Edgar BrooksBack in the 1960s, a Russian told me how, in Russia, they had a saying, “Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man, while communism is the exact opposite.”
As for that programme, when have journalists ever let the truth get in the way of a good story?
Edgar BrooksSo Abu Hamza ,the Taliban [ who despise education] think they are religious and represent God [their version].Who on this planet is to say that they are wrong .
Having seen how one of the latter tried to get his own 12-year-old sister to commit herself to a suicide bombing, most right-minded people would, I hope, condemn it.
We all suppose that god is good and great BUT what happens if he really actually isn’t that good ,that great,that honest etc,there’s going to be alot of very annoyed dead people when they get to the pearly gates
But he doesn’t exist, remember, so that’s a specious argument.
The point i am trying to make is that you don’t have to be religious to do the right thing,the honest thing,the decent things in life.Look after each other ,love each other,that has nothing to do with religion.
But if you’re a (genuine) member of a religion, it requires you to be all of those things, so what’s wrong with that?
Good grief ,religion is anti gay — yet i know a gay couple who are the best of the best in all senses of the word .
And then there’s Peter Tatchell, who comes across as thoroughly nasty. As one Christian told me, it’s “forgive the sinner, not the sin,” so it’s the act, not the person, which is reviled.
Religion attempts to get swathes of the population to conform en masse to it,no questions asked and if you do – oh my gawd look what happens on a small thread like this let alone in a world scale.
Sorry, but no, a true religion welcomes a questioning mind (back to the children again,) since that’s the only way to really learn.
Religion and greed will be the end of this planet.
Make that misuse of religion, and I’ll agree wholeheartedly
Edgar BrooksLike most religions for most of history then?
Not the religions, but most definitely applied to many proponents of said religions; there’s often a world of difference between what the religion says, and what some (pro and anti) claim that it says.
Edgar Brooks& you finish off with ad hominem, you’d fit right into a religion, pick one 🙂
Just following your lead, though I stop short of the foul, abusive language, of course.
I’m glad that you consider me to be a kind, considerate person, since that’s what a true practitioner of a religion should be, unlike Abu Hamza, the Taliban, and yourself, who twist, and distort, the real messages, to suit their own twisted agenda. Fortunately, I have other things that fill my life, so must politely (you should try that, sometime) decline your invitation.
Edgar BrooksSo because someone disagrees with you and puts an opposite point of view over they are a nasty piece of work, if that’s what religion does for you makes you think –forget it.
Wrong, someone who resorts to insults and foul language (inadequately disguised by initial letters) is, in my view, a nasty piece of work, so don’t make things up, and don’t assume that I’m, even slightly, religiously minded, either; I just loathe bullies and bigots who can’t allow a different point of view from their own.
Edgar BrooksOver the years, I can remember hearing, several times, that a man’s life was measured at “three score years and ten.” As the EU won’t allow life to = life, I could go along with a 70-year sentence, maybe with the dangling carrot of 50% off for good behaviour. Of course that 50% off would entail working, possibly filling in potholes, now that there are so few mailbags around.
Edgar BrooksYou need to prove something to be able to teach it- i could tell a gullible person that there is an invisible rabbit in the corner it’s just that they can’t see it but you can.They could then with your description write an essay on this invisible rabbit they have never seen or have proof of.
Rather in the way people write novels about mythical creatures, and win the Booker Prize.
I haven’t worked out this multi quoting lark yet but to go to BazV and Edgar Brooks about going to Sunday school.You two were a minority ,you thought for yourselves and possibly against you parents wishes you left Sunday school.
No, I left Sunday School because I’d been confirmed, which qualified me to attend church services in my own right, without need of an adult. When I stopped going to those services, out of boredom, my mother never made so much as a murmur, so, if I could make my own decision at 12/13, why can’t other youngsters?
Surely that means it is wrong to force religion [which could be an invisible rabbit for all intents and purposes ] onto people of a young age through peer pressure and the cult that religion is before they are old enough to have a right to say yes or no.
Perhaps it’s just as wrong to deny them the chance to find out, for themselves, whether that way of life is for them?
If people decide at an older age that they want to believe then thats fine,do it at home and don’t tell others that your god is the right one.
Why? “Freedom of expression” is not just a phrase, it’s an ideal to be cherished; if someone approaches you, spouting a religion in which you have no interest, you can always walk away (done it, myself, many times.)
I worry about whole races of people that are so brainwashed into getting up at all hours,praying en mass to their rightful god that they will kill to defend [eh ,where’s the love in that].
Just as we were, in this nation, when witches were burnt at the stake, or drowned; with education, this no longer happens, and it’s to be hoped that other races learn the same message, and quicker than we did, too.
All you need in life is to be good, honest ,trustworthy and respectful — those are the basics .They are not confined to religion,there are plenty of bad religious people out there and lots of really nice non religious out there.
And the main tenet of the Christian religion (can’t talk for others, since I’ve never bothered to learn about them) is the Ten Commandments, which tell you to be just that; I do find it rather sad that you don’t want children to be taught that.
Edgar BrooksBecause people actually speak different languages, science exists as does sport & history..
Nice try, stirrer; religions exist, as well, so why shouldn’t children be allowed to know about them?
Not mentioning god is NOT teaching atheism FFS, Here is it again in bold: Atheism is the default position, EVERYONE is born atheist until adults lie to them
Wrong, atheism is a disbelief in god, and it’s impossible to disbelieve something until you’re told about it. Everyone is born INNOCENT.
