Christmas

[luutzu]

I won't dispute that China has ongoing corruption, but to pin it on their lack of religion is a big call.

One thing that does stand out is that the least religious countries (Scandinavian for instance) also seem to have the highest ethical standards.

When it comes to the most religious countries it is hard to go beyond those in the Middle East that not only have few business scruples but commit human rights violations often on a par with countries like North Korea.

Outside the ME, two of the most corrupt countries (consistently topping the world list) are Thailand (predominantly Buddhist and regarded as extremely religious) and Indonesia (Muslim). Then we have Myanmar, another Buddhist country that has no qualms about allowing their Muslim minority to be slaughtered.

If you were to use Christianity as an argument, one thing that always struck me was that the countries that had the strongest adherence to, in this case, Catholicism, are often the most violent and corrupt within the "Christian" domain of countries. I'm referring to countries like Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, a few Latin American ones, Ireland and The Phillipines.

So the correlation of morals and scruples with religiosity is more likely to exist in the negative than the positive if the world as a whole is looked at, rather than a specific example of just one or two. It has being pointed out time and time again that countries that are becoming more secular are the ones exhibiting the higher moral and ethical standards. A good example is Ireland, which I listed above as historical having a high degree of violence. It is quickly becoming a good example of tolerance of human rights and non-violence. It was also listed recently as a country showing one of the highest declines in religiosity.

I think Ireland was violent because they don't like the British too much. That and it's Ireland with lots of Irish

 

[Boggo]

I think Ireland was violent because they don't like the British too much.

History indicates that there was a valid reason for them not liking those who took them over (violently)

 

[Tink]

Great post, Ves, thanks.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=25726&page=12&p=894597&viewfull=1#post894597

Agree, Rumpole, things we take for granted that are now here and established, like the Salvation Army etc.
It was Christian teachings, including the Red Cross, St John Ambulance, Royal Flying Doctor Service, and others.
We don't see them set up in the atheist countries.

VC, unless you have intentions of dismantling the rule of law, with no boundaries, no accountability, no responsibility, no rules, then you have religion pushed at you everyday.
What is right and wrong.
Morality, and codes of conduct.

So saying that you don't want it in public schools, is saying you don't want laws or boundaries, because that is where they come from.

Well said, trainspotter.
It has helped many people through difficult times, and even turned their lives around, for the better.
A good song by The Church too.

Love, hope, faith and charity - and of course, comfort for many, Tisme.

I don't care what people believe, I was just stating to VC, what this country was built on, and our Christian history.

As I have said, Science and Religion/God are both important in society.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27938&page=62

 

[Value Collector]

Great post, Ves, thanks.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=25726&page=12&p=894597&viewfull=1#post894597

Agree, Rumpole, things we take for granted that are now here and established, like the Salvation Army etc.
It was Christian teachings, including the Red Cross, St John Ambulance, Royal Flying Doctor Service, and others.
We don't see them set up in the atheist countries.

VC, unless you have intentions of dismantling the rule of law, with no boundaries, no accountability, no responsibility, no rules, then you have religion pushed at you everyday.
What is right and wrong.
Morality, and codes of conduct.

So saying that you don't want it in public schools, is saying you don't want laws or boundaries, because that is where they come from.

Well said, trainspotter.
It has helped many people through difficult times, and even turned their lives around, for the better.
A good song by The Church too.

Love, hope, faith and charity - and of course, comfort for many, Tisme.

I don't care what people believe, I was just stating to VC, what this country was built on, and our Christian history.

As I have said, Science and Religion/God are both important in society.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27938&page=62

tink, there is plenty of secular charities, the Red Cross is secular, so is oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, and heaps of others, and the secular ones are often the most effective, because they don't have to waste time preaching and won't deny help to those that don't fit their moulds.

 

[luutzu]

Great post, Ves, thanks.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=25726&page=12&p=894597&viewfull=1#post894597

Agree, Rumpole, things we take for granted that are now here and established, like the Salvation Army etc.
It was Christian teachings, including the Red Cross, St John Ambulance, Royal Flying Doctor Service, and others.
We don't see them set up in the atheist countries.

VC, unless you have intentions of dismantling the rule of law, with no boundaries, no accountability, no responsibility, no rules, then you have religion pushed at you everyday.
What is right and wrong.
Morality, and codes of conduct.

So saying that you don't want it in public schools, is saying you don't want laws or boundaries, because that is where they come from.

Well said, trainspotter.
It has helped many people through difficult times, and even turned their lives around, for the better.
A good song by The Church too.

Love, hope, faith and charity - and of course, comfort for many, Tisme.

I don't care what people believe, I was just stating to VC, what this country was built on, and our Christian history.

As I have said, Science and Religion/God are both important in society.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27938&page=62

Technically, Australia is an Atheist country. It's not a Theocratic country.

If you're saying that it was founded and built by Christians and it was Christian values that made it great. Well... the first few fleets were mainly convicts who probably broke a couple of the Ten Commandments; the others who sailed over may do so to get away from the unbearable Christians or trying to get away from the law and bondsman... and then there's the Aborigines having to vacate you know... you probably don't want that to be put at the foot of Christ's teachings.


From the few incidents I have seen personally... I find that as long as a Church goer and their family is all nice and sweet, then they're welcomed to the Church. The moment they "stray", they're avoided like the plague. So parents whose kids got addicted to drugs, you should have seen how the parents are treated... very cold.

Of course not all Christians or people are like that... but you know, religious people tend to not tolerate deviants too much. May make good friends when it's fair weather but otherwise...

