Military Review

Freedom in a European way: prohibition, prohibition, prohibition ... Part I

160
Freedom in a European way: prohibition, prohibition, prohibition ... Part I



6 days ago, the Russian public blew up newspublished by an Italian resource Ilgiomale.it "The European Court of Justice: since March 2016, infant baptism is a crime" . There were many publications based primarily on emotions, and not on the mind. In principle, this is understandable. The first reaction of a normal person to such arrogant blasphemy and deprivation of his elementary human rights is a disturbance, and, at the same time, extremely emotional. But here the first passions subsided, and it was time to figure out the sober head.

The motivation of the decision is: “Baptism violates Article 16 of the European Convention in conjunction with Article 22: children, in fact, are not yet able to understand and, in fact, are not in a position to embrace faith, do not realize this. Baptism is an act that must be chosen consciously and cannot be imposed from above by a religious organization (in this case the Christian Catholic), especially at a time when Europe found itself in a real melting pot of races, cultures and religions. The practice of this sacrament of initiation is incompatible with the interests of the child, in accordance with Art. 3 the Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified in May 25 1992 from a legal n.180, children must be protected in integrity and personal freedom. It is a step forward for Western civilization in respect of anything and everything. "

I propose to consider this decision from two sides - legal and sacred.

The European Court refers to the articles 16, 22 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and considers baptism as an action that cannot be imposed on the child from above. In addition, it is said that the practice of baptism must be voluntary and conscious, and therefore baptism in childhood is incompatible with the interests of the child.

The ordinance of baptism also violates Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by 25 May 1992, which states that the child must be provided with the protection and care necessary for his well-being.

Well what can I say? Let's read the documents yourself.

The article does not say which Convention the European court refers to. I looked “European Convention on the Exercise of Children's Rights (ETS N 160)” and found a discrepancy between the stated article numbers of the Convention and the subject matter. Such coincidences are not in the European Convention, but in UN Conventions which we will take into account.


Convention on the Rights of the Child

Adopted by General Assembly resolution 44 / 25 of November 20 of 1989 of the year.

Article 16

1. No child may be subject to arbitrary or unlawful interference with the exercise of his right to privacy, family life, privacy or correspondence, or unlawful encroachment on his honor and reputation.

2. The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or encroachment.

http://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/childcon.shtml

That is, a certain organization that called itself the "European Court" by its decision clearly interferes with the personal and family life of a child. In accordance with Section 2, a child has the right to protection against such interference, and the legal representatives of the child - his parents, and not his uncles and aunts on Mercedes and Audi - should determine the forms of this protection.

Article 22

1. States Parties shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a child who wishes to receive refugee status or is considered a refugee in accordance with applicable international or domestic law and procedures, either accompanied or unaccompanied by his parents or any other person, shall have adequate protection and humanitarian assistance. assistance in the application of the applicable rights set forth in this Convention and other international human rights instruments or humanitarian instruments to which the said of the state.

2. To this end, the participating States provide, when they consider it necessary, to assist any efforts of the United Nations and other competent intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations cooperating with the United Nations to protect such a child and assist him in finding parents or children. other family members of any refugee child in order to obtain the information necessary for him to be reunited with his family. In cases where parents or other family members cannot be found, this child is given the same protection as any other child, for any reason permanently or temporarily deprived of their family environment, as provided for in this Convention.


Since in the decision of the European Court the article 22 goes “in combination” with the article 16, the decision is based on it.

Even if we take into account that this article concerns refugees and their children, to whom the European judges have suddenly attributed the citizens of the EU, then even it indicates "In cases where parents or other family members cannot be found, this child is given the same protection as any other child, for any reason, permanently or temporarily deprived of his family environment. ”

That is, the article is valid in the absence of parents or other family members. That can not be attributed to the legitimate families of EU citizens.

Article 3

1. In all actions regarding children, regardless of whether they are taken by public or private institutions dealing with social welfare issues, courts, administrative or legislative bodies, priority is given to best interests of the child.

2. The participating States pledge to provide the child with the protection and care necessary for his well-being, taking into account the rights and obligations of his parents, guardians or other persons who are responsible for him by law, and for this purpose take all appropriate legislative and administrative measures.

3. States Parties shall ensure that institutions, services and bodies responsible for the care or protection of children meet the standards established by the competent authorities, in particular in the fields of safety and health and in terms of the number and suitability of their staff, as well as competent supervision .


The interests of the child are and are responsible for this is the parents. The decision of the European Court deprives the parents of this right, described in paragraph 2 of this article, which contradicts the UN Convention.

As we see, this decision of the European Court is not based on the UN Convention, but on interpretations by some organization called the “European Court” of this Convention. In addition, let's look at the competence of the European Court itself.

According to Wikipedia ,

European Court (Eng. European Court of Justice) - the highest instance of the Court of the European Union,

The European Court performs two main functions: it checks documents issued by European institutions and governments for compliance with contracts; interprets Union law at the request of national courts (in the framework of a prejudicial procedure).


This European Court, in accordance with its status, cannot interpret the UN Documents, in particular, the Convention, and even more so make some binding decisions based on the results of these interpretations.

Thus, the European Court itself violates the articles of the UN Convention and its own Of the protocol .

If the article is meant European Sudan per person his jurisdiction applies to all Council of Europe member states that have ratified European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedomsand includes all matters relating to the interpretation and application of the convention, including intergovernmental cases and individual complaints, then Preamble in particular, it is clearly stated that it is accepted:

- pay attention to United Nations Convention on the rights of the child, in particular article 4, requiring States parties to take all appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures aimed at the realization of the rights recognized in the said Convention;

- recognizing the importance of the role of parents in the process of protecting and safeguarding the rights and best interests of children and considering that the state in case of need should also be involved in such protection;

- assuming, however, that in case of conflict it is advisable that families try to reach an agreement before submitting the matter for consideration by the judicial authority;


In the rationale for making such a decision by the European Court, I did not see the rules listed in the preamble. Moreover, this decision is contrary to the points of the European Convention.

In addition, the competence of the European Court of Human Rights includes:

- examine individual and intergovernmental complaints filed with the European Court of Human Rights against one or more Council of Europe member states or against the European Union;

Who then filed a complaint about infant baptism, not the parents themselves? What right to interfere in family relations have “individual citizens”, and how does this question relate to “intergovernmental relations”?

And although the European Court has left a loophole:

- interpret the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms


But this loophole was immediately limited by the court itself:

- to make Advisory conclusions on the interpretation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, on matters not related to the consideration of cases

The question arises: if the case was considered on the complaint, how legitimate the complaint itself, and whether the Court had the competence to consider it. And if there were no complaints, the decision itself is only advisory in nature, not binding.

In addition, this decision, as I understood it, which bears the form of a Law, is extremely selective. It would be more logical and more legitimate to, within the framework of one law, decide on ceremonies over babies of all religious denominations, Judaism and Islam, and not exclusively Christianity. Moreover, the rite of circumcision of boys is surgical in nature and provides for a change in the physical integrity of the human body. Baptism is exclusively ritual character.

Thus, this decision is contrary to the basic principle of jurisprudence - "The law is equal for all"and, accordingly, is itself illegal.

I could not find a single appeal filed with the European court against this decision, which means that there is tremendous pressure on society in Europe, which is not only contrary to, but completely distorts into opposing stated values ​​and laws.

UPD. I am not a lawyer, I have no legal education and have never worked in areas related to the application of any Rights. All of the above is a private opinion (IMHO), based on the study of the subject by a modern educated person.

The issues of ethics, morality, personal freedom, freedom of religion and sacral components will be discussed in the second part of this article.
Author:
160 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. bogart047
    bogart047 28 January 2016 12: 58 New
    -105 qualifying.
    a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.
    1. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 28 January 2016 13: 04 New
      85
      Quote: bogart047
      a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.

      The whole problem is that they will stop baptizing children, they will refuse the Bible ... At least some brakes were moral. But Muslim children will not cease to be Muslim children. And Muslims drooling droplets to all conventions and European courts ...

      Allahakbar, Europe?
      1. Baikonur
        Baikonur 28 January 2016 13: 06 New
        48
        That is to the coming of age of the European child and will be ready (willing) to accept Islam! Jihad recruiters rejoice rubbing their hands! Euro-children, and not only children, have been given freedom to choose their religion along with freedom to choose their gender! Conscience and morality are prohibited, considered shameful! UUUUH, What a devilish mess in their already rotten perverted corrupted brains!
        1. Ami du peuple
          Ami du peuple 28 January 2016 13: 10 New
          51
          Quote: Baikonur
          That is to the coming of age of the European child and will be ready (willing) to accept Islam!

          They do not want to baptize - they will circumcise.
          1. _Vladislav_
            _Vladislav_ 28 January 2016 13: 45 New
            13
            Quote: bogart047
            a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.

            This is not a sound ban, it is an attempt to stick your nose further than it should be.
            Clear to you.

            DON'T CLIMB IN ANOTHER MONASTERY WITH YOUR CHARTER. For this they catch in the teeth.

            And who will advise us, these under-over-perverts "civilized"? Which priests are queers. And it's normal for them. Let the vurds bring up his end, but everything is fine with us.
            1. Temples
              Temples 28 January 2016 14: 57 New
              23
              All this is bullshit - proceedings where and which article applies.
              All EU bullshit.
              Until the age of 18, a person is a minor, on this basis, let them cancel their parents' education.
              Although piderasts in the USA and Europe have already abolished dad and mom.
              Europe and the USA decided to live without God.
              This is their choice. The choice of piderasts.

              We are Orthodox. And we live by our own rules. According to the laws of God.
              And Muslims also live according to the laws of God.

              And let the "Europeans" wipe themselves off with their articles and laws.
              At least some reasonable use of paper will be.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. Tatyana
                Tatyana 29 January 2016 06: 09 New
                0
                Of course, this ban leads to the Islamization of Europe, as it is directed only against Christians and there is no ban on circumcision of babies in Islam.
                This means one thing - the violent assimilation of the white European population into another race.
                This is the racial liberal fascism of American globalists on the occupation of Europeans in Europe by representatives of non-white races from BV and North Africa.
                REFERENCE
                When to circumcise?
                ... circumcision becomes mandatory upon reaching adulthood.
                But it is better to circumcise the child from the first days of his life. According to the Shafi'i madhhab, it is advisable to do it on the seventh day, and it is undesirable - until the seventh day. And according to the Malikite and Hanbali madhhabs, circumcision is preferably done at the age of seven to ten years.
                http://www.baby.ru/blogs/post/315687512-249925424/
            2. g1v2
              g1v2 28 January 2016 17: 09 New
              +3
              Well, if the Catholic Spain, Italy, Ireland and Croatia tolerate this, then it means that only slaves and their masters live in the EU. The Roman empire grass Christians by lions could not force them to abandon the faith, but then some European court forbade children to baptize and that’s all? Has Christianity ended in Europe? Was the pope just the director of a museum city? Where is the wave of indignation, where are the street fights with priests on the barricades? On the other hand, if European Catholicism dies, can there be a chance to return Europe to Orthodoxy? Missionaries who are not afraid of the European court, sermons on the streets, etc. Maybe this is our chance? request
          2. tol100v
            tol100v 28 January 2016 14: 05 New
            +7
            Quote: Ami du peuple
            They do not want to baptize - they will circumcise.