An absence of one thing doesn’t mean it must be something else. An absence of coconuts isn’t a Chevy any more than an absence of trees must mean you are in a desert.
And an absence of a cogent argument doesn’t make a statement true, either.
Would it help you if I typed slower or do you have a grown up nearby to explain words to you?
You really are a nasty piece of work, aren’t you?
Edgar BrooksHow can you teach atheism? there is no proof of a negative
or a positive
How can you teach religion ? there is no proof of existence
or non-existence
Surely the default is that you are born without any prejudices,anything that is put in there is either by survival instinct or taught by elders.Surely teaching religion should be banned until adulthood where people are free to decide for themselves after looking at all the facts.
As a child, I went to Sunday School, and at the age of 10, was confirmed into the church; within two years I’d had enough, and quit, so was perfectly able to make my own decision, yet you wouldn’t allow that choice. Education is the tool with which a child is prepared for the big, wide world, and to make decisions for himself/herself, yet you, because of your prejudices, would deny him/her that right.
Why stop there? Don’t teach them a foreign language, until they’re old enough to decide if they want to speak to foreigners; don’t teach them science until they can decide if science is for them; don’t let them play sport, until they can choose which sport they want to do; don’t teach history in case they learn how people have killed each other, and might get the idea.
There is no difference between what you would do, and what the Taleban did by denying girls an education.
Edgar BrooksIt seems to depend on your dictionary:-
DOGMA n “a settled opinion; a principle or doctrine; a doctrine laid down with (note – not by) authority”
Rather seems to cover both sides of the argument, to me, anyway.
Edgar BrooksOr maybe he was checking that his argument is being followed and its you who is stirring the dung?
Good lord, no, Heaven forbid that I should trespass on your territory, you being such a master of the art, and all that.
Edgar BrooksI’ve posted directly contradictory statements & not one person reading them has caught them.
Or possibly don’t care enough to bother? Admitting that you’re here just to act as a troll (aka “stirrer of excreta”) does you no credit, whatsoever.
Edgar BrooksSo you are quite happy that this psychopathic monster that you follow stands idly by while children are raped? That makes you nothing less than a sociopath.
You are sounding sillier, and more hysterical, as the thread moves to its inevitable demise; if lions and the threat of crucifixion didn’t deflect early Christians from their faith, then your patently absurd reasoning (if that’s the right word) has no chance, whatsoever. Nearly 70 years ago, my mother advised me never to get into an argument about religion or politics, and your shrieking rants show that (as so often) “Mother was right.” And, no, I’m not going to tell you what my beliefs/disbeliefs might be, because it’s none of your business.
Edgar BrooksI don’t have any policemen, crooked or otherwise, but it is nice of you to lift your nose out of the Daily Mail for a few moments..
.
Not one for snap judgements then? Always believe that someone, with whom you disagree, is guilty until proven innocent? Sorry for the disappointment, but I gave up reading newspapers 40 years ago, since I found that I couldn’t trust them to tell the truth. I recommend that you follow my lead, and treat all madia reports with the same caution; you never know, it’s possible that they get things wrong occasionally.
Were you there? Do you have any information that has not been reported in the court? Is my input any more cynical than those who welcome the death of a possible nasty piece of work with so much left unanswered?
Don’t answer a question with a question; I’m not the one refusing to accept the jury’s verdict, so my thoughts are as irrelevant as yours. A majority out of 10 people, who were there, and heard all of the evidence, have given a verdict, which you are hell-bent on refusing to acknowledge.
And since you ask I have had a police weapon pointed at me – it lasted maybe three seconds (or several hours as I recall) and I drain blood whenever I think of what could have happened if I hadn’t noticed the officer coming in and put my hands up immediately,
Yet Duggan, apparently, reached into his pocket (where police were entitled to think he might be carrying the gun they were told he’d acquired) to get a mobile phone, instead of putting up his hands. Never wondered why? Was it to warn his little friends that he wouldn’t be able to come and play Cowboys and Indians, after all?
Many years ago there was an occurrence of kids playing ‘cowboys’ or something where armed police were alerted to a gun battle – they apparently came in with guns nearly blazing to a group of boys with cap pistols and stick shouting bang. I was shocked on hearing this from a former workmate – his son was one of those involved and apparently my friend was on the receiving end of a copper telling him off for letting his son play with a stick. Innocents getting let off with a warning because the police were embarrassed?
Or maybe a policeman sick with the realisation of what could have happened (even policemen have feelings, strange as it might seem,) so gave vent? “Guns nearly blazing” Oh, please, you weren’t there, so how do you know that?
I’m sure you are happy that an event like this can only happen to the right sort, and will only happen to that criminal sort, aren’t you.
You do love the emotive claptrap, and running off at the mouth with cheap accusations, don’t you? Unfortunately for you, I’m not happy or unhappy, since the event has nothing to do with me, and, unlike some, I can resist the urge to stick my nose into an affair about which I know nothing.
Edgar BrooksI have two questions:-
were you in the coroner’s court throughout the hearing?
have you heard every word, from every witness, at first hand?
If the answer is “No” to either, or both, of the questions, then your entire thread comes out as a cynical attempt to blacken the characters of people you do not know, and all this talk of children with guns being gunned down does nothing to further your case.
“Maybe” “what if” “imagine” “would have” “could have” are no more than guesses, put forward by you, in an attempt to make things out to be worse than they really were; you even manage to imply that the gun was planted, after the event, presumably by one of your “crooked” policemen.
“Excreta agitator” (or a slightly more prosaic expression) comes to mind on reading your input.
Sign In
