Eric Pickles overturns ban on prayers at council meetings

Daily Echo: Sean Woodward Sean Woodward

Councils have been told they can continue holding prayers before meetings after one Hampshire authority vowed to join others in defying a ban.

The Government has rushed through new powers onto the statute book, days after a High Court ruling said it was unlawful for councils to incorporate prayers into proceedings.

It comes as the leader of one Hampshire authority said he would have been willing to defy the "ridiculous" ban.

Local Government secretary Eric Pickles has moved swiftly to overrule the controversial judgement.

He signed a parliamentary order that came into effect at midnight making the practice of holding prayers lawful.

It brings forward a power contained in the Government's Localism Act, which was due to come into force in April.

The ruling, by Mr Justice Ouseley, had been branded 'ridiculous' and 'anti-Christian' by some councillors, who were prepared to defy the ban before Mr Pickles intervened.

Cllr Sean Woodward, leader of Fareham Borough Council, said: “When I became the leader of Fareham Borough Council I formalised prayers on the council agenda and we have had them at the start of every full council meeting ever since. That was 13 years ago.

“But now I have been told by the council's solicitor that, if the prayers appear on the agenda for this week's meeting, I will be breaking the law and could face prosecution. That is just ridiculous. The Church of England is the established church in this country and saying prayers at the start of council meetings is a tradition that should not be changed.”

The ruling came after an atheist former councillor took Bideford Town Council in Devon to the court, with the backing of the National Secular Society.

On the new powers given to councils Mr Pickles said: “We are striking a blow for localism over central interference, for freedom to worship over intolerant secularism, for parliamentary sovereignty over judicial activism, and for longstanding British liberties over modern-day political correctness.

“Last week's case should be seen as a wake-up call. For too long, the public sector has been used to marginalise and attack faith in public life, undermining the very foundations of the British nation. But this week, the tables have turned.”

Comments (82)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:17pm Sat 18 Feb 12

thoughtprovoking says...

I'm glad to see our government has got it's priorities right... Growing youth unemployment, devastating jobs market & public sector, rising anti-social behaviour in our communities, widening gap between the rich and poor, but if we allow prayers at meetings, we'll be a better country!
I'm glad to see our government has got it's priorities right... Growing youth unemployment, devastating jobs market & public sector, rising anti-social behaviour in our communities, widening gap between the rich and poor, but if we allow prayers at meetings, we'll be a better country! thoughtprovoking

4:17pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Goldenwight says...

The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church.

I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer. Goldenwight

4:21pm Sat 18 Feb 12

bazzeroz says...

Amen!
Amen! bazzeroz

4:22pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

Goldenwight wrote:
The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church.

I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
[quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same Condor Man

4:37pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Goldenwight says...

Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was.

The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century.

Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing.

We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton. Goldenwight

4:51pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Stella Bell says...

We live in a multicultural society. Schools have taken this on board and no longer have assemblies in respect for all the other religions in this country. Sean Woodward has a lot to live up to by being a Christian in the C of E, (read the words below) but why does he need to carry on with a tradition that is out of date? I admire him for his beliefs but in his position I don't believe he should be inflicting them on others. ...... BEING A CHRISTIAN, CHURCH OF ENGLAND....SOME WORDS BY ARCHBISHOP ROWAN WILLIAMS............
....(found on the web) ‘Generosity, gratitude, confidence that when we fail we are still loved - all of this focused on Jesus' life and death and resurrection. That's where we start in the lifelong job of being a Christian. Nothing - says St Paul in the same passage - can separate us from this love. But this isn't an excuse for doing what we like, knowing we can get away with it.’………..
We live in a multicultural society. Schools have taken this on board and no longer have assemblies in respect for all the other religions in this country. Sean Woodward has a lot to live up to by being a Christian in the C of E, (read the words below) but why does he need to carry on with a tradition that is out of date? I admire him for his beliefs but in his position I don't believe he should be inflicting them on others. ...... BEING A CHRISTIAN, CHURCH OF ENGLAND....SOME WORDS BY ARCHBISHOP ROWAN WILLIAMS............ ....(found on the web) ‘Generosity, gratitude, confidence that when we fail we are still loved - all of this focused on Jesus' life and death and resurrection. That's where we start in the lifelong job of being a Christian. Nothing - says St Paul in the same passage - can separate us from this love. But this isn't an excuse for doing what we like, knowing we can get away with it.’……….. Stella Bell

4:56pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Sovietobserver says...

So, Mr.Woodward if there is a legal challenge to your flouting of the law I suppose the good old council tax payer will foot your bill , ...disgusting.
Do your praying in church, not at work.
If councillors are wasting time praying when they could be addressing local issues then I'd like to know who does and doesn't indulge so that I can mark my cross accordingly at the next election.
So, Mr.Woodward if there is a legal challenge to your flouting of the law I suppose the good old council tax payer will foot your bill , ...disgusting. Do your praying in church, not at work. If councillors are wasting time praying when they could be addressing local issues then I'd like to know who does and doesn't indulge so that I can mark my cross accordingly at the next election. Sovietobserver

4:56pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was.

The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century.

Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing.

We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
[quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference. Condor Man

4:59pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies
.
In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time
.
But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation
.
Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities
.
That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments.
If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies . In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time . But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation . Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities . That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments. Paramjit Bahia

5:04pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Ant Smoking MP says...

As long as Woodward doesnt force me or anyone else into praying he can do what he likes and believe in what he wants to believe in. It makes no odds to me or what I choose to believe in privately.
.
If an individual wants to pray I would be more than happy to leave the room so he/she can do his thing.
As long as Woodward doesnt force me or anyone else into praying he can do what he likes and believe in what he wants to believe in. It makes no odds to me or what I choose to believe in privately. . If an individual wants to pray I would be more than happy to leave the room so he/she can do his thing. Ant Smoking MP

5:13pm Sat 18 Feb 12

The_Walrus says...

This is so absolutely fair!

I had not bothered to get elected because of the prejudice against my religion, but now I am up for it, and when I am elected I am going to sacrifice a goat in each meeting I attend.
This is so absolutely fair! I had not bothered to get elected because of the prejudice against my religion, but now I am up for it, and when I am elected I am going to sacrifice a goat in each meeting I attend. The_Walrus

5:14pm Sat 18 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was.

The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century.

Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing.

We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
Basing a personal belief system on Reason rather than Superstition IS a legitimate DIFFERENCE.

People who embrace the DIFFERENCES between themselves and who respect those differences, are less likely to wage war.

With a rare exception, the disgusting Wars initiated over the past 2,000 years were prosecuted by Christians.

"The problem lies with bigoted atheists . . ."

How bigoted, how intolerant, how smug a comment is that!
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]Basing a personal belief system on Reason rather than Superstition IS a legitimate DIFFERENCE. People who embrace the DIFFERENCES between themselves and who respect those differences, are less likely to wage war. With a rare exception, the disgusting Wars initiated over the past 2,000 years were prosecuted by Christians. "The problem lies with bigoted atheists . . ." How bigoted, how intolerant, how smug a comment is that! clausentum

5:27pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Sovietobserver says...

