Poland is a Catholic country

In other words, it has been shown that Poland is not a Catholic country and that Catholic Poles outside Poland are less likely to be religious than the general population of their host countries. So now you want to discuss unmarried couples in the UK. How surprising.

Mods, this thread appears to be being deliberately taken off topic. Didn't there used to be a rule about posters avoiding off-topic discussions with off-topic discussions being defined as "not related to Poland or Polish people in any way."?

These expats may live in Poland for decades but they never really grasp the feel of their host country. In Poland snitching is a no-no just as cheating on tests is in America.

No, Polonius. You know the rules, and you were suspended recently for breaking them.

Perhaps you now will choose to explain why so-called Catholic Poles choose to abandon religion when they move to the UK?

Could it be that in the UK they don't feel pressured to go to church by those who do go to church, i.e. when they are given a free choice, they choose to not go to church.

Which entirely fits in with the "lack of peer pressure" felt in the UK as opposed to Poland.

I suspect it's the same with the priest visiting - people only let him in because everyone else is.

Let's not forget the very public chalking above one's door to prove that one has been approved for the year by the local priest.

Indeed.

I think it's very notable that you don't see such chalking in new developments. Strange how they also seem to abandon public displays of religion as soon as they're out of the crowd, isn't it?

How do you know that they abandon their religion? Were there any polls made?
If you mean church going then, no, delph, the fact that someone isn't attending church every Sunday doesn't mean they've chosen to abandon religion.

Really.
I know plenty of people here in Poland who believe in God, consider themselves Catholics but don't go to church for various reasons. I already wrote about it some time ago in another thread.


Harry, maybe in some small villages people feel pressured to go to church (but I'm just guessing, my grandma lives in a village and I've never noticed any pressure in this respect, we never go to church when we spend time there and noone cares).

But in general noone gives a damn whether you go to church or not. And remember that I speak from experience and I live in "Polska B".

The only people that might care may be parents. My mum is religious and I'm not sure if she quite gets it that my brother is an atheist lol But so what? He doesn't go to church anyway. He didn't when he lived with parents and he haven't since he moved out.

My best friend is an atheist and also quite anti-celrical lol - again, no problems.


"People only let them in because..." What people, delph? lol You guys seem to forget that majority of people in Poland declare themselves in polls as Catholics.

ffs... LOL
So maybe people in the West are atheists only because everyone else is? What, those who believe in sth don't want to be looked down upon and ridiculed and so they go with the flow?

Btw, my city grandpa was a communist and he wouldn't let the priest in despite the fact that my grandma was religious, even after the fall of communism. They were both friends with their neighbours and never had any problems or anything.


Oh dear, you are ignorants, aren't you?
It doesn't have anything to do with priest's visit. You put those letters on Epiphany.

*facepalm*

That made me laugh, a good response. I love reading about the habits of that strange beast the Catholic:)

It's a matter of their own faith, but as far as I understood it - not going to Church when you can go is a no-no. It does seem weird that while Church attendance is somewhere slightly below 40% in Poland, it stands at only 8% in the UK among the same people. Mind you, at least part of that is the "oh, look at me, I don't go to the Church in the UK because I'm so fashionable...yet I go at home because I don't want to upset my family" complex.


At least some of them are - definitely.

I wonder if the Church has any statistics on how many people attend Church in Poland but not in the country where they reside? Impossible to measure, I guess.

Delph, the statistics about fewer than four in ten Poles in Poland and only 8% of Poles in the UK attending church regularly are both figures from the RCC.

It is interesting that even according to their own statistics, Poles are actually less observant than the natives themselves.

So? If every Catholic would live precisely by the Book we all would be walking saints lol Sorry but this doesn't happen in any religion.


OK, but you do realise that you took into consideration only those reasons (for the low church attendance of Poles) that fit your prejudiced views?

