-? one thing that I find fascinating is the fact there is alot more tolerance shown to individuals in europe and canada, than here in the USA. Some put it down to church and moral issues.
But we as europeans etc are we less moral or just more understanding and tolerant.
Always thought the church was meant to teach tolerance and understand, but here it seems to be very intolerant. I don't particulally care if a person is gay or that someone that is so ill looks to other means to find a cure.
Maybe its a lack of exposure. I don't know.
European christianity used to have a great deal of intolerance associated with it. And I'm not just talking about the crusades and colonialism but as recently as the Second World War when the Catholic church in countries like Poland cast a blind eye as to what was happenning to the Jews.
And religion is still a factor of intolerance in Northern Ireland. So I don't think Europe can claim particular moral superiority.
The United States was founded by people fleeing religious persecution from Europe. And then many of the Baptist movements that flourished through the south and many other parts of the States were breakaway movements from Massachussetts puritans.
The history of these communities are by their nature insular and suspicious of outsiders. They came to America to practice freely.
The difference is that in modern times, while Europe and countries like Canada and Australia has become secular, (Britain is positively atheistic with one of the lowest church attendances in Europe) America is still a religious country and apparently becoming more so all the time.
The dillemma is that America is supposed to be a sectarian state too.
But it isn't. And those religious movements feel persecuted by those sectarians - read liberals. And that to me is why the intolerant right-wing and religious movements have grown hand-in-hand.
But we as europeans etc are we less moral or just more understanding and tolerant.
More understanding and tolerant? Less hung up about the particular branch of Christianity that my neighbour practices, maybe. I don't particularly care if someone's Lutheran, Southern Baptist, Baptist, Pentecostal, Seventh-Day Adventist, Reformed Pentecostal, or what ever branch of Christianity they follow. Whereas to a follower of that specific faith, all other versions of Christianity are Just Plain Wrong. I could care less what people do. American Christianity is all about intolerance, revenge and picking the juiciest bits of Leviticus to follow.
I feel it's because this country is so young in comparison.
So what it's going through now (in a timeline sense) is not unlike the issues Europe went through with similar issues a 100 years ago...
But because Europe is so old it has gone past the "chastity belt" phase...
Anyone know of a ranch for sale in Spain?
;)
(Britain is positively atheistic with one of the lowest church attendances in Europe) America is still a religious country and apparently becoming more so all the time.
I don't agree that Britain is atheistic. Very few people are actually atheists (ISTR that 5% is an oft-quoted number), and there is a huge interest in spirituality in the UK.
I don't think it's a good idea to compare British Christianity with American (midwest and Bible-belt) Christianity. A high proportion of Americans latch onto Christianity because they want to belong to a Christian community - they are not necessarily interested in living out a Christian life. It's very different in the UK - no one here goes to church "for show" anymore, but there are plenty of thriving and growing churches and there are lots of converts to Christianity.
) This is a good topic lol.
Maczippy I do know someone that does do large property sales in Spain lol. I agree with you as well, this is a young country. I always laugh at my friends here telling them, give you another hundred years and yea be just like England.
I do see people here going to Church as a Social thing more than living "the Christain Life style" sort of the old church net work lol.
But looking at the news this morning they kept talking about Christain right winning the vote. So how can you say you have a separated Church and State?
When you talk about so called Moral issues ie abortion etc, surely your religious position should not come into it. You should be acting on whats best for the country, not be worried that your preacher will be phoning you up and ticking you off.
I have often asked some of my religious friends, if the ten commandments say "do not kill" why do we still kill in the name of any religion. None have been able to ever answer that question. Because there is no answer.
(Britain is positively atheistic with one of the lowest church attendances in Europe) America is still a religious country and apparently becoming more so all the time.
I don't agree that Britain is atheistic. Very few people are actually atheists (ISTR that 5% is an oft-quoted number), and there is a huge interest in spirituality in the UK.
.
The largest growing religion is the Muslim. And although many people claim to be of the Christian faith they rarely attend church or pray.