Those of us who do not have compunction to pray or worship any god should be shown the same respect which is afforded to those that do.
Nobody should be forced into any club membership against their wishes,religion is the root of all evil, it divides people across the world, one would have thought in the 21st century modern man and woman would have grown out of worshipping a 2000 year old myth and all the hocus pocus that goes along with it.
Those of us who do not have compunction to pray or worship any god should be shown the same respect which is afforded to those that do. Nobody should be forced into any club membership against their wishes,religion is the root of all evil, it divides people across the world, one would have thought in the 21st century modern man and woman would have grown out of worshipping a 2000 year old myth and all the hocus pocus that goes along with it. Sovietobserver

5:27pm Sat 18 Feb 12

freefinker says...

Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was.

The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century.

Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing.

We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
Bigot - 'a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who thinks that anyone who does not have the same beliefs is wrong.'

I think you will find (if only you actually looked at what he says) his 'beliefs' are FAR less unreasonable than the myths and nonsense that underlie religions.

Belief – ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’

You see, you may want to ‘believe’, but all Richard Dawkins points out is the illogical position religious people adopt when confronted by fact and reason.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]Bigot - 'a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who thinks that anyone who does not have the same beliefs is wrong.' I think you will find (if only you actually looked at what he says) his 'beliefs' are FAR less unreasonable than the myths and nonsense that underlie religions. Belief – ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’ You see, you may want to ‘believe’, but all Richard Dawkins points out is the illogical position religious people adopt when confronted by fact and reason. freefinker

6:03pm Sat 18 Feb 12

clausentum says...

You Shall Not Bear False Witness Against Your Neighbour.

(8th Commandment according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church).

"The problem lies with bigoted atheists . . ."

How do you square that circle?

"it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like."

But atheists are "bigots".

How do you square that circle ?

Where is your love for your neighbours (atheists)?
You Shall Not Bear False Witness Against Your Neighbour. (8th Commandment according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church). "The problem lies with bigoted atheists . . ." How do you square that circle? "it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like." But atheists are "bigots". How do you square that circle ? Where is your love for your neighbours (atheists)? clausentum

6:48pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Georgem says...

Goldenwight wrote:
The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church.

I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The church of England IS the established church in England. The term "established church" has a specific meaning, that has nothing to do with how long it has existed. I think it's time you stopped trying to prove to everyone how good you are at nit-picking, and not just because you suck at it.
[quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The church of England IS the established church in England. The term "established church" has a specific meaning, that has nothing to do with how long it has existed. I think it's time you stopped trying to prove to everyone how good you are at nit-picking, and not just because you suck at it. Georgem

7:53pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Huffter says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies . In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time . But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation . Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities . That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments.
We live in an age where the diversity of human nature and beliefs is commonly respected. I am suprised you use your unbelief as a basis for calling other people's beliefs "misguided mumbo jumbo". Have a little decency and respect, please.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies . In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time . But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation . Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities . That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments.[/p][/quote]We live in an age where the diversity of human nature and beliefs is commonly respected. I am suprised you use your unbelief as a basis for calling other people's beliefs "misguided mumbo jumbo". Have a little decency and respect, please. Huffter

8:02pm Sat 18 Feb 12

freemantlegirl2 says...

Huffter wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies . In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time . But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation . Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities . That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments.
We live in an age where the diversity of human nature and beliefs is commonly respected. I am suprised you use your unbelief as a basis for calling other people's beliefs "misguided mumbo jumbo". Have a little decency and respect, please.
It's my belief that it's misguided mumbo jumbo too! and a nonsense when Councillors come from all sorts of different religious and non-religous backgrounds. If people want to go and say prayers (of any kind) then surely they can go to church before a council meeting?

But I agree with one of the above comment, let's please get on with something important!
[quote][p][bold]Huffter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies . In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time . But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation . Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities . That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments.[/p][/quote]We live in an age where the diversity of human nature and beliefs is commonly respected. I am suprised you use your unbelief as a basis for calling other people's beliefs "misguided mumbo jumbo". Have a little decency and respect, please.[/p][/quote]It's my belief that it's misguided mumbo jumbo too! and a nonsense when Councillors come from all sorts of different religious and non-religous backgrounds. If people want to go and say prayers (of any kind) then surely they can go to church before a council meeting? But I agree with one of the above comment, let's please get on with something important! freemantlegirl2

8:07pm Sat 18 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Huffter wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies . In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time . But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation . Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities . That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments.
We live in an age where the diversity of human nature and beliefs is commonly respected. I am suprised you use your unbelief as a basis for calling other people's beliefs "misguided mumbo jumbo". Have a little decency and respect, please.
This poster's "unbelief" is a smokescreen, an excuse to do what they predictably seek to do in all their posts - perpetuate their intolerance to any political belief different to their own. This poster's dogma and political intolerance is stunning. It makes him appear a clown.
[quote][p][bold]Huffter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: If even in 2012 voters have not realised the facts and keep on believing in unscientific stuff and to continue electing those who believe in opium of religion, then there right to attend prayers should not be questioned, provided they also respect rights of those who do not believe in misguided mumbo jumbo to stay away from these ceremonies . In fact in most councils that is exactly how the system has worked for a very long time . But sadly some silly character decided to challenge the ‘live and let live’ based approach in court of law, and the judge has passed the judgment which has created the current situation . Now religious prayers, which in most councils are very poorly attended; probably because most councillors have developed bit of intelligence, can not solve the financial problems of virtually all local authorities . That can only be achieved when national government starts providing sufficient funding to local councils. As current ConDem Coalition like NuLabour regime before it is hardly likely to do that, I can’t see how councillors attending or ignoring prayers to some imaginary God or Gods could possibly resolve their financial predicaments.[/p][/quote]We live in an age where the diversity of human nature and beliefs is commonly respected. I am suprised you use your unbelief as a basis for calling other people's beliefs "misguided mumbo jumbo". Have a little decency and respect, please.[/p][/quote]This poster's "unbelief" is a smokescreen, an excuse to do what they predictably seek to do in all their posts - perpetuate their intolerance to any political belief different to their own. This poster's dogma and political intolerance is stunning. It makes him appear a clown. clausentum

8:38pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Higginz says...

I thoroughly enjoy your posts Clausentum. They're well thought out, interesting and targetted. I like to think of you as a much more intelligent version of myself.
I thoroughly enjoy your posts Clausentum. They're well thought out, interesting and targetted. I like to think of you as a much more intelligent version of myself. Higginz

9:02pm Sat 18 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Higginz wrote:
I thoroughly enjoy your posts Clausentum. They're well thought out, interesting and targetted. I like to think of you as a much more intelligent version of myself.
As a teenager, I lacked confidence. Most teenagers do. It is part of the painful, confusing, Rite of Passage into Adulthood.

Someone with wisdom enlightened and encouraged me, by pointing out:

"Next time you are sitting on the top deck of a London bus, pause and reflect on the fact that at that moment in time, you, and only you, occupy that space in the Universe, no-one else. That makes you unique."

I absorbed the lesson. The challenge ever since then, has been balancing the "uniqueness" with humility. I fail much of the time!

Don't under estimate yourself - recognize and cherish your unique qualities and unmatched abilities.

You are not a "version" of anyone else.

