Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 118

Thread: Should the UK restrict the activities of religions?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    13,931
    Thanks
    3,356
    Thanked 3,258 Times in 2,490 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by T00ts View Post
    Presumably an academic learning of the different religions and their beliefs to allow comparison in order to understand the differences has a place in education. How else would people appreciate and integrate with others? If you start to ban it in this instance how long before it is considered irrelevant in society and it is banned altogether?
    As I understand it, the OP is not suggesting a ban on religion.
    It's amazing how common this narcissism is: I disagree with person A, and I also disagree with person B, therefore A and B are identical - Daniel Hannan

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    nuneaton
    Posts
    582
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Patman Post View Post
    Not ban, but restrict their activities and downgrade them from their tax-exempt charitable status.

    All formalised religions come to my mind. But there are some that are more notable, like Scientology, the weird Sci-Fi money-making and power-seeking cult that attracts and brainwashes adherents and actually causes harm and distress. Then there are the individual and institutional actions of the Catholic church and its attempts to cover up such activities as support and comfort for terrorists, and child and sexual abuse. Now we have Islam, in all its forms, still being promoted by non-believers (for their own reasons) as the religion of peace. But it appears that most of its various traditions believe in violence (to each other as well as the rest of us), and are readily activated.

    My view would be to repeal the tax-exempt charitable status of all religious activities unless they are directly connected to accepted charitable efforts — ie, care, non-religious education, welfare, etc. Churches, Mosques, Temples, etc, should only be exempt from taxation and charges for the proportion of their premises that are used for charitable activities.

    Lastly, I would disestablish the CofE and remove all clerics (including those appointed from other religions for the sake of balance) from our legislature...
    that would remove the rights of the religions from having laws that consider there “freedom of religion” and as it is equally a “free speech” issue the it would go against the right to have a representative within government at every level including MP,s or any other office within government..


    We have at the moment a system that represents every part of society why would you want to restrict It? Does that not restrict the freedom to think,
    It,s already well defined what a charity is or is not, the Government already regulates it.
    Its not a good thing to over regulate them.
    All it takes for evil to succeed is that good people do nothing
    When men cease to believe in god, thay do not therefore believe in nothing ,thay then become capable of believing anything. G.K Chesterton
    If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?" William Shakespeare,
    The cleverest thing the New World Order has done, is to convince mankind that It's a good thing to be enslaved.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    London N16
    Posts
    3,558
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 371 Times in 309 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by fubar View Post
    that would remove the rights of the religions from having laws that consider there “freedom of religion” and as it is equally a “free speech” issue the it would go against the right to have a representative within government at every level including MP,s or any other office within government..


    We have at the moment a system that represents every part of society why would you want to restrict It? Does that not restrict the freedom to think,
    It,s already well defined what a charity is or is not, the Government already regulates it.
    Its not a good thing to over regulate them.
    No rights removed. Just the subsidies that charity status brings. Public schools are being scrutinised to see if they deserve to be classified as charities, so why not churches...?
    The poster reserves the right to amend or completely change any opinions he has posted at any time — meanwhile, still waiting for the whip hand that Enoch forecast...

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    nuneaton
    Posts
    582
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Patman Post View Post
    No rights removed. Just the subsidies that charity status brings. Public schools are being scrutinised to see if they deserve to be classified as charities, so why not churches...?
    well to do that you would have to remove all charites as they would as would I open another charity to fund the church.But by and large it would serve no function other than to divide religion even further and draw more people to church..lets not forget that the church is in decline so it would be pointless really Here,s a thought how about looking into charities that are directly being fund with Goverment monies..

    The figures are astonishing. There are more than 195,289 registered charities in the UK that raise and spend close to £80 billion a year. Together, they employ more than a million staff – more than our car, aerospace and chemical sectors – and make 13 billion ‘asks’ for money every year, the equivalent of 200 for each of us in the UK.
    All it takes for evil to succeed is that good people do nothing
    When men cease to believe in god, thay do not therefore believe in nothing ,thay then become capable of believing anything. G.K Chesterton
    If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?" William Shakespeare,
    The cleverest thing the New World Order has done, is to convince mankind that It's a good thing to be enslaved.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    London N16
    Posts
    3,558
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 371 Times in 309 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Patman Post View Post
    ..............My view would be to repeal the tax-exempt charitable status of all religious activities unless they are directly connected to accepted charitable efforts — ie, care, non-religious education, welfare, etc. Churches, Mosques, Temples, etc, should only be exempt from taxation and charges for the proportion of their premises that are used for charitable activities...........
    From #1...
    The poster reserves the right to amend or completely change any opinions he has posted at any time — meanwhile, still waiting for the whip hand that Enoch forecast...

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Newport, South Wales
    Posts
    7,738
    Thanks
    1,076
    Thanked 895 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by RaymondDelauney View Post
    "Unregistered" schools are hardly new
    They probably are not.

