Christianity has a lot of conservative and liberal positions, the default of Islam appears to be fundamentalism
any evidence for that Monsieur Dancer?
The Koran is believed by Muslims to be directly written by God - hence cannot be deviated from, a Fundamentalist position.
While there are Protestant sects that take such a view over the Bible, authority in the Catholic and Orthodox world are determined by Church tradition so can be more flexibly determined and also evolve over time. Many Protestant sects also believe in continuing revelation via the Holy Spirit rather than Biblical Literalism (which also begs the question of which version of which canonical books).
THE last FMQs before the election was not a comfortable one for the Tax Freezers Alliance, the party formerly known as the SNP.
After bagging 56 MPs on an anti-austerity ticket, and hinting at radical change with Holyrood’s new powers, it finally unveiled its big idea this week: do nothing in case the rich throw a huff.
Ms Dugdale chortled sardonically. “And there we have it: a nationalist First Minister arguing that Scotland cannot go it alone on tax. That really takes the biscuit.”
Christianity has a lot of conservative and liberal positions, the default of Islam appears to be fundamentalism
any evidence for that Monsieur Dancer?
The Koran is believed by Muslims to be directly written by God - hence cannot be deviated from, a Fundamentalist position.
While there are Protestant sects that take such a view over the Bible, authority in the Catholic and Orthodox world are determined by Church tradition so can be more flexibly determined and also evolve over time. Many Protestant sects also believe in continuing revelation via the Holy Spirit rather than Biblical Literalism (which also begs the question of which version of which canonical books).
So Morris Dancer is correct on this.
But there is room for interpretation in which of the hadiths you observe (don't know if that's the correct expression) is there not? For example as I understand it wearing the Niquab is not in the Koran.
It's handy how the junior doctors are preparing the country for life in the future as when Hunt gets his shiny new rotas there will be so many holes in the A&E and ITU ones that it'll be like the strikes all over again.
I don't think you've ever answered this question:
NHS doctors think they should be paid free-market wages, as they appear to be
* Based solely on comments on pb.com
The free market is the free market, surely. Why should doctors have to do that more than anyone else who has received subsidised tuition?
Of course they are at liberty to move as individuals.
But the union leadership, to claim they are underpaid while not taking
Sounds reasonable.
The escalation announced yesterday looks to me like a major error.
Contract imposition is 4 months away. Juniors are applying for those jobs not knowing where they will be or what they will get paid. The rotas and contract terms are not yet published.
The BMA JDC could only escalate or accept. They cannot accept a deal rejected by 98.5% of their membership on a 70% turnout. Escalation it is.
Yes the brothers must stick together.. since the Scargill like leadership ,whipping up its members with half truths and sod the general public.
Frankly I hope it does irreparable damage to the reputation of doctors in general.. its not before time.. their "saintly" status is ludicrous.
Ignorance is bliss, I see.
Are you suggesting that 98.5% of junior doctors are too stupid to understand their own contracts? This is not led by radicals, it is led by people who do not want a major deteriation in their pay and conditions of service. Terms that are increasingly forcing people out. The BMAs conterproposals were cost neutral but Hunt refuses to even discuss them.
I see.."" "we are all in it together" except for the junior doctors"""".. I like the slogan.. it works..
I have been stuffed by Brown's recession and mismanagement of the economy, but you want your boys immune.
Junior doctors pay is already down 24% for some grades in real terms over the last decade, even before this latest paycut.
We cannot fill vacancies for many posts at present. Fortunately we still can employ EU staff fairly easily, indeed we now have more Greeks than Anglo-saxons in our dept. Without them we could not run a service, either emergency or elective.
Mr. 1983, there's not 100% agreement within Islam (as the Sunni/Shi'ite disagreements prove), but that doesn't meant it's not an almost completely fundamentalist religion.
Literalism/fundamentalism/conservatism/liberalism tend to be defined by the attitude of a believer to their holy book.
Danny Shaw Home Office confirms Daily Mail reports that 51 clandestine migrants found in separate incidents in Kent this week - Dartford & Patrixbourne
I wonder how much it would cost to search every vehicle and container for stowaways. I'd be happy to pay.
Christianity has a lot of conservative and liberal positions, the default of Islam appears to be fundamentalism
any evidence for that Monsieur Dancer?
The Koran is believed by Muslims to be directly written by God - hence cannot be deviated from, a Fundamentalist position.
While there are Protestant sects that take such a view over the Bible, authority in the Catholic and Orthodox world are determined by Church tradition so can be more flexibly determined and also evolve over time. Many Protestant sects also believe in continuing revelation via the Holy Spirit rather than Biblical Literalism (which also begs the question of which version of which canonical books).
So Morris Dancer is correct on this.
I'm happy for him to be correct if that's the case, if indeed it is so for all Muslims. I remain slightly sceptical whether that is really so. Pretty much all Christians (as far as I know) regularly affirm the bible to be the word of God without literally believing it to be the case. I wonder how it can be known that the same is not true for many Muslims.
Muslims believe that the Koran was dictated to Muhammed by God's messenger and it was written down word for word. The Hadith is a different matter.
No major Christian group believes the Bible was other than a collection of stories written by a variety of authors but inspired by the spirit of God. As I said yesterday, Genesis includes two separate and different stories of creation.
