Good for Michael Gove! Never thought I'd say that............

I'm starting to like Michael Gove. Good for him!

I am surprised an evangelical Christian couldn't cope with criticism, ridicule or even scorn , doesn't seem to know his bible

Sounds to me like he's coping fine. Got it well sorted out.

Full of platitudes and black and white thinking - just like his educational policies.

I know of no agnostic thinkers who would use a phrase like "pixie in the sky", but plenty who treat people of faith and of none with respect.

He also misses the point that in a multi-faith society, charitable works need to come with a no-strings policy, and simply be from a desire to help others rather than to convert.

It's the Tony Blair defence – respond in detail to an attack that has not been made. Tony Blair was much better at doing this than Michael Gove.

!!! What he says is true. And what better time of the church year to say it? Why shouldn't he express his thoughts?

"I know of no agnostic thinkers who would use a phrase like "pixie in the sky".

Oh, I do!

So long as "charitable works" bloody well come, what does it matter?!

There is some claptrap talked on here.

He appears to me to be constructing windmills to tilt at. Where is his evidence for the opinions he claims to be criticising?

Perhaps he's read a few threads of old on here.

And then there's Twitter.

Perhaps he's read a few threads of old on here.

And then there's Twitter.

Oops.

"There is some claptrap talked on here." - oh dear. This is what is troubling some gransnetters - this sort of level of debate becomes pointless. And it is putting off some members from taking part.

Views that differ from one's own are not "claptrap" they are just different.

I think that the level of debate has really gone downhill in recent months in spite of some trying to maintain proper respect for others' views.

It is possible to express an alternative view without it being "claptrap."

Mishap I think it's a mistake to assume that Christians who do good things only do so for other motives or that only Christians are so motivated. Undoubtedly, many people do good for other or additional reasons - for example, it makes them feel good about themselves or they want to look good and I suppose the same is true of some Christians, hope of heaven, fear of hell or the desire to convert. Not every one of us, though, surely? If there is such a thing as pure altruism, Christianity promotes that as much as any other belief system. I include personal philosophies in the last term.

Yes - I believe in pure altruism. But, to be honest, I do not see any point in an altruistic organisation having a label of a particular religion (or absence of this). I know I always feel squeamish about the bibles that go into the Christmas shoeboxes for the third world, where many have religions of their own that I respect.

I am not questioning the genuine altruism of these Christian charitable organisations or suggesting that they are just saving their own souls - I assume that their motives are pure. But in the article he was quoting an organisaton that is evangelical which implies a desire to change others' beliefs. That this is what I find unacceptable.

I agree that Christianity does try to promote altruism. That is certainly true of our local village church - mind you, most of their fundraising is apparently for the enormous sum that they are obliged to raise each year.

I ran a concert in the church in aid of a charity, and the local churchgoers said how lovely it was to have a church event that was for charity and not for the bread-and-butter upkeep of the parish.

To say that you know of no agnostics who refer to the Christian religion in the same vein as the "pixie in the sky" thing, is ridiculous. (Is that better than claptrap? ) Do you not read the likes of Twitter?

Maybe he wasn't talking about any "organisation". Just the people who try to follow Christ's teachings.

And Mishap, would you really want that lovely old church of yours to fall into decay? I wouldn't. Perhaps best not to criticise the fund-raising for church repairs.

I think he has been reading MumsNet! Real hatred of religion on there and it is like banging your head against a brick wall to give another side. Lots of talk about pixies in the sky, imaginary friends etc -and no toleration.

'Evangelism' does imply proselytising but an evangelical Christian isn't necessarily a missionary, Mishap. It's more a descriptor of a particular style of worship and an attitude to the religion. And if it is still the case that Bibles are being included with aid, no-one is obliged to read them. In the days when the gospel came as an unavoidable inclusion in the aid and care package, missionaries believed the news of Christianity was a much greater gift than any other. Evidence of more, not less, altruistic motivation.

Maybe they should give bibles out at food banks!

The only one in this particular discussion who seems to be displaying a fairly high level of intolerance at the moment is you jingle.

jingle, where I live, if you are a member of a Church- you have to pay Church tax (to cover for wages, activities, maintenance of buildings, heating, etc)- in most Counties (Cantons) this is compulsory. In mine, it was voted out a few years back- and people can now choose to pay it or not. It is amazing how many people suddenly 'lost their faith' once it was tied to the purse strings... often the same people who still expect to marry or be buried in Church. Although, also here- it is the Council that is in charge of our lovely Church (in front of our house which was the Vicarage since 1587 until 2009- see snowy photos)- so tax payers have to pay out of income tax, as well as for the Catholic Chapel down the road. There was a service today- but this is very rare nowadays. The heating system needs to be replaced at great cost- and the great majority of non-Church goers are indeed grumbling about having to pay- and would rather their taxes went to the school or health services, etc.

I do wonder how many people in the UK who call themselves Christians would actually continue to do so if it cost them 8% on top of their normal taxes.

What happened here after the vote, is that true believers who attend Church regularly continued to pay, but the 'cultural Christians' who only turned up for Christmas service, weddings and funerals, just fizzled out- leaving the Churches here (Protestant, Catholic and Christian Catholic/equivalent to Anglican, sort of) in dire straights without the funds - selling Vicarages and other buildings they owned for social uses (handicapped, elderly, special needs, etc), not replacing Vicars and other staff when leaving or retiring, and trying really hard not to cut services, not only to the Church, but the community).