Turn on thread page Beta

B1008 – Act of Supremacy (Repeal) Bill 2016 watch

Announcements
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    B1008 – Act of Supremacy (Repeal) Bill 2016, TSR Socialist Party


    Act of Supremacy (Repeal) Bill 2016
    A Bill to repeal the Act of Supremacy 1558 and revoke Anglicanism as the state religion of England.

    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

    1. Repeals and revocations
    (1) The enactments referred to in the entirety of the Act of Supremacy 1558 are repealed and revoked.

    2. Short title and commencement
    (1) This Act may be cited as the Act of Supremacy (Repeal) Act 2016.
    (2) This Act comes into force on the day on which it is passed.

    Notes:
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Recent studies have shown that almost 50% of the country is non-religious - that is, they do not follow any religion. In light of this, Anglicanism should not be the state religion when most of the country it applies to do not even follow said religion.

    The Act of Supremacy is over four hundred years old and relies on an outdated view of the link between monarch and religion. This will have the impact of changing the state religion, but will not restrict the rights of those who are Anglican, nor will it restrict the Anglican Commune as a whole.

    *Sniffs* "What does be that foul smell?" I think it's the smell of B....
    Any way lets analyse some sources for statistics rather than just making them up on the spot shall we!

    Hmmmmm,....

    It would appear to me that these sources suggest well in advance of 50% of the country are of the Christian religion! These are the first results to appear in a Google search:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religi...dom#Statistics
    (@ 59.5%(2011))
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32722155
    (@64%(2010))

    And I think we should be encouraging people to choose their own religion, rather than the Atheistic views forced on them by schools e.g.
    In Physics you learn the big bang theory, and and small sentence at the end of that part of the spec says, 'but there are other beliefs'
    And CRS teaches that these people believe this, rather than telling them to believe it. Now telling someone to believe in a religion is wrong, but that is effectively what happens to every GCSE physics student up and down the country, how is this in any way fair?
    Even worse than that, however is the questions of the physics paper which bluntly state 'Explain how the universe started' rather than 'Explain how the big bang theory suggests the universe began', the crucial difference being that it is suggesting that atheism is the only true way the world began.
    The world of atheists attacks religion in so many subtle and underhand ways, from their coverage of religion in the media to the test papers in schools this is the only reason the Christian population is decreasing.
    The other thing is that school teaches science is right religion is wrong, not science and religion can be interpreted in such a way as the two intertwine, meaning the students with a lower brain capacity flock like sheep to atheism because that's what they are told by their schools and the world around them.
    I say rather than repealing the law that we should have a shake up of the education system and of society to not favour atheists or anyone of any religion, shouldn't we all be on an equal ground? It is truly unfair for the semi-religion of atheism to rule over the world and declare that all other religions are wrong.
    I think it's appalling that people look at religion and they say, "look at them, they want to control the world with their religious beliefs, and want everyone to fall in with it" whilst they themselves contort the world in an attempt to remove religion.


    ... religious rant over.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    *Sniffs* "What does be that foul smell?" I think it's the smell of B....
    Any way lets analyse some sources for statistics rather than just making them up on the spot shall we!

    Hmmmmm,....

    It would appear to me that these sources suggest well in advance of 50% of the country are of the Christian religion! These are the first results to appear in a Google search:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religi...dom#Statistics
    (@ 59.5%(2011))
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32722155
    (@64%(2010))

    And I think we should be encouraging people to choose their own religion, rather than the Atheistic views forced on them by schools e.g.
    In Physics you learn the big bang theory, and and small sentence at the end of that part of the spec says, 'but there are other beliefs'
    And CRS teaches that these people believe this, rather than telling them to believe it. Now telling someone to believe in a religion is wrong, but that is effectively what happens to every GCSE physics student up and down the country, how is this in any way fair?
    Even worse than that, however is the questions of the physics paper which bluntly state 'Explain how the universe started' rather than 'Explain how the big bang theory suggests the universe began', the crucial difference being that it is suggesting that atheism is the only true way the world began.
    The world of atheists attacks religion in so many subtle and underhand ways, from their coverage of religion in the media to the test papers in schools this is the only reason the Christian population is decreasing.
    The other thing is that school teaches science is right religion is wrong, not science and religion can be interpreted in such a way as the two intertwine, meaning the students with a lower brain capacity flock like sheep to atheism because that's what they are told by their schools and the world around them.
    I say rather than repealing the law that we should have a shake up of the education system and of society to not favour atheists or anyone of any religion, shouldn't we all be on an equal ground? It is truly unfair for the semi-religion of atheism to rule over the world and declare that all other religions are wrong.
    I think it's appalling that people look at religion and they say, "look at them, they want to control the world with their religious beliefs, and want everyone to fall in with it" whilst they themselves contort the world in an attempt to remove religion.


