We can have a discussion which the anonymity of these boards allows us to be more disclosing than face to face. It has helped me clarify my ideas. I hope I have not been too hectoring at times.
Not at all.
People may not be aware of any religious tradition, but they still recognise goodness.
Yes
Loyalty can be loyalty to the wrong thing (the Nazi party or whatever.) I still think it is a useful word because it does not have sentimental connotations.
That's true.
It was the word my partner and I decided on when composing the vows for our civil partnership
Thinking about it more closely, maybe the only real usage of that word I have issues with is when it's has an ideology or belief as its subject.
I did Joyce's "Portrait of the Artist" for A level. Was your education anything like that?
Oh Thanks heavens it wasn't. I only read that book last year and, to be honest, rather rushed through the more religious chapters, finding them a little tedious. Just lots of wishy-washy stuff in my religious education. I think I should clarify what I said about doublespeak as well (I think I may not have worded it correctly at the time and in my response I was distracted). The contradiction I was getting was getting was more that people would say that story X was true, that story Y was true, and yet, when questioned about it directly say it wasn't. And then revert back to the old register.
Thinking about the Bible as an interesting moral read again, I think it clashes so much with a lot of current humanistic beliefs that it doesn't really stand up there for me as a good consistent example of moral reasoning. Saying that, I'm not an well-read when it comes to ethical or moral texts, so I can't think of any good canonical set of books that would act as a comprehensive replacement
Milly, have you considered setting up a "Richard Dawkins is evil" thread?
Oh DB I really quite like that CD quote!