Sunak is coming out of this with his reputation enhanced – politicalbetting.com

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I knew I liked you.

First class response.

Don't worry, I'll go back to finding ways to annoy you before long. It's in my book "Farooq is usually an arse". Can I persuade you to take this pamphlet or do you prefer eternal damnation?

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

No it doesn't, you just got sent to a concentration camp if it is Mein Kampf you criticised, a Gulag if it was the Communist manifesto you criticised and risk a Fatwa of death if it is the Qu'ran you mock and criticise.

I feel like you somewhat miss the point on this. It's to your and your cohorts credit that that doesn't happen when people mock the bible or christian beliefs. It's more grown up and mature not to respond like a violent toddler and expect people to accept it becasue it is a 'belief'.

It is deeply depressing that that is not the case on some other things people should feel free to criticise. And we shouldn't feel grateful we can get away with it with Christianity, we should be worried we cannot with others.

It's like being grateful the government doesn't arbitrarily lock us up and torture us for criticising it, like happens in many places - that's great, but it's kind of the bare minimum we expect.

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

You'd know better than me - does this sort of thing work on the base?

I mean, her instant resignation out of pique and this sort of thing makes it super clear that any issues she has with Sunak (or the 'sinister forces') extend no further than when it inconvenienced her being given a nice prize she was promised.

It's not exactly stirring up my proletarian rage at the establishment that her hero was unable to secure her the peerage he obviously told her was a sure thing.

BartholomewRoberts said:

.

Sean_F said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

Yea but you believe in Brexit which is a far far more ludicrous and illogical religion than any of HY's beliefs. I mean, you believed in Boris Johnson!! lol.

The reality is Barty, you remind me of people of undeveloped intellect who think it makes them look very big and witty to compare religion with Father Christmas and fairies (in fact I recall you making such a juvenile and uninformed suggestion), when in fact most of your political beliefs are so all over the place that I think you would believe anything that was told to you by someone that you like/hero worshipped , particularly if it aligned with your personal gripes and prejudices, or perhaps they painted it on the side of a bus. The Judeo-Christian tradition has given us most of our civilisation and ability to reason critically, but it has clearly left little mark on you. Your critique of religion is generally misinformed at best and basically moronic at worst. I'd stay off the subject if I were as misinformed as you. Stick to something you can relate to like planning policy. It requires less thought.

I would not ever compare religion to Father Christmas. The latter is real.

I am Father Christmas for my kids, as my parents were before me and for me. Millions of people spend every December creating the magic of Christmas and ensuring that Father Christmas is real for their children.

That's totally different to grown ups believing that sky fairies have decreed an absolute set of rules which should be enforced exactly as their prejudices happen to align or else you're a sinner.

Our civilisation owes far more to the Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans than it does Judeo-Christianism which jumped on the bandwagon of pre-existing civilisation.

The ancient world, pre conversion to Christianity, is fascinating, but a place whose notions of right and wrong, and proper conduct, would be utterly alien and shocking to modern Western people. Much more alien than medieval Europe would be.

This might be surprising to you, but there's this concept I believe in called 'evolution'.

Our society has evolved from ancient times to today. Our society has evolved within my own lifetime. In my own lifetime we've evolved from gays being ostracised and unable to get married to completely accepted. We've evolved from ethnic minorities being no more than a "Token Black" on TV (as South Park literally named that character) if there was even a Token on the show, to interracial entertainment being completely normal.

In my parents or grandparents lifetime we've evolved further still.

So why should it be remotely shocking that we have evolved even further from Ancient times? Or Medieval times?

That's kind of the whole point. There's no single text, no one book, no one belief system that sums up who we are and how we got here. We are more than the sum of our parts. We are thousands of years of societal evolution which has been built upon concepts that existed from ancient times and have evolved since and adapted since.

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

BartholomewRoberts said:

.

Sean_F said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

Yea but you believe in Brexit which is a far far more ludicrous and illogical religion than any of HY's beliefs. I mean, you believed in Boris Johnson!! lol.