    ... religious rant over.
    Those sources are older than the ones the Socialists are referring to. As the statistic will obviously change over time it is meaningless to cite a 5 year old poll as a counter.

    Also, lol at "the students with a lower brain capacity flock like sheep to atheism".

    The state should be secular. In order to treat all religions the same it must, itself, hold no religion.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Having looked through the link to the Act, almost all if not all has been repealed. I want to see the CofE disestablished, as the monarch and all of us should have the freedom to believe or not, and to follow the faith of our choice or not. This Bill will not do this, it appears.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    Having looked through the link to the Act, almost all if not all has been repealed. I want to see the CofE disestablished, as the monarch and all of us should have the freedom to believe or not, and to follow the faith of our choice or not. This Bill will not do this, it appears.
    If you want to destroy Anglicanism, you'll have to do it another way.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    If you want to destroy Anglicanism, you'll have to do it another way.
    I have no wish to destroy the CofE, just have it on the same footing as all other churches and other faiths.*
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    I have no wish to destroy the CofE, just have it on the same footing as all other churches and other faiths.*
    Then support this bill, which makes a start on it, and draft others to finish the job to your satisfaction. Most likely I'll support them.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah, why not.

    Aye
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Those sources are older than the ones the Socialists are referring to. As the statistic will obviously change over time it is meaningless to cite a 5 year old poll as a counter.

    Also, lol at "the students with a lower brain capacity flock like sheep to atheism".

    The state should be secular. In order to treat all religions the same it must, itself, hold no religion.
    The problem is exam boards, media personalities etc. are forcing ideas of atheism into everyday life, they are not being fair and nonreligious. Yes the state is considered Christian, BUT, there is no preferential treatment, nothing to put Christians apart from others. However as I said earlier my problem is atheism is taught as truth rather than allowing people to choose their own religion or represent a religion, and it should not be allowed for the government to do this. These theories of Darwin and of some magical 'big bang' are as proven as some omniscient being creating it. But not only are people taught to the theories as fact they are taught to reject religion, they are taught that religion and science cannot co-exist which is frankly just nonsense. The government obviously is ruled by religion, but the religion of atheism not of Christianity. And now Christianity is being forced out of it's own countries by suggesting things like this, soon Christianity will be a minority! And really that is what atheists are aiming for. But what fools like Richard Dawkins don't understand is that we are not 'inherently good' (yes that's quoting the imbecile) morals were developed by religion, without morals where would we stand in a greed-run cooperate society... oh hang on that's what England is turning into, isn't it funny how the less religious we get the more this occurs.
    But even on a separate idea, religion gives people hope! That is the foundation of all success, well, that or money and very influential friends and family. Hope is the driving force of the world and it was bought about by religion. The removal of religion is another sign of the starting of devolution... the idea that eventually everything will fall apart again.

    And my point about the students flocking to atheism is supported, the syllabus teaches 'atheism is true','religion is something we are separate from'. And in the headstrong teenage spirit the students think that what they've been taught is more correct than what their parents know. And anyone who doesn't know better just goes with the rest, I mean why have religion when you could have fun?

    I agree wouldn't it be great if the state was completely based on equality for all and atheism was seen as what it really is: A RELIGION! and there was no preference to atheists of Christians. However the state cannot be unbiased, the head of state (our dearest queen) must be the head of church, thanks to Henry the 8th's invent of the Church of England. And the government is made of mostly privileged people, who come from public school backgrounds, where they're not criticised for having a religion, so many of them follow the family religion of Christianity. So whilst the mindless flock follow what morons like Dawkins suggest, most of them are the working class not the ruling or higher classes, so I'm afraid they are under represented but that is because the intelligent can see for themselves that religion is the better option than believing in a mystical explosion occurring from nothingness. You also get many scientists realising that such beauty and logic exists in nature it could not occur through mere chance (quote the watch maker's analogy) Everything working together in harmony in balance, and so much pattern and logic. Thus leading to my conclusion that the majority of atheists are 'the flock' those who can justify their belief as much as I could justify turning into a banana as I sit here.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    And now Christianity is being forced out of it's own countries by suggesting things like this, soon Christianity will be a minority!
    Christianity already is a minority. That's why I proposed this bill in the first place.

