Three Quarters Of Gps Want To Go On...
News2 mins ago
Is it right to ban atheists ?
55 Answers
It seems it is not acceptable to ban homosexuals, colored people or Muslims(quite rightly) but when it comes to non believers its perfectly acceptable to discriminate.
Should they be allowed to do this ?
http://
Having sad that, with the revelations coming from the US Scout movement I'm not sure I wold want my son anywhere near this lot.
Should they be allowed to do this ?
http://
Having sad that, with the revelations coming from the US Scout movement I'm not sure I wold want my son anywhere near this lot.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
@Sandy elaborate on affirm.
Its possible the child got his opinion on matters religious from his parents - it is also possible that he came to his opinion independently.
The Scouts are part of the World Scouting Movement - A Christian ethos was never the primary guiding principle, although it was regarded as an important one.
Nowadays, The Scouts have modernised sufficiently that they recognise any religion,not just Christianity. This does discriminate against self professed atheists however, and they are in receipt of public money from a secular society. Thats wrong.
No one is calling for Atheist Choirs or whatever - the point is not to exclude on the basis of religious belief not to create a whole new bunch of exclusive organisations!
I, as an atheist, was, once upon a time, a church organist - that was acceptable to the church who gained a competent keyboard player and to me, who gained performance practice in front of an audience.They did not insist i declare a belief in god.
Its possible the child got his opinion on matters religious from his parents - it is also possible that he came to his opinion independently.
The Scouts are part of the World Scouting Movement - A Christian ethos was never the primary guiding principle, although it was regarded as an important one.
Nowadays, The Scouts have modernised sufficiently that they recognise any religion,not just Christianity. This does discriminate against self professed atheists however, and they are in receipt of public money from a secular society. Thats wrong.
No one is calling for Atheist Choirs or whatever - the point is not to exclude on the basis of religious belief not to create a whole new bunch of exclusive organisations!
I, as an atheist, was, once upon a time, a church organist - that was acceptable to the church who gained a competent keyboard player and to me, who gained performance practice in front of an audience.They did not insist i declare a belief in god.
The comparison to a vegetarian pork pie convention?
More like a teetotaller going to a restaurant and complaining he's made to drink wine!
The reason he's being kicked out is because none of the kids want to go to church parade and if he's let off for being an atheist all the other kids will do the same.
Simple as that I think!
More like a teetotaller going to a restaurant and complaining he's made to drink wine!
The reason he's being kicked out is because none of the kids want to go to church parade and if he's let off for being an atheist all the other kids will do the same.
Simple as that I think!
@modeller - that doesn't fly. If the oath is meaningless and "just a formality" -why bother with it?
And as for court, I doubt court officials would consider taking the oath is just a formality.
Either it is an important part of the fabric of the movement, in which case it is clearly discriminatory to self professed atheists - or it is a meaningless formality -in which case, why are they banning someone, and why bother to continue with it?
And as for court, I doubt court officials would consider taking the oath is just a formality.
Either it is an important part of the fabric of the movement, in which case it is clearly discriminatory to self professed atheists - or it is a meaningless formality -in which case, why are they banning someone, and why bother to continue with it?
@Sandy - It doesn't work Sandy. The Scouts are supposed to be teaching virtuous behaviour. The idea that the oath is just a formality, shorn of any meaning is manifestly not true, and attempting to justify the idea that lying is acceptable or that it teaches some sort of life lesson is just shallow.
Seems to me that those making arguments to defend the status quo are resistant to change and see such change as a challenge to faith.
Seems to me that those making arguments to defend the status quo are resistant to change and see such change as a challenge to faith.
He's probably been refusing for 10 months before being chucked out
However I recommend nipping over to R&S and reading Andrew's post on this
http://
"To enable young people to grow into independent adults the Scout Method encourages young people to question what they have been taught. Scouts and Venture Scouts who question God's existence, their own spirituality or the structures and beliefs of any or all religions are simply searching for spiritual understanding. This notion of a search for enlightenment is compatible with belief in most of the world's faiths. It is unacceptable to refuse Membership, or question a young person's suitability to continue to participate fully in a Section, if they express doubts about the meaning of the Promise
I find that rather interesting.
I still think they kicked him out to stop everyone using it as an excuse not to take part in brainwashing - er - religious activitities they don't want to go to.
However I recommend nipping over to R&S and reading Andrew's post on this
http://
"To enable young people to grow into independent adults the Scout Method encourages young people to question what they have been taught. Scouts and Venture Scouts who question God's existence, their own spirituality or the structures and beliefs of any or all religions are simply searching for spiritual understanding. This notion of a search for enlightenment is compatible with belief in most of the world's faiths. It is unacceptable to refuse Membership, or question a young person's suitability to continue to participate fully in a Section, if they express doubts about the meaning of the Promise
I find that rather interesting.
I still think they kicked him out to stop everyone using it as an excuse not to take part in brainwashing - er - religious activitities they don't want to go to.
@Sandy - shoot the messenger and ignore the message? Is that the argument now?
@Boo - thats kind of the argument all the way through- although the scouts claim to offer a kind of olive branch of allowing for searching for or doubting god, ultimately to join you have to declare a belief in a deity. Thats discriminatory for an public body in a secular society.
@Boo - thats kind of the argument all the way through- although the scouts claim to offer a kind of olive branch of allowing for searching for or doubting god, ultimately to join you have to declare a belief in a deity. Thats discriminatory for an public body in a secular society.
But it goes back to my argument- why try to join an organisation with beliefs you don't have? And not only that, fully expect them to unbend enough to accept you?
I stand by my point that ,yes its discriminatory- but then so what? It just is, either deal with it or join something else that will allow your child to go pot holing!
I stand by my point that ,yes its discriminatory- but then so what? It just is, either deal with it or join something else that will allow your child to go pot holing!
sandy
// This little chap looks to have the makings of a sanctimonious prig about him. 'Here I stand', he seems to be saying, 'I can do no other than renounce the fun I could have had with my pals, rather than compromise my strong godless convictions'. //
It's easy to reverse that argument and use it against anyone who makes a stand on something because they DO have a faith - simply replace the word 'godless' with 'religious' in the above quote.
I doubt you'd be referring to those people as sanctimonious prigs though.
// This little chap looks to have the makings of a sanctimonious prig about him. 'Here I stand', he seems to be saying, 'I can do no other than renounce the fun I could have had with my pals, rather than compromise my strong godless convictions'. //
It's easy to reverse that argument and use it against anyone who makes a stand on something because they DO have a faith - simply replace the word 'godless' with 'religious' in the above quote.
I doubt you'd be referring to those people as sanctimonious prigs though.
#modeller - that doesn't fly. If the oath is meaningless and "just a formality" -why bother with it?
And as for court, I doubt court officials would consider taking the oath is just a formality.#
Oh really ! I suggest you ask them . Taking the oath is meaningless for most people . If it had any value we wouldn't need courts as we would all tell the truth. Does it mean anything to all the accused when they plead Not Guilty ?
And as for court, I doubt court officials would consider taking the oath is just a formality.#
Oh really ! I suggest you ask them . Taking the oath is meaningless for most people . If it had any value we wouldn't need courts as we would all tell the truth. Does it mean anything to all the accused when they plead Not Guilty ?
