Passenger killed by air marshall

[Grammatron]

The Danish government is not religious. Get it through your thick skull.

Sheeesh.........

Not only is your government Religious it also has ONE SPECIFIC Religion. I believe you have to re-examine the thickness of your cranium.

 

[Grammatron]

I hate to admit it, but this insistence that the Danish government is religious underlines my criticism of Americans being disturbingly ignorant of non-American matters. Willingly ignorant, even.

And you proved Ny's point! Bravo sir, you are truely a master of making yourself look worse with each post

The Danish government is not religious.

And yet, it is. How funny.

Danish kids are not taught to be religious.

Dunno about that one.

Keep claiming otherwise, and you prove my point.

Point that you refuse to be admit you are wrong?

Good news then, you have proved that point beyond a shadow of a doubt so many times it's almost expected now.

 

[Upchurch]

The Danish government is not religious. Get it through your thick skull.

Gram is pointing out the double standard you are using here. Why is the US government religious when the Danish goverment is not?

 

[Thanz]

It isn't hair splitting at all. There is a hell of a difference between teaching kids about religion and teaching them to be religious.

when the rules apparently say that "The central knowledge area of the subject of Christian studies shall be the Evangelical Lutheran Christianity of the Danish National Church." that tells me that they are teaching one religion - the One True State Religion in the Realm. They are teaching the doctrines and beliefs of that church.

If it teaches them to be religious, then why aren't the churches filled with people? Church attendance is only 2-4%.

First, this is a completely different question. I did not make a point about Church attendance - I made a point about educaiton. Second, got a reference for those stats?

There is none. You are not sworn in, because in court, you have to tell the truth, regardless.

They just assume that you will tell the truth? They don't make you promise to tell the truth at all?

It's not a "hump". The church is supported by those who want to support it. Church support isn't mandatory. Do you understand this, yes or no?

The way I understand it is that some of the Church is supported out of the general funds of the government, either directly or indirectly. I also understand that section 4 of your constitution says "The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established Church of Denmark, and, as such, it shall be supported by the State.", which means to me that if everyone in Denmark opted out as you say they can, the gov't would still be obligated to support the Church. Yes or no?

No, it doesn't. The government and the state are two different things here. Our government is not religious, and the state is not either. You are wrong. Not just because you are ignorant of Danish matters, but because you also refuse to educate yourself.

On paper, it certainly does. The Constitution of Denmark obligates the State to support one particular church. The Constitution of the US prohibits the State from supporting any churches. Which is more religious again?

I didn't ignore it. I specifically said that I had addressed it. Don't blame me for your own laziness.

Telling me you addressed it and actually addressing it are two different matters. My post is number 714 on page 18 of this thread. Where did you address it?

People can judge for themselves.

I think they have. And I don't see much (if any) agreement with your position. What does that tell you?

 

[DavidJames]

Claus:
What I'm wondering in this discussion of the religiosity of the U.S. vs. Denmark is, are there tangible examples of preferential treatment or special consideration given to religion or religious concepts?

For example, in Denmark

Do you give special tax status to religions?
Do you provide public funding to religious organizations to perform charity work?
Do your leaders think that, when selecting, say judges for your highest court, the candidates religious views are important information to be known?

 

[CFLarsen]

Gram is pointing out the double standard you are using here. Why is the US government religious when the Danish goverment is not?

I have pointed out that there are a multitude of religious references wrt the US government. We don't have that in Denmark.

 

[CFLarsen]

Not only is your government Religious it also has ONE SPECIFIC Religion. I believe you have to re-examine the thickness of your cranium.

And you proved Ny's point! Bravo sir, you are truely a master of making yourself look worse with each post

And yet, it is. How funny.

Dunno about that one.

Point that you refuse to be admit you are wrong?

Good news then, you have proved that point beyond a shadow of a doubt so many times it's almost expected now.

Wow. You just proved, beyond doubt, that you are not a skeptic. Your willing ignorance is extremely disturbing.

Oh, well.