There can be other reasons too.
1. For example, I don't know if you know that but often the life of a Polish immigrant isn't easy. They work hard. Sometimes really hard. When you're tired you just want to go back home and rest.

2. Another reason - it seems you guys are incredibly anti-Catholic. The Catholic Church seems to be some kind of epitome of evil in the eyes of the British. If I emigrated and lived in the UK I would probably feel quite uneasy about being a Catholic. Some people because of such climate may feel like not showing off with their faith and rather hide it.

3. It is probably more accepted to be religious in general in UK than in Poland ("Christian charity Tearfund's survey of 7,000 people puts the UK among Europe's four least observant countries.") - so, reasons as above.

4. Yet another reason - some of the people who emigrated may be atheists who don't like the fact that Poland is so predominantly Catholic.

5. There may be less Catholic churches in UK than in Poland, so some people maybe would have to drive too far to a church.
6. People know the mass and prayers in Polish. Unless there's a Polish priest - it sucks for them.

As for point 2 - I wonder, are there any statistics about the church attendance of Polish immigrants in Ireland?


Could be, but do you know this from experience or are you just guessing?

I have an issue with the above statement.

If we can clarify fact here and quote like for like, Catholics are a minority religion in the UK, therefore we have to look at the % number of UK Catholics practising in the UK

v the % number of mmigrant Polish Catholics practising in the UK. I do not believe it will be possible to estimate these numbers accurately as Catholicism is also practised at home with some families not attending church especially those in rural communities.

In the following link dated from 2010 the BBC journalist leads us to believe that although COE is in much decline the RCC has remained since 1983.

Figures gathered by the National Centre for Social Research show that membership of most religions is lower now than it was 30 years ago, with a marked decline appearing among people who say they belong to the Church of England from 40 to 20%.

By comparison, the numbers of those claiming to be Catholic has remained fairly stable, dropping only 1% from 10 to 9% since 1983.

Source: bbc.co.uk/news/11297461

What is behind the drop in CoE membership? What about Presbyterians in Scotland and Catholics in Wales? Are the Protestants of Ulster Anglicans or what?

*in Poland than in the UK, of course, sorry ;)

You do talk some bollo*cks when it comes to Catholics in PL - H
The symbols on ones door are absolutely nothing to do with the priest blessing your home at the beginning of each year, the symbols are given out by the Church you could find them on the internet without ever visiting church.

W - funny how they always appear the same day that the local priest pointedly doesn't visit my flat (actually no longer as pointedly as when I was living in sin and corrupting a good(ish) Catholic girl.

I'm not saying this is the case, but only conveying some views quite widely held in the PolAm communtiy. Maybe its Angloism that has such a pronoucned anti-Papist streak. In the olden days, the American school and media were anti-Polish because Polonians did not conform to their WASPish standards. In more recent decades, the Poltical Correctness crowd, often of non-Anglo roots but considerably WASPified, is down on Polish Americans for being traditional, conservative, reilgious or whatever.

Harry, Epiphany in Polish is called Święto Trzech Króli. Trzej Królowie are the Biblical Magi (the Three Wise Men). The letters that people put usually above the door using chalk are K+M+B - these are initials of the names of the three Biblical Magi. Święto Trzech Króli (Epiphany) is observed on the 6th of January. That's when you're supposed to, as a custom, put those letters above your door.

Now, the priests' visits start usually after Christmas. There are a lot homes to visit so it takes time to visit everybody. Priests are assigned to "sectors", neighbourhoods to visit and they gradually visit one after another. It may take weeks to visit every household that wishes to be visited.

Maybe the priest visits your neighbourhood around Święto Trzech Króli (Epiphany).
Another reason may be this - K+M+B in Latin is read as "CMB" which stands for "Christus Mansionem Benedicat" (Christ bless this house). The priest during his visit blesses the house with holy water. So maybe people where you live put those letters only after the house is blessed. I'm not sure what this custom looks like in Warsaw. In my city people usually put those letters on Święto Trzech Króli (Epiphany). Unless they forget, which also happens lol


Yes, they had those religious wars, innit.