Jesus is a prophet in Islam, but Muslims believe that he was not crucified but was replaced on the cross by a phantom.
There are quite a few other "Gospels" knocking around but they were not accepted by the Church authorities for the 27 books of the NT.
Danny Shaw Home Office confirms Daily Mail reports that 51 clandestine migrants found in separate incidents in Kent this week - Dartford & Patrixbourne
I wonder how much it would cost to search every vehicle and container for stowaways. I'd be happy to pay.
Cheaper than the costs of putting them up as asylum seekers etc.
No major Christian group believes the Bible was other than a collection of stories written by a variety of authors but inspired by the spirit of God. As I said yesterday, Genesis includes two separate and different stories of creation.
Mr. Dugarbandier, there are smaller numbers of Muslims who raise doubts over aspects of their faith (I recall one woman criticising, as she described it, the imperialism of praying in the direction of Mecca). But they are in a (probably very) small minority. The reverse is true of Christianity.
Mr. CD13, if my fuzzy memory is right, in the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus fought a dragon. They should've included that.
Christianity has a lot of conservative and liberal positions, the default of Islam appears to be fundamentalism
any evidence for that Monsieur Dancer?
The Koran is believed by Muslims to be directly written by God - hence cannot be deviated from, a Fundamentalist position.
While there are Protestant sects that take such a view over the Bible, authority in the Catholic and Orthodox world are determined by Church tradition so can be more flexibly determined and also evolve over time. Many Protestant sects also believe in continuing revelation via the Holy Spirit rather than Biblical Literalism (which also begs the question of which version of which canonical books).
So Morris Dancer is correct on this.
But there is room for interpretation in which of the hadiths you observe (don't know if that's the correct expression) is there not? For example as I understand it wearing the Niquab is not in the Koran.
There are 4 schools of interpretation in traditional Islam ( hence madrassas are 4 sided) and of course there is room for interpretation in Koranic exegenesis. Nonetheless it is a fixed point that the Koran was written by God and revealed to Mohammad as the final prophet.
So when the Koran says that it is ok to rape female slaves taken in battle, then it is not easy to argue against it. (Surah 4:24)
There's clear evidence that secularism has gone hand in hand with the rise of other expressions of spiritual needs.
It's an assumption that the more extreme forms of Islam would be attractive to a sub-group of people seeking meaning in their lives.
We've also seen this in Christianity, with the growth of traditional liturgy and the strength of the more evangelical forms of Anglicianism and Protestantism.
1st point not in dispute.
question is whether jihadis are actually seeking spiritual meaning, or something else.
(and as you said yourself, secularism is not the same as athiesm, the US being highly secular, at least in theory, though very religious)
I'm not sure that anyone with an interest in homeopathy is seeking spiritual meaning either! It's just a sense that there needs to be "something more" than the humdrum day to day.
- Those who stand for nothing fall for anything
p.s. I'd dispute that the US is highly secular - I'm using it in the technical sense rather than in common parlance
I would put it the other way round. Technically the US is secular in that its constitution insists (to some extent) on the separation of church and state (in contrast with the UK). In common parlance it seems less secular because its has so many vocal Christians.
At all events, secularism itself is eminently worth defending. The devout should appreciate this as much as anyone as a secular society is a bulwark of religious freedom.
You forget that I trained as a theologian so sometimes get things arse about tit
If half of this is true then there's going to be a byelection in Wansbeck: https://storify.com/hopisen/defending-good-unions-doesn-t-mean-protecting-bad-?utm_campaign=&utm_content=storify-pingback&utm_medium=sfy.co-twitter&utm_source=t.co&awesm=sfy.co_b0xVj ' After the money began to arrive, Ian Lavery was paid £596,433 in salary, £152,583 in pension payments and £49,481 in Car allowance. After he left the Union, he got £62,000 in Redundancy. That makes a grand total of £860,000. (To be fair, around £80,000 came from the National NUM) That's not including any money for home loans, or the £85,426 in the 2013 accounts for "past General Secretary Redundancy costs". ' ' In total, after the Union got £1.6 million from coal miners compensation, it spent £1.56 million on remuneration and expenses. ' ' Guess how much ordinary miners get from that union? They get £50 when they die. '
One of many NUM scandals. Utterly disgusting how the miners have lost money to the various union heads. Pigs in trough and the TUC/Labour party has done nothing about it. Some brothers are more equal than other brothers.
But there is pretty good evidence that a secular society and the decline of mainstream churches has led to a demand from people to satisfy their spiritual longings. We see this manifested in the upswing in interest in paganism, astrology, homeopathy, Gaiaism, etc.
It's pretty logical that it would lead to an interest or openness to more virulent forms of Islam.
pretty logical, or a massive assumption without any evidence? As someone else was mentioning earlier, these young men often have a history of petty violence and criminality, and would otherwise be engaged in street gangs, most likely.
There's clear evidence that secularism has gone hand in hand with the rise of other expressions of spiritual needs.
It's an assumption that the more extreme forms of Islam would be attractive to a sub-group of people seeking meaning in their lives.
We've also seen this in Christianity, with the growth of traditional liturgy and the strength of the more evangelical forms of Anglicianism and Protestantism.
Although I'm not religious, I think the following saying is all too accurate: when people stop believing in something, it is not that they believe in nothing, it is that they believe in anything.