:-)
[quote][p][bold]Higginz[/bold] wrote: I thoroughly enjoy your posts Clausentum. They're well thought out, interesting and targetted. I like to think of you as a much more intelligent version of myself.[/p][/quote]As a teenager, I lacked confidence. Most teenagers do. It is part of the painful, confusing, Rite of Passage into Adulthood. Someone with wisdom enlightened and encouraged me, by pointing out: "Next time you are sitting on the top deck of a London bus, pause and reflect on the fact that at that moment in time, you, and only you, occupy that space in the Universe, no-one else. That makes you unique." I absorbed the lesson. The challenge ever since then, has been balancing the "uniqueness" with humility. I fail much of the time! Don't under estimate yourself - recognize and cherish your unique qualities and unmatched abilities. You are not a "version" of anyone else. :-) clausentum

10:13pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Greyhound1405 says...

I thought council business involved all members of the Community. Why does the C of E think it still speaks for us all? Church is the place for those leeches on Society. Prayer does not work. A waste of time in this time of limited resources. Superstition will not give the poor jobs, or the sick health.
I thought council business involved all members of the Community. Why does the C of E think it still speaks for us all? Church is the place for those leeches on Society. Prayer does not work. A waste of time in this time of limited resources. Superstition will not give the poor jobs, or the sick health. Greyhound1405

10:24pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled! Scrutinizer

10:26pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

Greyhound1405 wrote:
I thought council business involved all members of the Community. Why does the C of E think it still speaks for us all? Church is the place for those leeches on Society. Prayer does not work. A waste of time in this time of limited resources. Superstition will not give the poor jobs, or the sick health.
Well said! Absolutely spot on!
[quote][p][bold]Greyhound1405[/bold] wrote: I thought council business involved all members of the Community. Why does the C of E think it still speaks for us all? Church is the place for those leeches on Society. Prayer does not work. A waste of time in this time of limited resources. Superstition will not give the poor jobs, or the sick health.[/p][/quote]Well said! Absolutely spot on! Scrutinizer

10:27pm Sat 18 Feb 12

humpity says...

Praying should be allowed. Not forced.
Praying should be allowed. Not forced. humpity

11:03pm Sat 18 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

Scrutinizer wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing.

If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.
[quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled![/p][/quote]I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing. If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place. Condor Man

11:39pm Sat 18 Feb 12

clausentum says...

"If there is a God . . . "

Why do you doubt there is a God?

I thought Christians believe God's existence to be beyond question, undeniable and actually, a FACT?

"If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed."

How loving and charitable a view is that?

Is not God a forgiving entity who would welcome unbelievers into his embrace in the AfterLife, whatever their personal failings when alive ?

Your responses to other posters when seeking to explain or justify your chosen belief are wonky, irrational and almost child-like in their immaturity, to say the least.

The real Hell is not found in some fanciful place where non-believer's get shunted into when they die, because they are bad and wicked folk.

The real Hell is in the here and now. It is the sum total of the colossal, beyond measure, lack of humanity humans sadly display towards one another, every single day.

And, Hell on Earth is epitomised by an attitude expressed by deluded people worshipping an illusion, who then piously spout intolerance and hatred towards anyone who declines to be a member of their silly club.

What makes me think your comment to the other poster ("I wish you the best of luck"), to be disingenuous, mean, false and unchristian in its real intent?

For a "practicing Christian," you appear to have limited ability to express love, tolerance and compassion towards other people who have chosen not share your chosen religious belief. Jesus would have had something to say to you about that.
"If there is a God . . . " Why do you doubt there is a God? I thought Christians believe God's existence to be beyond question, undeniable and actually, a FACT? "If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed." How loving and charitable a view is that? Is not God a forgiving entity who would welcome unbelievers into his embrace in the AfterLife, whatever their personal failings when alive ? Your responses to other posters when seeking to explain or justify your chosen belief are wonky, irrational and almost child-like in their immaturity, to say the least. The real Hell is not found in some fanciful place where non-believer's get shunted into when they die, because they are bad and wicked folk. The real Hell is in the here and now. It is the sum total of the colossal, beyond measure, lack of humanity humans sadly display towards one another, every single day. And, Hell on Earth is epitomised by an attitude expressed by deluded people worshipping an illusion, who then piously spout intolerance and hatred towards anyone who declines to be a member of their silly club. What makes me think your comment to the other poster ("I wish you the best of luck"), to be disingenuous, mean, false and unchristian in its real intent? For a "practicing Christian," you appear to have limited ability to express love, tolerance and compassion towards other people who have chosen not share your chosen religious belief. Jesus would have had something to say to you about that. clausentum

11:43pm Sat 18 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Condor Man wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing.

If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.
A weak, defensive, response to a reasoned, intelligent post. Shame on you.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled![/p][/quote]I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing. If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.[/p][/quote]A weak, defensive, response to a reasoned, intelligent post. Shame on you. clausentum

11:56pm Sat 18 Feb 12

freefinker says...

Condor Man wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing.

If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.
.. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’.

.. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’.

.. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’.

Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion?

You are a grown-up after all.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled![/p][/quote]I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing. If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.[/p][/quote].. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’. .. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’. .. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’. Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion? You are a grown-up after all. freefinker

12:03am Sun 19 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing.

If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.
.. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’.

.. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’.

.. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’.

Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion?

You are a grown-up after all.
Jesus said that he was the way to heaven, if you believe that he was the son of God you will receive redemption and that place in heaven. Why would a man willing let someone else kill him in a horrific manner if there wasn't something behind what he was saying? why were the establishment at the time so determined to kill him, if he was just a crank they'd have just ignored him. There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died. The question is what happened after that.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled![/p][/quote]I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing. If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.[/p][/quote].. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’. .. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’. .. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’. Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion? You are a grown-up after all.[/p][/quote]Jesus said that he was the way to heaven, if you believe that he was the son of God you will receive redemption and that place in heaven. Why would a man willing let someone else kill him in a horrific manner if there wasn't something behind what he was saying? why were the establishment at the time so determined to kill him, if he was just a crank they'd have just ignored him. There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died. The question is what happened after that. Condor Man

12:08am Sun 19 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing.

If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.
A weak, defensive, response to a reasoned, intelligent post. Shame on you.
what do you expect me to say? it's ok, don't worry if you're wrong and if you don't get the afterlife then it's alright because the alternative really isn't that bad? I can't say that. How can you seriously say that what billions of people believe in is wrong just because you and some others can't find any reasoning behind it? what backs up your argument? The truth is that only after death will we ever know what the truth is.
[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled![/p][/quote]I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing. If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.[/p][/quote]A weak, defensive, response to a reasoned, intelligent post. Shame on you.[/p][/quote]what do you expect me to say? it's ok, don't worry if you're wrong and if you don't get the afterlife then it's alright because the alternative really isn't that bad? I can't say that. How can you seriously say that what billions of people believe in is wrong just because you and some others can't find any reasoning behind it? what backs up your argument? The truth is that only after death will we ever know what the truth is. Condor Man

12:32am Sun 19 Feb 12

freefinker says...

Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing.

If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.
.. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’.

.. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’.

.. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’.

Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion?

