Anyone who has received their Census form

[HarryBosch]

Tradition for traditions sake? Hate this argument.

 

 

 

where did I make it?

 

you'd seem a lot more certain in your opinions if you didn't need to twist those of others

[Matt]

I suppose if 55% of the population thought we should make cigarettes illegal then we should, right?

 

Or should we trust our elected politicians to stick up for the rights of the remaining 45%, and make a more reasoned decision than merely appealing to popularity?

Popularity = votes. Democracy fail.

[oafc0000]

Right back at ya oafc0000

 

I suppose if 55% of the population thought we should make cigarettes illegal then we should, right?

 

Or should we trust our elected politicians to stick up for the rights of the remaining 45%, and make a more reasoned decision than merely appealing to popularity?

 

If we are working off 55% being Christian... What is the number of religious people when you add in all the other faiths ? Then you sprinkle in people like Rummy who still respect the how much better faith schools perform...

 

That will be a much bigger number than 55%... Cast iron fact...

 

Any democracy is going to be a mirror to such a ground swell of opinion. You simply don't get it...

 

Like you have done through this whole thread, you are putting the importance of yourself ahead of the needs and wants of the sizeable majority.

 

Its not all about you I hope you know...

 

I think what you are looking for is a dictatorship or maybe some form of king to surpress the people and push across their own moral judgement. Ever thought about a good religion ?

Edited March 8, 2011 by oafc0000

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

Just as well. If nothing else, when you say, "I'm not a believer, but I have plenty of opinions about the insidiousness of religion," it's like saying, "I don't watch and I've washed my hands of the club (to use a scriptural metaphor) but I still reckon we should play Taylor up front with M'voto." Who cares if you don't believe? Who cares if you have a problem with people who do? Who cares?

1) It's nothing like the same thing. Religion is still a force (and not always a benign one) in the life of non believers.

2) Just because you like to put your fingers in your ears and go "la la la i'm not listening", doesn't mean that there aren't those who want to hear the debate and hear an opposing point of view. I for one am one of those people. There are religious people who have the same attitude. I just don't agree with their conclusions, that's all.

 

 

Like I said, just because you don't get it don't mean it's wrong.

And it it still remains unfathomable and unintelligible to me. You failed in your biblical duty to give logical defence for your belief.

[oafc0000]

Popularity = votes. Democracy fail.

 

Democracy is what it is... In the end it really is just a big popularity contest if we like it or not...

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

If we are working off 55% being Christian... What is the number of religious people when you add in all the other faiths ? Then you sprinkle in people like Rummy who still respect the how much better faith schools perform...

 

That will be a much bigger number than 55%... Cast iron fact...

 

Any democracy is going to be a mirror to such a ground swell of opinion. You simply don't get it...

 

Like you have done through this whole thread, you are putting the importance of yourself ahead of the needs and wants of the sizeable majority.

 

It isn't all about the irrational majority quashing the rights of the minority or the underage. That is a huge failure in your brand of democracy. I want my politicians to use their brains when making decisions that affect the population at large. That is what they were elected to do.

 

Appeals to popularity should never be a deciding factor for important policy making.

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

I think what you are looking for is a dictatorship or maybe some form of king to surpress the people and push across their own moral judgement. Ever thought about a good religion ?

 

Wow!! Talk about a strawman!

 

Where in the name of all that is holy did you get that from?

[oafc0000]

It isn't all about the irrational majority quashing the rights of the minority or the underage. That is a huge failure in your brand of democracy. I want my politicians to use their brains when making decisions that affect the population at large. That is what they were elected to do.

 

Appeals to popularity should never be a deciding factor for important policy making.

 

Its not my "brand" of democracy. I am talking about cold hard realities.

[Matt]

You failed in your biblical duty to give logical defence for your belief.

No he hasn't. He doesn't have to defend anything. You seem to believe in an ideal world, and know how that Ideal world should act - however the reality of it is, is that one can tolerate "religion lite" (thanks Harry) in our system because there isn't any surreptitious movement to topple governments or to indoctrinate all of our infants. I wondering if you are imposing the fundamentalist belief systems of religious hard-line societies of our world for one this is virtually stagnant here in the UK.

[Matt]

Democracy is what it is... In the end it really is just a big popularity contest if we like it or not...

I agree.

[oafc0000]

Wow!! Talk about a strawman!

 

Where in the name of all that is holy did you get that from?

 

You

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

Its not my "brand" of democracy. I am talking about cold hard realities.

Then we agree on that part at least. But in reality the census data, or any other poll shouldn't make a jot of difference to important policy making. The fact that it does is something I would like to highlight as being wrong.

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

You

Or the strawman version of me that you have constructed in your head

[HarryBosch]

Then we agree on that part at least. But in reality the census data, or any other poll shouldn't make a jot of difference to important policy making. The fact that it does is something I would like to highlight as being wrong.

 

but you still haven't shown us that it does

[jimsleftfoot]

it doesn't seem to have extended to Oldham

 

St Augustines and Our Ladys for the left footers and Our Ladys is going, isn't it?

 

and there's Crompton House and Bluecoat that are CofE I think

 

out of how many schools in total?

 

They are being merged and a new School (Cardinal Newman College) is being built on Broadway (Old Radclyffe School Site). Overall reduction in the numbers of Schools due to less kiddies generally.

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

No he hasn't. He doesn't have to defend anything.

I agree. But his bible says he should. Just saying.

 

You seem to believe in an ideal world, and know how that Ideal world should act - however the reality of it is, is that one can tolerate "religion lite" (thanks Harry) in our system because there isn't any surreptitious movement to topple governments or to indoctrinate all of our infants.

