Christian Grans

Yes, but I think it is a pity that people do not all have the courage of their convictions!

Greatnan
for the record my DD has not claimed to be a Catholic to get her daughter in this school.In fact she and her partner are not churchgoers ,nor has GD been baptised. They have been quite upfront about this,talked to headmaster and have not been put under any pressure to conform
Like most parents they agonised about choice of school.
Their school of choice a)is within easy walking distance of home b) has an excellent reputation in all subjects c) GDs choice as her friends are there.

Note. Existentialist defined as ,Life is what you make ofit. The little word 'of' is important don't you think?

Maniac - I am quite sure my post did not imply that your family had cheated in any way - please do not read insults where none was intended! I was making a general remark about schools asking personal questions of parents via their children. Talk about eggshells!

Many things happen in life which just have to be endured - there are some things so painful that no amount of positive thinking - or whever 'life is what you make of it' means - can make them bearable. I am sure I do not need to give examples.

absentgrana- in reply to your question of this morning "Is anyone complaining about Christians wanting to talk about Christianity?" well not in so many words, but the hostility to the idea of a dedicated thread is obvious Sorry for delay in replying, work got in the way.

Ceesnan Thank you for replying. A dedicated thread – to whatever subject, whether religion, politics, sexuality or anything else – that must be policed to prevent the "wrong" people posting – is anathema. Of course, I am hostile to the idea, but not necessarily hostile to peoples' religion, politics or sexuality, etc.
btw I know this tiresome business about work gets in the way of all sorts of things.

Ceesnan - why not just start any thread you want? There are no restrictions on what you could post, as long as it is within forum etiquettee. However, you won't be able to stop other people posting what they want, again as long as they remain within forum rules. Are you asking for permission to police a thread and remove any posts that you consider undesirable? If so, you are misunderstanding the nature of forums.
Why not join a Christian site, where you can swap ideas with other Christians to your heart's content (but of course, those pesky atheists get everywhere these days).

I wouldn't start a thread for Christians to discuss Christianity as I don't feel that I would have anything to contribute. The only reason I got involved in this was because of the blatant hostility to the idea and I really hate injustice. What is so wrong with having one thread for them? As has been said on this forum before, you don't have to read it.

I don't think you understand, ceesnan. Such a move would be apartheid. That's why it's not a good idea. As absent has said, it wouldn't be a good idea for any subject. Opposition to an apartheid regime on gransnet is nothing to do with the subject of the thread; it has to do with opposition to apartheid on principle, because apartheid is not healthy.

I think you would find, on application to HQ for such a thing, that that would be the reply – though expressed in a much better way than I have.

Good morning. Just read this thread. There has been an awful lot about religion on GN in the last week or so.
I see GN as a virtual women's centre with discussions going on in lots of cosy little rooms and over tables in the coffee bar. So what is the unspoken norm regarding these discussions, I ask myself. Anyone can join any discussion, as long as they follow the GN rules about not insulting etc. We try not to be rude, insulting or unkind. If we want to start a discussion we put a sign on the door and see who comes in to join us. We cannot guarantee that the people who walk through the door are going to be like minded. Neither can we put up a sign "knitters only".
But if someone has put up a sign saying "Advanced knitting group" and it gets invaded by people who want to argue the case for crochet, maybe it is a tad mean and unfair on their part.
ElsieJoy I do feel a little sorry for you but maybe your OP (original post) was a bit controversial. Atheists, you are a formidable bunch, like a whole pack of dogs with a bone. I would not like to be trying to stick up for Christianity with you lot on the case.
If you want to discuss Christian issues elsiejoy there is a whole section on religion and spirituality, with lots of threads I have never looked at. If a thread you like is there, why not "bump" it by adding a posting and see who joins. If you want to discuss Christian issues that have not yet been raised I am sure, if you get your thread title and OP on target it will attract some like minded people.

One last try! Ceesnan, because this is a forum for people of all faiths, and none. Do you think we should have threads specifically for Moonies, Trekkies, Hindus......... Your suggestion is not only out of step with the inclusive nature of this forum, but also unworkable. How would you stop non-Christians contributing? I suspect you have not thought through the implications of your suggestion.

JessM I think your contribution to this debate is helpful and your analogy with the 'Knitting' thread is an excellent one. You've made the point I've failed to make. Thank you.

JessM I like your knitting analogy.

Not all atheists are 'formidable'. I'm an atheist and other non-Christians have taken a more liberal approach on this thread. So we are not all the same, like Christians, atheists come in different shapes and sizes and often disagree amongst themselves.

JessM - I'm another fan of the knitting analogy.

