They serve the purpose of being able to prosecute forswearing, perjury, people who lie under oath. Also some people will not break an oath sworn on the Bible due to religious reasons or an affirmation due to moral reasons of conscience not being able to live with themselves.
I read ..... Blah blah blah . In other words no purpose At all.
They serve the purpose of being able to prosecute forswearing, perjury, people who lie under oath. Also some people will not break an oath sworn on the Bible due to religious reasons or an affirmation due to moral reasons of conscience not being able to live with themselves.
You can prosecute someone for telling lies without an oath to god. So we have dispensed with this.
I'm sure his comments are aimed at the UKIP religious nutters.
It's pretty simple technically Britain is a christian country with the Head of state the head of the main church.
In reality though were mostly secular. Most people I know aren't in the least bit religious.
It's kind of the opposite of the US which is technically a secular country but in reality you can't get anywhere if you're not seen as a practising christian ( or in some cases a jew )
Great Britain has been a Christian country since the Romans vacated this land, if not before.
By saying it's a "Christian country" he's relating the fact that most of our traditions, culture and even politics have evolved out of the nation practicing Christianity. Christmas and Easter are Christian holidays (yes, I know they were before until the Christians hijacked them), which we still celebrate as a state, as well as other minor dates including Saints' Days. The Church of England is the established church and the Church of Scotland also exists.
It's also arguable that democracy itself is a result of Christian values, so in that sense of course he's correct to say that we are a Christian country.
Nonsense
I can't think of anything less democratic than worshiping a GOD who can never be questioned, elected or removed from office
I'm sure his comments are aimed at the UKIP religious nutters.
It's pretty simple technically Britain is a christian country with the Head of state the head of the main church.
In reality though were mostly secular. Most people I know aren't in the least bit religious.
It's kind of the opposite of the US which is technically a secular country but in reality you can't get anywhere if you're not seen as a practising christian ( or in some cases a jew )
The UK's Head of State is not the head of the C of E. That's Archbishop of Canterbury. The Queen is its Supreme Governor.
Regarding the USA it's interesting to note that in Europe we tend to have the security of universal health. In the US they have religion that appears to be its substitute. Many cite the NHS as the closest thing the UK has to a religion.
The UK's Head of State is not the head of the C of E. That's Archbishop of Canterbury. The Queen is its Supreme Governor..
The Monarch used to be called Supreme Head of the Church of England, the title was changed in 1559 to Supreme Governor to be more inclusive of Catholics nobles swearing the Oath of Supremacy.
The Church of England is organised into two provinces; each led by an archbishop (Canterbury for the Southern Province and York for the Northern).
The Church of England is episcopally led (there are 108 bishops) and synodically governed. The General Synod is elected from the laity and clergy of each diocese
I read ..... Blah blah blah . In other words no purpose At all.
No purpose to you. They hold a purpose to those who see an oath as something they adhere to as a matter of conscience, and those who believe in abiding by what they swear to on the Bible.
You can prosecute someone for telling lies without an oath to god. So we have dispensed with this.
I posted "they" you don't have to give an oath to god, as I pointed out you can give an affirmation instead and perjury is the crime of lying under oath. So they hold meaning both to some people making them as to if they will then lie and legal meaning as to the consequences if they do lie.
No purpose to you. They hold a purpose to those who see an oath as something they adhere to as a matter of conscience, and those who believe in abiding by what they swear to on the Bible.
I posted "they" you don't have to give an oath to god, as I pointed out you can give an affirmation instead and perjury is the crime of lying under oath. So they hold meaning both to some people making them as to if they will then lie and legal meaning as to the consequences if they do lie.
Great Britain has been a Christian country since the Romans vacated this land, if not before.
By saying it's a "Christian country" he's relating the fact that most of our traditions, culture and even politics have evolved out of the nation practicing Christianity. Christmas and Easter are Christian holidays (yes, I know they were before until the Christians hijacked them), which we still celebrate as a state, as well as other minor dates including Saints' Days. The Church of England is the established church and the Church of Scotland also exists.
