Is there a God?

There's no god it's a fairy tale, evolution has been scientifically proven, Go on YouTube and look up "Richard Dawkins" it's a real eye opener

Yes, I think if you are following it, you do need to be truthful, as God can supposedly see through all deceit, otherwise the premise falls apart.

But it doesn't instruct you how to live your life AFAIK. It doesn't instruct anything, only encourages how to place your Wager

.

Therein lies the second flaw. Only those who have an inclination to believe in God, or at least apathy towards belief, can follow the thesis correctly. Individuals like myself who sincerely believe that there is no such thing are unable to do so without being dishonest and consequently sinning. Thus, only those who are inclined to believe can follow the wager successfully. All others are simply pretending.

The third flaw regards instruction and encouragement. Being told what to believe in, more so with regards to religion, undermines its primary principals entirely. Religious belief should be a natural decision made by the individual concerned; not by a theory, statistic, or philosophy such as this. What it's saying is "There's more to gain through belief than there is to lose". However, religion is not that simple for many.

but most athiests have no problem telling you that God doesnt exist using statistics, theories or scientific theory.
I believe in God with all my heart its the way I was raised and the choices I have made in my life and I expect people to respect that same as i respect other peoples beliefs.
Personally I find athiests an interesting breed and rather rude they not far from jehovahs witnesses who seem to feel the need to hammer their beliefs into every passerby and if you dont agree they throw a wobly.
The fact is I cant prove God exists anymore than you can prove that God doesnt exist, but that doesnt change my beliefs and doesnt give athiests the right to have a go at my beliefs.

You're getting confused, I stated that religion should be the choice of the individual alone. Athiests who attempt to disprove the existence of a deity with the methods you have specified, are often fighting a losing battle as most religions have equally weighted comebacks.

I also find it extremely ignorant that you can stereotype all athiests as 'rude and not far from jehovahs witnesses'. The majority of athiests, like myself, are happy to allow others the freedom to believe in what they like. I would never generalise all religious people as 'a breed'; everyone is different so such generalisations are highly flawed.

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, to comprehend, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated and the least beneficial.

Nothing like a good debate on religion for a Sunday morning

I had a very strict RC upbringing and most of Sunday was spent in Church, mass both morning and evening and catechism in the afternoon. I also attended catechism two evenings in the week where I was lucky enough to have the teachings of the RC Church rammed dowm my throat until one day I asked I nun How do we know that is true? I was asking why I hadn't seen god yet because I believed I was pure in heart and yet I hadn't seen god. At the time we we learning about the beatitudes and one of them said "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see god.

Her answer was that one day I would see god which basically meant that when I died if I had god in my heart I would be welcomed into the kingdom of heavan. I very quickly realised that religion and the existance of a god just filled my mind with a load of questions the answers to which were unknown or unknowable.

So I firmly in the agnostic box and whilst I want to believe in the existance of god there remain am almost endless list of unknowns to which the answers are unknowable.

But I respect anyone who believes in god and also those who don't because at the end of the day we each have a right to choose. I sure there is another beatitude to describe that viewpoint so hopefully one day I will see god afterall the only other option is far less palatable.

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, to comprehend, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated and the least beneficial.

Faith isnt a sinister thing. I believe faith is extremely improtant in some ways, it provides a rock for people. It can help people overcome grief, rationalise the unknowable and provide a spirtual enlightment. People who truly believe in God I tend to find are generally very happy with their lives and fufilled

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, to comprehend, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated and the least beneficial.

Faith isnt a sinister thing. I believe faith is extremely improtant in some ways, it provides a rock for people. It can help people overcome grief, rationalise the unknowable and provide a spirtual enlightment. People who truly believe in God I tend to find are generally very happy with their lives and fufilled

I appreciate the reasons why people choose to believe in a deity; however faith is still a sinister concept to me. Surrendering all my questioning, all my desire to learn and to comprehend, simply because of an archaic book seems ludicrous to me. More so considering it was put together by primitive, uncultured, desert dwellers with minimal knowledge. Equally, anything contained within a religious text could be said just as well in a non-religious one. Don't steal, don't kill, don't lie and so on are simple ethical and moral guidelines.