            They will start from the foreskin, and end with their heads!
            1. Ros 56
              Ros 56 28 January 2016 14: 18 New
              +4
              Quote: Tol100v
              They will start from the foreskin, and end with their heads!


              Moreover, note not your own, but Christian. Although with this approach, they are not Christian at all, but they don’t sew a sleeve.
              But we must seriously warn these dumb-headed Europeans, they will start chopping you like cabbage, do not complain and do not run to us in the form of refugees. Heads have been given to you, so that not only they are, or all damn thing to fence.
          3. guzik007
            guzik007 1 February 2016 12: 42 New
            0
            They do not want to baptize - they will circumcise.
            ----------------------------------
            At this pace, and it will be banned.
      2. bogart047
        bogart047 28 January 2016 13: 08 New
        -47 qualifying.
        Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.
        1. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 13: 19 New
          16
          stupidity, the Bible is the subject of Faith, and the priest of religion
          By the way, the Bible is a very powerful thing. I somehow started reading and stopped. I realized that I could live a little more and I could only live in a monastery
          1. _Vladislav_
            _Vladislav_ 28 January 2016 13: 54 New
            21
            Quote: bogart047
            Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.

            And I will not give you any evidence. I am Orthodox, my Christian faith - I believe in this, and my children will also be Orthodox, this is enough for me. And the fact that this is not enough for you or for someone else is purely your problem. I repeat once again - Do not go into a strange monastery with your charter.
            1. hartlend
              hartlend 28 January 2016 17: 54 New
              -7
              Orthodoxy and Christianity are two different things. Orthodoxy was in Russia before Christianity. Christianity was later divided into Roman (Catholic) and Byzantine (Otodox). The second is also known as orthodox. Later, ministers of the church appropriated the Orthodox brand. To the question of the Bible - consists of the old and new testaments. The Old Testament is 100% Judaism, why is it recognized by Christianity? You figure out for yourself who is who.
            2. There are a lot of us
              There are a lot of us 31 January 2016 08: 10 New
              0
              This one, Bogart47, apparently does not know that faith, therefore "faith", since it does not require proof
        2. Cripple cross
          Cripple cross 28 January 2016 13: 19 New
          35
          Quote: bogart047
          Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework?

          No one will educate you on a religious issue. You are too lazy to understand the topic, do not hang on others. Open the bible and read. I do not turn to faith, but I advise you to simply broaden your horizons and enlighten yourself intellectually.
          As you study the question, you will immediately understand that religion gives a person a guideline - WHAT IS POSSIBLE, AND WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE.
          And stop confusing bananas with herring. And here priests on Mercedes and religion. PRIEST PEOPLE - why can't he have a Mercedes? You can still send traffic cops there, you can deputies, president, plumber, loader. Anyone can be blamed for something and at the same time his area. Here you are for example - If you wrote a dumb comment, it does not mean that all commentators are dumb.
          Uncle ... you're quite a cookie! Just to blurt out! (without respect).
          PS - sometimes the dullness and narrow-mindedness of statements are simply annoying.
          1. Mexovoy
            Mexovoy 28 January 2016 13: 42 New
            +1
            Can't get landmarks without a bible? Other literature and society are useless without your book?
            1. Vasilenko Vladimir
              Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 13: 58 New
              14
              Quote: Mexovoy
              Other literature and society are useless without your book?

              have you read a lot of "books" ?!
              1. vorobey
                vorobey 28 January 2016 15: 16 New
                +7
                Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                have you read a lot of "books" ?!


                why are you so .. in the toilet mostly newspapers .. well, less often magazines about hunting and fishing ..
                1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                  Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 15: 28 New
                  0
                  no, well, just interesting
          2. dauria
            dauria 28 January 2016 13: 56 New
            -16 qualifying.
            that religion gives a person a guideline - WHAT IS POSSIBLE, AND WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE.


            This is in any herd (even monkeys, even wolves, even primitive people) and without religion. Kicks, fangs, and growls drive in the norms of behavior in the herd that are useful for its stable functioning, and they (these norms) are the result of natural selection of competing herds. And religions began without Bibles, and who said that the Bible will forever and will not give way to another "scripture"?
            And religion is an office that exists on the real needs of people in faith (more precisely, in psychological defense) and commodity-money relations. That is why it is useless to forbid it. The absolute analogue is vodka and a network of wine-vodka production and sales.
            By the way, religions compete fiercely for the consumer, and this is a huge managerial blunder for Catholics, if they allow this.
            And don’t worry about people - when they are leaning, the most atheistic atheist breaks down and invents a religion for himself (if he does not find another way to protect the psyche) Let the priests worry about lost profits.
        3. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 28 January 2016 13: 43 New
          16
          Quote: bogart047
          Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests in jeeps, yachts, planes

          Well, firstly, a priest is not a faith. This is only a cunning and thieving house keeper, which someone has identified as the receptacle of God on earth.

          Secondly, yes, we all see how many immoral things are going on in the church. But then again - do not confuse Faith and homosexual thieving types in robes ...

          And the third is one out of a hundred, out of a thousand, this religion will keep from theft, from heavy drunkenness, from sodomy - which means that such a religion has already justified its existence. Among other spiritual and moral instruments of influence on society.

          The question of the power of religion is another question, I wrote above. 200 years ago Orthodoxy was much stronger in Russia than today. And the Bolsheviks are not to blame for this. 200 years ago, three people in the village were literate. And today at least 8 years old, but everyone has unlearned somehow. And even more. The need for religion is less, but if it has at least minimal benefit, then it, religion, should be.

          For example, I saw a man with ten convictions, all blue from the tattoos, sweeping paths in the monastery and feeding pigeons there. Not that killing someone will say nothing, the voice will not raise it. To tell him what would become like that, 20-30 years ago, he would have spat in his face. But at least for his sake let the priests ride jeeps ...
          1. Heimdall47
            Heimdall47 28 January 2016 14: 18 New
            +6
            yes, we all see how many immoral things are going on in the church

            And what, I wonder, do you all see? You see the church only on the news. I have been going there regularly for about 15 years, and somehow I cannot remember "immoral things." But I have seen moral ones.
            Better, dear, tie your tongue to grind on empty - this is not Lenin's room and not the newspaper "Pravda".
            1. Zoldat_A
              Zoldat_A 28 January 2016 16: 20 New
              +4
              Quote: Heimdall47
              And interestingly, all of you see? You see the church only on the news.

              Well, you and me do not know my life - why so boldly declare that I, for example, see the church only in the news?

              I live by the windows of the cathedral, a five-minute walk from the diocesan administration, my daughter 35 years old goes to church and grandson 14, the first son-in-law in the church ... I see priests in jeeps and have heard about unusual relationships in the seminary ...

              Quote: Heimdall47
              Better, dear, tie your tongue to grind on empty - this is not Lenin's room and not the newspaper "Pravda".

              If you, dear Heimdall47, carefully read what I wrote, you would understand that I say that faith is a blessing, and the immoral servants of this religion are a completely different song and you don’t need to interfere with a sour skew with a fresh prosphora ... And then, damn it, they read something against dogma - and without thinking, into the battle for faith. Also me, the defenders of faith were found ... Who else just left the Lenin room is a big question ...

              For the inattentive, I repeat - faith and religion are one thing, and the hypocritical and thieving servants of this faith are something completely different ... And Vera is not to blame that such "servants" serve her ... Faith is what is in a person, and not what is drawn in tempera on a blackboard, not what is present in some building, even if it is beautiful and not at all like her preachers with non-standard jeep orientation ..

              Theological govn ..os .. there will be no doctor.
              1. Heimdall47
                Heimdall47 28 January 2016 16: 45 New
                -3
                overlooking the cathedral, five minutes walk from the diocesan administration

                Well, that doesn't prove anything at all. I meant the church from the inside. All of us live in five minutes - from this experts are not made.
                daughter 35 years old goes to church and grandson 14, the first son-in-law in the church served ... I see priests in jeeps, and heard about unusual relationships in the seminary ...

                This is certainly a more serious argument, but again - you yourself did not see anything.
                For example, my father is 80 years old, he also seems to be an atheist and is skeptical towards the church.
                Those. I imagine that he can similarly say - "my wife and son have been going to church for many years and therefore they say they have heard a lot and are generally an expert" laughing But that will not be true. By the way, we have pop on a big minivan in the village, too - they see everything. And the fact that the priest has four children - it seems like it does not matter.

                I agree with everything else.
                1. Zoldat_A
                  Zoldat_A 29 January 2016 08: 28 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Heimdall47
                  This is certainly a more serious argument, but again - you yourself did not see anything.

                  Should I go to seminary in my old age and hold a candle during non-standard relations between seminarians and their teachers in order to prove something to someone? In my opinion, this is superfluous. I ended up with youthful maximalism several decades ago ... It is enough that the diocesan administration knows about these relations and pretends that there is nothing. Their god is their judge. And I have enough that the grandson is growing the right man. 14 years old - they divide girls on their fists. And that, I think, is right. He’s calm for his grandson, and those seminarians have their grandfathers, let them hold candles for them ...
                  1. Heimdall47
                    Heimdall47 29 January 2016 09: 22 New
                    +1
                    Their god is their judge.

                    I agree completely. And about the rest - no one knows anything, except for the diocesan administration.
                    Believing rumors and building speculation on their basis is the last thing.
                    For example, if I, without serving in the army, start telling how bad it is - muzzles beat, officers through thieves and fools, barracks in an unconventional relationship (God forbid))), then you tell me what? - go first serve, balabol, then tell.
                    And I will answer as you say that I saw the military unit through the window, my father served with me, my nephew is serving now and that’s why I already know everything and I won’t hold a candle there.
                    Do you like it?
                    So I don't like it when unchurched people begin to paint all kinds of heresy about "priests in foreign cars", "pederasty in the seminary," etc.
                    Therefore, you must be mutually polite and try on yourself first, what you hang on others.
              2. Stanislav
                Stanislav 29 January 2016 09: 57 New
                0
                You are wrong, I also go to church for many years, and I don’t get hit by hypocritical or thieving fathers. Well, maybe there are such, but their units. Personally, I know one priest who helps alcoholics. He saved dozens of people from this terrible misfortune!
                And believe me the honest priests in the Orthodox Church are overwhelming majority.
        4. Putinets
          Putinets 28 January 2016 14: 01 New
          +5
          Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.


          Sorry, what are you driving? And please, report to us here on the forum, how much money you get, where, how much you spend on your wife. children, lovers or drink. Judging by the flag, normally get away from taxes and probably do not pay for a communal apartment.
          Do not want, do not like to report? So why the hell do you go into your pocket and think what the same priests are doing or what others are driving on. And you don’t need proof. You yourself did not hold the Bible in your hands and did not read. Otherwise, they would not have asked. For example, at least the first chapters of the Solomon Parables. No need to get into a place where you don’t understand anything
        5. Siberian38
          Siberian38 28 January 2016 14: 07 New
          0
          What do you bring? Even Euro-Gomics will not let you in and will never let you in! laughing
        6. Geser
          Geser 28 January 2016 14: 37 New
          +1
          The fact that some priests live luxuriously agree. But this does not mean that faith should be rejected, since the priest does not believe too much. Faith has always been and will be in the hearts of men, no matter what priests may be.
        7. _my opinion
          _my opinion 28 January 2016 15: 03 New
          0
          Quote: bogart047
          Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.

          do not confuse the general idea with specific people ... I adhere to the principle: if something revolts me in others, I look for it in myself and uproot, and after that, what revolts in others ceases to cling to me and somehow it disappears from others or something ...
          ... I didn’t set a minus for you, but a plus too
        8. vorobey
          vorobey 28 January 2016 15: 14 New
          +2
          Quote: bogart047
          I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.


          learn to answer for yourself ...
        9. Kyrgyz
          Kyrgyz 28 January 2016 18: 38 New
          0
          Quote: bogart047
          Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.

