I’ve recently returned from a rather pleasant visit to a place whre there were no people with higher education, sporting vulgar acronyms.

Croydon?

I travelled at various times on four different public service vehicles (coaches) full with unrestrained passengers.

What happened, did you fire the chauffeur? I mean, having to travel with…riff raff, how absolutely common! And on an old coach as well…

That is, unrestrained by seatbelts not behaviour.

Thank goodness you clarified that; we could have been confused about your meaning of the word ‘unrestrained’ on a thread about seat belts.

With about 70-80 passengers in various stages of relaxation, an accident might have produced some rather interesting moments.

Interesting? I fail to see how 70-80 people in various stages of relaxation being involved in an accident could be described as ‘interesting’.

So yes, the seatbelt law is responsible, commonsensical and its adherants say that it saves numbers equivalent to the population of London – every year – except in coaches.

Did the coach have seat belts fitted or was it over 14 years old?

Coaches made or first used after 1 October 2001 are fitted with three point seat belts or retractable lap belt in all forward and rearward facing seats.

Passengers over the age of 14 years must wear a seat belt in coaches. They must be notified of the requirement to wear a seat belt (this is usually by a notice on the vehicle, an announcement or a film). Each passenger is legally responsible for wearing their seat belt.

The law does not yet require passengers under 14 years old to wear a seat belt. However, all passengers are strongly advised to wear seat belts or the correct child seat on all journeys.

http://www.childcarseats.org.uk/the-law/other-vehicles-buses-coaches-and-minibuses/

So you see the law in Britain requires that coaches first used after October 2001 must be fitted with seat belts which must be worn, unless the passenger is under 14 years old.
Did you break the law, John?

The abstracts of most major religions have more similarities than differences, so what did you expect, a Barney the Purple Dinosaur dogma?

OOOoo!!! You got one? (Thought dinosaurs apparently happened before the earth was created and only exist to prove something or other to creationists)

I was a well respected member of an American copier forum which in the general section(much as this) got around to Religion and I said I was a non believer. The Death threats and vitriol I received from my so called friends was something else again. One member from Tennessee PM’d me and said he was still my friend but if he said to his employer or prospective employer that he did not believe he would not get the job or promotion.

Mentioned it before – had a colleague tell me she’d pray for my soul after I told her I didn’t believe and wouldn’t be going to church that Sunday; had an understanding office boss at the time but he had to be careful because he knew he would be in trouble if head office thought that he was morally unsound for not having any religious belief. Such was life in America.

Which is why this topic is frequenty raised here? 😉

(I can lend you a spare ‘L’ if you’ve run out…)

It is probably more because something happens to let the subject be raised and someone comes in with some crazy reason for why we all should accept this ancient superstition – the one with little proof other than a believer insisting that we MUST believe. It is always the way that their religion is the right one and all others are wrong – and unbelievers inevitably will end up burning in hell (other domains of eternal torment are probably available dependant on what lunacy you believe).

What do you want to talk about then.Vietnam, agent orange Lt Calley the way you treated your veterans or Hanoi Jane?
As a person living in America you choose any subject and lets see what we all say about it. This one has IMO run its course.

As for your remark about America and my experience with America, As an outsider during my time I have been able to observe much on both sides of the Mason Dixon line.I fear we have imported to much rubbish from the good ole USA from trick or treat,drug culture and large portions of fast junk food. I will give you some of your music is great though from Blues to Rock and Roll.

Lets not get into any of that – we have a few things of our own that we don’t talk about: if you want to discuss that sort of thing try starting your own thread and not dragging this one off topic.

And surely teasing RpR is a fun sport, is it not?;o)

Death threats because you said you were an atheist, hmmm, if you say so…

I say so – seen it on an American film forum (long since gone) that I joined, although several months after the event I hereby mention. A thread about The Passion of the Christ with Jim Caviezel in the lead role. Someone was discussing Mel Gibson’s directing and an argument started about some point mentioned in the bible; reference was demanded for something (I forget what) that someone insisted wouldn’t have occurred at the time and someone else replied with ‘read your bible!” which brought forth the taunt ‘don’t have one, don’t need one’ and all hell broke out. And yes, someone asked for the address of the bible-less user because that person didn’t deserve to live on god green earth, apparently. The thread was locked, although I was amazed it wasn’t deleted.

#138 All I said when someone had a relative gravely ill was in the context of religion was I could not pray for them as I was a non believer but I had them in my thoughts and mind and hoped they made a speedy recovery and I hoped also they found some comfort in their prayers.

Yep, that would do it.

Ones rhetoric exposes ones intellect and yours speaks volumes.
Have a nice day.

Oh come on! He practically called you dumb and you wish him a nice day?;o) Curse him, threaten him with the wrath of your god and watch him quake!

