We should be moving towards a secular country.

[titbumwillypoo]

In the last census a third of the country identified as having no religion. This is a trend that is likely to increase in the future. I believe we should be moving towards having a complete separation of Church and state.

1. Removal of any religious leaders from the House of Lords. Believing in an invisible man is no qualification for having influence on the laws of our country.
2. Removal of charity status for all religions. Other entertainment venues don't get charity status, why should they? If they have a good business model for their club then the membership should be enough.
3. Removal of Faith schools. We don't let children drink or smoke or drive cars until they are mature enough to make that choice for themselves so why is it ok to allow them to be indoctrinated into these cults from such a young age?
4. Ban children from organised worship - See point 3
5. Ban religious symbols and dress from our streets. We don't allow nudists to wander around our city centres expressing their beliefs because it can cause offence so why do religions get to do it? What people do in their own home is up to them but publicly displaying your gang colours is divisive to a wider society. AIBU - Religion has a place in society AINBU - Religion is on the out and the faster it's gone the better.

I find the idea of replacing R.E classes with moral philosophy only, very interesting. Presumably this would be a heavily redacted curriculum, no Aquinas for example? You'd then have to remove all subsequent development of thought with Thomist influences.There goes MacIntyre then, probably the most influential moral philosopher of the past 150 years. How "problematic" would Aristotle be, for that matter? Will the children be allowed to come to the conclusion that there is such a thing as human nature, or will they be heavily instructed in subjectivism and reductionism. We would want to create a secular society after all.

God is dead, and we have killed him.

This is a topic that I really wish people would engage with, deeply.

And the lack of Christian unity on the thread is infuriating, but the way.We all repeat the creed. Divided we fall.

Ok Point 4 first. At no point did I say parents can't talk about their religion at home but by not allowing them access to organised religion until they are old enough to make their own choice means they will have less influence over their formative years. We don't let 5 year olds watch 18 certificate films due to the negative effect it has on their growing brains so by the same logic limiting their exposure to religion until they are old enough to critical think can only be a good thing for them.
The charity work that churches do is more a failure of government and society than a positive that churches fulfil. We're the 6th richest country in the world we shouldn't need foodbanks.
Point 5. Yes it is at the extreme side but frankly whilst we live in a country where a person can be in danger from a crowd for wearing a hat or children are bullied and threatened for not wearing certain religious garb then I say ban it until they can play nicely with each other. Whilst self expression causes so many problems and symbolism can be grounds for offence the easiest and most logical solution is a ban as we don't seem to be able to find a middle ground as a society.

But your assuming being part of a religious community is a negative thing, for many young people being part of that community is a very positive thing and you want to take that away.

The Church was responsible for all charity in this country prior to the creation of the modern state. It's ability to do this was only really hampered by the Reformation, when Church lands were seized by the nobility and encompassed into their estates. The Church is the originator of charity in the form we currently understand it (it is one of the virtues). The Church is doing what it always has done, albeit with more limited means, relatively, than it had in the past.

This 100%.

I wouldn't support abolishing RE - my DC1 took GCSE RE and it was incredibly well taught - they learned how to debate, construct an argument and take in different points of view. As long as RE isn't about indoctrination into a particular faith, I completely support it because it promotes understanding.

I personally don’t agree with state funded faith schools, especially as in the UK it can mean a child having to travel miles for a non-faith school, or being forced to attend a faith school. I did look around our local Sikh primary school, but I think religion at school should be about learning about other beliefs, rather than practicising them in a group setting.

Religious symbols I have no issue with, if a cross, turban etc aren’t okay, then neither is westminster abbey.

I don’t agree with religious leaders being in government, the house of lords etc, religious people fine, not not religious leaders.

Banning childrens access to religion is just stupid, are you going to make sister act or call the midwife an eighteen cerificate? Will children be banned from weddings and funerals? Will adults have to hide their wedding photos if a child is in the house?

Ds is (by choice) an atheist but he really enjoys RE because although he doesn’t believe he is interested in the faith of other people and from a young age I have encourage him to respect the beliefs of others

Not to mention that being culturally Christian there’s plenty of Western literature/music/art that would require at least a background knowledge of Christianity / the Bible to properly understand.

Correct, people just can't handle the fact that once you're dead.., you're dead. I just find it incredulous that people in this day and age are religious. Christianity is dying in this country but in my personal life experience , in the cities I think islam is taking hold as the dominant religion as others become atheist./ Anti- theism

Lots of entertainment venues have charity status, you don't know wtf you are talking about.