Mr. Dugarbandier, also, many Christians would say Mormons aren't Christian. Mormons do follow the Bible but (again, my understanding is that) they take the Book of Mormon as more important.
I think Mormons do consider themselves Christian.
Edited extra bit: I'm also mildly amused that we're having an incredibly civilised conversation about religious fundamentalism.
Junior doctors pay is already down 24% for some grades in real terms over the last decade, even before this latest paycut.
We cannot fill vacancies for many posts at present. Fortunately we still can employ EU staff fairly easily, indeed we now have more Greeks than Anglo-saxons in our dept. Without them we could not run a service, either emergency or elective.
You keep coming back to the staffing point. That's entirely irrelevant to the question of pay & conditions - if it's true then it's a problem for Hunt, but that's his decision.
Christianity has a lot of conservative and liberal positions, the default of Islam appears to be fundamentalism
any evidence for that Monsieur Dancer?
The Koran is believed by Muslims to be directly written by God - hence cannot be deviated from, a Fundamentalist position.
While there are Protestant sects that take such a view over the Bible, authority in the Catholic and Orthodox world are determined by Church tradition so can be more flexibly determined and also evolve over time. Many Protestant sects also believe in continuing revelation via the Holy Spirit rather than Biblical Literalism (which also begs the question of which version of which canonical books).
So Morris Dancer is correct on this.
But there is room for interpretation in which of the hadiths you observe (don't know if that's the correct expression) is there not? For example as I understand it wearing the Niquab is not in the Koran.
There are 4 schools of interpretation in traditional Islam ( hence madrassas are 4 sided) and of course there is room for interpretation in Koranic exegenesis. Nonetheless it is a fixed point that the Koran was written by God and revealed to Mohammad as the final prophet.
So when the Koran says that it is ok to rape female slaves taken in battle, then it is not easy to argue against it. (Surah 4:24)
Nevertheless, the Koran also says only that women (and men) should dress modestly. It takes a pretty awesomely warped interpretation to decide that means the Niquab for women, and no restrictions for men.
Mr. Dugarbandier, also, many Christians would say Mormons aren't Christian. Mormons do follow the Bible but (again, my understanding is that) they take the Book of Mormon as more important.
I think Mormons do consider themselves Christian.
Edited extra bit: I'm also mildly amused that we're having an incredibly civilised conversation about religious fundamentalism.
I did have the tongue in the cheek there
it's actually very interesting to have contemporary accounts of how new religions form. Mark Twain's scathing review of either the Mormon Bible or the Book of Mormon (sorry I forget which) is rather amusing. Which doesn't make the persecution or suffering of the Mormons of the time any the less.
One of these days I shall get round to reading the histories of Haile Selassie as well
Latimer Alder Really? Airbus are sooo going to build all their planes w/o wings or engines for 10 years. How many will they sell? https://t.co/4bBy55QepM
But there is pretty good evidence that a secular society and the decline of mainstream churches has led to a demand from people to satisfy their spiritual longings. We see this manifested in the upswing in interest in paganism, astrology, homeopathy, Gaiaism, etc.
It's pretty logical that it would lead to an interest or openness to more virulent forms of Islam.
pretty logical, or a massive assumption without any evidence? As someone else was mentioning earlier, these young men often have a history of petty violence and criminality, and would otherwise be engaged in street gangs, most likely.
There's clear evidence that secularism has gone hand in hand with the rise of other expressions of spiritual needs.
It's an assumption that the more extreme forms of Islam would be attractive to a sub-group of people seeking meaning in their lives.
We've also seen this in Christianity, with the growth of traditional liturgy and the strength of the more evangelical forms of Anglicianism and Protestantism.
Although I'm not religious, I think the following saying is all too accurate: when people stop believing in something, it is not that they believe in nothing, it is that they believe in anything.
(See homeopathy, etc.)
CS Lewis? Not sure what his point was though, really. probably it's hard to force yourself to believe something that you don't believe
Junior doctors pay is already down 24% for some grades in real terms over the last decade, even before this latest paycut.
We cannot fill vacancies for many posts at present. Fortunately we still can employ EU staff fairly easily, indeed we now have more Greeks than Anglo-saxons in our dept. Without them we could not run a service, either emergency or elective.
You keep coming back to the staffing point. That's entirely irrelevant to the question of pay & conditions - if it's true then it's a problem for Hunt, but that's his decision.
Pay and conditions are fundamental to recruitment and retention. As indeed is a boss that treats the workforce with respect rather than bullying.
Junior doctors pay is already down 24% for some grades in real terms over the last decade, even before this latest paycut.
We cannot fill vacancies for many posts at present. Fortunately we still can employ EU staff fairly easily, indeed we now have more Greeks than Anglo-saxons in our dept. Without them we could not run a service, either emergency or elective.
You keep coming back to the staffing point. That's entirely irrelevant to the question of pay & conditions - if it's true then it's a problem for Hunt, but that's his decision.
It takes a certain level of cluelessness to follow the logic trail that is:-
We have a shortage of doctors and already use expensive locums to fill in the gaps - hmm lets increase staffing requirements while making terms and conditions worse - that will fix the issue...
The problem is that there are various departments who already cannot recruit enough trainees to fill the existing gaps....
I suppose we are getting more secular in that there is more and more ignorance about religion nowadays (I don't include PBers generally).