You are a grown-up after all.
Jesus said that he was the way to heaven, if you believe that he was the son of God you will receive redemption and that place in heaven. Why would a man willing let someone else kill him in a horrific manner if there wasn't something behind what he was saying? why were the establishment at the time so determined to kill him, if he was just a crank they'd have just ignored him. There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died. The question is what happened after that.
'There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died.'
You mean a radical Jewish preacher at serious odds with the established religion was put to death by the Romans at the behest of the Jewish religious hierarchy. Yes, I can go along with that, but that’s all it was. No more, no less; just another of numerous the victims of religious intolerance.
However, the Jewish religion, then and now, and all other monotheist religions are just mythical stories. To a certain extent one can forgive belief in such silly myths for those who lived at that time as they knew no better.
But that is no longer an excuse for you. The scientific revolution of the last 500 years, so bitterly opposed by religions, can provide a far superior creation explanation and it’s backed up by verifiable proof.
Just grow up, start facing up to reality and stop living in fantasy-land.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled![/p][/quote]I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing. If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.[/p][/quote].. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’. .. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’. .. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’. Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion? You are a grown-up after all.[/p][/quote]Jesus said that he was the way to heaven, if you believe that he was the son of God you will receive redemption and that place in heaven. Why would a man willing let someone else kill him in a horrific manner if there wasn't something behind what he was saying? why were the establishment at the time so determined to kill him, if he was just a crank they'd have just ignored him. There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died. The question is what happened after that.[/p][/quote]'There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died.' You mean a radical Jewish preacher at serious odds with the established religion was put to death by the Romans at the behest of the Jewish religious hierarchy. Yes, I can go along with that, but that’s all it was. No more, no less; just another of numerous the victims of religious intolerance. However, the Jewish religion, then and now, and all other monotheist religions are just mythical stories. To a certain extent one can forgive belief in such silly myths for those who lived at that time as they knew no better. But that is no longer an excuse for you. The scientific revolution of the last 500 years, so bitterly opposed by religions, can provide a far superior creation explanation and it’s backed up by verifiable proof. Just grow up, start facing up to reality and stop living in fantasy-land. freefinker

12:44am Sun 19 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail.

The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning.

As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life.

'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled!
I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing.

If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.
.. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’.

.. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’.

.. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’.

Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion?

You are a grown-up after all.
Jesus said that he was the way to heaven, if you believe that he was the son of God you will receive redemption and that place in heaven. Why would a man willing let someone else kill him in a horrific manner if there wasn't something behind what he was saying? why were the establishment at the time so determined to kill him, if he was just a crank they'd have just ignored him. There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died. The question is what happened after that.
'There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died.'
You mean a radical Jewish preacher at serious odds with the established religion was put to death by the Romans at the behest of the Jewish religious hierarchy. Yes, I can go along with that, but that’s all it was. No more, no less; just another of numerous the victims of religious intolerance.
However, the Jewish religion, then and now, and all other monotheist religions are just mythical stories. To a certain extent one can forgive belief in such silly myths for those who lived at that time as they knew no better.
But that is no longer an excuse for you. The scientific revolution of the last 500 years, so bitterly opposed by religions, can provide a far superior creation explanation and it’s backed up by verifiable proof.
Just grow up, start facing up to reality and stop living in fantasy-land.
grow up? I was talking to an eminent professor the other day who shares the same beliefs as me. Should he grow up too? I can't comment on your background or level of education but I've met doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers, and even people who work in shops that believe that Jesus was the son of god. Is my Cambridge graduate friend living in a fantasy land just because he loves Jesus?

I'd love to know the actual proof that god doesn't exist. Where is it? Not even Stephen Hawking has discovered how the university was actually created - what was the catalyst behind the 'big bang'?
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]No, Richard Dawkins is most certainly not bigoted at all. In fact he is one of the most reasonable, intelligent minds around. A very decent man who debates in a calm and reasoned manner, despite a huge barrage of agressive attacks ranged against him and his (our) ideas by religionists like yourself. The late and great Christopher Hitchens was of similar superior intellect and the likes of the deluded religionists (of whatever type) hated him for it to - unlike his bigoted, nutcase of a brother of course, who currently peddles his nonsense for the trashy Mail. The religionists are very worried now. They (you) know that they (you) are 'on the run' and that having had their (your) way for so many years, atheism is fighting back and standing up for the rights of people who don't believe in any fantasy sky gods and the airy-fairy tales associated with them, nor want their (our) children indoctrinated in them in any way either. The fight back has started - and we are winning. As for Richard Dawkins and your accusation that he wants to 'provoke difference'; well that has to be - in the way in which you intend it certainly - one of the most ridiculous phrases that I think I've ever heard in my life. 'Formalised prayers on the agenda', Councilor Sean Woodward! B*ll*cks!And as for Pickles? Well it's about time someone had him pickled![/p][/quote]I think I'll stick with what I believe in. If there is a God I'll get to meet him when I die, if there isn't I'll rot in the ground. Either way, I'd have lost nothing. If, though, there is a God and you don't get to meet him then quite frankly you're screwed. If you're willing to take that risk I wish you the best of luck, I here hell's a terrible place.[/p][/quote].. oh, it's 'belief' again - ‘confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof’. .. or do you mean faith - ‘belief that is not based on proof’. .. proof - ‘evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true’. Isn’t it about time you started to distinguish between reality and delusion? You are a grown-up after all.[/p][/quote]Jesus said that he was the way to heaven, if you believe that he was the son of God you will receive redemption and that place in heaven. Why would a man willing let someone else kill him in a horrific manner if there wasn't something behind what he was saying? why were the establishment at the time so determined to kill him, if he was just a crank they'd have just ignored him. There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died. The question is what happened after that.[/p][/quote]'There's plenty of evidence that Jesus lived, that he was crucified and that he died.' You mean a radical Jewish preacher at serious odds with the established religion was put to death by the Romans at the behest of the Jewish religious hierarchy. Yes, I can go along with that, but that’s all it was. No more, no less; just another of numerous the victims of religious intolerance. However, the Jewish religion, then and now, and all other monotheist religions are just mythical stories. To a certain extent one can forgive belief in such silly myths for those who lived at that time as they knew no better. But that is no longer an excuse for you. The scientific revolution of the last 500 years, so bitterly opposed by religions, can provide a far superior creation explanation and it’s backed up by verifiable proof. Just grow up, start facing up to reality and stop living in fantasy-land.[/p][/quote]grow up? I was talking to an eminent professor the other day who shares the same beliefs as me. Should he grow up too? I can't comment on your background or level of education but I've met doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers, and even people who work in shops that believe that Jesus was the son of god. Is my Cambridge graduate friend living in a fantasy land just because he loves Jesus? I'd love to know the actual proof that god doesn't exist. Where is it? Not even Stephen Hawking has discovered how the university was actually created - what was the catalyst behind the 'big bang'? Condor Man

1:20am Sun 19 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god"

Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy.

"what do you expect me to say?"

You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers.

People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.
Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god" Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy. "what do you expect me to say?" You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers. People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God. clausentum

1:51am Sun 19 Feb 12

IronLady2010 says...

I pray for a sunny day tomorrow, won't get me anywhere, as god only exists in the minds of those who live in fantasy world!
I pray for a sunny day tomorrow, won't get me anywhere, as god only exists in the minds of those who live in fantasy world! IronLady2010

8:23am Sun 19 Feb 12

Stella Bell says...

We will only know, when we are dead whether there is a god and we get sent to heaven or hell. But if there isn't a god we will not know because we are dead!
We will only know, when we are dead whether there is a god and we get sent to heaven or hell. But if there isn't a god we will not know because we are dead! Stella Bell

8:27am Sun 19 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
I pray for a sunny day tomorrow, won't get me anywhere, as god only exists in the minds of those who live in fantasy world!
Never mind about "tomorrow"! The "sunny day" is here TODAY, Sunday! I'm off out for my favourite little walk down at Lepe, and I don't need anyone's little god to accompany me while I'm at it! That's plenty good enough for me! Alleluia! ;-)
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I pray for a sunny day tomorrow, won't get me anywhere, as god only exists in the minds of those who live in fantasy world![/p][/quote]Never mind about "tomorrow"! The "sunny day" is here TODAY, Sunday! I'm off out for my favourite little walk down at Lepe, and I don't need anyone's little god to accompany me while I'm at it! That's plenty good enough for me! Alleluia! ;-) Scrutinizer

8:28am Sun 19 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

clausentum wrote:
Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god"

Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy.