          A jeep yacht a plane is not immoral, just as poverty is not a guarantee of piety, Christ was not poor and did not starve.
        10. antoXa
          antoXa 28 January 2016 18: 49 New
          0
          bogart047
          Religion is not in churches and priests, it is in the soul of a person or is it or is not there, in the souls of many priests is emptiness and so what? Does this mean that there is no God?
          Apparently yours is empty too.
          1. Vasilenko Vladimir
            Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 18: 58 New
            0
            Quote: antoXa
            Religion is not in churches and priests

            in the soul of man, Vera and in the churches is just religion
            1. antoXa
              antoXa 2 February 2016 11: 27 New
              +1
              Vasilenko Vladimir
              If you believe in SOMETHING vague, then you simply have faith in something ... and if you are an Orthodox Christian then this is a respected religion with certain traditions, rituals and a certain culture.
              If you simply believe, but even did not hold the Bible in your hands, then your Faith is worthless.
              Before you correct someone, understand the concepts.
        11. gorgo
          gorgo 28 January 2016 21: 05 New
          +1
          Do you consider being in jeeps / yachts / airplanes immoral in itself? An interesting concept ... St. righteous John of Kronstadt was not a very poor man and rode a carriage (an analog of Mercedes today). And this did not prevent him from being a saint. The problem is not in wealth, but in the heart of man. And this is so trite and understandable to any Orthodox that it’s time to already know that, comrade ... If you, of course, are Orthodox ...
        12. Ivan_ich
          Ivan_ich 28 January 2016 21: 19 New
          +1
          Quote: bogart047
          Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.

          And where does the priests. I believe in God and not in priests. And everyone chooses a parish for himself ...
        13. Ros 56
          Ros 56 29 January 2016 07: 25 New
          +2
          Quote: bogart047
          Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework?


          Listen dear, I'm sorry, are you really not friends with your head. The Bible is a guide to action, nothing more, but the person decides to be a person or a beast. By analogy with the traitors during the war, everyone took the oath, but not everyone surrendered or betrayed.
        14. Larra anathema
          Larra anathema 31 January 2016 11: 34 New
          +1
          You are not inside the system - you are outside of it. An unchurched person will not see either adequate, wise and restrained priests, or true believers, and not those who are engaged in% marketing on forums. About adequate, worthy Orthodox do not write in the internet. This is completely uninteresting.
          And when Old Man in a jeep - DOOO!
          By the way, I don’t personally know such people in jeeps. I know that the friend of the priest has a white penny, he goes on her funeral service and take communion for those who cannot reach the church themselves.
      3. bogart047
        bogart047 28 January 2016 13: 14 New
        -31 qualifying.
        one more time: give at least one example that the Bible has forced at least someone to stay within the framework of morality.
        My previous koment was deleted, censorship is like in a geyrop.
        1. hrapon
          hrapon 28 January 2016 13: 24 New
          19
          Quote: bogart047
          one more time: give at least one example that the Bible has forced at least someone to stay within the framework of morality.
          My previous koment was deleted, censorship is like in a geyrop.


          Nobody will lead a discussion with you on the intellectual level of a "vacuum cleaner".

          Proof are all 20 centuries of Christianity. Look at the calendar. It is calculated from the Nativity of Christ. Not a single idea without carriers of faith and its adherents can exist for so long.
          1. Sobol
            Sobol 28 January 2016 17: 20 New
            +2
            Quote: hrapon

            .. Proof are all 20 centuries of Christianity. Look at the calendar. It is calculated from the Nativity of Christ. Not a single idea without carriers of faith and its adherents can exist for so long.

            And before that, people did not live? They lived for many millennia. They also loved, hated, defeated / defeated, gave birth and raised children, baked bread. They all did this wrong, not knowing Christianity?
            1. hrapon
              hrapon 28 January 2016 18: 58 New
              +2
              Quote: SoboL
              Quote: hrapon

              .. Proof are all 20 centuries of Christianity. Look at the calendar. It is calculated from the Nativity of Christ. Not a single idea without carriers of faith and its adherents can exist for so long.

              And before that, people did not live? They lived for many millennia. They also loved, hated, defeated / defeated, gave birth and raised children, baked bread. They all did this wrong, not knowing Christianity?


              A lot has been written about this. I advise you to read at least something.

              Maybe then you will understand why the Son of God accepted death on the cross ... and what his Sermon on the Mount means. Or at least watch Mel Gibbson's The Passion of the Christ. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) I don't know any comics on this topic.
              1. Sobol
                Sobol 29 January 2016 11: 11 New
                0
                Quote: hrapon

                A lot has been written about this. I advise you to read at least something.

                Maybe then you will understand why the Son of God accepted death on the cross ... and what his Sermon on the Mount means. Or at least watch Mel Gibbson's The Passion of the Christ. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) I don't know any comics on this topic.

                Read. In short - "for our sins." And what have We come to for 20 centuries of Christianity? To the wedding of same-sex couples, to pedophile priests, to drunken priests knocking people down in their cars, to the "holy fathers" who wring out the old people in the name of the Lord. To my great regret, religion has become a business. I understand that the family is not without its black sheep and there are True Priests, But a thousand more times But.
                1. antoXa
                  antoXa 3 February 2016 11: 03 New
                  0
                  Sobol
                  Are you asking the question "where have we come to"? Who are we? I didn't come to this ...
                  Did you come personally? If so, speak for yourself
        2. Heimdall47
          Heimdall47 28 January 2016 13: 29 New
          11
          give at least one example that the bible made someone stay within moral limits

          It keeps me within the framework of morality. Since neither the constitution nor the criminal code are respected, nor are those who wrote them.
          It is far more logical to believe the Bible than Darwin's theories in aliens or the Russian constitution.
          A very real example. Arranges ?
          1. BARKHAN
            BARKHAN 28 January 2016 16: 05 New
            +4
            Quote: Heimdall47
            It keeps me within the framework of morality.

            Join. Regards hi
        3. sq
          sq 28 January 2016 13: 38 New
          +4
          Forces those who want to have this "moral framework". The Bible, Koran, Torah, Vedas and others only indicate this framework. Further, each is determined by the SAM, or it is forced by society.
        4. dauria
          dauria 28 January 2016 17: 38 New
          0
          one more time: give at least one example that the Bible has forced at least someone to stay within the framework of morality.


          Quite simply, the Nazis in the Patriotic War are completely "Christians". People quickly forget what they do not want to remember ... Oh, the example is in the wrong direction, well, sorry, that is, that is.
        5. Leonid L
          Leonid L 28 January 2016 21: 58 New
          0
          For a Russian person, such an example can be the life of the Holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir
        6. Stanislav
          Stanislav 29 January 2016 10: 07 New
          0
          The Bible does not force or force anyone.
          But she gives moral guidelines, well, or just saying the commandments.
          Well, for example, Do not kill, do not steal, do not commit adultery, honor your parents, and so on.
          But to believe or not to believe, everyone decides for himself.
      4. Kars
        Kars 28 January 2016 13: 30 New
        +4
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        And Muslims drooling droplets to all conventions and European courts ...

        This means banning circumcision, or what else they are doing there. And this is a ban on the EU territory, whatever they want to do there.
      5. Ezhaak
        Ezhaak 28 January 2016 14: 29 New
        +6
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        But Muslim children will not cease to be Muslim children.

        Is it only Muslim? Jewish circumcision, read the introduction to Judaism a week after birth is done. Or are they already beginning to think very hard at this age?
        Quote: article
        children, in fact, are not yet able to understand and, in fact, are not in a position to embrace faith, do not realize this.
        Someone is very actively pushing their schizophrenic wishes. Only now his name remains a secret.
      6. Corsair
        Corsair 28 January 2016 16: 49 New
        +2
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        The whole problem is that they will stop baptizing children, they will refuse the Bible ... At least there were some moral brakes. But Muslim children will not cease to be Muslim children. And Muslims drooling droplets to all conventions and European courts ...

        what Why? Those who have had baptism purely for fashion will also stop Muslim children — they will grow up and choose who they should be — or do you think they circumcised, gave a name in a mosque — did a person suddenly become a supporter of Islam for life? It all depends on the family, upbringing, religiosity of parents and the availability of education, most diversified, educated people need faith mainly in old age or stressful situations, because it is common for any person to seek help from higher powers and answers in areas beyond. In any other cases, this is a kind of fashion statement, belonging to some group. State law should be above religion and faith, regardless of their currents and directions.
      7. Avantageur
        Avantageur 28 January 2016 16: 55 New
        +3
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        Quote: bogart047
        a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.

        The whole problem is that they will stop baptizing children, they will refuse the Bible ... At least some brakes were moral. But Muslim children will not cease to be Muslim children. And Muslims drooling droplets to all conventions and European courts ...

        Allahakbar, Europe?

        In order for the brakes to be, you need to educate the children correctly, and in order to properly educate you do not have to baptize for this.
      8. Darth Revan
        Darth Revan 28 January 2016 21: 08 New
        0
        Truly Akbar! am wassat
      9. field engineer
        field engineer 28 January 2016 22: 49 New
        +1
        New Sodom and Gomorrah.
      10. Sunjar
        Sunjar 29 January 2016 15: 30 New
        0
        I draw your attention to the fact that homosexuality means that you need to teach children from elementary grades, although they also seem to be incompetent children.
    2. Boos
      Boos 28 January 2016 13: 05 New
      0
      It's okay, if you want to be a slave of God, do it yourself ... "Slave of God", I didn't think it up, otherwise the Orthodox will come flying in now.
      1. Zoldat_A
        Zoldat_A 28 January 2016 13: 23 New
        16
        Quote: Boos
        Normally, if you want to be a servant of God, do it yourself ...

        I myself do not believe in God or in hell - life lived like that. But the rights of believers are accustomed to respect. Any religion.

        And now, in fact, about religion. The lower the educational and cultural level of society, the greater the need for religion. Two or three thousand years ago it was necessary to explain to the people why it was raining and thunder. And at the same time - why are some rich and not others and everyone in his place should sit and not rock the boat. So there was a need for religion.

        Since then, people have learned that the weather is ruled by atmospheric fronts and other meteorological crap, and not the Thunderer at all. And at the same time they learned that nowhere was his place among the rich or the poor registered for anyone. And little by little the need for religion began to fade into the background ... Tolerance appeared, those who wanted to rewrite the Bible came out, otherwise it is intolerantly written about how men "get to know each other" ...

        Now look at the Muslim countries where three quarters cannot read, not to speak about atmospheric fronts. Allahakbar is indisputable there! A mosque, a Qur'an and an automaton - that’s all they need in life.

        And today in Europe - with all the practical uselessness, Christianity was another thread that kept Europe from falling into the madness of tolerance. And they cut her. I repeat - I have any religion on the drum, I perfectly lived a life of an atheist and in my old age I’ll somehow manage without God. But young, soft brains, which only think that they know everything and understand everything, need a DOGMA. Indisputable. This is good, and this is bad. Therefore, nothing good is that, after 1700 years, Christianity was ruined - no ....
        1. jjj
          jjj 28 January 2016 13: 30 New
          +1
          And the Lord said that he was not a slave, but a brother
          1. Boos
            Boos 28 January 2016 13: 37 New
            0
            Lord? Is that Jesus? He was sent to the lost sheep of Israel, and how it ended ...
            1. Ivan_ich
              Ivan_ich 28 January 2016 21: 32 New
              0
              Lord? Is that Jesus? He was sent to the lost sheep of Israel, and how it ended ...