Why is the indoctrination of children required to teach such simple lessons? Telling children, that if they don’t do the right thing, they’ll suffer terrifying punishments or unbelievable rewards, that’s making a living out of lying to children. That’s what the priesthood do. And if all they did was lie to the children, it would be bad enough. But they rape them and torture them and then hope we’ll call it ‘abuse’.

Furthermore, organised religion is sinister as it allows the control of many people. As Hitchens once said, [i]“Everything about Christianity is contained in the pathetic image of 'the flock.” This epitomises my problem with faith and religion, it promotes blind and unquestioning loyalty in a theory without proof. The oligarchs, those at the top, have indefinite power to manipulate and control on the basis of a religious text. A text which was obviously written by some fairly unexceptional humans, however is now widely proclaimed as the 'word of God' to coerce people into belief.

However, as you say, if faith allows people to deal with the simple concept of mortality then so be it. However, I fail to see how it 'rationalises the unknowable'. That seems fairly oxymoronic, can the 'unknowable' (as you put it) ever be rationalised? Even so, as a previous poster has said, religion left him with more questions than he had to begin with. Thus, religion is the basis for a myriad of problems in humanity, yet provides no answers; only more unanswerable questions.

No god, no personal god anyway. No afterlife, the universe doesn't owe you a reason for existence.

But if this world was religion free, it would be almost exactly the same, people would find reasons to bash each other's skulls in. People create the dichotomy between religious and non-religious too often.

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, to comprehend, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated and the least beneficial.

Faith isnt a sinister thing. I believe faith is extremely improtant in some ways, it provides a rock for people. It can help people overcome grief, rationalise the unknowable and provide a spirtual enlightment. People who truly believe in God I tend to find are generally very happy with their lives and fufilled

I appreciate the reasons why people choose to believe in a deity; however faith is still a sinister concept to me. Surrendering all my questioning, all my desire to learn and to comprehend, simply because of an archaic book seems ludicrous to me. More so considering it was put together by primitive, uncultured, desert dwellers with minimal knowledge. Equally, anything contained within a religious text could be said just as well in a non-religious one. Don't steal, don't kill, don't lie and so on are simple ethical and moral guidelines.

Why is the indoctrination of children required to teach such simple lessons? Telling children, that if they don’t do the right thing, they’ll suffer terrifying punishments or unbelievable rewards, that’s making a living out of lying to children. That’s what the priesthood do. And if all they did was lie to the children, it would be bad enough. But they rape them and torture them and then hope we’ll call it ‘abuse’.

Furthermore, organised religion is sinister as it allows the control of many people. As Hitchens once said, [i]“Everything about Christianity is contained in the pathetic image of 'the flock.” This epitomises my problem with faith and religion, it promotes blind and unquestioning loyalty in a theory without proof. The oligarchs, those at the top, have indefinite power to manipulate and control on the basis of a religious text. A text which was obviously written by some fairly unexceptional humans, however is now widely proclaimed as the 'word of God' to coerce people into belief.

However, as you say, if faith allows people to deal with the simple concept of mortality then so be it. However, I fail to see how it 'rationalises the unknowable'. That seems fairly oxymoronic, can the 'unknowable' (as you put it) ever be rationalised? Even so, as a previous poster has said, religion left him with more questions than he had to begin with. Thus, religion is the basis for a myriad of problems in humanity, yet provides no answers; only more unanswerable questions.

Indeed religon has its many problems and flaws specially with paedophillia owever i wont go into that as remember that doesnt apply to the many people who are practising christians. As for lying to children about heaven and hell that is your conception of it, they don't believe its a lie so therefore as far as they are concerned its the truth.