It's also arguable that democracy itself is a result of Christian values, so in that sense of course he's correct to say that we are a Christian country.
Actually that's not strictly true, after the Romans left and the Anglo-Saxons migrated to Britain they brought their Germanic paganism with them and Christianity pretty much existed among the Celtic/Briton communities in the western fringes of the island because it was pushed out. The area we now call England had Christianity reintroduced in 597 but Anglo-Saxon paganism still hung on until the 8th century and some did resist conversion to Christianity. Germanic paganism returned once again in the form of Norse paganism after the Danes began to settle in the 9th century, in fact the old Anglo-Saxon and Norse religion were very similar, although by that point the Anglo-Saxons had become Christians and became pious and rather sanctimonious so called the Vikings "heathens". You can see it in our days of the week- Monday "Moon day", Tuesday- "Tīw's day", Wednesday-"Woden's day", Thursday "Thunor's day", Friday "Frigg's day" and Sunday "Sun day". All of these are from Germanic paganism except for Saturday which is Roman, "Saturn's day".
Then of course there's Christmas in Britain which is essentially a Judeo-Hellenic-Roman-Celtic-Germanic affair. We still sometimes call this time of year "Yule" or the "Yuletide" (tide means time in Old English) and in Scandinavia today Christmas is called "jul" or "juletid", in England too this goes back once again to Germanic paganism. Great Britain has been an island for about 8,000 years and modern humans arrived in this land 25,000 years ago, so for the vast majority of its history this has not been a Christian island and even when it did become one it existed with a mix of non-Christian elements anyway.
As for the established church, well much of Europe have disestablished theirs and I'm all for separating church and state. As for democracy I'm sure we can trace its origins to Ancient Greece and human qualities such as altruism, compassion and charity are not from Christianity, they go back way much further than that, you can even see these traits in other primate species to some degree.
Actually that's not strictly true, after the Romans left and the Anglo-Saxons migrated to Britain they brought their Germanic paganism with them and Christianity pretty much existed among the Celtic/Briton communities in the western fringes of the island because it was pushed out. The area we now call England had Christianity reintroduced in 597 but Anglo-Saxon paganism still hung on until the 8th century and some did resist conversion to Christianity. Germanic paganism returned once again in the form of Norse paganism after the Danes began to settle in the 9th century, in fact the old Anglo-Saxon and Norse religion were very similar, although by that point the Anglo-Saxons had become Christians and became pious and rather sanctimonious so called the Vikings "heathens". You can see it in our days of the week- Monday "Moon day", Tuesday- "Tīw's day", Wednesday-"Woden's day", Thursday "Thunor's day", Friday "Frigg's day" and Sunday "Sun day". All of these are from Germanic paganism except for Saturday which is Roman, "Saturn's day".
Then of course there's Christmas in Britain which is essentially a Judeo-Hellenic-Roman-Celtic-Germanic affair. We still sometimes call this time of year "Yule" or the "Yuletide" (tide means time in Old English) and in Scandinavia today Christmas is called "jul" or juletid", in England too this goes back once again to Germanic paganism. Great Britain has been an island for about 8,000 years and modern humans arrived in this land 25,000 years ago, so for the vast majoirty of its history this has not been a Christian island and even when it did become one it existed with a mix of non-Christian elements anyway.
As for the established church, well much of Europe have disestablished theirs and I'm all for separating church and state. As for democracy I'm sure we can trace its origins to Ancient Greece and human qualities such as altruism, compassion and charity are not from Christianity, they go back way much further than that, you can even see these traits in other primate species to some degree.
good post but wasted, the response will be...no, you're wrong. It is a christian country. You know what it's like arguing with the religious.
Under what act?
The perjury act states
"If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury"
Lawfully sworn means bound by an oath, a person who is sworn before giving testimony.
It's also arguable that democracy itself is a result of Christian values, so in that sense of course he's correct to say that we are a Christian country.
