Religion vs Homosexuality

[jimboston]

jim, I found the perfect picture for you:

This is great. I feel just like the guy standing up talking to the Chinese guy with the hat on.

[Bernie Sanders]

jim, I found the perfect picture for you:

This is great. I feel just like the guy standing up talking to the Chinese guy with the hat on.

[PLAYER57832]

Denmark,

Not going to tackle the others, but Denmark is hardly secular. They are not given to the religious fights we see here in the US, but that is largely because it is a very small and still fairly homogeneous society. They have a state religion, in fact, taught in the public schools to all students, and while its easy enough for kids to opt out, very few do.'

You can debate whether that means they actually follow their religion, etc, but most will still claim the title, at least officially.

Here's your chance to distinguish yourself from jimboston by actually reading the links he posted in this thread about religion in Denmark, Sweden, Finland and New Zealand.

Sticking with Denmark, because I can go on more than just internet links.

Set aside that Wikki is not verified fact,is subject to constant editing and so forth, the interpretations are really opinion. See, when you get into subjects like religion, the way someone in the US would speak of it is just not the same as in Denmark. People in the US tend to be more vocal, though not necessarily more clear, on their religion because we have such diversity. In Denmark, it is different. Danes tend to consider faith much more personal. Also, because they basically all go through the same religious education, fiscally support the same church, etc (again, not there are various "opt out" options), they more or less resolve any questions/debates far earlier than we do here. Beyond that, you could argue very much that part of the whole reason for the heavy socialistic views there has a lot to do with Christianity. While here in the US, many will cite their financial (etc) success as "due to God" in some sense or another, in Denmark that is just "not done". I am not saying there is no such thing as class or that. Of course, there is, and "one upmanship", but the idea of "keeping up with the Jonses" is not as prominent. You are more likely to hear one mom tell another "get so and so, so he/she is like the others" than "I got MY child .....". If you actually talk to Danes, as opposed to just going by polls, you find that while attending church and pronouncing membership in a particular church are not that strong, most do profess belief in God and adherence to Christian values. Also, it is quite traditional for Danes to not go to church, to see faith as something they can experience outside of "4 walls". They tend to go to church 4 times -- when getting baptized, when getting confirmed, when getting married and then when old. This contrasts with the US tradition where we have "Sunday school" in large part because of secular schools. Also, where large numbers historically came because they wanted an individual and specific adherence to their beliefs. In other words, whether that makes it a "Christian nation" depends more on your definition of "Christian" versus "secular" than on how Danes actually feel. For my part, taking the US in contrast, our whole system of education and justice are to be removed from specific religion. Danes, to contrast, take their religion as fundamental, (not fundamentalist, but fundamental to their society) and, in modern terms see that as bringing them to tolerance. That tolerance is being challenged and often stretched, but that is another debate. I would argue that while Danes might not profess particular church membership, they actually are "more Christian" than many here who attend church daily and profess great outward belief, but that is just my personal opinion.

[mrswdk]

Sticking with Denmark, because I can go on more than just internet links.

Yup, always good to throw some random anecdotes into the mix!

If you actually talk to Danes, as opposed to just going by polls

You mean, if I had a conversation with a couple of Danish people instead of relying on national surveys?

If only!

I would argue that while Danes might not profess particular church membership, they actually are "more Christian" than many here who attend church daily and profess great outward belief

You should probably have read the link then.

[mrswdk]

To go back to a point jim made earlier about secularism in Denmark, I just noticed this while rereading the 'religion in Denmark' page:

Four of Denmark's prime ministers have identified themselves as atheists

Turns out avowed atheists can quite easily become the head of state in Denmark.

[AndyDufresne]

...is just my personal opinion.

Should be player's signature.


--Andy

[mrswdk]

...is just my personal opinion.

Should be player's signature.


--Andy

It's a close contest between that and:

Digging the exact studies up would take more time than I have for a casual discussion right now.

[Phatscotty]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

As waauw said, it's called the law.

I suspect a lot of people used the same logic when slavery was questioned... ''It's called the law'
Why can't black people attend that all white school? 'Hey, the law is the law!'
No blacks allows in this restaurant.... 'Just following the law n stuff'

eh?

[mrswdk]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

As waauw said, it's called the law.

