The Pope

[graeme]

Just to be clear, I'm absolutely not turning it personal and I have no intention of doing so. You did make seemingly contradictory statements, but you're prefectly right that they're not relevant to the debate, so my apologies.

I'm perfectly happy to separate your statements (including retrospectively) from your own beliefs, and say nothing further about your own beliefs.

As for trying to convert you, nope. Never tried to do that to anyone.

[mwmackenzie]

[quote="BigD
It seem the Athiests are out to try and convert me to atheism. It seems to me that atheism is highly intolerant of others beliefs. Why would that be?[/quote]



Why try and push atheist views on other, NOBODY is preaching or pushing their "other" religeons or beliefs on here just the atheists getting all uppety that they're right

Live and let live!

Each to their own, we're all equal human beings at the end of the day, what paople take comfort in is their own business!

Mark (hoping not to have offeded anyone as no offence intended!)

[robin]

BigD, you're spot on. There is absolutely no reason for believers to justify their belief to Graeme or anyone else. He won't understand it, but that's because he has no faith. Faith is immune to logic. Logic cannot analyze faith. Discussing it in this manner is a complete waste of time, unless the goal is to convert someone. I don't think _that_ is a reasonable pass time, and is certainly off topic for this list.

The initial question still stands. Should somebody's religion be reason enough to not entrust them with certain jobs. The answer is obvious - there can be no discrimination on religion. People on the logic side of the fence should see that clearly*. People on the faith side of the fence should see that for their own religion at least. There will be some opportunists on both sides for whom this might be a convenient discussion point to jump in with some inappropriate generalizations about one religion or another. They are obviously stupid (or they are unwilling to apply logic to their own point of view).

*If you believe "the church does no good, only people do" it follows you must also believe "the church does no evil, only people do".

Cheers,
Robin

[BigD]

If you believe "the church does no good, only people do" it follows you must also believe "the church does no evil, only people do".

That is the best statement yet, I wish I could have thought of that.

Greame, had it occured to you that I might go to church because I enjoy it and that I am not sure where I am in the faith thing yet? Nothing is black and white and you assumed because I go to church I am Holier than thou'. My problem is that I have a logical brain and I need evidence to believe something to be true but by that rational I also need evidence for it not to be true. I am open minded about most things.

It did irc slightly that because I go to church someone can quite openly say that I listen to voices in my head and could kill at any moment. Or that I should not be allowed in a position of responsibility. Which is why I was seeking clarification on that point made in the OP.

I have seen evidence that faith helps people so there must be something there. I have also seen that the spirit, no pun intended, of the church is to help and support people not only in the local community but further affield. Yes there are some Churches who want to ram it down your throat but that doesn't work for me hence why I never went to Sunday school. And in my opinion they do more harm to themselves, at a time when congregation numbers are at all time lows, than good.

[graeme]

BigD, you're spot on. There is absolutely no reason for believers to justify their belief to Graeme or anyone else.

Nobody, least of all me, is asking for justification. Only clarity, explanation, understanding. Sharing of the underlying basis for opposing views with total mutual respect for those views. That is all.

He won't understand it,

Well, pardon me for trying. It's rare that I hold your viewpoint in anything other than the highest regard Robin, which makes that a wee bit painful to read. I can assure you I have dedicated many hours to trying and will continue to do so.

but that's because he has no faith. Faith is immune to logic. Logic cannot analyze faith.

Agreed. I've already stated that faith is particularly interesting to me precisely because I have none. I'm not asking for logical explanations for faith. I'll take any hints I can get in any language, and let me worry about translating it into terms I can understand. I'm as interested in the intangible instincts and fears and gut feelings that we all have just as much as the more scientifically tangible things. I'm not a robot.

Discussing it in this manner is a complete waste of time, unless the goal is to convert someone.

Well the goal is to convert, yes, but only in the debating sense. In a debate you keep score by show of hands, but as nobody here is keeping score we'll call this discussion, not debate. The rules still apply that arguments should be well formed and orderly and polite, but nobody minds what view you arrive with or what view you leave with.

As for whether it's a waste of time, yes, but only if people insist on dragging it back down to "Religious Debating 101 - Faith v Logic". That, I agree is a complete waste of time and always degenerates into a bunfight. I haven't been interested in that for years - there are bigger questions.

I don't think _that_ is a reasonable pass time, and is certainly off topic for this list.

Fair enough, you're the admin. I find it sad that the most interesting topic of them all is given special off-topic protection when we seem to be able to talk about absolutely anything else, but then I'm not the admin who has to clean up the metaphorical bloodbath and broken bottles afterwards.

EDIT: Ahh, I reread that. I see now that you mean trying to convert each other is off topic. Yes, totally.

