• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

France - terrorist attacks [Priest killed in Rouen church attack]

eile

Well-Known Member
Liberté, égalité, fraternité to cut it short. You can also read Voltaire if you have more time. Religion is absolutely not part of the founding principles of the French Republic. France may be a traditional catholic country, the Republic is (annoyingly) fiercely non-(anti?) religious

"[...], where are they themselves rooted? what are they based on? what is their reference or inspiration? assuming you'd dare point to one, is it contradictory? does it justify their opposite or non-existence just the same? if you are unable or unwilling to answer these questions then you are in no position to state what or how a civilized and progressive society is supposed to be, let alone offering alternatives to existing foundations or references"
 

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Yes, but you can't deny that many of the laws in the West are based on ideas that are based on, among other sources, Christian values.
I never denied anything. If, by Christian values, you mean the actual teaching of Jesus (tolerance, sacrifice, openness, freedom of spirit), then yes. But I would venture to say that these clearly were not the values practiced by the church in the 1700 and 1800 hundreds. Heck, these are not the values consistently practiced by the church today (except of course the current pope and the Jesuits in general).

But we're veering off topic here.
 

Silence

Well-Known Member
Orange Room Supporter
what are they those founding principles? where are they themselves rooted? what are they based on? what is their reference or inspiration? assuming you'd dare point to one, is it contradictory? does it justify their opposite or non-existence just the same? if you are unable or unwilling to answer these questions then you are in no position to state what or how a civilized and progressive society is supposed to be, let alone offering alternatives to existing foundations or references. additionally using sarcasm in such a case it becomes pretty much ironical
Seriously!
There is a whole world outside of.....where you are. may be by small steps to start (sunglasses and sunblock cream may be needed):
Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen de 1789 / Constitution / Droit français / Accueil | Légifrance, le service public de l'accès au droit - Accueil
Then some basics
La devise de la République, rappelée dans l'article 2 de la Constitution de 1958, est « Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité ». Elle repose sur la philosophie des Lumières et les principes de la Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen de 1789. Ces valeurs se traduisent par des droits

La République est fondée sur des principes : elle est indivisible, laïque, démocratique et sociale

Basically we are going more than 2 centuries back, you seem to have missed them
 

Indie

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
I never denied anything. If, by Christian values, you mean the actual teaching of Jesus (tolerance, sacrifice, openness, freedom of spirit), then yes.

That's what I meant. Despite France being a fiercely secular state, today, we cannot claim that their Christian heritage plays no role in their values.
 

Silence

Well-Known Member
Orange Room Supporter
Yes, but you can't deny that many of the laws in the West are based on ideas that are based on, among other sources, Christian values.
Of course they are based on Christian values...., no people can evolve without starting from its traditions but also no people will evolve if it remains limited to them..... the important thing is they didn't stop there.
 

Indie

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Of course they are based on Christian values...., no people can evolve without starting from its traditions but also no people will evolve if it remains limited to them..... the important thing is they didn't stop there.

I agree that people need to evolve from their traditions. We can even see such evolution within the Church, for example. Not a fast enough evolution according to some, but it is there nonetheless.

However, if you take "Christian values" as opposed to "Christian traditions," the former are, for the most part, in no need of evolution. They are pretty high up there with the most progressive ideologies that existed throughout history.
 

eile

Well-Known Member
Seriously!
There is a whole world outside of.....where you are. may be by small steps to start (sunglasses and sunblock cream may be needed):
Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen de 1789 / Constitution / Droit français / Accueil | Légifrance, le service public de l'accès au droit - Accueil
Then some basics




Basically we are going more than 2 centuries back, you seem to have missed them

where are they, the items in this declaration, themselves rooted? what are they based on? what is their reference or inspiration? what defines them or confines them or dictates related parameters? assuming you'd dare point to a reference, is said reference contradictory? does it justify or allow for the opposite or non-existence of what is in that declaration? if you are unable or unwilling to answer these questions then you are in no position to state what or how a civilized and progressive society is supposed to be, let alone offering alternatives to existing foundations or references
 

Silence

Well-Known Member
Orange Room Supporter
where are they, the items in this declaration, themselves rooted? what are they based on? what is their reference or inspiration? what defines them or confines them or dictates related parameters? assuming you'd dare point to a reference, is said reference contradictory? does it justify or allow for the opposite or non-existence of what is in that declaration? if you are unable or unwilling to answer these questions then you are in no position to state what or how a civilized and progressive society is supposed to be, let alone offering alternatives to existing foundations or references

Leik, try 2 or 3 more copy/pastes and may be I'll start to erect the parameters that dictate my inability to be in this kama sutra position to state who is supposed to be on top of the existing foundations in a straight or inverted alternative relationship with the non-existence of the hole in the whole.
 

