Please or to access all these features

Mumsnet classics

Relive the funniest, most unforgettable threads. For a daily dose of Mumsnet’s best bits, sign up for Mumsnet's daily newsletter.

Honest question. Is this site a religious site?

843 replies

follderol · 26/01/2009 18:01

It seems to me there's a large amount of Christian posts. I've also noticed a fair amount of disapproval for other religions.

I am an atheist. I don't really want to be part of a christian site posing as a parenting site.

So is this actually a Christian place?

OP posts:
IorekByrnison · 01/02/2009 23:04

Are you all watching The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser?

Like AWPA

ruty · 01/02/2009 22:52

what dya say Swedes? Did I miss you being obscene?

[considers opening boutique hotel in Devon called 'The Wankery'..]

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:52

Really? Is that right? That is interesting. I'm completely a thicko about the science bit.

TheFallenMadonna · 01/02/2009 22:48

Actually, I find the colour thing very interesting. There is certainly a scientific explanation for colour vision, but the phenomenological consciousness of colour really can't (at the moment) be simply explained by science. Or at least not in a way that is widely accepted.

Not really relevant to the discussion. Sorry. Back to you biscuits and wankery.

Swedes · 01/02/2009 22:33

Threadworm

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:29

Swedes, perhaps cottage is a verb there and the St Martins were known for it. It is not a house name just a malicious piece of graffiti.

Swedes · 01/02/2009 22:26

at nooks.

RustyBear · 01/02/2009 22:26

Well, I'll start with Ward - I think I'm probably still enough of a historian to read with an eye to possible bias- and go on to an atheist pov afterwards. Any recommendations?

Swedes · 01/02/2009 22:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:24
Grin
UnquietDad · 01/02/2009 22:24

nooka, sorry. I didn't mean to call you nooks. It was a slip of the keyboard, and not some weird attempt to appear over-familiar...

RE the above, is someone going to say "get thee to a wankery"?

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:23

It would be quite a nice house name, wouldn't it. The Wankery.

Swedes · 01/02/2009 22:22

Is wankery also a noun, like a wormery? A place where wankers can hang out.

UnquietDad · 01/02/2009 22:21

The Judeo-Christian god is also totally, in its own way, a product of its culture. Every god is.

We're back to special pleading again. I always come back to the same question - why your god and not someone else's god? To claim that it's all part of some great supernatural force and that they are all the same thing really is intellectually bankrupt as an argument, and anyway it totally contradicts all the stuff nooks has cited above about the various ways in which they are all different.

I've just googled Ward and he is an ordained priest. Forgive me, but isn't that a bit like reading "Why Burgers Are Great" written by a senior manager at McDonald's? Is there no objective Theology For Dummies?

It's funny how people find Dawkins cheap and nasty when interviewing people. True, he is sharp, and doesn't brook any waffle, but that's not the same as being rude. He occasionally gets irritated, true, but wouldn't you? FFS, you'd need the patience of a saint not to when you put up with people throwing that much half-baked, ill-thought-out, irrational piffle at you all the time. I've seen him interviewing religious people and he affords them just as much - and as little - opportunity to put their theories and their evidence in front of him as he would any of his scientific colleagues. That's not just polite - that's something he simply does not have to do, and yet he does. In this sense, he is tolerant.

Threadworm, colour is a bad example because there is a clear, simple, scientific explanation for it. It may not have been within the knowledge of our forebears, but so what? There are plenty of things science doesn't currently understand, but it it strives to. If 19th-century learning had just accepted that colour was "beyond human understanding" and in the realm of the "spiritual", we'd never have had the writings on the subject by Goethe, Maxwell and others who have helped us to understand it.

AMum, I rather thought that was what you were driving at so thank you for clarifying it. We are speaking totally different languages, and that is the problem I have here with Threadworm and others. The terms people use on here are just not clearly defined enough - they can mean whatever they want them to mean, and this is somehow evidence of an extraordinarily "sophisticated" approach to faith which I would immediately understand if I went and read some theology. Forgive me for being a little cynical.

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:18

Good point. Pedantic wankerishness, one of the best sorts.

RustyBear · 01/02/2009 22:17

I think wankery has to be an adjective, as it means 'like a wanker' whereas wanky means 'like a wank', which is probably not what you mean.....

RustyBear · 01/02/2009 22:15

Bath Olivers?

Thanks for the recommendation, justabout, I'll have a look in the library.

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:14

OK, AWPA will celebrate communion with Madelaines and an insouciant red with a suggestion of cinnamon and furled daisies.

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:12

They are certainly pretty wanky.

TheFallenMadonna · 01/02/2009 22:12

Madeleines, surely?

ruty · 01/02/2009 22:07

ok, what is the most wankery biscuit available? [is wankery only a noun? Quite like it as an adjective]

Threadworm · 01/02/2009 22:03

Ruty, AWPA sounds good -- so long as we can decide on the right biscuits.

nooka · 01/02/2009 21:44

I don't think that you can substitute different faiths so easily. The gods of Norse mythology (and Greek/Roman to some extent) were capricious and absorbed in their own lives and feuds. Their impact on humanity was direct (Odin fathered many children, as did various other gods) and generally not positive. They were a way to explain the vagaries of life, when there were few other explanations around. They are also very much products of their cultures and geographies (I really don't think if you compare pantheistic faiths you will find much in common with monotheistic faiths). The spiritual concept of something greater than me that created the world is only a small part of most religions. It might be the bit they have in common, but really Thor is not at all similar to the Christian concept of God (I don't think that there is any evidence that Thor cared much about people for example).

I also don't think that there are any great "Truths" or that seeking them is necessarily a good thing. I firmly think that morality is relative, culturally and personally formed. I suspect that is part of what makes me an aetheist, the idea of an absolute truth is to me slightly abhorrent, I am much more comfortable with shades of grey. History shows those that think they are right are much more dangerous than those who are not sure.

justaboutisnotastatistician · 01/02/2009 21:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RustyBear · 01/02/2009 20:42

So, if I want to read some theology - what should I start with?
Is there a Theology for dummies?

Swipe left for the next trending thread