http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/ If there wasn't one before, it's time we started it... Sun, 12 Oct 2008 17:27:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6458 Sunny Hundal Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:54:09 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6458 I'm disappointed with Dr Williams. Well done on the govt for doing this. I’m disappointed with Dr Williams. Well done on the govt for doing this.

]]> http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6446 Eric Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:03:48 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6446 Reading the debate, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. The Archbishop of York in particular managed to sit so firmly on the fence that there is, as they say, no doubt that the iron will have entered into his soul. He was particularly upset that parliamentarians are "attempting to relegate considerations of religion and faith from matters of public policy to the private sphere" - which is precisely where liberals think they should be. He claims that "the place of Christianity in the constitutional framework of this country as governed by the Queen in Parliament under God is not in question, but some members of the other place seem to question that reality." And when he then declares that the existing law "protects society against civil strife" he seems to echo Stephen Green. Reading the debate, I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. The Archbishop of York in particular managed to sit so firmly on the fence that there is, as they say, no doubt that the iron will have entered into his soul. He was particularly upset that parliamentarians are “attempting to relegate considerations of religion and faith from matters of public policy to the private sphere” - which is precisely where liberals think they should be. He claims that “the place of Christianity in the constitutional framework of this country as governed by the Queen in Parliament under God is not in question, but some members of the other place seem to question that reality.” And when he then declares that the existing law “protects society against civil strife” he seems to echo Stephen Green.

]]> http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6441 Nick Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:30:15 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6441 No argument from me! Good stuff. No argument from me! Good stuff.

]]> http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6432 Gracchi Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:27:14 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/06/whats-the-difference-between-a-stoat-and-an-archbishop/#comment-6432 Definitely. Having laws which defend one kind of ideas suggests that the state privileges those ideas and I don't think Britain should be a Christian country (or for that matter a Sikh, Muslim or Hindu country) but a secular country ie one tolerant of all religions and the belief that all religion is superstition. The Blasphemy law ought to go as its symbolic of the idea that Britain is a religious christian state. Definitely. Having laws which defend one kind of ideas suggests that the state privileges those ideas and I don’t think Britain should be a Christian country (or for that matter a Sikh, Muslim or Hindu country) but a secular country ie one tolerant of all religions and the belief that all religion is superstition. The Blasphemy law ought to go as its symbolic of the idea that Britain is a religious christian state.

]]>