Posts by Tess Rooney
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I think discrimination is immoral.
Really? All forms of discrimination?
I'd descriminate against Tony Vietch if he wanted to run a woman's refuge. Or a pedophile from babysitting children.
As an intransitive verb there are two different connotations here. To be discriminationg was once positive.
But otherwise, what ever happened to live and let live. You don't have to agree with me, and I likewise. But I think both of us should be free to live our lives as we see fit. It would be very different if I was not prepared to accept a democratic process, if I wanted my morality imposed on everyone else. And I don't want to do that. I just don't want to be imposed upon in return.
-
This is a 'belief' which simply isn't true.
There is no way to empirically prove whether God exists or not. I can't prove something as spiritually harmful, neither can you prove it is not. These are not empirical claims.
By all means, atheists can run adoption agencies that refuse to adopt to couples of faith. Certainly there is a belief that faith can harm children.
-
<quote>Which they do partially to sustain their supposed relevance in modern society.<quote>
Nah... Don't really think so. Those old busildings are there as historic places, rather than trying to reach out to modern society. They're a bugger to maintain. Wickedly expensive to light, heat, and keep clean and safe. And there's no way historic places are going to let them be bulldozed down so that something more practical could be put up.
Seriously, have you ever been to morning Mass in winter at the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament in Christchurch? You can't heat the thing because it's umpteen stories high and completely uninsulated. It's like sitting in a fridge. I mean honestly, it's a big, stone box.
Small, modern heated churches would be far more amenable.
-
Which is why we have/need universal human rights.
And idea which was strongly influence by the Christian thought of there being God given rights.
The idea of individual rights comes from the Christianised West.
-
Please also note the APA research I linked to which indicated that there is no difference in outcomes for children of gay parents when compared to children of straight parents.
You're thinking from a utilitarian perspective, with utilitarian axioms. Which is fine, but it's not going to lead to any kind of understanding, assuming you're interested in that.
The goal of Christianity is eternal life. Hence the term "Gospel", good news. A Catholic adoption agancy wouldn't place children with people who had sold their soul to Satan either, even if they were jolly nice people. Every act has a moral weighting. So even something that may be non-harmful from a materialistic point of view, can still be seen as harmful if it separates one from God.
-
...why waste taxpayers money to support religion?
Well for a start tax payers aren't directly funding religion. Rather religious organisations get special tax breaks. It's a relevant distinction.
But as to why? Practically it's a historical hold over from when religion was far more central to the community's life.
There is some practical advantage to it. Churches often maintain important historical buildings, such as cathedrals, which are open to the public. The bulk of charity work, such as food banks and city missions are run by the churches. Look at the Salvation Army for example.
Provided all religions can access it, along with say the Secular Humanist Afternoon Tea Church, it's a fair system.
-
Oh no, god forbid you should have to address the rights of others outside the faith.
All religions address the rights of others, it's just a question of difference in what people see as positive.
So for example, the Krishna Conscienceness Movement publicises the dangers and cruelty of eating meat. They do this beacuse they are concerned at people building up karma which will prolong their soul's existence on earth. Hence they offer very cheap food that does not build up karma, to help your soul get off the wheel of life.
Now your local beef farmer is not going to see this as positive, or caring. Likewise those who work at abattoirs.
-
Let's also end today their tax exemptions, across the board.
Why? Provided any church or religious organisation can access the tax benefit it's fair. As long as it's the same rule for Christianity, or Wicca, or Scientology, or the Church of Satan, or whatever it's just.
-
Indeed there are. But that's not the provision of a good or service, and you know it.
I'm not a legal expert, or even a legal dabbler, so I don't know how to draft a law. But I do know what I think is fair.
No religious organisation should have to change the tenants of their faith. So no clergy or organisation should be forced into offering religious goods or services if it is against their faith.
OTOH if they are offering a public service, say a food bank, or housing, it should be fairly and squarely open to all. However there are some exceptions to this... and I know you will all disagree with me on this... But it is still what I believe.
Religious adoption agencies should not be forced to place children with same sex couples - why? Because they truely believe it to be harmful for the child and because there are other adoption agencies, eg. State ones.
And, private hospitals should not be forced into providing contraceptives and abortions.
The thing that ties these two things together is that the by not allowing the conscience opt out, you are forcing an organisation to do something actively harmful (in their eyes).
So for example, a Jehovah Witness hospital should not be forced to provide blood transfusions. Likewise no one should be forced to use a JW hospital. Or a hospital could refuse to circumsise baby boys, those wishing for that would have to go elsewhere.
I don't think people should be made to do something they view as wrong. People should not be coerced in this way.
-
I believe Tess herself did something very similar at a friend's (non-religious) marriage. It's a neat idea.
I did indeed :)
I also agree with Emma re: Catholic's marrying in Presbyterian churches. My Catholic grandfather (the one who tied up the nun and locked her in a cupboard) married my Presbyterian grandmother in a Presbyterian church. The family were NOT amused.
At a family reunion two years ago, it was still a topic of conversation :)