I do agree that religon has been used to manipulate the masses by preaching the "word of God" to fight Wars etc but that is simply the fault of those in power, after all people who gain power eventually abuse it for their own personal needs.

As for my statement about rationalising the unknowable I mearly use it to explain that throughout history unexplainable happening in the forms of miracles have been explained as a work of God. Take Muamba for example many people see that as a miracle afterall he was dead for 70 minutes. Its easier to explain that as the aid of God rather than that of medicine, first aid and the overall superior fitness he had over the average person. As for "rationalising the unknowable" being oxymoronic I don't agree, though I should have used the word unexplainable, its human nature to rationalise things that they simply cannot comprehend, ala UFOs and other crazy theories. Religon was indoctrinate throughout the human race as we simply did not comprhend the greater world. We didnt have as many advancements in Science as we do now.

There is a God because of there wasn't I wouldn't be able to prove anything. Every argument against God assumes God because it assumes universal laws of logic that can only be accounted for by God. Something can't come from nothing & logic can't come from non-logic

Nothing like a good debate on religion for a Sunday morning

I had a very strict RC upbringing and most of Sunday was spent in Church, mass both morning and evening and catechism in the afternoon. I also attended catechism two evenings in the week where I was lucky enough to have the teachings of the RC Church rammed dowm my throat until one day I asked I nun How do we know that is true? I was asking why I hadn't seen god yet because I believed I was pure in heart and yet I hadn't seen god. At the time we we learning about the beatitudes and one of them said "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see god.

Her answer was that one day I would see god which basically meant that when I died if I had god in my heart I would be welcomed into the kingdom of heavan. I very quickly realised that religion and the existance of a god just filled my mind with a load of questions the answers to which were unknown or unknowable.

So I firmly in the agnostic box and whilst I want to believe in the existance of god there remain am almost endless list of unknowns to which the answers are unknowable.

But I respect anyone who believes in god and also those who don't because at the end of the day we each have a right to choose. I sure there is another beatitude to describe that viewpoint so hopefully one day I will see god afterall the only other option is far less palatable.

I can most associate with this as I had exactly the same upbringing.I stand today as a total non-beleiver,convinced that all religion is nothing more than a tool for the control of many by the few.The message or messages of religion are many and most people live by some of the messages contained in whatever scipture you choose to follow but where I draw the line is believing that these messages are divine.I suppose we ought to be thankful that the real power of religion is diminished otherwise we might all be burnt for even having this conversation(in some countries under some faiths we still would be).

Yes, but we gave him to Arsenal

I was brought up as a buddhist believing everything and everyone is equal therefore everyone in their own right is a god, however i lost faith when a series of bad events badly fucked up my life therefore i guess i'm classed as an athiest now but i wear a cross everyday around my neck as a symbol of luck.

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, to comprehend, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated and the least beneficial.

ohhhga,to love god isn,t a decision taken on an interlectuall level. so no amount of writings by academic non believers will prove anything.God has to be felt .if they havn,t felt god then they are in no postition to know of his power.a bit like me telling you about the feeling of pride you get when you see cardiff run out at the ccs.i wouldn,t understand totally as i,m not a ccfc fan.Religon is different to faith.a religon is for example catholic,c of e,baptist etc.faith is faith in what all those religons are supposed to practice.jesus/god ,the holy spirit .there are people in churches who are religous ,by that i mean they follow what the church tells them but it doesn,t mean they have unswerving faith(in what the bible teaches).some christians are raised from a baby in the faith.others like myself went away from faith,messed my life up ,hit a rock bottom then found a place where i could get help.my faith has built from there.so an academic non believer has zero knowledge of what it feels to be cleansed/forgiven if you like.i can see quite clearly at one stage i believed of god but not in him and certainly had no faith.to me if there if no god then we started from nothing are going nowhere and life means nothing.i believe totally in the right for a non believer to not believe.jesus wants people to come to him,not to be forced to come to him.

