What secularism is

States like China and N Korea are not secular - they merely replace the deity with the State, and worship proceeds as before - this is also true of Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany, both of which were led by people who knew the technique well - Hitler, a Roman Catholic who claimed God's approval for what he did, and Stalin - who was trained in a seminary.

I must say it's pleasing that nobody has thrown their teddies out of the pram during these threads - it doesn't happen often!

I'm not convinced by the statement that altruistic characteristics are ' often more evident in the world's least religious nations'. I'm sure this quote ignores a huge body of meticulous research to back it up. Otherwise it sounds very much like wild generalisation on no evidence.

Merry christmas to all.

I was answering Soutra.
And now I can see that she thought I was talking specifically about France in my post to Penstemmon, but I was talking in general, not specifics.

I think Eleothan is bringing together all the strands of this discussion, soontobe - not just your point of view.

I didn't say you did.

I have not mentioned France as far as I know.

Good post, Eloethan

You seem unable to understand soontobe that what you believe is personal to you. You may believe in heaven and hell - others are either undecided or don't believe - conceptually or materially - in the existence of heaven and hell.

This inability of certain sections of people from all religions or belief systems to appreciate that their beliefs are unquestionable and inherently superior, has, I feel, caused and continues to cause many of the problems in the world today.

France is a secular state but I don't think it has done a particularly good job of integrating its population and has far worse race relations that we do. I'm inclined to think, though, that this lack of cohesion may well be more connected to resentments arising from its colonial history - in particular in relation to Algeria - than to secularism.

A review in "Christianity Today" of a book called "Society without God" which looks at the effect of secularism on societies, with particular reference to Swedish society, concluded that:

"Zuckerman proposes what he calls a "socio-religious irony." The world's great religions speak of caring for the sick, the poor, and the orphaned, and of practicing mercy and goodwill toward fellow humans, yet these traits are often more evident in the world's least religious nations."

The reviewer points out that this does not prove causation - that secularism results in a more altruistic and caring society - but she nevertheless recognises that it is something worth considering.

I realise this is straying away from the OP. But, as some posters appear to think that the current privileged position of the C of E provides some sort of ethical/moral framework which would not be there without its presence, I thought I'd just throw another thought into the mix.

'Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live'

And you base your post of 15.43 on what particular personal knowledge of France soontobe?
Apart from getting the wrong end of the stick re secularism you seem to be living in some parallel universe where schools and or the state teach good old C of E to all their meek little kiddywinks. It is NOT the respondibility of the State to dictate our beliefs thank god thst went out with religious persecution centuries ago. Lets not go back to burning heretics!

Believe!

So I be.ieve

Galen - so if muslim girls want to wear their hijab in school, their parents have to try to get them into a muslim school. Not so easy as in the UK, there are very few.

galen

lily, I did not say the UK was a theocratic state. You are extrapolating in an exaggerated manner from what I did say. Do you actually think that it was the separation of church from state in the repressive regimes you refer to that made them repressive? I don't.

China does not fit the description of secular that the UK National secular Society describes just as the ones you referred to from the twentieth century didn't. I do not know anything about the North Korean approach to religion. They do have a dead person as their official head of state, which I find somewhat weird but whether that is relevant to religion or to secularism I have no idea.

I think my understanding of secularism and what it is for, which the NSS article in the OP describes extremely well, is leagues apart from some other people's understanding of it. Nobody, so far, has said exactly what they disagree with in that article, which is telling I think.

DD is just arriving from Edinburgh. Happy Christmas, everyone.

Children willnhear about their family's God at their home or church, or wherever anyone wishes to introduce a deity; it will inevitably crop up in literature. It is not the responsibility of the state to ensure it happens, nor should it be.

The trouble with France is that it does not allow people to hold to their religious customs,eg, girls are not allowed to wear the hijab in school I believe.

Just read this interesting thread. Yes France is a good example, but it's also a strongly socialist state. The legal system mostly from the Napoleonic laws, which came after the french revolution. I thinks that's the derivation.
As for education, there are state schools, but also faith schools, many are catholic.
I suppose it does work, but there's still a lot of racial/religious hatred, mainly against N. African immigrants. The french are much more racially outspoken than the british.
Another secular state, I think, is Israel. And they have problems with it.

You can hardly call the UK a 'theocratic state'. And what about my example of N Korea and China. Whatever your graph 'proves' bags the reality is that the most repressive states in the last century have been entirely secular and in a number of cases have allowed some religion to exist under severe restrictions.

That sounds great. But in reality, many many children would not then hear anything about God or another religion at all.

soontobe I believe in France that many schools close early on a day a week for children to be instructed in the religion of their family. It then becomes the responsibility of parent/church/synagogue/mosque/gurdwara etc to teach children about their family religion. All fair all equal.

Axes Bags? Whose head are you after?

In my mind there are two axes. One is the totalitarian/freedom axis and one is the theocratic/secular axis. Think of them crossing at right angles in a two-dimensional space (piece of paper). History and current events show that theocratic states tend more to totalitarianism and states with more freedom for individuals tend to be more secular. You can pick out examples that refute this in greater or lesser ways without actually knocking it down. That is what is happening here.

That's what I thought! It's a pity. Last time I visited last year, there were many more hidjabs to be seen.

I think, on paper, Turkey is secular but Erdogan is a strong Islamist and seems to some to be moving Turkey in a repressive and regressive direction.