Is religion relevant in a modern day society?

SamCDKey:

I would actually not consider India to be third world,

Thats not what people thought in 1947

I believe that investing in the growth of economic opportunities in Africa can have the same results.

See the effects of microcredit in Africa. The people have learned to survive in very adverse conditions and are excellent business people. All they need is oppportunity.

http://www.microcreditsummit.org/press/see.htm
 
I believe that investing in the growth of economic opportunities in Africa can have the same results.

Then why don't people who claim to care so much, invest their money in the damned place and leave the rest of us alone?!

If everyone who claimed to care invested, it would amount to billions of dollars a year, wouldn't it? Yet .....do ya' think they really care that much?????????

Talk is cheap!

Baron Max
 
Then why don't people who claim to care so much, invest their money in the damned place and leave the rest of us alone?!

If everyone who claimed to care invested, it would amount to billions of dollars a year, wouldn't it? Yet .....do ya' think they really care that much?????????

Talk is cheap!

Baron Max


If you like I can tell you where to send the money :)
 
Bite me, attention ho.

Nope that wasn't it - not even a glimmer there
Winnie_Winnie_1125714712.gif
 
See the effects of microcredit in Africa. The people have learned to survive in very adverse conditions and are excellent business people. All they need is oppportunity.

Soon, a Starbucks coffee hut on every corner.
 
Is religion relevant in a modern day society?
I am currently preparing for a public debate on the issue and would love to know your opinions and thoughts that may prove useful.

I can do no better than refer you to, 'Is God Relevant' by Luis Palau published (in the UK) by Hodder and Stoughton ISBN 0-340-70990-1 - I don't know about the US editions.

This is a very thought provoking book on this subject and should prove very useful to you, whether you agree with the author's conclusions or not.

Regards,



Gordon.
 
Lightgigantic:

That is rather funny, my last name is but one letter different than the priest's in that comic strip.
 
Never say never

Religion is important and relevant in society because it is a part of our lives even if we are not religious ourselves, we still ahve to interact with religous people...

On Modern society how exaclty woudl you define modern society?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
take care
zak
 
Never say never

Religion is important and relevant in society because it is a part of our lives even if we are not religious ourselves, we still ahve to interact with religous people...

On Modern society how exaclty woudl you define modern society?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
take care
zak

Firstly I would like to thank Gordon for his recommendation.

Zak. I was referring to a Western society. A so called “sophisticated” society. Of coarse religion is relevant to some people but is it generally losing its significance in the general publics hearts and minds? Is the next generation going to less religious than the last?


Nsn
 
Hi NSN

Thank you for your comments

You are right... iN ENGLAND anwyay i beleive this has a lot to do with the 80's and the thacther revolution where whe stated their is no such thing as society....and promoted people to be selfish.. Thus we lost the sense of community and the church rapidly lost its congregations etc....

Of course this may have been happening before espicaliiy sfrom and since the 60's with their happy go lucky libertaerianism but the 80's gave it another spurt of energy..... Unfortunately the breakdown of the chruch in england has led to an increase in single parent families, tennage yobery and underage pregnanacies to name but a few problems stemed from the breakdown of the chruch.

~~~~~~~~~~
take care
Zak
 
Hi NSN

Thank you for your comments

You are right... iN ENGLAND anwyay i beleive this has a lot to do with the 80's and the thacther revolution where whe stated their is no such thing as society....and promoted people to be selfish.. Thus we lost the sense of community and the church rapidly lost its congregations etc....

Of course this may have been happening before espicaliiy sfrom and since the 60's with their happy go lucky libertaerianism but the 80's gave it another spurt of energy..... Unfortunately the breakdown of the chruch in england has led to an increase in single parent families, tennage yobery and underage pregnanacies to name but a few problems stemed from the breakdown of the chruch.

~~~~~~~~~~
take care
Zak

I can relate to the comments relating to Thatcher's morality (or perhaps amorality might be more accurate) but I do not think she undermined religious belief in the UK. If anything the reaction against her totally 'self based' concept which underpinned her monetarist policies probably helped the organised church.