 

[CFLarsen]

when the rules apparently say that "The central knowledge area of the subject of Christian studies shall be the Evangelical Lutheran Christianity of the Danish National Church." that tells me that they are teaching one religion - the One True State Religion in the Realm. They are teaching the doctrines and beliefs of that church.

No, they are not. They are teaching the kids what that religion, as well as others, are about. They are not teaching the kids to be religious.

First, this is a completely different question. I did not make a point about Church attendance - I made a point about educaiton. Second, got a reference for those stats?

In Danish:

Folkekirken mangler viden om medlemmerne
The Danish newspaper Berlingske Tidende 17 february 2005, by Brita Stenstrup:

I begyndelsen af 1800-tallet gik halvdelen af den danske befolkning, det vil sige en halv million mennesker, til alters en eller to gange om året, for det skulle de. I dag bøjer 2,5 mio. danskere knæ ved alteret i løbet af året. Flere og flere kirkegængere deltager i nadveren ved søndagens højmesse. 70 procent af dem, der regelmæssigt går i kirke i dag, går også til alters. Men de er gengangere. De rekrutteres fra de fem procent af befolkningen, der går regelmæssigt i kirke.

"In the beginning of the 18th century half of the Danish population attended church, about half a million people, once or twice a year, because they had to. Today, 2.5 million Danes bend their knees at the altar during the year. More and more churchgoers participate in communion at Sunday's High Mass. 70% of those who regularly go to church today also take communion. But they are "repeat customers" (me: sorry, there isn't a precise English word for it, but you get the picture). They are recruited from the five percent of the population that are regular church attendants."

They just assume that you will tell the truth? They don't make you promise to tell the truth at all?

Nope. When you are in court, you will tell the truth. That's it. If you don't, you will get 1 year in prison.

Do try to accept that we do it this way. Just because we don't do it the American Way doesn't mean we are wrong. Is that OK with you?

The way I understand it is that some of the Church is supported out of the general funds of the government, either directly or indirectly. I also understand that section 4 of your constitution says "The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established Church of Denmark, and, as such, it shall be supported by the State.", which means to me that if everyone in Denmark opted out as you say they can, the gov't would still be obligated to support the Church. Yes or no?

Until you answer the question, you are not entitled to ask questions. Do you understand that church support is not mandatory, yes or no?

On paper, it certainly does. The Constitution of Denmark obligates the State to support one particular church. The Constitution of the US prohibits the State from supporting any churches. Which is more religious again?

What is it that compels you to refuse to educate yourself about non-American issues? The Danish state and the Danish government are two different things. Our government is not religious, and neither is our government.

What will it take for you to admit you are wrong?

Telling me you addressed it and actually addressing it are two different matters. My post is number 714 on page 18 of this thread. Where did you address it?

Again, don't blame me for your laziness.

I think they have. And I don't see much (if any) agreement with your position. What does that tell you?

So far, we haven't heard from other Danes. If they agree with me, will you admit that you are wrong?

Just yes or no.

 

[CFLarsen]

Claus:
What I'm wondering in this discussion of the religiosity of the U.S. vs. Denmark is, are there tangible examples of preferential treatment or special consideration given to religion or religious concepts?

No.

Do you give special tax status to religions?

We give tax reductions (since Denmark is a heavily taxed country, tax deductions is a big issue here ) to acknowledged religions. It has mostly to do with how popular and organized it is. E.g., the Asatru people have had their recognition withdrawn, due to the confusion and internal disagreement.

We also give tax deductions to people who buy real estate. And people who go on maternity leave. And a lot of other things. Like I said, tax deductions is big here....

Do you provide public funding to religious organizations to perform charity work?

No.

Do your leaders think that, when selecting, say judges for your highest court, the candidates religious views are important information to be known?

Absolutely not! It would be considered extremely inappropriate to even suggest such a thing.

Oh, me gosh! The Danish Supreme Court Judges are selected from their legal knowledge and experience only.

 

[Grammatron]

Wow. You just proved, beyond doubt, that you are not a skeptic. Your willing ignorance is extremely disturbing.

Oh, well.

Because -- like most of the posts on this thread, and indeed this forum -- if you say so it must be true.

Sure man.