              So it didn’t end, but it has been going on for two thousand years ...
        2. Heimdall47
          Heimdall47 28 January 2016 13: 59 New
          0
          Since then, people have learned that weather fronts rule atmospheric fronts and other meteorological crap, and not the Thunderer at all.

          Only the people did not recognize the most important thing - where it all came from, why it came from and where it will go.
          And everything else you listed - "atmospheric fronts, rich / poor, etc." in comparison with the problem of meaning and reason for being is not worth a dime.
          1. Corsair
            Corsair 28 January 2016 17: 01 New
            +1
            Quote: Heimdall47
            Only the people did not recognize the most important thing - where it all came from, why it came from and where it will go.

            laughing Do they want to know this? With the exception of a small percentage of those living on the planet, the rest are quite happy with the versions of life from God and life from Darwin, although there are dozens of 2 different versions.
            The meaning of being is not described either in the Bible or in the Koran, but all the carrots are in the form of paradise, beautiful maidens, Valkyries, etc. it was invented by people to stimulate faith, and much is quite easy to understand. Paradise - for relaxation (worked all my life - take a rest), virgins - for Arabs (it is very difficult for men to be with girls there - Kalyms, blood feuds, hard customs, etc.), the Norwegians of the Valkyries came up with - so that it would not be so scary to die in wars - for they often lived in raids. There may be explanations from the topic with a finger to the sky, but a lot has been invented by people for people.
            1. Boos
              Boos 28 January 2016 18: 38 New
              0
              The Valkyries from the Old Faith have nothing to do with the Sinai religions, while their ancestors were revered, not Yahweh ...
            2. Heimdall47
              Heimdall47 28 January 2016 20: 23 New
              0
              Do they want to know this? Except for a small percentage

              No, they don’t want to. Most prefer a dog's life - satisfying instincts and animal needs. So what? Let's abandon religion, philosophy, mathematics and will satisfy the wishes of the lumpen?
              Well, for example, a man was born blind-born or a complete freak - how do these Darwin, Valkyries justify this and give him comfort?
              Or come to the ward of cancer patients and sell them "2 dozen different versions". Console them with scientific atheism. Most likely they will look at you like an idiot. This is at its best.
              A priest (mullah can) for any listen. So - all your theories are worthless, since they are not universal and simply primitive. They are suitable for young people whom life has not yet set in haste.
              1. Corsair
                Corsair 2 February 2016 11: 16 New
                0
                Quote: Heimdall47
                A priest (mullah can) for any listen. So - all your theories are worthless, since they are not universal and simply primitive. They are suitable for young people whom life has not yet set in haste.

                This is a question, a person is weak and he needs to believe in someone or something, especially in difficult and stressful situations, they will listen to these figures only because someone told them and taught them before, or made them believe. Bring to a person from the jungle who has never seen religious figures in his life and believes only in the spirits of the forest - he will not listen to these bearers of faith, but here is a person who was told and shown to the father, mullah, etc. from childhood. - will listen.
    3. Engineer
      Engineer 28 January 2016 13: 08 New
      +7
      What religious wars are there now? Or do you want to say that ISIS, generated and controlled by the United States and its satellites, are conducting a religious war in BV? This is the thinking at the level of ISIS fighter who does not need to know more.
    4. Fafnir
      Fafnir 28 January 2016 13: 12 New
      0
      Have you read the article? The ban applies only to one particular denomination.
      1. Boos
        Boos 28 January 2016 13: 16 New
        +2
        Don't you know that in essence Islam, Christianity and Judaism have the same saints? And they are co-religionists, the rest paid "jiziyah" -tax for the right to trade in Constantinople.
    5. Blondy
      Blondy 28 January 2016 13: 23 New
      +1
      This liberalism at the individual level, blows up the foundation of Christian European tsvmlizatsii as a social system. Naturally, the holy place will not be empty, and it will be filled, all and sundry and most likely all Muslims.

      Well, and what are universal values ​​here?
    6. WKS
      WKS 28 January 2016 13: 34 New
      +1
      What about circumcisions of the foreskin to the foolish?
      1. Corsair
        Corsair 28 January 2016 17: 07 New
        +1
        Quote: wks
        What about circumcisions of the foreskin to the foolish?

        In hot climates it was often a necessity, therefore it has spread to many countries and often it is not an indicator of faith or religion.
        1. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 18: 04 New
          0
          Quote: Corsair
          In hot climates - this was often a necessity

          it would be a necessity; it would fall off;
    7. Pig
      Pig 28 January 2016 13: 42 New
      +1
      "" a ban on imposing religion on an incapacitated person "
      well, that's right ... but "transgender" values ​​can be imposed on an incapacitated person
      it is very easy to fall to debauchery and bestiality - it is difficult to rise
    8. roman_pilot
      roman_pilot 28 January 2016 13: 50 New
      +3
      Let’s ban vaccinations then. The child will grow up and decide for himself whether to make them or not.
      1. brn521
        brn521 28 January 2016 15: 14 New
        0
        Quote: roman_pilot
        Let’s ban vaccinations then.

        As for vaccines - is another matter. In the USSR, a very real percentage of complications and deaths was laid down in statistics. Now - and at all a mess.
    9. Siberian38
      Siberian38 28 January 2016 14: 03 New
      +1
      Dill in your spirit! am
    10. kepmor
      kepmor 28 January 2016 15: 23 New
      0
      Parents, Homeland and Faith DO NOT CHOOSE!
      This is from the Almighty!
    11. your1970
      your1970 28 January 2016 18: 21 New
      0
      bogart047
      Well, if you approach from this point of view, then cutting the umbilical cord is generally an attempted murder- "I'm directly connected with my mother, she provides me with this thing, and you CUT IT !!!!! Without my will !!! I can about 5 years. I look like her or 20 !!! I will drag it through the courts !!! "
    12. antoXa
      antoXa 28 January 2016 18: 41 New
      0
      bogart047
      And what do you think, do parents have the right to give birth to a child without asking him permission to do this? maybe the European Court to make such a decision? so that they do not suffer there for a long time. in 50 years, Arabs and Negroes will live quietly in Europe.
    13. RUSS
      RUSS 28 January 2016 21: 59 New
      0
      Quote: bogart047
      a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.

      You in Ukraine have already most of yourselves renounced Christianity - sectarians and atheists are in power, schismatics are taking over temples, sects are flourishing all around, and what do we see in your country now?
    14. RUSS
      RUSS 28 January 2016 22: 09 New
      0
      But after all, in Russia after 1917, there was something similar and children were forbidden to baptize, and adults, too, if it was not forbidden, it was certainly undesirable, and I also remembered that the Bolsheviks, instead of baptism, invented their own "sacrament" and called it -Octabrins, thank God it did not take root among the infidels!
      In the picture taken on November 16, 1924, the baby is "October" by the People’s Commissar A.V. Lunacharsky.
    15. Hlyneope
      Hlyneope 29 January 2016 21: 09 New
      0
      Religion was more often still an occasion, not a cause, but generally yes, without it it would be better. In our country, you also need to introduce a similar ban for all faiths.
  2. bad
    bad 28 January 2016 12: 58 New
    10
    Many publications have appeared, based primarily on emotions, and not on the mind.
    ... that’s how civilizations begin to die .. is there another opinion?
  3. McLuha-MacLeod
    McLuha-MacLeod 28 January 2016 13: 00 New
    17
    If you cannot baptize children, then circumcision must be prohibited.
    1. not a Jew
      not a Jew 28 January 2016 13: 04 New
      +8
      Quote: McLooka-MacLeod
      If you cannot baptize children, then circumcision must be prohibited.

      This is an outrageous, vile, and inhuman statement. UNTOLERANT treat Jews and Muslims. You are a terry anti-Semite and Islamophobic. You never get Schengen. sad fool am
      1. edmed
        edmed 28 January 2016 15: 25 New
        +2
        good It is, yes!
      2. the villain
        the villain 28 January 2016 16: 14 New
        +3
        Quote: not a Jew
        Never get a Schengen.

        Oh, but I wanted so much dreamed laughing ... As for the Schengen, I remembered Shoigu's words: "I do not need a visa, the order of the Supreme Commander is enough for me." fellow
    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 13: 16 New
      11
      I’ll tell you more about vaccinations and any treatment is illegal, and if you conduct a survey among children, do they want to learn ... laughing
    3. Butchcassidy
      Butchcassidy 28 January 2016 13: 41 New
      +1
      Baptizing children is not only possible, but also necessary.

      Although in Europe that has departed from its Christian roots, this is not the case.

      I am saddened, but not surprised. He stopped wondering when in England the church building was sold under the organization of a pederast club.

      Satanism in its purest form.
      1. BARKHAN
        BARKHAN 28 January 2016 16: 28 New
        +2
        Quote: ButchCassidy
        Satanism in its purest form.

        This is the main answer to what is happening. Step by step, year after year, before our eyes, everything is turned upside down. Everything connected with faith is being persecuted.
        When Satanists or atheists talk about believing Christians, they imagine "gorged and ignorant" grandmothers in handkerchiefs ... Who can be spread rot and persecuted, you can say and do anything you want with impunity towards the Church ...
        So, I want to convincingly convince them ... it is not!
        In Russia, for example, there is someone to defend the church and the faithful, including with arms in their hands. And this is legal and fair. Unless in Russia someone is forcibly dragged into the Church, or baptized by force. Here let the European integrator pedophiles put their paws and see how it ends.
        But Europe can’t be saved. And for some reason I’m not sorry for her.
  4. Engineer
    Engineer 28 January 2016 13: 02 New
    15
    And to force children to eat vegetables is not violence, but to go to school? Which of the children wants to study? No one, because this is violence, i.e. the crime.
    1. Colonel
      Colonel 28 January 2016 17: 31 New
      +2
      Quote: Engineer
      And to force children to eat vegetables is not violence, but to go to school?

