To think it is about time to stop being a Christian country.

[ShagOBite]

On the council prayers debate, lots of people have said "but we're a Christian country". Why are we? Should we be? How do we go about changing this? It seems so inappropriate and unnecessary in this day and age.

Are secularists going to say they don't want to see posters advertising carol services
Of course not. Carol services are legal events, peopel enjoy attending them, there are posters for all sorts of things that some will wish to attend, some won't. Why would anyone ban a carol service poster but not a Justin Bieber poster?

No religious opinions in the newspaper
Presumably a letters page thrives in people of varying points of view. Colunists also present a wide range of views. If some paper decides to become overladen with religious articles and biased towards a religious point of view, I can just stop buying it. Newspapers are not state subsidised.

No notice boards outside the local church in case it indocrinates anyone walking past? Such noticeboards hold no sense of authority over and above any other advert, and it would contravene free speech to ban them. Totally different to a school teacher, paid by the state to educate our children, telling them something. I did complain about our local church using council noticeboards to put up homophobic posters when SEction 28 was being repealed, though.

No R.E. in schools because you can always listen to what your parents tell you?
Educating ABOUT religion is valuable - and RE, well taught in schools may well help counter highly partisan views which children may absorb at home - such as a load of twaddle about atheists having no moral basis / wanting to ban religion etc etc.

OK, so we've put all those straw men to bed.

Absolutely popcorn. These vicious satan-worshipping secularists want to BAN ALL RELIGION ANYWHERE EVER and they want to HANG ALL VICARS and SHOOT THE POPE and BURN DOWN THE CHURCHES and you WON'T BE ALLOWED TO WISH ANYONE ELSE A MERRY CHRISTMAS or they'll SEND YOU TO A GULAG. And then they're going to come round to your house and EAT YOUR BABIES and you won't be able to do anything about it BECAUSE IT WILL BE ILLEGAL TO PRAY.

[sigh] Any other ridiculous, made up, straw-man arguments you want to sling out there?

In the interests of RE DS has been on numerous visits to churches, mosques and temples. The ONLY children whose parents have refused permission for these trips are Christian. All the antheists have happily signed the consent form.
If you are worried about tolerance, fear not the atheists!

Like I said several pages ago, this discussion would be a great deal easier and more rational if the Christians taking part would just google for a definition of secularism. The ignorance being displayed is quite telling, yet we secularists are being accused of intolerance and militancy. Not remotely acceptable if you have no idea of what you're actually arguing against.

There are other books than the bible, dictionaries should also be an invaluable tool >

I think many people who come up with the 'but we are a Christian country' line have a fear in the back of their mind that Britain is being 'taken over' by other religions, and somehow secularism will facilitate the takeover.

But I don't see why this would be the case, really. For example, a child from a non-Christian religion is unlikely to be converted to Christianity by singing 'All Things Bright and Beautiful' in school assembly. Neither are they (imo) going to think somehow 'better' of Christian culture by being forced or 'encouraged' to take part in Christian ceremonies in school and civil life. If anything, (again, imo) it's likely to have the opposite effect, and reinforce any alienation, resentments and divisions which might exist.

Bonfire, I think you are spot on in your first para.

Well I have spent 4 hours away from this discussion and am unsurprised that none of the questions have been answered yet!

However, we have established that secularists and atheists are not baby eaters, don?t want to hang the pope for being religious and fully support religious freedom. Now that we have that cleared up, I have another question which someone might answer (since they seem unwilling to answer any of the already asked questions).

THE QUESTION: If you are a Christian, and you (or your partner) need to get a job (as we all do to pay the bills). We are in a recession, so you have to move to where the work is and school your children locally. Unfortunately the area you are force to move to only has Muslim schools and there are no Christian schools for your DC to attend. How would you feel about having your child being taught a faith other than your chosen faith? If in this situation, you elected to opt your child out of the collective worship (which you are entitled to do), how would you feel if your child was bullied by the other children for being different?