"Mary, Mary, Quite Contrary" and all that.

Btw, didn't you mean "Anglicanism"? What's "Angloism"? o_O

Simple, they never seen the like. The land of phallus worshipers. It is fascinating.


that is donation which is voluntary, what priest will do with that money is not your business, nobody is forcing you to contribute. Taxed? For government to sounder on their cronies and family?No!

If some priest buy himself a limo it i due to his hard work and he pays all taxes like other citizens - extra taxes would leaving only on priest would be discrimination.


In schools because most of the parents like to give their children Catholic education. They pay taxes and they have the right to that. The same goes for chaplains, as people in military. policy and in hospitals need to have their spiritual to be taken care of.

As for the Church fund - it derives from the building and land confiscated by commies. Either the Polish state should give in all back or is only right that pay yearly for holding that fortune in their hands. I'm all for no paying that from the budged but for the return all estate confiscated by Soviets into the rightful hands.


Not only the Church,and Church provide charitable help to people, provide help in hospitals, orphanages and do so many other service to the needed that if the state would have to pay for all that they would be paying 100 times overt the value of the money they would have got in tax.

What do you say about markets they have four or five years time break from many taxes and when the time is up they just switch places with other brand of a supermarket. How about that?Once has to wonder are they pay taxes at all?They exist purely for profit no charity services from them, why do you pick on the Church then?


That is the raison d'être of the Church to say what is moral and what is not. To influence people to behave morally - I see nothing wrong with that is not a secret.

I would worry about all those pro abortion lobby or pro contraception lobby they have vested interest in that, behind them there are serious monies and they are buying people and paying them for them services to all their lobbyists. You will never hear about the fact that anti-conception pills are increasing risk of breast cancer for women.

How about that - that almost a crime. All that monies pass under the table.No, control - who know what else is done in that way. Conspiracy?


So your approach is instrumental - they done us a good service and now they can go **** themselves. I hope none will treat you this way as you are treating others. But karma is a *****.

Also if not for the RCC the Polish nation wouldn't came to exist.


I did write that.

Angloism may not be too fortunate a neologism that I have coined but means Englishness. I didn't know if everyone on PF would know what a WASP was (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant). I was just toying with the idea that America's mainstream anti-Catholicism may be rooted in England's traditonal anti-papism.

Either make all money gifts non-taxable, or make everyone pay the same tax rate on them. It's socially unfair if one group is privileged over another. I, personally, am for a minimalist government and minimal taxes. I will repeat again - my tax money goes, involuntarily, to churches. So yes, someone IS forcing me to contribute. Against my will.


Before it was a voluntary donation. Now you're claiming it's hard work. Do priests pay income taxes, social security or health insurance in the same amounts as other employees do, then?


The state should be secular and not involved in or be paying for any religious teachings. If parents want to teach their kids fairy tales, they are more than welcome to bring religion lessons back to churches, where they will be financed from private funds. Besides, I thought we agreed that taxing is bad, because of the "government that sounders on their cronies and family". Totally agree. Let's reduce the tax, and instead, only families who want to send their children to churches to be taught stories as truth, will pay for it.


Didn't the church already get what it was owed, and then some more? Aren't most of the funds from that fund used for social security and healthcare premiums for priests now?


The charitable help to people is just a small part of the money that flows through the church. What about the rest? Where is the transparency? Why aren't churches showing their full financial reports?


Of course, tax breaks for insitutions that exist solely for profit should not exist. Everyone should be taxed equally. However, I don't see the the malls or supermarkets taking my tax money to support themselves. If I don't want to give them a single dime, I won't, whereas I'm forced to finance RCC. That's a reason good enough to pick on.