The reality is Barty, you remind me of people of undeveloped intellect who think it makes them look very big and witty to compare religion with Father Christmas and fairies (in fact I recall you making such a juvenile and uninformed suggestion), when in fact most of your political beliefs are so all over the place that I think you would believe anything that was told to you by someone that you like/hero worshipped , particularly if it aligned with your personal gripes and prejudices, or perhaps they painted it on the side of a bus. The Judeo-Christian tradition has given us most of our civilisation and ability to reason critically, but it has clearly left little mark on you. Your critique of religion is generally misinformed at best and basically moronic at worst. I'd stay off the subject if I were as misinformed as you. Stick to something you can relate to like planning policy. It requires less thought.

I would not ever compare religion to Father Christmas. The latter is real.

I am Father Christmas for my kids, as my parents were before me and for me. Millions of people spend every December creating the magic of Christmas and ensuring that Father Christmas is real for their children.

That's totally different to grown ups believing that sky fairies have decreed an absolute set of rules which should be enforced exactly as their prejudices happen to align or else you're a sinner.

Our civilisation owes far more to the Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans than it does Judeo-Christianism which jumped on the bandwagon of pre-existing civilisation.

The ancient world, pre conversion to Christianity, is fascinating, but a place whose notions of right and wrong, and proper conduct, would be utterly alien and shocking to modern Western people. Much more alien than medieval Europe would be.

This might be surprising to you, but there's this concept I believe in called 'evolution'.

Our society has evolved from ancient times to today. Our society has evolved within my own lifetime. In my own lifetime we've evolved from gays being ostracised and unable to get married to completely accepted. We've evolved from ethnic minorities being no more than a "Token Black" on TV (as South Park literally named that character) if there was even a Token on the show, to interracial entertainment being completely normal.

In my parents or grandparents lifetime we've evolved further still.

So why should it be remotely shocking that we have evolved even further from Ancient times? Or Medieval times?

That's kind of the whole point. There's no single text, no one book, no one belief system that sums up who we are and how we got here. We are more than the sum of our parts. We are thousands of years of societal evolution which has been built upon concepts that existed from ancient times and have evolved since and adapted since.

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

Gardenwalker said:

What is “total Brexit” supposed to mean?

Sounds a bit eschatological to me, and presumably culminates in some mass kool-aid drinking ceremony somewhere in the South American jungle.

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

If you suspect I approve of people being barred from criticising religion, any religion, you'd be wrong. You single out Islam for sound reasons; a lot of recent problem around religion in this country have been because of Islam. The fault is with those who believe that non-adherents should shut up about it, and especially with those who believe that they should take matters into their own hands to enforce that "rule". I don't think it's necessary to single out one belief system, though, because any are susceptible to indulging in it. Especially if they see one succeed via extreme means.

We shouldn't have blasphemy rules, de jure or de facto. It's wrong to silence people. Is that clear enough?

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

Leon said:

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

If you suspect I approve of people being barred from criticising religion, any religion, you'd be wrong. You single out Islam for sound reasons; a lot of recent problem around religion in this country have been because of Islam. The fault is with those who believe that non-adherents should shut up about it, and especially with those who believe that they should take matters into their own hands to enforce that "rule". I don't think it's necessary to single out one belief system, though, because any are susceptible to indulging in it. Especially if they see one succeed via extreme means.

We shouldn't have blasphemy rules, de jure or de facto. It's wrong to silence people. Is that clear enough?

Fair enough. Why do you think this de facto blasphemy law, protecting Islam, has arisen?

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

You'd know better than me - does this sort of thing work on the base?

I mean, her instant resignation out of pique and this sort of thing makes it super clear that any issues she has with Sunak (or the 'sinister forces') extend no further than when it inconvenienced her being given a nice prize she was promised.

It's not exactly stirring up my proletarian rage at the establishment that her hero was unable to secure her the peerage he obviously told her was a sure thing.

'...Last Thursday, while taking the dog for a walk as the heat of the sun faded on London's pavements, I got a call from a leading political journalist whom I respected and liked. His words chilled me. 'Nadine, I've seen the [honours] list that's being published tomorrow and your name has been removed. Did you know this?' I was stunned. I didn't believe him.

I rang Boris who was in Egypt and about to give a speech. 'B******s,' he bellowed down the line. 'It's someone in No 10 who is just making mischief. Sunak told me himself that you were on it just days ago and he wouldn't lie to me. It's a wind up.'

So...yes?