I've seen shock that the Vatican and Popes believe in evolution, amazement that the "Father of the Big Bang" was a Catholic priest, and total ignorance that the OT and NT are separate parts. Hence the assertion that Leviticus and the Gospels are equivalent. As for the "golden rule" ???
The OT is regarded as useful and guided by the spirit of God as a lesson. The NT ... as quoted ... new wine in new bottles.
I don't claim any particular knowledge but as a child of the fifties. it must have been a different world. I happily discuss with Atheists but they often have negligible real knowledge of what the Christians actually believe. To a small minority, they don't need to know any facts, they just know better.
Mr. Dugarbandier, also, many Christians would say Mormons aren't Christian. Mormons do follow the Bible but (again, my understanding is that) they take the Book of Mormon as more important.
I think Mormons do consider themselves Christian.
Edited extra bit: I'm also mildly amused that we're having an incredibly civilised conversation about religious fundamentalism.
I did have the tongue in the cheek there
it's actually very interesting to have contemporary accounts of how new religions form. Mark Twain's scathing review of either the Mormon Bible or the Book of Mormon (sorry I forget which) is rather amusing. Which doesn't make the persecution or suffering of the Mormons of the time any the less.
One of these days I shall get round to reading the histories of Haile Selassie as well
The Book of Mormon, I think he called it literary chloroform?
Danny Shaw Home Office confirms Daily Mail reports that 51 clandestine migrants found in separate incidents in Kent this week - Dartford & Patrixbourne
I wonder how much it would cost to search every vehicle and container for stowaways. I'd be happy to pay.
Personally?
That's what taxation is. Personally paying for the government to do stuff.
YASMIN ALIBHAI-BROWN: Why will no one admit the way some western Muslims raise their children is fomenting terror? Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3507086/Why-no-one-admit-way-western-Muslims-raise-children-fomenting-terror.html#ixzz43oEuN6N1 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook "And, yes, in some cases Muslims will be helping to shelter known terrorists. It is true that the alleged Belgian terrorists were able to hide, presumably with local help, in Muslim ghettoes after the Paris massacre last November, and to plot this new mass murder."
Mr. CD13, mind you, Jesus' best appearance was when he was a giant, magic, talking lion.
Mr. Dugarbandier, all of them? No. But an overwhelming majority.
Fundamentalism, in the past mostly, has also been part of various other religions. I do think we might be better off if we had religion for ritual and philosophy for morality (as was the case a couple of millennia ago) but monotheism put paid to that, despite Julian the Apostate's best efforts.
The capacity for mankind, on a general or individual basis, to be daft ought not be underestimated.
No major Christian group believes the Bible was other than a collection of stories written by a variety of authors but inspired by the spirit of God. As I said yesterday, Genesis includes two separate and different stories of creation.
Junior doctors pay is already down 24% for some grades in real terms over the last decade, even before this latest paycut.
We cannot fill vacancies for many posts at present. Fortunately we still can employ EU staff fairly easily, indeed we now have more Greeks than Anglo-saxons in our dept. Without them we could not run a service, either emergency or elective.
You keep coming back to the staffing point. That's entirely irrelevant to the question of pay & conditions - if it's true then it's a problem for Hunt, but that's his decision.
It takes a certain level of cluelessness to follow the logic trail that is:-
We have a shortage of doctors and already use expensive locums to fill in the gaps - hmm lets increase staffing requirements while making terms and conditions worse - that will fix the issue...
The problem is that there are various departments who already cannot recruit enough trainees to fill the existing gaps....
Well the long term fix would be to increase the number of medical places at universities, paid for by increasing the tuition fee costs on students and aligned with an obligation to work in NHS for a set period - eg 3 years.
This would 1. Increase the supply of UK trained doctors 2. Drive down the salary levels of doctors in the UK 3. Improve the quality of the NHS and decrease its costs.
Christianity has a lot of conservative and liberal positions, the default of Islam appears to be fundamentalism
any evidence for that Monsieur Dancer?
The Koran is believed by Muslims to be directly written by God - hence cannot be deviated from, a Fundamentalist position.
While there are Protestant sects that take such a view over the Bible, authority in the Catholic and Orthodox world are determined by Church tradition so can be more flexibly determined and also evolve over time. Many Protestant sects also believe in continuing revelation via the Holy Spirit rather than Biblical Literalism (which also begs the question of which version of which canonical books).
So Morris Dancer is correct on this.
But there is room for interpretation in which of the hadiths you observe (don't know if that's the correct expression) is there not? For example as I understand it wearing the Niquab is not in the Koran.
There are 4 schools of interpretation in traditional Islam ( hence madrassas are 4 sided) and of course there is room for interpretation in Koranic exegenesis. Nonetheless it is a fixed point that the Koran was written by God and revealed to Mohammad as the final prophet.
So when the Koran says that it is ok to rape female slaves taken in battle, then it is not easy to argue against it. (Surah 4:24)
Nevertheless, the Koran also says only that women (and men) should dress modestly. It takes a pretty awesomely warped interpretation to decide that means the Niquab for women, and no restrictions for men.
The Burka (not sure about the Niquab) was originally a expression of nationalist resistance to the guidance that the British provided to Ali Pasha in Egypt.
No major Christian group believes the Bible was other than a collection of stories written by a variety of authors but inspired by the spirit of God. As I said yesterday, Genesis includes two separate and different stories of creation.