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, to comprehend, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated and the least beneficial.

ohhhga,to love god isn,t a decision taken on an interlectuall level. so no amount of writings by academic non believers will prove anything.God has to be felt .if they havn,t felt god then they are in no postition to know of his power.a bit like me telling you about the feeling of pride you get when you see cardiff run out at the ccs.i wouldn,t understand totally as i,m not a ccfc fan.Religon is different to faith.a religon is for example catholic,c of e,baptist etc.faith is faith in what all those religons are supposed to practice.jesus/god ,the holy spirit .there are people in churches who are religous ,by that i mean they follow what the church tells them but it doesn,t mean they have unswerving faith(in what the bible teaches).some christians are raised from a baby in the faith.others like myself went away from faith,messed my life up ,hit a rock bottom then found a place where i could get help.my faith has built from there.so an academic non believer has zero knowledge of what it feels to be cleansed/forgiven if you like.i can see quite clearly at one stage i believed of god but not in him and certainly had no faith.to me if there if no god then we started from nothing are going nowhere and life means nothing.i believe totally in the right for a non believer to not believe.jesus wants people to come to him,not to be forced to come to him.

Of course, as you say, people claim to have 'felt' God and his influence, presence and so on. However that does not disregard or render any writings on the subject of faith worthless; they are invaluable whether they praise or refute religious beliefs. Simply because I haven't 'felt' God (because I believe it to be the greatest fallacy) does not mean I, or any other individual, is unable to comment on it.

Furthermore, you're exhibiting a somewhat cliche' argument which suggests that those who have not experienced 'God's influence' cannot possibly comment on Him. Applying that theory, only religious believers can ever write, comment or discuss faith and religion fairly. Surely this would lead to total bias? In my opinion all perspectives are of equal value, whether the Pope or Hitchens, or you and I. By rejecting the writings of athiests or agnostics, you only further the elitist and oligarchic image that faith and religion has forged itself throughout our history.

It's fair to differentiate between faith and organised religion; I agree. However my problem does not lie with those who seek faith, it is totally understandable and I am more than aware of the reasoning behind it. Let me make it clear, those who seek or retain faith are of no concern, and should be allowed to do so in all societies. Yours is one of many stories of individuals regaining their faith after it had been seemingly lost. I simply stated that total and unquestioning faith can cause many problems; both for the individual and society as a whole.

To me, what we started from is nothing short of irrelevant. Where we're going is of greater significance, yet no one can fully predict the future; only make an educated judgement. What I find truly astounding is your claim that if there is no God, then life means nothing. Why is this? In my opinion, after death there is nothing; we are dead, gone and buried. However life can be wonderful. We can experience dizzying highs and sickening lows, feel love and hatred in equal measure, happiness and depression; everything is there for us to relish. However, after our death, there is nothing more; but I want nothing more. Regardless of whether a deity exists or not, our lives most certainly mean something.

If you sincerely believe that 'Jesus does not want people to be forced to come to him'; then surely the majority of religious individuals have disobeyed this in some form? Many religious people have been raised in a religious household, as you said yourself, from birth they have been fed religious rhetoric and in reality have little choice but to follow their parent's faith. I know a family in which the Father is a staunch Christian and all five of his children are equally devout. This is no coicidence, they have been led from birth to believe in this. Essentially, if the religious decision so to speak, could only be made when one reaches the age of reason (16+ for example) then the amount of religious people would be far smaller. Thus, many people are left with little choice, and are indirectly forced into religion whether they think so or not.