It still just seems like a big old 'wah, I didn't get that thing I don't really deserve*'

*such as anyone deserves such a thing - Dorries was a Cabinet Minister for just under 1 year and a MP for less than 20. There have been far less distinguished peers, definitely, but she's not exactly a major figure either.

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

I won't do any of that because I wouldn't do any of that for any religion.

I don't debate politics or religion in my own name. I don't debate politics or religion on my social media accounts. And I don't burn books - anywhere.

But you just said you are - as you should be - free to criticise and ridicule religion. I’ve shown you that this is not the case

You avoid the thorny truth by then simply saying you never debate politics or religion in your own name, so the issue does not arise

This is like debating with a 13 year old

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

I won't do any of that because I wouldn't do any of that for any religion.

I don't debate politics or religion in my own name. I don't debate politics or religion on my social media accounts. And I don't burn books - anywhere.

But you just said you are - as you should be - free to criticise and ridicule religion. I’ve shown you that this is not the case

You avoid the thorny truth by then simply saying you never debate politics or religion in your own name, so the issue does not arise

This is like debating with a 13 year old

HYUFD said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

Not for all of us. And I am still happy to say that Islam is a belief in Middle Eastern Sky Fairies - just like Christianity.

It doesn't believe in the Trinity though. Islam sees Jesus as a prophet (albeit a less important one than Muhammad) but it doesn't see him as God and Holy Spirit too as Christians do

CorrectHorseBat said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Nothing to do with religion but people do jump on HYUFD at times for seemingly no reason. He's a perfectly nice - if odd, like me - chap.

He supported the Spanish police beating old ladies who were trying to vote and advocates sending in tanks to prevent the Scots voting for independence and using nukes against Argentina.

I am all for diversity of opinions but some opinions reflect very badly on their adherents.

You must hate me then Richard.

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

CorrectHorseBat said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Nothing to do with religion but people do jump on HYUFD at times for seemingly no reason. He's a perfectly nice - if odd, like me - chap.

He supported the Spanish police beating old ladies who were trying to vote and advocates sending in tanks to prevent the Scots voting for independence and using nukes against Argentina.

I am all for diversity of opinions but some opinions reflect very badly on their adherents.

You must hate me then Richard.

No. I dislike and scorn some of your opinions, particularly with relation to the elderly. Again, they reflect badly on you, particularly given your past history.

You called me an idiot so I can't believe you have much respect for me. I thought that well beneath you, we had always got on well before that but I thought it so unnecessary.

Andy_JS said:

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

Working-class people are discriminated against in this country.

Richard_Tyndall said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Nothing to do with religion but people do jump on HYUFD at times for seemingly no reason. He's a perfectly nice - if odd, like me - chap.

He supported the Spanish police beating old ladies who were trying to vote and advocates sending in tanks to prevent the Scots voting for independence and using nukes against Argentina.

I am all for diversity of opinions but some opinions reflect very badly on their adherents.

You must hate me then Richard.

No. I dislike and scorn some of your opinions, particularly with relation to the elderly. Again, they reflect badly on you, particularly given your past history.

You called me an idiot so I can't believe you have much respect for me. I thought that well beneath you, we had always got on well before that but I thought it so unnecessary.

Respect is earned - and lost.

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

Leon said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

She has a point. She is certainly treated worse, both by her opponents and those on her own side, because she is a working class woman. Angela Rayner similarly. There is a lot of classism in British political and media circles.

Yes I agree. And yes, ditto Rayner

Cyclefree said:

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/R-v.-Foster-sentencing-remarks-12.6.23.pdf

The sentencing remarks in the abortion case. Not quite how it was presented earlier. Deception and lying are not viewed favourably by the courts. The sentence does seem a tad harsh.

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

Not for all of us. And I am still happy to say that Islam is a belief in Middle Eastern Sky Fairies - just like Christianity.

It doesn't believe in the Trinity though, Islam sees Jesus as a prophet (albeit a less important one than Muhammad) but it doesn't see him as God and Holy Spirit too as Christians do

I believe anyone should be allowed to indulge themselves in their own faith, whatever that may be.

Where you and I differ is my view that such divinity is best served in solitude. Organized religion on the other hand is the root of much of the World's woes. It is not your Gods or your prophets who are to blame, it is avarice of men who build their churches, idols and finery with money they demand with menaces from the poor. From the Church of Rome to the Church of Scientology, Charlatans become wealthy and then politically connected to enhance that wealth.

