From: usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk 
  
 On 3 Aug 2025 18:23:28 GMT, "Jeff Gaines"  wrote: 
  
 >On 03/08/2025 in message  Mark 
 >Goodge wrote: 
 > 
 >>On 3 Aug 2025 13:05:44 GMT, "Jeff Gaines"  wrote: 
 >> 
 >>>On 03/08/2025 in message <7qlu8kpluuppf9u7kn0m9lndp236d80gdl@4ax.com> Mark 
 >>>Goodge wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>>Charities and limited companies are defined by legislation. Which 
 >>>>legislation defines religion? 
 >>> 
 >>>The new legislation I have suggested. 
 >> 
 >>How would your suggested legislation define religion? 
 > 
 >Not my job, that's why we have civil servants. 
  
 So you don't actually have any suggested legislation. 
  
 >No comments from anybody on the principle? All happy with a lop sided 
 >system that follows along behind the problems? 
  
 I think the idea of having an official recognised list of religions is 
 bonkers. There are occasional situations where it is necessary to decide 
 whether or not something is a religion (for example, when a charity wishes 
 to make use of the "advancemrnt of religion" charitable purpose, or where a 
 court needs to decide if abuse was religiously aggravated). But these are 
 all situations which can be decided on a case by case basis on the facts as 
 presented. Having an official list won;t help, and may well hinder. 
  
 Also, having a list doesn't help when the relevant question is whether or 
 not something falls within one of the items on the list. I presume that both 
 Christianity and Islam would be on your list. But would Jeohvah's Witnesses 
 and Christadelphians be included as Christians? If not, would they have 
 their own separate entries? Would Druze be included as Islam, or would they 
 have a separate entry? Because whatver decision you make here, you are going 
 to offend a significant number of people and an even greater number of 
 people will disagree with you. 
  
 Mark 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)