Faith or indoctrination?

I would if I were you let it stand, we are not back in the classroom, where we have to explain to "MISS".
<LE SIGH>

Ok! Was getting bored. Heads/brick walls etc!
Interesting point, Galen, I expect many of us would have to say the same if we approach the subject with an open mind.
Thatbags, your comment says it all and succinctly.

I'm not sure if everyone who says the UK is a Christian country has the same perception of what a Christian country is but I think there is quite a lot of evidence that it is. We have a Christian state religion of which the Queen is head. The majority of people who identify themselves as members of a religion claim to be Christian. There are substantial numbers of members of other religions living in the UK but each of them is a minority. Christianity and Christian ideas permeate our culture, traditions and public and private rituals. This may not be acceptable to some people who object to the prominence of Christianity in our formal public life but saying it isn't so doesn't prove it isn't.

Quite!
Is blind belief good?
Or, are the 'Doubting Thomases ' right?
Does it matter so long as moral principles are adhered to
Or is belief in The Son of God essential for salvation?
If that exists?

I have never understood what salvation means - what are we to be saved from? Being human? Hell and damnation?

We just need to live lives of kindness and consideration, and sadly there are times when religions stand in the way of that.

We need to teach those values to our children independently of religious dogma.

To revert to an earlier thread here, I have just driven my DGS (aged 5) back from the swimming pool and he was singing about Jesus being crucified. I asked where he had learned the song and he said "At school." This is an LA non-church school. I call that indoctrination.

I understand where galen is coming from. The older I get, the more I question.

My God Atqui ! Was that a sarky reference to something I said earlier in this thread. On Wednesday actually?

Are you hanging on my every word? I really wouldn't bother. I can talk as much crap as the next person.

( Atqui Fri 25-Apr-14 21:18:46)

JINGS- not in the least bit sarky.Sorry though that you found it appropriate by your admission to contribute 'crap' to the discussion.

I think atqui's remark follows from galen's, jings old bean.

Atqui was obviously referring back to the post I highlighted there.

To use a phrase from my post, and put quote marks round it, was quite obviously sarcastic.

Atqui I don't understand that last sentence.

I think I might be working it out. Some punctuation would have been good.

I give up!
I am resigning from GN !
It's getting too nasty for me!
Goodbye all!

Oh what rubbish!

There is nothing wrong with taking a break from Gransnet, but it's good to do it quietly. To throw a hissy fit is called "flouncing".

I'd go to bed, Galen, if I were you. When you get up in the morning, this thread will most likely have been abandoned and everyone arguing over something else entirely.

Galen - you posted late in the evening, I hope you decide not to go .
I can understand your frustration though.

Don't abandon us galen - some threads do degenerate in this way. It is best to drift away from them temporarily until things get back on kilter again - which I am sure they will.

Have you got a windy day in the Bristol channel? - we are not that far from you and it is very windy today. We unexpectedly have two little grand-boys here this morning and there was no question of a lie -in!

Hope that they day will cheer up for you.

I sincerely hope that Galen did not think my response to her comment was sarcastic. I was aghast that Jings should accuse me with such a rant. I was genuinely pleased that someone else was feeling the same doubts as me. I went to bed rather than being drawn into it. What a shame . I really enjoyed the thread .

When I left GN the first time it was mainly because you made a similar comment to me Jings. i don't plan to do likewise this time but would like to point out that such a comment can be quite shattering (it was to me although I suspect Galen is made of sterner stuff) None of us can know how individuals are feeling and perhaps we should be more thoughtful with our responses.

I haven't been around for a few days, so have just read this thread carefully, because I know it is a topic that can produce heated debate. It was really interesting to read in one sitting, and to follow the debate, and the inevitable digressions through.

As ever, it is sad to see reasoned, thoughtful discussions knocked into touch by either inane comments or pointed rudeness. Such a pity.

(This is only a "Christian country" because the C of E is the established church, and part of government. There is no reason why any one religion should be seen to be predominant just because of history.)

The institutionalised nature of christianity in Britain is just a historical accident and based on the whims of the royals of the time. There is no reason why our lives should be dictated by it. The disestablishment of the church is long overdue. Heirs to the throne who are genuine religious doubters are in an impossible position.

Couldn't agree more, Mishap!

I still don't understand how a 'country' can be described as 'Christian' anyway. An individual can choose to espouse a given set of ideas, yes; unlike sexual orientation it IS a choice!

What is needed, to protect EVERYbody's freedom to 'worship' or not as they please is a secular country - which in most practical ways we now have. That is completely INclusive, and removes un-supported belief from governance so that no single cult has any un-earned advantage.

Good posts, mishap and feetle, and I agree. Secularism gives protection of religion (be part of any one you like) and from religion equally and is, because of that, the fairest approach.

Why would anyone want something different from fairness except to have an unfair advantage?

There is a school of thought that the loose and inclusive nature of the modern Church of England is what ensures everybody's freedom to worship or not as they see fit. I wonder, if it weren't for the CoE continuing to maintain that freedom and the need to respect everyone's position in matters of faith, whether it would continue?