Mormons?
Mormons aren't Christians.
As mentioned below, I wasn't being entirely serious there
In general, most Christians rate the Gospels as being of the highest importance, followed by the rest of the New Testament, followed by the Old Testament. Most don't see themselves as being bound to follow Mosaic laws, for example. Most would accept that plenty of characters in the Old Testament performed acts that flagrantly violate the later teachings of Jesus.
But there is pretty good evidence that a secular society and the decline of mainstream churches has led to a demand from people to satisfy their spiritual longings. We see this manifested in the upswing in interest in paganism, astrology, homeopathy, Gaiaism, etc.
It's pretty logical that it would lead to an interest or openness to more virulent forms of Islam.
pretty logical, or a massive assumption without any evidence? As someone else was mentioning earlier, these young men often have a history of petty violence and criminality, and would otherwise be engaged in street gangs, most likely.
There's clear evidence that secularism has gone hand in hand with the rise of other expressions of spiritual needs.
It's an assumption that the more extreme forms of Islam would be attractive to a sub-group of people seeking meaning in their lives.
We've also seen this in Christianity, with the growth of traditional liturgy and the strength of the more evangelical forms of Anglicianism and Protestantism.
Although I'm not religious, I think the following saying is all too accurate: when people stop believing in something, it is not that they believe in nothing, it is that they believe in anything.
(See homeopathy, etc.)
It does indeed take a degree of mental fortitude to actually believe in "nothing". But it's most likely the truth...
I suppose we are getting more secular in that there is more and more ignorance about religion nowadays (I don't include PBers generally).
I've seen shock that the Vatican and Popes believe in evolution, amazement that the "Father of the Big Bang" was a Catholic priest, and total ignorance that the OT and NT are separate parts. Hence the assertion that Leviticus and the Gospels are equivalent. As for the "golden rule" ???
The OT is regarded as useful and guided by the spirit of God as a lesson. The NT ... as quoted ... new wine in new bottles.
I don't claim any particular knowledge but as a child of the fifties. it must have been a different world. I happily discuss with Atheists but they often have negligible real knowledge of what the Christians actually believe. To a small minority, they don't need to know any facts, they just know better.
Having been brought up a Catholic and now being an atheist I am always surprised that I seem to end up giving the Church more credit than it deserves. For example I spent decades thinking for some reason that the principle of papal infallibility had been dumped by Vatican II. It was only after a discussion on PB that I went and loomed it up and found that Papal infallibility is still the official position of the Vatican.
In general, most Christians rate the Gospels as being of the highest importance, followed by the rest of the New Testament, followed by the Old Testament. Most don't see themselves as being bound to follow Mosaic laws, for example. Most would accept that plenty of characters in the Old Testament performed acts that flagrantly violate the later teachings of Jesus.
I thought that the Gospels were pretty explicit that the New Covenant replaced the Mosaic Covenant in its entirety.
@GeoffM - prob don't have the same issue in Gib, but what happened to the local referendums to approve increases in council tax before they could be imposed?
No one asked me about the 4% increase in my bill last week, which has now made me £100 a year worse off.
Good news on the NZ flag - the flag New Zealanders formed their nation under, fought and died for and nods to the nation's British roots.
Not sure why it was necessary as the silver fern was an official emblem anyway.
Many New Zealanders have a strong affinity and loyalty to Britain.
Affinity, for sure. I'd say loyalty is pushing it. In my experience, anyway.
I think for many older New Zealanders, and it would probably be concentrated in that generation to be fair, they would have found the idea of removing the Union flag from their flag offensive.
On matters of foreign, security and defence policy, New Zealand's ability to participate has been hugely reduced over the last 20 years, but it is still one of our closest allies and affection for the monarchy is still high.
Obviously that doesn't mean that if we say "jump", New Zealand says "how high?".
What a selfish waste of money the New Zealand Flag referendum has turned out to be. While it ended up closer than I expected, and I likes several of the initial shortlist, there didn't seem to be any appetite for it and they even held 2 votes rather than seeing if people wanted a change at All. Silly.
@rogerlwhite: Remember many Scot nationalists will be feeling pain today. Give them the same sympathy they'd give No voters if it had gone the other way.
Nevertheless, the Koran also says only that women (and men) should dress modestly. It takes a pretty awesomely warped interpretation to decide that means the Niquab for women, and no restrictions for men.
The Burka (not sure about the Niquab) was originally a expression of nationalist resistance to the guidance that the British provided to Ali Pasha in Egypt. It's entirely political, not religious at all
I seem to recall that until around the late 60’s it was a requirment that women attending church wore a hat. Isn’t there something somewhere about “if a woman is not covered, let her be shorn”? Probably somewhere in Paul’s Letters.
Junior doctors pay is already down 24% for some grades in real terms over the last decade, even before this latest paycut.
We cannot fill vacancies for many posts at present. Fortunately we still can employ EU staff fairly easily, indeed we now have more Greeks than Anglo-saxons in our dept. Without them we could not run a service, either emergency or elective.
You keep coming back to the staffing point. That's entirely irrelevant to the question of pay & conditions - if it's true then it's a problem for Hunt, but that's his decision.
It takes a certain level of cluelessness to follow the logic trail that is:-
We have a shortage of doctors and already use expensive locums to fill in the gaps - hmm lets increase staffing requirements while making terms and conditions worse - that will fix the issue...