"what do you expect me to say?"

You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers.

People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.
How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved.

Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles.
[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god" Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy. "what do you expect me to say?" You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers. People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.[/p][/quote]How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved. Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles. Condor Man

10:40am Sun 19 Feb 12

Torchie1 says...

I wonder how many atheists there are when the pilot asks the passengers to 'brace for impact' ?
I wonder how many atheists there are when the pilot asks the passengers to 'brace for impact' ? Torchie1

11:12am Sun 19 Feb 12

freefinker says...

Condor Man wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god"

Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy.

"what do you expect me to say?"

You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers.

People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.
How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved.

Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles.
.. I'd put my 'faith' in a doctor because s/he has been trained in the reality of provable science and medicine over several years.

I can accept there are also some highly trained professionals in science and medicine who have yet to face up to their childhood indoctrination in whatever myths their parents and/or schools and/or religious institutions inflicted upon them.

However, that would not prejudice me against their professional competence – just as I’m sure you would be perfectly happy to be treated by atheist medical professionals.

Yet again you bring up irrelevant red herrings. The fact remains that you just can’t accept the scientific and philosophical rational that when you’re dead, you’re dead – full stop.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god" Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy. "what do you expect me to say?" You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers. People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.[/p][/quote]How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved. Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles.[/p][/quote].. I'd put my 'faith' in a doctor because s/he has been trained in the reality of provable science and medicine over several years. I can accept there are also some highly trained professionals in science and medicine who have yet to face up to their childhood indoctrination in whatever myths their parents and/or schools and/or religious institutions inflicted upon them. However, that would not prejudice me against their professional competence – just as I’m sure you would be perfectly happy to be treated by atheist medical professionals. Yet again you bring up irrelevant red herrings. The fact remains that you just can’t accept the scientific and philosophical rational that when you’re dead, you’re dead – full stop. freefinker

12:00pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about. Condor Man

12:03pm Sun 19 Feb 12

southy says...

Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church.

I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
The oldest Religion is paganism, then it was Orthodox has practise like the Greeks and northen Europe, then came your Roman Catholic which at the time was base in what we know today as france, then your Anglican Church.
But Atheist have been around all though each of the era's, the mono-god-Religions force the Atheist and pagans to attend Religious sevices with threats that ended up in there deaths.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]The oldest Religion is paganism, then it was Orthodox has practise like the Greeks and northen Europe, then came your Roman Catholic which at the time was base in what we know today as france, then your Anglican Church. But Atheist have been around all though each of the era's, the mono-god-Religions force the Atheist and pagans to attend Religious sevices with threats that ended up in there deaths. southy

12:14pm Sun 19 Feb 12

southy says...

If people wishes to practise this mumbo jumbo then they should be allowed, But it should not take place in the council chambers there should be a room set aside for those who wish to do so.
Politics and Religion should be kept apart.
If people wishes to practise this mumbo jumbo then they should be allowed, But it should not take place in the council chambers there should be a room set aside for those who wish to do so. Politics and Religion should be kept apart. southy

1:24pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Saintlygirl says...

Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.
The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same
Certainly it was.

The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century.

Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing.

We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.
as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.
How DARE you brand atheists as bigoted! I take offence to that! Just because we don't believe in God or the Bible does not make us bigoted. Live and let live is my motto! You should let people believe in what they want and not brand them for not being Christian. This is the precise reason I refust to believe; we are considered bad, yet although I am what I would consider agnostic as I like to believe we go somewhere where when we die, however, I still have morals and hopefully am a good person, but I don't need religion to be this way! I was brought up to learn respect and have good common sense! It's thanks to my parents, not the bible. Prayer time is not a right nor is it something that should be taken away, it's a respect issue, of which I respect ALL beliefs and don't brand them.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Goldenwight[/bold] wrote: The Church of England is AN established church in this country, not the established church. I believe (and I may be wrong here) that the Church in Wales predates Christian worship in England by some decades. And other religions have been established here far longer.[/p][/quote]The Catholic church was around long before Henry VIII invented the church of England. As the Queen is head of both the Anglican Church and the Government church and state are one and the same[/p][/quote]Certainly it was. The Christian tradition was, however, brought to England by St Augustine (allegedly) in the 7th Century. Simply having the same leader does NOT make the state and the Church of England the same thing. We have a tradition of religious tolerance in this Country dating back some years. The last recorded massacre of Jews, for example, was over 1,000 years ago. Whilst many wish to overturn this state of affairs, I am not one of them. I wonder how many readers are prepared to put their comments in writing here and disagree with me? Certainly I'm aware that there is a lot of negative feeling against completely innocent peacefully living muslims in Southampton.[/p][/quote]as a practising Christian (and believe I need it) it's great to live in a country where you can believe or not in whatever you like. Many Muslims feel that it's easier for them to practice Islam here than in many majority Muslim nations. The problem lies with bigoted atheists like Richard Dawkins who want to provoke difference.[/p][/quote]How DARE you brand atheists as bigoted! I take offence to that! Just because we don't believe in God or the Bible does not make us bigoted. Live and let live is my motto! You should let people believe in what they want and not brand them for not being Christian. This is the precise reason I refust to believe; we are considered bad, yet although I am what I would consider agnostic as I like to believe we go somewhere where when we die, however, I still have morals and hopefully am a good person, but I don't need religion to be this way! I was brought up to learn respect and have good common sense! It's thanks to my parents, not the bible. Prayer time is not a right nor is it something that should be taken away, it's a respect issue, of which I respect ALL beliefs and don't brand them. Saintlygirl

1:29pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

southy wrote:
If people wishes to practise this mumbo jumbo then they should be allowed, But it should not take place in the council chambers there should be a room set aside for those who wish to do so. Politics and Religion should be kept apart.
Comrade southy; Listen, I never thought I would find m'self e-v-e-r 'saying' this, but I'm in 100%, total agreement with you on an issue!

