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

Well, there are already laws passed to deal with kiddy fiddlers, in or out of the church!

Jab I go along with the general gist of what you're saying, but there are two specific things Id like to toouch on.

"No time to deal with the *kiddy fiddlers* in the Chruch though I see.

and

"UK population of Christians is millions,


The UK population is in the millions Yeah, and Im a vase of bananas.

Thing is that's how easy it is to be a christian you just say "I am" a bit like Emily Howard saying she's a lady. Except far easier because to be a christian you dont have to go to all the trouble of finding womens clothes in big sizes like you do if you are a rubbish transvestite.

Which does relate to the other bit if you have just been released from prison for any manner of sexual or violent offence all you need to do is turn up at a church and say hello Im a christian and they have to let you become one of the congregation. If your parole or sex offenders registration says you have to anounce this to people like the vicar they still have to accept you, something to do with all that forgiveness lark.

Now Im all for admiting and atoning for your wrong doing then being rehabilitated stuff

Thing is the church or rather different branches of it is allowing sex offenders into its community its, its family, its organisation without a organised child protection policy in place in every church. Last I heard they had drawn one up and were urging different branches of the communion to take it up. Not demanding or forcing, but urging

Laws? No, it does not mean they are going to try for any new laws, just piss and moan about the ones we have. They's rather have a 'coffee morning natter about a TV show' well covered by broadcasting standards, than say, seek to deal with criminals that damage children, and then schedule a real debate in Parliament; too busy making wise cracks about marking time until the next election.

The BBC did a public broadcast service, by bringing a different medium to the great unwashed. It did not put Jesus on the cross now did it?

My church has a child protection policy, and I'm rather surprised to hear that there are churches which don't have them. At Barton Evangelical Church (the one I attend), to work with the kiddies you have to sign the church CPP and get the 'enhanced disclosure' thingy which involves the police check and all that malarky. I can't think of the proper name for it, but it's the same thing that teachers have to get (and I have to have it for work as well, as we have under-18s using our library and staying on campus over the summer!).

David

The church is a family and that's not my view its the churches. They encourage the parishoners to be friendly with each other. There's a difference between library users and staff, but the lines are blurred in a setting where people are seen as a single group.The child protection policy which it is important to have for staff and volunteers in other settings is hopefully going to be extended to encompass all areas of church life because of the nature of the relationships people can easily build up and the way people are off their guard in churches and during associated events.

Not everyone will have to have Criminal Records Bueaurau Checks "CRB" but it will mean that churches especially those with known sex offenders amongst the congrgation look carefully at their procedures to take any steps necessary to prevent risk of abuse.

one love

I thought pretty much any organisation dealing with children needed a child protection policy or oficer, though I'm not sure whether such a policy would necessarily (or even usually) extend to preventing membership of the organisation by a known offender if they were not going to have unfettered access to children.

I know one of my *caving clubs* is likely to ban sub-18 membership (unless maybe if a child was always going to attend events with a parent or guardian) to avoid the hassle of having to designate a child protection officer, so I wouldn't have thought churches would be in a better position, given their nature and the ages of children attending.

Like I said earlier its not to stop registered offenders joining. why shouldnt they join its a club that worships a God who murdered the first born in Egypt for just beiing first born and Egyptian they probably feel an affinity with senseless violence and harming the young and innocent.

The policy is to make sure that offenders in the congregation dont have opportunity to offend.

Child protection is a fairly easy thing to introduce (you can get online guides and even policies you seemly read sign up to and implement from National Governing Bodies, RFU the FA etc... but it does mean restructuring some of what you do to fall in line with good practice.

Thing is the church does not tell children about the dark hearts of its congrgation some of them say christians are lovely, which isnt always the truth. Giving that message whilst doing their utmost to make children safe. is something the church is notoriously bad at.

one love

Remember *all* Christians are perfect, well 47,000 of them apparently.

Were there even 47,000 different *people*, or just different email addresses?

There is surely on ONE email address that *really* counts and on the matter of whether or not HE was really offended, The Deity has deigned to pay us earth-bound mortals another visit.

Last time it was as a piece of toast. Is it me or are the miracles seemingly less miraculous these days?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4172689.stm

"The oyster stuck to his hand as if God was calling him, he said."




az

>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4172689.stm

It looks rather more like the distinctly un-saintly Saddam Hussein than Jesus. Also, the image appears to be wearing a Biggles-style old-fashioned flying cap with goggles. I wouldn't have thought the Christian Messiah would have modelled himself on Crazy Frog.

