Archive for RELIGION
BBC Thought for the Day
Posted by: | Comments
I have just been reading an interesting piece in the Telegraph, about secularists wanting a voice on Radio 4’s, “Thought for the Day” slot. Personally I find the Today programme quite a good bit of news reporting, especially as they have a really agressive style of interrogating their guests, in a very un-Paxman like way.
So for the un-initaited ”Thought for the Day” comes on during the Today programme around about 7:45am and a pre-selected religious buff gives us a 3 minute monolgue about what he thinks about current affairs. There are a mix of religious commentators from the Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and many other faiths. Needless to say, its almost like a daily sermon in a 3 minute slot.
Now the evil secularists, atheists and humanists want to get in on the action and have a slice of the action, boring people to death with their endless drivel in the 7:45am slot. Sorry to be harsh, but you can’t tell me it will be any better just because they don’t believe in God. I’d don’t agree that non-believers should be banned from the slot, but equally I don’t really give a crap. There are a lot more important issues to address than “Thought for the Day”. How about, so called “honour killings”, or forced marriage, what about the 26 C of E Bishops who sit unelected in the House of Lords.
I just can’t get up the energy to argue about “Thought for the Day” as it all just smacks of, me-too-isms. The only reason the slot has 4.5 million listeners is because they’re already tuned into the Today programme and can’t be bothered the change the radio station. I bet if you took it off air, and made it available only on iPlayer very few people would bother to go look for it.
Oh and if you’re one of those religious types, don’t go thinking I’m on your side either. You get plenty of programmes on TV, like all the channels that pump out worship on Sky. They even have it listed specifically in the planner! Let us also not forget “Songs of Praise” and “Around the World in 80 faiths”. So don’t tell me that the religious are hard done by.
So what to do with the 3 minute boredom slot? either make it more interesting, or bin it is my view. I have no interest in it and it seems completely out of place in the programme content.
Anne Rice born again?
Posted by: | CommentsI
n my daily summary of Google news, one of my favourite authors, Anne Rice, talks to the Kansas City Star about how she’s gone from being an atheist to being religious again.
It’s interesting to me that some people who are affected by traumatic events return to, or find religion. In the article Rice is quoted as saying she can now hope to be reunited with her child at some future point. For someone like me this is simply wishful thinking, and just because she believes in God now, does not change reality of life. All that has changed is her perception of the world around her.
For Anne being an atheist wasn’t easy, and she’s right, for some people grasping what the evidence shows us can sometimes be frightening and scary. In some ways I understand why someone who’s suffered a traumatic event might find religion comforting. The compassionate part of me says we shouldn’t try to convince people otherwise, as long as their innocent faith doesn’t turn to something bitter and twisted.
Has Anne’s change of heart changed my mind about her work? Absolutely not, because I read books written by a brilliant and captivating author. Just because she’s decided she believes in God doesn’t change the fact she’s written some amazing stories.
In some ways it is disappointing that such an intelligent and creative woman has reverted to a belief in the sky fairy. However I ask myself is it better to have a happy and productive Christian life, than a woefully miserable and desperate one as an atheist? However when you look more closely, it is fear and loss that seem to be drivers behind this reversion. This supports the Richard Dawkins argument about religion being promoted through fear. It is remarkable that an attachment to the material world drives people to religion, so that they can maintain some form of attachment after they experience loss. Buddhists talk of not being attached to the material world in order to free ourselves from pain and suffering. Atheism certainly recognises the nature of the world as it is, pain, death, life, joy, all swirling around us.
My school of thought is that without pain how can we know pleasure or joy. I can look at my life and say "One day I will die, and that is the end of me", or I can look at my life and think about the difference I want to make in the world right now. I can’t escape the fact I will die, so why dwell on it? It’s simply a part of nature. The point about atheism being hard isn’t new, and Julie Sweeney really digs into the emotional aspect of this in her audio book "Letting go of God".
I think for people who are students of nature and science we approach these questions with a more empirical mind, and rationalise things with an almost Mr Spock type logic. Perhaps it just takes remarkable strength of character to be atheist? Perhaps for the artistic mind, such detachment is difficult, and so the comfort of religion does away with all the unpleasant reality of the world, and replaces it with a warm comfort blanket of perceived reality (God).
Channel 4 | Make Me a Christian
Posted by: | CommentsI was watching a very interesting show on Channel 4 called “Make me a Christian”, and I found it very fascinating. Most of the values they expressed, such as not getting too drunk and having sex with random people are quite common sense values. They quite rightly pointed out that if you sleep around you’ll get and STI, and highlighted that abortion was not an easy option for unwanted pregnancy.
If I am perfectly honest I found that I agreed with most what the Christian mentors were saying, but what I did not agree with was the context. The difference is that I don’t resort to mythology to validate these values. I draw on my own common sense, experience and understanding of the consequences of my actions. It is quite a common perception that because I am a humanist I don’t have any moral compass. However I am always careful to continually check my moral compass and not assume that my values are always right.