    To be clear, I do not hate Christianity, or at the very least I do not dislike Christianity any more than any other religion practised in this country. I will oppose bills which prevent people from practising the religion of their choice.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    The problem is exam boards, media personalities etc. are forcing ideas of atheism into everyday life, they are not being fair and nonreligious. Yes the state is considered Christian, BUT, there is no preferential treatment, nothing to put Christians apart from others. However as I said earlier my problem is atheism is taught as truth rather than allowing people to choose their own religion or represent a religion, and it should not be allowed for the government to do this. These theories of Darwin and of some magical 'big bang' are as proven as some omniscient being creating it. But not only are people taught to the theories as fact they are taught to reject religion, they are taught that religion and science cannot co-exist which is frankly just nonsense. The government obviously is ruled by religion, but the religion of atheism not of Christianity. And now Christianity is being forced out of it's own countries by suggesting things like this, soon Christianity will be a minority! And really that is what atheists are aiming for. But what fools like Richard Dawkins don't understand is that we are not 'inherently good' (yes that's quoting the imbecile) morals were developed by religion, without morals where would we stand in a greed-run cooperate society... oh hang on that's what England is turning into, isn't it funny how the less religious we get the more this occurs.
    But even on a separate idea, religion gives people hope! That is the foundation of all success, well, that or money and very influential friends and family. Hope is the driving force of the world and it was bought about by religion. The removal of religion is another sign of the starting of devolution... the idea that eventually everything will fall apart again.

    And my point about the students flocking to atheism is supported, the syllabus teaches 'atheism is true','religion is something we are separate from'. And in the headstrong teenage spirit the students think that what they've been taught is more correct than what their parents know. And anyone who doesn't know better just goes with the rest, I mean why have religion when you could have fun?

    I agree wouldn't it be great if the state was completely based on equality for all and atheism was seen as what it really is: A RELIGION! and there was no preference to atheists of Christians. However the state cannot be unbiased, the head of state (our dearest queen) must be the head of church, thanks to Henry the 8th's invent of the Church of England. And the government is made of mostly privileged people, who come from public school backgrounds, where they're not criticised for having a religion, so many of them follow the family religion of Christianity. So whilst the mindless flock follow what morons like Dawkins suggest, most of them are the working class not the ruling or higher classes, so I'm afraid they are under represented but that is because the intelligent can see for themselves that religion is the better option than believing in a mystical explosion occurring from nothingness. You also get many scientists realising that such beauty and logic exists in nature it could not occur through mere chance (quote the watch maker's analogy) Everything working together in harmony in balance, and so much pattern and logic. Thus leading to my conclusion that the majority of atheists are 'the flock' those who can justify their belief as much as I could justify turning into a banana as I sit here.
    The 'Big Bang Theory' is backed up by a plethora of evidence. As is evolution and natural selection. You can accept these scientific truths without abandoning your religion. These aren't 'atheist' theories and 'atheism' is not a religion.

    Schools should never pretend as if any religion offers truths compatible to those derived from the logical interpretation of empirical evidence.

    And whilst I know not what intellectual reserves you're drawing from when you call one of the most eminent scientists of our time a 'moron' I think you completely devalue your argument by saying so.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    BobSausage I honestly don't know why I'm doing this because I feel you are either a troll or so detached from reality that you won't understand my arguments but her it goes anyway.

    Firstly, you are misusing the term athiest, something many people do but still. Athiest is simply the lack of a belief in God. There are atheistic religions such as Buddhism. The correct term is irreligious.

    Secondly, 'atheism' isn't taught as true. I can tell you as a strongly irreligious person in schools I felt that religion was forced upon me most of the time. What is taught as true is science for which we have evidence and proof.

    Thirdly on your point about morals I do hope you aren't saying that irreligious people are immoral, greed has always existed in human society and to try and link it to the growing lack of belief is absurd.

    Lastly religion gives, in my mind, the illusion of hope. It is one of the leading causes of division in the world to day and doesn't improve people's life a great deal.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    Christianity already is a minority. That's why I proposed this bill in the first place.