If religious people aren't allowed to teach their kids about their beliefs about the world, or educate them accordingly, I would suggest that we also prevent people with non-religious belief systems from doing so. Why should humanists or logical positivists get to pass on what are, in my opinion, non-coherent philosophies to their kids?

And do we really want the state deciding what beliefs systems are the "correct" ones? That'll work out I'm sure....

“There is more moral beauty in a Dickens novel than in the whole of the Bible. In fact, there is more moral beauty in P. G. Wodehouse”.

Are you joking? While Dickens and P.G. Wodehouse are undoubtedly talented writers, dismissing the beauty, cultural and linguistic importance of the Bible is overlooking its significant impact on literature, language, and culture.

For instance the King James Bible not only influenced English literature but also played a pivotal role in shaping the English language itself. Its language and phrases have become deeply ingrained in every day speech. Many expressions and idioms that we use today originate from the King James Bible, such as "a drop in the bucket," "the powers that be," or the writing on the wall”., “skin of my teeth”, “a labour of love”…countless.

Countless writers, poets, and thinkers have drawn inspiration from the Bible, incorporating its themes, characters, and language into their works. Its stories and teachings have permeated the cultural fabric of this country, influencing art, music, politics, and ethics. Even Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have admired the linguistic beauty of the King James Bible.

Condescending, self-righteous and incorrect. I give you that the Church of England is rapidly declining. Catholicism, however, is more than holding its own.
In London the pews are packed.

Easter was a hit this year🐣 Reports flooded social media of packed parishes and rapid increase of Easter baptisms. It was reported as one of the busiest Easter Mass in 25 years. Westminster Cathedral was so packed on Good Friday that security had to turn people away. And it wasn't just the UK; similar stories came from Ireland, the US to Indonesia.

Most of the congregation are multi-national, and immigration has absorbed fuelled the rise in Catholics in London. Just as did in Liverpool after the famine, so nothing new there.

I personally find it incredulous that someone holds have such a nihilistic view that death is final. However, I did not patronise others for thinking differently to me.

I agreed with you and then it all went a bit odd. Definitely a separation between church and state. And yes, churches aren’t charities. “The Church” is a massive landowner. I also would prefer secular schools, or ant least the majority to be; our only option was CofE (where all the staff had to pretend to be devout but I very much doubt they were).
I don’t think children should be banned from worship, but I also don’t think schools should be teaching Christianity as fact.

@Barr77 organised religion is backwards.
Death is final.

What sort of comment is that?

You're atheist so everyone should be or at least look like one?

You're as bad as the rest.

In your opinion. I beg to differ. Dogmatic much? You have that in common, at least, with the more religious fundamentalist brethren

I'm sorry that I don't believe in the sky fairy.

Fact is that if you don't indoctrinate children religions die quickly. The state shouldn't be in support of that; let it be for the parents to make choices for their children.

Rather than ban all religions, ban all fundamentalists and terrorists is what you mean OP. Also why have you posted a Daily Mail of all links about one specific religion?

And do we really want the state deciding what beliefs systems are the "correct" ones? That'll work out I'm sure....
Agree with this.

Some posters on this thread seem to think that other people and families should have their freedom to express their religion and raise their children limited by the state, which is a little worrying.

People of all faiths and no faith should be concerned about a move to suppress different religious and philosophical viewpoints.

We are heading for a very dangerous place indeed if we can not be respectful of different views.

There is no sky fairy. "Si comprehendis non est Deus." Rather than reducing someone else's worldview to such a reductive statement it is usually better to say that you do not understand it.

At the heart of traditional Christianity is a metaphysics that can take many years of study to begin to fully understand and explore. It has a rich intellectual tradition that tackles big questions; meaning, virtue, values.

Dear God! I’m an atheist and think some of your points are ridiculous. I think banning prayer at lunch times is an absolute disgrace and if these kids were praying with bibles, instead of Korans, then a ban would not have been in place.

DD’s friend wasn’t allowed to take part in the exchange activities in a secondary school in France because she wears a Hijab, is that what you want for the UK? There’s supposedly separation between Church and State in the US, with school boards being besieged by book banning fanatics, is that the secularist model you want to copy?

Secularism isn't the utopia you think it is.

Another ‘I’m sorry..but’. Why bother? You’re not sorry for your position, and neither am I.

I don’t believe in the sky fairy either, but something significantly and immensely more substantial. But again, each to their own.