      Come on, when they gave birth, they didn’t ask the child for consent, when they taught to speak, there was no question of choosing a language (on the part of the child), and then point by point ... wink
    2. The comment was deleted.
  5. Woodman
    Woodman 28 January 2016 13: 03 New
    +9
    It seems to me more and more that the old woman Europe is specially "warmed up" for great chaos ...
  6. Mercenary
    Mercenary 28 January 2016 13: 09 New
    +5
    These obscurantists will die out, and something is not a pity. Geyropa in its hatred and tolerance for centuries-old traditions has already reached senility.
    1. Siberian38
      Siberian38 28 January 2016 14: 13 New
      +1
      It is sad that this is happening near our borders.
  7. inkass_98
    inkass_98 28 January 2016 13: 10 New
    +5
    There was a book called "The Feast of Disobedience". So there it explains in an accessible form what will happen when the children do what they want. In most cases, only parental guidance will guide the child in the right direction. This does not concern the inadequate, here we must talk about the deprivation of parental rights.
  8. Peacemaker
    Peacemaker 28 January 2016 13: 10 New
    +6
    On the one hand, this is correct. On the other hand, the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church have been practicing this for centuries. I think here it is necessary to let people choose for themselves. Against the background of the imposition of the church of the wedding of homosexuals and the ban on wearing a cross on the neck. This prohibition looks like an act of hypocrisy and lack of respect for the traditions of one’s own people.
  9. Oprichnik
    Oprichnik 28 January 2016 13: 11 New
    +9
    Lord Jews! You violate the rights of the child on the 7th day after his birth.
    But seriously, after reaching the age of majority, a young individual, not burdened with faith, but obscurantism from TV and PC screens becomes either a nihilist or a satanist. Although it grew, for example, in a Christian family. Two generations later, a complete scribe begins in the morality of mankind.
  10. bogart047
    bogart047 28 January 2016 13: 12 New
    0
    I didn’t understand something, is there censorship of reports of immoral behavior of members of the clergy? Somehow petty and unworthy of such a reputable site.
    1. sq
      sq 28 January 2016 13: 41 New
      +2
      Who screams loudest about immorality? Isn't he who does not know such a concept - moral?
    2. gladysheff2010
      gladysheff2010 28 January 2016 14: 08 New
      +1
      "Dear", here and now comments are being written and questions concerning the topic of the post are being discussed directly, and you are taking us into the abyss of senseless and fruitless discussions about the imperfection of the world, so you are not here! hi
    3. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 14: 16 New
      +2
      censorship is on your censor. is
      by the way, you did not give any messages about "immoral behavior of clergy members"
      literally you reported
      I see priests in jeeps, yachts, planes
    4. Vitaly72
      Vitaly72 28 January 2016 15: 15 New
      +1
      After all, I saw the third day in the infernal chariot stinking with gasoline, but I saw nothing immoral in this
    5. BARKHAN
      BARKHAN 28 January 2016 16: 35 New
      +3
      Everyone will answer personally before God, including priests. Especially priests.
      Quote: bogart047
      I didn’t understand something, is there censorship of reports of immoral behavior of members of the clergy? Somehow petty and unworthy of such a reputable site.

      You do not understand that? Re-read your posts! You accuse the entire clergy for the "immorality" of its individual members.
      Go to another place as a dilution.
  11. X Y Z
    X Y Z 28 January 2016 13: 12 New
    +3
    I read that the practice of baptizing children in infancy came to us from the Catholic West. In the years of early Christianity, it was customary to be baptized already in adulthood, when the brains were in the right place, at 30 ... 40 years. All this happened in full understanding of what you are doing, the obligatory knowledge of dogmas and the existing practice of life according to the gospel commandments.
    1. Boos
      Boos 28 January 2016 14: 01 New
      0
      But how did Vladimir Rus baptize with fire and sword? Or do you think that the Eastern Orthodox Church did not have its inquisition?
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 14: 16 New
        0
        Quote: Boos
        Did the Orthodox Church not have its inquisition?

        essentially no
        1. Boos
          Boos 28 January 2016 14: 31 New
          0
          Burned at the stake, of course less than in the West.
          1. Vasilenko Vladimir
            Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 14: 34 New
            0
            by orders of magnitude and the Inquisition itself as a separate institution was not
  12. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 28 January 2016 13: 13 New
    +5
    The fact that European-style democracy is a democracy of prohibitions is already becoming a widespread belief.

    In the narrow sense (about the baptism of infants) - it cannot be said that this is a fiction of the European Court. Some currents in Protestantism believe that baptism is a conscious act of faith in a mature person. Turchinov should know this well; but he only knows about the terrible Russian missiles laughing

    Personally, I am outraged by another:

    1. Rude intervention of a secular court in matters of faith. Religious communities, within their frameworks, may establish such a ban for their members; that is, do not baptize. However, their membership is purely voluntary, and Protestants are by no means sectarians and heretics.
    2. Gross court interference in family matters.
    3. The indescribable stupidity of a European court. This question is a theological question; are there any experts in court? On what basis do they solve theological questions?
    4. As other commentators have written before me - the nasty practice of adopting normal children by sodomites - this is what you need to do!
  13. hrapon
    hrapon 28 January 2016 13: 14 New
    +1
    The decision of the ECHR, outrageous in form and content, and with far-reaching consequences.
  14. bogart047
    bogart047 28 January 2016 13: 16 New
    -11 qualifying.
    two of my comments have already been removed with a request to provide evidence of the effectiveness of the Bible on the moral principles of man. Go to freedom of speech!
    1. Vitaly72
      Vitaly72 28 January 2016 15: 22 New
      0
      But what about the commandments of Christ? Do not find that this is the moral principles?
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 28 January 2016 16: 02 New
        +1
        But what about the commandments of Christ? Do not find that this is the moral principles?


        And why is the code of the builder of communism worse?
        The question is how the elite observes even the "commandments" or even the "code".
    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 16: 07 New
      0
      and what's wrong, give evidence
  15. AID.S
    AID.S 28 January 2016 13: 17 New
    -5
    Quote: bogart047
    a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.

    I put you a plus, but for some reason I put a minus. Providence? laughing I’ll fix it later. In general, I agree with you for the first time with the European Court.
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 28 January 2016 16: 03 New
      +1
      I put you a plus, but for some reason I put a minus.


      Because others have put two minuses before you since you opened the page. Already Major General, it's time to know the "materiel" :).
  16. Rokossovsky
    Rokossovsky 28 January 2016 13: 21 New
    +3
    Here I read the comments and marvel!
    I don’t even want to talk about the unsubscribed minutes after the publication of the article ...
    For people calling to ban Islamic and Jewish rites, I recommend that you reread the last paragraph and stop flogging nonsense!
    Issues of ethics, morality, personal freedom, religious freedom and sacred components I will consider in the second part of this article

    The main points of the article:
    Thus, this decision contradicts the basic principle of jurisprudence - “The law is equal for everyone”, and, accordingly, it is illegal

    That is, a certain organization that called itself the “European Court” by its decision clearly intervenes in the personal and family life of the child. In accordance with paragraph 2, the child has the right to protection from such interference, and the forms of protection should be determined by the legal representatives of the child - his parents, and not uncles and aunts on Mercedes and Audi

    As we see, this decision of the European Court is not based on the UN Convention, but on the interpretations of a certain organization called the “European Court”

    There is another act of violating the principles of international law, which runs counter to the fundamental principles of the UN - that’s the main thing in this article!
  17. hartlend
    hartlend 28 January 2016 13: 23 New
    -5
    Quote: bogart047
    6 days ago, the Russian public was blown up by the news published by the Italian resource Ilgiomale.it "European Court: Since March 2016, infant baptism is a crime."

    Nobody blew anyone up. Personally, I hear for the first time, watch and read the news. Moreover, some kind of Italian resource. Moreover, the author himself does not know which of the European courts made this decision and whether he had authority. In general, a minus per article. Although I am not Svidomo, I completely agree with the first comment from bogart047. If on the merits of the matter, everyone should consciously choose faith or religion, to each his own. Accordingly, baptism, circumcision of two religions, and other cults and sacraments with children fall under the ban. While Europe is a mess, there you can declare such decisions. In Russia, the canonical religions will not allow, this is the loss of market share.
  18. tomcat117
    tomcat117 28 January 2016 13: 30 New
    +2
    What is Europe in the light of the above problem?
    This is a terrible monster devouring its peoples and their future.
    This is a conglomeration of states whose leaders have a terrible disease - the lack of reason.
    The worst thing is that Europe is rejecting the obvious, building an "ephemeral Tower of Babel", the foundation of which has already begun to fall apart brick by brick under the onslaught of the "barbarians".
    Each nation chooses its own historical path.
    It’s hard to argue with them, to see this final diagnosis - the death of society in its current form.
  19. Zomanus
    Zomanus 28 January 2016 13: 36 New
    +1
    Yes, I do not care for them, to be honest.
    If people can’t defend their own, then figs on them.
    State and law are of course norms.
    But when they begin to confuse the coast, then it is worth correcting them.
    By the way, here is another demonstration of this ...
    In the Danish city of Sennerborg, an 17-year-old girl who used a gas canister against a man who attacked her was accused of carrying weapons illegally, reports The Daily Mail.
    According to media reports, the attack occurred near the local refugee center. According to the woman, the rapist threw her to the ground and tried to undress. The victim of the attack managed to get an aerosol can and use it, after which the attacker fled the scene.
    The girl faces a fine of 500 kroons (about 70 euros) for carrying a canister that is prohibited in the country for storing and carrying a can.
    Source: http://rusnext.ru/news/1453964937
    1. BARKHAN
      BARKHAN 28 January 2016 16: 54 New
      +2
      Perverted renegades, degenerates, and liars. They accidentally took the place of those Europeans who founded European civilization. Their ancestors colonized half the world, created and created ... these same ones except for piderasty could not cherish anything.
  20. hrapon
    hrapon 28 January 2016 13: 38 New
    +4
    Quote: bogart047
    two of my comments have already been removed with a request to provide evidence of the effectiveness of the Bible on the moral principles of man. Go to freedom of speech!


    Do not confuse freedom of delirium with freedom of speech.
  21. Evgtan
    Evgtan 28 January 2016 13: 39 New
    -3
    What is in Islam, what in Christianity is violence against a person! A person must come to one or another faith, consciously, and not by birth. Born in a Muslim family - circumcised, in a Christian - baptized.
    1. Evgtan
      Evgtan 28 January 2016 16: 28 New
      +2
      Any religion, in my opinion, is primarily a submission mechanism. "Servant of God" and that says it all. How much blood has been shed! In the name of I.Kh. etc. God endured and commanded us. Read the old testament: - there Jesus says, - he brought you not peace, but a sword. cursed will be the one who does not renounce in my name, from his children and his parents. Well, etc. In Russia, until the 19th century, there was a double belief, Orthodoxy was very closely intertwined with paganism, in which Russians were not slaves, but relatives of the gods. Read the tales of A.S. Pushkin. there every syllable is saturated with paganism. In our time, Maslenitsa and Christmastide are celebrated. If you suddenly frighten an Orthodox Christian, you can hear: - "Chur me" and the sign of the Cross will immediately follow. Maybe that's why Orthodoxy is so different from Catholicism and Islam, in the direction of decency and culture? I am baptized, but I do not feel involved in Christianity or any other religion. Therefore, I am convinced that A person must come to one or another faith, consciously, and not by birth
  22. russmensch
    russmensch 28 January 2016 13: 45 New
    +4
    I don't know much about religious issues, as well as legal ones, but there is one BUT ... Baptism is, first of all, a rite that goes back to the depths of centuries. It is believed that from the moment of baptism, the "hand of God" descends on the person who has passed it and his personal guardian angel begins to be invisibly present. Which in the future will protect him from illness, death and other misfortunes and lead him through life. This is what our ancestors were guided by when baptizing their children and "giving them the opportunity to feel divine conduction" in the form of physical and spiritual protection.
    At the same time, it was the kids who needed protection, as the least adapted at first to life. Mortality among babies was very high and thus protection was put. I don’t know how anyone, I myself was baptized in infancy. Being a military man many times I got into a situation when I definitely had to die and something always happened that saved my life. Everyone said that I was lucky, but one priest asked if I was baptized and after an affirmative answer said that it was my guardian angel that saved me. That's how I live, I don’t believe it myself, but may I also have a guardian angel.
    Well, if Europe so wants to lose its angels - the path is clear.
  23. fax66
    fax66 28 January 2016 13: 47 New
    +5
    If you follow this logic, then you cannot give a name at birth - let it be numbered, and as he grows up he will choose. So Europe is already sliding towards the "sexlessness" of children: in some places there is no longer a "boy" and a "girl", but there is "IT" ... which itself must determine who it is ...
    Insanity grows stronger ..
    1. Gormenghast
      Gormenghast 28 January 2016 13: 58 New
      +1
      Of course, you can’t give a name. Suddenly the child will not like it, but to change it is necessary to wait for adulthood. laughing

      And gender cannot be indicated. laughing
      1. kpd
        kpd 28 January 2016 17: 40 New
        +1
        As for the name - upon receipt of the passport, you can change the name and patronymic and last name, so it is quite possible under Russian law.
  24. Cripple cross
    Cripple cross 28 January 2016 13: 49 New
    +5
    Quote: Zoldat_A
    The lower the educational and cultural level of society, the greater the need for religion. Two or three thousand years ago it was necessary to explain to the people why it was raining and thunder.