Muslims in Great Britain are asking for greater representation in the House of Lords, based on the apparent fact that there are more practicing Muslims in Britain today than practicing Anglicans. This from the Hindustan Times:
More people in Britain attend mosques than the Church of England. It is for the first time that Muslims have overtaken Anglicans. According to figures 930,000 Muslims attend a place of worship at least once a week, whereas only 916,000 Anglicans do the same. Muslim leaders are now claiming that, given such a rise of Islam in Britain, Muslims should receive a share of the privileged status of the Church of England.
Muslims should receive a share of the privileged status of the Church of England.
What does that mean though? Do you think Muslim leaders want to take up a seat in the House of Lords? I'm not sure that that would even be legally possible or desirable (swearing allegiance to the Queen, Defender of the Faith, and all that), but I was always of the understanding that the various faith-based groups in the UK were more than happy to be represented in the Lords by the bishops. It's not as if the C of E bishops are radical in any way, and their pressure for the Commons to put consideration into moral matters is something that is not in conflict with non-Christian denominations.
As far as the other privileges, Muslim leaders play their part in state occasions such as Remembrance Sunday and usually have at least the same level of involvement as leaders of free churches and the RCC.
Surely the best thing to do in Britain would be to disestablish the church of England, and separate church and state.
The current Labour administration wants to reform the house of lords anyway, so they can remove the bishops when they do it. Then, any muslim, christian, hindu, buddhist or whatever leaders can stand for election to the new house of lords like anyone else.
Muslims should receive a share of the privileged status of the Church of England.
What does that mean though? Do you think Muslim leaders want to take up a seat in the House of Lords? I'm not sure that that would even be legally possible or desirable (swearing allegiance to the Queen, Defender of the Faith, and all that), but I was always of the understanding that the various faith-based groups in the UK were more than happy to be represented in the Lords by the bishops. It's not as if the C of E bishops are radical in any way, and their pressure for the Commons to put consideration into moral matters is something that is not in conflict with non-Christian denominations.
As far as the other privileges, Muslim leaders play their part in state occasions such as Remembrance Sunday and usually have at least the same level of involvement as leaders of free churches and the RCC.
What does it mean?
I suspect they want to participate on an equal footing with the C of E.
Eventually the Queen may lose her status and what power she still posseses. Times are changing rapidly.
The US may be the only country that will survive the Muslim takeover.
Surely the best thing to do in Britain would be to disestablish the church of England, and separate church and state.
The current Labour administration wants to reform the house of lords anyway, so they can remove the bishops when they do it. Then, any muslim, christian, hindu, buddhist or whatever leaders can stand for election to the new house of lords like anyone else.
I don't think anyone (MPs, the Church of England, other Christian churches, non-Christian churches, the scientific and medical communities, etc.) really wants this though. Hopefully, idealogy will not get a chance to over-rule pragmatism and common sense. The bishops do a good job in the House of Lords and they don't abuse their position. What's the problem?
Well, Ameriscot I was basing my observations about the UK on church attendance figures, which are indisputably the lowest in Europe and personal experience.
I'm afraid I don't know one overtly religious person in the UK, while I know several here in Canada, mainly devout Catholics (who are in the majority here). But I'm perfectly willing to stand corrected.
Surely the best thing to do in Britain would be to disestablish the church of England, and separate church and state.
The current Labour administration wants to reform the house of lords anyway, so they can remove the bishops when they do it. Then, any muslim, christian, hindu, buddhist or whatever leaders can stand for election to the new house of lords like anyone else.
I don't think anyone (MPs, the Church of England, other Christian churches, non-Christian churches, the scientific and medical communities, etc.) really wants this though. Hopefully, idealogy will not get a chance to over-rule pragmatism and common sense. The bishops do a good job in the House of Lords and they don't abuse their position. What's the problem?
Whats the problem?
The same problem we have in Canada. In our case the Senate.
In both bodies the members are not elected by the people.
Church attendance is a very crude tool to use when comparing levels of Christianity in different countries - almost useless. Unfortunately, it's the easiest one to measure.
Shouldn't the next Archbishop of Canterbury come from an African country?
http//deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595100851,00.html
And what would be the problem?