Then there are some very crucial differences I have with the Christian view, such as their position on homosexuality, and abortion. Christians would call this moral relativism, but I call it being compassionate, and showing empathy. Sometimes morality isn’t as black and white as the words on a page. If you were living on the streets and you children were starving what would you do to feed them, and keep them safe?
It’s very easy to be moral when we have modern comforts, food, clothing and fresh water. I’ll be interested to see how the next episode turns out…
Like Father, Like Son
Posted by: | CommentsI was having a lovely chat around the dinner table, and talking to Michael about his school report. I as got to the end there was a whole section on RE, and the teacher had commented about how he doesn’t talk about his “Spiritual beliefs”. So I asked him what he believes and he says he doesn’t believe in God or Gods, any of them. He believes that when we die we cease to exist. This is quite an interesting insight into the mind of a 9 year old, because he expresses himself so articulately and clearly about his reasons.
We have never told our children what they should believe and we’ve always told them about the different religions of the world. We’ve never hidden the truth of our own beliefs from our kids, because we’ve taught them tolerance and how to think and reason for themselves.
One interesting fact about RE classes at school, is that they don’t ever tell you it’s ok to have a non-theistic belief, or philosophy. I have never been against the idea of comparative RE in schools, but I found it fascinating that kids are studying, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam but they don’t get any exposure to other views. Michael had never heard the term agnostic or atheist until I explained them this evening. We know that RE isn’t part of the national curriculum and local SACRE’s (Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education) decide what the content of the classes should be. Usually these are headed up by a Church of England minister, and some representation from other religious groups. Unsurprisingly Humanists rarely get a look in on these councils.
So I have given my son the language of humanism, and explained what it means to be atheist, agnostic and what a Humanist is. At the moment he seems to identify with the idea of atheism, but he could change his views as he grows older. If he’s anything like me he might spend time looking the different religions and just end up finding out that what he knew all long, and that he’s a Humanist. However this is for him to decide, because unlike a religious perspective I do not believe in telling my children what they are.
He’s made several significant choices in his young life about what he believes, first the not believing in God, then choosing not to attend religious worship at school, and now the assertion that he’s an atheist.
I don’t imagine he understands how difficult it can be, particularly in as he’s living in a time where there as resurgence in religiosity. People of religion often make snap judgements that because you don’t believe that you have no morals, or you don’t deserve to be treated equally, or that you want to ban religion.
Let’s hope the world advances during his lifetime and the liberal voice of religion takes hold so he doesn’t have to go through the same intolerance that I find on a scarily regular basis.
Proposal for Buddhist school
Posted by: | CommentsThe Buddhist community in Birmingham is now looking to get into the faith school business, like many other religions. The BBC report that:
A Buddhist charitable trust is to draw up a proposal for the first Buddhist state primary school in the UK to be built in the Midlands.
The argument against this is no different to the argument against faith schools of Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism. They all claim to be open minded, loving people of all religion however we cannot escape the truth that this is simply sectarianism. The intent behind these schools is clearly to promote their own faith, why else would you create a faith school?
What is most interesting is that you would not be allowed to set up a humanist or secular school, because the law currently requires a daily act of worship. Therefore the playing field when it comes to schools is not remotely level.
The BBC report quite rightly asks the question:
Integration or segregation?
This only shows the increasing need to disestablish the church and separate religion and the state completely. All the time the C of E has it’s special place in British education and the House of Lords, other religions will want a slice of the pie too.
Ministers ‘ignoring Church role’
Posted by: | CommentsAccording to the BBC, the government only pays ‘lip service’ to the Church of England. So let us look at the evidence behind this. Umm…. 26 Bishops who sit in the House of Lords, bishops on the news every other week, thought for the day, songs of praise, faith slots here there and everywhere on the BBC. Oh and lets not forget the church indoctrination that goes on in all those faith schools (and community schools).
Forgive me if I don’t feel a great swell of sympathy for the state religion being ignored by ministers.
Quite honestly it is about time religion stopped sticking its nose into politics. Hazel Blears talks of listening to the “Christian majority” but even the last census (as well as church statistics) show this to be utter nonsense.
“God is dead”, to quote Nietzsche, so let him rest in peace, and once and for all disestablish the church. The state should be secular, it’s only because the religions keep saying secular like it’s a dirty word that people think secularisation of the state is a bad thing. Look at France! hundreds of years of culture and progress, and all in the remit of a secular state.. Secular means a free and fair society for all despite their religious or non-religious philosophical views.
So I say shut your yap, bishop Lowe, because it is utterly false to claim you don’t want to influence political decisions, yet want ministers to listen to you. Why else would you want ministers to pay more attention to you? A nice chat and cup of tea perhaps?
We all know the church has its own political agenda, and given half a chance would seek to reassert itself as it did in bygone days, that are best left bygone. The recent controversy on stem cell research only serves to illustrate this point.
As for churches being contracted to provide social services, well we only have to see how that turned for employees of the Christian charity prospects.
So Bishop Lowe, I say this. I don’t want ministers listening to you, I want them governing for the benefit of all British people NOT your church!