    Sorry, I didn’t read further. But already from this your phrase I came to the opposite conclusion.
    The less the need for religion, the lower the cultural and educational level.
    Take an interest in the ministry education program. You will understand that education there, in all directions, is 10 times better than in modern "institutions" stamped in every gateway. Education from clergy at the level of good state universities.
    1. Gormenghast
      Gormenghast 28 January 2016 14: 01 New
      +1
      Yes, faith has nothing to do with education. Neither among believers, nor among clergy.
      1. Cripple cross
        Cripple cross 28 January 2016 15: 42 New
        -1
        Quote: Gormengast
        Yes, faith has nothing to do with education. Neither among believers, nor among clergy.

        I do not agree.
        Excerpt from Wikipedia.
        In the broad sense of the word, education is a process or a product of the “formation of the mind, character and physical abilities of an individual ...
        In a technical sense, education is the process by which society through schools, colleges, universities and other institutions purposefully transfers his cultural heritage - accumulated knowledge, values ​​and skills - from one generation to another [between generations] ”

        Each country has a certain religious structure. Cultural heritage. And this aspect is included in the human education program.
        Education is not only 2 + 2 math.
        A concept such as religious education also exists and includes enormous volumes of information.
  25. _Igorek_
    _Igorek_ 28 January 2016 13: 51 New
    0
    Wimps !!!
  26. bannik
    bannik 28 January 2016 13: 53 New
    +3
    Quote: bogart047
    a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.

    Moreover, the child is not even asked in which family and in which country he would like to be born. So the "European Court" still has something to "work on"
  27. koksalek
    koksalek 28 January 2016 14: 11 New
    +1
    Full steam ahead to the Islamization of Europe.
    1. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 14: 18 New
      0
      Quote: koksalek
      to the Islamization of Europe.

      I think to fag
  28. Stanislav
    Stanislav 28 January 2016 14: 21 New
    0
    Quote: bogart047
    a very robust ban on imposing a legally incapable person on religion. It would be like this everywhere, there would be fewer wars.

    There is nothing sound in it. Renouncing the faith of his ancestors, a person loses moral guidelines. In a society that has lost these guidelines, various abominations begin to flourish. This is exactly what happened in Europe, once Christian Europe became a home for pedophiles, homosexuals and other nasty things. The terrible consequences of this are very clearly visible.
  29. el coyote
    el coyote 28 January 2016 14: 30 New
    0
    with the name of Christ on the lips of the Europeans we already went. not a ride. Decided to try under the banner of Allah?
  30. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 28 January 2016 14: 36 New
    +2
    Frankly, I don’t give a damn about the geyropa and what they will do there with their children. This is their own business.
    The only thing, I consider it simply necessary that the relevant Russian structures loudly raise this topic at all levels and stick a nose to the geyrope in its own bowel movements.
    And who will broadcast to anyone here for freedom? In fact, Americans and Geyrodtsy - savages and Papuans, only in a beautiful green candy wrapper.
  31. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 28 January 2016 14: 39 New
    +2
    I do not know whether such a law was adopted or not, but I would not be surprised if it is adopted in today's Europe. It's just that Europe is being "lowered", and European civilization is based on Christianity. Religion, from my point of view, is the need of society, among other things. These are moral guidelines for community life (and sin too), and supervision over observance (God sees everything), and imminent punishment (if not in this life, then in that one), and attitude to external (for a given society) peoples and phenomena (patriotism in particular). All this is brought up from childhood. Europe is transferred to an amorphous state (food for other societies), for this they break the connection between generations (including juvenile justice). In Ukraine, the ram was also "onizhedeti". Therefore, by the way, the Ministry of Education is the "holy of holies", but we have something incomprehensible.
  32. dobrovic
    dobrovic 28 January 2016 14: 45 New
    0
    How pleasant it is to read such elaborate, judicious articles ... I can agree or not, but the arguments are obvious. Thank!
  33. MarKon
    MarKon 28 January 2016 14: 54 New
    +2
    You can’t baptize, you can’t cut, you can’t be forced to wash dishes and floors, you can clean your room, you can’t even be asked to scratch your back, you can’t be forced to learn algebra and the Russian language, geometry (like if you don’t walk at home
    The Brussels bureaucracy completely messed up
    1. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 14: 56 New
      +1
      Quote: MarKon
      clean your room

      this is definitely impossible, it’s possible from the room, but not like
  34. alicante11
    alicante11 28 January 2016 14: 55 New
    -1
    I have a very complicated situation with baptism. My own mother and grandmother (also not believers at all) were baptized in the 4th grade. Moreover, the father mocked for a very long time, they say, how is it that the chairman of the council of the pioneer detachment is baptized. Naturally, I lost my temper and made a scandal, although I only blamed myself for not being able to go against my mother and grandmother (and these were such women that it was VERY difficult to go against them) and defend my beliefs. I also considered it impossible to throw a cross, because I perceived it as an analogue of a pioneer tie, only of another faith, which was just as sacred to me and even more, because I believed (and believe) in communism. As a result, after another scandal, the cross went to my mother's jewelry box "until the time" when I can decide what to do with it. Fortunately, I didn't have to decide. At first I forgot about him, still a child. And a few years later, already in the 90s, when someone reminded me of baptism, and I remembered this story, it turned out that the cross had disappeared from the box. To my questions, where did he go, my mother answered with ignorance. Personally, I saw in this a kind of "finger of fate", which strengthened me in my atheism on a par with money-grubbing churchmen.

    And that is why I refused my wife’s proposal to baptize children. The reason is exactly the same as in the decision of the European Court. A child ACHIEVING the age at which he can make a decision must decide for himself whether he should be baptized, whether he needs faith. As I understand, I
    an atheist, and the wife, too, is by no means a believer. Moreover, I see no reason to baptize children and make them potential traitors, because baptism is a sacrament by accepting which you partake of faith. And throwing a cross - you betray this faith. Therefore, baptism must be AWARE!

    Thus, if this decision was made by a RUSSIAN court, I would support it with both hands. BUT is a gay European court. As correctly pointed out in the comments above, it is possible to decide for a child his "gender" type by giving him to a same-sex family, but christening, which in any case, in comparison, is virtuous and spiritual, is impossible. And this is not correct. As the saying goes, you either take off the cross, or put on your pants.
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 28 January 2016 15: 26 New
      -1
      Still, it would be interesting to know what those who put the "minus" disagree with. The issue of ethics, after all, so you can comment on it. Or is communism so hateful?
      1. Heimdall47
        Heimdall47 28 January 2016 15: 40 New
        0
        to know what those who put the "minus" disagree with

        I disagree with everything. Faith is the same basic thing for a child as brushing your teeth, respect for elders, honesty, etc. Even more - faith gives all this justification, cements all these qualities.
        Well, from the standpoint of materialism and communism, you cannot explain to your child why you cannot steal. After all, if it’s clever to do this so that no one knows, then you can get a great job in life.
        And communism is an archaic, outdated ideology. Quite a dead end theory. Like to shake this rattle - shake.
        1. alicante11
          alicante11 28 January 2016 15: 58 New
          +3
          Faith is the same basic thing for a child as brushing your teeth, respect for elders, honesty, etc. Even more - faith gives all this justification, cements all these qualities.


          And why do you think this is so? Personally, I do not agree with this. I do not have the right to do this?

          Well, from the standpoint of materialism and communism, you cannot explain to your child why you cannot steal.


          Easy - THREE reasons. First, you don't like it if someone steals from you. Secondly, if they find out, it will be a shame, and thirdly, it is banal - they will go to jail. But from the point of view of religion, it cannot be explained. You do, after all, like "stole-repented-gave money-free from sin." Moreover, at a very official level.

          After all, if it’s clever to do this so that no one knows, then you can get a great job in life.


          How much rope do not curl ...

          And communism is an archaic, outdated ideology.


          Yes, is it really a religious person to talk about "antiquity" ...
          Well, about the fact that it has become obsolete. Well, religion also "outlived" about thirty years ago, and now any official or bandit will go to church to skis in order to atone for sins.

          Quite a dead end theory.


          Much deadlock.
          This is where the Lord God lives with us? They used to say "in the sky", then when the planes flew - in space, when the spaceships were launched, it was not there either. Here, in my opinion, at the present time they still cannot agree on where He is. Either in a "distant, distant galaxy", or in a parallel universe.
          1. Heimdall47
            Heimdall47 28 January 2016 16: 13 New
            -1
            And why do you think this is so? Personally, I do not agree with this. I do not have the right to do this?

            Therefore - "faith gives all this justification"
            You have.
            Easy - THREE reasons. Firstly, you don’t like it if they steal from you. Secondly, if they find out, it will be a shame, thirdly, it is trite - they will put him in prison.

            But what about Lenin Vladimir Ilyich - with "plunder the loot", with the robberies of churches, the confiscation of property from the peasants?
            Well - wasn’t he ashamed? And they didn’t put him in prison. And they didn’t put Chubais out and Vasilieva came out dry.
            So why not hit the exploiter now and not remove the wallet from him? Or do damned bankers quietly withdraw money - is it a good thing?
            That is, your arguments are fake - right?
            How much rope do not curl ...

            Well, for the majority of your party leaders she curled up to a safe death.
            How do you have - "stole-repented-gave money-free from sin"

            Not so - if you stole, then you will go to the investigator. The priest who confesses you will be the first to send you. And if you have repented, then you will also go to the investigator. Otherwise, they did not repent. You have misconceptions about confession.
            where does the Lord God live? They used to say "in heaven"

            I don’t know where He lives. This is His personal affair, which has nothing to do with me. I will die - I recognize. In the meantime, I do not need anything.
            1. alicante11
              alicante11 28 January 2016 16: 35 New
              +1
              But what about Lenin Vladimir Ilyich - with "plunder the loot", with the robberies of churches, the confiscation of property from the peasants?


              "Rob the loot", listen to it yourself! That is, restore justice. And what could be higher, better and more spiritual than justice?

              And they didn’t put Chubais out and Vasilieva came out dry.


              And what does communism have to do with it?

              So why not hit the exploiter now and not remove the wallet from him? Or do damned bankers quietly withdraw money - is it a good thing?


              Naturally. Although "tapping" is not necessary if he gives the "wallet" himself. "Hit" only if it threatens. You probably don’t know that the Bolsheviks initially released the tsarist officers "on parole." And those, having given the required word, went on the move "to the Don". Fairness is Foreva.

              Well, for the majority of your party leaders she curled up to a safe death.