Our concept of Democracy comes from the Anglo-Saxons - where the practice was to vote for the leader of a tribe.;
While Rome was a republic (it has ceased to be by the time Rome Invaded Britain) only Roman citizens had the vote - Slaves which outnumbered citizens by a considerable margin did not have a vote.
Athenian democracy also only saw a minority actually qualify to vote (less than 1 in 6).
If anything this has it's routes in Israelite tradition, not Greek. as the two systems share so much.
1. Both systems proclaimed their people to be a nation of freemen.
2. Both systems claimed their law was of divine origin.
3. Both systems divided their people into tens, fifties, hundreds, and thousands.
4. Both systems democratically elected their officials to head each of these divisions.
5. Both systems provided for a system of justice which allowed the victim of a wrong to be compensated in damages with the threat of "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" if compensation was not forthcoming.
6. Both systems allowed offenders to work off their payments as bond-servants if they could not provide compensation otherwise.
7. Both systems used the sacred oath in administering justice.
8. Both systems emphasized strong local self-government with appeals to a higher level only in case of dire necessity.
9. Both systems operated under a social compact or sacred covenant which a person was required to embrace before being admitted to their commonwealth.
10. Both systems required that decisions concerning officials or new laws must be made by common consent of the people.
11. Both systems based their law on the inalienable rights of the individual.
12. Both systems allowed elected or appointed officials only limited, specifically enumerated powers.
One explanation is that since the northern Ten Tribes of the Israelites were captured by the Assyrians and later escaped to the region of the Black Sea around 600 B.C., there could have been a cross-fertilization between their own culture and that of the Scythians.
A second theory is offered, with considerable supportive evidence, that strong segments of the Israelites could have been intermingled with the Scythians and subsequently accompanied the Scythians when they migrated into Europe.
under the Anglo-Saxon principle of a covenant society they established a "constitution of general public assemblies; the election of their magistrates by the people, their sheriffs, their coroners, their port-reeves, and even their tything-men; the dispensation of justice in the county-courts principally, except in cases in which the supreme authority of the Crown was called upon to interfere, are laws of Saxon parentage.
Nonsense ! There are despots all over the world "who can never be questioned, elected or removed from office". And they often think they're God.
The world's democratic countries have mostly evolved out of Christian nations.
In spite of Christianity rather than because of it, society has become more democratic and free since the rise of secularism. Nobody is denying that despots often have a God complex but absolute power corrupts absolutely whether it's the Catholic Church, a communist or fascist dictorship or even in modern democracies sometimes. Democracy in its earliest form existed in Europe (Greece) before it was a (mainly) Christian continent anyway.
It was a clumsy thing to say, and if he had said "we are a country with a predominantly Christian culture" then I, as an evangelising atheist, would not have much of a bone to pick.
Frankly, I think it was code for "we are not a Muslim country".
In spite of Christianity rather than because of it, society has become more democratic and free since the rise of secularism.
Are you referring to the Communist revolution as the shinning example of secularism that frightened the UK into granting sufferage after the first world war due to fear of violent revolution and tryanny.
Actually that's not strictly true, after the Romans left and the Anglo-Saxons migrated to Britain they brought their Germanic paganism with them and Christianity pretty much existed among the Celtic/Briton communities in the western fringes of the island because it was pushed out. The area we now call England had Christianity reintroduced in 597 but Anglo-Saxon paganism still hung on until the 8th century and some did resist conversion to Christianity. Germanic paganism returned once again in the form of Norse paganism after the Danes began to settle in the 9th century, in fact the old Anglo-Saxon and Norse religion were very similar, although by that point the Anglo-Saxons had become Christians and became pious and rather sanctimonious so called the Vikings "heathens". You can see it in our days of the week- Monday "Moon day", Tuesday- "Tīw's day", Wednesday-"Woden's day", Thursday "Thunor's day", Friday "Frigg's day" and Sunday "Sun day". All of these are from Germanic paganism except for Saturday which is Roman, "Saturn's day".