I won't spoil it by saying communism is a kind of religion too...or maybe I just did! ;-)
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: If people wishes to practise this mumbo jumbo then they should be allowed, But it should not take place in the council chambers there should be a room set aside for those who wish to do so. Politics and Religion should be kept apart.[/p][/quote]Comrade southy; Listen, I never thought I would find m'self e-v-e-r 'saying' this, but I'm in 100%, total agreement with you on an issue! I won't spoil it by saying communism is a kind of religion too...or maybe I just did! ;-) Scrutinizer

1:42pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
clausentum wrote: Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god" Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy. "what do you expect me to say?" You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers. People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.
How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved. Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles.
.. I'd put my 'faith' in a doctor because s/he has been trained in the reality of provable science and medicine over several years. I can accept there are also some highly trained professionals in science and medicine who have yet to face up to their childhood indoctrination in whatever myths their parents and/or schools and/or religious institutions inflicted upon them. However, that would not prejudice me against their professional competence – just as I’m sure you would be perfectly happy to be treated by atheist medical professionals. Yet again you bring up irrelevant red herrings. The fact remains that you just can’t accept the scientific and philosophical rational that when you’re dead, you’re dead – full stop.
Exactly, unless you become 'undead', in which case it's fangs for the memories...! ;-)
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god" Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy. "what do you expect me to say?" You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers. People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.[/p][/quote]How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved. Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles.[/p][/quote].. I'd put my 'faith' in a doctor because s/he has been trained in the reality of provable science and medicine over several years. I can accept there are also some highly trained professionals in science and medicine who have yet to face up to their childhood indoctrination in whatever myths their parents and/or schools and/or religious institutions inflicted upon them. However, that would not prejudice me against their professional competence – just as I’m sure you would be perfectly happy to be treated by atheist medical professionals. Yet again you bring up irrelevant red herrings. The fact remains that you just can’t accept the scientific and philosophical rational that when you’re dead, you’re dead – full stop.[/p][/quote]Exactly, unless you become 'undead', in which case it's fangs for the memories...! ;-) Scrutinizer

2:07pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

Torchie1 wrote:
I wonder how many atheists there are when the pilot asks the passengers to 'brace for impact' ?
That's easy to explain in the context of eg. christianity, but also all other belief systems too. So most of us in so-called countries of the West have been exposed to saturation of christian indoctrination, not least it's scare tactics of hell and damnation and salvation, from when we were v-e-r-y young. What this amounts to is that when a human is been exposed to that kind of intense religous influence, and finds him/herself in an acceptionally life-threatening eg. your 'brace for impact' situation, he/she will cry out to anything in his/her memory which even remotely hints at a possibility of being extricated or 'saved' from said situation. If people were not brought up with any kind of religion, then they would not seek to refer to it in way should they find themselves in such a situation. It is when we are in a reasonably rational, 'normal' everyday situation, as we are for most of the duration of our lives, that we are able to understand that our brains don't 'need' the desperation of referring to fantasy religous 'saviours' and their box of hocu-pocus tricks. This is a (quite possibly t-h-e most) tremendously significant indication of the extent to just how much 'progress' (development) human beings have made in our evolution to date, whether it is has positive or negative consequences for us - which is another matter.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: I wonder how many atheists there are when the pilot asks the passengers to 'brace for impact' ?[/p][/quote]That's easy to explain in the context of eg. christianity, but also all other belief systems too. So most of us in so-called countries of the West have been exposed to saturation of christian indoctrination, not least it's scare tactics of hell and damnation and salvation, from when we were v-e-r-y young. What this amounts to is that when a human is been exposed to that kind of intense religous influence, and finds him/herself in an acceptionally life-threatening eg. your 'brace for impact' situation, he/she will cry out to anything in his/her memory which even remotely hints at a possibility of being extricated or 'saved' from said situation. If people were not brought up with any kind of religion, then they would not seek to refer to it in way should they find themselves in such a situation. It is when we are in a reasonably rational, 'normal' everyday situation, as we are for most of the duration of our lives, that we are able to understand that our brains don't 'need' the desperation of referring to fantasy religous 'saviours' and their box of hocu-pocus tricks. This is a (quite possibly t-h-e most) tremendously significant indication of the extent to just how much 'progress' (development) human beings have made in our evolution to date, whether it is has positive or negative consequences for us - which is another matter. Scrutinizer

2:38pm Sun 19 Feb 12

peter sowerby says...

Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.
Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings. peter sowerby

2:45pm Sun 19 Feb 12

southy says...

peter sowerby wrote:
Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.
Very true but its Capitalism that Controls Religion all ways have done, its a way to control the masses
[quote][p][bold]peter sowerby[/bold] wrote: Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.[/p][/quote]Very true but its Capitalism that Controls Religion all ways have done, its a way to control the masses southy

2:56pm Sun 19 Feb 12

southy says...

When you think about it what Pickles and this government is an act of dictatorship
When you think about it what Pickles and this government is an act of dictatorship southy

3:05pm Sun 19 Feb 12

peter sowerby says...

southy wrote:
peter sowerby wrote: Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.
Very true but its Capitalism that Controls Religion all ways have done, its a way to control the masses
Didnt Carl Marx say capitalism will eat itself? I am still waiting in eager anticipation. The problem is it seems to be eating everybody else first.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]peter sowerby[/bold] wrote: Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.[/p][/quote]Very true but its Capitalism that Controls Religion all ways have done, its a way to control the masses[/p][/quote]Didnt Carl Marx say capitalism will eat itself? I am still waiting in eager anticipation. The problem is it seems to be eating everybody else first. peter sowerby

3:08pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Shaun Cunningham says...

Let’s us get back to the core issue: What are Christian values in the Council chamber; Councillors enter the chamber with decisions already made. The leadership trash all sentiments other than their own, and then you have Councillors getting elected on one platform then go walk about because their fulfilment can be obtained elsewhere. Too say we have faith and ask God for guidance, guidance for what, if the heart does not vibrate with the beat of moral righteousness then what hollow actions they deem to be. The road they wish to travel is already mapped out, God plays no part in the Council Chamber for if he did one would see some humility and humbleness instead of the arrogance and self-importance which we so offend we see and read about.
Let’s us get back to the core issue: What are Christian values in the Council chamber; Councillors enter the chamber with decisions already made. The leadership trash all sentiments other than their own, and then you have Councillors getting elected on one platform then go walk about because their fulfilment can be obtained elsewhere. Too say we have faith and ask God for guidance, guidance for what, if the heart does not vibrate with the beat of moral righteousness then what hollow actions they deem to be. The road they wish to travel is already mapped out, God plays no part in the Council Chamber for if he did one would see some humility and humbleness instead of the arrogance and self-importance which we so offend we see and read about. Shaun Cunningham

3:16pm Sun 19 Feb 12

southy says...

peter sowerby wrote:
southy wrote:
peter sowerby wrote: Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.
Very true but its Capitalism that Controls Religion all ways have done, its a way to control the masses
Didnt Carl Marx say capitalism will eat itself? I am still waiting in eager anticipation. The problem is it seems to be eating everybody else first.
He did and you seeing it happening where companys take over other companys so there is less compention.
And the end result is a big major war on the scale of the World Wars
[quote][p][bold]peter sowerby[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]peter sowerby[/bold] wrote: Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.[/p][/quote]Very true but its Capitalism that Controls Religion all ways have done, its a way to control the masses[/p][/quote]Didnt Carl Marx say capitalism will eat itself? I am still waiting in eager anticipation. The problem is it seems to be eating everybody else first.[/p][/quote]He did and you seeing it happening where companys take over other companys so there is less compention. And the end result is a big major war on the scale of the World Wars southy

3:24pm Sun 19 Feb 12

forest hump says...

People have the right to beleive in whatever they want. If religon comforts then fine. Just keep it out of any form of Government. I take exception to elected officials wasting taxpayers money...time is money. Focus that faith and belief into improving facilities and quality of life. Personally, I beleive Darwin is closest to getting it right.
People have the right to beleive in whatever they want. If religon comforts then fine. Just keep it out of any form of Government. I take exception to elected officials wasting taxpayers money...time is money. Focus that faith and belief into improving facilities and quality of life. Personally, I beleive Darwin is closest to getting it right. forest hump

3:49pm Sun 19 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Condor Man wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god"

Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy.

"what do you expect me to say?"

You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers.

People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.
How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved.

Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles.
I wonder if you are aware of how utterly foolish you appear when putting forward your child-like arguments?

