Sekulerur hykleriskur hugburður

Hevur gudleyst og sekulert hyklarí umsíðir nátt sítt mál? Nýðliga hava hesir brokka seg um at ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) hevur vraka eina klagu frá 'the National Secular Society' um at ASA virkar mótvegis fríðari expressionismu. Talan er um reklamir og aðrar myndir sum alment beinleiðis niðurgera, spotta og provokera kristin og aðrar religiónir.

Hetta byrjar at blíva rættuliga stuttligt, tí sum ikki einaferð vísa hesir ateistar sín hykleriska holdning. Hesir halda tað verða rætt og jaligt at fyritøkur og felagskapir alment eiga at sleppa at tekja sær við tí mest ósigiliga atburðinum. Harnæst halda hesir at samfelagsbólkurin sum er fyri skotum, bara eigur bukka og boyggja seg, tí hetta er ein formur fyri expressionismu.

Samstundis gallopera hesir gudloysingar áhaldandi í rættin og bløðini, har teir grenja, klaga og brokka seg um at teirra rættindir eru brotin, ikki tí at teirra filosofiski holdningur ella teirra persónligheitir verða álopnar ella niðurgjørdar, men tí hesir ikki klára at síggja uppá ein kross, ella tey 'tíggju boðini' í einum almennum rúmi.

Óansæð hvussu ateistar vilja verja hendan holdningin, við tí muni sum eisini má gerast millum reklamur og tey religiøsu útrykk sum hanga á almennum støðum, so vísir hetta kortini ein ótolerantan hugburð sum tykist halda at øll (inkludera kristin og religiøs) eiga at vælkoma kritik og speireking alt meðan hesi sjálvi ikki eiga rætt sín til almenna expressionismu uppiborna. Týðiligt er tað, at hetta í veruleikanum einki hevur við rættindi og frælsi at gera, men heldur tykist verða eitt propagandastríð.

Veit ikki hvussu ateistar høvdu reagera um tað var ateisma og Darwin sum soleiðis alment vóru skýrd, niðurgjørd, verði tað seg í reklamum, skeltum ella sjónvarpi. Halda vit veruliga Dawkins og aðrir høvdu dansa og tekjunum ella siti og frøtt seg um expressionismu, ella høvdu hesir kanska tiki beinini uppá nakkan og runnið beina leið í rættin, ella lobbia nakrar politiskar-samfelagsligar kreftir?

http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2012/01/advertising-watchdog-accused-of-excessive-deference-to-religion

Sekularistar banna Kristindómi men loyva islamskari bøn

Hetta var tað sum eg bíðaði eftir, sekularistar eru nú fyri islamskari bøn á almennum stovnum.

Hetta vísir:

1) Sekularisma er anti-kristilig (hetta er eingin loyna)

2) Sekularisma er ov veik fyri teimum kreftunum sum nú flyta inn í vesturlendska samfelagið. Sjálvt um sekularisma er anti-kristin og enntá materialistisk, er hon kortini pro-islam; logiskt? Nei!  (trúgv tí ella ikki men í USA hevur sekularisma evangelisera fyri Islam á almennum skúlum útyvir 10 ár. Óansæð mótstøðu og klagu frá óttafullum kristnum foreldrum hava kristnu børn teirra, verið tvungin at siga shahada (játta Islam sum einastu sonnu religiónina) og at hugsa sum muslimar í útvið eina viku, og ja (believe or not) enntá at læra positivt um 'jihad'.

Sekularistar hava í hesum føri sligi hart niður á tey sum seta seg í móti, og hava í hesum føri valt at bróta við annars harða normin um at skilja religión frá statinum. Í Islam er religión og statur eitt og tað sama)

3) Eru sekularisma og Islam bara ein og tann sami andi, frá somu anti-kristiligu keldu? Hetta er ein ekstremur spurningur, men hvat læra vit annars av tilgongdini?