The problem is that there are various departments who already cannot recruit enough trainees to fill the existing gaps....
Well the long term fix would be to increase the number of medical places at universities, paid for by increasing the tuition fee costs on students and aligned with an obligation to work in NHS for a set period - eg 3 years.
This would 1. Increase the supply of UK trained doctors 2. Drive down the salary levels of doctors in the UK 3. Improve the quality of the NHS and decrease its costs.
So you think increasing the fees students have to pay, tying them down to contracts after university whilst reducing their pay will solve an immediate problem.
To solve the numbers issue you need to increase the number of spaces available to study medicine and that may eventually give you what you want if increasing supply does lead to decreasing salaries and improved quality (personally I doubt supply leads to those effects but hey if you believe so I will accept your knowledge).
The lead time (probably 10 years) means none of the above will solve your immediate issue though.... Heck even forcing students to work in the NHS will only kick in 7 years hence...
But there is pretty good evidence that a secular society and the decline of mainstream churches has led to a demand from people to satisfy their spiritual longings. We see this manifested in the upswing in interest in paganism, astrology, homeopathy, Gaiaism, etc.
It's pretty logical that it would lead to an interest or openness to more virulent forms of Islam.
pretty logical, or a massive assumption without any evidence? As someone else was mentioning earlier, these young men often have a history of petty violence and criminality, and would otherwise be engaged in street gangs, most likely.
There's clear evidence that secularism has gone hand in hand with the rise of other expressions of spiritual needs.
It's an assumption that the more extreme forms of Islam would be attractive to a sub-group of people seeking meaning in their lives.
We've also seen this in Christianity, with the growth of traditional liturgy and the strength of the more evangelical forms of Anglicianism and Protestantism.
Although I'm not religious, I think the following saying is all too accurate: when people stop believing in something, it is not that they believe in nothing, it is that they believe in anything.
(See homeopathy, etc.)
It does indeed take a degree of mental fortitude to actually believe in "nothing". But it's most likely the truth...
We just replace a set of values based on ancient myths with a set based on common sense, science, personal morality and rationalism. The first effect of which is generally to get rid of a lot of those nonsensical bigotries against sections of society like women, gays and ethnic minorities.
I suppose we are getting more secular in that there is more and more ignorance about religion nowadays (I don't include PBers generally).
I've seen shock that the Vatican and Popes believe in evolution, amazement that the "Father of the Big Bang" was a Catholic priest, and total ignorance that the OT and NT are separate parts. Hence the assertion that Leviticus and the Gospels are equivalent. As for the "golden rule" ???
The OT is regarded as useful and guided by the spirit of God as a lesson. The NT ... as quoted ... new wine in new bottles.
I don't claim any particular knowledge but as a child of the fifties. it must have been a different world. I happily discuss with Atheists but they often have negligible real knowledge of what the Christians actually believe. To a small minority, they don't need to know any facts, they just know better.
I don't think any stark distinction can be drawn between the Old and New Testaments in terms of the degree to which they are divinely inspired. If a work is "given by inspiration of God", as Jesus says of the OT, then we must suppose that it does not contain any factual or moral error. We can certainly say that parts of it are to be understood as poetry. We can also argue that the old covenant has been set aside, so the Mosaic law is in abeyance (though why it was ever necessary is trickier to answer). But none of that helps with 1 Samuel 15.3!
The Muslims who I know fill a pretty broad spectrum, from people who take it very seriously and are easily upset by provocations (to be clear, I don't know anyone who feels violently about them - they're just unhappy) to people who just go through the motions because their friends and family wouldn't like it if they didn't. In between there's a majority who do believe in it in a general way and pray when they have time, but have other aspects of life that matter more. I don't know anyone from a Muslim background who is overtly atheist. As a group they remind me of the older generation of my family with respect to Christianity - I've an uncle who is a fundamentalist, a couple who are vague deists, a serious CoE supporter with various church roles, and some quiet sceptics.
In the same way as some in my family were upset by deliberate provocations like the "Piss Christ" exhibit in the ICA, some of the Muslims of my acquaintance are upset by things like the Mohammed cartoons, and they make them more defensive and assertive. They tend to see things like criticism of the hijab and halal as more civilised versions of the same general rejection of their right to follow their religion (they are more open to people like me who criticise halal but also have other concerns about slaughterhouses), though only one actually wears the hijab and some of the others aren't too fussed about halal. The older ones worry that the younger ones are getting more secular and selective in their adherence to the beliefs (smoking, drinking, etc.). In general they all seem to me rather like Christians one generation back. I'm an atheist so I think they're all deluded: they know that and accept it with weary tolerance, perhaps because I don't make a habit of ranting about it.
Now my circle of acquaintances is generally doing OK - typically shopkeepers and restauraunt owners whose kids are branching out into professions - and aren't in the "angry slum" environment from which ISIS draws sympathy. But FWIW there's nothing about them that makes me feel that a generalised crackdown on Islam would be in any way helpful or fair. Focusing on things that are actually illegal, from FGM to any kind of violence and forced marriages, seems to me the way to go - creeping secularism is eroding the rigidity of the legal practices, just as it did for Christianity. For the "angry slum" people, it may be going the other way, and that needs to be addressed more selectively - it's not just a religious problem.