Great. If abortion, contraception, in-vitro fertilization is not moral to you, no problem. You're entitled to your own opinion. It's absolutely atrocious, however, to make other people follow your own moral standards by signing them into law. If you don't like the idea of gay marriage, don't enter one. If you don't like the idea of abortion, don't perform one. In a free society, no one is, or ever will, force you to do so. But don't prevent others from doing it if they choose to.

Some studies show that some oral contraceptives slightly increase the risk of breast cancer. Some show that they decrease ovarian and endometrial cancer. Some studies also show that the use of ibuprofen increases chances of a cardiac arrest. Should we ban them all then? It's all on the table, you wanna take them - it's your choice. No provisions of law should prevent free access to either.


Sounds exactly like church's finances to me.


No, my approach is that we didn't get rid of one occupant to have the church fulfill the same role now. I don't see how am I being instrumental. The church did good service, and now it's time to provide "services" only to these, who want them, not to everyone, against their will. Your way of thinking reminds me of the ways of military juntas. They impeach the existing power to give freedom to people, where in fact the only thing that changes is the autocrat that rules. So did we fight the commies to install church as the leader (theocracy), or to set the country and its people free?


Okay?

In moist countries in the world charitable institutions which do contribute to the society are not taxes or donation are not taxes like income. The only places which do not practice that are some shytholes or dictatorships or both. .


All people;e are forced to pay taxes and have no say in which way those money are being spend.


Sure they do! What makes you think they don't.


They income is based on voluntary donations but being a priest involve also some services like weddings, funerals and such. Those are voluntary as well as one do not have to involve a priest in those.

Do you think that priests do not work hard? They are busing on average from 10 to 14 or more hours a day. With only one day off a week.


That is for a democratic precess to decide. So far the state has no calms in taxing Catholics. How about providing services? Like religious teaching?If not, substantial tax deduction.


I would go further, lets Catholics worry about education of their children themselves and no tax from them on the education system in Poland.They should cut the tax by half at least.


No!Not near enough. The gov is trying to get off cheaply.


How do you know that? that contradictory statements -

It is not the Church that take tax money but the government. That could be remedied quite easily - by returning all estate confiscated by Soviets as it should be done. If there is no transparency about that it on the gov side.

Pick on the Tusk then it his fault - if you dare. Ranting about the Church is safe. That the secret.


Well, ain't Catholics an majority in Poland and ain't the rule of democracy state that majority rule. stands to reason as they pay taxes too so the law should be tailored to their moral sensitives.


Really? Are an alien? The Church to not hire lobbyist and do not pay them and is open about its moral standing/


Well that is moral law which you do not have abhor to. At least it gives a moral and cultural consistency which is important. As for you assassination their are your own and I'm not gonna comment on that.


I didn't write it!

Someone is forcing me to contribute to all sorts of things I disagree with through taxation that happens in all countries. Making charities tax exempt is grand, removing all public subsidies to everything is also grand if you wish to live in a place governed by patronage. Why can the Church not act as a lobby group just like industrialists and the wealthy? Should all laws be influenced by anyone and everyone other than the Catholic Church?

I like the idea of totally secular states but have to live with the reality that you cannot change or erase history, there is no year zero and the Church has always played a roll in Poland and at times the most important roll.

You're taking my words out of context. Of course, all gifts to charitable institutions better be tax-free. But Church isn't only a charitable institution. It spends its money on rich and gold dripping churches, on luxurious vehicles, and so on; and as such, its income should be taxed.

A small example: I want a church wedding. The price? "Whatever you're willing to offer, but no less than..." - so the usual. Let's say one grand. I'm assuming these are the costs of the venue (the church), the priests' "hard work", their time, etc. How much tax is being paid on that 1k and why is it 0? Then we have a private ceremony. We also need a venue, time, labor so we spend more money. But that money is taxed.

In both cases I pay for services that I receive (don't even start trying to convince me it's a voluntary donation). The rules should be the same.


