In the UK the game is up for mediums, psychics, tarot card readers and occultists. They now fall within the ambit of consumer protection regulations.

See:

PSYCHIC CRACKDOWN ON THE CARDS

Mediums are fighting new EU rules designed to protect the public from dodgy traders, fearing that honest spiritualists could be targeted

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/apr/06/eu

"….there will now be nothing between the medium and the trading standards officer - and no need to prove fraud. Instead it will be up to the trader, in this case the medium, to prove they did not mislead, coerce or take advantage of any 'vulnerable' consumers."

Fair enough.

But what about the so-called mainstream religions. How reliable are those promises of an afterlife of ease and joy, with or without virgins?

Will your enemies really suffer eternal damnation?

Can a church truly cleanse your mind of pernicious alien influences from 75 million years ago?

Why should some varieties of shamanism be subjected to consumer protection regulations and not others?

We in Australia should go a step further than the UK. ALL religions should be made subject to the Trade Practices Act.*

After that we can start on political parties.

*See http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/tpa1974149

If you're going to subject religions to the Trade Practices Act you ought to subject their opposite - atheism. Good luck!

and politicians

Steven, love to see it especially for some of the more extreme groups (the kind of group where Gibo's claims fit in).

I'll go with Graham's idea, any athiest group taking money from people on the basis of the claims made by the group should be required to support their claims.

I'm not sure how many athiest groups make money out of their claims of the non existance of god nr the non existance of an afterlife.

The monothiests have two different types of claims to prove, that their god exists and that all the others don't.

On the other hand athiests just have to add one additional god to the second proof from the monthiests or if their claim is that there is no proof of the existance of god then they just need to rebut the first proof of any thiest group.

Panthiests are in for a really tough time trying to prove the existance of a whole bunch of gods.

Agnostics have little to prove.

Bring it on.

R0bert

GrahamY wrote:

"If you're going to subject religions to the Trade Practices Act you ought to subject their opposite – atheism…"

My first reaction was to say atheists aren't traders. We give our advice away for free – which may be why no one pays any attention to us.

If we're not trading we are not subject to the Trade Practices Act.

But then I realised this was not true. Richard Dawkins must have made a mint out of The God Delusion. He is certainly trading. So are all the shops selling his books.

Can Prof. Dawkins positively guarantee that if you become in atheist you won't end up "where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched?'"*

Should booksellers eagre to profit from Dawkins' books be subject to the Trade Practices Act?

*Mark 9:48. Now there's an ambiguous verse if ever there was one. Imagine how many ways you can interpret that, Willy.

If you want a deeper revelation of Mark 9:48 Steven, have a sqiz on the net at Mary K Baxter- A divine revelation of hell heaven.
Its extremely descriptive about hell and its suffering.
The moment I heard her story I knew in The Holy Spirit that it was true.
We dont pick on a Holy God or His people.