Is it not a basic human right for your child to go to school and feel safe and feel the same as the other children?

Please can someone give an honest answer to this question, and then try to see why this is the situation that many atheist families face all over the country.

Sure, many secularists are moderate - as are many religious people :) But it's disingenuous to pretend they ALL are, and that NONE of them want to ensure other ways of being are pretty much eradicated. Some atheists/agnostics/secularists are just as guilty of this as some religous people. And they won't be happy with just getting religion out of civil life - they just use these things as the easiest targets to begin with, and once those are done they will indeed wonder "what's next"? I assume I can count on the support of everyone here to make sure this doesn't happen?

If it helps to move the discussion past yet another of your ridiculous straw-man arguments then yes, if ever we had a secular government that wanted to BAN ALL RELIGIOUS PRACTISES ANYWHERE EVER!!??!!! then you have my word I would protest against that.

Now, getting back to the reality that there is no mass movement to ban such religious practises, could you answer himalaya's question - What is the purpose of having children, parents and teachers who have no desire to be involved in Christian worship or faith-based education be pressured into it because it is the default option in their local schools? Who would lose out if it became an opt-in activity?

"How would you feel about having your child being taught a faith other than your chosen faith?"

Firstly, I don't think you can be "taught a faith".

If the collective worship was moderate and non-fundamentalist I'd probably be happy for my child to attend. Indeed, worship of a "broadly muslim" nature is probably not much different from "broadly christian" in terms of values, consideration for others, appreciation of the possibility of a God etc.

I would continue to practise Christianity at home. I'd tell my child I wasn't a muslim and describe the things our faiths have in common, as well as where they differ. If I was in a country with a long-standing muslim heritage I would take that into consideration too.

"If in this situation, you elected to opt your child out of the collective worship (which you are entitled to do), how would you feel if your child was bullied by the other children for being different?"

Can you give me even one example where a child has ever been bullied for not taking part in collective worship?

If it did happen, I'd complain to the school. Most schools have an anti-bullying policy. There are all kinds of ways children can be bullied for being different, whether it's hair colour, musical tastes, clothes, accent, sexuality or anything else. The problem is the bullies, not difference.

"Is it not a basic human right for your child to go to school and feel safe and feel the same as the other children?"

To feel safe, yes. To feel the same as everyone else, not necessarily.

Ooh, straw man argument! My bingo card is getting full...

"What is the purpose of having children, parents and teachers who have no desire to be involved in Christian worship or faith-based education be pressured into it because it is the default option in their local schools? Who would lose out if it became an opt-in activity?"

You could say the same about any aspect of school that you didn't like. I'm sure many children/parents have "no desire" for their children to learn certain subjects they might consider useless for their future career, or to eat the school dinners that are provided, or to sit next to naughty Johnny. Taking part in things you don't like is a useful part of education and it broadens minds.

Anyway, where have all the other Christians gone? Putting their feet up in the pub somewhere? :o Time for someone else to answer some of the questions. One person's perspective isn't going to do a lot - I've done my best but you've probably heard enough from me for the time being! Will be back sometime to see what others have to say :)

Popcorn - I would bet a lot of money that the secular movement is mainly made up of very moderate and liberal (with a small L) people. The sort of people who are appalled by the oppression of minorities and very pro the individual's right to worship as they choose.

I also genuinely think that the Christian church would be doing itself a massive PR favour if it stood up and said 'you know what, it isn't fair that children of worshippers are given an unfair advantage with regard to state school admissions. And it's a matter for the individual whether they want to pray in public or not, it shouldn't be a compulsory part of civic life.' It's the decent thing to do, and they would be respected for it.