Ohhga I think that is a bit stereotypical to describe that religion is forced on people from birth and quite unfair. We live in a Christian society and it's a part of our communities. Parents have the right to decide if they want their children to be brought up in a religious environment as a child you have no thought on such things and so your parents are responsible for for you. Saying that if it was left till 16 is of course going to see less devotion as they would have no connection to religion. It is always up to the individual if they want to believe in God and if they choose to keep practising the faith it is solely their point no one elses

Ohhga I think that is a bit stereotypical to describe that religion is forced on people from birth and quite unfair. We live in a Christian society and it's a part of our communities. Parents have the right to decide if they want their children to be brought up in a religious environment as a child you have no thought on such things and so your parents are responsible for for you. Saying that if it was left till 16 is of course going to see less devotion as they would have no connection to religion. It is always up to the individual if they want to believe in God and if they choose to keep practising the faith it is solely their point no one elses

In the olden days, religion WAS forced upon you. If you didn't believe in god and was an atheist, you were essentially a heretic. Galilleo (spelling) as a prime example, I believe he didn't believe in god or any religion, he told the Vatican (?) and they ordered his execution, UNLESS, he believed in god.

Now, I may have that WAY off the mark, however, it's roughly on the same lines.

My point being, over the years religion was forced upon you, but eventually was relaxed a bit more due to "freedom of speech" (which itself is a load of bollocks), however a heck of a lot of people STILL believe in god and I believe it's because the way they teach it to you in school. The way they taught religion to me, was effectively preaching, they pretty much told me God exists and Darwins theory of Evolution is wrong, what's their proof? Oh that's right, some stories in an old book.


Now, I have no problem with religious PEOPLE and I respect their views, however I do have a problem with religion.

Ohhga I think that is a bit stereotypical to describe that religion is forced on people from birth and quite unfair. We live in a Christian society and it's a part of our communities. Parents have the right to decide if they want their children to be brought up in a religious environment as a child you have no thought on such things and so your parents are responsible for for you. Saying that if it was left till 16 is of course going to see less devotion as they would have no connection to religion. It is always up to the individual if they want to believe in God and if they choose to keep practising the faith it is solely their point no one elses

How is it stereotypical? I never said that it was applicable to all, I said that is is applicable to many. Equally, I disagree that we live in a Christian society, I believe that we live in a fairly agnostic society, and Christianity is of course the most prominent religion.

Of course they are, however the standing of religion must surely be questioned if child indoctrination is required? Nobody, regardless of age, should not be force-fed religious rhetoric without their own consent. Religious primary schools are an interesting subject with regards to this.

You return to my initial point, religious choice, belief, and faith should all be a result of the individual alone, and not external or environmental factors. However, due to many variables, this is simply not the case.

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, to comprehend, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated and the least beneficial.

ohhhga,to love god isn,t a decision taken on an interlectuall level. so no amount of writings by academic non believers will prove anything.God has to be felt .if they havn,t felt god then they are in no postition to know of his power.a bit like me telling you about the feeling of pride you get when you see cardiff run out at the ccs.i wouldn,t understand totally as i,m not a ccfc fan.Religon is different to faith.a religon is for example catholic,c of e,baptist etc.faith is faith in what all those religons are supposed to practice.jesus/god ,the holy spirit .there are people in churches who are religous ,by that i mean they follow what the church tells them but it doesn,t mean they have unswerving faith(in what the bible teaches).some christians are raised from a baby in the faith.others like myself went away from faith,messed my life up ,hit a rock bottom then found a place where i could get help.my faith has built from there.so an academic non believer has zero knowledge of what it feels to be cleansed/forgiven if you like.i can see quite clearly at one stage i believed of god but not in him and certainly had no faith.to me if there if no god then we started from nothing are going nowhere and life means nothing.i believe totally in the right for a non believer to not believe.jesus wants people to come to him,not to be forced to come to him.

Of course, as you say, people claim to have 'felt' God and his influence, presence and so on. However that does not disregard or render any writings on the subject of faith worthless; they are invaluable whether they praise or refute religious beliefs. Simply because I haven't 'felt' God (because I believe it to be the greatest fallacy) does not mean I, or any other individual, is unable to comment on it.

