Double standards? There's some double standards in operation in this post alright, RC practices, last time I checked, were for practicing RCs and no one is being compelled to observe and respect them other that RCs. Sorry but difference does it make to anyone else and if you dont like the rules then dont join the club.
It's still encouraging whot is essentially illegal behavior; it's not legal to discriminate based on gender nor race in Britain, yet that is essentially whot the church is condoning and encouraging.
As such, were we to change this to say... religiously encouraged pedophilia, which's ALSO illegal, yeu can't just say "But it's our tradition! Only our members are practicing it!"
What's the harm in exorcisms? has a pretty good list of cases where people were KILLED via poorly done exorcisms done by otherwise perfectly legitimate religions. If yeu browse around there's also issues with several cases of untreated ailments due to religious beliefs or faith healing belief, and so on. Murder is not legal, yet in some of these cases the religious shroud has allowed such to occur without repercussion.
Illegal is still illegal, based upon the country yeu are in, regardless of whot yeur traditional beliefs are. I'm not allowed to rip yeur heart out and sacrifice it any more than yeu're allowed to tell me it's alright to maintain sexist practices.
Sorry, but practices of any kind, held within the boarders of a country, are enforced by the laws of that country, and everyone within that country is compelled to observe and respect those laws if they want to live there, regardless of their religion. If yeu have a problem with that, move to some third world country that doesn't have a police force to enforce their laws.
"I'm not really interested in what your take on communism is but objectively both of those regimes are prime examples of Godless, secular and modern regimes, result? Massive loss of life, the institutionalisation of muderous practices and policies. The church is far from the villain of the piece that its often cast it but its an easy target for tired arguments. "
Being Godless, secular and modern regimes means nothing; I could point to the taliban, to the crusades, to even nazi germany (note that hitlar was christian and the jews thing was done, in his own words...
“We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.” -Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933
(This statement clearly refutes modern Christians who claim Hitler as favoring atheism. Hitler wanted to form a society in which ALL people worshipped Jesus and considered any questioning of such to be heresy. The Holocaust was like a modern inquisition, killing all who did not accept Jesus. Though more Jews were killed then any other it should be noted that MANY ARYAN pagans and atheists were murdered for their non-belief in Christ.)
Obviously, antiquated, spiritual, god-fearing regimes can still be bloody, and in fact, usually are far moreso, as yeu're given one more excuse to go to war: religion.
I dont believe the state has or should have the power to compell compliance or conformity with secular norms and mores or traditions anymore than I believe the opposite that a Church should, vie the state, be able to compell non-believers or followers into adopting their norms or mores or traditions.
Just out of interest what isnt logical about tradition and what is unreasonable about traditionalism?
I do believe that the state has, and should have, the power to compel compliance and conformity to the laws that those who live within its' boarders must adhere to, regardless of tradition nor religion.
As for tradition, it is by very nature illogical; it relies upon consistantly sticking to the same philosophy or action, regardless of outcome or validity, context nor current situation applied therein. A tradition that's been held onto for hundreds of years was started originally with a purpose, and generally, that purpose has either long been forgotten, or no longer applies.
Whot's more amusing, is traditions, due to often being transferred orally from one generation to the next, or even adjusted in various ways to suit the needs of that era, can be warped and twisted in interesting ways, showing that they truly aren't as rigid and compelling as people often mistake them to be. Check the 'traditions' of two separate regions in Europe for example, say... opposite ends of France; even something so simple as a "traditional meal" can be completely different from the northern and southern regions of the same country, yet they both originated in the same locale originally, and both claim to be the same thing.
Now is this unreasonable? Not really. Just because it's illogical, doesn't mean it's unreasonable.
Tradition in and of itself just means yeu keep doing the same thing the same way repeatedly. If it WORKS then why not?
The issue is that sometimes traditions do not match up with a dynamic system, such as say... LIFE.
We are not static creatures; our environment we live in, the homes we build, the technology we create, none of this remains the same over time. We ourselves, even, are ever changing.
The only purpose for the vast majority of traditions, is the fear of change and to claim that SOMETHING is permanent and unchanging, something yeu can remember since yeu were born always being there.
I live in an area that's very old... right now I'm in Halifax, and they cling to tradition like it's the only thing they have going for them. Try building a new business, or building. Go on, try it. Good luck getting the permit, because yeu're not allowed to construct any "new" buildings anywheres remotely near anything that's a heritage building. Which means for entire blocks in deep downtown, there's a lack of skyscrapers despite the pressing need for their existence, because they 'look bad against the stone masonry heritage buildings'.
Why do we sacrifice our present and future just to cling needlessly to the past? Obviously if we forget our past, we're just going to repeat it, but the past should be a tool used to mold our future for the better, not to be an iron grip from which we can never escape.
Such is the fault of tradition; it provides a past, and is an aspect of ones' culture, however, once it's into the realm of tradition, it also generally is something that should've been abandoned long ago, and the only reason we're still clinging onto it is because it's a tradition.
Far too often I see people do stupid or horribly bad things, simply out of the sake of tradition.
Perhaps it's just the entp in me, but I just flat out can't stand people doing the same dumb mistake even today, despite that we knew it was a dumb idea 100 years ago, because we apparently just can't seem to learn from our mistakes. That's my frustration with tradition - it encourages people to never attempt to better themselves, nor learn from their mistakes. It instills a fear of change and promotes stagnation.
While tradition in and of itself is not bad, it must be understood that whot yeu do is done regardless of whether it's a good idea or not, rather than assuming that yeu do it because it's a good idea.
We each make our own little traditions over time, it's natural to do so. Sometimes it's amusing. Even in something modern and relatively short term, such as a game say... WoW, I may have a particular spot in a raid instance where one person always seemed to die. Even though they've since learned how to avoid dying in that one spot, they do it anyway because it's become a bit of a 'tradition'. I've even seen them actively suicide themselves to enforce it to occur because it would break tradition for them to survive that fight. They do this, however, with the knowledge that it is a dumb thing to do, and that because of such, it is amusing, and relatively harmless. This is perfectly fine, because they acknowledge it's a bad idea, and revel in the foolishness of doing so.
The problem comes in when people don't realize that whot they're doing is still a stupid idea, same as it was so long ago. When yeu can not grasp the difference between cause and effect, perhaps yeu shouldn't be in charge of things, is all I'm saying. If yeu can't grasp the concept that it is a bad idea, but yeu do it anyway, rather than thinking that, because yeu do it, it must therefore be a good idea, then I really don't want yeu dictating policy for me.
But that's just my own little grudge on tradition. It has nothing to do with the rest of the post but I saw it there and had to rant sorry ^^
