8 2 mins 10 yrs

Some interesting comments here by Baroness Warsi;

“The minister, who is also chairman of the Conservative Party, says: “My fear today is that a militant secularisation is taking hold of our societies. We see it in any number of things: when signs of religion cannot be displayed or worn in government buildings; and where religion is sidelined, marginalised and downgraded in the public sphere. “For me, one of the most worrying aspects about this militant secularisation is that at its core and in its instincts it is deeply intolerant. It demonstrates similar traits to totalitarian regimes – denying people the right to a religious identity because they were frightened of the concept of multiple identities.”

She is 100% and I find it interesting that Warsi, a Muslim, has the courage to speak up for those of us with Faith.  I contrast her directness with the pusillanimity of so many of our so-called Religious leaders. Of course we should all be a bit more tolerant, me included but the naked intolerance of the secularist fringe is disturbing and it needs curtailed.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

8 thoughts on “SECULARISM UBER ALLES?

  1. Oh dear, here we go yet again.

    They hate it when the shoe’s on the other foot, don’t they? “Militant secularism” indeed.

    It’s simply, baroness. We secularists wish to impose nothing on people of faith. All we ask is that you impose nothing more on us. (Those bishops in the Lords would be a kick-off, pun intended.)

    What could be more tolerant and less militant?

  2. Here we go again. The secularist myth of neutrality.
    “We secularists wish to impose nothing on people of faith.” Slip of the tongue?
    Hardly militant – simply human behaviour.

  3. She wants “a seat at the table in public life” for religion. I think the only way to get a seat at the table should be by election. If people want religion in public life they should vote for religious people. They tend not to.

    I grew up in a country where the Church had a seat at the table. In fact they pretty much owned the table. That’s why it was illegal to buy condoms or get divorced.

    Obviously religious groups would like to influence policy without the need to be elected. The Catholic Church would be delighted to have a say in family law for example.

    And if you offered Islam a say in the criminal justice system they’d take your hand off.

  4. Here’s another one.

    Tories are popping up all over the place to tell Britons what they want to hear, and they’re still doing nothing about them. They have no intention of doing anything about them either.

  5. I stand with the Baroness and applaud her courage. There seems to be a growing pattern developing where worship of any sort is frowned upon. Baroness Warsi refers to this as Militant Secularism but we seem to have Militants in all our Religions. Funny though how the term Secularists now indicates a particular belief system whereas someone like myself who does not believe at all except in concepts like tolerance and self respect would no more side with Militant Secularism than I would with Militant Fudamentalism.

  6. Peter T,

    “There seems to be a growing pattern developing where worship of any sort is frowned upon.”

    That’s your perception. As far as we secularists are concerned, supernaturalists are welcome to their absurd beliefs and worship. But please, keep them to yourselves, OK?

    As a ratepayer I have no problem with my council charging me for bin-collection and other useful services. However, if certain council members wish to chat to imaginary friends I consider it unreasonable that I should fund their one-sided conversations.

    And don’t get me started on the abuse of my taxes being frittered away on clergy and ritual.

  7. I am sure there are believers that share the same attitude that secularists are welcome to their absurd beliefs and should keep those beliefs to themselves.

    And similarly they may feel that their taxes are not best served by councils dictating that their religious expression illegal.

  8. Jonathan,

    “I am sure there are believers that share the same attitude that secularists are welcome to their absurd beliefs and should keep those beliefs to themselves.”

    Your statement makes no sense.

    “And similarly they may feel that their taxes are not best served by councils dictating that their religious expression illegal.”

    They may feel as they wish but they’d still be mistaken. To the best of my knowledge, no council dictates anything of the sort.

Comments are closed.