Neil, you raise some interesting questions. I thought Joe Hockey's opinion piece was very good although I only skimmed it quickly at work.
In the LGBT community many behave as though 'all Christians/Muslims/Buddhists' are the same. Yet we are incensed if someone says 'all those gays are the same'. And focussing on 'evangelical christians' is like focussing on 'promiscuous gays'.
I think religion is a complex social phenonemon, bound up with individual personalities and the culture of the time - and that culture is never homogeneous.
And Gus, I totally agree with you about atheism "(which I now herald as its own religion, with its own fundamentalists)". I don't regard myself as belonging to any specific religion.
'Post-christian' may be a bit of a cop out but it is probably accurate enough. I will happily attend a Catholic Mass or an Anglican service (for different reasons), and claim membership of both as it suits me.
I could be a Buddhist as well if I wasn't spreading myself too thin. As for believing in God, I can only say 'sort of' at best. So I may have to join the atheists/agnostics as well.
If I continue with my current resurgence of blogging enthusiasm you may understand where I am coming from. I have become so tired of the ignorance and prejudice of certain atheists that I was prompted to look again at my own religious roots. I value the insights that I have received from both the Anglican and Catholic Churches.
I read most of Joe's speech, and for the most part agreed with him. I'm an Atheist, having grown up with the Church of England faith, and agree that faith should be a deeply personal one.
I could go on a diatribe now to say how much Joe in his parliamentary career has completely contradicted himself, but it doesn't seem necessary.
As for your comments - to say that atheism is a religion is absurd - it doesn't even fit the definition. I've also seen 'The God Delusion', and I too bristled at Dawkins. He's arrogant, smarmy, and worse - British, but we shouldn't hold that against him (too much
( ... )
Comments 4
Reply
In the LGBT community many behave as though 'all Christians/Muslims/Buddhists' are the same. Yet we are incensed if someone says 'all those gays are the same'. And focussing on 'evangelical christians' is like focussing on 'promiscuous gays'.
I think religion is a complex social phenonemon, bound up with individual personalities and the culture of the time - and that culture is never homogeneous.
Reply
'Post-christian' may be a bit of a cop out but it is probably accurate enough. I will happily attend a Catholic Mass or an Anglican service (for different reasons), and claim membership of both as it suits me.
I could be a Buddhist as well if I wasn't spreading myself too thin. As for believing in God, I can only say 'sort of' at best. So I may have to join the atheists/agnostics as well.
If I continue with my current resurgence of blogging enthusiasm you may understand where I am coming from. I have become so tired of the ignorance and prejudice of certain atheists that I was prompted to look again at my own religious roots. I value the insights that I have received from both the Anglican and Catholic Churches.
Reply
I could go on a diatribe now to say how much Joe in his parliamentary career has completely contradicted himself, but it doesn't seem necessary.
As for your comments - to say that atheism is a religion is absurd - it doesn't even fit the definition. I've also seen 'The God Delusion', and I too bristled at Dawkins. He's arrogant, smarmy, and worse - British, but we shouldn't hold that against him (too much ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment