BS: An Easter Question

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 05:02 AM

" I have no desire to defend my faith. I only want to live it. It's the tradition I grew up in, and I like it. It's part of me"

A problem some people on this site have is that most, if not all, religions seeks to set parameters to how even non believers have to live their lives. They seek the opportunity to indoctrinate children into their way of thinking, they seek to control who we can have sex with and the way in which that sex is conducted. They seek to control our lives. Full stop. They tell us fairy tales which they cannot justify and when the stupidity of those are exposed they move the goalposts and say we didn't actually mean that bit ........... here's a new bit.

You can do as you please Joe and good luck to you, but please don't try to pass on your belief to other people it is superfluous in an enlightened age.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 05:36 AM

"enlightened age" (surely some mistake? Ed).

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 05:39 AM

There have been so many such threads.

I thought we were discussing an Easter question. There have not been many such threads about that. Are you saying it is acceptable to bring a persons previous posting history into play instead of addressing the actual points involved?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 05:44 AM

Sorry Akenaton I should have remembered that there are people here who are not, and never will be, enlightened.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 05:52 AM

Raggytash :0)......but I was actually referring to the current attitudes on abortion and same sex relationships which you alluded to and which are far from "enlightened"

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 06:02 AM

This is very disappointing. As ever, I tend aim my fire at Catholicism in general, mostly confining criticism of individuals to "if the cap fits." Joe comes back after a weekend mini-break (perhaps he missed seeing some of the light-hearted banter that went on while he was away) and before you know it his guns are ablaze, calling me patronising names (gosh, I was a bit weak there with my Holy Joe riposte...) and misrepresenting me (actually, if anything, worse than that: ascribing remarks to me that I've never made). Now he drags Dave in to boot, and he goes for Musket, who hasn't posted for over a week to the thread, and even then hardly in the warlike manner Joe indicates. Keith then wades in and tries to up the ante by confusing belligerence and forthrightness. You have it in a nutshell, Raggytash. And it's significant that the breach of the peace comes from the religious "side." They sure seem to be missing those heresy laws. Bad form, chaps. You can't discuss the pros and cons of religion with believers in one corner and dissidents in the other without being forthright. But you can retain your dignity and cool. That's what we're supposed to be doing in the brave new world, no?

I'll say it again for your benefit, Joe Offer: you don't have to defend your faith in front of me. I've lost count of the number of times I've defended your right to believe what you like, including in this very thread. It's entirely your business. When you decide to propagate it as faith to other people, it might become ours. If you choose to discuss your beliefs in the open, you can expect comeback. Your extensive training should enable you to handle that with a cool head. That's the only place I'm coming from.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Senoufou
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 06:50 AM

Oh dear. I had an idea that starting this thread (albeit lightheartedly) would end in acrimony and unpleasantness.

I agree that one can discuss and put forward a viewpoint about someone's religion or atheism in a robust way. Airing views is interesting.

I don't agree that one can be insulting (yes there are insults on this thread) unkind, vituperative or scathing.

I was really enjoying the posts on here, thinking how lovely that we can all entertain each other for over 200 posts and talk about subjects very dear to our hearts without becoming nasty. It was looking as if the whole thread could dance along in the spirit of friendliness, as the topics in the Music Section above usually proceed.

But no. Same as usual. I feel very sad and a bit ashamed that I started all this!

I'm sorry Joe that you feel your religious beliefs have been rudely disparaged. I have every respect for all religions (including my husband's Islam) and I also quite see how atheists come to their conclusions about a non-provable belief system. I don't think anyone has been patronising on here, but maybe I have been rather flippant about some of the stories in the Bible. If so,I'm truly sorry.

I'm a bit naive to have thought that the new rule about being a member would make this section more gentle and friendly, without detracting from the high level of discussion I've always enjoyed.

Ah well, "Dew yew keep on a-troshing tergether..."

(Norfolk for 'onwards and upwards')

Senoufou

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 07:03 AM

Senoufou, you have every reason to be flippant about stories in the bible. They are just that, stories. I used to like Hansel and Gretel but I wouldn't base my life on it.

The story I like most from the bible is about Moses and his motorbike.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 07:37 AM

Well I did think that "dearest Steve" (twice, once after my protestations) and "Steviebaby" were patronising and hardly designed with keeping the peace in mind.   If it's about setting a tone, that isn't the way to do it. I've attacked ideas on this thread, not individuals. And I've said what my ideas are, and you're free to attack them back. That is the way it should be. Instead, Joe, you accuse us of caricaturing religion and say it's like having a conversation with Donald Trump. You referred to "my protestations that in Great Britain, such insults are considered to be friendly banter, I don't think most Britons would agree" when I never said any such thing, or anything like it. You don't like religion threads, that's clear. But try not to have us thinking that you're out to shut them down just because you feel got at. The only thing that's sacred to me is the truth, and the only path to truth I see is via evidence and reason. I don't have a naturally thick skin but I find that helps.

And Dave, where's me bloody ten bob!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 07:52 AM

:-D Did you not get it? A very nice man in Nigeria said that if I sent him my bank details he would get it to you! Can't trust anyone nowadays.

Talking of which, isn't there something in the bible stories about bearing false witness? Or is it wearing false fishnets? I can't remember.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 07:57 AM

And, Eliza. Don't worry. It happens all the time. I have opened threads on the most innocuous subjects only to watch them turn into bar room brawls. At least yours is still open! Keep yer pecker up. Or maybe that can be controversial too..? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 07:58 AM

Steve, you have joined the other "usual suspects" for years in ridiculing those of us who have a faith, in fact you have often been the instigator of such ridicule.

Personally I find myself unable to accept large portions of religion like the rising from the dead or an afterlife. I do see the value of a moral code while we are alive.

However I do not see the need to ridicule those who do chose to have a religious faith and if I were to write on issues that I am opposed to as you and your friends do on religion,you people would be the very first to complain and start name calling.
"men in frocks", "your invisible friend", "religious child abuser" may seem funny to you, but to people of faith, they are extremely insulting.   As you have no way of proving any of the charges you make against believers, I suggest you leave them to believe what makes them better people.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 08:07 AM

"men in frocks" = Men wearing vestments that can be described as frocks.

"your invisible friend" = Has anyone seen god? Is it visible?

"religious child abuser" = There are plenty about.

As you have no way of proving any of the charges you make against believers,

Errr, I think I just did.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 08:09 AM

Tell you what Akenaton, I'll stop when religion ceases to have an input on my life in any way, shape or form. Until then I retain to right to slag it off as I see fit.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 08:34 AM

What do you mean, those of us who have a faith? I thought you were an atheist!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:04 AM

By "us" I mean members of this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:14 AM

My brother in law is a full time pro evangelical minister with his own church and congregation.
I'd guess I'd probably have not his first choice for seducing his sister away from the flock

[..errrr....but she did seem very keen and an enthusiastic learner...]

I meet him every now and then for family gatherings I can't get out of,
and I've seen him preaching and speachifying...

He's a decent sharply intelligent bloke with a very funny sarcastic sense of humour.

I'm aware of some of his fixed church views on certain keycontentious issues.

But away from his job, at family meals or restaurants we get on ok, as we never have discussed religion.

On the other hand one of the other ministers who proceeded over the wedding of my wife's nephew,
was a very nasty hostile piece of work.. instantly dislikable in his intolerance.
His sermon at the wedding even had believers cringing and wincing...
He definitely made it clear how much he he despised 'feminists' when outlining the wifely virtues...

I wish I had a recording of that vile shite's sermon for evidence, because it still leaves a bad taste when I think of it...

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:18 AM

Raggytash, what particular aspects of religion have an impact on your life?....Religion has no impact on my life.
I can choose which parts to accept and which to reject.
If I choose to reject it all I am at liberty to do so.
I do not feel the need to ridicule those who think differently.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:24 AM

PFR Misogyny is not confined to members of the clergy. I myself have been accused of being a misogynist by a very intelligent member of this forum, because I did not believe Mrs Clinton was "Presidential material"

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:30 AM

Religion has no impact on my life. I can choose which parts to accept and which to reject.

How do you reject Sunday trading laws? Or the 26 unelected Bishops that sit in house of Lords and decide our fates? Or the fact that some of our national holidays are of religious significance?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:40 AM

Or the numerous radio and TV programmes every day or Cameron spouting on about a Christian country we all live in (which incidentally is nonsense, how many "Christians" actually attend a church)or swearing the bible in a court of law. I could go on, at length but it's all been said before.

Religion is deeply engrained in our daily life whether you accept it or not.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:41 AM

"proceeded"... ????

of course I meant to type "presided"....

I need a strong mug of black tea.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 09:48 AM

I remember the euphoria of Tony Blair becoming prime minister... until he publicly declared he was a christian...

Cameron's recent televised tripe about us being a christian country had me shouting at the telly like a lefty Alf Garnett... 😠

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 10:13 AM

Dave,

I thought we were discussing an Easter question.

Not for some time. The thread was made into another anti religion bash.

Are you saying it is acceptable to bring a persons previous posting history into play instead of addressing the actual points involved?

Previous posting history on the current issue, yes of course.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 10:20 AM

"The thread was made into another anti religion bash"

Perhaps then you can start to understand how those of us who do not subscribe to any given religion feel about the constant, incessant, unrelenting religious battering we get on a daily basis.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 10:23 AM

No.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 10:23 AM

Sorry Keith. I forgot that you kept a set of secret rules just for these purposes. Using the phraseology from another thread, my bad.

Tell me something though. Does it not get a bit boring playing a game that only you know the rules for?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 10:38 AM

Raggytash, the things you mention don't impact on my life at all.
They may make some people slightly annoyed, but "impact", isn't that a bit strong?
What sort of life is damaged by such an impact?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 11:04 AM

A very serious impact of religion on millions of people's lives is what is unashamedly my biggest beef with religion. Tiny babies are signed up into religions the world over. No choice there. Typically, they will spend the next decade and a half, or more, being force-fed the dogma of their parents' particular faith. This will be reinforced strongly by religious miseducation in schools and by clerics performing religious rituals in religious buildings in which the children will be told that mythology is the unalloyed truth and will be made to chant prayers or sing hymns which are full of certainties. No choice there either. Now many of us who went through all this (and my personal experience was relatively benign compared to many) managed to shake it off as adults. Many do not. Any choice they may have in the matter is swept under the carpet. Next time you speak to a Muslim, ask them what the penalty is for apostasy, then still tell me if you think they have free choice.

Organised religions depend on this early-life recruitment. Of all the disagreeable aspects of religion, that must be by far the worst (at least since they stopped burning people at the stake for heresy or imprisoning scientists). We are confronted by obscene terminology such as Muslim children, Catholic children and Protestant children. But without it there would be no organised religion to speak of. Very few adults in their right minds who had been properly educated, as opposed to brainwashed, would willingly sign up. Otherwise intelligent and caring parents see nothing wrong with their children being taught that the faith they themselves happened, by sheer accident of birth, to be born into is the only true one.   

In the above I have not parodied or caricatured religion. There is no ridicule and there is no personal attack. I have not said that it's wrong to have belief. When I say these things, as so often I do, the usual response from believers is shifty denial. Seldom is any convincing justification put forward for these scurrilous practices. My view is that they know that there isn't any justification, but it doesn't seem to matter to them because their religious practices with their children, no matter how morally shaky, are generally wrapped up inside a warm and fuzzy community ethos. Well to me that isn't right. In fact, it's abusive. Free choice, which religion fears, would consist of neutral and comprehensive education about world religions, which I'd heartily support, and a no-pressure invitation to sign up as adults only. The right thing, but zero chance of it ever happening.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 11:05 AM

Hell, Dave, the Professor doesn't know the rules of his OWN game!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 11:35 AM

Well in my world, I know of no one who is forced to practice religion, or to think Christianity is the only or true religion.

Where I live and I suppose the rest of the UK one can choose religion or reject it, personally I think there is good and bad in religion, but the good certainly outweighs the bad.
I know a few atheist/agnostic families where one or more of the children have turned to a faith based life and some devout families who's children have rejected religion.

I think perhaps you have got the whole issue completely out of proportion, obsessiveness can eventually become a serious problem when there is nothing to reinforce it.
It is surely all a matter of personal choice, after all, "faith" is not about to make anyone ill?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 11:58 AM

Faith is not about to make anyone ill? It can make you very ill if you happen to be a member of the wrong faith in the wrong place!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 12:28 PM

It's perfectly clear that my post went right over your head, akenaton. Try listening, but failing that don't bother to respond.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 12:34 PM

I walked into towwn for a pint. I passed one defunct catholic church, I could see aan abbey and protestant I church saw three union flags on this bit. I crossed the bridge aand could see another catholic church and another two protestant churches. Two English flags and a Scottish soltaire. I then passed aa methodist church and a c of e chapel. In the pub they are selling abbey ale and when I sneezed three people said bless you

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: DMcG
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 01:55 PM

As you say, Steve, you make that argument frequently and consistently. And we disagree. And we both know where that leads.

So for a change of perspective, don't you think we also indoctrinate children with other beliefs - consumerism, patriotism, free markets and the like, which can also have huge impact? Are they also abusive? I don't see anything as many posts about those.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 02:02 PM

Firstly apologies for the typing on the previous post. My android is contrary to say the least.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 02:04 PM

Maybe we need reports and evidence from mental health researchers
as to which of these institutionalised forms of societal indoctrination
are significant factors in most prevalent diagnosed mental health problems... ???

I might risk betting that religion screws up more individuals...

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 02:05 PM

Keith, I am not in the least surprised by your post of 10.23. In fact it was everything I expected of you.









Isn't religion a wonderful, all embracing thing. A delight to behold in all it's golden glory.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 02:21 PM

don't you think we also indoctrinate children with other beliefs - consumerism, patriotism, free markets and the like, which can also have huge impact? Are they also abusive?

Yes.

But that doesn't mitigate the role of religion.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: DMcG
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 02:31 PM

That's nice and clear, Greg.i agree it doesn't mitigate the role of religion. But we have discussed that to death. What's your explanation of why we ignore all the other things you consider child abuse?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 03:25 PM

"As you say, Steve, you make that argument frequently and consistently. And we disagree."

There are lots of arguments embedded, not just the one. It's typical of the defensive Christian to lump them together dismissively. Unfortunately, that is exactly what your post does. "Frequently and consistently." Gosh, you sound almost bored. And why NOT frequently and consistently? One day I may just get an honest response that doesn't waffle about deeper truths and things held sacred and that what Christians do to the children who are future of this planet is none of my business. But you absolutely don't owe it to me. Just like I don't owe it to you to stop making what I consider to be a fair case against the terrible harm that religion does to people.

"And we both know where that leads"

That is just negative. I'm happy to keep making the case. You're free to ignore. Look what's happened on this probably-doomed thread. Who's set the tone for the crash to come? It does not have to happen. Everyone here is free to rise above the crap. You, me and Joe, right? "We both know where that leads" almost sounds like a threat.

"So for a change of perspective, don't you think we also indoctrinate children with other beliefs - consumerism, patriotism, free markets and the like, which can also have huge impact? Are they also abusive? I don't see anything as many posts about those."

I absolutely couldn't agree more. Pity you're not here to hear me burbling on incessantly to Mrs Steve about exactly all those things. Unfortunately, I don't usually start threads. I suppose that makes it my fault that we don't discuss 'em enough. My wrist is considering itself slapped.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 03:49 PM

Of the 3 you mention,cousin McGnome, I would only class patriotism as coming close to indoctrination and to that to any child is wrong. The other 2 are economic constructs which, as a child, I had neither clue nor interest in. When I began to study economics and politics at around 16 we were taught consumerism, free markets, socialism, communism and everything in between. If religion was taught in such a comparitive way I would have no issue. I am told it is now like that now but, like Steve, I was brought up in 1950s Catholicism and, prior to that, Russian Orthodoxy. I would like to say it did me no harm but some would agree to differ ;-) I wouldn't like to risk it happening to my own children and grandchildren so, I hope, I gave them the wherwithall to make up their own minds. Seems to have worked out OK.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: DMcG
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 05:20 PM

I wasn't being dismissive, or lumping arguments together, and I was certainly not being threatening, Steve. The "we know where that leads" comment was simply observing past history. You yourself said "when I make these points, as I frequently do" and i was just agreeing with you. I also acknowledged your consistency.. (Consistently is not the same as constantly, obviously). As for boredom, I admit to that, because I don't think I have read anything especially new on this topic on mudcat for some years.

Which is why I made the point that actually we indoctrinate children all the time in lots of different ways, so it is interesting why we only ever seem to address one form.

I think I'd take up punkfolkrocker's bet, because you can't just look at individuals. You have to think of things like smog in cities because of overuse of cars (because, after all, we've got the money so why shouldn't we have a car?.) Maybe ISIS will prove me wrong by grabbing nuclear weapons somehow, but I would think out-of-control consumerism is more likely to damage us as a species than religion.


Dave of the Gnomish qualities: I did not mean we are formally teaching consumerism in
Economics lessons in schools: I meant how every advert, many children's programmes and, of course, adult example teaches children to be avid consumers. Schools, if anything, are one of the few forces trying to hold this back by encouraging children to "think green" but it is them against the rest of society.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 06:01 PM

Aye, there is that. One of my proudest moments was when my second eldest was about 14 and he refused to wear a branded tracksuit:-) Surely it is not beyond the wit of other parents to instill the same ethos?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 06:06 PM

" As for boredom, I admit to that, because I don't think I have read anything especially new on this topic on mudcat for some years."

You're supposed to wade in, not just read. Never admit to boredom. You have the choice to avoid threads that bore you. Yet here you are, commenting on issues that you say bore you. You love it really! Read what people say. It isn't all the same. There's nuance, There's different angles. There's always a lot to learn.

Start threads on those other issues. I'll be right with you. But this thread is about religion and I didn't start it!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 06:20 PM

just some idle thoughts.. again back to my student days in the early 80s....

In literature, plays, movies, etc... frequently encountered characters were "lapsed catholics":
driving the drama though angst, bitterness, confusion, guilt, etc, they were suffering...

What ever the situation, scenario of the dramatic story, they certainly didn't seem to be very happy people...

Maybe a lot of writers of fiction were catholics...???

Irrespective of denomination..
I recall religious guilt as being very problematic for characters dealing with adolescent confused sexuality..

"Oranges are not the only Fruit" being a notable example..

In a 1960s - 80s culture where I grew through various forms of brainwashing,
religion seemed to me to be the most overt form of attempted control..
thankfully offset to some extent by popular media presenting stories and characters fighting back against it....

If I was 35 years younger I'd be able to knock off a 2000 word essay on this between now and tomorrow breakfast,
get on my bike, and hand it in to the lecturer 2 mins before deadline... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Apr 16 - 06:43 PM

What's your explanation of why we ignore all the other things you consider child abuse?

'Cause nobody starts a thread on 'em? Be my guest.   ;>)

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Apr 16 - 02:24 AM


You're supposed to wade in, not just read. Never admit to boredom. You have the choice to avoid threads that bore you. Yet here you are, commenting on issues that you say bore you.

The boredom comes from the predictability of the responses, and counter-responses, and counter-counter-responses.   There are other ways of avoiding boredom, such as raising an aspect that we haven't discussed before, such as, for example, why one form of indoctrination is discussed all the time and others are completely ignored.

It's a bit too easy to say I could raise threads on these other aspects, or that this thread is about religion. Of course I could do so. But that does not address the issue why there is such a disparity in the behaviours. A thread could be on any topic and if some people see a legitimate reason to reference what they see as religious child abuse they will do so. I am not objecting to that. If it is legitimate, bring it in. But they (almost) never throw in that they think the US is indoctrinating children with its daily pledge of allegiance, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 16 - 06:21 AM

Well way back in the dim and distant past I DID rail against that as a matter of fact.

The reason we home in on Catholicism or Christianity is because that happens to be the background of most people here. I can read about Islam, for example, but I haven't had that lifelong learn-as-you-go immersion in it that would enable me to comment on it as fruitfully as I can on the faith that was foisted on me from birth. I'm guessing that that applies to most people here. I'm not scared of talking about Islam, but I wonder how many people here would feel comfortable as rank outsiders in extensively criticising its practices on this forum. I doubt that the mods would love us for doing that either. We talk more about Christianity because, to some degree, most of us are insiders.

Incidentally, one of the absurdities of religion is the routine enforced chanting of prayers. At school we did the morning offering, grace before meals and one or two others that escape me now. At my secondary school one Salesian brother even had us doing the Angelus if we happened to be in his lesson at noon. I can say with considerable confidence that absolutely none of it ever stuck with any of us. It was no more than inane jumping through hoops. I see the US pledge in the same way. These things shouldn't happen but they're hardly going to deprave or corrupt their victims. Religion, so adept at loading guilt on to people and making escape difficult, has far more insidious ways of exerting control.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 16 - 06:22 AM

Grrr.