Locke and religious tolerance

[Jack Knave]

Run their own schools with mainly religious curriculum, especially for boys. That's a special arrangement. Not everyone has it.
I am not complaining about them at all Trippy, just highlighting that we do have such communities in our midst and they are part of the UK. I wouldn't like to see them 'deported' & don't understand how they could be, being as they belong here.

There is not just one culture here that everyone has to conform to.

If someone breaks the law that's a different matter; of course they should be arrested and tried,maybe go to prison but someone who is a citizen, like ourselves, can't be just shipped off somewhere else - as convicts were sent to Australia in days gone by.

The special arrangement you describe above wouldn't be allowed. No religious schools. All children would have to go to a state school. As I have said above I think religion is archaic and not appropriate for modern society.

[Jack Knave]

If people don't abide by the rules of the land (and this applies to anybody, not just religious fundamentalists) we already have a system to deal with them: we put them in prison.

I'm not talking about the laws now, as they have been corrupted by the neo-liberal project and political correctness etc. but a set of laws for a modern civilised people, not those who think God and all that exists. Also the laws now are not enforced as we have seen recently with the lack of convictions for FGM and so on. Or how a load of Pakis sadistically sexually abused children and boasted that the law wouldn't dare touch them. These children told the police and were essentially ridiculed and laughed at. Even the Labour councillors knew about this and did nothing because of that fucking brainwashing politically correct shit. The law is worthless unless it has teeth.

[Jack Knave]

I wonder what sort of people you are talking about when you say -
.....................
Please explain.  Could be any of us if we have practices and beliefs that are not the 'cultural norm' (whatever tht is).

This thread is mainly about the toleration of religion. I don't believe in religious schools or any other opt outs that is contrary to the laws or the culture of the land, as I would see it in this hypothetical exercise.

[Jack Knave]

What about practices such as child brides ?
Where do we draw the line & say NO !!!!!?

Who mentioned child brides as in as if it is legal now.....?

[Robbie]

This thread is mainly about the toleration of religion. I don't believe in religious schools or any other opt outs that is contrary to the laws or the culture of the land, as I would see it in this hypothetical exercise.

I don't believe in faith schools either Jack but would you really go as far as to send people who support them to another land?

[trippymonkey]

That's already illegal here anyway. No-one can marry under 16 and then need parental permission but I'd have thought you knew that.
It does happen in other countries and there are charities which we can support to fight it (Plan International UK is one I know about which does tremendous work), but I thought we were talking about here in the UK.

Are you quite sure you know what's going on IN the UK???

[Jack Knave]

I don't believe in faith schools either Jack but would you really go as far as to send people who support them to another land?

Their support for them would be pretty superfluous as the law wouldn't allow them. If they were that keen on them then it may be suggested they leave for a country that allows them.

[jeremyp]

What about practices such as child brides ?
Where do we draw the line & say NO !!!!!?

We draw the line and say no. It doesn't seem difficult to me.

The line in the UK is at 16 years of age.

[jeremyp]

No they should NOT be tolerated in a free society, if they are abusive and violent.

We already don't tolerate violence. What is your point?

[Nearly Sane]

Moderator A number of posts have been removed from the board. Members should post in line with the Forum Rules, link below. In particular, note posts  in breach of 1.h will be removed, and members may be suspended following such a breach.


http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=7765.0

[Robbie]

Are you quite sure you know what's going on IN the UK???

Not everything. We all know things go on that area, drugs, money laundering, organised prostitution - all - illegal, e.g. young women transported to the UK from Eastern European countries for the purpose of prostitution. Plenty of other things that are illegal. Tht's the point, the illegality. If it is uncovered, people are prosecuted. Doesn't all happen overnight.

No idea what you are getting at precisely.There are no legal marriages of children here. Go back to the 12/13th centuries, children were married to other children, generally noble-folk, one woman I read about some time ago was widowed twice by the time she was 13! A few years later she contracted a marriage with someone she loved, had children and lived happily for many years but she had still been 'married' at the age of 6 to a little boy. They lived in eachother's houses, played, took lessons etc. like other kids. The parents had arranged the marriages, with the intention of uniting noble houses.

That wouldn't happen now but illegal stuff still goes on. I've not heard of 'child brides' in UK being that common though, might happen but certainly illegal. Happens in other countries especially remote areas - Plan UK is good charity to support that helps stop this sort of thing.

[Robbie]

Their support for them would be pretty superfluous as the law wouldn't allow them. If they were that keen on them then it may be suggested they leave for a country that allows them.

That makes me think of Jews being driven out of many countries countless times over many centuries & i feel sad at the image of that.

[Sassy]

Could you imagine a world of evil allowed because of the stupidity of mankind believing religions who kill others like the 9/11 actually have any tolerance for others?

