Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H
Gormley


Compensation culture in a secular context

Compensation claims should be calculated on the basis of how long a person is likely to live in pain and how much money it would take to buy happiness to make up for the pain. One can get money and go on holidays with it and still be unable to have a good time. So the decision has to be based on theory. The question must be asked, how much money would this person need to be reasonably happy?

Small offences should be ignored by the law. It is silly to sue a person for giving you a push that should not have made you fall or for saying you are boring. It is unjust to go any further with it for a telling off would suffice.

The state must not pay compensation for crimes committed by the Church

If the Church commits crimes the Church must pay the compensation itself. These crimes have nothing to do with taxpayers.

All teachings that faith comes before people, whether these teachings are explicit or the even more dangerous implicit, must be recognised as leading to a culture where the state will steal the taxpayers money to pay for the crimes of the Church.

Doctrines such as,

our Church brings people to the only saviour from sin

our Church is the only true Church

Such doctrines imply that it is better to pay money to these setups than to help the poor. The religion denying this is hot air and insincere. The believers do however admit that if there is a choice between saving a person from sin or giving them money that the first is better.