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

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?

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.

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.

"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."

Oops.

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.

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

There is some claptrap talked on here.

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

!!! 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!

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.

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.

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

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

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