    To be clear, I do not hate Christianity, or at the very least I do not dislike Christianity any more than any other religion practised in this country. I will oppose bills which prevent people from practising the religion of their choice.
    From the stats I've found we still have a majority, minor though it is.
    But my problem is that atheism is a religion, and it is controlling and contorting the country and subtly persecuting religion through the education system, through the media etc. I think we need to respect our ancestors and keep this as a multi-cultural country, but still dominated by Christianity. And my point was on Christianity as a worldly population, not a national population. You see if Christianity no longer controls England, other countries follow. The Christian population plummets from 23% worldwide to say 10%, soon Christians become extinct, because the system now idolises theories which are taught as fact not theory, and it really annoys me to see in school 'THIS IS HOW THE BIG BANG OCCURRED' on displays rather than 'THEORIES ON HOW THE WORLD WAS CREATED'. What I hate is the isolation and removal of Christianity from the public eye, now if a student says they're Christian in school they get laughed at, called racist or homophobic... I am Christian yet neither of these things. And in a physics class I had to try to explain myself to the morons rather than them just accepting it, because society now casts out Christians.

    This bill does not affect people, it just labels the country and to reject it is just another kick in the teeth to Christians, so I say no, this bill would again isolate and cut Christians out of society.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    From the stats I've found we still have a majority, minor though it is.
    But my problem is that atheism is a religion, and it is controlling and contorting the country and subtly persecuting religion through the education system, through the media etc. I think we need to respect our ancestors and keep this as a multi-cultural country, but still dominated by Christianity. And my point was on Christianity as a worldly population, not a national population. You see if Christianity no longer controls England, other countries follow. The Christian population plummets from 23% worldwide to say 10%, soon Christians become extinct, because the system now idolises theories which are taught as fact not theory, and it really annoys me to see in school 'THIS IS HOW THE BIG BANG OCCURRED' on displays rather than 'THEORIES ON HOW THE WORLD WAS CREATED'. What I hate is the isolation and removal of Christianity from the public eye, now if a student says they're Christian in school they get laughed at, called racist or homophobic... I am Christian yet neither of these things. And in a physics class I had to try to explain myself to the morons rather than them just accepting it, because society now casts out Christians.

    This bill does not affect people, it just labels the country and to reject it is just another kick in the teeth to Christians, so I say no, this bill would again isolate and cut Christians out of society.
    Nearly half of the country is non-religious, and I can back that statement up.

    Nevertheless, this bill is only an official recognition that more people are non-religious than Christian. It's not targeting Christianity unfairly.

    Besides, there is far more proof for evolution and the Big Bang than there is for Divine Creation (which there is a total of no proof for).

    Christians being labelled racist or homophobic is not out of nowhere, The Bible calls for homosexuals to be put to death, or do you not read your own book?

    I'm not unjustly targeting Christianity. If the official religion were Islam, or Judaism, or any other religion, and the followers did not make a majority, I would still call for this bill to be passed.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    BobSausage
    Thirdly on your point about morals I do hope you aren't saying that irreligious people are immoral, greed has always existed in human society and to try and link it to the growing lack of belief is absurd.

    Lastly religion gives, in my mind, the illusion of hope. It is one of the leading causes of division in the world to day and doesn't improve people's life a great deal.
    One your third point (I'm too tired to respond to four so two should do).
    I was not inferring that irreligious people are immoral, I was proposing that morals derive from religion, without religion, before it etc. things we consider immoral were the norm.

    And on the other point I call BS. Ok not strictly true. What you are therefore proposing is without religion the world would be peaceful? No. As long as humans exist there will be conflict, even within religious groups ( I don't know if you heard of the (white) christian in America attacking a (mostly black) church, about a year ago) there is conflict. Conflict occurs because everyone has different ideals, and to say religion is the fault is possibly slightly correct because religion is a group of morals, and when some conflict it causes division. The only way to create peace in the world would be a single universal monotone dictatorship with no free thought, therefore no conflicting ideals, to blame religion alone though? That's stooping a little low.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    One your third point (I'm too tired to respond to four so two should do).
    I was not inferring that irreligious people are immoral, I was proposing that morals derive from religion, without religion, before it etc. things we consider immoral were the norm.
    Morals derive from religion? Religion is baseless, based on a being whose existence cannot and will not be proven. Why should anyone derive their morals from something so pointless?

