(06-27-2011, 06:22 AM)Leanne Wrote:it doesn't sound like it but it really is. the head of the church in the uk has little or no power regards the government save for ceremonial ones.(06-27-2011, 01:08 AM)velvetfog Wrote:Your slip is showing. That paragon of excellence and virtue, catalyst for British Protestantism King Henry VIII, declared himself Supreme Head of the Church of England in 1534. The current Supreme Head of the Church of England is Her Majesty QEII. This doesn't sound like separation to me.(06-26-2011, 05:27 PM)billy Wrote: i thought most democracy removes the church from state?It does indeed. That seperation is an essential aspect of preventing the recurrence of theocratic dictatorship.
Of course, when one collects Heads of State as a hobby, one can call oneself reformed as one pleases. And the Church of England didn't require an Inquisition -- they chose genocide instead.
1534 was a long time ago.
Quote:vf said; The Muslim influence in Europe has reached the point where there are now neigbourhoods in Swedish cities where the women living there are afraid to walk outside without a scarf on their head. Young male Muslim fanatics act as Sharia morality police in the streets, dominating the girls and women, and threatening them. That is wrong.yes it is. arrest and deport them if they do it. give em a prison sentence. use the law. don't however use it as a tool to win votes just for the sake of winning votes. and by all means use your boarders wisely, but don't condemn just because of race or religion. sweden has laws, enforce them.
sj; most countries are the same about national anthems, often there's an oath of allegiance as well. i think the uk are making sure people can speak understandable english too.
i don't think what's happening in the netherlands is borne of religion, it borne more from political agenda. again, laws can be made to ensure dutch laws are adhered too.