Then of course there's Christmas in Britain which is essentially a Judeo-Hellenic-Roman-Celtic-Germanic affair. We still sometimes call this time of year "Yule" or the "Yuletide" (tide means time in Old English) and in Scandinavia today Christmas is called "jul" or "juletid", in England too this goes back once again to Germanic paganism. Great Britain has been an island for about 8,000 years and modern humans arrived in this land 25,000 years ago, so for the vast majority of its history this has not been a Christian island and even when it did become one it existed with a mix of non-Christian elements anyway.
As for the established church, well much of Europe have disestablished theirs and I'm all for separating church and state. As for democracy I'm sure we can trace its origins to Ancient Greece and human qualities such as altruism, compassion and charity are not from Christianity, they go back way much further than that, you can even see these traits in other primate species to some degree.
And so it was dictated that the relevance of history should be reduced to origins rather than development, including that in application. In parallel, the superior century in every conceivable sense, the 20th, was eradicated from all reference in case those with any living memory of it should say to those younger that life was better before them.
My first thought exactly. Trying to subconsciously undermine the opposition.
You may think Jews are just white people but wait til one tries to become pm......or usa president.
I expect it has more to do with trying to win back older religious voters lost to UKIP over gay marriage than Miliband being Jewish. As within a week or two of the first gay marriages getting quite a lot of local and national coverage Cameron started going on about his Christianity all the time.
Hitchens for once has it right - UK is a Christian Nation only when trying to get a child into a faith school
Thats true. But if a so called christian child is given a place in a muslim or sikh school the parents are up in arms and I am ashamed to say I'd be one of those parents.
Comments
I read ..... Blah blah blah . In other words no purpose At all.
You can prosecute someone for telling lies without an oath to god. So we have dispensed with this.
It's pretty simple technically Britain is a christian country with the Head of state the head of the main church.
In reality though were mostly secular. Most people I know aren't in the least bit religious.
It's kind of the opposite of the US which is technically a secular country but in reality you can't get anywhere if you're not seen as a practising christian ( or in some cases a jew )
Nonsense
I can't think of anything less democratic than worshiping a GOD who can never be questioned, elected or removed from office
How about Adolf Hitler and Evan "Dr Death" Harris?
Nonsense ! There are despots all over the world "who can never be questioned, elected or removed from office". And they often think they're God.
The world's democratic countries have mostly evolved out of Christian nations.
The UK's Head of State is not the head of the C of E. That's Archbishop of Canterbury. The Queen is its Supreme Governor.
Regarding the USA it's interesting to note that in Europe we tend to have the security of universal health. In the US they have religion that appears to be its substitute. Many cite the NHS as the closest thing the UK has to a religion.
The Church of England is organised into two provinces; each led by an archbishop (Canterbury for the Southern Province and York for the Northern).
The Church of England is episcopally led (there are 108 bishops) and synodically governed. The General Synod is elected from the laity and clergy of each diocese
Actually that's not strictly true, after the Romans left and the Anglo-Saxons migrated to Britain they brought their Germanic paganism with them and Christianity pretty much existed among the Celtic/Briton communities in the western fringes of the island because it was pushed out. The area we now call England had Christianity reintroduced in 597 but Anglo-Saxon paganism still hung on until the 8th century and some did resist conversion to Christianity. Germanic paganism returned once again in the form of Norse paganism after the Danes began to settle in the 9th century, in fact the old Anglo-Saxon and Norse religion were very similar, although by that point the Anglo-Saxons had become Christians and became pious and rather sanctimonious so called the Vikings "heathens". You can see it in our days of the week- Monday "Moon day", Tuesday- "Tīw's day", Wednesday-"Woden's day", Thursday "Thunor's day", Friday "Frigg's day" and Sunday "Sun day". All of these are from Germanic paganism except for Saturday which is Roman, "Saturn's day".