"UK population of Christians is millions"

How many of those are actual Christians, though, and how many are "cultural Christians" who see Christian as culturally synonymous with "British"?

Most people "inherit" their faith from their parents. Richard Dawkins wrote a naive but inherently-intelligent article a couple of years ago deploring the fact that children are born into a faith (his fundamental argument completely failed to understand how religions work - he compared them to a choice such as political ideology, failing to understand that religionists regard their faith as *an inherent and unassailable truth* and regard immediately bringing their children into their faith as a matter of urgency). Unless you are politically/spiritually/morally concientious enough to openly reject or change the religious affiliation you were handed-down from your parents then you'll probably just tick "Christian" on the census form, even if you don't believe that Christ is your personal saviour, that he was the son of God, that he died for your sins, and regularly attend church services. For that reason, there are millions of cultural-Christians (and cultural-Muslims, cultural-Jews etc) in the UK who are actually barely or even non-religious.

Unless people have very warped minds, they can't really be wishy-washy inheritors of a faith they don't really believe in, *and* at the same time regard religion as an unassailable truth needing to be indoctrinated into their kids at the first opportunity, unless they're just putting on an act to try and get their kid into the local faith school.
Presumably there's a generational effect at work - the children of a modern-day complete religious apathist may well be rather less likely to describe themselves as religious than the parents who couldn't be arsed *not* to tick '[*insert random religion*]' on a census form.

Many politically minded people regard their ideology as fundamentally correct. I don't see much of a psychological difference between religion and politics.

That Britain is a christian nation is about as true as, England being a nation of shop keepers or animal lovers. The reduction in the number of independent retailers and work load for the RSPCA, PDSA< NCDL ec... tell very different stories.

The UK is the home of football, and we love the underdog here but the expanding waisatlines of this nation and the imminent demise of many smaller football clubs shows just how passionate we really are and how we exercise or (rather dont exercise) our support for the underdog.

Our figures of speech are inert and lag way behind shifts in attitude. I meet people all the tin=me who dont feel strongly about religion and dont deal with it or think about it from day to day. Thus when they are asked about it they dall back on the description of religion that is most expressed by those in their community or more likely the community of their parents.

Its like sports commentators who spend the first week of the Olympics finding it hard to adjust from saying English Athletes to British Athletes because most of the time the athelets are competing for their home principality rahter than Great britain collectively.

People dont often think about what they are saying and just blurt out a "default" answer. Or one that springs to the lips readily eg Alan Davies on QI.

one lova

"Many politically minded people regard their ideology as fundamentally correct. I don't see much of a psychological difference between religion and politics."

There is a fundamental difference, which is that people with a political ideology merely believe it because it's what they prefer. Religion, on the other hand, claims to be a Truth and you have to like it or lump it. However, people tend to choose their religion as they would their politics - taking the religion that "makes most sense" or chimes best with their personal beliefs. I still find this quite bizarre - surely if, for example, you believe the Muslim faith utterly but don't agree with it you have to accept that your opinon does not count. In a belief sense, changing religion for the reasons I describe is assuming the entire universe and God himself will simply shift along with you. In fact, given the age of most religions, it's surely assuming that the universe always held the beliefs you now hold.

I think this is why I prefer politics as a belief system to religion.

Or you could say that the UK is a Christian nation in almost exactly the same way that we're all subjects of the Queen.

My view is simply that Britain is no longer a Christian nation, and vocal Christian groups (*cough* Christian Voice *cough*) should stop pretending that it is. Protesting laws etc. is certainly within their rights, but using 'Britain is a Christian nation, therefore...' as a starting point is just ridiculous!

And I say that as a Christian, so I can definitely understand how irritating it must be for non-believers when this assumption crops up yet again.

David

<>

You seem to be saying that it is a moral obligation to reject or change the religion one is born with! Why should this be the case? Is there a certain obligation to rebel against the parents that you think everyone should have?

(I was "brought up" atheist, so maybe that's what I did do!)

I think you're reading too much into it. I just took it as meaning that unless someone is particularly strongly motivated for some reason, the likelihood is they won't give a *conscious outright rejection* to the beliefs they are brought up with, even if they have drifted a little and don't really believe a lot of it now. I would've thought that's a pretty non-contraversial point.