Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another way to divide the nation by reporting such statistics maybe?? " I suppose it also depend on one's interpretation of whether Christian Nationality in the US is best for all their citizens. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is this a thing? I was aware of Christian Nationalists in the US, but is that another thing that is being "exported" to the UK? The last census had less than 50% of the population identifying as Christian. Thoughts? " Here a lot of them call themselves English nationalists…. Because… you know  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another weird thing in the US is "Prosperity theology". To most European Christians it probably seems like the opposite of Christianity but it's a major theme in megachurches like Lakewood. " Hmmm. Kind of explains some of what's happening in the US. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another way to divide the nation by reporting such statistics maybe?? "  Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Reporting that fewer than half the UK now identifies as Christian didn’t divide the nation — it just revealed the reality already in motion. The census didn’t create decline in faith, it measured it. Honest data doesn’t attack tradition; it shows where society actually stands, so policy and culture can reflect people as they are, not as we imagine them." Hold on a minute  The manipulation of stats is bread and butter when it comes to controlling the narrative, 97% of people surveyed also agree. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hold on a minute The manipulation of stats is bread and butter when it comes to controlling the narrative, 97% of people surveyed also agree. "Eighty-three percent of statistics are made up on the spot — confirmed by a rigorous sample of whoever said it first. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Reporting that fewer than half the UK now identifies as Christian didn’t divide the nation — it just revealed the reality already in motion. The census didn’t create decline in faith, it measured it. Honest data doesn’t attack tradition; it shows where society actually stands, so policy and culture can reflect people as they are, not as we imagine them. Hold on a minute The manipulation of stats is bread and butter when it comes to controlling the narrative, 97% of people surveyed also agree. "Hahaha, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've just been reading another piece of research by Theos Think Tank, and also the London School of Economics. Theos is saying more research is needed, but no evidence of Christian Nationality in the UK. Other sources say that it's here, but hasn't got the same impetus as in the US. " The impression i got from my reading was that it is here but at the moment it's small. But it is rising and could be problematic at some point | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wait until people find out that buddhist temples encourage financial donations for favour from the spiritual beings. It it is a minefield this religious stuff "I don't know, but it seems like you're mocking this topic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wait until people find out that buddhist temples encourage financial donations for favour from the spiritual beings. It it is a minefield this religious stuff
I don't know, but it seems like you're mocking this topic. "What is the point of the topic? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wait until people find out that buddhist temples encourage financial donations for favour from the spiritual beings. It it is a minefield this religious stuff
I don't know, but it seems like you're mocking this topic.
What is the point of the topic?"You don't have to engage, if you don't like or understand the topic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wait until people find out that buddhist temples encourage financial donations for favour from the spiritual beings. It it is a minefield this religious stuff
I don't know, but it seems like you're mocking this topic.
What is the point of the topic?
You don't have to engage, if you don't like or understand the topic. "I did engage on the topic, you understand the contradiction and relationship between belief and practice across many religions? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I do think it’s a threat. If we don’t stamp it out now, we’ll be fighting to contain it in five years when it’s already entrenched. The NatCon movement spreads the same way the gender-critical one did: quiet infiltration through institutions, media, and politics until suddenly it looks like it’s “everywhere.” It isn’t mass popular support, it’s persistence and opportunism. There’s a reason people have started shortening it to “NatC.” The pattern’s the same — wrap regressive ideology in respectable language, claim to defend tradition, and rely on the public’s apathy until it’s too late to uproot." I think it's already here. It may not be a cohesive group yet, but certain politicians have made reference to England (in particular) being a Christian country, then there was the Unite the Kingdom rally with similar commentary. The'Kings Army'. Supposed 'dark money' from American Christian Nationalist groups coming to the UK and Europe to fund religion in politics. It's not as organised as America yet, but give it time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As the Church of England in desperation to maintain relevance is baptising illegal migrants to help their asylum claims we can't see this being a thing." It's not the Church of England, Wales or Scotland that is of concern. Nor does conversion guarantee asylum. It's more the politicalisation of religion, statements about England being a Christian country, when less than half the population identify as Christian. A return to Judeo-Christian values. These are comments made by politicians. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Right now there isn’t a full-blown NatC movement in the UK, but the ingredients are all there. It isn’t really about religion – it’s about power and identity. Christianity is just the wrapping paper that makes the bigotry look respectable. We’re already seeing the groundwork being laid. The flag-shagging nationalism, the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and the gender-critical crusades all feed the same instinct: defining who counts as “real” Britons and who needs to be put back in their place. A NatC movement won’t need actual believers. It will recruit from anyone angry at change, anyone nostalgic for a Britain that never really existed. It will claim to defend faith and tradition while using both as weapons against anyone who doesn’t fit the mould. If it gets a foothold, it won’t stop with trans people or migrants. Movements built on purity always turn on their own in the end." I agree, the elements are present, but not yet as organised as America. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, the US version of the cult seems to be doing a lot of damage over there. Let's hope it doesn't gain traction over here. " We need to remember the US is a different place to the UK. They have a radically different view of religion over there to the UK, particularly of Christianity. Over there Christianity is beyond mainstream. Over here? It’s basically forgotten. That won’t change. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, the US version of the cult seems to be doing a lot of damage over there. Let's hope it doesn't gain traction over here. We need to remember the US is a different place to the UK. They have a radically different view of religion over there to the UK, particularly of Christianity. Over there Christianity is beyond mainstream. Over here? It’s basically forgotten. That won’t change." That's the point. The Christian Nationalists in the US played the long game. Money from the US is being channeled over here for the same purpose. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Right now there isn’t a full-blown NatC movement in the UK, but the ingredients are all there. It isn’t really about religion – it’s about power and identity. Christianity is just the wrapping paper that makes the bigotry look respectable. We’re already seeing the groundwork being laid. The flag-shagging nationalism, the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and the gender-critical crusades all feed the same instinct: defining who counts as “real” Britons and who needs to be put back in their place. A NatC movement won’t need actual believers. It will recruit from anyone angry at change, anyone nostalgic for a Britain that never really existed. It will claim to defend faith and tradition while using both as weapons against anyone who doesn’t fit the mould. If it gets a foothold, it won’t stop with trans people or migrants. Movements built on purity always turn on their own in the end." That your opinion I'm sure others will have different opinions like gender affirming care particularly of minors, biological definition of sex and migrants integrating into society etc | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Right now there isn’t a full-blown NatC movement in the UK, but the ingredients are all there. It isn’t really about religion – it’s about power and identity. Christianity is just the wrapping paper that makes the bigotry look respectable. We’re already seeing the groundwork being laid. The flag-shagging nationalism, the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and the gender-critical crusades all feed the same instinct: defining who counts as “real” Britons and who needs to be put back in their place. A NatC movement won’t need actual believers. It will recruit from anyone angry at change, anyone nostalgic for a Britain that never really existed. It will claim to defend faith and tradition while using both as weapons against anyone who doesn’t fit the mould. If it gets a foothold, it won’t stop with trans people or migrants. Movements built on purity always turn on their own in the end. That your opinion I'm sure others will have different opinions like gender affirming care particularly of minors, biological definition of sex and migrants integrating into society etc" Us has already eroded women's rights in some states. Then we have Farage wanting to reduce the time frame for abortions, suggesting that women aren't as career orientated as men. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are they right wing, or are they just right…" They think magical sky wizard controls all, they are far from right, just delusional. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Luckily on the whole the uk has left these ancient fair tales behind, we’re way ahead of the yanks on this. " worshiping a god, yes, but religion offered a way living that society could understand and live by day to day. We see this today in islamic countries, which is confusing, when people in the west confess religion is myth and fairytales, to then go on and champion islam as a choice that shouldn't be questioned. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then we have Farage wanting to reduce the time frame for abortions ..." Except he isn't wanting to do that. All he said was that, with the advances in neo-natal care meaning that 22 week births often survive, maybe it's worth looking at whether the current 26 week limit is the right one. He's not actively pushing for a reduction. "... suggesting that women aren't as career orientated as men." Is that really a contentious thing to say, that some women would prefer to bring up children instead of forging a career? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then we have Farage wanting to reduce the time frame for abortions ... Except he isn't wanting to do that. All he said was that, with the advances in neo-natal care meaning that 22 week births often survive, maybe it's worth looking at whether the current 26 week limit is the right one. He's not actively pushing for a reduction. ... suggesting that women aren't as career orientated as men. Is that really a contentious thing to say, that some women would prefer to bring up children instead of forging a career?" Consider it against the backdrop of other things he has said. Falling birth rates. No cap on child benefit A no evidence claim that the majority of women would want to stay home to look after children. Suggesting that once married, couples stay married (Hmmm, where have I heard that before. Oh! No fault divorce in the US) The no medical evidence reduction in time frame for abortions (Oooh, Roe v Wade similarities) What is all of this doing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then we have Farage wanting to reduce the time frame for abortions ..." "Except he isn't wanting to do that. All he said was that, with the advances in neo-natal care meaning that 22 week births often survive, maybe it's worth looking at whether the current 26 week limit is the right one. He's not actively pushing for a reduction. ... suggesting that women aren't as career orientated as men. Is that really a contentious thing to say, that some women would prefer to bring up children instead of forging a career?" "Consider it against the backdrop of other things he has said. Falling birth rates. No cap on child benefit" Everyone agrees that we need more young people in this country to pay the taxes to support the aging population. Encouraging more births is one way of fixing that problem. "A no evidence claim that the majority of women would want to stay home to look after children. Suggesting that once married, couples stay married (Hmmm, where have I heard that before. Oh! No fault divorce in the US)" He hasn't said either of these things. "The no medical evidence reduction in time frame for abortions (Oooh, Roe v Wade similarities)" There's bucket loads of evidence that children born at 22 weeks can survive. Just visit any neo-natal ward in the country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then we have Farage wanting to reduce the time frame for abortions ... Except he isn't wanting to do that. All he said was that, with the advances in neo-natal care meaning that 22 week births often survive, maybe it's worth looking at whether the current 26 week limit is the right one. He's not actively pushing for a reduction. ... suggesting that women aren't as career orientated as men. Is that really a contentious thing to say, that some women would prefer to bring up children instead of forging a career? Consider it against the backdrop of other things he has said. Falling birth rates. No cap on child benefit Everyone agrees that we need more young people in this country to pay the taxes to support the aging population. Encouraging more births is one way of fixing that problem. A no evidence claim that the majority of women would want to stay home to look after children. Suggesting that once married, couples stay married (Hmmm, where have I heard that before. Oh! No fault divorce in the US) He hasn't said either of these things. The no medical evidence reduction in time frame for abortions (Oooh, Roe v Wade similarities) There's bucket loads of evidence that children born at 22 weeks can survive. Just visit any neo-natal ward in the country." Harpers Bazaar It’s hardly surprising that Farage has antiquated views; they are, after all, in keeping with Reform UK’s election _anifesto. The 28-page pamphlet (a flimsy effort, compared to the short tomes released by both the Labour and the Conservative parties last year) said: “The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could” – which was not based on any research and is directly in contrast to actual figures. A report by Careers After Babies found that 98% of mothers want to go back to work Wednesday 28th May 2025 Katherine O’Brien, Head of Campaigns and Communications at BPAS, said: "MPs are of course entitled to express their own personal views on abortion, but it is wrong to suggest that there is any medical evidence that supports a reduction in the abortion time limit. Just last year, leading fetal medicine experts wrote to Members of Parliament to warn that there is no clinical justification for reducing the time limit based on national outcomes data, and that any such move would have catastrophic consequences for women. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Harpers Bazaar It’s hardly surprising that Farage has antiquated views; they are, after all, in keeping with Reform UK’s election _anifesto. The 28-page pamphlet (a flimsy effort, compared to the short tomes released by both the Labour and the Conservative parties last year) said: “The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could” – which was not based on any research and is directly in contrast to actual figures. A report by Careers After Babies found that 98% of mothers want to go back to work" So not Farage saying it, but the Reform _anifesto. You claimed it said "the majority of women would want to stay home to look after children", but what it actually says was "The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could". The key word that you omitted was "more". I doubt you'll find any mother that wouldn't welcome more time with her child. "Wednesday 28th May 2025 Katherine O’Brien, Head of Campaigns and Communications at BPAS, said: "MPs are of course entitled to express their own personal views on abortion, but it is wrong to suggest that there