Anyone who has received their Census form

[jimsleftfoot]

No... They allow big corporates like Oracle / Microsoft to spunk money off you for very little

 

To be fair, I am mainly just talking about the tech world... I am sure things like Project Management qualifications are better

 

I was thinking more of the Chartered Institute Qualifications.

[Crusoe]

Some qualifications are utterly worthless. I — well, my employer — had to pay $280 per year to keep me certified for a qualification I gained in 2002. I cancelled it a few years back as they were getting absolutely nothing for that money.

[Zorrro]

I'm going to church on Sunday.

[Matt]

I'm going to church on Sunday.

Don't you start.

[Zorrro]

Missus wants the little 'un christened. I'm cool with it, it's not like I actually have to listen.

[Matt]

Missus wants the little 'un christened. I'm cool with it, it's not like I actually have to listen.

It's all cool, companheiro, it's all cool.

[leeslover]

Well i maintain she is a beautiful baby whether or not the priest can rinse those numbers off her head.

[Ackey]

For those who argued there was no real 'value' in this campaign I'd like to point out a Tory MP has just used censous data to justify Religious representation in the House of Lords.

[Zorrro]

I went to church again today.

[leeslover]

Is that your codeword for Craven Cottage?

[rudemedic]

For those who argued there was no real 'value' in this campaign I'd like to point out a Tory MP has just used censous data to justify Religious representation in the House of Lords.

 

Meh! If I've got the figures right of the 792 members of the House of Lords (discounting those who are currently inelligible to vote for numerous reasons), 26 are religious figures- the Lords spiritual.

 

That is less than 3.3% (or 1/30th). I think there are more than 3.3% of the population who are religious and whilst automatically getting a place if you are a Bishop of certain places is a bit dodgy its better than the 90 or so who have inherited their seats and the ones who are members because they gave money to various parties. The house of Lords is far from perfect and there are much bigger things wrong with it than some Bishops get seats.

[Ackey]

Meh! If I've got the figures right of the 792 members of the House of Lords (discounting those who are currently inelligible to vote for numerous reasons), 26 are religious figures- the Lords spiritual.

 

That is less than 3.3% (or 1/30th). I think there are more than 3.3% of the population who are religious and whilst automatically getting a place if you are a Bishop of certain places is a bit dodgy its better than the 90 or so who have inherited their seats and the ones who are members because they gave money to various parties. The house of Lords is far from perfect and there are much bigger things wrong with it than some Bishops get seats.

You're crossing the argument though.

 

I agree the house of lords is a load of tosh and should be changed.

 

I agree inherited peerages are scandalous.

 

That doesn't dillute the issue that religious leaders should not have a guaranteed place in that flawed system. What's the reasoning? The justification?

[rudemedic]

You're crossing the argument though.

 

I agree the house of lords is a load of tosh and should be changed.

 

I agree inherited peerages are scandalous.

 

That doesn't dillute the issue that religious leaders should not have a guaranteed place in that flawed system. What's the reasoning? The justification?

 

Because otherwise how would the views of the religious (or even those that meerly go to their place of worship) be accounted for? Give me one example of a politician winning their seat based on their religious view. You don't become a Bishop automatically, its a position based on merit. People seem keen to get a bigger representation of the "minorities" population in the House of Lords, why not religious representation. Admittedly to do that properly it should not be purely Christian religous representation, Imams and Rabbis should be involved too.

 

Like it or not a % of the population is religious- whilst there are members of both Houses who are religious, party politics might mean they can't vote with their religious view. Bishops have no such problem- think of them as cross-benchers who are experts in theology.

[oafc0000]

I don't see why religious leaders should get automatic places IF the house was fully elected... If the second house becomes fully electable I can choose to put a religious leader in that house...

 

While it is not electable and is flawed I would like to see religious leaders in there to represent my views (some what)

[rudemedic]

I don't see why religious leaders should get automatic places IF the house was fully elected... If the second house becomes fully electable I can choose to put a religious leader in that house...

 

While it is not electable and is flawed I would like to see religious leaders in there to represent my views (some what)

 

You can but they what are the odds they get in? I don't see too many Reverends or Vicars or Rabbis in the Commons. The Christian party is lucky to keep its deposit.

[oafc0000]

You don't have to be a vicar to represent Christian values etc... Democracy will give the representation the people demand in the end and that is the way it should be.

Edited April 3, 2011 by oafc0000

[oafc0000]

Christian value I hold deep is the value of marriage. Plenty of mps represent this value for example.

[leeslover]

I dont care if the people taking my money and telling me how to live my life are selected by ancestry, religion, x on a piece of paper every 5 years or party nomination. I just want them to :censored: off.

[rudemedic]

You don't have to be a vicar to represent Christian values etc... Democracy will give the representation the people demand in the end and that is the way it should be.

 

Would agree if it was true democracy, the system we have at the moment is not true democracy. In many ways, "Christian" values are very similar to the values of Islam and Judaism and those who aren't all that religious so are unlikely to come into place anyway. Therefore, unless you legalise something specifically outlawed in the Bible (although a lot of the stuff outlawed in the bible is contradicted elsewhere) its going to be a matter of opinion if it goes against Christian values. Whilst I'm confident there have been more recent cases the legalisation of homosexuality would be a good example, but that was in the 60s and lots more people went to church then.

[Ackey]

Ahh, but many of the religious representatives in the Lords actively opposed the equality act in relation to homosexuality. Actively trying trying to prevent equality.

 

Why is there not a token Gay role? They're an important community.

[Stitch_KTF]

Ahh, but many of the religious representatives in the Lords actively opposed the equality act in relation to homosexuality. Actively trying trying to prevent equality.

 

Why is there not a token Gay role? They're an important community.

 

Speaking of which, IS anybody watching this Louis Theroux programme?

 

[garcon]

Is that your codeword for Craven Cottage?

It's got something to do with cottaging, so I heard.

 

Serious point now - it's time we accepted that we live in a secular country, with many different forms of religion followed by many different people. And (I would argue) a significant majority not following any religion at all.

 

Those trying to hang on to some notion of Britain being a Christian country belong with those who can't cope with the end of the Empire.

[oafc0000]

Would agree if it was true democracy, the system we have at the moment is not true democracy. In many ways, "Christian" values are very similar to the values of Islam and Judaism and those who aren't all that religious so are unlikely to come into place anyway. Therefore, unless you legalise something specifically outlawed in the Bible (although a lot of the stuff outlawed in the bible is contradicted elsewhere) its going to be a matter of opinion if it goes against Christian values. Whilst I'm confident there have been more recent cases the legalisation of homosexuality would be a good example, but that was in the 60s and lots more people went to church then.

 

I have no idea what you are going on about to be frank so moving on...

[oafc0000]

Why is there not a token Gay role? They're an important community.

 

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/07/14/first-out-gay-tory-peer-joins-house-of-lords/

 

Happy ?

[Ackey]

http://www.pinknews....house-of-lords/

 

Happy ?

 

You and I both know that doesn't count!