 

[Grammatron]

I have pointed out that there are a multitude of religious references wrt the US government. We don't have that in Denmark.

Except for that state-funded, state-supported religion; one, true religion in your constitution.

 

[CFLarsen]

Because -- like most of the posts on this thread, and indeed this forum -- if you say so it must be true.

Sure man.

Are you suggesting that I don't generally provide evidence of my claims?

Just yes or no.

 

[Grammatron]

Are you suggesting that I don't generally provide evidence of my claims?

Just yes or no.

Yes.

 

[CFLarsen]

Yes.

Prove it.

 

[Upchurch]

I have pointed out that there are a multitude of religious references wrt the US government. We don't have that in Denmark.

Claus, you have a religion specifically mentioned in your constitution. Is that not a religious reference?

 

[Grammatron]

Prove it.

Here's a little tip: Opinion is not evidence.

 

[Mycroft]

Prove it.

That would be proving a negative. Can you prove you do?

 

[NoZed Avenger]

Just because we don't do it the American Way doesn't mean we are wrong. Is that OK with you?

Wow. I never realised the Danes were so knee-jerk defensive about how they did things.

 

[Thanz]

No, they are not. They are teaching the kids what that religion, as well as others, are about. They are not teaching the kids to be religious.

Not other religions until the upper years. Again, I think that you are splitting hairs here.

(translation):"In the beginning of the 18th century half of the Danish population attended church, about half a million people, once or twice a year, because they had to. Today, 2.5 million Danes bend their knees at the altar during the year. More and more churchgoers participate in communion at Sunday's High Mass. 70% of those who regularly go to church today also take communion. But they are "repeat customers" (me: sorry, there isn't a precise English word for it, but you get the picture). They are recruited from the five percent of the population that are regular church attendants."

As I read that, church attendance has been somewhat constant since the 18th century (2.5 million being about half of Denmark's population) with perhaps more participation from those who do go. And about 5% are your frequent prayers - regular attendants. Not 2 - 4% as indicated. Roughly 50% at some point (likely Christmas and Easter) with 5% attending regularly.

Nope. When you are in court, you will tell the truth. That's it. If you don't, you will get 1 year in prison.

Do try to accept that we do it this way. Just because we don't do it the American Way doesn't mean we are wrong. Is that OK with you?

I can accept that you do it that way, I am just surprised that there is no formal remider process (like forcing a promise/taking an oath) to remind the witness and impress the importance of telling the truth upon them.

Until you answer the question, you are not entitled to ask questions. Do you understand that church support is not mandatory, yes or no?

Ah yes, the lovely CFLarsen debate rules. I have a problem with the way that you phrase the question. I set out what my understanding was. My understanding is that the State must support the Church, constitutionally speaking. And as such, the State does support the Church from general revenue - either directly or indirectly. Unless you can opt out totally from taxes, then church support is mandatory - in that some portion of your regular tax dollars goes to the church. So, my understanding is that some level of Church support is mandatory, as set out in this paragraph. Which would make my answer to your question a qualified no.

What is it that compels you to refuse to educate yourself about non-American issues? The Danish state and the Danish government are two different things. Our government is not religious, and neither is our government.

What is the distinction that you are making between the State and the Government? I don't understand what you are saying, and your last sentenct must be a typo. Our government, and neither is our government? Was one of those supposed to be State?

What will it take for you to admit you are wrong?

Well, actually believing I'm wrong for one thing.

Again, don't blame me for your laziness.

I'm not. I'm blaming you for yours. I am saying that you did not respond to that post. If I have missed your response, point it out to me. I went to the trouble of specifically identifying the post that I think you ignored, at least do me the courtesy of pointing to your response (if it exists).

So far, we haven't heard from other Danes. If they agree with me, will you admit that you are wrong?

Just yes or no.

Uh, no, I guess. How am I supposed to answer that in advance? Until I see what they say, I don't know what I am admitting to being wrong about, if anything.

 

[CFLarsen]

Claus, you have a religion specifically mentioned in your constitution. Is that not a religious reference?

Yes, it is. Nobody is questioning this.

But, do we see the same religious references as we do in the US?

No. We. Do. Not.

Your point?