Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Troll Fest Part II

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    HershO, Let's not debate until we understand. That is the point of this thread afterall - understanding why we are different.

    Tell us about Church and State in Germany, et al. Most of us understand, I think, what that means in the US.
    http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en

    Comment


    • #62
      Ned : yep, many countries (including France) pay religious schools with Tax Euros. In France, it was something too sensible to be touched 100 years ago, and it remains today extremely sensible every time an Education Minister dares to touch it (there has been 2 attempts to reform the system inn th last 20 years, one in favor of public schools, the other in favor of religious schools ; both have been cancelled because of the impressive mobilisation of both sides).

      There are 2 kinds of private schools : those who have a "contract" with the State, and whose funds are partly covered by taxes (thus lowering the fee for children), and those who don't have such a "contract", and which get nothing.
      Schools with contract must abide with the Education Ministry's rules, and must be opened to pupils from all religions, even if these schools are almost all catholic (France has been almost 100% catholic until the rise of Islam through immigration ; yet there are no muslim schools in France IIRC)
      The upside for the State is that about 17% of students cost less to educate (since private schools fund partly the education themselves), and the upside for catholic families is that their children can recieve academical religious education.
      Naturally, the downsize for left-wingers like me is that we pay taxes for the propaganda of the catholic church.
      "I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
      "I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
      "I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- Dis

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Ned
        HershO, Let's not debate until we understand. That is the point of this thread afterall - understanding why we are different.
        Is that a Bush quote ?

        As for example Germany: State and Church are not strictly separated. The relationship is governed by state neutrality in matters of world view. That simply means that a catholic school, a protestant kindergarden, an orthodox homeless shalter etc recieve public funding equally for the service they perform - just like other private schools etc that have no religious background.

        The state is also funding religious instruction - or ethics instruction for those whose parents are not religious. You could just argue about some remains of preferential treatment that go back to the Concordate.

        The US approach leads to all kinds of problems in making that "wall of separation". One of the funniest cases I remember was the one about the state subsidising schoolbusses that bring students (also) to religious classes. It is also allowed to subsidise religion-run hospitals IIRC. De facto you have monotheistic neutrality in the US anyway, not separation. Also, there is no need for a strict seperation for us because we have very secular societies.
        “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by HershOstropoler
          Ned (and to some extent Dan): You really live in a fantasy world.

          Now, if you can understand the two concepts of religious neutrality (a la Germany and Austria, for example) and strict separation of church and state (a la US and France), we can debate this. Requires a bit of knowledge about comparative constitutional law. Then maybe even Ned would understand why Osama would not like either concept.

          "Most European countries fund religion directly from tax dollars."

          Explain. But please not the german "Kirchensteuer".
          It MUST be defended. Religion in class is something done in Austria. And not in U.S. It MUST be defended. (I personally don't care because I think religion has a beneficial effect on man and society...even if all made up...but I'm an odd duck.)

          Comment


          • #65
            Drunk again ?
            “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

            Comment


            • #66
              What crap are you talking?

              Originally posted by Ned


              Once upon a time, there was an English prince who love a Catholic girl. He was forced to marry someone else, a good "Protestant" girl. But he continued to love the other. The girl he married came to know that she was not loved, and ... Well now she is gone.

              The prince still cannot marry his true love.

              Where is the fault in this tragedy? It is that the Monachy is the head of Church of England.

              But more than this, this tragic love story drives home to all Catholics that they truly are second class citizens in the UK.

              And all that has what to do with the price of kippers?
              One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by HershOstropoler
                Drunk again ?
                No. Monday morning.

                Comment


                • #68
                  I hate Mondays. At least Monday the 13th has passed.
                  “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: What crap are you talking?

                    Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin



                    And all that has what to do with the price of kippers?
                    Oblivious to discrimination, as always.

                    What do you think Ireland is all about, btw.
                    http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      HershO, It looks like Germany supports "religion." It just that it is neutral between religions.

                      Some argue that that is all our own First Amendment says. The Supremes have held the other way. Their rulings lead to the recent Ninth Circuit cases banning the use of "God" in the pledge of allegience because the law supported "monothesism." This provoked outrage in the US, and the Ninth Circuit is reconsidering.

                      I personally see merit in the German approach.

                      I still condemn the English state religion approach.
                      http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Re: What crap are you talking?

                        Originally posted by Ned


                        Oblivious to discrimination, as always.

                        What do you think Ireland is all about, btw.
                        The Ireland situation would not be resolved if the monarchy was removed and the UK government was segregated from religion.

                        The issue of Diana and the Prince of Wales has crap all to do with religion.
                        One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          America is going both too far and not far enough with seperation of church and state.

                          On one hand, the court system, persistantly harried by the ACLU, is attempting to eliminate the use of religious symbols or names in public. Which is kinda odd, because then its breaking the other constitutional protection of freedom of religion without persecution.

                          On the other, we have Sr. Bush. Actually, I support his vouchers, etc. and protection of (christian) religion. But many people don't, and I see their point.

                          Europe is just odd here. I'll usually defend Europe's actions as opposed to our own, but the whole lot of you are screwed up when it comes to your religious policy.
                          "The Enrichment Center is required to inform you that you will be baked, and then there will be cake"
                          Former President, C3SPDGI

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Ned:

                            "HershO, It looks like Germany supports "religion." It just that it is neutral between religions."

                            Or other world views. You could start an agnostic private school.

                            "Some argue that that is all our own First Amendment says. The Supremes have held the other way."

                            Sometimes they did, sometimes not. To me the establishment clause stands against a preferential treatment of baptism, monotheism or whatever, but it does not exclude what is labelled "entanglement" as long as there is no discrimination.

                            On the other hand, the permanent referrals to god in politics strikes us as odd.
                            “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              "It just that it is neutral between religions."

                              Scientology.
                              I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                What about scientology ?
                                “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                                Comment

                                Working...