Loading…

Religious / Charitable Organisations

This topic contains 2 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  SC_Admin 9 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #797

    SC_Admin
    Keymaster

    User: MmH

    How would these be chosen? If you take CoS, RC, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh as being probably the religions with most adherents in Scotland, nominal adherents anyway, that’s five immediately. Leaving aside other religious groupings like Quakers, Anglicans, & Buddhists who would have voices significantly different from those five. Also people with no faith need to be included in this section, since they too have a valid voice to add. That doesn’t leave much space for charitable organisations. I think it would be better to rejig the numbers overall and separate religious/atheist voices from charitable organisations.

  • #814

    SC_Admin
    Keymaster

    User: Dhowdle

    B2 says “The Parliament” whereas the other paragraphs simply say “Parliament”. “The” is unnecessary.
    B5. “have the authority” rather than “enjoy the authority”?

    B6. I think we need to define what “accredited press” means. I suspect that some of our current alternative media might not be “accredited”, but nonetheless have a valid voice.

    B8e. I have similar concerns as above. We must, I guess, give a voice to religious groups, but that voice should not be disproportionately loud. It should certainly not be in danger of drowning out the charitable sector.

  • #817

    SC_Admin
    Keymaster

    User: Camille Mesnage

    I’m agree with you. The figures presented seem too low for all groups. I do not think it is equal representation and especially as regards mainly religious representatives. However, I agree with the idea, for me, you just have to change the numbers. Otherwise, there will be discrimination in the representation of groups.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.