kmarthe

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
What we really need is a better secret service, an honest foreign policy in line with the founding principles of the French Republic not a NATO pawn one, and an internal policy not under the influence of the big corporations and the military industry, an efficient public service, a high level public national education (like it used to be) and the safeguard of freedom of speech and artistic creation. Those founding principles are the only "God" France needs...The other Gods are free to be worshiped and none should be able to jeopardize what generations of free thinkers achieved not the god of muslims or christians or jews...not even the god of Pokemons

The "God" that you specified in the red sentences has been sought by the French people since centuries, they even made a laïcité law in 1905 to seal the strict separation between the state and the Church, and since then dear Silence the French got two world wars and now a third and more dangerous one... So if centuries did not suffice France to find that "God" I don't think they will ever manage to get it ;) When people lose their values and lose the ability to distinguish what is wrong from what is right in small as well as big issues while worshipping money and financial whales, then nothing can compensate for the consequences that follow their immoral decline!
 

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
When people lose their values and lose the ability to distinguish what is wrong from what is right in small as well as big issues while worshipping money and financial whales, then nothing can compensate for the consequences that follow their immoral decline!
You are equating being secular with loss of values and this is a very dangerous statement. Again, practicing Christians, be it the Catholic Church or the random rag tag of "churches" in the US are the first to have turned their back to those values. One does not need to be Christian to promote the right values that Jesus himself promoted, but that most Christians (even more in Lebanon than in Fance) actively work against.

You don't need God to know right from wrong. You don't need the threat of Hell or the promise of Heaven to know how to behave
 

eile

Well-Known Member
[...]

You don't need God to know right from wrong. You don't need the threat of Hell or the promise of Heaven to know how to behave

moral authority/reference and moral accountability are relied upon and upheld by default by all humans/societies (regardless of content or the validity of one versus the other). in other words, since you and @Silence are evading tackling the content/extent/roles/validity of chosen/claimed authorities/references, and presenting instead arguments such as the one i'm quoting, even by said arguments you are wrong; you cannot use your [authority/reference and accountability] argument against God/morality any more than you can use it against your preferred alternative of [moral authority/reference and accountability]
 
Last edited:

kmarthe

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
You are equating being secular with loss of values and this is a very dangerous statement. Again, practicing Christians, be it the Catholic Church or the random rag tag of "churches" in the US are the first to have turned their back to those values. One does not need to be Christian to promote the right values that Jesus himself promoted, but that most Christians (even more in Lebanon than in Fance) actively work against.

You don't need God to know right from wrong. You don't need the threat of Hell or the promise of Heaven to know how to behave

You are right to conclude what you concluded because I did not elaborate but rather was responding to @Silence statement. Let me elaborate. I did not mean the red sentence and did not equate secularism to the loss of values.

A good Christian practice dictates the separation of state and Church, that is, clergy out of power and politics, laws not applied in the name of God and religious authorities confined to treating the spiritual side of their flock. Abiding by such a conduct would lead to a secular state where morals can be kept independently of secularism. BUT there is a difference between keeping God in the church with church separated from state AND declaring war on the presence of God in one's life and destroying churches. Morals and Christian values have been replaced by a blind submission to the power of money, corruption is spread in almost every aspect of one's life (work, social conduct, mariages, political practices, etc.) and this is the result not of the separation of church and state but of the rejection of God's teachings and the absence of people's upbringing according to Christian morals. When religious teachings are nowhere to be given to ensure that people grow following a given code of ethics and when corruption becomes institutionalized then not only people stop distinguishing right from wrong but there will be nothing that can prevent social problems, wars, unrest etc. This has been always the case in the history of religions and what we are seeing now is simply another episode.

I hope my point is clear now.
 

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
. Morals and Christian values have been replaced by a blind submission to the power of money, corruption is spread in almost every aspect of one's life (work, social conduct, mariages, political practices, etc.) and this is the result not of the separation of church and state but of the rejection of God's teachings and the absence of people's upbringing according to Christian morals. When religious teachings are nowhere to be given to ensure that people grow following a given code of ethics and when corruption becomes institutionalized then not only people stop distinguishing right from wrong but there will be nothing that can prevent social problems, wars, unrest etc. This has been always the case in the history of religions and what we are seeing now is simply another episode.

I hope my point is clear now.

