This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Teddy Eagle 30 Oct 21 10.38pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Are they? I thought religious leaders were appointed by their organisations and councillors elected. Only the kind of community that exists here tends to have a self-appointed loudmouth leader. But you don’t want religious leaders involved in life outside their places of worship.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 31 Oct 21 8.15am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
But you don’t want religious leaders involved in life outside their places of worship. On the contrary. I want them actively involved. What I don't want them doing is them preaching outside their places of worship, or organising any specifically religious activities. Religion should be for the religious. They can play a valuable role in building bridges between other communities and participating in local life.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 31 Oct 21 9.14am | |
---|---|
This guy has absolutely no idea about different dominations within Islam. He doesn't seem to understand that the Qu'ran specifically warns against dilution of the religion. The Deobandis, for example, run roughly a third of the Mosques in the UK, are traditionalists and would find his requirements laughable....They have been allowed to run their own schools for quite a while.....In fact he seems to know very little about the religion. When I recommended that Britain ban non medical circumcision and halal meat....both for ethical reasons and as a way of tackling the growth of anti western religions I was told that this would lead to conflict.....Well, it's funny that when this guy actually promotes the idea that religions can't promote their actual religion, meaning that their schools would have to stop teaching it.....not something I'd do as a point of freedom.....I notice that no one on the left wants to make the same point. In fact you notice that the wider left on here are silent as a mouse. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 Oct 2021 9.24am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Teddy Eagle 31 Oct 21 9.20am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
On the contrary. I want them actively involved. What I don't want them doing is them preaching outside their places of worship, or organising any specifically religious activities. Religion should be for the religious. They can play a valuable role in building bridges between other communities and participating in local life. Build bridges to span the chasms that have been created around them? There aren’t many religious leaders who haven’t been trying to do this for millennia. If the people who follow their religions don’t listen to them there’s no chance for those who don’t.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 31 Oct 21 2.07pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
This guy has absolutely no idea about different dominations within Islam. He doesn't seem to understand that the Qu'ran specifically warns against dilution of the religion. The Deobandis, for example, run roughly a third of the Mosques in the UK, are traditionalists and would find his requirements laughable....They have been allowed to run their own schools for quite a while.....In fact he seems to know very little about the religion. When I recommended that Britain ban non medical circumcision and halal meat....both for ethical reasons and as a way of tackling the growth of anti western religions I was told that this would lead to conflict.....Well, it's funny that when this guy actually promotes the idea that religions can't promote their actual religion, meaning that their schools would have to stop teaching it.....not something I'd do as a point of freedom.....I notice that no one on the left wants to make the same point. In fact you notice that the wider left on here are silent as a mouse. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 Oct 2021 9.24am)
Religious schools are definitely first on my hit list. Every child needs to be taught, in their schools, in the company of everyone of every and no faith, about religion, all of them, and their history and contribution to the development of human understanding. They also must be taught about the conflicts. What they must not be taught is any specific religion at school. That is for their homes and places of worship, who can provide religious education for those who want it, outside of mainstream schooling. The constant claims about "freedoms" is a complete red herring. As I have pointed out many times in any democracy no-one is completely free to do whatever they wish. We always must bow to the wishes of the majority and behave responsibly. Any tolerant democracy, such as ours, will bend over backwards to try to ensure people are free to act in whichever way they want, but there will always be red lines. This is one example of where a red line needs to be drawn.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 31 Oct 21 2.14pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Build bridges to span the chasms that have been created around them? There aren’t many religious leaders who haven’t been trying to do this for millennia. If the people who follow their religions don’t listen to them there’s no chance for those who don’t. If what I recommend ever came to pass, then we would be in an entirely new situation. There would have to be a lot of groundwork done and, probably, new structures created, to allow room for the discourse to happen. The chasms are indeed big, but the need to bridge them is bigger.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 31 Oct 21 2.33pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Are they? I thought religious leaders were appointed by their organisations and councillors elected. Only the kind of community that exists here tends to have a self-appointed loudmouth leader. Isn't that what we are talking about, the UK? Many community leaders in the UK are actually allowed to "lead" because the community is scared stiff of them. Back in their heritage country the families of theses leaders have power at a local level all they have done is transfer that to the UK. I don't blame those who stay silent as they are protecting their loved one back home. I am not aware of any democratic process for community leaders by the way I am not taking about councillors at least they have a mandate. These people are in the ones that often the police kowtow to and yet no one has elected them.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Teddy Eagle 31 Oct 21 2.38pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
If what I recommend ever came to pass, then we would be in an entirely new situation. There would have to be a lot of groundwork done and, probably, new structures created, to allow room for the discourse to happen. The chasms are indeed big, but the need to bridge them is bigger. This is true but the people concerned are operating outside their own religious tenets and communities.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
dannyboy1978 31 Oct 21 3.13pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
On the contrary. I want them actively involved. What I don't want them doing is them preaching outside their places of worship, or organising any specifically religious activities. Religion should be for the religious. They can play a valuable role in building bridges between other communities and participating in local life. Building bridges? With who and why?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Matov 31 Oct 21 3.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Like 52 v 48? LOL.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
PalazioVecchio south pole 31 Oct 21 4.57pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
On the contrary. I want them actively involved. What I don't want them doing is them preaching outside their places of worship, or organising any specifically religious activities. Religion should be for the religious. They can play a valuable role in building bridges between other communities and participating in local life. Anjem Choudery was very actively involved in the community. Bombing and stabbing up the whole place. great leadership talents from that 'community leader'. Do you think he is the only one ?
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 31 Oct 21 6.25pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Matov
Like 52 v 48? LOL. Whoosh
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.