    In my primary school days every kid in the street was "looked after" between the hours of school closing and mums returning home from work by a motley crew of "aunties" "grandmas" and the like who rotated responsibilities according to work schedules with those in part time jobs taking their turn on the rota and those in full time work bunging cash under the radar to say thank you. It was probably Blair who "professionalised" this and made it the multi-million pound business it has become, with lovely rakeoffs for the state demanding those who mind children do so as a business ....
    --
    "The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the purposes of depleting the taxpayer's pocket. And the taxpayer is in like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue"

    Lord Clyde: "Ayrshire Pullman Motor Services V Inland Revenue, 1929"

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    2,358
    Thanks
    124
    Thanked 567 Times in 453 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by johnofgwent View Post
    It was probably Blair who "professionalised" this and made it the multi-million pound business it has become, with lovely rakeoffs for the state demanding those who mind children do so as a business ....
    Depending on how accurate your rose-tinted memories may be, I rather imagine that the major part of the drive to professionalise such ad-hoc childcare has been to address the inherent and obvious Safeguarding Issues.

    As we're just about to hit the Festive Season I'm reminded of a story from a few years ago: An old boy who'd been employed as a department store Santa was told his services were no longer required. He made the front page of at least one local paper and local radio, "heartbroken" that "P.C Bosses" had deemed him "too old" to perform his functions anymore. To read his account it was as though a combination of Ebenezer Scrooge and Hitler had pushed dog poo through his letterbox.

    The store involved, of course, got their P.R Team onto the case immediately to put the record straight and kill the story before it went national (a story like that? Editors dream of such a case. It's such a Newsroom gift I'd have been amazed for it not to be headlining Japanese TV by the end of the week and have Members in the House calling for the immediate resignation of the Shop Manager...).

    The facts of the matter were that - months earlier - the gentleman had been asked to have a CRB check (which the store would, naturally, pay for). For whatever reason, he'd declined to do so and had consequently not been re-engaged.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    London N16
    Posts
    3,558
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 371 Times in 309 Posts
    When I referred to unregistered schools I meant the operations that take pupils out of recognised education and lose them from the registers to put them full time into places that teach only religion and scripture:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7819731.html
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36302054
    http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/20...stered-schools

    This has nothing to do with after-hours care, which assumes the children have been in regular education during the day...
    The poster reserves the right to amend or completely change any opinions he has posted at any time — meanwhile, still waiting for the whip hand that Enoch forecast...

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 156 Times in 143 Posts
    No religion should be allowed to promote any beliefs that are in conflict with the law of the land.
    The highest punishment any religion should be allowed to impose or seek to impose on a follower for offending against its rules should be expulsion from the religion.
    The promotion of unsubstantiated beliefs as 'fact' should be treated the same way misleading advertisements.
    I dahn do non-judgement'aw. ... and put ya blinkin' shirt on mate, wiwya!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    By all means call me radical, in fact call me what you wish, I am pretty thick skinned. I am 100% behind Jayde Fransen when she says Islam should be banned from the UK. I believe it should be banned all together from the west, as it has no place in a democracy.

    I am 180 pages into the Quran, and believe me it doesn't make pleasant reading. Verse after verse of threats, violence, and intolerance. Yes, I accept the old testament isn't very pleasant either, but Christians don't tend to live their lives by it. Ultimately, Buddhists, Sikhs, and Hindus are not attempting to take over the world, whereas Muslims are following their religion and attempting to do just that. The more liberal amongst you will put your heads in the sand, think to yourself it won't happen in your lifetime (which it won't) and tell us all that it is only a small amount of radical Muslims we have to worry about. Well here are some facts. There are 1.2m Muslims on the planet, and security forces around the world believe that approximately 25% have radical views, even if they aren't carrying them out at present. That means the total amount of Muslims who share radical views exceeds the population of the USA. Not such a small minority then. Did you know, more than 4 times the amount of Muslims have left the UK to join Isis than there are Muslims in the British army. The argument that most Muslims are moderate and wish nobody any harm does not stand up. There current behaviour and their potential future actions are two very different things. During the second world war the vast majority of German's were good people, and if we then had the liberal outlook we have now, we would have pussy footed around and let Hitler take over. Islam is a far bigger threat than Hitler ever was, but unfortunately so many are still denying it to themselves.

    A poll indicated that the vast majority of UK Muslims believe we should have Sharia law. We already have a Muslim mare in Bradford, Luton and our capital London. At present we have about 4 million Muslims in the country, and this will double and treble very quickly. Along the way more influential positions will be taken by Muslims, and believe me, we will not need a majority of Muslims in the country before we become a Sharia state. This isn't an extremist view, this is simple mathematics. Unfortunately as soon as any body of people point these facts out, they get shouted down and called names, which unfortunately is a liberal tactic that still appears to working in our crazy society.

    Ultimately, I live in a small village far away from the Islamic threat, and would like to think I will be dead before the first one moves in, but who knows? I would also like to think that my son won't have to witness the takeover, but believe me, the generation after that isn't going to like what is inevitably going to happen. Unfortunately, whilst we CAN accommodate people from many religions, Islam we simply can't.

    Now, for any of you lefties out there who see the world as a global village, a place where all religions and cultures can live side by side in complete harmony, want to challenge my opinions and predictions, please go ahead. However, if you start name calling, I shall indeed make you look very silly.

Similar Threads

  1. Religions are evil
    By albertcornercrew in forum Religion, Faith and Spirituality
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 26-06-2017, 10:08 PM
  2. Will Trump Reinstate the Un American Activities Committee ?
    By johnofgwent in forum United States Politics Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 29-01-2017, 01:56 PM
  3. Balls: I'd restrict winter fuel cash
    By stevectaylor in forum Political News
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-06-2013, 10:11 PM
  4. Is it legal to restrict phone deals to Under 24's ?
    By johnofgwent in forum Political Correctness Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 25-09-2012, 11:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •