Christian parents sue government over school's transgender policies

I know that. Local c of e is 'high church'. Been a few times because reasons.

As someone raised RC it all felt quite familiar.

The fact is there are plenty of groups/ churches/ places of worship round here that are simply not mainstream in the context of England and C of E.

And imo that org beliefs are NOT mainstream in England.

The CofE as religion goes is pretty liberal, moderate etc.

The Church of England is a very broad church. It has some very 'high church' churches with 'bells and smells', evangelical churches, charismatic churches, incredibly open to the point of nothingness churches, churches that would never have a women vicar to ones that embrace one....

I thought that sending missionaries overseas to essentially convert people there was not seen as generally positive these days.

I made no mention of sending missionaries overseas but quite a lot of churches do send missionaries to the UK.

Evangelism/spreading the word includes to neighbours, local people, friends, relatives...

Anyone wanting to see can look through the info and cases on their site

christianconcern.com/about/services/christian-legal-centre/

People can make their own minds up.

I'm RC myself.

The RC church has differences around the world/ and even church to church. In various ways.

And outside there, there are a huge number of flavours of Christianity.

In England the CofE is the state religion. It's the default. Births weddings funerals etc. Most who tick Christian on an equalities type list are not members of the less well known strands. And generally not particularly devout.

That's surely not in question?

The CofE as religion goes is pretty liberal, moderate etc.

To generalise that across all flavours strands etc gives an incorrect picture.

People’s idea that Christianity is a fringe activity are something I find odd.

A third of the world are Christian, and most of the world (a bit over half) believe in the same Abrahamic God. It is still the majority belief.

Among Christians, about half are Catholic, 10% Orthodox, 25% Evangelical and the rest mostly other Protestants.

Maybe it is easier to forget in secular places that the Abrahamic religions are still growing.

My only point here is and has been all through.

That it's very interesting that strategic litigation, brought by people who are more likely to be seen in a sympathetic light, and 'backed' by religious orgs, seems to be on the rise here. When previously it was very much seen as a USA thing.

I have huge sympathy for these parents. They have the right (protected in law) to have their Christian beliefs respected. Teaching children that boys can become girls by putting on a dress is disrespectful to these beliefs, is unscientific, and just plain wrong. I hope they succeed.

And another thing, it is entirely possible to be a right wing feminist and/or a Christian feminist. In fact, Baroness Nicholson is one of my feminist sheroes. Frankly, the atheist left have not covered themselves in glory on this issue. I am proud to stand alongside GC women of all religious faiths and none, and regardless of their wider political views.

Spreading the word of Jesus is evangelism

Aims are spreading word of Jesus, baptising people etc.

If they didn't do this they wouldn't be Christian churches.

Certainly the org supporting this couple with court case have a very particular set of ideas that I would think would not be main priorities for most CofE, and by a good number would be seen as quite extreme.

Also just checked a local church my friend used to go to. I remembered they did missions and wanted to see what doing now.

They do still do missionary work in big way. Aims are spreading word of Jesus, baptising people etc.

They are called charismatic evangelical. Had to look charismatic up. Interesting.

That's the norm that's being referenced as part of standard Christian community or, I mean it seems quite out of the mainstream to me.

(Apparently speaking in tongues goes on but no link so I mean. Years ago though. Dunno about now. Casting the devil out and whatnot).

Lovely I did say round here.

It's an area that is very interesting for diversity of religions / branches of religions including more fundamental groups.

Don't know about elsewhere.

Yes, there is a historical relationship between British and American evangelical groups but American Christianity all round is very, well, American.

But as for funding - many people who have fallen afoul of gender ideology have found the only people who would help them have been fairly conservative groups, often religious. The usual groups a person might look to, like civil liberties orgs, the Elizabeth Fry society, won't touch it.

^^in the UK

The org supporting them with the court case are evangelicals.

I mentioned earlier that round here anyway, they are indeed a different thing to mainstream Christianity in England. (IE where I live and different countries here some different religious landscapes so up just say England).

So often conversation seems to be at cross purposes these days.

This is general- it's same as the wider situation everywhere isn't it.

Just time after time of being strongly challenged on holding a view you have either not raised at or, or indicated that you don't hold.

Just a general comment. I'm getting tired of it though.

It’s disappointing that the image and association of Trump and his ilk waving a bible around has obliterated real Christian experience in the UK.

The article was unclear.

The Times should have reported, in clear terms, what the school did or said to their DC that the parents who withdrew their sons objected to.

But as they aren't a Muslim woman who can be conveniently co-opted in to the "single sex space" argument they are getting short shrift from some posters on here.

ItsRainingProstateOwners
Isn’t Keira Bell’s lawyer anti-abortion? I can’t remember the details but I think agrees with stuff lots of us here wouldn’t.

And?

Well that’s my point, what does it matter? It’s important that the case is brought.

I am sure if the teacher was teaching it along the lines of 'some people believe you have a soul which is attached to roles and stereotype ascribed to each sex and they believe that sometimes this soul/essence is attached to the opposite sex to their own sex. We know you can't change sex but these believers try to alter their body and presentation to match that is those they believe their soul is attached to.' Them I am sure she wouldn't have an issue.

Having read the article I can see that what appears to be their specific objection (children being told they can change sex and supported in social transition) is something GC feinists would agree with. However I do wonder why they couldn't just say to their child, as many of us have had to-' yes, some people do believe that, but they are mistaken And it's kind/polite not to pick arguements with them about it (especially if it's your teacher).'
What I dont see them saying is that there are safeguarding and cultural problems that flow from accepting the fiction that people can change sex. I wonder why not, given that most people will easily understand that.
I also noticed that they seem to be describing their children as reassuringly boyish and I suspect are quite keen that they adhere to sex role stereotypes. So we would differ there too.
I really think it's OK to agree with people about one thing and disagree with them about another. Religious belief isn't contagious or even heritable, and I should know.