              So because everything is fair and everything is for the country. Even Khrushchev, who created a bunch of problems, created them because of his mistakes. And you compare what remains after Stalin, a uniform, a pipe, a pair of boots and a Great Power, and what remains after the current patriarch with his limousines and millions of hours. With what own.

              Not so - if you stole, then you will go to the investigator.


              What are you? Is it where in the Bible or where else is it said?

              The priest who confesses you will be the first to send you.


              What are you? And the temples built with the money of "lads"? For bloody money? Or was it not like this, neither under the tsar nor in the 90s? Or were all the donors escorted to the prosecutor's office?

              Otherwise, they did not repent. You have misconceptions about confession.


              Respected. My father built temples. And I saw this church ... people ... Forgive me, but there is (or maybe already was) in Khabarovsk ONE priest whom I respect. From the white clergy, he is engaged in orphans, campaigning for service to the Fatherland in the army, helping soldiers in units. He was invited by one devout teacher to us at a technical school for a conversation with students. And I also talked to him. Yes, I do not agree with him on many things, he is dense in his faith and a stupid person. But, damn it, RESPECT, a person really believes and does the work necessary for the people and the motherland. And the sense of the mind, if I do not do a tenth of what he does?
              And everyone else I know or have heard of are businessmen from the church. One word of OOO "ROC". This is even worse than OJSC "RF".

              I don’t know where He lives. This is His personal affair, which has nothing to do with me. I will die - I recognize. In the meantime, I do not need anything.


              Well, the same with communism. We will die, we will find out who is right and who is to blame. But then WHY do you need to baptize a child until he decides for himself what he needs, communism or God?
              1. Heimdall47
                Heimdall47 28 January 2016 17: 07 New
                0
                Those. I don’t understand something - going out with a wave on the road, stopping expensive foreign cars and shaking money out of passengers is a good thing?
                And do you teach this to your children?
                Well, if so, they would say right away and there are no questions.))
                it is not necessary to "tap"

                Why not?
                Vladimir Ilyich with Joseph Vissarionovich would not regret ... Destroy as a class ..
                What are you? Is it where in the Bible or where else is it said?

                Yes, it is written in spiritual literature. Christianity professes complete submission to worldly laws, as long as they do not contradict the dogmas of faith. From here, in fact, everything flows. Submission, you see, not evasion?
                And if you know a thousand supposedly religious people who did not do this, then they did so not according to the dogma of the church, but contrary to them.
                My father built temples. And I saw this church ... people ...

                It's not about people. The point is in the individual person and the dogma of the church in which the person believes. Everything else is absolutely not important and does not play any role in the faith of this person. In the end, everyone will answer only for his own. And no matter who the businessman is or not. The article of faith does not mention this.
                1. alicante11
                  alicante11 30 January 2016 06: 18 New
                  0
                  Those. I don’t understand something - going out with a wave on the road, stopping expensive foreign cars and shaking money out of passengers is a good thing?


                  You confuse warm with soft.
                  Coming out "with the bulwark on the road" you redistribute the loot in your favor. Thus increasing the amount of injustice. The slogan "plunder the plundered" meant the redistribution of the plundered in favor of the people, from whom it was all stolen. Which increased the amount of equity. No one denies excesses and abuses. But the question is in principles.

                  Vladimir Ilyich with Joseph Vissarionovich would not regret ... Destroy as a class ..


                  You either don't know, or ... you're cheating. The adherents of the Russian Orthodox Church love to show off by how many tank columns the Russian Orthodox Church "gathered" during the Second World War. But in order for it to be able to do this, it should at least not have been destroyed. So your thesis is refuted by historical facts.


                  Yes, it is written in spiritual literature. Christianity professes complete submission to worldly laws, as long as they do not contradict the dogmas of faith


                  Well, in the Bible I have not seen this. And in the literature available to me, too. If you give a proof, the question can be considered settled.


                  And if you know a thousand supposedly religious people who did not do this, then they did so not according to the dogma of the church, but contrary to them.


                  But how can you tell a true believer from a non-true believer? And why baptize a non-believer at all, because he still will not follow the "dogmas of faith" and will only be external attributes of faith to provoke a negative attitude towards true believers? And why baptize a child who does not yet believe, by definition?

                  It's not about people. The point is in the individual person and the dogma of the church in which the person believes.


                  And ... like this, that is, faith is the business of each individual believer? I understand correctly? Then I totally and completely agree. But what is the use of temples, church hierarchy? Well, I would understand temples as places of communication for true believers, a kind of clubs of interest. Although not too expensive "clubs"? The chapel-chapel is just right, and return the temple under the planetarium. But why do we need, for example, the Russian Orthodox Church with its priests and the patriarch or the Catholic Church with its pope and priests, or Islamism with its mullahs? Why are psalms-prayers-rituals needed? Why should I read "Our Father" and not "Standing up with a curse branded"? Why does each religion consider its rituals to be correct, and those of others to be heretical? If faith is a personal matter for every person, doesn't he have the right to believe as he wants?

                  In the end, everyone will answer only for his own. And no matter who the businessman is or not. The article of faith does not mention this.


                  Well, this is a VERY comfortable position. The violation is going on now, and the responsibility will be there then, after death. Well then, let's abolish the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the courts, the prosecutor's office. All the same, those who "behave badly" will be punished in the "next world." After all, this is what the church postulates, and, as you see, worldly laws contradict its postulates. How to be, sir?
              2. Heimdall47
                Heimdall47 28 January 2016 19: 59 New
                +1
                What are you? And the temples built with the money of "lads"? For bloody money? Or was it not like this, neither under the tsar nor in the 90s? Or were all the donors escorted to the prosecutor's office?

                I don’t know - it must have happened. But I'll reveal a secret - in general, the church forbids taking such money. Have you heard "about the wages of a harlot and the price of a dog"? It is unlikely of course.
                You may say - but they took it! Yes, they took it and the scripture directly says about this - "Every man is a lie." And the priest and the bishop and any layman.
                No one ever claimed that any priest is subject to canonization during his lifetime. This is a false idea.
                probably not aware that the Bolsheviks initially released the tsarist officers "on parole."

                Wow - right all the officers? smile Here you have a stormy fantasy.
                Rose Zemlyachka with White Kun, when they spanked officers in the Crimea - also only those who violated the "word of honor"?
                And when the tsar’s children were shot and beaten with bayonets, were they released first?
                And tens of thousands of murdered / tortured clergymen - that too ... honestly?
                1. alicante11
                  alicante11 30 January 2016 06: 29 New
                  0
                  I don’t know - it was probably so. But I’ll tell you a secret - in general, the church forbids taking such money.


                  Well, why then does the Russian Orthodox Church not refuse, say, from the church at the entrance to Dolgoprudny? Or is he not satisfied with the check on what money the temple is being built for? You can forbid anything, follow up who should? God?

                  You may say - but they took it! Yes, they took it and the scripture directly says about this - "Every man is a lie." And the priest and the bishop and any layman.


                  Otlchino. And if any person is a lie, then the church on the heap is also a lie, because it consists of people. Then why is it needed?

                  And when the tsar’s children were shot and beaten with bayonets, were they released first?


                  I believe that this was done wrongly and unfairly. Nikolashka and Aliska, IMHO, deserved to die, children did not. Unfortunately, in the conditions of the Civil War there were a lot of innocent victims.

                  And tens of thousands of murdered / tortured clergymen - that too ... honestly?


                  I told you how the Bolsheviks acted "from the beginning." But they simply had to respond to the White Terror with the Red Terror. Because good must be fisted, otherwise it will be destroyed by evil. As for the priests, the main culprits were the ideologists who answered in 37th. And the performers are either anarchist bandits, or renegade renegades from the peasants, or simply wishing to plunder FOR YOURSELF. Many of them also ended badly. And rightly so. Because in a difficult time for the church, when the possibility of becoming a martyr is high, only true believers remained at the post. By the way, it is beneficial for the church itself to be persecuted. Because it cleanses the church of the husk that sticks to it.
        2. Gormenghast
          Gormenghast 28 January 2016 20: 23 New
          +1
          The basic principle of communism is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. The basic principle of socialism is in the Epistles of the Apostle Paul, and even in the Old Testament.

          Why you can not steal - this is - how to; this is the 8th commandment, and the explanation for it is the Sermon on the Mount (So in everything, as you want people to do with you, so do you with them, for this is the law and the prophets).

          By the way, just the other day, Putin publicly voiced the idea that "If we look at the code of the builder of communism, which was widely replicated in the Soviet Union, it is very similar to the Bible. This is not a joke, this is such an excerpt from the Bible in fact".

          Suppose I have known this for a long time, but hearing from the president’s lips is always a pleasure.

          The ruin of churches, the killing of clergy, and the infringement of the rights of believers are not related to communism proper.
  35. Cripple cross
    Cripple cross 28 January 2016 15: 18 New
    +1
    Quote: dauria
    that religion gives a person a guideline - WHAT IS POSSIBLE, AND WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE.


    This is in any herd (even monkeys, even wolves, even primitive people) and without religion. Kicks, fangs, and growls drive in the norms of behavior in the herd that are useful for its stable functioning, and they (these norms) are the result of natural selection of competing herds. And religions began without Bibles, and who said that the Bible will forever and will not give way to another "scripture"?
    And religion is an office that exists on the real needs of people in faith (more precisely, in psychological defense) and commodity-money relations. That is why it is useless to forbid it. The absolute analogue is vodka and a network of wine-vodka production and sales.
    By the way, religions compete fiercely for the consumer, and this is a huge managerial blunder for Catholics, if they allow this.
    And don’t worry about people - when they are leaning, the most atheistic atheist breaks down and invents a religion for himself (if he does not find another way to protect the psyche) Let the priests worry about lost profits.


    Well, if you classify yourself as a herd of animals, then you really do not need religion. You and moral guidelines are not needed. You can go outside and with your fangs, claws and growl to show your attitude to people and the world around us. I just think it is doubtful that society recognizes this as the norm of behavior and you can compete with someone in this way. If only in a special clinic. As for the competition for the consumer - you name me at least one religion, the representative of which tried to compete for you. Do not take sects. For a sect is a sect. I think not a single representative of any religious community remembered or will remember you. No one will compete because of you. If you want, then you yourself will come. No, you’ll stay calm as you live. No one forces you and does not drag you anywhere.
    Here you clearly have the wrong idea of ​​the world, of good and evil. You recall the habits of animals and apparently consider people animals. But I consider myself a lot of people and know how to see differences from animals, by the way these are people who have religious landmarks. You compare religion and wine production. This is how to say - to have a baby and kill a person, it is one and the same.
    Somehow you have everything abstractly, in the animal. And your parents did not try to eat at birth? In the world of animals and insects, this is practiced by ktsati. And in that world, females kill partners when mating. And if we are animals, maybe we do not need development. Let's turn off the computers and go out into the fields. We will not say that we are people or something? We’ll walk, rush, we’ll shake the grass.
  36. S_Baykala
    S_Baykala 28 January 2016 15: 21 New
    +2
    Quote: bogart047
    Give evidence that the Bible somehow keeps a person within a moral framework? I see priests on jeeps, yachts, planes - apparently this does not work with them.


    And what - 10 commandments from the Bible have already been removed? This is so offhand.

    As for the priests in jeeps: an excellent explanation - Yu. Nikitin. "The Return of Thomas".