If you set up straw men, you're bound to get it on your bingo card

Sure, many secularists are moderate - as are many religious people But it's disingenuous to pretend they ALL are, and that NONE of them want to ensure other ways of being are pretty much eradicated. Some atheists/agnostics/secularists are just as guilty of this as some religous people. And they won't be happy with just getting religion out of civil life - they just use these things as the easiest targets to begin with, and once those are done they will indeed wonder "what's next"? I assume I can count on the support of everyone here to make sure this doesn't happen?

The thing is, I can't think of one single example of such a person.

Bonfire - to be fair, some christians and people of other faiths do see the unfairness and campaign against it - look up The Accord Coalition.

Grimma - oh that is encouraging, I hadn't seen that site before. Hope they get somewhere with their campaigning!

Yes - its good it really isn't 'us' against 'them'.

The bottom line is that basically the whiny christians can''t accept that their silly bullshit isn't special and no more deserving of extra privilege than any other mythology. They can't give a proper justification of special treatment for christian mythology and ritual ie making it a part of civic life and inflicting it on everyone regardness of their personal choices, when it's about as appropriate to privilege one brand of mythological crap over the rest as it would be to insist that people born under the sign of Gemini are too inherently decietful to be allowed to take public office, or something like that.

And unfortunately, its the 'whiny' ones who get quoted in the media, not the unwhiny Accord types.

I'm not sure the fear that Christians are feeling comes from any encroachment by other faith groups, in fact they're actually using the secularist uprising to band together and make it a cause of faith against militant secularism. It's quite hilarious that these groups e.g. Christian and Muslim can't agree on much except their utter fear and contempt of the common enemy. All of a sudden they become interfaith groups

notfluffy - yes I think that's true as well, amongst the religious leaders anyway. Not so sure about the grass roots (but am willing to be corrected).

Embracing tolerance is a good public position for religious leaders to take though - if I was one that's what I'd do

THE QUESTION: If you are a Christian, and you (or your partner) need to get a job (as we all do to pay the bills). We are in a recession, so you have to move to where the work is and school your children locally. Unfortunately the area you are force to move to only has Muslim schools and there are no Christian schools for your DC to attend. How would you feel about having your child being taught a faith other than your chosen faith? If in this situation, you elected to opt your child out of the collective worship (which you are entitled to do), how would you feel if your child was bullied by the other children for being different?

I'm a Christian living in England who has never belonged to (or regularly attended) any branch of the established church. I am an active participant in church activities, being a leader in my local church, attending worship at least twice most weeks, doing community work through the church. I grew up in the Church of Scotland which, as has been said upthread, is not established.

I have not posted before because I did not read the discussion when it first started (I expected it to be a lot less sensible than it has been). Having started to read it today, I did not want to post before reading it all, in case it had moved on and my post was irrelevant.

I agree that the "daily act of worship of a broadly Christian nature" should be removed from schools. I don't think that it helps the church (that is, the church universal, not specifically the CoE) and it encroaches on the proper sphere for spiritual and religious upbringing of children (the home). One of the reasons I decided to home educate was because I did not want to expose my children to a "daily act of worship of a broadly Christian nature" which might be conducted by people who did not believe in God and therefore might misrepresent my faith. It is not unheard of for teachers to ridicule children who express a faith viewpoint. Small children should not be expected to be able to defend their faith (or lack of faith) in school.

Oh good grief Popcorn. So the reason why all children should spend time in Christian worship is because (a) if was made optional they wouldn't go because it's not cool and (b) because doing things you don't like is good for you.

Seriously? That generic argument could be used to justify any uncool thing you don't want to do - being poked with sticks, learning the periodic table, PE, eating worms, morris dancing etc... The point is some things can be justified as compulsory activities and some can't.

At some point you have to say WHY non Christians are so sure to benefit from years of Christian worship even if their ( ...it's not just an RE field trip).

Since no one has given a good reason why compulsory religious practice benefits children it starts to look very likely that it is continued for the benefit of the church (..what institution wouldn't want
a captive audience..)

As bonfire said earlier, I think the CoE should give up 'bums on seats' and take the moral high road of saying "this isn't right".