So when you pray in solitude, ask your God if he is angered that the CoE owns so much real estate here in the UK, and why don't the C of E liquidate these assets to clothe, feed and educate the needy?

Substitute C of E for just about any faith based organised church throughout the World if you like.

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

Not for all of us. And I am still happy to say that Islam is a belief in Middle Eastern Sky Fairies - just like Christianity.

It doesn't believe in the Trinity though, Islam sees Jesus as a prophet (albeit a less important one than Muhammad) but it doesn't see him as God and Holy Spirit too as Christians do

I believe anyone should be allowed to indulge themselves in their own faith, whatever that may be.

Where you and I differ is my view that such divinity is best served in solitude. Organized religion on the other hand is the root of much of the World's woes. It is not your Gods or your prophets who are to blame, it is avarice of men who build their churches, idols and finery with money they demand with menaces from the poor. From the Church of Rome to the Church of Scientology, Charlatans become wealthy and then politically connected to enhance that wealth.

So when you pray in solitude, ask your God if he is angered that the CoE owns so much real estate here in the UK, and why don't the C of E liquidate these assets to clothe, feed and educate the needy?

Substitute C of E for just about any faith based organised church throughout the World if you like.

As the C of E is not a socialist organisation but a Christian organisation focused on worship of the living Christ. Yes it also provides foodbanks, schools and homeless shelters too but its ultimate purpose is to provide places of worship for fellow Anglicans to partake of Holy Communion, read the Bible and worship

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

She has a point. She is certainly treated worse, both by her opponents and those on her own side, because she is a working class woman. Angela Rayner similarly. There is a lot of classism in British political and media circles.

Yes I agree. And yes, ditto Rayner

There's this black lady I saw recently in an advert (I presume she must be a minor celeb) who sounds EXACTLY like Angela Rayner.

carnforth said:

Cyclefree said:

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/R-v.-Foster-sentencing-remarks-12.6.23.pdf

The sentencing remarks in the abortion case. Not quite how it was presented earlier. Deception and lying are not viewed favourably by the courts. The sentence does seem a tad harsh.

From 9, "Indeed I consider it would have been better had the letter not been written at all" is rather pointed. Is the letter available ?

Leon said:

Alexandria, Virginia, in the 1850s. These photos still shock

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

Not for all of us. And I am still happy to say that Islam is a belief in Middle Eastern Sky Fairies - just like Christianity.

It doesn't believe in the Trinity though, Islam sees Jesus as a prophet (albeit a less important one than Muhammad) but it doesn't see him as God and Holy Spirit too as Christians do

I believe anyone should be allowed to indulge themselves in their own faith, whatever that may be.

Where you and I differ is my view that such divinity is best served in solitude. Organized religion on the other hand is the root of much of the World's woes. It is not your Gods or your prophets who are to blame, it is avarice of men who build their churches, idols and finery with money they demand with menaces from the poor. From the Church of Rome to the Church of Scientology, Charlatans become wealthy and then politically connected to enhance that wealth.

So when you pray in solitude, ask your God if he is angered that the CoE owns so much real estate here in the UK, and why don't the C of E liquidate these assets to clothe, feed and educate the needy?

Substitute C of E for just about any faith based organised church throughout the World if you like.

As the C of E is not a socialist organisation but a Christian organisation focused on worship of the living Christ. Yes it also provides foodbanks, schools and homeless shelters too but its ultimate purpose is to provide places of worship for fellow Anglicans to partake of Holy Communion, read the Bible and worship

Jesus was a socialist.

He wasn't, read the parable of the talents. He was also a social conservative, albeit with compassion for the sinner provided they recognised their sin

Andy_JS said:

dixiedean said:

Not all religions are the same.
Nor even similar.

Lutheranism seems to have delivered the best outcomes.

BartholomewRoberts said:

TimS said:

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

^ this.

If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.

It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,

If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.

I agree entirely, but you kinda miss the point that we now have a de facto blasphemy law. If you stand up and criticise or ridicule Islam - as should be your right, this is why we had The Enlightenment - you are likely to get into big trouble, if not get yourself beheaded. So people don’t do it. They stay silent. Think of that poor teacher in Batley. He is STILL in hiding with his family

We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of

A couple of years ago we had someone come here who was proselytising Islam on this site.

