Religious Special Pleading

I thought we had established that prohibition doesn't generally universally prevent a practice but it does have an inhibitory effect in certain cases, circumcision included. It's unnecessary. I'll do you a solid though. I'll include 'Ringo is not aware anyone wants to engage in the practice' as a criteria.a) stoning adulterers, homosexuals and those that work on the Sabbath
b) slavery / indentured servitude
c) Flogging adulterers and unbelievers
d) removing the hands of thieves
e) human sacrifice (what if the victim consents? What if they were 'brainwashed' all their life into that consent?)
f) beating children with rods
g) Declining to employ people of the 'wrong' religion.
h) Marrying children off and the consummation thereof
i) Footbinding
j) Beating one's spouseSo - what's next? Let's do 'beating one's spouse'. That's certainly something that people do in the US. Why should that remain prohibited? I don't see why we can't inhibit the practice. But prohibition does inhibit the practices. I don't expect it would happen with many. See female circumcision as a comparison. I claim only that prohibition of circumcision will inhibit the number of circumcisions. I told you to pay attention to the scope. You claimed I could control whether we took parents away. That's not strictly true, but in so far as it is, I can also assert control over the numbers by inhibiting the practice by making it illegal.

You said you could control the number of circumcisions. Did you mean you could influence the number? And you can't. Beating one's spouse is a social and cultural taboo. Is there even a specific legal prohibition? If their is, by your own admission it isn't working. Sez you. Unfortunately, we can't rewind history and re-run it with different parameters, so the claim is pretty empty.

You said I could control taking parents away from their children. Did you mean I could only influence it? Whether its taboo depends on the society and / or cultural context - even within the US. Some people disagree with you. And it is working. Are you saying we should allow it? Yep. It's what is observed. If Doctors stop performing it, if insurance stops covering it -- it's inevitable rates will decline in the US.

Yes. I'm saying, as I said, that it is not a prohibition, per se. It would be a social/cultural taboo with or without any specific legal prohibition. It is not clear that adding a specific legal prohibition would reduce the incidence. Hold on. Back up a minute there. Notice the plural "practices". You're the one who used it. The practices we were talking about in Message 346 were drinking alcohol, doing drugs and having abortions. Do we really observe that prohibition inhibits those practices? So now you're moving the goalposts to circumcision. But it isn't medical circumcisions that you want to prohibit, is it?

Well there you go, quite straight forward really. Well, it is. It was lawful in the 19th Century to beat one's spouse. The US outlawed it in 1920. The justice system started to take it more seriously in the 70s and prosecutions went up. Marital rape was legal in some states in the 1990s! That's disputable. It was made illegal in the 1920s, but most people, the legal system included, seldom bothered prosecuting it because, though it might be distasteful - it was essentially socially acceptable. It took 50 years after the legal prohibition for society to put its foot down and begin to make it a social taboo, and even then it took another couple of decades to complete the process. Not only is it quite clear to me - it also gives people recourse to get abusers out of their lives, gain custody of children etc. Yes.There is some interesting area when it comes to addiction - as legalizing something may help fight addiction for a variety of reasons. But I said this back in Message 288:

quote:

---

The Queen of England used cocaine in the 19th Century. Doctors used it. Labourers regularly used it, soldiers used it and so on. I expect consumers have probably decreased since the late 19th and early 20th Century - if total consumption has increased I expect this is a function of increased production due to agricultural and technical improvements ... even if consumption hasn't changed - or gone up - it wouldn't change my original comment from over a month ago

​

quote:

---

you can't jump from what is true of nouns to what is true of verbs (murder, abuse etc).

---

​

---

Circumcision has been the main goalpost here from the outset. My primary concern is with regards to non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision. That's what I want to prohibit above all else. Once that's done we can start discussing the exact age at which non-therapeutic circumcision is appropriate.

There was a line though. You could still be prosecuted for a sufficiently egregious assault. A similar situation exists to this day with corporal punishment for children. There is a growing social taboo against it but it is still legal in many jurisdictions. In fact, nobody is ever likely to be prosecuted for slapping their child's hand away from a hot stove.The legal response stems from the existing social change, not vice versa. Did they stop using it because it became illegal?

One case of special pleading has been resolved - coroners must prioritise religious funerals over others even if it means others are delayed because of it.

quote:

---

A London coroner has been ordered by the High Court to change her "cab-rank" queuing policy for handling burials after it was ruled "unlawful".

---

Coroner ordered to change 'cab-rank' burial release policy - BBC NewsI've no problem factoring in the stupid beliefs of believers so long as it doesn't impact on those of different beliefs or none but I guess this is one of the smaller inconveiences religionists impose on others.

Next week the Irish have a referrendum on abortion - their 6th attempt to remove the article banning it from their constitution. A real anomaly - few constitions have a such an amendment, created, of course by the Catholic church that had/has a total grasp on Irish life. 93% of Irish primary schools are Catholic.In the past - and currently - the church's obsessions with all things sexual tried to stop such things as tampon sales and contraception.The Catholic church in Ireland is losing its influence as a younger generation learns more of the world and the disgusting activities of priests and nuns over child abuse, cover-up and mother and baby homes are exposed. Attendance at mass is low and falling and priests are getting hard to recruit. But there is support for the anti-abortion from a growing Muslim community there.It looks quite close, but the odds are that Irish women will finally get the right to choose.