That is actually false. You have a say by electing your representatives. The stance where people feel they have no say can only lead to deterioration of democracy. Yes, we are forced to pay taxes. We live in a social country, so public education - fine, public healthcare - fine, public roads - fine. But siphoning tax money to a religious institution in a country that has secularism written in its constitution - not fine. I shouldn't be forced to support a religion (or its minsters).


Priests pay only 20% of their social security premiums. They also have their premiums calculated based on minimum salary. Please do your homework.


Right. These are voluntary. So, following your logic, you can go have a party with a DJ, who would take money for his services, but since you can have a party without him, his remuneration would be considered a voluntary donation. Good thinking. I would like to familiarize you with the term "voluntary donation". It means presenting something willingly as a gift, acquired by the other side without compensation. Here, we clearly have a service (priest/church preparing and attending the wedding) and the payment for it (the money you *cough* "donate"). A taxable transaction.


Awesome. Let them be rewarded for their work. By people who want their services and are willing to pay for them. If I don't want their services, I don't want to pay for them.


Right. So, if one day (hope not) Poland is overrun by islamic majority and they - democratically - enact a law which would put all declared Christians in jail, you'd be fine with that? Democracy works because there are checks and balances, because the majorities are required to protect the minorities. Because we have a constitution in place. Otherwise we have something that's called a tyranny of majority, which would suppress minorities' rights.

As for the democratic process, we have our constitution enacted in such. And then we have the concordat that was signed single-handedly - something quite undemocratic. Since the constitution is the supreme law of our nation, we made it our law, which clearly says the state is secular. Hence, yes, I believe pouring tax money into church's pockets is wrong.

Regarding religious teachings. You can't possibly put an equal sign between teaching math, science, Polish or English and teaching fairy tales, prayers and indoctrinating our kids. The former should be subsidized in a social country. The latter should be eliminated from public funding. Move catechesis back to the church, where it belongs.


As I stated before, I'm all for small government. The more control people have over their money, the better.


Again, there is no transparency. The church should report every single grosz it receives, just like any other person, institution, NGO, charity. Then, everything that was given away as charity should be tax free, everything else - taxed. Simple as that.


Semantics. The governments takes tax money and gives it to the church.


And how much is that exactly? And how much has already been given back as a compensation? In all possible forms?


The secret to what? I don't like Tusk and I hope PO loses power as soon as possible. The privileges of the Church haven't changed, no matter what party was ruling the country. I think that's what needs to change presto.


Read up. If the majority tells you to praise Allah 5 times a day or be booked into the big house, then maybe you'll start thinking about the rights of minorities.


Say what? Our church leaders are lobbyists. Can't you see how they influence the ruling class?


Well the problem is that incoherence with this arbitrarily set moral law, which is written into current legislature, poses real problems to people who choose not to follow it, including jail time. As for the assassination, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about...

No,that your fault you are not making yourself clear enough.


No is not but the main bulk of its practical, material activity is in fact charitable and pro-social.


Not religious charitable organization spent money on salaries for its workers, offices and whereases those are cost. Anyhow money on building Churches are mainly from voluntary donations which shouldn't be taxed. You are have tax obsessed mind. Big companies are employing legions of richly reworded lawyers just to cheat on taxes, only honest people are being taxed to the hilt. Attempt at cutting in some placed were were all kinds of vultures smell a profit is but low meanness.

Anyway only foreigner would say gold dripping churches. Hardy any gold there. Are you sure that you are Polish.


What luxurious vehicles? Those are private property for most part, bought and paying form by its owners there are not irregularity you suggest.


So what? Do you want a church wedding or not? If you do you pay if you don't you do not pay - simple! Why would that all be for free? You would have to pay for not religious wedding as well.


I will check for you.


Theoretically but in practice your vision is false.


I'm fine with that, all Church property should be returned and no money would have been shipped form the budged to the Church except for the grands for the proper maintenance of historical buildings, often Churches. Those are just in the national heritage pool.


you don't that is the beauty of it! you are just being awkward.