I agree with the first half of the above. I would venture to say though that Lebanon is not any better, therefore (and this is why I disagree with the bottom half of your statement), I don't believe this has anything to do with religious teachings,at least not in the traditional way. I don't think people need religious teaching to feel and display basic human compassion and human decency. I it funny but if you take the US, it is usually the left wing that is more tolerant and compassionate, while the right wing, despite clinching to their bibles, that are bigots, intolerant and selfish. I happen to have had the opportunity to go to a Jesuit school and the fundamental teaching their (provided by the Jesuits) was 100 times more tolerant that what I heard in Maronite churches. In fact, we were told that anyone can go to heaven, even non Christians, as long as they show love and compassion,which, incidentally is what Jesus said. Now try to tell a Maronite clergy that...
 

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
moral authority/reference and moral accountability are relied upon and upheld by default by all humans/societies (regardless of content or the validity of one versus the other). in other words, since you and @Silence are evading tackling the content/extent/roles/validity of chosen/claimed authorities/references, and presenting instead arguments such as the one i'm quoting, even by said arguments you are wrong; you cannot use your [authority/reference and accountability] argument against God/morality any more than you can use it against your preferred alternative of [moral authority/reference and accountability]
I have no idea what you just said.

Good day.
 

Silence

Well-Known Member
Orange Room Supporter
You are right to conclude what you concluded because I did not elaborate but rather was responding to @Silence statement. Let me elaborate. I did not mean the red sentence and did not equate secularism to the loss of values.

A good Christian practice dictates the separation of state and Church, that is, clergy out of power and politics, laws not applied in the name of God and religious authorities confined to treating the spiritual side of their flock. Abiding by such a conduct would lead to a secular state where morals can be kept independently of secularism. BUT there is a difference between keeping God in the church with church separated from state AND declaring war on the presence of God in one's life and destroying churches. Morals and Christian values have been replaced by a blind submission to the power of money, corruption is spread in almost every aspect of one's life (work, social conduct, mariages, political practices, etc.) and this is the result not of the separation of church and state but of the rejection of God's teachings and the absence of people's upbringing according to Christian morals. When religious teachings are nowhere to be given to ensure that people grow following a given code of ethics and when corruption becomes institutionalized then not only people stop distinguishing right from wrong but there will be nothing that can prevent social problems, wars, unrest etc. This has been always the case in the history of religions and what we are seeing now is simply another episode.

I hope my point is clear now.
So @Nonan is the good guy and I am the bad one :)
I don't have anything against those who consider their religion as the best personal supplier for human values and ethics, the problem starts when they consider it the exclusive supplier and sole agent.

In secular france, the battle is not between Christian values versus a blind submission to money, it is between the secular humane concept of "Etat providence" based on the public service and the big money and corporations who want to kill the public and social service in order to make more money.
 

kmarthe

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
I agree with the first half of the above. I would venture to say though that Lebanon is not any better, therefore (and this is why I disagree with the bottom half of your statement), I don't believe this has anything to do with religious teachings,at least not in the traditional way. I don't think people need religious teaching to feel and display basic human compassion and human decency. I it funny but if you take the US, it is usually the left wing that is more tolerant and compassionate, while the right wing, despite clinching to their bibles, that are bigots, intolerant and selfish. I happen to have had the opportunity to go to a Jesuit school and the fundamental teaching their (provided by the Jesuits) was 100 times more tolerant that what I heard in Maronite churches. In fact, we were told that anyone can go to heaven, even non Christians, as long as they show love and compassion,which, incidentally is what Jesus said. Now try to tell a Maronite clergy that...

I never said Lebanon is better in fact, you should keep in mind that thanks to Internet borders have been kind of scrapped and people have an easy access to anything with just a click. A Christian code of ethics, even though I think is perfectly capable of installing a given set of values, is often coupled with other factors mainly the cultural aspect of a society. For instance, the cultural differences between West and Est, are so significant up to the point that the expression of the Faith (based on the same doctrine and text) differs with the practical aspect dominating over the spiritual one in Western societies vs a dominant spiritual expression in the Eastern ones.

Now regarding your red sentence, I went to both a Maronite and Jesuit educational institutions and my experience (with the respect to the aspects you mentioned) might be different, most probably because of the people with whom we got the chance to deal. But the teachings are the teachings, and the openness of the Catholic Church to the idea that anyone can go to Heaven as long as they show compassion and love for both should be the same because such a verdict comes form the same central authority in the Vatican. You may have gotten to deal with a Maronite qu7 clergy :p (may God help you if that was the case :D )

So @Nonan is the good guy and I am the bad one :)
I don't have anything against those who consider their religion as the best personal supplier for human values and ethics, the problem starts when they consider it the exclusive supplier and sole agent.

In secular france, the battle is not between Christian values versus a blind submission to money, it is between the secular humane concept of "Etat providence" based on the public service and the big money and corporations who want to kill the public and social service in order to make more money.