@GeoffM - prob don't have the same issue in Gib, but what happened to the local referendums to approve increases in council tax before they could be imposed?
No one asked me about the 4% increase in my bill last week, which has now made me £100 a year worse off.
@Casino_Royale You're right; it's not a thing here in Gib. But I must look at my Council Tax bill for my place in the UK and see if anything nasty is lurking there. Thanks for the reminder!
The Muslims who I know fill a pretty broad spectrum, from people who take it very seriously and are easily upset by provocations (to be clear, I don't know anyone who feels violently about them - they're just unhappy) to people who just go through the motions because their friends and family wouldn't like it if they didn't. In between there's a majority who do believe in it in a general way and pray when they have time, but have other aspects of life that matter more. I don't know anyone from a Muslim background who is overtly atheist. As a group they remind me of the older generation of my family with respect to Christianity - I've an uncle who is a fundamentalist, a couple who are vague deists, a serious CoE supporter with various church roles, and some quiet sceptics.
In the same way as some in my family were upset by deliberate provocations like the "Piss Christ" exhibit in the ICA, some of the Muslims of my acquaintance are upset by things like the Mohammed cartoons, and they make them more defensive and assertive. They tend to see things like criticism of the hijab and halal as more civilised versions of the same general rejection of their right to follow their religion (they are more open to people like me who criticise halal but also have other concerns about slaughterhouses), though only one actually wears the hijab and some of the others aren't too fussed about halal. The older ones worry that the younger ones are getting more secular and selective in their adherence to the beliefs (smoking, drinking, etc.). In general they all seem to me rather like Christians one generation back. I'm an atheist so I think they're all deluded: they know that and accept it with weary tolerance, perhaps because I don't make a habit of ranting about it.
Now my circle of acquaintances is generally doing OK - typically shopkeepers and restauraunt owners whose kids are branching out into professions - and aren't in the "angry slum" environment from which ISIS draws sympathy. But FWIW there's nothing about them that makes me feel that a generalised crackdown on Islam would be in any way helpful or fair. Focusing on things that are actually illegal, from FGM to any kind of violence and forced marriages, seems to me the way to go - creeping secularism is eroding the rigidity of the legal practices, just as it did for Christianity. For the "angry slum" people, it may be going the other way, and that needs to be addressed more selectively - it's not just a religious problem.
I mostly agree but I think the gap with the Christian experience is greater than one generation. Two or three generations would be closer to the mark imo. I do think it's very illluminating to chat to actual Muslims about Islam.
Not sure about "angry slum" as a characterisation of IS adherents. Many of them seem to be educated (I hesitate to say "well educated") and to have decent jobs.
Comments
"Those categories really are: gallows, gulag, re-education, jury’s out and comrades” one MP said. https://t.co/QpXCchb5s9
While there are Protestant sects that take such a view over the Bible, authority in the Catholic and Orthodox world are determined by Church tradition so can be more flexibly determined and also evolve over time. Many Protestant sects also believe in continuing revelation via the Holy Spirit rather than Biblical Literalism (which also begs the question of which version of which canonical books).
So Morris Dancer is correct on this.
Updated trend chart on Britain's EU referendum (via Harold Clarke). 177 polls, Sep 2010-March 2016 #euref --> https://t.co/jgIZnR7dXU
We cannot fill vacancies for many posts at present. Fortunately we still can employ EU staff fairly easily, indeed we now have more Greeks than Anglo-saxons in our dept. Without them we could not run a service, either emergency or elective.
72% of bets & 48% of stake money since the date of the #EUreferendum was announced have been for a 'Leave' outcome.
source @sharpeangle
Literalism/fundamentalism/conservatism/liberalism tend to be defined by the attitude of a believer to their holy book.
No major Christian group believes the Bible was other than a collection of stories written by a variety of authors but inspired by the spirit of God. As I said yesterday, Genesis includes two separate and different stories of creation.
Jesus is a prophet in Islam, but Muslims believe that he was not crucified but was replaced on the cross by a phantom.
There are quite a few other "Gospels" knocking around but they were not accepted by the Church authorities for the 27 books of the NT.
https://storify.com/hopisen/defending-good-unions-doesn-t-mean-protecting-bad-?utm_campaign=&utm_content=storify-pingback&utm_medium=sfy.co-twitter&utm_source=t.co&awesm=sfy.co_b0xVj
' After the money began to arrive, Ian Lavery was paid £596,433 in salary, £152,583 in pension payments and £49,481 in Car allowance.
After he left the Union, he got £62,000 in Redundancy.
That makes a grand total of £860,000. (To be fair, around £80,000 came from the National NUM)
That's not including any money for home loans, or the £85,426 in the 2013 accounts for "past General Secretary Redundancy costs". '
' In total, after the Union got £1.6 million from coal miners compensation, it spent £1.56 million on remuneration and expenses. '
' Guess how much ordinary miners get from that union?
They get £50 when they die. '
We should give them Australia.
Status Quo wins the referendum, again.
Mr. CD13, if my fuzzy memory is right, in the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus fought a dragon. They should've included that.
So when the Koran says that it is ok to rape female slaves taken in battle, then it is not easy to argue against it. (Surah 4:24)
"Mormons?"
Well-meaning but hardly major.
Some brothers are more equal than other brothers.
(See homeopathy, etc.)
