That you chose to ignore the meaning of my post and take offense at the deliberate use of an expletive (which is accepted by the OLO filter), says more about your prejudices towards others than it does about your ability to understand another's point of view.

A reminder, secularism allows religious to practice whatever dogma with which they are indoctrinated - like sacrificing goats. Unfortunately for the non-religious we are forced to accommodate such excuses for bad behaviour.

Trav, your point about human nature is valid, however, it is only religion and other dogma (facism and communism) that succeeds in convincing good people to do bad things. Therefore, the teaching of critical thinking of our children cannot begin soon enough.