Depends on which version of Christianity you use.
What the Prosperity Congregation consider to be a value would be considered a sin by many others.
On the same logic do you think we need to completely rewrite English Law which was writren on the same principles?
1 Like
Big hans small map statement. Who do yoy define as the " they".
There is a danger that you place Christian values in the same box as actions taken by people who claim to be Christian.
2 Likes
Need to divert away from the religion / belief discussions - my version of XXXX is better than yours; no itâs not - let war commence (Crusades for starters).
When I rule the world, Iâll ban religion (& Coronation Street!). 
HEY That is so offensive
atleast get rid of Hollyoaks & Eastenders too
People making the policy, obviously, or they wouldnât have banned them.
Would it still be allowed on the battlefield?
One thing that my career in the army thought me was that, you can be in a unit full of the worlds most devout atheists, but when you get incoming everyone is talking to god!
1 Like
My pleasure - & all the rest of the soaps!
Have to work on the substitute programmes - mandatory âhow to doâ useful things - beneficial to self / families / society!!
All inclusive - although padres would be known as âgood peopleâ not god people! 
Thatâs really offensive.
To imply the way an atheist views the world is weak enough to collapse in the face of certain death is to patronisingly tell us our convictions arenât as strong as those borne of religion.
âNo atheists in foxholesâ is a nonsense Iâve heard many a padre scoff at me over the breakfast table.
Also, being an atheist tells you nothing about what we actually believe. Weâre all atheists. You just make an exception for the one god you believe inâŚ
Edit: to be clear, I may soil myself and cry for my family, but Iâm no more likely to suddenly pray to a god than I am to seek solace in leprechauns or fairies.
1 Like
This exactly. Unfortunately, those at the very top have, in recent years, chosen to target the 25.6% in the hope of raising recruitment to minimum levels. This despite their own studies showing that the vast majority of the 25.6% could never be persuaded to join the military.
At the same time, the way they have gone about it - Army âsnowflakes wantedâ campaign, and the RAFâs recent recruitment PR disaster, âuseless white malesâ email etc - have alienated and disheartened the 74.4%. Its become a vicious circle. Less of the largest demographic are joining, maybe because its not seen as being âmanlyâ anymore, so they push harder to recruit those from other, smaller demographics.
Thankfully, the RAF has realised its mistake, (with the help of the press), has apologised and scraped the disproportionate targets.
1 Like
Presumably you know this from experience? You have been in the open and shelled?
This is actually irrelevant.
What you appear to be arguing, in a clunky but unfortunately common way, is that when faced with certain death, an atheist will suddenly start believing in, and praying to, a god (weâll assume the judeo-Christian one, but there are many options).
If you imagine the same argument, but implying that you will suddenly start believing in, and praying to, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or the power puff girls, you should hopefully see the weakness of your argument, which you have absolutely made up and have not witnessed playing out.
Nobody who thinks the world is free of the supernatural and gods will suddenly think otherwise just because theyâre about to die. It is illogical, and a very tired trope pushed by religious figures for decades. It is for this very reason that I know you are religious, because you are clearly unable to imagine how ludicrous your argument is to someone who sees the world a different way to you.
It is a narrative designed to undermine our view of reality and make it out to be nothing more than a childish fad. Which would be hilarious if it wasnât such a passive-aggressive affront.
Edit: I should of course offer the same courtesy, which is that a religious individual is also not going to suddenly drop their world view on their death bed/in their shell scrape.
Although perhaps on reflection of such horrors, they may justifiably question whether an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving god could let them endure that while killing many others, assuming survivor bias hasnât kicked in.
2 Likes
Shall I start the lock the thread countdown?
8 Likes
Having just checked back to see the long debate, I was going to post a long thread to try & address some of the points & reduce the heat, (hopefully) returning it to topic.
But locking it might be best.
1 Like
Iâm amazed how far weâve made it!
2 Likes
2 Likes
Iâm sorry to continue with this, I apologise for the thread drift, and I promise this will be my last word on the matter, butâŚyou say nobody will suddenly think otherwise, when I have very definitely seen, and heard it myself. Fortunately, the lads prayers were answered that day. Normal non-believing resumed the next day!
Regarding the âno atheists in a foxholeâ thing, Iâve been under fire with non-believers and didnât witness any Damascene conversations.
I think itâs a concept that had some validity in an earlier age, where everyone had received a fundamentally Christian upbringing both at home and throughout their education, but had lapsed or rejected their religion, would still have that religious background to fall back on. This is no longer the case with the majority of the current generation of service personnel and so I believe that the idea of them dropping their lifelong atheism at the drop of a hat (or shell) is now as unlikely as @MajorDisaster suggests.
3 Likes