#OnThisDay 1999: NATO begins air strikes against Yugoslavia – the first time against a sovereign country in its history
I think Mormons do consider themselves Christian.
Edited extra bit: I'm also mildly amused that we're having an incredibly civilised conversation about religious fundamentalism.
it's actually very interesting to have contemporary accounts of how new religions form. Mark Twain's scathing review of either the Mormon Bible or the Book of Mormon (sorry I forget which) is rather amusing. Which doesn't make the persecution or suffering of the Mormons of the time any the less.
One of these days I shall get round to reading the histories of Haile Selassie as well
Latimer Alder
Really? Airbus are sooo going to build all their planes w/o wings or engines for 10 years. How many will they sell? https://t.co/4bBy55QepM
Oh well. I suppose that just proves taking everything literally is daft
We have a shortage of doctors and already use expensive locums to fill in the gaps - hmm lets increase staffing requirements while making terms and conditions worse - that will fix the issue...
The problem is that there are various departments who already cannot recruit enough trainees to fill the existing gaps....
I've seen shock that the Vatican and Popes believe in evolution, amazement that the "Father of the Big Bang" was a Catholic priest, and total ignorance that the OT and NT are separate parts. Hence the assertion that Leviticus and the Gospels are equivalent. As for the "golden rule" ???
The OT is regarded as useful and guided by the spirit of God as a lesson. The NT ... as quoted ... new wine in new bottles.
I don't claim any particular knowledge but as a child of the fifties. it must have been a different world. I happily discuss with Atheists but they often have negligible real knowledge of what the Christians actually believe. To a small minority, they don't need to know any facts, they just know better.
The Gospel of Thomas should have been made into a film or TV series.
The OT was a natural for the same reason.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3507086/Why-no-one-admit-way-western-Muslims-raise-children-fomenting-terror.html#ixzz43oEuN6N1
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
"And, yes, in some cases Muslims will be helping to shelter known terrorists. It is true that the alleged Belgian terrorists were able to hide, presumably with local help, in Muslim ghettoes after the Paris massacre last November, and to plot this new mass murder."
Mr. Dugarbandier, all of them? No. But an overwhelming majority.
Fundamentalism, in the past mostly, has also been part of various other religions. I do think we might be better off if we had religion for ritual and philosophy for morality (as was the case a couple of millennia ago) but monotheism put paid to that, despite Julian the Apostate's best efforts.
The capacity for mankind, on a general or individual basis, to be daft ought not be underestimated.
This would
1. Increase the supply of UK trained doctors
2. Drive down the salary levels of doctors in the UK
3. Improve the quality of the NHS and decrease its costs.
It's entirely political, not religious at all
Distrust of atheists is "deeply and culturally ingrained" even among atheists
http://digest.bps.org.uk/2016/03/distrust-of-atheists-is-deeply-and.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+BpsResearchDigest+(BPS+Research+Digest)
No one asked me about the 4% increase in my bill last week, which has now made me £100 a year worse off.
Wings over Bath: - £71,000 in 24 days (±£3,000/day)
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-great-leap-forward#/
Keep Robert The Bruce Seal in Scotland - £213 over one day
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/robert-the-bruce-s-seal-for-public-display
That's the whole point of not being a tribe.
On matters of foreign, security and defence policy, New Zealand's ability to participate has been hugely reduced over the last 20 years, but it is still one of our closest allies and affection for the monarchy is still high.
Obviously that doesn't mean that if we say "jump", New Zealand says "how high?".
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD
Probably somewhere in Paul’s Letters.
Edited for spelling
To solve the numbers issue you need to increase the number of spaces available to study medicine and that may eventually give you what you want if increasing supply does lead to decreasing salaries and improved quality (personally I doubt supply leads to those effects but hey if you believe so I will accept your knowledge).
The lead time (probably 10 years) means none of the above will solve your immediate issue though.... Heck even forcing students to work in the NHS will only kick in 7 years hence...
In the same way as some in my family were upset by deliberate provocations like the "Piss Christ" exhibit in the ICA, some of the Muslims of my acquaintance are upset by things like the Mohammed cartoons, and they make them more defensive and assertive. They tend to see things like criticism of the hijab and halal as more civilised versions of the same general rejection of their right to follow their religion (they are more open to people like me who criticise halal but also have other concerns about slaughterhouses), though only one actually wears the hijab and some of the others aren't too fussed about halal. The older ones worry that the younger ones are getting more secular and selective in their adherence to the beliefs (smoking, drinking, etc.). In general they all seem to me rather like Christians one generation back. I'm an atheist so I think they're all deluded: they know that and accept it with weary tolerance, perhaps because I don't make a habit of ranting about it.
Now my circle of acquaintances is generally doing OK - typically shopkeepers and restauraunt owners whose kids are branching out into professions - and aren't in the "angry slum" environment from which ISIS draws sympathy. But FWIW there's nothing about them that makes me feel that a generalised crackdown on Islam would be in any way helpful or fair. Focusing on things that are actually illegal, from FGM to any kind of violence and forced marriages, seems to me the way to go - creeping secularism is eroding the rigidity of the legal practices, just as it did for Christianity. For the "angry slum" people, it may be going the other way, and that needs to be addressed more selectively - it's not just a religious problem.
Not sure about "angry slum" as a characterisation of IS adherents. Many of them seem to be educated (I hesitate to say "well educated") and to have decent jobs.