    Let me ask you this: if you weren't a Christian, would you go around raping and murdering people? No? Then your morals don't stem from religion.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    One your third point (I'm too tired to respond to four so two should do).
    I was not inferring that irreligious people are immoral, I was proposing that morals derive from religion, without religion, before it etc. things we consider immoral were the norm.
    straight away this is untrue. Religions derive their morals and rules from the society of the day. If you look at the evolution of Christianity for example when it reached Rome it adapted a lot and absorbed lots of different cults traditions into it to become more appealing. Indeed all regions have a founder and that founder sets out the moral guidance for that religion and has the morals before that religion exists because the morality is derived from society and implanted into religion, as it evolves religion then changes and morphs to meet the moral standards of the day.

    on the other point I call BS. Ok not strictly true. What you are therefore proposing is without religion the world would be peaceful? No. As long as humans exist there will be conflict, even within religious groups ( I don't know if you heard of the (white) christian in America attacking a (mostly black) church, about a year ago) there is conflict. Conflict occurs because everyone has different ideals, and to say religion is the fault is possibly slightly correct because religion is a group of morals, and when some conflict it causes division. The only way to create peace in the world would be a single universal monotone dictatorship with no free thought, therefore no conflicting ideals, to blame religion alone though? That's stooping a little low.
    no I'm not proposing that at all. I'm saying that religion is a major source but not by any means the only one.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    The 'Big Bang Theory' is backed up by a plethora of evidence. As is evolution and natural selection. You can accept these scientific truths without abandoning your religion. These aren't 'atheist' theories and 'atheism' is not a religion.

    Schools should never pretend as if any religion offers truths compatible to those derived from the logical interpretation of empirical evidence.

    And whilst I know not what intellectual reserves you're drawing from when you call one of the most eminent scientists of our time a 'moron' I think you completely devalue your argument by saying so.
    Eminent scientist? He is no such thing, he has a degree in zoology from Oxford and has written a couple of books trying to disprove parts of the bible, he is a blustering fool when yo see him on camera trying to stir up religious hatred. He is also for no given reason an Anti-Christian, why? To encourage hatred of the religion. He picks on the religion, he could do actual science to disprove it, no he just blusters and shouts over any opposition. Moron does not even begin to describe this foolish imbecile.
    And any plethora of 'evidence is still not proven, there is no proof, it is impossible. Make a time machine and then I'll believe it, but I also know Christians who don't dispute the 'big bang' in fact I was talking to someone about it recently who said they believed the bible was phrased in such a way as to explain it to the people to help them better comprehend it, you must remember this is part written over 2000 years ago to a naive world with primitive understandings. Does not the order of the bible vaguely resemble evolution too? Plants them fish then animals then humans? that sounds about right to me. And also if you read other parts of the bible it says 'A day in heaven is like 1000 years on earth' and with no way of discerning how log a year was back then it is more than possible, it hasn't always been 365 days.

    Is that alright with you?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    Morals derive from religion? Religion is baseless, based on a being whose existence cannot and will not be proven. Why should anyone derive their morals from something so pointless?

    Let me ask you this: if you weren't a Christian, would you go around raping and murdering people? No? Then your morals don't stem from religion.
    Again read it as it was to be read. I said that historically religion is the source of morals and there is more than enough evidence: the ten commandments, most of Leviticus etc. They are the basis for many laws today.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    Again read it as it was to be read. I said that historically religion is the source of morals and there is more than enough evidence: the ten commandments, most of Leviticus etc. They are the basis for many laws today.
    But such morals as in Leviticus which tell us to kill adulterers and homosexuals are surely wrong? Does that not cast doubt on the other morals expressed in the Bible?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I do not like the thought of the government not promoting Christmas, Easter
    Government can still promote Christmas and Easter as they are celebrated by many non-religious families, and have become quite secular holidays for a lot of people.

    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    the 10 Commandments, traditional relationships, traditional family unit, and schools not doing their part to promote Christianity, or Catholicism.
    When does the government promote the ten commandments anyway? They don't as far as I'm aware, nor should they. The same goes for traditional relationships and promotion of christianity. They're not promoted by the government anyway, so this doesn't change that.

    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I feel this bill is the start of a slippery slope where the dominance of Christian values, and teaching in society starts to diminish by a a continual move to removing religion from life.
    I'm afraid this has already begun to happen, as it should, given that Christians are a minority in the UK.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 23, 2016
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.