And yet faith schools are on the rise.

 

I wondering if you are imposing the fundamentalist belief systems of religious hard-line societies of our world for one this is virtually stagnant here in the UK.

I don't see it as quite as stagnant as you do. But i'm not sure what good it does to compare ourselves to a full blown theocratic state. It's like saying that some female circumcision is worse than male circumcision. That may be so, but I see them both as immoral acts when practiced on children. Both should be resisted.

Edited March 8, 2011 by PhilStarbucksSilkySkills

[oafc0000]

Or the strawman version of me that you have constructed in your head

 

Its interesting how you don't see it yourself...

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

Its interesting how you don't see it yourself...

I am rubber, you are glue.

 

That is where you are going with this, right?

 

Always the same with you. The debate gets to a point where you are convinced that your most recent statement needs no explanation beyond what you believe has already been stated and you take the bogus moral high ground of silence or cheap quips.

Edited March 8, 2011 by PhilStarbucksSilkySkills

[oafc0000]

I am rubber, you are glue.

 

That is where you are going with this, right?

 

Always the same with you. The debate gets to a point where you are convinced that your most recent statement needs no explanation beyond what you believe has already been stated and you take the bogus moral high ground of silence or cheap quips.

 

In any discussion there will come a point where opinion is polarised and you have to just move on and accept each others stance.

 

I wasn't taking any moral ground. It is you that has done that. You said as much in words above when you said the vast majority are in the wrong and their views should not be represented in government policy. Democracy to me is about the will of the majority. You see it differently.

 

As for cheap quips. You make plenty regarding religions. While not seeing how your own stance is very similar in nature to many of your complaints regarding religions. The way they impose there will and expect everyone to adopt to their moral findings. Cough, look at your own stance above.

 

You put your own thoughts and opinions on a higher shelf and feel you deserve more representation than your numbers demand.

Edited March 8, 2011 by oafc0000

[Ackey]

agree with most of that

 

the bit in bold isn't what they're getting at school though, is it?

 

they get more of a relgion-"lite", which is pitched perfectly for me

I don't know, I'm not at those schools.

 

But I know I'd rather my tax money went to a secular school than a non-secular one. The essence of a Catholic school is that they're teaching Catholicism is the "right" religion. How can a secularist be comfortable with that?

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

Democracy to me is about the will of the majority. You see it differently.

The majority get their say every 5 years. That is democracy. That doesn't mean that every policy decision from then on should be up to public vote. There needs to be more common sense than that.

 

While not seeing how your own stance is very similar in nature to many of your complaints regarding religions. The way they impose there will and expect everyone to adopt to their moral findings. Cough, look at your own stance above.

 

How is asking people not to impose their will on others, or their children comparable to actually the actual imposition of will itself?

 

And my morals are based on logic and reason and are up for scrutiny and debate. And I invite anyone to challenge them. But I am not imposing anything by saying that the state should not impose religious indoctrination on children. It is this very imposition that I am against. At best it is unnecessary and divisive.

 

You put your own thoughts and opinions on a higher shelf and feel you deserve more representation than your numbers demand.

Logic is not a popularity contest. Nor is morality. But now I am repeating myself and I have things to do. I'll catch this discussion later.

[oafc0000]

The majority get their say every 5 years. That is democracy. That doesn't mean that every policy decision from then on should be up to public vote. There needs to be more common sense than that.

 

Every decision is not up for the public vote though. But every five years the people put a representative into power who is in-line with their views. Surprise, surprise you end up with policies which are then inline with those people. What is wrong with that ? (well generally speaking of course )

 

 

How is asking people not to impose their will on others, or their children comparable to actually the actual imposition of will itself?

 

And my morals are based on logic and reason and are up for scrutiny and debate. And I invite anyone to challenge them. But I am not imposing anything by saying that the state should not impose religious indoctrination on children. It is this very imposition that I am against. At best it is unnecessary and divisive.

 

I am understand what you are against but its by the by. The people don't agree and its the peoples government. One day, if you have your numbers, you can make your changes.

 

Logic is not a popularity contest. Nor is morality. But now I am repeating myself and I have things to do. I'll catch this discussion later.

 

Logic isn't the issue. Government policy and democracy is.

Edited March 8, 2011 by oafc0000

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

1) It's nothing like the same thing. Religion is still a force (and not always a benign one) in the life of non believers.

 

Some things were decided before you were born - and sometimes no one but you is interested in changing them.

 

2) Just because you like to put your fingers in your ears and go "la la la i'm not listening", doesn't mean that there aren't those who want to hear the debate and hear an opposing point of view. I for one am one of those people. There are religious people who have the same attitude. I just don't agree with their conclusions, that's all.

 

I only put my fingers in my ears when I've got hiccups or when Rhianna comes on the radio. I'm not interested in reading peopel write about something they're not interested in. 1,000 words on why I don't believe x or y is less interesting by a country mile than 20 on why I am interested in x or y.

 

 

And it it still remains unfathomable and unintelligible to me. You failed in your biblical duty to give logical defence for your belief.

 

I'm doing fine - but thanks for asking. I won't be troubling my priest to confess my evangelical failure even if you might like me too. I've been fairly logical so far I reckon. I'm basically inviting the atheists and the agnostics and what have you to relax about religion. There's really no need to feel hard done by.

Edited March 8, 2011 by 24hoursfromtulsehill

[HarryBosch]

after all that the question is a voluntary one :lol: :lol:

[HarryBosch]

census completed by the Bosch households 4 Christians