Minorities are best protected but moral and ethical teaching of the Church. In the world there are hardly any democracy worth mentioning which didn't stared as a Christian state.

As long as Christan moral code is a guidance for the law makers that harmony and internal integrity of the society is ensured.
An example - civil partnership for guys is a far reaching democratic compromise but still do not goes against the Church tolerance and teaching but gay marriage is not, that too far, that is war on the civilization. However if some dudes would like to call themselves married that wouldn't be punished by the law. No religious values forcing on somebody who is not Christan or don't want to be.

That is compromise but when secular state status is by some ideologically biased minorities to secure their moral code or lack of aforementioned then its no longer democracy or comprise that is a cheeky war on the Christan civilization , It is not about religious state but it is all about attack on the very basic democracy and order which has been build on the moral code.

You can debate about decoration and even walls of a house but when you staring digging at foundation the fun is over and you deserve smack for being an dangerous idiot.


That is a new concept a tyranny of majority and even if there is some merit to it. In practice that idea renders concept of democracy useless, maybe its time to find something else instead.


No is not as it can be overruled by the EU law.
I think that your understanding of the secular state concept is peculiar - secular do not mean atheistic or anti-Christian but that neither religion or any secular ideology do not take precedence in the state.

Also secular do not mean that some nondescript minorities can force on majority their morality and rules. I take tyranny of majority any time over tyranny or minority.


You still do not get it - money or property returned - simple and then we can talk.


We are back to square one. Fine but all Catholics parents who wish to give their children Catholic education should be able to do that and accordingly their taxes should be reduced by a substantial margin.


the reality - the government takes taxes and squanders it the government refused to return the church property and then give some pennies as a token gesture to the Church but buzz about it all the

time.


Are you for a small government? For people to take care for their monies themselves? It is a very strange statement i th light of your claims? Do you think that the

Church are not people or they do not deserve the rights you grand to other anonymous people?


privileges that exist only in your mind. The Church in Poland earned its position many times over.


No I don't. The ruling class are just redundant waste.


What are you taking about? Nobody is going force religion on anybody and never did. Reading ideological bulshyet written by foreigners and Soviets addled your brain. Polish Church and the law induced conversions? Pure fiction from the fairly land.


the only people who have a problem with the moral law are those who are dangerously derailed.


Association that is. Your association are your responsibility especially as it do not reflect reality.

jkb If abortion, contraception, in-vitro fertilization is not moral to you....
Then don't do it. That seems to make sense until someone says the taxpayers' money should be used to finance them or refund the cost in part or in whole. Then those opposed are forced to help bankroll something that violates their conscience.

Doctors may invoke a conscience clause and refuse to perform an abortion, even if it is permsisible under the law, if it vioaltes their conscience.

By the looks of it the church is made up of people.
That being said, "the church" is an organization and if this organization is operating within a different set of rules than other organizations despite functioning on a for-profit basis, like most other companies, then one would have to concede that is unfair.

*Disclaimer The RCC in Poland seems to operate on a for-profit basis in practice, until I see otherwise, that's how I'm gonna see it.*


Perhaps that is true but why those in this holier than thou organization accept ill-gotten funds does lead to other questions.


It's not a single sentient body. The honest efforts of those in the past are not something everyone who joins up later should be able to bask in until kingdom come.

No, it's your fault you snip and cut my quotations according to your liking and reply to them in part, making my statements contextually completely different. It's called manipulation.


Main bulk? Show me some proof, statistics, how much money goes from church to the charity and what percentage is that. Then we can talk.


Voluntary donations... I already explained the term to you in my previous post. Go read it. Also, have you been to any polish church recently? Hardly any gold? Right. And yes, I'm 100% Polish.


And how did the "owners" get the money? Income. Taxed? No.

First search result from google:


superauto24.se.pl/auta-gwiazd/twoj-biskup-jezdzi-limuzyna-za-150-000-zl-zdjecia-czym-jezdza-polscy-biskupi_245777.html


I'm not saying it should be free. It's a service. You're free to choose. I have absolutely no problem in church setting prices for its services. The only problem that I have is that these services should be taxed just like any other services performed by other parties. You willingly omitted my example about the party and the DJ, which was spot-on and you know it.


Check then. But I can tell you right now. The church treats it as a donation. There is no tax distributed from that payment.


My vision is false? Okay, then who elects these idiots to the parliament? Aliens?


You still failed to disclose how much does the state still owe to the parasite that our church is.


I'm being awkward? So, you're telling me the tax money I pay don't go to church or its ministries? Welcome to the alternative reality.


That is not up for you to decide. I, as an atheist, am a minority in Poland. I'm definitely not best protected by "moral" and "ethical" "teachings" of the Church.


Right. Originally protestant or anglican democracies are so negligible that they are not even worth mentioning.


Take a look at the non-religious, and thus uncivilized and savage countries, such as: Estonia, Sweden, Denmark, Czech Republic, Norway, Japan or United Kingdom. How come they are doing pretty well without any religious superstitions?


War on civilization? Interracial relationships used to be just that. Working women used to be just that. What gives you a moral mandate to decide what is "too far"? You're basing your judgement on your own superstitions. You are limiting other peoples' freedoms because of your religious possession. Why, do you think that once gay marriage is singed into law, you'll need to get married to another man? No, and that's the beauty of being able to choose.

But no one is preventing you from following your moral code as a Christian. You don't need to have it signed into law to follow it. Enjoy your freedoms and let others enjoy theirs. What do you consider "very basic democracy"? If it's Christian values, then following your logic, most of the western, civilized Europe is not democratic. That is obviously false.


If you keep on imposing your christian morals on others who don't want to accept them, you are the dangerous idiot here.


Well, have fun looking. Let me know when you come up with something.


We also did accept the EU law in public voting. And you completely are missing the point, which was that the concordat was signed single-handedly - in a very undemocratic manner.


It means religion-free. Separate from religion. Not affiliated with any religion or any church. Look up the definition. It's not something you can discuss, it's something you either understand or not.


No. But it also means that the state is not allowed to force minorities by the majority's vote to support any religion at all. And that's what's happening right now (vide tax money).


Read up, I'm still waiting for the answer.


How about we follow the German path then. These who declare themselves religious, pay an extra tax for their church. This way no money coming from atheists will support any church. Only people (and their children) who pay up will be able to attend religious teachings (in their respective church of course, not a secular school) and get all the perks of being religious. That sounds fair to me.


Pennies? Over 1 billion PLN per year to say the least - you call this pennies?


I am all for a small government. But right now, in our current state of affairs, we are very far from it. This means, everyone has to declare their income and pay hefty taxes. That should include the Church.


Its position should be in religious people's hearts, away from all the politics.


They are. It doesn't change the fact that the church tries to influence the ruling class way too much.


I'm showing you a hypothetic situation, in which a majority, in a democratic way, surpresses the minorities' freedoms. I know the example might be a bit too harsh, but that's exactly how it works. You're happy as long as you beloing to the majority. When you're a part of minority, you have to fight for your rights and freedoms.


Are you calling me dangerously derailed? I'm sorry, but it seems you're the one seriously derailed if you want to control what other people can or can't do, even if it doesn't infringe your personal freedoms.


I still don't understand what you are trying to say here...


If it makes sense, why isn't it permitted by law? This is exactly what I'm talking about - imposing your own moral code on others, by law. It's atrocious. Then, you're against public funding of such procedures, fine. I'm against public funding of most of things. Let the people have their money and decide what's best for them.

As to invocation of conscience clause, it should be abolished altogether. If you're taking the path to study and practice gynecology, one of your duties is to know how to perform an abortion, and to perform it if needed.