Nah, church of malt and hops.

Old Marty sent on a different path from the church of Rome but unlike the poor old Baptists and such, he knew beer and Christians was a holy marriage.

He was also a rabid anti semite…

In his 1543 work On Jews and Their Lies, Luther ranted that the Jews were not the chosen people but were the devil’s people, and referring to them with violent, obscene language. He advocated burning their synagogues, destroying Jewish prayerbooks, outlawing rabbis from preaching, seizing Jews’ property and money, and smashing up their homes, so that they would be forced into labour or expelled for eternity. Sound familiar?

From the very first post and all the following posts it is obviously true, that come the judgement, there will be very few who will be able to plead complete ignorance of God. Which is something to be thankful for. Alleluia.

Indeed, but thank goodness it isn’t going to happen because religion is bunkum.:o)

Can you pick lottery numbers as well?

The bible is filth!!! :eagerness:

You should see the bit about incestuous rape – two daughters getting their father drunk to ‘preserve’ his seed…;o)

The Bible says God finds homosexuality to be an abomination, that is it.

Indeed it does, and yet nothing is said in reproach about David’s love for Jonathan…

1 Samuel 20:41 And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded.

1 Samuel 20:42 And Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, forasmuch as we have sworn both of us in the name of the LORD, saying, The LORD be between me and thee, and between my seed and thy seed for ever. And he arose and departed: and Jonathan went into the city.

2 Samuel 1:26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.

Another example, and one of the few mentions of lesbians:

Luke 17:33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.

Luke 17:34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.

Luke17:35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

…the Baptist church you mention has been/is loudly condemned by all Christian denominations.

It is condemned by athiests as well the superstitious, but for such a tiny part of the god-bothering system it achieves remarkable international recognition. Isn’t it wonderful what the oxygen of publicity can do for extremist organisations?

If one were to proclaim such insults about Mohammed one would be subject to a death sentence that is officially proper by Muslim dogma.
Boy are Muslim and Christian dogma alike, yeah sure.

Salman Rushdie had a fatwa issued against him for his (rather boring) novel The Satanic Verses, and he is still around (although his Japanese translator was stabbed to death, his Italian and Turkish translators had attempts made on their lives, and his Norwegian publisher was shot three time but survived. Religion, eh!). Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard had a fatwa declared on him for representing Muhammad in art form – and Osama bin Laden wanted him extradited so that an Islamic court could carry out the death sentence – but he too is still around.
They will have official protection, of course, but even so…

What science knows and can proves is the equivalent of how much water a gnat crapping in the ocean would displace.
If they would spend more time to see how God might have done what God did, with or without the word God, rather than trying to prove what they think is how it should have been done, there would be no quarrels as they would go about it admitting they know nothing and are onlytrying to learn what might, or might not, have happened.

But…they know how much water a gnats dropping would displace in the ocean – without needing to believe in a deity too.

And where should they look to see how a god might have done something? That well known work of science fiction, or any of the other similar works revered by religions the world over? Or should they chat with the clergy, priests, mullahs, pole sitters, lamas, padres, any other number of holy persons, men of the cloth and other associated child abusers? And what logical experience do these men of god have to talk about matters scientific – are they mathematicians, geologists, biologists, engineers, or have knowledge about anything other than what happens daily in their empty temple to a bygone fear?
That you cannot prove of any godly existence does not inspire belief; that thousands of others over hundreds of years have also not proven anything other than that if you threaten people with believe or die then they will submit to nearly anything doesn’t make it true either. I would believe you and your arguments more if you happened to instantly convert ISIS into not being a murderous bunch of religious freaks, but that isn’t going to happen any time soon so I guess my own lack of faith in invisible friends and things that go bump in the night is utterly safe.

In one post you claim to be atheist and then spent the rest of the thread rubbishing science, evolution, knowledge, yet defending the concept of god.

Can you point out that post, please. RpR is a dedicated god-botherer and anything that says different is likely to be someone making a mistake.

You rubbish evolution, yet the fossil record says otherwise, you rubbish “big bang” theory, but there is a growing theory that “big bangs” have been happening across the universe for millions of years and probably still are. We know for instance that stars (ie suns) have a tendency to implode or explode taking any attendant systems with them, all the energy and material is either trapped or scattered, it is still there, for all we know new suns and new systems may be forming right now, the problem being of course is that we only see these events millions of years after they occurred due to the distance involved.

Unfortunately whatever you say about evolution and big bangs, etc, will cut no ice with him because these theories used science in their discovery and development – which therefore rules them out of being a serious and acceptable answer to those for whom a god is the only possible explanation.

It strikes me that there must be another side to this belief ‘coin’ – where the gullible believe in a god there has to be a devil, doesn’t there? No one has mentioned those other fictional, man-made, anti-deities…