Interesting article from the New York Times about lack of religious practice by Christian Europeans: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=68&e=10&u=/nyt/faithfadeswhereitonceburnedstrong My own view is that centuries of influence by religious leaders in Europe has simply worn them out. That's why the separation of church and state is a good thing.
"In France, which is predominantly Catholic but emphatically secular, about one in 20 people attends a religious service every week, compared with about one in three in the United States." I knew I liked the French...
Not really news is it? This has been going on for quite some time. I have never attended a church. And except for my grandmother maybe, I don't believe I know anyone who has. Life's a bitch eh God?
Don't know why this is news to anybody. Socialism commonly destroys or corrupts good things like work ethic, family, and religion. Heck, that's the liberal agenda in our country.
I think, errrr...hope...you forgot the sarcasm brackets.It should have looked like this: [sarcasm]Don't know why this is news to anybody. Socialism commonly destroys or corrupts good things like work ethic, family, and religion. Heck, that's the liberal agenda in our country[/sarcasm] See? Don't thank me, I'm always glad to help.
[Karl Keller] THE SKY IS FALLING!!!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!! [/Karl Keller] In case you don't get it, "lack of religious practice by Christian Europeans" applies to muslims as well.
AP - Heaven. A new study has shockingly shown that Europeans don't go to church. In related news, God has announced that European countries will no longer win the World Cup, which he would like to confer on the elect. Byron Moreno is the referee God has chosen for the 2006 final ... just to make sure.
It´s very interesting that liberalism in my country is the total opposite of socialism. It seems to have a very different meaning in the US. And it is very ture what edrocker says that religion isn´t always good. Or do you think so Daksims?
Same thing here, liberal means "a devoted to capitalism and self regulating free market". I guess it's because of McCarthy. Social democrat looks bad, above all if you look at the meaning in an american dictionary. social democracy n. A political theory advocating the use of democratic means to achieve a gradual transition from capitalism to socialism. Not at all, in the european meaning. No transition to Sovetsky Soyuz planned. Maybe in the first decades of 20th century... Anyway names are just names.
Religion's reputation probably isn't helped by the some of the antics we witness by the established churches overseas - like the catholic church telling people in Africa, which is suffering decimation in some areas from HIV/Aids, that the HIV virus can pas through a condom which is a scientific nonsense. This despite the fact that it is consigning millions of them to an early grave.
This is a complicated issue. Does it make sense to say that a given a religion contributes to good or bad behavior? Maybe. I'm not sure. What we do know is that some social conditions influence behavior. And I know people who are members of religion X who make good choices, and people who are members of religion X who make some bad choices. I also know people who are members of no religion who make good choices, and people who are members of no religion who make some bad choices. It is clear that social conditions affect behavior. That is undeniable. Even those of us with a high degree of personal will-power cannot help but be significantly shaped by the world in which we live. It also seems that most, if not all, of us have free will. For example, sometimes if one did X, one could have not done X. Gandhi had good social influences, and he also made good choices. Hitler had bad social influences (e.g. his father physically abused him), and he also made bad choices. Sometimes the amount of free will we have gets reduced by events. For example, if someone does something when he is sleep-walking. Or if someone has no food to eat so he robs a bakery. Sometimes the number of choices we are able to make gets increased by events. For example, someone who has a great education might be able to engage in more behaviors than someone with a poor education. And someone who is physically healthy might be able to engage in more behaviors than someone who is in bad health. What we should do as members of society is try to make society such that we increase the number of acts that people are able to do.
If you're saying that reducing the number of people's sexual partners is one method of reducing the increase in the level of infection of HIV/Aids you're correct. However, if you're saying that HIV/AIds can be eradicated by stopping everyone on the continent of Africa, (indeed, everyone on the planet), from having sex you're an idiot. Sensible people will realise that a more practical method of stopping the spread of the infection is required, i.e. condoms. In the light of the title of this I feel it fair to point out that the catholic church telling bald-faced lies in an effort to get people, (who are largely uneducated), NOT to use something to protect themselves from a life threatening illness simply on the basis of dogma - IS WRONG... I would say that it is probably wrong in the eyes of god but, as I'm an atheist, that's not really an issue because he doesn't exist.
There is social and economical liberalism. In Germany the liberal party (FDP) is liberal both socialy( pro imigration, pro gay rights) and economicly ( more market, less state). American liberals are for more support for the weaker members of society. This is of course a very simplified explanation.
"Liberal" as a political term in the US is basically used as a synonym for "leftist." Very different from its meaning in most of rest of the world.
It's generally thought that people who are thought to be 'on the right', (not a phrase I generally use - I prefer to discuss issues rather than positions), are hard-headed, realistic and inlikely to be given to flights of fancy. At least, that is how they like to think of themselves. People 'on the left', on the other hand, are sometimes thought to live in a utopian dream land, to think that everyone is wonderful and kind or, at least, would be if given half a chance. However, these are illusions. The reality is that it is people like you, Mr. Segroves, who deal in absolute's so the problem of Aids in Africa can be summed up simply. 'What is consigning millions to an early grave is widespread promiscious sexual activity' I may be old fashioned but this led me to believe that you think that 'What is consigning millions to an early grave is widespread promiscious sexual activity' I can see the attraction of such an idea for someone whose thought processes seem to be, (how shall I put this...), unencumbered by most forms of intellectual distraction, but I think many will see the lack of an attempt to further analyse what is a complicated and tragic situation is a flaw in your argument - to put it mildly. I'm also intrigued exactly how you know the level of sexual promiscuity for young people in Africa when compared to young people in, say, New York. My best guess is that it may be a little higher but, as J.K. Galbraith pointed out many years ago, the level of sexual activity is often a function of poverty and lack of education - Frankly, if you're poor, without a job or any hope there's nothing else to do. The real difference between these two groups is in three important areas. 1. The level of education, 2. The free availability of condoms, and, 3. Few people, including most catholics, give a rats about what the church thinks in this regard. In any event my point about the catholic churches, (and the American right's), position concerning sex education in Africa stands but, clearly, you can keep 'wishing upon a star' - or maybe you could try praying. If you do the latter you may well find yourself talking to me because, contrary to my previous statement I do believe in god. More accurately - I am god. I established this many years ago when I was praying in church - I turned around and found I was talking to myself.
He was a wise man who invented God. - Plato Man is certainly stark mad. He cannot make a worm, and yet he will be making gods by dozens. - Montaigne
" The secularization of Europe, according to some political analysts, is one of the forces pushing it apart from the United States, where religion plays a potent role in politics and society, shaping many Americans' views of the world. Americans are widely regarded as more comfortable with notions of good and evil, right and wrong, than Europeans, who often see such views as reckless. " I don't know if reckless would be the word. Simplistic would fit the bill better. It is curious as to why there has been such a shift in just a few decades. Maybe we're more cynical and less trusting of authority in general. Nobody is remotely shocked at politicians lying. In fact we expect it. No prime minister is ever held in the same reverence as is afforded to the President in the US. We don't take easily to others telling us what to do, what is right and wrong and what to believe. There is something of a stigma attached to being openly religious over here. If someone talks about Jesus everyone feels uneasy, rather like if a friend unexpectedly visits and 'subtly' turns the conversation round to the fact that he's started selling Amway products. Hearing the words "time to die"" from an amorphous voice from the dark corner of your bedroom at 3am may be horrifying enough, but it barely compares to the fear of opening your front door to an inanely grinning family asking if you've let Jesus into your life.