Minnist væl, tá hesar somu kreftur løgdu á kristnar næmingafelagskapir í Onglandi, bara tí at kristin ikki vildu loyva eina gudleysa infiltrering á CU leiðsluni. Her avgjørdi universiteti at banna kristna felagskapinum. Slík viðferð var ikki framd móti humanistiska næminga felagskapinum ella tí islamska, sum tá var undir mistanka fyri at rekrutera terroristar.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/on_the_front_lines_of_the_culture_wars/2011/07/canadian-school-bars-christian-prayers-but-allows-muslim-prayertime-in-cafeteria.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jákup Lutzen (limur í Gudloysi) hevur akkurát gjørt nakrar viðmerkingar til hendan postin á Gudloysi blogginum.

Jákup skilir fyrst og fremst ikki sambandi, millum hendingina og sekularismu. Satt at siga skilji eg ikki heilt hvussu hetta skal verða so torført. Tað var grunda av teimum sekuleru kreftunum at kristin bøn var banna úr skúlum í Kanada.
Mær vitandi, var eisini lagt upp til at almennir skúlar, ikki skulu nýtast í nøkrum religiøsum týdningi. Við øðrum orðum nýtsla av einum rættuliga almennum rúmi, eitt nú eini kantinu er ikki rætta plássi til nakran religiøsan aktivitet. Her kann eg sipa til fleiri hendingar, har kristin í pritavum samtalum og ikki í almennum rúmum (so sum einari kantinu) eru blivin útvíst ella ámint, fyri nógv minni.

Jákup heldur at avgerðan hjá skúlaleiðsluni má skiljast í samanhenginum av at fleiritalið av næmingunum eru muslimar. Hmm, er tað ikki so, at nógvar av sakunum, í eitt nú USA komast av at fleiritalið eru kristin og tó verða hartaði og álopin av sekularistum, tó at bøn og religión lokalt hevur spælt ein týðandi leiklut í síðani skúlin byrjaði?

Jákup leggur eisini dent á at kristin hava miðskilt sekularismuna sum eina anti-kristiliga rørðslu. Eg veit ikki hvat ein skal siga til eina slíka viðmerking, ein rørðsla sum ikki vil møtast á hálvari leið og sum heldur bannar bøn, religión frá tí almenna rúminum og almennum stovnum, og hareftir hóttir við handtøku, rættargongd og revsing, fyri síðani at fastleggja frálæru og filosofi uppá eina materialistiska heimsmynd, er heilt avgjørt anti-kristilig av nátturu--veit ikki hvat eg og onnur skulu hava miðskilt.

Ein fer neyvan at siga við ein jøda at nazistar ikki vóru og eru rasistar og jødahatarir, teir ynskja bara ikki samfelagi skal ávirkast av jødamentan--hmm.

Jákup skilir heldur ikki hvat sekularisma og materialisma hava at gera hvør við annað, men eg eri vísir í at hann fult væl er greiður yvir at tað er materialistiska heimsmyndin sum sekularisma umboðar í tí almenna.

Og fyri at svara Jákup um sambandi millum sekularismu og Islam, so kann eg bara siga, sum eg eisini áður havi sagt, at eg skilji heldur ikki samanhengin.

Skjóti bara uppá at sekularisma í veruleikanum bara er anti-kristilig.

Europa Ráði verja Menningarlæruna

Helt ikki neyðugt var, at gera so mikið burturúr og at fara so víðgongt og harðliga til verka fyri at verja eina so væl grundgivna og prógvaða, vísindaliga niðurstøðu. 

Ella?

Europa Ráðið hevur so viðtiki at verja menningarlæruna og halda fast uppá at aðrar meinningar í kritisera ella hótta páhaldi í núverandi niðurstøðuni eru brot á mannarættindini, eftirsum onnur ástøðið og aðrar áskoðanir hótta tryggleikan í okkara samfelagið onkursvegna.

