Jump to content

Recommended Posts

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I meant to say 'dissemination ....' how it came

> out as 'desemination...' probably unconscious

> reference to other 'faith' goings-on.

> R. Dawkins is not arguing against the past because

> the religious beliefs of the past are alive and

> well today. Faith schools are still operating

> using dogma from the past, much of it

> fundamentalist, and it is just as bad as it was 30

> years ago- if not worse.

> All faiths are self-serving. The leaders are just

> the same as politicians...instead of crosses on

> ballot papers, read 'bums on pews' or whatever.

> It's all just a way of keeping the poor and needy

> satisfied with the promise of this 'heaven' ffs


I have similar misgivings about organised religion (and faith schools) as you, but I think faith or spirituality are a different category, and not indicative of irrationality or ignorance. When Dawkins speaks to someone like George Coyne, then it's an interesting conversation about faith or lack of it, but all too often he concentrates on weird fundamentalists who deny evolution, themselves a minority of a minority. In this country less than 10% of people go to Church weekly (according to the Humanist society).

Let's ask ourselves, why did religions (faith evolve)? They evolved in two ways, in trying to address aspects of human nature that were viewed as destructive, and in trying to explain the wonders of the world that science hadn't yet explained. We can easily reject much of the latter and label those who ignore scientific evidence as ignorant (and this is what Dawkins attacks). But there is some value in the former.


Nothing indoctrinates us more than advertising. There are billboards on pretty much every street corner and in every sitting room via the TV. So although I'm an athiest, I would be slow to reject all religion as BS (there are far more dangerous forms of brainwashing out there).


There is a philosophy in amongst religions which is the reason there are foodbanks for people to go to (where would they go without that?). And most religions, not just the monotheist ones, demand giving to and feeding of the needy. Many religious festivals are based on some form of giving or forgiveness, which has it's sole aim in well being and harmony. These are not qualities found amongst the cold capitalists of the city and government. Materialism has never made up for a lack in human relationships, or a lack of community.

I watched "Jesus Camp" on Netflix last night (see link below). Some of the stuff going on in there is way past the line of child abuse in my book. Also desperately worrying how deeply entrenched in American politics and law this evangelical mentalness is.


https://vimeo.com/33740057

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...