Then of course there's Christmas in Britain which is essentially a Judeo-Hellenic-Roman-Celtic-Germanic affair. We still sometimes call this time of year "Yule" or the "Yuletide" (tide means time in Old English) and in Scandinavia today Christmas is called "jul" or "juletid", in England too this goes back once again to Germanic paganism. Great Britain has been an island for about 8,000 years and modern humans arrived in this land 25,000 years ago, so for the vast majority of its history this has not been a Christian island and even when it did become one it existed with a mix of non-Christian elements anyway.
As for the established church, well much of Europe have disestablished theirs and I'm all for separating church and state. As for democracy I'm sure we can trace its origins to Ancient Greece and human qualities such as altruism, compassion and charity are not from Christianity, they go back way much further than that, you can even see these traits in other primate species to some degree.
good post but wasted, the response will be...no, you're wrong. It is a christian country. You know what it's like arguing with the religious.
Yes well said
The perjury act states
"If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury"
Lawfully sworn means bound by an oath, a person who is sworn before giving testimony.
Our concept of Democracy comes from the Anglo-Saxons - where the practice was to vote for the leader of a tribe.;
While Rome was a republic (it has ceased to be by the time Rome Invaded Britain) only Roman citizens had the vote - Slaves which outnumbered citizens by a considerable margin did not have a vote.
Athenian democracy also only saw a minority actually qualify to vote (less than 1 in 6).
If anything this has it's routes in Israelite tradition, not Greek. as the two systems share so much.
1. Both systems proclaimed their people to be a nation of freemen.
2. Both systems claimed their law was of divine origin.
3. Both systems divided their people into tens, fifties, hundreds, and thousands.
4. Both systems democratically elected their officials to head each of these divisions.
5. Both systems provided for a system of justice which allowed the victim of a wrong to be compensated in damages with the threat of "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" if compensation was not forthcoming.
6. Both systems allowed offenders to work off their payments as bond-servants if they could not provide compensation otherwise.
7. Both systems used the sacred oath in administering justice.
8. Both systems emphasized strong local self-government with appeals to a higher level only in case of dire necessity.
9. Both systems operated under a social compact or sacred covenant which a person was required to embrace before being admitted to their commonwealth.
10. Both systems required that decisions concerning officials or new laws must be made by common consent of the people.
11. Both systems based their law on the inalienable rights of the individual.
12. Both systems allowed elected or appointed officials only limited, specifically enumerated powers.
One explanation is that since the northern Ten Tribes of the Israelites were captured by the Assyrians and later escaped to the region of the Black Sea around 600 B.C., there could have been a cross-fertilization between their own culture and that of the Scythians.
A second theory is offered, with considerable supportive evidence, that strong segments of the Israelites could have been intermingled with the Scythians and subsequently accompanied the Scythians when they migrated into Europe.
under the Anglo-Saxon principle of a covenant society they established a "constitution of general public assemblies; the election of their magistrates by the people, their sheriffs, their coroners, their port-reeves, and even their tything-men; the dispensation of justice in the county-courts principally, except in cases in which the supreme authority of the Crown was called upon to interfere, are laws of Saxon parentage.
See http://www.constitutionweekusa.com/index.cfm/resources/patriotic-church-services/the-anglosaxon-connection/
In spite of Christianity rather than because of it, society has become more democratic and free since the rise of secularism. Nobody is denying that despots often have a God complex but absolute power corrupts absolutely whether it's the Catholic Church, a communist or fascist dictorship or even in modern democracies sometimes. Democracy in its earliest form existed in Europe (Greece) before it was a (mainly) Christian continent anyway.
Frankly, I think it was code for "we are not a Muslim country".
And so it was dictated that the relevance of history should be reduced to origins rather than development, including that in application. In parallel, the superior century in every conceivable sense, the 20th, was eradicated from all reference in case those with any living memory of it should say to those younger that life was better before them.
My first thought exactly. Trying to subconsciously undermine the opposition.
You may think Jews are just white people but wait til one tries to become pm......or usa president.
Thats true. But if a so called christian child is given a place in a muslim or sikh school the parents are up in arms and I am ashamed to say I'd be one of those parents.