Eggja verður til:

 

• At myndugleikar fara til verka.
• At vit uppøsa fjøldina.
• At vit ikki vísa opinleika og tolsemi
• At skapa hugburðin at opinleiki og tolsemi eru skaðilig. 

http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc07/EDOC11297.htm

Grundgevingar fyri avgerðini sum ávirkandi røddir í Europa hava tikið, kunnu lesast í hesum skjalinum:

SummaryThe theory of evolution is being attacked by religious fundamentalists who call for creationist theories to be taught in European schools alongside or even in place of it. From a scientific view point there is absolutely no doubt that evolution is a central theory for our understanding of the Universe and of life on Earth.
Creationism in any of its forms, such as “intelligent design”, is not based on facts, does not use any scientific reasoning and its contents are pathetically inadequate for science classes.
The Assembly calls on education authorities in member States to promote scientific knowledge and the teaching of evolution and to oppose firmly any attempts at teaching creationism as a scientific discipline.
A.       Draft resolution1.       The Parliamentary Assembly is worried about the possible ill-effects of the spread of creationist theories within our education systems and about the consequences for our democracies. If we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights, which are a key concern of the Council of Europe.
2.       Creationism, born of the denial of the evolution of species through natural selection, was for a long time an almost exclusively American phenomenon. Today creationist theories are tending to find their way into Europe and their spread is affecting quite a few Council of Europe member states.
3.       The prime target of present-day creationists, most of whom are Christian or Muslim, is education. Creationists are bent on ensuring that their theories are included in the school science syllabus. Creationism cannot, however, lay claim to being a scientific discipline.
4.       Creationists question the scientific character of certain items of knowledge and argue that the theory of evolution is only one interpretation among others. They accuse scientists of not providing enough evidence to establish the theory of evolution as scientifically valid. On the contrary, they defend their own statements as scientific. None of this stands up to objective analysis.
5.       We are witnessing a growth of modes of thought which, the better to impose religious dogma, are attacking the very core of the knowledge that we have patiently built up on nature, evolution, our origins and our place in the universe.
6.       There is a real risk of a serious confusion being introduced into our children’s minds between what has to do with convictions, beliefs and ideals and what has to do with science, and of the advent of an “all things are equal” attitude, which may seem appealing and tolerant but is actually disastrous.
7.       Creationism has many contradictory aspects. The “intelligent design” theory, which is the latest, more refined version of creationism, does not deny a certain degree of evolution but claims that this is the work of a superior intelligence and not natural selection. Though more subtle in its presentation, the doctrine of intelligent design is no less dangerous.
8.       The Assembly has constantly insisted that science is of fundamental importance. Science has made possible considerable improvements in living and working conditions and is a not insignificant factor in economic, technological and social development. The theory of evolution has nothing to do with divine revelation but is built on facts.
9.       Creationism claims to be based on scientific rigour. In actual fact the methods employed by creationists are of three types: purely dogmatic assertions; distorted use of scientific quotations, sometimes illustrated with magnificent photographs; and backing from well-known scientists, most of whom are not biologists. By these means creationists seek to appeal to non-specialists and sow doubt and confusion in their minds.
10.       Evolution is not simply a matter of the evolution of humans and of populations. Denying it could have serious consequences for the development of our societies. Advances in medical research with the aim of effectively combating infectious diseases such as AIDS are impossible if every principle of evolution is denied. One cannot be fully aware of the risks involved in the significant decline in biodiversity and climate change if the mechanisms of evolution are not understood.
11.       Our modern world is based on a long history, of which the development of science and technology forms an important part. However, the scientific approach is still not well understood and this is liable to encourage the development of all manner of fundamentalism and extremism, synonymous with attacks of utmost virulence on human rights. The total rejection of science is definitely one of the most serious threats to human rights and civic rights.
12.       The war on the theory of evolution and on its proponents most often originates in forms of religious extremism which are closely allied to extreme right-wing political movements. The creationist movements possess real political power. The fact of the matter, and this has been exposed on several occasions, is that the advocates of strict creationism are out to replace democracy by theocracy.
13.       All leading representatives of the main monotheistic religions have adopted a much more moderate attitude. Pope Benedict XVI, for example, as his predecessor Pope John-Paul II, today praises the role of the sciences in the evolution of humanity and recognises that the theory of evolution is “more than a hypothesis”.
14.       The teaching of all phenomena concerning evolution as a fundamental scientific theory is therefore crucial to the future of our societies and our democracies. For that reason it must occupy a central position in the curriculum, and especially in the science syllabus. Evolution is present everywhere, from medical overprescription of antibiotics that encourages the emergence of resistant bacteria to agricultural overuse of pesticides that causes insect mutations on which pesticides no longer have any effect.
15.       The Council of Europe has highlighted the importance of teaching about culture and religion. In the name of freedom of expression and individual belief, creationist theories, as any other theological position, could possibly be presented as an addition to cultural and religious education, but they cannot claim scientific respectability.
16.       Science provides irreplaceable training in intellectual rigour. It seeks not to explain “why things are” but to understand how they work.
17.       Investigation of the creationists’ growing influence shows that the arguments between creationism and evolution go well beyond intellectual debate. If we are not careful, the values that are the very essence of the Council of Europe will be under direct threat from creationist fundamentalists. It is part of the role of the Council’s parliamentarians to react before it is too late.
18.       The Parliamentary Assembly therefore urges the member states, and especially their education authorities, to:
18.1.       defend and promote scientific knowledge;
18.2.       strengthen the teaching of the foundations of science, its history, its epistemology and its methods alongside the teaching of objective scientific knowledge;
18.3.       make science more comprehensible, more attractive and closer to the realities of the contemporary world;
18.4.       firmly oppose the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline on an equal footing with the theory of evolution by natural selection and in general resist presentation of creationist theories in any discipline other than religion;
18.5.       promote the teaching of evolution by natural selection as a fundamental scientific theory in the school curriculum.
19.       The Assembly welcomes the fact that, in June 2006, 27 Academies of Science of Council of Europe member states signed a declaration on the teaching of evolution and calls on academies of science that have not yet done so to sign the declaration.