Furthermore, you're exhibiting a somewhat cliche' argument which suggests that those who have not experienced 'God's influence' cannot possibly comment on Him. Applying that theory, only religious believers can ever write, comment or discuss faith and religion fairly. Surely this would lead to total bias? In my opinion all perspectives are of equal value, whether the Pope or Hitchens, or you and I. By rejecting the writings of athiests or agnostics, you only further the elitist and oligarchic image that faith and religion has forged itself throughout our history.

It's fair to differentiate between faith and organised religion; I agree. However my problem does not lie with those who seek faith, it is totally understandable and I am more than aware of the reasoning behind it. Let me make it clear, those who seek or retain faith are of no concern, and should be allowed to do so in all societies. Yours is one of many stories of individuals regaining their faith after it had been seemingly lost. I simply stated that total and unquestioning faith can cause many problems; both for the individual and society as a whole.

To me, what we started from is nothing short of irrelevant. Where we're going is of greater significance, yet no one can fully predict the future; only make an educated judgement. What I find truly astounding is your claim that if there is no God, then life means nothing. Why is this? In my opinion, after death there is nothing; we are dead, gone and buried. However life can be wonderful. We can experience dizzying highs and sickening lows, feel love and hatred in equal measure, happiness and depression; everything is there for us to relish. However, after our death, there is nothing more; but I want nothing more. Regardless of whether a deity exists or not, our lives most certainly mean something.

If you sincerely believe that 'Jesus does not want people to be forced to come to him'; then surely the majority of religious individuals have disobeyed this in some form? Many religious people have been raised in a religious household, as you said yourself, from birth they have been fed religious rhetoric and in reality have little choice but to follow their parent's faith. I know a family in which the Father is a staunch Christian and all five of his children are equally devout. This is no coicidence, they have been led from birth to believe in this. Essentially, if the religious decision so to speak, could only be made when one reaches the age of reason (16+ for example) then the amount of religious people would be far smaller. Thus, many people are left with little choice, and are indirectly forced into religion whether they think so or not.

hello again .i understand what your saying about the kids been raised up in faith but you would have to ask them if they wish their parents had let them be faithless till 16.if they believe they will be grateful for been raised that way.anyway if say one of those kids had shown a deffo sign of leaving the fold so to speak they would have to be left to their own ways.you cannot manufacture god.jesus asks his disciples to take the good news of him not to force it on anyone.ie,if you talk to someone and they don,t want it then so be it. i,m no good on these things so excuse the lack of paragraphs to ME i believe life would mean little.i also don,t think the physical death means the end but i don,t spend time dwelling on this as i believe today is the most important day of my life.as to writing about god etc ..for me anyone can write about him.that doesn,t mean they understand god or the feeling that god gives a believer.also i believe SOME athiests do have a religon.it,s called athieism.i,v met people who have spent that much time trying to convert me that it,s an obsession to them.i,m sure there are religous people like this too(just a few ).so in closing ohhga what i,m trying to get across is we could debate this all night but i,d still feel the same im sure and maybe you,d still feel the same.like i said i,m all for anyones right not to believe or to believe.all the big bang stuff ?who made the big bang?atoms?who made the atoms?i,v decided where lifes started for me.i,ll leave it for others to decide where it started for them.i,v met a member of this forum .i think we spent 5min talking about it.

no god would allow half a world to be starving and the other half waddling around in obesity mode. Defo 100% no god.

no god would allow half a world to be starving and the other half waddling around in obesity mode. Defo 100% no god.

You're absolutely right, the reason for what you said is because of wealth and greed, us Westerners are the consumers and we just consume everything.

no god would allow half a world to be starving and the other half waddling around in obesity mode. Defo 100% no god.

You're absolutely right, the reason for what you said is because of wealth and greed, us Westerners are the consumers and we just consume everything.

If there was a god then people would not be starving to death at this moment when thousands of greedy people (it started with the sheer greed of the USA) pump food into their bodies…….

