Well-written op-ed about a secular nation

[cb2008]

Originally Posted by badlander

Im sure you are making some point. Not related, one is a right and one is a change in peoples views and beliefs.

Freedom of religion is different from freedon to force your religious views upon others.

I wonder if you quoted me because you have falsely accused me if trying to end religion in the Ubited States. I want people to use their religion as a tool for themselves not as a weapon upon others.

Freedom to practice religion is the essence of a secular society. You may be having a different interpretation of secularism.

[badlander]

Originally Posted by cb2008

Freedom to practice religion is the essence of a secular society. You may be having a different interpretation of secularism.

I apologise if i am incorrect that freedom of religion was a legal righf.

What do you think my interpretation of secularism gets wrong?

[cb2008]

Originally Posted by badlander

I apologise if i am incorrect that freedom of religion was a legal righf.

What do you think my interpretation of secularism gets wrong?

I dont know what your interpretation is. Secularism means only one thing, that no religion will determine the laws nor would any one religion will be favored over others, and all citizens have the freedom to practice their religion protected.
I have nothing more to say on this.

[badlander]

Secularism is defined as the separation of regluon from civil affairs and the state.

I dont know if every country that is considered secular has full freedom of religion. Probably most of the nations and probably for most religions but i so nomreason to investigate every secular nations constitution or practice to determine if tjat is what defines secularism rather than the definition provided tjat it is about separation of religion from civil affairs and the state.
Maybe certain religions or atheism are banned in some countries that fall within the definition.

I beieve you can have freedom of religion in a non secular nation. If that is the case then freedom of religion is not the definition of secularism.

I would never advocate against freedom of religion or freedom from religion. I just think it should not be forced upon the public as in prayers in schools led by staff

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by badlander

Secularism is defined as the separation of regluon from civil affairs and the state.

I dont know if every country that is considered secular has full freedom of religion. Probably most of the nations and probably for most religions but i so nomreason to investigate every secular nations constitution or practice to determine if tjat is what defines secularism rather than the definition provided tjat it is about separation of religion from civil affairs and the state.
Maybe certain religions or atheism are banned in some countries that fall within the definition.

I beieve you can have freedom of religion in a non secular nation. If that is the case then freedom of religion is not the definition of secularism.

I would never advocate against freedom of religion or freedom from religion. I just think it should not be forced upon the public as in prayers in schools led by staff

Thailand is a fascinating case in point. The king is charged with the responsibility of protecting all religions. And yet Buddhism is so intertwined with government that it is...fascinating and overwhelming.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Originally Posted by mensaguy

What does it say? I can't read it without disabling my ad blocker (which pretty much defeats the purpose in having an ad blocker).

No reason to fear a secular nation

Phil Zuckerman Los Angeles Times Apr 9, 2021 0

The secularization of U.S. society — the waning of religious faith, practice and affiliation — is continuing at a dramatic and historically unprecedented pace. While many may consider such a development as cause for concern, such a worry is not warranted. This increasing godlessness in America is actually a good thing, to be welcomed and embraced.

Democratic societies that have experienced the greatest degrees of secularization are among the healthiest, wealthiest and safest in the world, enjoying relatively low rates of violent crime and high degrees of well-being and happiness. Clearly, a rapid loss of religion does not result in societal ruin.

For the first time since Gallup began tracking the numbers in 1937, Americans who are members of a church, synagogue or mosque are not in the majority, according to a Gallup report released this week. Compare today’s 47% to 1945, when more than 75% of Americans belonged to a religious congregation.

This decline in religious affiliation aligns closely with many similar secularizing trends. For example, in the early 1970s, only one in 20 Americans claimed “none” as their religion, but today it is closer to one in three. Over this same time period, weekly church attendance has decreased, and the percentage of Americans who never attend religious services has increased from 9% to 30%.

Fears that this rise of irreligion might result in the deterioration of our nation’s moral fiber — and threaten our liberties and freedoms — are understandable. Such concerns are not without historical merit: The former Soviet Union was a communist country deeply rooted in atheism and was one of the most corrupt, bloody regimes of the 20th century. Other atheistic authoritarian regimes, such as the former Albania and Cambodia, were equally crooked and vicious. (Bolded by TotN.)


https://journalnow.com/opinion/colum...ed57b716b.html