Christian Grans

Have you read this whole thread, soop? A number of posters, both religious and not have said they felt some of these posts seemed to be hostile. I said earlier that some people are put off posting by a negative response. I don't think they are all over- sensitive. We aren't all brussen as my granny would have said.

Soop has said what I too have said several times. Having different points of view does not imply personal attack.

I have really lost the plot here - I cannot see that anyone of any belief on this trhread has said anything offensive - just expressing different views.

If the atheists and agnostics on this thread express concerns about what is and has been done in the name of religion, then they are only expressing views that my christian friends share.

Why is this seen as a threat?

I'm afraid I'm going to be controversial again. I think, upon investigation, it will be found that 'secular' does not mean 'non-christian' when used by christians, as a rule. That does not, of course, cover everyone's use of the word. It could even be that people of other faiths use 'secular' to mean non-christian too, but that is news to me. Thank you for the information, elsie-joy. It does clear up something in your original post that I was puzzled about. One of the first lessons I had in philosophy at university was about defining the words one was using. It has been shown on this thread how important this is for preventing misunderstandings.

I will, however, stick with the dictionary definitions for my own use. Just wanted to make that clear. I might refer to a christian as secular, you see, and I won't be insulting them if I do.

Elsiejoy - I am very surprised that the people who sent you messages of support 'felt as Christians they ought to stay silent.' Isn't that exactly what Christians are not supposed to do?
I can't say I have received any messages of support because all the people who agree with me and understand that my opposition is only to organised religion, not individuals, feel able to post their agreement on the open forum.

Mishap Thanks for making good sense of my befuddled mind. I also feared that I was losing the plot.

I lost the plot long ago. In fact I didn't know there was a plot. I was just going with the flow. Thank you for your clear and true words, mishap, as always.

Oh no! Big mistake! I was confusing Lewis Carroll with C S Lewis. [apology emoticon] CSL was a christian. Haven't a clue about Carroll.

The rest stands.

Bags, you have just set me off on a very interesting bit of research on Lewis Carroll (Charles Dodgson). He was a remarkable man. He was a deacon of Christ Church College so he had to accept the 39 articles of the Anglican church, but he was interested in many philosphies and also electoral reform. There has always been some prurient interest in his relationship with Alice Liddell, but her parents obviously thought it was purely innocent.

Bags Lewis Carroll was a conservative sort of man in many ways. He was also a mathematician and logician. He was interested in psychic research and wrote, i think but don't quote me, some philosophical stuff too.

C S Lewis also wrote some good stories, but that was different.

'Secular' implies a level playing field, with no religious privilege.

I would like, by the way, to see the religious oath in courts abolished, in favour of the affirmation that I elect to use. That way, my affirming is not going to prejudice religious members of the jury, or the bench, against me.

'Secular' just implies a level playing field, with no religious privilege.

I would like, by the way, to see the religious oath in courts abolished, in favour of the affirmation that I elect to use. That way, my affirming is not going to prejudice religious members of the jury, or the bench, against me.

Where's the DELETE button??!?

Sorry - I double posted...

That is a very good point feetlebaum Did you know, by the way, that underneath the bit where the PM leans his elbows during PMQs, there's a Bible? Not that it's stopped a succession of them lying through their teeth.

I would like to see prayers (always Christian) banned from council meetings and Parliament. I also affirmed during my divorce case and I did wonder whether it would prejudice the judge against me.
These are some examples of what I mean by wanting a secular state - one in which everybody is free to practise their own religion, but not to have any religion involved in the mechanism of the state. I do not understand how anybody could find fault with this.

Bags Lewis Carroll was a C of E deacon, therefore presumably Christian.

Bags I'm beginning to think you haven't read the other posts! The very long entry in the OED gives several definitions of 'secular' one of which is 'not religious' and which I gave earlier. Since then, others have posted with similar definitions from other dictionaries. 'Secularism' has a more limited meaning and is the movement to separate the state from religion. But SECULAR isn't restricted to that meaning. I can understand why feetlebaum wants to do away with taking the oath in court if he believes that affirming might lead to discrimination. Lots of people don't take the oath for all sorts of reasons , some of them religious, so I think it's unlikely. But as for prayers Greatnan, if they have no meaning for you, why do you object to them? There was an issue about prayers being on the agenda of a secular meeting and I agree that is not appropriate. A parish council meeting might be a tricky one to make a ruling on...

You answer your own question, Lily. They are not appropriate in a meeting meant for all denominations and none. I don't care what people do at their Parish meetings, as presumably everybody attending would be a member of that particular church. I am not sure how I am ever going to persuade you that I have no interest in preventing believers worshipping in any way they want - just so long as they do not seek to impose their beliefs on me via the state.

greatnan in reply to your remark of this morning - something along the lines of how could non Christians be stopped from contributing -I would have hoped that basic courtesy would play a part or is that too much to hope for?

Yes. You are asking for discrimination on religious grounds. Would you like to ban people of faiths other than Christianity from 'your' thread too?

And I thought only Catholicism inculcated guilt!

Oops, last post was meant to be on another thread. We do need delete/edit buttons!

Let/s get this straight - it's not 'my' thread. I only got involved in this as I could see what the OP was asking for and couldn't understand why the atheists//agnostics/whatever were so blatantly hostile. It was her first post, what a wonderful impression to give her.

Greatnan The parish council is part of the administrative structure of local government. The parish in some areas is an local administrative unit. The Parochial Church Council is the elected body which deals with the ecclesiastical affairs of the CoE parish. I never came across a member of any faith who objected to prayers of another faith. Prayers shouldn't have been on the agenda of a secular meeting because they weren't part of the business of the meeting. In my view, if people don't want to be present for the prayers, they can go elsewhere. Or do what you said you did at a wedding, sit through them in silence. How can they hurt you?

I think by "your" thread, Ceesnan, Greatnan meant one dedicated exclusively to Christians and barred to non-Christians.

ElsieJoy was quite happy to "shout" her faith so it would be absurd of her to resent people with different opinions responding. She also said that "reading so many secular posts" saddened her – a contentious remark that was bound to provoke a response.

I have absolutely no idea what she was asking for and was not hostile. This site is called Gransnet – that implies that we are all mature people, not children needing protection.

Oh, Lily, I am touched by your interest in my posts - I am afraid I really don't remember yours nearly as well.