I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.

He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.

Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.

OK go and draw a satirical cartoon of the Prophet and put it on social media in your name. Or burn a copy of the Koran in Basingstoke Aldi. Or rant about the evil of Islam on Youtube. You won’t do this, will you? Because you are scared of what would happen to you. For good reason. Yet you would do all these things vis a vis Christianity or Buddhism. So we have a de facto blasphemy law that protects Islam and pretty much only Islam

PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different

Not for all of us. And I am still happy to say that Islam is a belief in Middle Eastern Sky Fairies - just like Christianity.

It doesn't believe in the Trinity though, Islam sees Jesus as a prophet (albeit a less important one than Muhammad) but it doesn't see him as God and Holy Spirit too as Christians do

I believe anyone should be allowed to indulge themselves in their own faith, whatever that may be.

Where you and I differ is my view that such divinity is best served in solitude. Organized religion on the other hand is the root of much of the World's woes. It is not your Gods or your prophets who are to blame, it is avarice of men who build their churches, idols and finery with money they demand with menaces from the poor. From the Church of Rome to the Church of Scientology, Charlatans become wealthy and then politically connected to enhance that wealth.

So when you pray in solitude, ask your God if he is angered that the CoE owns so much real estate here in the UK, and why don't the C of E liquidate these assets to clothe, feed and educate the needy?

Substitute C of E for just about any faith based organised church throughout the World if you like.

As the C of E is not a socialist organisation but a Christian organisation focused on worship of the living Christ. Yes it also provides foodbanks, schools and homeless shelters too but its ultimate purpose is to provide places of worship for fellow Anglicans to partake of Holy Communion, read the Bible and worship

Jesus was a socialist.

He wasn't, read the parable of the talents. He was also a social conservative, albeit with compassion for the sinner provided they recognised their sin

Jesus was an orange book Lib Dem.

Depending upon the passage he was somewhere between a socialist and an orange book Lib Dem.

Sort of like the Archbishop of Canterbury.

The tragedy of Christianity is that "Christians" are far more interested in the teachings of Paul than of Christ.

Mexicanpete said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

HYUFD said:

'NADINE DORRIES: The sinister forces that stopped me, a girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the House of Lords'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html

She has a point. She is certainly treated worse, both by her opponents and those on her own side, because she is a working class woman. Angela Rayner similarly. There is a lot of classism in British political and media circles.

Yes I agree. And yes, ditto Rayner

There's this black lady I saw recently in an advert (I presume she must be a minor celeb) who sounds EXACTLY like Angela Rayner.

A J Odudu?

She's also a politics graduate from Keele University.

rcs1000 said:

Andy_JS said:

dixiedean said:

Not all religions are the same.
Nor even similar.

Lutheranism seems to have delivered the best outcomes.

Surely Mormonism?

Utah is very rich, with relatively little homelessness and few substance issues. All the empirical evidence is that LDS adherents are happier than average too.

If it wasn't for the ban on coffee and tea, and my lack of belief in God, I think I'd have probably given it a spin.

BartholomewRoberts said:

.

Sean_F said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Can I make a small point of order:

IMHO piling in on HYUFD for his political opinions is fine, but piling in on him because of his religious faith demeans those that do it. Just sayin'

That is spot on. HYFUD's religious beliefs should be respected. I also suspect that those piling on would be slightly more reticent if HYFUD proclaimed himself Muslim (and, yes, that means you think because HYFUD is a Christian it is fair game to attack his faith whereas you would be concerned about being called Islamophobic etc if you attacked the faith of those with different religions).

Oh what sanctimonious rubbish.

I'm happy to take anyone on who tries to shove their stuff down other people's throats, and yes that includes Muslims too. If someone is preaching Islam then its not Islamophobic to reject or rebut it, any more than its antisemitic to do so for someone preaching Judaism.

Discriminating against someone because they're x, y or z is wrong, but debating ideas if someone is putting theirs forwards and you view things differently is never wrong. Its civilised and enlightened and can be a pleasant conversation for both parties. He likes it as much as we do.

Yea but you believe in Brexit which is a far far more ludicrous and illogical religion than any of HY's beliefs. I mean, you believed in Boris Johnson!! lol.