We can all discuss the pros and cons but some religions should not be allowed to practice in other parts of the world.
Do we need to say more. Would probably have kept many a lot safer if it had been done a long time ago.

[floo]

Could you imagine a world of evil allowed because of the stupidity of mankind believing religions who kill others like the 9/11 actually have any tolerance for others?

We can all discuss the pros and cons but some religions should not be allowed to practice in other parts of the world.
Do we need to say more. Would probably have kept many a lot safer if it had been done a long time ago.

I hadn't noticed your take on religion is particularly tolerant, you have condemned me to hell a few times!

[trippymonkey]

I'd be interested to know which of SOME religions Sass is on about. Islam certainly but others?

Nick

[Sassy]

I hadn't noticed your take on religion is particularly tolerant, you have condemned me to hell a few times!

I have never condemned anyone. It has never been mine to judge others.
 The words a person speaks and their actions which could be seen to condemn them because of what they have read or believe.
But as you don't believe you could not see yourself as honestly being condemned.
Do you think that God existing for you would change that?
Because man cannot condemn another.

[floo]

I have never condemned anyone. It has never been mine to judge others.
 The words a person speaks and their actions which could be seen to condemn them because of what they have read or believe.
But as you don't believe you could not see yourself as honestly being condemned.
Do you think that God existing for you would change that?
Because man cannot condemn another.

Most of your posts directed at people who don't see it your way are condemning and judging their take on faith! 

[ippy]

Turfing any one religion out of our education system would be the wrong way of dealing with these people, it's necessary to turf them all out so that we don't have the why my lot are being chucked out and not X religion.

I know the history of how the religion has been involved with education, but really it's about time they put in their place, which shouldn't involve education.

Religion can't legitimately be ruled out of our common history, nor should it be, but calling time on lessons specifically about religion wouldn't be out of order.

ippy

[floo]

As religion has played such an important part in world history, for better or for worse, information about the world's leading religions should be part of the school curriculum. However, proselytising must be forbidden.

[ippy]

As religion has played such an important part in world history, for better or for worse, information about the world's leading religions should be part of the school curriculum. However, proselytising must be forbidden.

I put this on my previous post Floo, I thought you might have missed it, as follows: 

"Religion can't legitimately be ruled out of our common history, nor should it be, but calling time on lessons specifically about religion wouldn't be out of order".

I didn't mean to cut out religion entirely from our education system just as I said above, however I do think it would be legitimate to drop  religious education specifically aimed at any child under the age of seven, the age where most of us acquire the ability to challenge.

The largest number of religion based schools, funnily enough, are for the pre seven year old age group, I wonder why?

ippy 

[floo]

I put this on my previous post Floo, I thought you might have missed it, as follows: 

"Religion can't legitimately be ruled out of our common history, nor should it be, but calling time on lessons specifically about religion wouldn't be out of order".

I didn't mean to cut out religion entirely from our education system just as I said above, however I do think it would be legitimate to drop  religious education specifically aimed at any child under the age of seven, the age where most of us acquire the ability to challenge.

The largest number of religion based schools, funnily enough, are for the pre seven year old age group, I wonder why?

ippy

No doubt on the basis  of, “Give me a child until he is 7 and I will show you the man.” If you indoctrinate a child at a young age, they are more likely to stick with that indoctrination. It would be interesting if any surveys have been done to see how true that is. It didn't work for me, I kicked the faith of my childhood into touch as soon as I began to think about it logically.

[Sassy]

Most of your posts directed at people who don't see it your way are condemning and judging their take on faith! 

I beg to differ, there has been posts from yourself and other atheist which do condemn and judge the religious beliefs of others.
I do not believe you are in any position to judge others given your own history. Class houses and stones come to mind.

[floo]

I beg to differ, there has been posts from yourself and other atheist which do condemn and judge the religious beliefs of others.
I do not believe you are in any position to judge others given your own history. Class houses and stones come to mind.

I have no idea what the heck you are on about, but judging by your posts, neither do you!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The special arrangement you describe above wouldn't be allowed. No religious schools. All children would have to go to a state school. As I have said above I think religion is archaic and not appropriate for modern society.

Yet allowing schools on the basis of parental income is I suppose.

[ProfessorDavey]

Turfing any one religion out of our education system would be the wrong way of dealing with these people, it's necessary to turf them all out so that we don't have the why my lot are being chucked out and not X religion.

I think that is correct - we shouldn't have any state schools that have a specific faith ethos.

Indeed over the past few years this issue of 'if we allow schools of x religion, why not schools of y religion' has lead us down the bonkers path where we are increasing the number of faith schools (often to 'correct' the perceived wrong of allowing CofE schools but not jewish schools or Muslim schools) while at the same time in the real world the proportion of people having anything to do with the organised religions that control those schools diminishes.

Parents should be free to bring up their children within a specific faith tradition (providing it doesn't step over the line into being abusive) but it isn't the state's job to pay for it.