Light sensors cause religious row

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

Story here.

Maybe they should just move?

SoupDragon: I think you need to read the second half

MP

They are not the same, they have similarities because neither one has any basis in fact. It is (probably)not fact that if Tiger forgot to put on his red underpants he would automatically loose, similarly it is (probably) not fact that if you turn a light on on a Sunday you will automatically not be a good_*insert religion here.
Of course, like any good Dawkinsee I will be happy to be corrected if facts arise.(Not really a follower, just liked the sound of Dawkinsee)

Other things can help you grow into a better and more thoughtful person.

the first poll I found. It has 33% saying they are supersititous

I fail to see the link between Tiger Woods wearing his lucky red underpants and people feeling that there is a spiritual undercurrent to life, the connection with which helps them to grow into better and more thoughtful humans.

Can't be ar$ed, MP.

poppity liked your other post, you say it better (less FFSing) than me.

Soupy - the laws of a religion having been in existance for thousands of years do not change to accomodate 20th C inventions or dictates. The rabbis are well versed in dealing with questions which come up as a result of changes in life situations or technological advances. They do this without changing the religion at all.

To answer some of your points:

1 Having a light shining in a stairwell 24 hours a day would piss you off. REally? Presuming you were asleep in your bedroom , a light from the hall shining through what must be a tiny chink in your front door would make you feel that strongly. Even if it did , what this couple are proposing is not that a light is kept on 24 hours per day. Prior to the sensor being installed there was no light at all. The couple are proposing an override switch. That is all.

2 The other leaseholders paying legal costs. As a Property solicitor I cannot see how this is the case. Leases do not provide for leaseholders to pay anyone's legal costs and that includes the landlord's. Furthermore service charges are subject to stringent regulation and easy to challenge and landlords are aware of this. I very much suspect this point was made to stir up the other residents against this couple and intensify media interest.

3 Practice religion in your home not in public places - this couple did, yes. They were forced however to bring this into public debate since something done in their immediate environment is forcing them to either cease using their flat or violate the sabbath. They are simply asking for eiter the status quo to be returned ( remember they did not ask for or make the change - it was forced on them) or for a change to be implemented which would safeguard their religious practices but not have an impact on residents.

If your argument as to following religious practices at home only is followed to the extreme then presumably muslim girls should not be allowed niqab or hijab at School and Christain religious festivals should not be celebrated in public. I do not agree with this analogy and believe that part of being a tolerant and multicultural society is allwoing relious practices to take place in public.

science is an evidence based system. Conclusions are drawn from facts and observations.

religion is a belief based system. Conclusions are drawn from feelings/emotions/ handed down stories and hearsay. There is no proof demanded.

hence religion is a superstition methinks.

"Well the first part of that seems to be putting down superstitous people again and the second part is a claim that remains to be proven."

I was quoting from the article in question, although actually the celebrity with lucky pants is Michael Jordan. Apologies to any offence caused to Mr Woods.

"I've not seen evidence that the spirits/gods etc exist nor evidence that it has that effect on people."

I'm not saying that they exist. I'm saying that people feel "that there is a spiritual undercurrent to life, the connection with which helps them to grow into better and more thoughtful humans." You can dispute that it has any beneficial effects on the humans in questions, but if those humans claim it does, it seems a bit rude to say that they are mistaken. I suppose you could make the same claim about someone who claims to feel better/more enlived by psychotherapy - or indeed any holistic care. "Well there is no evidence that this therapy has helped you, so I don't believe in it!" And like religion, psychotherapy is rather hard to measure! (in fact a lot of studies show that TECHNICALLY it seems to make things WORSE!) Nonetheless, people should surely have the right to have their opinions respected, and the right to continue to attend psychotherapy?

Of course these analagies are crude.

I'm still not sure of the point being made here: namely that it is NECESSARY and seemingly UNAVOIDABLE to use the word "superstition" when discussing religion.

Can I have some more sentences and perhaps suggest alternative phrases that wouldn't offend people with religious belief?

well explained lisalisa. But though logically you are right, this shouldn't matter to the residents and they should let the couple have their way.

In reality the couple need to realise that all those non-jews have their own beliefs and if they find 'illogical' symbolism irritating, they will not want to enable them.

I can see both sides and alas none have the moral high ground!

Leaving Woody Allen's hilarious cinematic angst aside I would be interested to learn if OCD is more prevalent amongst ultra-orthodox Jews!

It is bloody daft really isn't it? Rules and prayers for everything, even going to the loo or planning on having sex!

Liberal Jews have a far more realistic, and IMO healthy, attitude towards life!

nooooooooo Lucia, all is now calm, you will stir up a storm.

[ducks for cover]

She might need to sound less like a Tim Dowling pastiche to arouse any genuine ire

[frantically googles Tim Dowling??]

ahem

that makes up for all the exhausting arguing - sleep well!

You too

Don't forget to say your prayers

What I don't understand is that one cannot expect that outside influences observe the Sabbath. If one is Orthodox Jew, then of course you keep the Sabbath, but surely there is a tolerance/understanding that others may not? Seems to me that they didn't install the sensor light, and aren't breaking the Sabbath? Didn't Hassidic/Orthodox Jews used to use goys (sorry if this is offensive term) to turn on lights before sensors/timers existed?

If they walk past the sensor, they are switching the light on.

lucia - what an ignorant post! Why should orthodox jews have ocd ? Do you have ocd or tend towards it becuase you follow rules in your life? Everyone, religious or not, follows some type of rule structure otherwise anarchy would descend. If there were no rules then ( leading to ocd!) presumably the kids could stay at home and not go to school, I don't have to go to work but would still get paid and I also wouldn't have to wait at traffic lights.

And orthodox judaism has lasted over 5,000 years with new adherents all the time- liberal judaism is just over 100 years old and losing members all the time!!! But - sorry - will have to try and be more tolerant even when faced with intolerance!

ilovemydog - whether or not they installed the light makes no difference. They are not allowed to trigger it. Otherwise the anaolgy could be that they didn't install the cooker therefore they can turn it on or they didn't make the car therefore they can drive it.

And - no - it has never been permissible to ask non jewish people to carry out tasks for a Jew. I have a non jewish au pair and would not dream of ( as its prohibited by the religion ) of asking her to turn on lights/the cooker etc. AS I said previously we don't need to as all our household needs are arranged before the sabbath starts.

Actually the rules on having sex are very beneficial and I find fit my needs perfectly - willing to share if anyone wants to know!!!!

Fair enough.

Take another scenario. If an Orthodox Jew was walking during the Sabbath past a light that was already on, would this be permissible?

MP, I agree beliefs should be respected, they are useful and helpful in many respects. It should go for all parties though, although atheism is not a belief in the sense that religion or reiki is, it is still a set of values which people sshould be free to hold should they choose, and is just as valid.

I don't think it's necessary or unavoidable to use the word superstition in reference to religion, and won't now I am aware it offends, which I do not wish to do. I wanted to clear up though, why I had made that comparison, and that I was not trying to be willfully belittling in my use of it.

Lisalisa, it is interesting to read your views. I don't actually understand why the override switch wasn't an option in this case. It may be jumping to conclusions though to assume the refusal of this was due to them being Jewish(not that you were saying it was). I sincerely hope it wasn't and there were other reasons for it going as far as lawyers etc.

I really enjoyed that discussion, it was interesting to read both sides of the arguement without it getting too out of hand for a change

ilovemydog - yes as they have not turned it on. The prohibition originates from the commandment not to create which ( without going into how we get from creating to turning on lights) means that they cannot turn the light on . If it is already on no problem.