h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,7369,1224048,00.html

I'd like to keep my political insitutions nicely secular thank you very much. Call me a godless heathen, but what really is the point of trying to squeeze God into the new European Constitution?


I can't say I'm shocked to see The Vatican has a hand in this.

Ludicrous. Anyone would think we were still living in the eighteenth century.

How can I vote in favour of a nonsecular constitution?

Noggin

Yeah the origings of modern Europe are really down to the Catholic Moors in Spain and city states of Greece

God botherers

one love

The French constitution specifically seperates Church and State, thus all the fuss about the wearing or displaying of religious symbols in schools or state institutions.

In other words this fish won't fly.

If it helps delay the 'constitutional treaty' negotiations, though, I shall regard the debacle as containing a distinct element of serendipity.

It occurs to me, though, that a thorough reference of Europe's religious roots could hardly omit the classical deities; after all, the Roman Empire covered a great deal of what now constitutes the E.U. Member States -- and then there's the Graeco-Roman cultural impact.

Given the amount of Japanese technology to be found in Western European homes in modern times, moreover, and its consequent cultural importance in modern Europe, perhaps a passing reference to Shinto wouldn't go amiss.

Or possibly a New Age approach: all E.U. meetings henceforth to take place in the presence of crystals, jossticks, dream catchers and an effigy of Avalokitesvara -- modern, multicultural, and suitably vacuous.

-- RFJS__, who ironically has just finished revising Kierkegaard's 'Fear and Trembling'.

"cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe"

sums it up rather nicely, I think. What's wrong with that?

I've nothing against Christianity, but let's keep church and state as separate as possible....


Otto

What exactly does 'humanist' mean, and what would its role be in the 'constitutional treaty'?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=humanist

Hmmm.

Ok, the hippies would have us believe that age of Pisces (roughly speaking, the past 2,000 years) ended in the 60s with the dawning of the age of Aquarius, age of Aquarius, Aquariuuuuuuuuuuuuus.

Sorry, got carried away there. The age of Pisces was supposed to be the age of Christianity - Pisces, the fish; Jesus, fisher of men. Aquarius was supposed to be a new age of reason, tolerance, open-mindedness, etc.

Seems like the fish isn't going into the net without a fight.

Here is the Humanist view of Church and State: http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/bullough_16_2.html

One of the aspects of Humanism the betterment of mankind through peace, understanding, compassion, and education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
There are actually three (at least) forms of Humanism; Secular Humanism, Religious Humanism, and Christian Humanism.

The Secular Humanists don't believe in God, but in the Brotherhood of Man.
"Regarding political matters, Secular Humanism seeks to keep the government separate from the influence of any particular religion in order that rules developed under secularism may be universally applied."

Religious Humanists: "While retaining a number of religious beliefs and/or practices, religious humanism still gives human interests, values, and worth a central place."

Christian Humanism: "Choose to identify themselves as Christians after some thought on the subject (ie, not simply as an inherited label or nominal religious classification); Find themselves largely in agreement with the positive aspirations of modern humanism as expressed in such writings as the Humanist Manifesto III; May or may not believe in a transcendent realm or an immortal component of human existance (soul), or may remain agnostic on the matter, but do believe that good conduct in this life is of greater importance than such belief." http://www.christianhumanism.org/whatis.shtml

http://www.iheu.org/resolutions/resolutions_worldpolicy.html
"The humanist movement applies to all men and women who recognise the realities and needs of the time to work for the enlightenment and emancipation which are the spiritual conditions of a world order, without which mankind cannot prosper, and may not survive."

I hope the treaty writers know all that... Actually, I'm quite cynical enough to suspect that they do, and deliberately chose a suitably vague word that would lend itself to expedient interpretations, or simply that would be as close to vacuity as possible.

Not that 'religious', or indeed 'Christian', are words on whose precise definitions everyone would agree.

It does seem bizarre that a religion originally only for Jewish people, developed in the middle east, should have any bearing on Europe whatsoever.

Life can be bizarre, but this bearing is just a consequence of the spread of ideas and the interaction of cultures over time; and Christianity is a missionary religion anyway. Cultures do influence each other, ideas do spread; that's hardly unusual. It's a historical fact that Christianity's impact on European history has been immense; however, it doesn't necessarily follow from that that the proposed lines should be included in the 'constitutional treaty'.

This issue reared its ugly head a while ago, the Vatican pushing for pretty much the same lines. Although one could say that the Roman church ans its offshoots were the big dogs on the block there are just too many other traditions that contributed to the fundamental heritage of Europe. Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Germanic, etc. pagans, Muslims, Jews all of these were vital to history. It would be a difficult task to try and list everybody, and then we would have squabbles over the order. Best to leave it out.

Funny that we are having a constitutional crises over this at the same time that the weight of votes becomes an issue. I smell conspiracy...

Yep, the pagans were here long before the christians and we will still be long after they leave.

Am working my way through several texts by Freidrich Nietzsche for an essay - now there's a man who had took a dim view of religion in general!