I agree, lily, that jess's analogy is a good one.

However, I don't believe I'm the only person to have seen deliberate provocation in the OP. I didn't actually respond to the purely religious stuff. I just explained the misuse of the word secular. From there people chose to get upset. They needn't have.

If I started a knitting thread and misused an important knitting term in my OP, I would not take it amiss if someone corrected that misuse. I'd probably thank them for setting me right. Misuse of terms is not helpful.

Nor have I got upset about the arguments against my agreement with what Sam Harris says about the bible. I expected opposition to that OP. I also expected some agreement with the sentiments expressed. And that has happened. I'm not complaining. I won't complain if that thread gets completely "taken over" by posters who adore the bible. I might argue with them though.

Religion is controversial. Witness internecine strife and religious wars. Lack of religion is controversial because it still seems threatening to some people (even though it isn't). Therefore, it's only logical to expect dissertational 'strife' on such subjects. None of that needs to be personal. None of the most argumentative atheists get personal on such threads. But still there are complaints.

Let's face it, atheists can't win, whatever they do . Oddly enough though, globally speaking, they are 'winning' more support all the time. Through argument.

PS I think knitting could probably be described as 'secular'.

No, the definition you offered of 'secular' Bags was partial and in the context, not the one that applied.

Why are atheists who state their beliefs clearly 'like dogs with a bone'- I find that a trifle offensive. The believers on these threads are equally ready to argue the toss, so how come only the atheists are criticised? These discussions are never one-sided and some of the most provocative posts are made by believers. The same non-facts are reiterated regularly - e.g. that atheists have made hostile comments about individual believers.
(Flounces off in a huff)

I did not mean to use the term "formidable" in a critical sense petallus. And I meant collectively rather than, necessarily, individually.
I consider it something of a compliment if it is used about an individual. But it depends how it manifests itself. It describes a certain kind of power, and power often needs to be tempered.

The only power any member has on this or any other forum is the power to state their views within forum rules. Some of us enjoy debating and, naturally, use any tools at our disposal. Should we not be allowed to do that? I think some of our believing members are more than capable of holding their own in any discussion.

But we are talking about Christianity on this thread – some people as practising Christians, some as "non-religious" Christians, some as agnostics and some as atheists. But the subject is still Christianity although, as with almost all conversations on Gransnet, it wanders off the topic from time to time. I simply don't understand the problem.

I don't think the knitting analogy is at all valid. Nobody has come on this thread to say let's talk about Sikhism instead, for example. That would be the parallel with crochet. But it's an inappropriate analogy because you can go through your entire life and never have anything to do with knitting – you can't do that with Christianity.

This is such a rich and tantalising discussion, which I find myself going to first, most days. I like the analogy of us all popping in for a chat and a coffee and deciding which room or table we will join to enter or watch the discussion.

I share absent's view. The thread is about Chrstianity. I wonder if having an Atheism thread would help in terms of non-atheists beng able to question and critique why we don't believe in a god? Although, on second thoughts, it could be quite boring, now we've disspelled the notion of there being any mlitant atheists on here.

It wouldn't take long to say why I don't believe in any god - I see no evidence of any! If there were any proof, then faith would not be needed and we would not be having this type of discussion. Of course, we could be discussing what that particular god wants us to do, and which particular religion has the right approach.
In other words, we could still continue to squabble about religion!

Definitons of secularism.

I beg to differ from your view of the meaning of secular in the OP, lily. I think you are mistaken.

She said: "Saddens me to read so many secular posts."

I'm not aware of any posts using the definiton of secular that you and someone else reminded me of (i.e. a parish priest without monastic vows/restrictions; a 'lay' priest). If I have missed them, I'd take it knidly if you could point them out to me. In the meantime, I reassert that the OP of this thread actually was referring to atheistic posts, not secular ones.

Quite apart from what I've already said, why would anyone object to secular posts if the meaning was as you say? It simply doesn't make any sense to me. If you can explain that, and prove by rational discussion that your interpretation is correct, I'll drop my argument. I have acknowledged the meaning that you reminded me of. You are right that secular has that meaning. My point is that that is NOT what the OP meant. To me, it's obvious that she wasn't talking about lay clergy. i really don't see how you can squeeze that meaning into her words.

I daren't hesitate to say anything about the militant atheist tendency on this forum because I know I will be told several times that no-one has been attacked criticised personally, it is only their opinions that have been contested. I don't think ElsieJoy's OP was intended to be provocative at all. She's new to Gransnet and was surprised at the number of militant anti posts on a 'Religion'' thread. As I was last year before I had posted a word.

All posts which are not about religion are secular posts.