 

[SirRumpole]

Technically, Australia is an Atheist country. It's not a Theocratic country.

Australia is not an atheist country it's a secular country, with a mixture of religions, atheism and agnostics.

If people say in census that they have "no religion", it doesn't necessarily mean they are atheists. They may believe in a God but they just don't recognise the claims of any religion to be His/Her/It's spokesmen.

 

[luutzu]

Australia is not an atheist country it's a secular country, with a mixture of religions, atheism and agnostics.

If people say in census that they have "no religion", it doesn't necessarily mean they are atheists. They may believe in a God but they just don't recognise the claims of any religion to be His/Her/It's spokesmen.

True. But aren't they the same thing? Atheist is a term to describe the person while Secularism describe the same thing but for the country/state? Never mind. You know what I mean.

 

[SirRumpole]

True. But aren't they the same thing? Atheist is a term to describe the person while Secularism describe the same thing but for the country/state? Never mind. You know what I mean.

Sorry mate I don't know what you mean.


Atheism is an individual belief, secularism applies to the society, which is what you said but atheism and secularism are not the same.

Secularism is basically separation of church and state, it makes no comment on whether God does or does not exist, it is an administrative system not a belief system.

 

[luutzu]

Sorry mate I don't know what you mean.


Atheism is an individual belief, secularism applies to the society, which is what you said but atheism and secularism are not the same.

Secularism is basically separation of church and state, it makes no comment on whether God does or does not exist, it is an administrative system not a belief system.

See, I was personifying a State. If the secular state is a person, and that person is then an Atheist. Since we're splitting hair, "Agnostic".

A secular state does not favour any deity or religion - it says you plebs believe and pray to whomever and whatever you want, as long as you pay your taxes and don't give us trouble. When you don't mind what god your people pray to, it implies that you don't believe in one, or many, or any.

So "Secular" is a nice way to put it - it doesn't offend people when what you're really saying is their belief are full of it.

 

[SirRumpole]

See, I was personifying a State. If the secular state is a person, and that person is then an Atheist. Since we're splitting hair, "Agnostic".

No, no, no. A secular State cannot have a belief, it's neither religious, agnostic or atheist, it has no opinion.

Individuals have beliefs about religion, the secular state does not.

 

[luutzu]

No, no, no. A secular State cannot have a belief, it's neither religious, agnostic or atheist, it has no opinion.

Individuals have beliefs about religion, the secular state does not.

I did said "True" to what you're saying. Was trying to wiggle out of what I said though

 

[SirRumpole]

I did said "True" to what you're saying. Was trying to wiggle out of what I said though

Fair enough. At least we can celebrate Australia day without this religious stuff.

 

[Value Collector]

No, no, no. A secular State cannot have a belief, .

in the interests of muddying the water, lol, Atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of belief.

So, if a secular state can not have a belief, then you can say it lacks a belief, and is therefore an atheist in the true sense that it is unconvinced of any of the claims, and lives as if none of them are true, and must justify its actions in non religious reasoning.

 

[Tink]

I answered in here, luutzu.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=27938&page=63&p=894865&viewfull=1#post894865

If there was no God, VC, atheism wouldn't exist.
You have nothing to show for atheism, apart from destruction.

You want me to remind you of the atheist countries you created?

 

[SirRumpole]

in the interests of muddying the water, lol, Atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of belief.

So, if a secular state can not have a belief, then you can say it lacks a belief, and is therefore an atheist in the true sense that it is unconvinced of any of the claims, and lives as if none of them are true, and must justify its actions in non religious reasoning.

How many pink elephants can you fit on the head of a pin ?

I'm still on holidays, but secularity means a mixture of all opinions ;ie it's a group characteristic not an individual one.

Back to the cricket.

 

[Value Collector]

but secularity means a mixture of all opinions ;ie it's a group characteristic not an individual one.

No, it means - " not connected with religious or spiritual matters "

Eg, people with spiritual or religious leanings can take part in secular things, they can't however drag their spiritual or religious opinions into the activity, otherwise the activity ceases to be secular, so any actions they take need to have non religious reasoning.

 

[Value Collector]

If there was no God, VC, atheism wouldn't exist.
You have nothing to show for atheism, apart from destruction.

You want me to remind you of the atheist countries you created?

Why would atheism not exist, that's like trying to prove Santa claus by saying "if there was no Santa Claus, then the big kids that don't believe in him wouldn't exist"

Humans make up all sorts of stories, and someone rejecting the story doesn't mean the story must be true.

Tink, you don't believe in any of the Aboriginal, African, Asian or Native American creation stories, is that proof they must be real. I reject your middle eastern creation myth in exactly the same way you reject the thousands of others, there is noting special about yours, it's equally ridiculous.

I haven't actually created any atheist countries tink.

 

[Tisme]

No, no, no. A secular State cannot have a belief, it's neither religious, agnostic or atheist, it has no opinion.

Individuals have beliefs about religion, the secular state does not.

Which is why until recently politicians took the oath on the Bible

 

[SirRumpole]

Which is why until recently politicians took the oath on the Bible

Yes, interesting. I wonder what atheists would take an oath on ? A copy of Dawkin's "The God Delusion perhaps ?

What about agnostics ? Maybe a Thesaurus perhaps .

 

[Tink]

They do in the Courts also, where our laws were established.

An oath is a verbal promise to tell the truth. Oaths are frequently made while holding the Bible, the New Testament or the Old Testament.

"I swear by Almighty God that the evidence I shall give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."