The vote was 66% in favour of abortion, so another brick in religion's wall is kicked out.Northern Ireland has a similar ban in place which is now coming under pressure for change. This one might be harder.

Well finally...The first successful prosecution of FGM since the law was introduced in the mid 80's has just happened.This is a particularly nasty case. The mother thought she was a witch“While the parents were on bail, police searched the unemployed mother’s home and found evidence of witchcraft, including spells aimed at silencing police, social workers, officers and lawyers in the case.” ^^^The 40 frozen limes containing spells aimed at silencing police, social workers officers and lawyers. Photograph: Metropolitan police/PAMother of three-year-old is first person convicted of FGM in UK | Female genital mutilation (FGM) | The GuardianPeople will believe absolutely anything.Percy, can you see why that image isn't working?

I do not think the link actually is directly to the image. The link actually takes you to a different webpage for all the images in the article, not a direct link to the image. Not sure if there is a direct link to the image.Percy,
Am I on the right track?

This one is worth watching. Sadly, unlike the US, the UK teaches religion in public schools.

quote:

---

Parents launch court action over Christian school assemblies

​

Couple say their children are being indoctrinated and school did not provide good alternative

​

Burford primary school in the Cotswolds. It became an academy and in 2015 and joined the Church of England’s Oxford Diocesan Schools Trust.

​

A couple who say their children are being religiously indoctrinated during Christian school assemblies are to launch a high court challenge.

​

Lee and Lizanne Harris will say in a judicial review claim in the autumn that Burford primary school in Oxfordshire made their children take part in Christian prayers and watch re-enactments of Bible stories including the crucifixion.

​

The couple withdrew their children from the assemblies but say the school refused to provide a meaningful alternative of equal educational worth. Instead, the Harris children were put in a room with an iPad and supervised by a teaching assistant, according to their parents.

​

At the time the Harris children enrolled, Burford primary school was a community school with no religious character. But in 2015 it became an academy and joined the Church of England’s Oxford Diocesan Schools Trust (ODST).

​

All state schools are required to provide an act of daily worship of a broadly Christian character under the 1944 Education Act. Parents are entitled to withdraw their children from collective worship.

​

The Harrises, whose case will be heard at the high court in November, will argue that the school must provide an inclusive assembly as a meaningful alternative for pupils withdrawn from Christian worship.

​

They will raise concerns that during school assemblies, stories of God and Christianity were presented to children as fact, and that school leavers were presented with a Bible as a guide to life at a ceremony in a church.

​

The couple also claim that it is inappropriate that officials from a nearby church, St John the Baptist, which is part of the evangelical wing of the Church of England, regularly led worship at school assemblies.

​

In a statement, they said: We enrolled our children into a state community school — which is meant to have no religious character — but over time we noticed harmful aspects of evangelism spreading into assembly and other parts of the school which goes against our children’s rights to receive an education free from religious interference.

​

‘When our children go to school they shouldn’t have to participate in Christian prayers, or watch biblical scenes such as the crucifixion being acted out, nor should they have to hear from evangelical preachers who spout harmful and often divisive messages.

​

They were going to court reluctantly, they added, but [we] feel strongly that we need to try to make our children’s education as inclusive as possible.

​

We also don’t think it’s acceptable that they be left to play with an iPad because we’ve withdrawn them. They should be able to participate in an inclusive assembly that is of equal educational worth and which is welcoming and respectful of all students no matter their background.

​

The school’s website says daily assemblies provide space for children to develop a reflective approach to life, and the ability to express their thoughts. Additionally, it is a time when children and staff come together to celebrate shared beliefs and values relating to the day to day life of school.

​

Once a week, it says, assemblies are organised by the children’s coordinator at St John the Baptist church at which Bible stories are read and brought to life through interactive drama using mime, costume, props, puppets and sound effects, with the children also getting involved.

​

The website of the ODST, whose 33 church and community schools educate more than 6,100 children, says the trust is motivated by our Christian values to serve our local communities, but we do not impose those values We welcome those of all faiths and none, and we are proud of the ethnic diversity within our academies which reflects that of their local community.

​

In a statement, the trust said: Collective worship, which is a statutory requirement in all church and community schools, is aimed at encouraging pupils to develop a sense of mystery, awe and wonder about the world. This is all done through listening to stories from a wide range of different cultures and religions, giving time for children to think about themselves, and the contribution they all make to our society.

​

It said it was confident that Burford primary school, as a community school, has acted entirely appropriately, and has followed all statutory requirements.

​

Andrew Copson, chief executive of Humanists UK, which is supporting the couple’s legal challenge, said: We are the only sovereign state in the world to require schools to hold daily Christian worship, yet 80% of our young people and 75% of people of parental age are not Christians. Our state schools are instead home to children of a broad diversity of cultures and backgrounds and they deserve and need inclusive activities that bring them together as one community.

​

Requiring children to participate in religious worship and then marginalising them if in good conscience they cannot, ignores their right to freedom of religion or belief and is a negation of inclusion.

---