is any medical evidence that supports a reduction in the abortion time limit. Just last year, leading fetal medicine experts wrote to Members of Parliament to warn that there is no clinical justification for reducing the time limit based on national outcomes data, and that any such move would have catastrophic consequences for women." An organisation that describes itself as "the UK's leading abortion care provider" says that we shouldn't think about changing abortion law. What a surprise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Harpers Bazaar It’s hardly surprising that Farage has antiquated views; they are, after all, in keeping with Reform UK’s election _anifesto. The 28-page pamphlet (a flimsy effort, compared to the short tomes released by both the Labour and the Conservative parties last year) said: “The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could” – which was not based on any research and is directly in contrast to actual figures. A report by Careers After Babies found that 98% of mothers want to go back to work So not Farage saying it, but the Reform _anifesto. You claimed it said "the majority of women would want to stay home to look after children", but what it actually says was "The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could". The key word that you omitted was "more". I doubt you'll find any mother that wouldn't welcome more time with her child. Wednesday 28th May 2025 Katherine O’Brien, Head of Campaigns and Communications at BPAS, said: "MPs are of course entitled to express their own personal views on abortion, but it is wrong to suggest that there is any medical evidence that supports a reduction in the abortion time limit. Just last year, leading fetal medicine experts wrote to Members of Parliament to warn that there is no clinical justification for reducing the time limit based on national outcomes data, and that any such move would have catastrophic consequences for women. An organisation that describes itself as "the UK's leading abortion care provider" says that we shouldn't think about changing abortion law. What a surprise." Ok, so you don't think any of this is relevant. That's your perogative. Personally, I think it's very relevant. Have you read the LSE article? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" So not Farage saying it, but the Reform _anifesto. " And it would get in the _anifesto without his approval?! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Harpers Bazaar It’s hardly surprising that Farage has antiquated views; they are, after all, in keeping with Reform UK’s election _anifesto. The 28-page pamphlet (a flimsy effort, compared to the short tomes released by both the Labour and the Conservative parties last year) said: “The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could” – which was not based on any research and is directly in contrast to actual figures. A report by Careers After Babies found that 98% of mothers want to go back to work So not Farage saying it, but the Reform _anifesto. You claimed it said "the majority of women would want to stay home to look after children", but what it actually says was "The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could". The key word that you omitted was "more". I doubt you'll find any mother that wouldn't welcome more time with her child. Wednesday 28th May 2025 Katherine O’Brien, Head of Campaigns and Communications at BPAS, said: "MPs are of course entitled to express their own personal views on abortion, but it is wrong to suggest that there is any medical evidence that supports a reduction in the abortion time limit. Just last year, leading fetal medicine experts wrote to Members of Parliament to warn that there is no clinical justification for reducing the time limit based on national outcomes data, and that any such move would have catastrophic consequences for women. An organisation that describes itself as "the UK's leading abortion care provider" says that we shouldn't think about changing abortion law. What a surprise. Ok, so you don't think any of this is relevant. That's your perogative. Personally, I think it's very relevant." Let's get this clear. You claimed that Nigel Farage said certain things, and that there's no evidence that could support changing the abortion law. I claimed that he didn't say those things, and that there is some evidence (maybe not enough to change the law, but enough to suggest we have a think about it). The stuff you posted above does not support the claim that Nigel Farage said those things, or even that the Reform Manifesto said them. The stuff you posted above is a partisan view of the evidence on abortion, and does not reflect a balanced view on the subject. "Have you read the LSE article?" Does it deal with what Nigel Farage actually said, or with the availability of evidence to question the current abortion time limit? "So not Farage saying it, but the Reform _anifesto." "And it would get in the _anifesto without his approval?!" Still not the same thing as him actually saying it. Besides, the words you quoted (and the sentiment behind them) were not in the Reform Manifesto, so it's a moot point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Harpers Bazaar It’s hardly surprising that Farage has antiquated views; they are, after all, in keeping with Reform UK’s election _anifesto. The 28-page pamphlet (a flimsy effort, compared to the short tomes released by both the Labour and the Conservative parties last year) said: “The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could” – which was not based on any research and is directly in contrast to actual figures. A report by Careers After Babies found that 98% of mothers want to go back to work So not Farage saying it, but the Reform _anifesto. You claimed it said "the majority of women would want to stay