BBC News Online | Politics | Ministers ‘ignoring Church role’
Ministers ‘ignoring Church role’
Posted by: | CommentsAccording to the BBC, the government only pays ‘lip service’ to the Church of England. So let us look at the evidence behind this. Umm…. 26 Bishops who sit in the House of Lords, bishops on the news every other week, thought for the day, songs of praise, faith slots here there and everywhere on the BBC. Oh and lets not forget the church indoctrination that goes on in all those faith schools (and community schools).
Forgive me if I don’t feel a great swell of sympathy for the state religion being ignored by ministers. Quite honestly it is about time religion stopped sticking its nose into politics. Hazel Blears talks of listening to the “Christian majority” but even the last census (as well as church statistics) show this to be utter nonsense.
“God is dead”, to quote Nietzsche, so let him rest in peace, and once and for all disestablish the church. The state should be secular, it’s only because the religions keep saying secular like it’s a dirty word that people think secularisation of the state is a bad thing. Look at France! hundreds of years of culture and progress, and all in the remit of a secular state.. Secular means a free and fair society for all despite their religious or non-religious philosophical views.
So I say shut your yap, bishop Lowe, because it is utterly false to claim you don’t want to influence political decisions, yet want ministers to listen to you. Why else would you want ministers to pay more attention to you? A nice chat and cup of tea perhaps?
We all know the church has its own political agenda, and given half a chance would seek to reassert itself as it did in bygone days, that are best left bygone. The recent controversy on stem cell research only serves to illustrate this point.
As for churches being contracted to provide social services, well we only have to see how that turned for employees of the Christian charity prospects.
So Bishop Lowe, I say this. I don’t want ministers listening to you, I want them governing for the benefit of all British people NOT your church!
BBC News Online | Politics | Ministers ‘ignoring Church role’
Our day in Wiltshire
Posted by: | CommentsMy wife loves old things, which makes me wonder why she decided to hook up with a guy six years younger than herself. Due to her love of old things, we decided to go and visit Stonehenge, and from there Salisbury cathedral. I’m not usually that interested in visiting dusty old museum places, but I thought I’d cave in on this occasion as it was part of our British heritage.
They day didn’t start that well though as I managed to slip in the shower. I first hit the edge of the bath with my shoulder, simultaneously smacking my knee, I then swung around grabbing at the curtain, but landing on my back at the same time smacking my elbow on the bathroom scales.
So having virtually crippled myself we set off for the day, and arrived at Stonehenge for a look around. Julie went a bit weird and did some sort of Pagan worship thing and I left her to it. Druids regularly perform rituals at this ancient site as do many other Pagans.
The stones weren’t that interesting for me as I’ve studied their history, and quite frankly it’s just a pile of stones to me. The kids weren’t all that interested either, so I took some pictures of the them and Julie.
Then we looked at the sign which had other spots of local interest, and decided we’d have a look at which ones were on the Tomtom. The closest point marked was Old Sarum and it was en route to Salisbury, so we decided to go there. Old Sarum is a ruined old castle, which English Heritage describe as earthworks. However it was quite an interesting visit. There is also the site of the original cathedral at Old Sarum, and some lovely views of the Wiltshire countryside.
With my knee and back now virtually crippling me found a place to park in the city itself, and had some lunch at Subway which was lovely. Ummmm… Subway!
So after hobbling towards the Cathedral we went to one of the museums which was right outside. It had a whole local history on the area and was very good. One of those dusty old houses which has been converted into a dusty old museum. Not my cup of tea, but the kids found it interesting.
However my pain was increasing and we decided to head back. I was hobbling and my hip was aching partly because of my sore back, and partly because I was over compensating for my damaged knee. We took some pictures of the Cathedral, but both Julie and I would not enter.
As a place of Christian worship the scale just shows what a privileged position in our society the church holds. I wonder if there was a real Jesus how proud he would be of the grand and boastful creation of his followers.
More religious nonsense in public life
Posted by: | CommentsI saw this article on the BBC News web site and I have to say I am growing increased fed up with these religious people crying foul all the time.
Now Christian registrars don’t want to perform civil partnerships. Well here’s my argument, by it’s definition it isn’t marriage, it isn’t religious so shut up and get on the with job you’re paid (£31k) to do. Technically the registrar isn’t marrying the pair, they are overseeing the commitment to a civil partnership, effectively a contractual agreement.
I get quite cross when I hear these pitiful arguments that just because they believe in some mythical/imaginary figure in the sky they should be allowed to treat people unfairly.
Imagine if the person was a racist and not a Christian, would they be allowed to refuse to marry black people because on grounds of conscience. Of course NOT! They’d be sacked for discrimination.
I argue this again and again, if your religion means you cannot fulfil the requirements of your job function, bog off and find another job. Or in this case join the clergy and conduct religious weddings, on heterosexuals only.
Discrimination of this kind shouldn’t be accepted any more. I wonder how it work if I turned up to work one day saying that I couldn’t help a customer because they were Christian and I was an atheist, consequently I only wanted to serve atheist customers. Ummm…. I think I might be fired from my job and rightly so. Fortunately I treat people equally and fairly regardless of their faith or belief.
BBC NEWS | England | London | Registrars ‘in fear’ over beliefs