You need your false God to have meaning and a sense of purpose in your life. So stick with your theological crutch, but in a quiet , brave, honest, reflective moment ask yourself:

"If my crutch got knocked aside and I was unable to stand on my own two feet, who would I be, where would I be?"

Your God will not provide the answer.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: Citing elevated, upstanding, intelligent members of society such as:"doctors, scientists, lawyers, bankers, teachers," is not proof positive that "Jesus was the son of god" Those same lauded pillars of society can equally be child rapists as we all know. So, a silly argument to try and make real, a fantasy. "what do you expect me to say?" You are right. Unreasonable, unrealistic for me to expect anything resembling an intelligent response because you are immersed in an indoctrination. All you are capable of is to reach for an indoctrinated set menu of pap answers. People with closed minds who have really stopped seeking answers to the unanswerable, and instead, settle for a contented, cosy, warm and fuzzy, fixed belief, are both to be pitied and feared - history has shown, repeatedly, they are capable of any dishonesty and obscenity in the name of their made-up God.[/p][/quote]How can you be taken seriously if you make wild assertions about people? there are plenty of atheists who rape children, your comment shows a real contempt for others. I hope that one day you have to put all your hope in the doctor you have labelled, all the trust in him as you health depended on it. You'd have complete faith in him that he'd sort out that problem, and if he did you'd been saved. Until you can treat others with the respect that we all deserve stop plucking phrases out of the God Delusion and start appreciating that we all have different views on things. Unless you actually know what you are saying is the truth stop belittling those who hold a different view. If you live in Southampton I would imagine that most GP's surgeries had at least one Christian doctor, bear that in mind when you ask them to look at your piles.[/p][/quote]I wonder if you are aware of how utterly foolish you appear when putting forward your child-like arguments? You need your false God to have meaning and a sense of purpose in your life. So stick with your theological crutch, but in a quiet , brave, honest, reflective moment ask yourself: "If my crutch got knocked aside and I was unable to stand on my own two feet, who would I be, where would I be?" Your God will not provide the answer. clausentum

3:56pm Sun 19 Feb 12

freefinker says...

Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions? freefinker

4:08pm Sun 19 Feb 12

freefinker says...

.. should read
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us KNOW about this?
.. should read 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us KNOW about this? freefinker

4:13pm Sun 19 Feb 12

peter sowerby says...

forest hump wrote:
People have the right to beleive in whatever they want. If religon comforts then fine. Just keep it out of any form of Government. I take exception to elected officials wasting taxpayers money...time is money. Focus that faith and belief into improving facilities and quality of life. Personally, I beleive Darwin is closest to getting it right.
Disagree, elected officials should be only answerable to electorate and any council meeting policy decisions should not be based or influenced on their prayers to any of their gods or gurus. We now have a high Court ruling overturned by Eric Pickles a man known to fall flat on his face at the sight of a crucifix and with no doubt claiming god on his side.
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: People have the right to beleive in whatever they want. If religon comforts then fine. Just keep it out of any form of Government. I take exception to elected officials wasting taxpayers money...time is money. Focus that faith and belief into improving facilities and quality of life. Personally, I beleive Darwin is closest to getting it right.[/p][/quote]Disagree, elected officials should be only answerable to electorate and any council meeting policy decisions should not be based or influenced on their prayers to any of their gods or gurus. We now have a high Court ruling overturned by Eric Pickles a man known to fall flat on his face at the sight of a crucifix and with no doubt claiming god on his side. peter sowerby

5:30pm Sun 19 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Mr Pickles:

“We are striking a blow for localism over central interference, for freedom to worship over intolerant secularism, for parliamentary sovereignty over judicial activism, and for longstanding British liberties over modern-day political correctness.

“Last week's case should be seen as a wake-up call. For too long, the public sector has been used to marginalise and attack faith in public life, undermining the very foundations of the British nation. But this week, the tables have turned.”

The crusading knight, on his heavy duty charger, appears from over the horizon. With one magnificent swish of his political sword he restores sanity to the council chamber.

But, hey! Praying to a God is only a start. Why stop there, crusading knight.?

Why not use your awesome legislative powers to put right many other wrongs and properly restore God-given traditions to the council chamber?

Lady members of the council should be forced to wear hats. And, long silk gloves.

Gentlemen only permitted black socks underneath shiny polished shoes, and neatly folded white handkerchiefs in the breast pocket of their suits.

Tea, from the former colonies, substituted for that wildly immoral cup of coffee.

Bare white walls restricted to a single adornment - a framed glorious coloured picture of Jesus.

But, above all, enshrine into Law, the lack of boundary between personal religious preference and elected governance, with deviants hoisted off to a dank paupers prison cell and hung by their goolies until they repent.
Mr Pickles: “We are striking a blow for localism over central interference, for freedom to worship over intolerant secularism, for parliamentary sovereignty over judicial activism, and for longstanding British liberties over modern-day political correctness. “Last week's case should be seen as a wake-up call. For too long, the public sector has been used to marginalise and attack faith in public life, undermining the very foundations of the British nation. But this week, the tables have turned.” The crusading knight, on his heavy duty charger, appears from over the horizon. With one magnificent swish of his political sword he restores sanity to the council chamber. But, hey! Praying to a God is only a start. Why stop there, crusading knight.? Why not use your awesome legislative powers to put right many other wrongs and properly restore God-given traditions to the council chamber? Lady members of the council should be forced to wear hats. And, long silk gloves. Gentlemen only permitted black socks underneath shiny polished shoes, and neatly folded white handkerchiefs in the breast pocket of their suits. Tea, from the former colonies, substituted for that wildly immoral cup of coffee. Bare white walls restricted to a single adornment - a framed glorious coloured picture of Jesus. But, above all, enshrine into Law, the lack of boundary between personal religious preference and elected governance, with deviants hoisted off to a dank paupers prison cell and hung by their goolies until they repent. clausentum

7:24pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Stella Bell says...

To Claussntum. One of the best posts so far today was the one from Shaun Cunningham but you have brought a bit of laughter at the end of the day. So thank you.
It really doesn't matter about any views expressed on this website or by the residents in the Borough of Fareham, Sean Woodward will do as he likes and it would certainly not occur to him that he should get the views of others.
To Claussntum. One of the best posts so far today was the one from Shaun Cunningham but you have brought a bit of laughter at the end of the day. So thank you. It really doesn't matter about any views expressed on this website or by the residents in the Borough of Fareham, Sean Woodward will do as he likes and it would certainly not occur to him that he should get the views of others. Stella Bell

7:40pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details? Condor Man

8:05pm Sun 19 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Stella Bell wrote:
To Claussntum. One of the best posts so far today was the one from Shaun Cunningham but you have brought a bit of laughter at the end of the day. So thank you.
It really doesn't matter about any views expressed on this website or by the residents in the Borough of Fareham, Sean Woodward will do as he likes and it would certainly not occur to him that he should get the views of others.
Some politicians, local or national, enter politics genuinely seeking to make a positive difference to the quality of lives of their constituents who elected them. They are honorable people, irrespective of their political colouring.

Many politicians, local and national, enter politics to pursue their personal political dogma, to line their pockets or the pockets of their friends and to experience the aphrodisiac of exercising power.

The latter, have few morals or ethics and don't give a monkeys for the views of those who bestowed upon them the privilege of power.