Kemst hettar av at mann er farin at kenna hitan? At røddir vilja verða menningarlæruni ímóti ikki eina av meiri ella minni religiøsum áðum men av socialum áðum og kanska enntá innvortis vísindaligum áðum. 

Tað hjálpir neyvan heldur at Islam er í vøkstri, at hugtakið Gud er vaksandi innan heimspekiliga økinum, at fleiri og fleiri hugsandi og vísindafólk koma út úr skápinum sum ID tilhengarir og at ovurhonds vesturlendingar so spakuliga venda sær til meiri andaligar tulkingar av tilveruni. 

Vegurin frammeftir sum hesir verjar fyri menningarlæruni síggja fyri sær, er tí ikki erlig gransking ella erligt kjak men heldur verja. Her velur man tí heldur at fremja akademiskan ágang, at taka áskoðanir í rættin (Dover) og úthýsa, svartlista og hótta granskarir og lesandi sum ditta sær at hugsa opið ella øðrvísi. 

Og hetta kallar man vísindi í hesum døgum. 

Haldi at mong kristin ikki hava áhuga í at yvirtaka vísindina, men heldur at uppliva erliga og opna gransking og erligt kjak, heldur enn óvísindaliga og ótolynta hugburðinum niðanfyri: 

"91. With creationism today, we are witnessing a growth of modes of thought which, the better to impose religious dogma, are attacking the very core of the knowledge that we have built up little by little concerning nature, evolution, our origins and our place in the universe. There can be no doubt that this is a serious attack on human rights."

Samsvarar akkurát við hugburðin í hesum døgum: vit nýtast ikki at hugsa, granska ella kjakast, øs bara fjøldina upp.

Hvussu í allari tí víðu verð kann skapanarvísind ella ID verða eitt álop á mannarættindir? 

"92. There is a great risk of a serious confusion being introduced into our children’s minds between what has to do with convictions, beliefs and ideals and what has to do with science, and of the advent of an “all things are equal” attitude, which may seem appealing and tolerant but is actually extremely harmful."

Eg sigi bara "wow"

Toleransi og opinleiki eru also skaðilig; havi øll fingi tað við?

"104. A detailed study of the growing influence of the creationists shows that the discussions between creationism and evolutionism go well beyond intellectual disputes. If we are not careful, the values that are the very essence of the Council of Europe will be in danger of being directly threatened by the creationist fundamentalists. It is part of the role of the Council’s parliamentarians to react before it is too late."

Hvør reaktión? 

Her eru kjak og opinleiki ikki vælkomin og ræðandi er tað at reaktiónin skal verða lógargevandi og politisk: 

"The Parliamentary Assembly therefore urges the member states, and especially their education authorities, to..."

Vísindi og sannleiki er harvið vorðin ein stats spurningur heldur enn søkjanin eftir sannleika.