If it was just a matter of personal belief I'd agree with that. But it isn't. Christianity (in my country and yours) is a very powerful lobby. In the US you have a theoretical separation of church and state - yet a large amount of policy and law gets made on the basis of religious lobbying.

In Britain we have no theoretical separation of church and state. Our upper house (the House of Lords) is made up of the Lords Temporal and the Lords Spiritual. Christian leaders (bishops and archbishops) get seats in our legislature. They are a powerful voice. State funded schools in Britain must, by law, be run according to a 'broadly Christian ethos' and schools are supposed, again by law, to have a daily act of worship (though this has been interpreted in looser and looser ways to basically mean an 'assembly' for many schools). Terrestrial broadcasting licences carry with them an obligation to include a minimum quota of religious programming. And we still have anti-blasphemy laws.

As in the US, the main lobby for changes to abortion laws to make them much stricter, and the main lobby against changes in law to allow assisted suicide for the terminally ill come from religious groups - primarily Christian.

On an individual level each person's faith is their own. But as long as they get to shape the world I live in, and have a constitutional power beyond anything I have in my lack of faith - then the 'live and let live' ethos has already been fundamentally compromised.

"the 'live and let live' ethos has already been fundamentally compromised"

Oh, I agree.

And when Joe or Joanne refuses to let me be (by way of waving a pamphlet in my face, or blocking my exit, or legislating against me) I do what any self-respecting anarchistic sociopath does: I break the law.

If I can't walk away, I'll make it so you'll want to let me walk away.

And -- no -- I won't do it through organized efforts within the system...that's the chump's way.

Wave that pamphlet in my face and I may make you eat it.

Block my exit and I may hit you in the head.

Legislate against me and *I will certainly break those laws.









*speaking of: how’s the ACA goin’ for you folks?

ACA?

Affordable Care Act: sumthin' I'm not complying with.

Ahhhh. Gotcha :)

Directly related to this thread:

AC/DC's album "Highway To Hell" was released 35 years ago this month.

Just sayin'.

:cool:

fify

This is an interesting debate to me, only because so many people seem interested. I am pretty sure no one in australia (except maybe immigrants) care much what anyone else does religiously. In fact, our PM cops a truckload of shit for his religious leanings. Most Australians are very anti-religionintheworkplace type beliefs. Of course, if you want your kid to go to a catholic school, they have to be catholic and baptised etc.

This is very true and one of the reasons they hold disproportionate power is they are fighting for the status quo.

The states were usually made up of one or two religious sects who'd learned to get along, but they didn't trust the other states(sects), so resisted uniting. They liked the idea of splitting from England but saw no reason the couldn't be a small country, like in Europe.

Everyone from constitutional scholars to school children have at least a rough idea how the documents were written and rewritten to get everyone to support the idea of a United States. They had to guaranty the Federal government would not interfere with the religious practices already in place, no official religion, complete separation of church and state.

However, the Federal government was tiny and had little effect on day to day life. The state and local laws, which actually controlled life, were enacted by groups which were far from diverse. So when the law says you must attend church on Sunday and carry a gun to protect your family, nobody bats an eye. Same for a law saying you must be a God fearing man to hold public office.

In days of olde the people lived their religion, and made damn sure their neighbors did too, or they would be invited out of town. So all this theoretical blather about maintaining the lifestyle declared by the founding fathers is a bullshit diversion. That never existed except in history classes that lied. What they really want is to go back to when everybody in town was the same color/religion/education.

Uh-oh, some of y'all are going to burn. I am going to tell 9-6 on all of you.

"some of y'all are going to burn"

I live in south Louisiana...it's summer...already burnin'.

We have had a cooler than normal summer so far in MS. Weather patterns seem to be changing

I am going to step up on a soap box. I have struggled with issues of faith most of my life. I finally decided to make a concerted effort because it gives me support and helps guide me to being a better man within the community.

I am a Messianic Jew studying Buddhism. I guess you could say I am trying to hedge my bets. I hope you all realize I am teasing when I make comments about as in "some of y'all are going to burn".

Well, we've talked before in here about the way Britain, though Church and state are intimately linked at every level, is actually pretty irreligious in the main. There is no stigma attached to atheism. far more likely to be seen as odd if you profess a strongly evangelical faith than if you profess atheism. Most Christians tend towards the tea and jam social kind of faith.

But Christianity is protected in a way atheism (or indeed most other religions) is not.