LOL! Nope you and Nona are very nice ma32oul rafi2 Silence you thought I see you as a bad guy?!? :eek:

I speak about Christianity because I know it more than other religions/sets of values, you may have other cultures who may have a similar peaceful impact. This is not the point of the discussion here.

Regarding your red sentence, without a code of ethics that preaches good morals, the secular humane concept of "Etat providence" based on the public service CANNOT overcome the big money and corporations :) Again when people don't have the means to know what is good and what is bad, and what is corrupted and what is not, there is no way they would succeed to implement a good secular state. Have you ever seen a corrupted judicial system leading to fair judgements? Nope! After rejecting Christianity, the West failed to find an equivalent substitute that can be used to safeguard values, despite the huge advances in science and technology and the industrial revolution that followed, there is still something missing and that is the presence of God's touch in the people spirits :)
 
Last edited:

eile

Well-Known Member
I have no idea what you just said.

Good day.

no worries, work on it. in the meanwhile, here's a rundown of our interaction in this thread so far:

you and @Silence have claimed that society is better off without religious-based / traditional morality, and that it is better off being based on modern 'completely secular' principles. i asked both of about those principles, what are they, their foundation, their reference, assuming you would give us an alternative to the one you're advising against, you only offered a summary of those principles, i enquired you about the supposed alternative reference/foundation upon which said principles are supposedly standing or being sustained. no answers were given whatsoever

seeing that your evasion was being put to light, you took the initiative and proceeded with making the situation appear differently as if you're tackling the subject by claiming that, by form, the reference/foundation you're advising against is not preferable/valid because it involves authority (e.g God) and accountability (e.g Judgement day), i replied by demonstrating that even this attempt of criticism (as shallow and inaccurate as it is) is rendered invalid/self-refuting by sole reason that the same can be said about all humans and societies and systems of moralities in general / by default. in doing so i put to light your second attempt (being mingled with deceit this time) at evading answering my questions

initially i said, given the topic at hand, logic dictates that when someone doesn't have answers to the perfectly legit questions i initially raised, let alone invests some effort in evading them, they automatically deem themselves unqualified for commenting let alone advising on how and what societies are supposed to be. and given that you both have met this condition so far, you automatically fall within said category
 
Last edited:

HannaTheCrusader

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
For t one who says that France can't change
Explain this one

كيف تفسر إن اللي فوق دول يبقوا أجداد اللي تحت :
- الشعب اتقدم ؟
- الشعب تاخر ؟
- -الشعب اتجنن؟


 

Thawra # Furoshima

Well-Known Member
First, France is a secular republic but religion is legal and there is not a total separation. Second, the region of Alsace and Lorraine have a concordat with the Church. Three, the Catholic Schools are financed by the State due to a law passe by General De Gaule in 1962. Four, 1 million people went to the street against Gay Marriage in 2015. Five, President Hollande is visiting the Pope Today. Finally while some catholic priests were bad, people like Saint John Paul 2 and Mother Theresa are major figures who brought freedom and social solidarity to billions of people.
 

The Bidenator

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
You are right to conclude what you concluded because I did not elaborate but rather was responding to @Silence statement. Let me elaborate. I did not mean the red sentence and did not equate secularism to the loss of values.

A good Christian practice dictates the separation of state and Church, that is, clergy out of power and politics, laws not applied in the name of God and religious authorities confined to treating the spiritual side of their flock. Abiding by such a conduct would lead to a secular state where morals can be kept independently of secularism. BUT there is a difference between keeping God in the church with church separated from state AND declaring war on the presence of God in one's life and destroying churches. Morals and Christian values have been replaced by a blind submission to the power of money, corruption is spread in almost every aspect of one's life (work, social conduct, mariages, political practices, etc.) and this is the result not of the separation of church and state but of the rejection of God's teachings and the absence of people's upbringing according to Christian morals. When religious teachings are nowhere to be given to ensure that people grow following a given code of ethics and when corruption becomes institutionalized then not only people stop distinguishing right from wrong but there will be nothing that can prevent social problems, wars, unrest etc. This has been always the case in the history of religions and what we are seeing now is simply another episode.

I hope my point is clear now.

That is because you live in a tiny bubble with a simplistic worldview which assumes an ethical false dichotomy: my religion good, everything else bad. Newsflash - we do not need god or religion and certainly not your god or religion to exercise good moral behavior. But, what the hell, put your money where your mouth is: show us your model society. You may pick any society that once existed at any point in time.

Let us rejoice that Christians are following the code of ethics set by modern civilization. If they were still exercising their code of ethics and "Christian morals" as they did in the middle ages then we'd be in real trouble.
 
Top