The reality is Barty, you remind me of people of undeveloped intellect who think it makes them look very big and witty to compare religion with Father Christmas and fairies (in fact I recall you making such a juvenile and uninformed suggestion), when in fact most of your political beliefs are so all over the place that I think you would believe anything that was told to you by someone that you like/hero worshipped , particularly if it aligned with your personal gripes and prejudices, or perhaps they painted it on the side of a bus. The Judeo-Christian tradition has given us most of our civilisation and ability to reason critically, but it has clearly left little mark on you. Your critique of religion is generally misinformed at best and basically moronic at worst. I'd stay off the subject if I were as misinformed as you. Stick to something you can relate to like planning policy. It requires less thought.

I would not ever compare religion to Father Christmas. The latter is real.

I am Father Christmas for my kids, as my parents were before me and for me. Millions of people spend every December creating the magic of Christmas and ensuring that Father Christmas is real for their children.

That's totally different to grown ups believing that sky fairies have decreed an absolute set of rules which should be enforced exactly as their prejudices happen to align or else you're a sinner.

Our civilisation owes far more to the Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans than it does Judeo-Christianism which jumped on the bandwagon of pre-existing civilisation.

The ancient world, pre conversion to Christianity, is fascinating, but a place whose notions of right and wrong, and proper conduct, would be utterly alien and shocking to modern Western people. Much more alien than medieval Europe would be.

This might be surprising to you, but there's this concept I believe in called 'evolution'.

Our society has evolved from ancient times to today. Our society has evolved within my own lifetime. In my own lifetime we've evolved from gays being ostracised and unable to get married to completely accepted. We've evolved from ethnic minorities being no more than a "Token Black" on TV (as South Park literally named that character) if there was even a Token on the show, to interracial entertainment being completely normal.

In my parents or grandparents lifetime we've evolved further still.

So why should it be remotely shocking that we have evolved even further from Ancient times? Or Medieval times?

That's kind of the whole point. There's no single text, no one book, no one belief system that sums up who we are and how we got here. We are more than the sum of our parts. We are thousands of years of societal evolution which has been built upon concepts that existed from ancient times and have evolved since and adapted since.

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

Andy_JS said:

dixiedean said:

Not all religions are the same.
Nor even similar.

Lutheranism seems to have delivered the best outcomes.

Surely Mormonism?

Utah is very rich, with relatively little homelessness and few substance issues. All the empirical evidence is that LDS adherents are happier than average too.

If it wasn't for the ban on coffee and tea, and my lack of belief in God, I think I'd have probably given it a spin.

If it wasn't for the ban on meat I'd give vegetarianism a spin.

Also, Mormon girls are cute.

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Leon said:

carnforth said:

Leon said:

Alexandria, Virginia, in the 1850s. These photos still shock

Wow. More info: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_and_Armfield_Office

Alexandria VA was one of the biggest slave trading towns in the world, at one point. The history is intense

They had a massive Slave pen here, whence they would despatch coffled slaves down the Natchez Trace to Nawlins

I did the Natchez Trace last year. Barely any mention in the history of the 1-2m slaves marched down the road, in chains, in the huge domestic slave trade (which burgeoned after Atlantic trading was abolished and Britain enforced the rule)

By the 1830s, agricultural productivity in the old plantations of Tidewater Virginia and Maryland was plummeting due to soil exhaustion from two centuries of tobacco raising. The new boom lands, especially for cotton, were in the lower, Gulf South.

Hence many planters up and relocated with their slaves. And even more turned their slaves into a replacement cash crop, by selling them down the river, and/or down the Natchez Trace.

ADDENDUM - Major reason why the original District of Columbia west of the Potomac, was ceded back to Virginia in 1830s, was because of concern that Congress might one day abolish the slave trade in DC (by simple majority in both houses absent presidential veto) or even slavery itself.

Leon said:

OK I’ve made it to Alexandria. It is indeed pleasant. Thank you for the sound advice to come here. I now need oysters in a relaxed setting. Suggestions welcome

Yokes said:

Ukraine. Just where ate the Challenger 2s, about half the Leopard 2s and the Marder and CV90 IFVS. In short the heaviest armoured kit currently believed to be in country.

Other than sightings of a number of Leopard 2s, the rest has yet to appear in one single picture.

Tbias Ellwood thinks he knows something is coming, does he?

Maybe the direction of travel could be East not South