The initial question still stands. Should somebody's religion be reason enough to not entrust them with certain jobs. The answer is obvious - there can be no discrimination on religion. People on the logic side of the fence should see that clearly*. People on the faith side of the fence should see that for their own religion at least. There will be some opportunists on both sides for whom this might be a convenient discussion point to jump in with some inappropriate generalizations about one religion or another. They are obviously stupid (or they are unwilling to apply logic to their own point of view).

Yup, I think we're sort of agreed on that. There are jobs which should be secular, but that still means absolutely anyone could do them. They just need to leave their views at the door, and that means atheists too!

* If you believe "the church does no good, only people do" it follows you must also believe "the church does no evil, only people do".

That's a logical fallacy. Is that a test of my reasoning ability?

[graeme]

Greame, had it occured to you that I might go to church because I enjoy it and that I am not sure where I am in the faith thing yet? Nothing is black and white and you assumed because I go to church I am Holier than thou'. My problem is that I have a logical brain and I need evidence to believe something to be true but by that rational I also need evidence for it not to be true. I am open minded about most things.

I hear you loud and clear. I used to go to church (CofS) and didn't instantly overnight decide not to. There was a long period of belief, followed by a longer period of feeling something was wrong, followed by a period of opting out, followed by a long period of emptyness where I didn't know what I was supposed to think any more followed by lots of reading which made sense of it all and turned me hardcore atheist, followed by the eternal quest to understand if I made the right choice or not! There's nothing black and white here...

It did irc slightly that because I go to church someone can quite openly say that I listen to voices in my head and could kill at any moment. Or that I should not be allowed in a position of responsibility. Which is why I was seaking clarification on that point amde in the OP.

Tough one. I think I've made my view clear, and it's that it's not somebody's religion which decides whether they're qualified or not, but their ability to leave it at the door when they get to work. An atheist with an unbalanced view could do just as much damage.

I have seen evidence that faith helps people so there must be something there. I have also seen that the spirit, no pun intended, of the church is to help and support people not only in the local community but further affield. Yes there are some Churches who want to ram it down your throat but that doesn't work for me hence why I never went to Sunday school. And in my opinion they do more harm to themselves, at a time when congregation numbers are at all time lows, than good.

Yeah, that tore me up too. There's the general companionship and buzz that you get from just being around like minded people... I don't need to explain that to the Church of Colin Chapman here!

[GregR]

there are too many people on here that see a lack of faith as some sort of a badge of honour, like they are the embodiment of logic and that anyone that doesn't see it as they do are somehow lesser in the heed. Its one extreme to the other here thesedays, its either, look at me the wrong way and I'll bat you to the head' or 'you're not as intellectual as me'.

D - fair play to you mate. Of everyone that's contributed to the thread you get the Greg coconut of admiration.

[Shug]

there are too many people on here that see a lack of faith as some sort of a badge of honour, like they are the embodiment of logic and that anyone that doesn't see it as they do are somehow lesser in the heed. Its one extreme to the other here thesedays, its either, look at me the wrong way and I'll bat you to the head' or 'you're not as intellectual as me'.

D - fair play to you mate. Of everyone that's contributed to the thread you get the Greg coconut of admiration.

From the man that moans we have no debates on here any more. We have a robustly argued, but level headed and respectful debate and what do you do?

Moan about it.

Awesome.

[tut]

Jesus Christ, can it be more simple?

You believe in a God or you do not believe in a God. Full Stop.

tut

[vx220]

Now what was the question again

[DDtB]

[pete]

The initial question still stands. Should somebody's religion be reason enough to not entrust them with certain jobs. The answer is obvious - there can be no discrimination on religion.

The original question was inspired by the pope decrying pending equality legislation which will prevent discrimination on the grounds of sexuality. I can think of no jobs where that might be an issue.

But it occured to me that perhps the same can not be said of religion.

Seems to me, an atheist, that one must base one's opinions to some extent on the bible if one describes oneself as a Christian. Otherwise you aren't a Christian but just "religious" or "spiritual" (how 90s does that sound?).
At least that is what I think. I could be wrong but let's presume I'm right.

But which bits?
Surely even if you discount all the mad stuff, all the old Jewish Laws (Leviticus), the bits that have been re-interpreted as metaphor you are still left with some bits.
And those bits surely have (say) Christ rising again, him being God's son, and God talking to and guiding folk. Isn't that a minimum?
So given that person X has faith. And believes that minimum of the bible do they believe it could happen to them?

What do they believe could happen?


Now when you say you can't discriminate on the basis of religion is that what you really mean? Or do you mean mainstream religions? Or non-fundementalists?

Take it to an extreme, would you want a creationist teaching science? Well I suppose they could set aside their beliefs and teach the syllabus, so OK.
But would you want them setting the syllbus?


Hey maybe you are right, I don't actually know what a Christian believes, or come to that what any of the Abrahamic religions believe - at least not on an individual level. I've a suspicion a lot of them know they have faith but don't actually know what they believe either.
But I would like to know how they would react if any of the "supenatural" things that happen in the bible happened to them.

And maybe a person who accepts that supernatural things could happen and thinks it is desirable to hear voices may be less suited for a particular job than someone who on hearing voices would be more inclined to seek medical help.

That's all I'm saying.

[pete]

You have still not answered my original query though which was to try and get what you were saying in your original post. Are you saying that all believers in God (not extremists) should not hold a position of authority and have the ability at any point to kill themselves and innocent people because of a whisper in their ear. I would call them mental patients not religious.

You see that's what i don't understand. I do not want you to justify your faith, faith is faith. I get that.
But I don't understand what people actually believe, I mean the bible seems pretty clear to me - God sometimes speaks to folk.
Doesn't he? Isn't that what people who go to Church think?
It's what I thought when I went.
When Saul saw a blinding light and then Jesus spoke to him that's not a metaphor is it?

Surely Christians believe that actually happened?

So if they do believe this, do they not also believe that God may speak to them directly too?

But ask yourself this. Forget about your faith and look at it from the point of view of someone who doesn't have faith.
Now be interviewing for a job and have a candidate who explains to you they believe in magic, that there is a book they use to guide their life which features incest, rape, misogeny, human sacrifice, slavery, (all from the good guys) and then moves on to a day when the world will end and people will be bodily taken into heaven. That in this book people hear voices and those voices are the voice of god and they must be obeyed.

You gonna give him a job?

Again you have taken an extreme example of someone who believes the bible (or book of magic in your example) is going to tell them to blow someone up. Most Christians I know are not like that and the Bible generally helps them do good or help them get through a difficult time in their life. Who am I/you to tell them that it’s rubbish. Surely they are entitled to their views/beliefs too?

Sorry how is that an extreme example. My imaginery job candidate doesn't say he believes it all. He says he believes in magic (which I'm pretty sure all Christians do, use the word supernatural instead if you don't like magic) and he is guided in his life by the bible. That's it. How is that extreme? Which bit isn't every Christian?

We do practice and attempt to further equality.

Unless the people you are working for are religious, in which case you do not want them there as they may blow you up at any moment. A touch hypocritical I think.

My original post was a reaction to a news story. I was trying to show there are perhaps a lot more reasons to not employ someone who is religious than there are to discriminate against them for other reasons. Religious figures are actually preaching inequality. And practising it.
Is typing on a forum preaching?

[robin]

Last post from me on this I promise ... I'll let everyone and anyone else have the last word.

Greg - not sure if you're including me in the badge of honour camp? I don't care what people believe and nobody will be surprised to hear that I don't believe in anything much. I don't go out of my way to tell people what I think of their beliefs, despite daily opportunities to do just that (half my family believe).

Graeme, perhaps I misquoted you - I thought you had said "the church does no good, only people do good". I'm assuming you disagree with the statement that "the church does no evil, only people do evil". If not, I apologise for getting it wrong again. But assuming you do this helps to illustrate two points. Firstly, you're not neutral in this discussion, and as such it's not surprising that people on the other side of the discussion are a little reluctant to discuss their ideas, motivations, beliefs with you. If you were interested in this subject in an academic sense, you would avoid making it clear what you believe. Secondly, you must have a different view of logic from me. To say that "the church does no good, only people do" to me means the church is an abstract concept; doing good in any meaningful way is an action that requires the selfless application of resources, generally by people (sometimes animals, never inanimate objects or abstract concepts). This same applies to any other conjunction of "the church" and "people", e.g. "The church does no evil, only people do" or more mundanely, "The church doesn't make a cup of tea; only people do". Of course if you have faith you are able to believe "the church does good" and then you could probably also believe "the church does evil", though you're unlikely to do so.

I don't mean to belittle your search for knowledge and understanding here, I justthink that you're onto a loser Also, I apologise for the rudeness of my contributions to this topic - I should have couched my opinions in a less arrogant way (or followed my own advice and not got involved in the first place ).

Cheers,
Robin

[GregR]

there are too many people on here that see a lack of faith as some sort of a badge of honour, like they are the embodiment of logic and that anyone that doesn't see it as they do are somehow lesser in the heed. Its one extreme to the other here thesedays, its either, look at me the wrong way and I'll bat you to the head' or 'you're not as intellectual as me'.

D - fair play to you mate. Of everyone that's contributed to the thread you get the Greg coconut of admiration.

From the man that moans we have no debates on here any more. We have a robustly argued, but level headed and respectful debate and what do you do?

Moan about it.

Awesome.

Shug, are you playing for the coconut of mis-quote or simply the coconut of falsehood? You're clearly suggesting I have moaned that we don't have enough debates on here. Remind me when I gave the impression I gave a flying one?

No moaning - if anything contributing to the debate by trying to remove or highlight the intellectual one-upmanship being peddled as a point of view.

Edited to say Robin - I don't and didn't include you in the one-upmanship camp. Not going to blow sunshine up your behind, but you're probably the most modest stupidly highly intellegent person I've ever met