I suspect a lot of people used the same logic when slavery was questioned... ''It's called the law'
Why can't black people attend that all white school? 'Hey, the law is the law!'
No blacks allows in this restaurant.... 'Just following the law n stuff'

eh?

lolwut

I'm saying that the law is a way of regulating people's behavior. Just because people have previously made laws that we know consider to be counterproductive doesn't make the law an ineffective tool.

[Dukasaur]

To go back to a point jim made earlier about secularism in Denmark, I just noticed this while rereading the 'religion in Denmark' page:

Four of Denmark's prime ministers have identified themselves as atheists

Turns out avowed atheists can quite easily become the head of state in Denmark.

A prime minister is not a head of state.

Denmark is a parliamentary monarchy, like Britain or Canada. The Queen is the head of state, the prime minister is just a servant. A high-ranking servant to be sure, but nonetheless just a servant.

[Bernie Sanders]

To go back to a point jim made earlier about secularism in Denmark, I just noticed this while rereading the 'religion in Denmark' page:

Four of Denmark's prime ministers have identified themselves as atheists

Turns out avowed atheists can quite easily become the head of state in Denmark.

A prime minister is not a head of state.

Denmark is a parliamentary monarchy, like Britain or Canada. The Queen is the head of state, the prime minister is just a servant. A high-ranking servant to be sure, but nonetheless just a servant.

Wrong, the Queen or King is just a figurehead

[Dukasaur]

To go back to a point jim made earlier about secularism in Denmark, I just noticed this while rereading the 'religion in Denmark' page:

Four of Denmark's prime ministers have identified themselves as atheists

Turns out avowed atheists can quite easily become the head of state in Denmark.

A prime minister is not a head of state.

Denmark is a parliamentary monarchy, like Britain or Canada. The Queen is the head of state, the prime minister is just a servant. A high-ranking servant to be sure, but nonetheless just a servant.

Wrong, the Queen or King is just a figurehead

Educate yourself:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_system

A parliamentary system is a system of democratic governance of a state in which the executive branch derives its democratic legitimacy from, and is held accountable to, the legislature (parliament); the executive and legislative branches are thus interconnected. In a parliamentary system, the head of state is normally a different person from the head of government. This is in contrast to a presidential system in a democracy, where the head of state often is also the head of government, and most importantly, the executive branch does not derive its democratic legitimacy from the legislature.

Countries with parliamentary systems may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the ceremonial head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of the legislature (such as the United Kingdom, Sweden and Japan), or parliamentary republics, where a mostly ceremonial president is the head of state while the head of government is regularly from the legislature (such as Ireland, Czech Republic, Germany, Pakistan, India and Italy). In a few parliamentary republics, such as Botswana, South Africa and Suriname, as well as German states, the head of government is also head of state, but is elected by and is answerable to the legislature.

[Bernie Sanders]

Countries with parliamentary systems may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the ceremonial head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of the legislature (such as the United Kingdom, Sweden and Japan)

Yep, I read it.

[Dukasaur]

Countries with parliamentary systems may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the ceremonial head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of the legislature (such as the United Kingdom, Sweden and Japan)

Yep, I read it.

Yes, and the magical part is what makes parliamentary democracies more stable than republics.

The head of state is a relatively harmless figurehead, while government is entrusted to a commoner who has just the social status of a servant.

Unfortunately, humans have inborn response to a leader. In republics, the president or chairman is glorified more and more until he gains demigod level. This gives him the ability to accumulate more power, until he is effectively a dictator. In a parliamentary democracy, the glorification is put in one vessel, and the power in another, so that this tendency is eliminated. No matter how much pomp and ceremony is piled upon the Queen of England, the Prime Minister cannot cash in on it. He remains just a humble servant.

This is why after 800 years of democracy in England it is still relatively stable, while after 240 years of democracy in America it is already in the final throes of the death spiral to dictatorship. Hero worship of the American president, speaking of Him in hushed tones as if he was the Right Hand of God, is what put it there.

In the middle of World War II Churchill was still able to walk about with one or two bodyguards, while Roosevelt already had a battalion of paramilitary Secret Servicemen protecting him. That's because Churchill, for all his power and influence, was seen as just a replaceable servant, mortal and fallible, while Roosevelt was already venerated as a saint.