home to look after children", but what it actually says was "The majority of mothers would choose to stay at home more if they could". The key word that you omitted was "more". I doubt you'll find any mother that wouldn't welcome more time with her child. Wednesday 28th May 2025 Katherine O’Brien, Head of Campaigns and Communications at BPAS, said: "MPs are of course entitled to express their own personal views on abortion, but it is wrong to suggest that there is any medical evidence that supports a reduction in the abortion time limit. Just last year, leading fetal medicine experts wrote to Members of Parliament to warn that there is no clinical justification for reducing the time limit based on national outcomes data, and that any such move would have catastrophic consequences for women. An organisation that describes itself as "the UK's leading abortion care provider" says that we shouldn't think about changing abortion law. What a surprise. Ok, so you don't think any of this is relevant. That's your perogative. Personally, I think it's very relevant. Let's get this clear. You claimed that Nigel Farage said certain things, and that there's no evidence that could support changing the abortion law. I claimed that he didn't say those things, and that there is some evidence (maybe not enough to change the law, but enough to suggest we have a think about it). The stuff you posted above does not support the claim that Nigel Farage said those things, or even that the Reform Manifesto said them. The stuff you posted above is a partisan view of the evidence on abortion, and does not reflect a balanced view on the subject. Have you read the LSE article? Does it deal with what Nigel Farage actually said, or with the availability of evidence to question the current abortion time limit? So not Farage saying it, but the Reform _anifesto. And it would get in the _anifesto without his approval?! Still not the same thing as him actually saying it. Besides, the words you quoted (and the sentiment behind them) were not in the Reform Manifesto, so it's a moot point." That's fine. You have your way of looking at information, and I have mine. I'm not going to argue over semantics. There is a bigger picture and all these things are part of the whole, should Reform get into power. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to argue over semantics." A lot of people use this argument, and it seems odd. 'Semantics' means 'covering the meaning of words'. If you're not going to discuss what Farage's words mean, it seems a bit pointless you posting here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to argue over semantics. A lot of people use this argument, and it seems odd. 'Semantics' means 'covering the meaning of words'. If you're not going to discuss what Farage's words mean, it seems a bit pointless you posting here." On the contrary, it's raising awareness about what to expect from Christian Nationalists in the UK, against the backdrop of British politics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to argue over semantics." "A lot of people use this argument, and it seems odd. 'Semantics' means 'covering the meaning of words'. If you're not going to discuss what Farage's words mean, it seems a bit pointless you posting here." "On the contrary, it's raising awareness about what to expect from Christian Nationalists in the UK, against the backdrop of British politics." It certainly raises awareness of what you think will happen. But since you won't discuss anything, it's unlikely that anyone else will understand your viewpoint. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to argue over semantics. A lot of people use this argument, and it seems odd. 'Semantics' means 'covering the meaning of words'. If you're not going to discuss what Farage's words mean, it seems a bit pointless you posting here. On the contrary, it's raising awareness about what to expect from Christian Nationalists in the UK, against the backdrop of British politics. It certainly raises awareness of what you think will happen. But since you won't discuss anything, it's unlikely that anyone else will understand your viewpoint." As I've said, you have your views and I have mine. Enjoy your day  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As I've said, you have your views and I have mine. Enjoy your day "As I was reading that, an actual rainbow appeared outside my window. Thanks for that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Everyone agrees that we need more young people in this country to pay the taxes to support the aging population. Encouraging more births is one way of fixing that problem. " Fine if they can and will get jobs. The government would need to encourage people to stop working and move over to let young uns take over and not forcing people to work longer by reducing pension incentives and increases in retirement age | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting read. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4p42kydx9o" I was not at all surprised by the content in this article when I saw it yesterday. When I look around the murkier depths of the internet there's a clear picture that's being painted. Christianity (good) Vs islam (evil). Unfortunately, the language and ideology that has spread here from America is not having a very positive affect on Britain. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting read. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4p42kydx9o I was not at all surprised by the content in this article when I saw it yesterday. When I look around the murkier depths of the internet there's a clear picture that's being painted. Christianity (good) Vs islam (evil). Unfortunately, the language and ideology that has spread here from America is not having a very positive affect on Britain. " I don't think you need to delve into the murkier depths for that, it's right there on social media. I'm my view Christianity and Islam are both as daft as each other. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting read. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4p42kydx9o I was not at all surprised by the content in this article when I saw it yesterday. When I look around the murkier depths of the internet there's a clear picture that's being painted. Christianity (good) Vs islam (evil). Unfortunately, the language and ideology that has spread here from America is not having a very positive affect on Britain. I don't think you need to delve into the murkier depths for that, it's right there on social media. I'm my view Christianity and Islam are both as daft as each other." On social media there's an element of deniability to posts/ comments made as to the meaning of them. In the murkier depths people don't hide their views. I understand your point of of view on faith but faith is not harmful. I know people that have turned their lives around by finding faith. Whereas, there are some who use faith and politics for an extreme purpose. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting read. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4p42kydx9o I was not at all surprised by the content in this article when I saw it yesterday. When I look around the murkier depths of the internet there's a clear picture that's being painted. Christianity (good) Vs islam (evil). Unfortunately, the language and ideology that has spread here from America is not having a very positive affect on Britain. I don't think you need to delve into the murkier depths for that, it's right there on social media. I'm my view Christianity and Islam are both as daft as each other. On social media there's an element of deniability to posts/ comments made as to the meaning of them. In the murkier depths people don't hide their views. I understand your point of of view on faith but faith is not harmful. I know people that have turned their lives around by finding faith. Whereas, there are some who use faith and politics for an extreme purpose. " Maybe, if you're using the word faith synonymously with religion, but really there's nothing that a religion can give that a decent therapist can't also give. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe, if you're using the word faith synonymously with religion, but really there's nothing that a religion can give that a decent therapist can't also give." Except for absolution if it turns out that the religion is correct. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe, if you're using the word faith synonymously with religion, but really there's nothing that a religion can give that a decent therapist can't also give. Except for absolution if it turns out that the religion is correct." Do I detect a whiff of Pascal's Wager? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Except for absolution if it turns out that the religion is correct." Not actually true. You can attend church all you like, but if St Peter doesn't like the cut of your jib then you're out on your ear. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting read. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4p42kydx9o I was not at all surprised by the content in this article when I saw it yesterday. When I look around the murkier depths of the internet there's a clear picture that's being painted. Christianity (good) Vs islam (evil). Unfortunately, the language and ideology that has spread here from America is not having a very positive affect on Britain. I don't think you need to delve into the murkier depths for that, it's right there on social media. I'm my view Christianity and Islam are both as daft as each other. On social media there's an element of deniability to posts/ comments made as to the meaning of them. In the murkier depths people don't hide their views. I understand your point of of view on faith but faith is not harmful. I know people that have turned their lives around by finding faith. Whereas, there are some who use faith and politics for an extreme purpose. Maybe, if you're using the word faith synonymously with religion, but really there's nothing that a religion can give that a decent therapist can't also give." Regarding the therapist, that simply isn't true. For a start therapy costs money whereas belief/faith/religion costs nothing other than time. A religious teacher wants to help someone because it's their vocation. It also opens the door to a community that will be welcoming, something that some people will never have experienced before. That's definitely not something you'll get from therapy, no matter how good the therapist is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Except for absolution if it turns out that the religion is correct." "Not actually true. You can attend church all you like, but if St Peter doesn't like the cut of your jib then you're out on your ear." Well yes, obviously you have to actually follow the religion and obey the rules. But it at least offers the possibility of absolution if you pick (and adhere to) the right one. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you "follow" a religion due to political beliefs, is that actually meaningful engagement or a means to an end?" I was using 'follow' to mean 'engage with a religion in a genuine and heartfelt way'. Obviously you don't get the potential benefits if you just go through the motions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you "follow" a religion due to political beliefs, is that actually meaningful engagement or a means to an end? " It's more of a choice than simply being born into it. The door that leads in is less important than what one does inside. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