I wouldn't bury the Church of England yet! Yes it has its problems. It always does. It needs to be remembered that the structure of the C of E is opposite to that of the Roman Catholic church. In the latter there is an overall leader (the Pope) and he and his immediate circle effectively decide what is church policy and that is then given as a directive to the followers. The Archbishop of Canterbury on the other hand is, like the Prime Minister is in politics in the UK, only primus inter pares (first amongst equals). The C of E is a wide church with policies deriving from all manner of committees (or synods as they are rather quaintly called) and its adherents are actively encouraged to think things through for themselves and debate issues. In my view this makes the Anglican church a stronger institution but it does mean it's always under tension (or rather many tensions). A classic example would be the debate on the Assisted Suicide Bill recently in the UK when the Anglican bishops mainly opposed the bill whilst the chair of the society most in favour (the Voluntary Euthanasia Society) was a charismatic Anglican church attending christian!

From the last census in the UK (2001) only around 14% declared that they had no religion and in no area did it get much above a quarter of the population. Interestingly there was no great sociological divide with some of the richest and poorest areas at both extremes and in the middle range. From the latest figures available church attendance in Angllcan churches in the UK is no longer declining and in fact the number regularly attending showed a slight increase on the previous census.

I believe that the shift towards atheism that characterised western society in the 19th. and 20th. century has now ended. I believe that this is because the ordinary people had been told by the academics and intellectuals that if they got rid of organised religion, they would be able to organise a better future by their own efforts - a 'modern' scientific humanist society would effectively be the great panacea. Organised religion was thus made out to be the great 'bogeyman', a philosophy still espoused by many current contributors to this site.

In reality of course as far as the ordinary person was concerned the new non-religious societies have turned out to be no better and in many ways worse than their 'religious' predecessors.

The debate about 'Faith Schools' is an interesting example of a change in attitude. They have not been abolished in the UK, not because of any fear from our largely atheistic politicians of religious organisations but because they are so incredibly popular, including amongst those with no religious faith whatever. The reason for their popularity is that they not only produce some of the highest academic standards but they also instill good moral values in the pupils, which sadly many of the standard state politically correct non religious schools lamentably fail to do currently.

Interestingly if your area has a church based school in the locality, the houses are likely to command higher prices than equivalent properties in nearby areas that do not - Strange but true!

Atheists have been predicting the end of religion for at least 200 or more years in the western world and this appears to me to be even less likely in the 21st. century than at any time previously.


Regards,



Gordon.
 
Dear Gordon

i read your comments with interest thank you...

Please dont interpret my comments as stating the end of the C OF E, i hope very much that the C OF E has a revival as i beleive its weakening influence over the last few decades has led to the social problems today. i do hope soon that the C oF e will be revived and the ethos of the family reinforced, which will hopefully diminsh a lot of the problems we see on the streets today as outlined in my post above.

~~~~~~~~~~~
take care
zak
 
Gordon said:
In reality of course as far as the ordinary person was concerned the new non-religious societies have turned out to be no better and in many ways worse than their 'religious' predecessors.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html


The debate about 'Faith Schools' is an interesting example of a change in attitude. They have not been abolished in the UK, not because of any fear from our largely atheistic politicians of religious organisations but because they are so incredibly popular, including amongst those with no religious faith whatever. The reason for their popularity is that they not only produce some of the highest academic standards but they also instill good moral values in the pupils, which sadly many of the standard state politically correct non religious schools lamentably fail to do currently.

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/faithschools.html
 
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html

I have read the main points of this. The study uses the USA as the example of a Christian society (a very dabatable premise!), describes Britain as 'secular' which is not quite correct either and equates the whole christian belief into Evolution versus Christianity, which is to say the least somewhat simplistic and is not what most people outside of the US would consider a prime debate.

The concept of Scandinavian countries being totally 'secular' and not having social problems is incorrect on both counts. In any event to try and compare completely different countries and cultures in this simplistic way is a most dubious concept. It is extremely biased and flawed resarch.



http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/faithschools.html


I had not read this. It is of course a personal opinion as to why faith schools should not exist. I can understand the view but the point I was making is that it is the political correctness, secularity and relativist views translated into state schools which has perversely made faith schools popular even with those of no faith. Lots of ordinary people reject God in the UK (though perhaps not quite as many as some think) but even more reject the perverse post modern relativist muddle we have got ourselves into.

Whilst I agree that in theory you do not need any form of religion to maintain and promote a good moral basis for society, it does appear in practice that the more secular or atheist societies become the more they do drift towards a cloudy relativistic muddle which does start to badly affect the fabric of civilised society.

Regards,


Gordon.
 
I have read the main points of this. The study uses the USA as the example of a Christian society (a very dabatable premise!), describes Britain as 'secular' which is not quite correct either and equates the whole christian belief into Evolution versus Christianity, which is to say the least somewhat simplistic and is not what most people outside of the US would consider a prime debate.

America is without doubt a fundamentalist religious society, I don't think anybody would refute this. It's secular foundations don't mean an awful lot when you look at the way the country is today. I wouldn't really call the UK a good example of secularism either, but it is on the right path. Not sure what you were trying to get at when talking about evolution versus Christianity?

The concept of Scandinavian countries being totally 'secular' and not having social problems is incorrect on both counts. In any event to try and compare completely different countries and cultures in this simplistic way is a most dubious concept. It is extremely biased and flawed resarch.

There is no society on the planet that doesn't have it's problems, however I would put forward scandinavian countries as being the most secular and probably the most stable.

I had not read this. It is of course a personal opinion as to why faith schools should not exist. I can understand the view but the point I was making is that it is the political correctness, secularity and relativist views translated into state schools which has perversely made faith schools popular even with those of no faith. Lots of ordinary people reject God in the UK (though perhaps not quite as many as some think) but even more reject the perverse post modern relativist muddle we have got ourselves into.

Well it is personal opinion that they (faith schools) should exist, and common sense that they shouldn't.

Just out of interest, how do you guage that more people are fed up with secularism, than they are with religious indoctrination in state schools? Even if this is the case, why is this? Is it because they interpret the perceived lack of morals in todays younger generation to the lack of religious education? Well parents need not look towards religious schooling to help them out, they need only look as far as their own lacksadaisical parenting skills. I believe our culture in the UK appears to becoming Americanised. The media and political portrayal of what we should be scared of and blowing societies problems out of proportion appears to be sending UK citizens doo-lally just like Americans. I think this is a UK phenomenon and I don't think it effects most countries in Western Europe and Scandinavia in the same way, despite the fact many of those countries are highly secular.

Religious schooling doesn't exactly have a poor record, but what school's wouldn't with that kind of selection process? If they are high up on the league tables, it certainly isn't due to their method of education, but they pupils they choose.

Only 'active' non-believers are wise to the dangers of organised delusion, most people (including most non-believers) believe it is beneficial because they are under the impression religion is good for morals (which obviously isn't the case), or because of tradition. Blind followers of tradition are also a danger... there are people who cut off half their childrens penis because of tradition. Well... I am very pissed off at my religious upbringing because I was told what to believe in when I didn't have the ability to think for myself - imagine how pissed off I would be if someone cut off my penis without my consent!

Whilst I agree that in theory you do not need any form of religion to maintain and promote a good moral basis for society, it does appear in practice that the more secular or atheist societies become the more they do drift towards a cloudy relativistic muddle which does start to badly affect the fabric of civilised society.

I think secular societies are doing quite well actually:

High levels of organic atheism are strongly correlated with high levels of societal health, such as low homicide rates, low poverty rates, low infant mortality rates, and low illiteracy rates, as well as high levels of educational attainment, per capita income, and gender equality. Most nations characterized by high degrees of individual and societal security have the highest rates of organic atheism, and conversely, nations characterized by low degrees of individual and societal security have the lowest rates of organic atheism. In some societies, particularly Europe, atheism is growing. However, throughout much of the world – particularly nations with high birth rates – atheism is barely discernable.

http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/atheism.html
 
Back
Top