[PLAYER57832]

You should probably have read the link then.

I did.
As usual, you make assumptions based on your beliefs, not fact. And.. instead of even bothering to answer the point I brought up, you just claim I could not have read the link.

The real truth is that the study is not conclusive. It is almost impossible to truly quantify ideas like religious belief, because you have to start by defining what that belief is and what it means. The article made reference to a lot of superficialities. Basically people don't go to church and don't talk a lot about God so therefore they are not a religious nation, though they have a state church and most citizens profess belief in God, etc.

Or, to put it another way -- is the nation of people who don't think much of going to church, but are willing to pay more taxes so that his neighbor gets a decent house, food and medical care , more secular than a nation of people that do attend church, but is full of "if you don't make it its your own fault and don't ask me for help" mentality?

[mrswdk]

When I said 'head of state', I was just referring to the person who is actually in charge (which the monarch in a constitutional monarchy is not).

[mrswdk]

The real truth is that the study is not conclusive. It is almost impossible to truly quantify ideas like religious belief

Except for where people were explicitly asked 'do you believe there is a god or other power?', 'do you believe in the Christian god?', 'do you believe Jesus was the son of God?' and so on.

is the nation of people who don't think much of going to church, but are willing to pay more taxes so that his neighbor gets a decent house, food and medical care , more secular than a nation of people that do attend church, but is full of "if you don't make it its your own fault and don't ask me for help" mentality?

You forgot the key measure of religiosity - people's favorite flavor of milkshake.

[PLAYER57832]

The real truth is that the study is not conclusive. It is almost impossible to truly quantify ideas like religious belief

Except for where people were explicitly asked 'do you believe there is a god or other power?', 'do you believe in the Christian god?', 'do you believe Jesus was the son of God?' and so on.

No, and my answer shows that I did not. Each of those depends upon who is asking, who is answering and the definition. I can guarantee that if I ask a member of the church of Latter Day Saints, a Funamentalist Christian, a Roman Catholic and a member of the Missouri Synod Lutheran church, they would each tend to give different answers. Danes fall into another category. ELCA is probably the closest US denomination, but it is not an exact match to the official Danish Church.

You forgot the key measure of religiosity - people's favorite flavor of milkshake.

Yet another example of what mrswdk considers "intelligent" and "reasoned" debate.

[Paddy The Cat]

Well, I was going to engage in the discussion here... but I see that this thread is off the rails.

*slowly backs away*

[PLAYER57832]

Well, I was going to engage in the discussion here... but I see that this thread is off the rails.

*slowly backs away*

Actually, it could use a turn back. What were your thoughts?

[tzor]

Well, I was going to engage in the discussion here... but I see that this thread is off the rails.

That happens to most of the treads around here.

Rails? We don't need no stinking rails!

[Phatscotty]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

As waauw said, it's called the law.

I suspect a lot of people used the same logic when slavery was questioned... ''It's called the law'
Why can't black people attend that all white school? 'Hey, the law is the law!'
No blacks allows in this restaurant.... 'Just following the law n stuff'

eh?

lolwut

I'm saying that the law is a way of regulating people's behavior. Just because people have previously made laws that we know consider to be counterproductive doesn't make the law an ineffective tool.

Okay. I got off kilter there as I was more into Wauw and what he said and how he said it. The law can regulate people's behavior. The law can also have virtually zero effect on regulating people's behavior. Wauw said it in the way that the law works, cuz it's the law. If the laws worked the way he implied, there wouldn't be any prison cuz nobody would ever break the law and that's the safety net he tried to cast over the conversation.

[hotfire]

jim, I found the perfect picture for you:

This is great. I feel just like the guy standing up talking to the Chinese guy with the hat on.

so that graph proves it then....case closed...there are no other factors to look at...none

[owenshooter]

i'm sorry... i don't understand the premise of the thread... as a recovering catholic, i was under the impression that both were one in the same...-Jésus noir

[PLAYER57832]

i'm sorry... i don't understand the premise of the thread... as a recovering catholic, i was under the impression that both were one in the same...-Jésus noir

exactly...

Still, some religious individuals do feel their faith takes opposition to homosexuality, though even then, what that means varies a great deal.