Music is for everyone not just the religious (From Worcester News)

This man is nothing if not determined to get us all thinking that "religion" is bunkum and the only true religion is science and atheism.
Tracy Emin and other artists like her I think would be seriously offended to be told that the church dominates artistic life in Britain and it appears that this line of argument (because that's what it is and biased opinion)also would have us accept that our beautiful church music, hyms and particularly Christmas carols are "just as important to all the humanists, atheists and agnostics". Now that is bunkum, if they are true to their godless position, they would attach no more liking or importance to "While Sheperds Watch and similar to the beatles singing a "Yellow Submarine".
Yes, music does belong to everyone, but church music belongs more to those who "believe" rather than the godless of whom some, seem to take delight in putting relion down.
I can't imagine many readers being impressed by the idiotic mention of supposed deities of music namely Hathor, Myoonten, Saraswati and Apollo. Any normal, intelligent human being know any of these apart from Apollo.
You have told us all that you are an atheist Mr Churchill, you have told us all that our beliefs are nonsence and can be disproved by science, why not now give it a rest because some of us prefer to remain idiots and continue to "beleive" and we are not taken in by atheist dogma and propaganda.

Alan2,

I do believe that "religion" (why the scare quotes?) is bunkum, as you put it. It's not all I write about but it is a subject that especially rankles me, in many ways.

Am I trying to win people over to my point of view? Well, I guess so, but only in the same way as is everyone else who bothers to debate.

I didn't say that "the church dominates artistic life in Britain" today, obviously. I referred only to "the historical domination".

I said "the power of music" (i.e. in general, not religious music specifically) is "just as important to all the humanists, atheists and agnostics." I didn't say that everyone liked exactly the same music in exactly the same way as you seem to imply - such a statement obviously would be "bunkum". Yes it is patently obvious that some religious music might not appeal to a non-believer (in particular the lyrics even when the music itself is powerful). But this surely applies to most people; everyone will have some composition which they want to enjoy but for which the intended meaning may sometimes spoil it.

I agree that church music in a sense more closely "owned" by actual church-goers than by other people, in the same way that some music cannot be separated in our conception from a certain period of history, or in the same way that music might seem ethnically "owned". It was the Bishop's implication than all the value in all music in some way came from God that I was criticising.

Sorry, Alan2, but I cannot fully grasp your last paragraph. You seem to be telling me to go away because you can't stomach what you read. I don't do dogma (there's no doctrine I must refer to) and I don't do propaganda (truth is my primary motivation, as self-aggrandising as that may sound). If you prefer to remain an idiot, go and watch a few episodes of Hollyoaks.