Gillard is a true red
#46
Re: Gillard is a true red
You could but you'd be wrong Religion is a faith based dogma, atheism is the just an absence of that dogma with the belief that things should be subjected to evidence based tests like all parts of our secular democracy are meant to be.
The don't do it in the name of atheism like religious crusaders do. They are economic movements. They have a lot in common with religious crusaders though - after the ability to control people.
Extreme christians are pushing it.
Why would we replace the pagan celebrations we are used to?
And what about those leaders who are atheist and do the same - a couple of examples include Albania when it was under Hoxha, North Korea, China. Political doctrine can be easily seen along the same lines as religious doctrine, and I would say that atheist doctrine is a form of religious doctrine.
Not all Christians agree with the proposed internet filter, it's far to easy to generalise this as a "Christian supported" proposal. The problem is that many people (both Christian and "other") are not aware that child porn traffic is apparently more likely on peer-to-peer than WWW, and so the internet filter will have very little effect.
Why would we replace the pagan celebrations we are used to?
#47
Re: Gillard is a true red
I may be talking out of turn but I believe they would be happy to call it something else, for example "civil union" but this was also objected to by many religious.
#48
Re: Gillard is a true red
Marriage is a civil secular union in our democracy. The church has nothing to do with it. People can optionally sign a church register as well as the govt one but that is their own faith based appendage and nothing to do with the secular institution of marriage.
#49
Account Closed
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,188
Re: Gillard is a true red
To claim the church has "nothing to do with it" is, frankly, nonsense.
#50
Re: Gillard is a true red
Legally that's all correct, but unless I'm mistaken, and if I am I'm sure somebody will be along soon enough to tell me, marriage was at the prerogative of the church and a religious concept.
To claim the church has "nothing to do with it" is, frankly, nonsense.
To claim the church has "nothing to do with it" is, frankly, nonsense.
#52
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,555
Re: Gillard is a true red
It maybe to you. My wedding was a civil arrangement that bonded us in marriage. Marriage means different things to different people and different religions. The bible is irrelevant to me and a significant amount of society. Marriage is a concept generated by society over the years and has evolved. Marriage will carry on evolving as societies norms and tolerances change.
Gay people do not want to settle for something different to what the rest of us take for granted. Why should they?
Gay people do not want to settle for something different to what the rest of us take for granted. Why should they?
#54
Re: Gillard is a true red
You could but you'd be wrong Religion is a faith based dogma, atheism is the just an absence of that dogma with the belief that things should be subjected to evidence based tests like all parts of our secular democracy are meant to be.
The don't do it in the name of atheism like religious crusaders do. They are economic movements. They have a lot in common with religious crusaders though - after the ability to control people.
Extreme christians are pushing it.
Why would we replace the pagan celebrations we are used to?
The don't do it in the name of atheism like religious crusaders do. They are economic movements. They have a lot in common with religious crusaders though - after the ability to control people.
Extreme christians are pushing it.
Why would we replace the pagan celebrations we are used to?
Gay couples had dozens if not hundreds of protections they could not partake in because of the laws prohibiting their union.
I may be talking out of turn but I believe they would be happy to call it something else, for example "civil union" but this was also objected to by many religious.
I may be talking out of turn but I believe they would be happy to call it something else, for example "civil union" but this was also objected to by many religious.
Great posts. I was going to reply to some of the previous ones, but I don't think I could do as good a job as you have here!
S
#55
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Hill overlooking the SE Melbourne suburbs
Posts: 16,622
Re: Gillard is a true red
I think that one of the reasons why so many go to church, etc., is because having literally no authority above you is quite stressful. Imagine making serious decisions all day long, decisions that will affect the lives of millions in some cases - but there is no one to pass it up to, ever. So believing in a god allows them to have a boss again, some constant they can draw on in the difficult times.
#56
Re: Gillard is a true red
To say marriage has nothing to do with religion - why don't men in Australia have multiple wives as in other nations? What are the exact reasons why bigamy is illegal?
Why do we get married at all? what are the benefits to our society?
(I'm not religious by the way! )
Why do we get married at all? what are the benefits to our society?
(I'm not religious by the way! )
#57
Re: Gillard is a true red
To say marriage has nothing to do with religion - why don't men in Australia have multiple wives as in other nations? What are the exact reasons why bigamy is illegal?
Why do we get married at all? what are the benefits to our society?
(I'm not religious by the way! )
Why do we get married at all? what are the benefits to our society?
(I'm not religious by the way! )
Today, we see things only in legal terms and therefore it makes sense to allow gays and lesbians to marry, because in marrying they will become "equal". Of course, the ancient tradition of union between man and woman for the purposes of producing and protecting their progeny is a different thing.
One philosopher recently asked: what is wrong with inequality? What do we mean by equality? We are fundamentally all unequal. My view is that I can see no reason why gays and lesbians shouldn't be allowed to marry, but even if you call it marriage and afford them all the legal benefits of marriage, it will still not be the same intitution as that entered into by man + woman.
#58
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,396
Re: Gillard is a true red
Therefore, an argument could be made that atheism results in narrow thinking, as you put it, because people following this dogma have closed their minds to the idea of a God - even though the Bible has quite a lot of evidence for its credibility.
And so are non-Christians supporting and pushing for the internet filter. However, not all Christians and not all non-Christians support the internet filter. It's as much a "Christian-supported proposal" as it is a "non-Christian supported proposal".
So you support religious public holidays now - I thought you were an atheist!! Paganism is a religion(s) too you know..
#59
Enjoying living in Perth
Joined: Jun 2010
Location: Perth
Posts: 24
Re: Gillard is a true red
I fully agree, that is why I think unfertile men and women should also be refused the right to marry, after all what is the point? Or are you telling me that LOVE has anything to do with it?
By the way, this is Gillard's view on the subject:
http://www.samesame.com.au/news/loca...o_gay_marriage
Well I find great that she is an atheist, but I this is a bit disappointing to me...
Luis
By the way, this is Gillard's view on the subject:
http://www.samesame.com.au/news/loca...o_gay_marriage
Well I find great that she is an atheist, but I this is a bit disappointing to me...
Luis