    And all these priests, about whom you speak with such ridiculous fervor, are but servants of God in God's house. Well, like grooms, cooks, butler and other servants. Each house has its own rules, but special rules in God. Therefore, here, too, the servants underwent difficult preparation for serving the Lord. So what if a servant starts to lift his nose, he’s taller than others, and even more so than those commoners who cut down forests or plow the land? Have you ever seen servants in the presence of important gentlemen, who also begin to become important? From this the greatness and nobility of their master does not diminish.
  37. kam4atka
    kam4atka 28 January 2016 15: 44 New
    -1
    in no way does the Bible keep a person within a moral framework, in any way. Education, environment, society builds "framework". In general, they correctly banned, the question of faith is difficult. A person must independently comprehend the essence of faith, without any intermediaries there, having nothing to do with the Faith.
    1. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 28 January 2016 16: 05 New
      0
      Quote: kam4atka
      Education, environment, society builds "framework"

      and on what education is based? !!!
  38. Sergelis
    Sergelis 28 January 2016 15: 46 New
    0
    Nothing more to write about? Catholics, for example, have a rite of confirmation, during which they confirm their agreement with all dogmas
  39. dison
    dison 28 January 2016 15: 47 New
    +1
    Quote: Temples
    All this is bullshit - proceedings where and which article applies.
    All EU bullshit.
    Until the age of 18, a person is a minor, on this basis, let them cancel their parents' education.
    Although piderasts in the USA and Europe have already abolished dad and mom.
    Europe and the USA decided to live without God.
    This is their choice. The choice of piderasts.

    We are Orthodox. And we live by our own rules. According to the laws of God.
    And Muslims also live according to the laws of God.

    And let the "Europeans" wipe themselves off with their articles and laws.
    At least some reasonable use of paper will be.


    I agree! I wanted to write about the same thing.
  40. Izotovp
    Izotovp 28 January 2016 15: 49 New
    0
    As one very religious Muslim told me: they believe that since Muhammad was later than Jesus, he was the last prophet and his word is important, therefore everyone is now born by default as Muslims, and when they accept another faith, they become traitors, infidels.
  41. dison
    dison 28 January 2016 15: 55 New
    0
    They mix freedom and lawlessness and present everything as freedom laws.
  42. Algetxnumx
    Algetxnumx 28 January 2016 15: 56 New
    +2
    Quote: CrippleCross
    Education at the level of good state universities.

    Naturally, they do not take anyone to the theological seminaries and God forbid the exams there, and most importantly, there are NO USE RESULTS.
  43. brn521
    brn521 28 January 2016 15: 58 New
    +2
    Quote: alicante11
    Thus, if this decision were made by the RUSSIAN court, I would support it with both hands. BUT is a Geyropean court.

    At least an honest attitude. And the prerequisites are set out in sufficient detail, for which you are a plus. Baptized, baptized, and educate or at least explain something - shish, which is not surprising, because and they’re not even a foot in the tooth.
    But still, what's the problem? Once they are baptized, it means they believe in something and try to convey something and somehow educate. Take at least the potential existence of the afterlife, where you may have to answer, if not before God, then before your conscience. As for me, a very important factor that can make the world around us better. What do the materialists offer in return for such a whip? The moral in which the rational components of the cat cried. A person is invited to do what is disadvantageous to him only because such morality. And what is the result? People are no longer born, because unprofitable.
    Well, in the end, baptism is not circumcision. A person who has matured and received some kind of education, for example, according to US standards, can decide that Christian teaching is nonsense, therefore baptism and everything else does not make sense. He will calmly forget everything and begin to live according to the laws that he considers correct. In your case, something went wrong, so a rational approach did not help and you still believe in something. And transfer your internal conflict to others, agreeing to the possibility of prosecution due to some nonsense. Well, unreasonable, poorly educated parents conduct a harmless and non-binding ritual over their children. Well, who cares? From vaccinations of harm and even more.
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 28 January 2016 16: 55 New
      0
      At least an honest attitude. And a sufficiently detailed background.


      Thank you for your honest position.

      But still, what's the problem? Once they are baptized, it means they believe in something and try to convey something and somehow educate.


      Fashion - the second half of the 80's was. Everyone went to be baptized and they went and dragged me. My father fought back, but I didn’t.

      Take at least the potential existence of the afterlife, where you may have to answer, if not before God, then before your conscience.


      So I’m talking about, live so that there is no shame. Then the answer to God is not terrible.

      The moral in which the rational components of the cat cried.


      Do what you want others to do with you. Because there is always strength for strength, for cunning there will always be cunning, and even for luck there will always be luck.

      A person is invited to do what is disadvantageous to him only because such morality. And what is the result? People are no longer born, because unprofitable.


      There was no such problem in the USSR.

      Well, in the end, baptism is not circumcision. A person who has matured and received some kind of education, for example, according to US standards, can decide that Christian teaching is nonsense, therefore baptism and everything else does not make sense


      Yes, but it's a betrayal. Yes, small, but it’s like, once small, second time, third. As they say, a claw is bogged down - a bird abyss.

      In your case, something went wrong, so a rational approach did not help and you still believe in something.


      I believe in a lot :). But now it is important that I believe in justice.

      And transfer your internal conflict to others, agreeing to the possibility of prosecution due to some nonsense.


      Well, judging by the minuses to some comments in the thread - this is not bullshit :).

      Well, unreasonable, poorly educated parents conduct a harmless and non-binding ritual over their children. Well, who cares? From vaccinations of harm and even more.


      I agree. Therefore, I do not insist on such a ban. Only would support him.
      1. brn521
        brn521 29 January 2016 16: 31 New
        +1
        Quote: alicante11
        Fashion - the second half of the 80s was. Everyone went to be baptized and they went and dragged me.

        Well so me too. In the same way, they were admitted to the pioneers in October. In the Komsomol did not have time. The oath is again in the army. All this is an introduction to a particular religion, one way or another way of life and a set of rules, an attempt to drive it into one or another framework. Obligations, albeit often formal.
        Quote: alicante11
        So I’m talking about, live so that there is no shame.

        Then I messed up. Conscience is a very formal thing. In fact, it's just an internal conflict. Examples from folk. "The toad that strangles." I missed some freebies and that's it, hello toad, goodbye to sleep and appetite. Or let's say a person whose conscience does not allow to let go of his own, whoever it is. Still, the more correct practice is to work on getting closer to some external ideal. For example, this was the original meaning of confession - a report on the work done on oneself and the identified shortcomings.
        Quote: alicante11
        Do what you want others to do with you.

        Also a very relative thing. A simple example is men who want to stretch their hands and drive adrenaline through the blood. Give someone in the face, get in the face in response.
        Quote: alicante11
        There was no such problem in the USSR.

        In the USSR there were both problems, as elsewhere. And with the birth rate, the number of children per person inevitably fell. And with the reluctance of people to sacrifice their interests for the sake of some kind of mythical rules, whatever you call them, morality or something else, this is a problem of all times and peoples.
        Quote: alicante11
        Yes, but it's a betrayal. Yes, small, but it’s like, once small, second time, third. As they say, a claw is bogged down - a bird abyss.

        Betrayal of what? When you were baptized, did you give any obligations? To god? So what to do if you do not see him, do not understand and do not believe? To people? Then this is not Orthodoxy. Another thing is if you think that Someone is there, and you owe this to Someone. Then please. That's just the communist ideology in the USSR clearly indicated that there is no one. After the person there is only a corpse, a short folk memory, and, first of all, materials specially prepared and approved by censorship.
        Quote: alicante11
        Now it’s important that I believe in justice

        An attempt to develop the concept of justice to the limit, to make it objective, leads to a very doubtful result: justice turns into a bunch of law + lawyers. And there is no way to get past this. Begin to understand the question of what justice is - in the end, get the same bunch - a set of dead letters and professional jugglers with these letters. Well, with God, the concept of justice does not get along very well. The accusation of God of cruelty and injustice is a phenomenon as widespread as useless.
      2. brn521
        brn521 29 January 2016 16: 33 New
        0
        Quote: alicante11
        Well, judging by the minuses to some comments in the thread - this is not bullshit :).

        For an atheist - nonsense. Well, the parents decided to wash the baby in a special way, and so what? I mean a real atheist. Let me explain that true atheism is not a struggle against faith, but its absence. The basic condition of a person. Who did I believe in when I was just born? Well, the fight against faith is a trivial competition of faiths. Like people don’t go to the liturgy, but go to community work days and demonstrations. Do not spend money on icons and candles, but rather spend on a portrait of Lenin and a red corner. Do not read the Bible, read Marx (although the result in fact will be the same, void in my head and unanswered questions :)). There is truth and typical Satanism based on obsession. When a person experiences suffering from the very fact of the existence of faith. They just desperately need some kind of fig to get to the priests, mock at the shrines, etc. This is abnormal, of course.
        Quote: alicante11
        Therefore, I do not insist on such a ban. Would only support him

        And what prompts to support? Only personal experience - like the parents soared their brains, but they were underdone and it turned out to be nonsense. For example, I prefer to defend more traditional principles. Children are given birth and raised by parents. They will be able to instill some Christian virtues - well, that's good. Baptized just like that, according to tradition or just in case - well, figs with him. Let's start digging up because of such nonsense - we'll give bad people the opportunity to do whatever they want to order. Today they don't like that the child was baptized. Tomorrow will not like that brought up in a traditional sexual orientation. But what about - according to the newly emerged Western values, the child should have a choice. You can completely isolate the child until adulthood, so that nothing at all affects his "free choice". But, as science shows, a person in such conditions does not even reach an animal in terms of the level of development.
  44. 2s1122
    2s1122 28 January 2016 16: 06 New
    +3
    All this crap reminds me of the era of early Christianity, with persecution of the apostles and followers of the doctrine. And the revelation of John the theologian about the coming of Satan.
  45. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 28 January 2016 17: 00 New
    +2
    Wow, survived to such sad times. Really reminds the beginning of the persecution of Christianity. My grandmother took me to the church in infancy, despite the fact that in those years in the USSR it was, to put it mildly, not encouraged, although it was not forbidden. Where I was safely and dubbed, for which I am still deeply grateful to my granny. And the choice, like everything based on reason, logic, cold reason, is not a divine affair. To put it mildly. No wonder the Russians choose with their heart, not their mind.
  46. Sedoy
    Sedoy 28 January 2016 18: 08 New
    +1
    well, and forbid circumcision to do until adulthood then ... :)
    that muslims that Judas make him boys too early ...
    Yes, and religion education, too, does not start at age 20 ...

    shorter shit that's all ...
  47. atamankko
    atamankko 28 January 2016 18: 20 New
    +1
    Which only trash does not carry from rotten Europe.
  48. Hlyneope
    Hlyneope 29 January 2016 21: 07 New
    0
    It has long been time already to forbid choosing what to believe for the child. I agree that if baptism is forbidden, then circumcision and the rest of the obscene heresy should also be prohibited.

    The issues of ethics, morality, personal freedom, freedom of religion and sacral components will be discussed in the second part of this article.

    Ethics and morality are so relative concepts that I do not understand at all how they can be viewed at least somehow objectively. Well, about personal freedom and freedom of religion, baptism, without the consent of the child, is, in fact, forced conversion. Is that for "renunciation" of this very baptism in our time is not sent to the stake. However, other confessions should also be banned from this practice.
  49. GDV
    GDV 30 January 2016 17: 13 New
    0
    For a thousand years we were baptized in Russia from infancy and by the grace of GOD before the final judgment we shall be baptized.