Ohhga I think that is a bit stereotypical to describe that religion is forced on people from birth and quite unfair. We live in a Christian society and it's a part of our communities. Parents have the right to decide if they want their children to be brought up in a religious environment as a child you have no thought on such things and so your parents are responsible for for you. Saying that if it was left till 16 is of course going to see less devotion as they would have no connection to religion. It is always up to the individual if they want to believe in God and if they choose to keep practising the faith it is solely their point no one elses

How is it stereotypical? I never said that it was applicable to all, I said that is is applicable to many. Equally, I disagree that we live in a Christian society, I believe that we live in a fairly agnostic society, and Christianity is of course the most prominent religion.

Of course they are, however the standing of religion must surely be questioned if child indoctrination is required? Nobody, regardless of age, should not be force-fed religious rhetoric without their own consent. Religious primary schools are an interesting subject with regards to this.

You return to my initial point, religious choice, belief, and faith should all be a result of the individual alone, and not external or environmental factors. However, due to many variables, this is simply not the case.

a lot of our laws are based on christianity so the state must still see it as worthwhile as most of the laws have been around a few years.talking of schools.when i was married i /we got my eldest step son into a catholic high school.for me i wanted him to have a christian education and for his mother more the discapline.the lad has sort of gone from non belief to a bit of a belief to non again to a sort of belief.i never ever told him he must believe.glad he went there though.next weekend he flies to sweden with the england handball team.they don,t really play handball that much in the non catholic schools around here.i,m not catholic by the way.pleased and so proud of him.great school who have helped turn out a great young lad.tbf your school seem to have done a good job with you along of course with your parents.i like your zest for life

Galeo was classes a heretic by the Vatican purely because he went against the idea that the Earth was the centre of solar system and had calculated that it was rather the Sun was the centre and we revolved around it. The Vatican were against this and placed him under house arrest hoping he would change his mind.

As for religion being forced in the olden days it is because religion made up the backbone of all great civilisations hence if you didn't believe in it you were seen as odd and an outcast. However as science has become more popular religion has had to take a more subdued role

I think it's very wise to hedge your bets with this, just in case. It's good to have a couple of strings to your bow in this life - even Hitler was a painter & decorator.

Songs Of Praise is on BBC1 later. I watch it every week religiously.

Galeo was classes a heretic by the Vatican purely because he went against the idea that the Earth was the centre of solar system and had calculated that it was rather the Sun was the centre and we revolved around it. The Vatican were against this and placed him under house arrest hoping he would change his mind.

As for religion being forced in the olden days it is because religion made up the backbone of all great civilisations hence if you didn't believe in it you were seen as odd and an outcast. However as science has become more popular religion has had to take a more subdued role

So, are you saying we NEED religion?

I think it's very wise to hedge your bets with this, just in case. It's good to have a couple of strings to your bow in this life - even Hitler was a painter & decorator.

Songs Of Praise is on BBC1 later. I watch it every week religiously.

that made me burst out laughing

I think it's very wise to hedge your bets with this, just in case. It's good to have a couple of strings to your bow in this life - even Hitler was a painter & decorator.

Songs Of Praise is on BBC1 later. I watch it every week religiously.

that made me burst out laughing

Your space bar is working then.

I think it's very wise to hedge your bets with this, just in case. It's good to have a couple of strings to your bow in this life - even Hitler was a painter & decorator.

Songs Of Praise is on BBC1 later. I watch it every week religiously.

he loved cats and was a veggie

I think it's very wise to hedge your bets with this, just in case. It's good to have a couple of strings to your bow in this life - even Hitler was a painter & decorator.

Songs Of Praise is on BBC1 later. I watch it every week religiously.

he loved cats and was a veggie

I think it's very wise to hedge your bets with this, just in case. It's good to have a couple of strings to your bow in this life - even Hitler was a painter & decorator.

Songs Of Praise is on BBC1 later. I watch it every week religiously.

that made me burst out laughing

Your space bar is working then.

mate im cack on these.i took it on board though .k.r.o