The full article is at Christianity-High-Court-rules.html

Abbreviated extracts follow:

    There is no place in British law for Christian beliefs, despite this country’s long history of religious observance and the traditions of the established Church, two High Court judges said . . .  Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson made the remarks when ruling on the case of a Christian couple who were told that they could not be foster carers because of their view that homosexuality is wrong . . .

    The judges underlined that, in the case of fostering arrangements at least, the right of homosexuals to equality “should take precedence” over the right of Christians to manifest their beliefs and moral values. In a ruling with potentially wide-ranging implications, the judges said Britain was a “largely secular”, multi-cultural country in which the laws of the realm “do not include Christianity” . . .

    The ruling in the case of Owen and Eunice Johns . . .  is the latest in a series of judgments in which Christians have been defeated in the courts for breaching equality laws by manifesting their beliefs on homosexuality. In their ruling, the judges complained that it was not yet “well understood” that British society was largely secular and that the law has no place for Christianity. “Although historically this country is part of the Christian West, and although it has an established church which is Christian, there have been enormous changes in the social and religious life of our country over the last century.”  . . .

    The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former bishop of Rochester, described the judgment as “absurd”. . . . “To say that this is a secular country is certainly wrong . . . However, what really worries me about this spate of judgments is that they leave no room for the conscience of believers of whatever kind. This will exclude Christians, Muslims and Orthodox Jews from whole swaths of public life, including adoption and fostering.”

    Speaking personally, Canon Dr Chris Sugden, the executive secretary of Anglican Mainstream, said the judges were wrong to say religion was a matter of private individuals’ beliefs: The judges "are treating religion like Richard Dawkins does, as if Christian faith was on a parallel with Melanesian frog worship. . . . 


    What is being done in the U.S. on such matters?

Views: 434

Replies to This Discussion

Crap to one person is another's treasure!!!

Here is a happy-looking fat and contented god from Melanesia:

I wonder if the cleric Dr. Sugden would like to be treated to this one. 


The judges "are treating religion like Richard Dawkins does, as if Christian faith was on a parallel with Melanesian frog worship. . . .
As it should be.....for all religions and worship of nonsense.  I don't know anything about Melanesian frog worship so I'll reserve judgment of this until I've done some reasoned research.

I have had this on my website for years....called it "the anitomical frog"

never knew what it meant ...until now!

the father....son....and the toad in the hole.




One thing they forgot to mention.... Melanesians can prove the existence of frogs!!

Yes, the red-eyed tree frog-god really exists, which is more than can be said for the christian god of judaic fiction.

Red-eyed tree frog, yes. They're actually fairly common here in Costa Rica (or at least they were until the chytrid fungus pandemic wiped out most of them). 


Not so sure about that god thing, though.  They're certainly not worshiped here.  Except maybe by the tourism ministry and the eco-lodge owners.

Do any of the aboriginal natives fry and eat them instead, then? 

Or at least the legs, as in Europe. 


I just Asked Jeeves. I kid you not. 

"French people eat frogs’ legs. Consumption of frogs' legs in France totals 3000 to 4000 tons per year (60 to 80 million frogs). . .  if cooked correctly, they are delicious, having a delicate flavor tasting somewhere between chicken and fish. Frogs' legs are one of the better-known delicacies of French and Cantonese cuisine."

Nobody eats them.  They're kinda small, like most tree frogs, and have rather skinny hind legs, the part of frogs that the French eat. Not much meat there, maybe a gram or two, and, like most tree frogs, they're seriously poisonous anyway


So the only eating that gets done on account of tree frogs here is by the eco-lodge owners, eating well because of all the tourists that come here from all over the world to have scenery smeared past their eyeballs, of the volcanoes,  tree frogs, parrots, toucans and howler monkeys.  The latter, you don't want to get too close to.  If they take exception to your presence, they'll fling their dung at you.  But don't tell the tourists.  We don't wanna scare 'em off.

"Our amphibian, which art in the rain forest,

Kermit be thy name. 

Thy wetland come,

thy will be done, on earth as it is in water.

Give us this day our daily bug,

and forgive us our dryness

as we forgive the dryness of others.

Lead us not into the desert,

and consider us primeval,

for thine is the bayou, and the glory, for wetter and wetter,


I do not know what all the fuss is. Just have a prayer day to the all powerful frog, and I have all the "faith" in the world that frog will see to it that membership grows, of course unless its not frog's will...


© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service