It is relatively easy to distinguish which politician resides in which camp. The trick is to peer through the chocking smoke of dishonesty and lack of integrity that wafts about them.
[quote][p][bold]Stella Bell[/bold] wrote: To Claussntum. One of the best posts so far today was the one from Shaun Cunningham but you have brought a bit of laughter at the end of the day. So thank you. It really doesn't matter about any views expressed on this website or by the residents in the Borough of Fareham, Sean Woodward will do as he likes and it would certainly not occur to him that he should get the views of others.[/p][/quote]Some politicians, local or national, enter politics genuinely seeking to make a positive difference to the quality of lives of their constituents who elected them. They are honorable people, irrespective of their political colouring. Many politicians, local and national, enter politics to pursue their personal political dogma, to line their pockets or the pockets of their friends and to experience the aphrodisiac of exercising power. The latter, have few morals or ethics and don't give a monkeys for the views of those who bestowed upon them the privilege of power. It is relatively easy to distinguish which politician resides in which camp. The trick is to peer through the chocking smoke of dishonesty and lack of integrity that wafts about them. clausentum

8:13pm Sun 19 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers clausentum

8:27pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Georgem says...

Torchie1 wrote:
I wonder how many atheists there are when the pilot asks the passengers to 'brace for impact' ?
And I wonder how many there are just after the subsequent safe landing
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: I wonder how many atheists there are when the pilot asks the passengers to 'brace for impact' ?[/p][/quote]And I wonder how many there are just after the subsequent safe landing Georgem

8:34pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Georgem says...

peter sowerby wrote:
Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.
A tired old cliche wheeled out in every theological discussion, and it's the epitome of an association fallacy. Protip: the "other side" could - in fact, do - employ the exact same tactic, pointing to all the good deeds done in the name of various magic ghosts. If you want to paint yourself as a rational-thinking atheist, you really need to avoid this line of faulty reasoning.
[quote][p][bold]peter sowerby[/bold] wrote: Down throughout the ages humans have been slaughtering and butchering billions of themselves in the names and behalf of their gods and idols. Please keep them out of council meetings.[/p][/quote]A tired old cliche wheeled out in every theological discussion, and it's the epitome of an association fallacy. Protip: the "other side" could - in fact, do - employ the exact same tactic, pointing to all the good deeds done in the name of various magic ghosts. If you want to paint yourself as a rational-thinking atheist, you really need to avoid this line of faulty reasoning. Georgem

8:39pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Condor Man says...

clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
well, the offer is there if you fancy a cup of tea on a Sunday afternoon. I'm happy with what I believe, if you don't want to come along that's fine. I just hope you don't live to regret it!
[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]well, the offer is there if you fancy a cup of tea on a Sunday afternoon. I'm happy with what I believe, if you don't want to come along that's fine. I just hope you don't live to regret it! Condor Man

8:46pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Georgem says...

clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better!
[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better! Georgem

9:14pm Sun 19 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Georgem wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better!
Valid observation ;-)

This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all.

He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry!

You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better![/p][/quote]Valid observation ;-) This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all. He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry! You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks. clausentum

9:28pm Sun 19 Feb 12

freefinker says...

clausentum wrote:
Georgem wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better!
Valid observation ;-)

This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all.

He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry!

You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.
.. agreed.
But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.
[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better![/p][/quote]Valid observation ;-) This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all. He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry! You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.[/p][/quote].. agreed. But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same. freefinker

10:41pm Sun 19 Feb 12

Georgem says...

freefinker wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Georgem wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better!
Valid observation ;-)

This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all.

He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry!

You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.
.. agreed.
But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.
Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though!
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better![/p][/quote]Valid observation ;-) This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all. He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry! You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.[/p][/quote].. agreed. But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.[/p][/quote]Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though! Georgem

11:03pm Sun 19 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Georgem wrote:
freefinker wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Georgem wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better!
Valid observation ;-)

This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all.

He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry!

You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.
.. agreed.
But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.
Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though!
Steady on! You risk sounding pious, nay, a tad smug in your gentle wrist-slapping. Now, that COULD be irritating. :-)
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better![/p][/quote]Valid observation ;-) This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all. He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry! You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.[/p][/quote].. agreed. But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.[/p][/quote]Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though![/p][/quote]Steady on! You risk sounding pious, nay, a tad smug in your gentle wrist-slapping. Now, that COULD be irritating. :-) clausentum

6:20am Mon 20 Feb 12

Stella Bell says...

to clausentum We are peering through the chocking smoke of dishonesty that wafts around them. I believe it is beginning to clear. This article about prayers just shows the arrogance of our hypocritical council leader, but money talks and I fear that until the smoke clears completely he will continue in his usual manner.
to clausentum We are peering through the chocking smoke of dishonesty that wafts around them. I believe it is beginning to clear. This article about prayers just shows the arrogance of our hypocritical council leader, but money talks and I fear that until the smoke clears completely he will continue in his usual manner. Stella Bell

6:44am Mon 20 Feb 12

Georgem says...

clausentum wrote:
Georgem wrote:
freefinker wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Georgem wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better!
Valid observation ;-)

This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all.

He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry!

You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.
.. agreed.
But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.
Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though!
Steady on! You risk sounding pious, nay, a tad smug in your gentle wrist-slapping. Now, that COULD be irritating. :-)
Not a wrist-slapping, sorry if it came off as such.
[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better![/p][/quote]Valid observation ;-) This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all. He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry! You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.[/p][/quote].. agreed. But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.[/p][/quote]Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though![/p][/quote]Steady on! You risk sounding pious, nay, a tad smug in your gentle wrist-slapping. Now, that COULD be irritating. :-)[/p][/quote]Not a wrist-slapping, sorry if it came off as such. Georgem

7:43am Mon 20 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Georgem wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Georgem wrote:
freefinker wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Georgem wrote:
clausentum wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to.

I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.
‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some.

Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: -
1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old.
2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old.
3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old.
4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old.
5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago.
6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago.
7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years.

Now CM, please, please tell me: -
1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell?
2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species?
3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this?

Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?
I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?
So.

You have no answers to offer the other poster.

So.

You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you.

Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts.

Where or where is your belief in yourself?

Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals?

Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers
Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better!
Valid observation ;-)

This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all.

He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry!

You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.
.. agreed.
But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.
Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though!
Steady on! You risk sounding pious, nay, a tad smug in your gentle wrist-slapping. Now, that COULD be irritating. :-)
Not a wrist-slapping, sorry if it came off as such.
Text on a computer screen is a flawed and notoriously limited medium to accurately convey sentiment and the essence of what the writer means with that text.

Misinterpretation on my part. Sorry.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Freefinker, I think you're being rather disingenuous to a lot of rational thinking people who happen to share different views to you. Perhaps you too are an eminent professor? Many people find faith later in life, not having been indoctrinated or having this inflicted on them. They don't have this baggage to face up to. I think you need to read all the facts before you start denouncing things you clearly no nothing about.[/p][/quote]‘facts’ you say. Well let’s have some. Unless you are one of those crazy ‘bible literalists’ (and not even the pope is anymore) here are some facts: - 1) The universe (or at least the only one we have evidence for) is about 13 billion years old. 2) The earth and solar system are about 4.5 billion years old. 3) Life on earth is about 3.8 billion years old. 4) Complex multi-celled life is under 1 billion years old. 5) The origins of primates are about 58 million years ago. 6) The genus Homo evolved about 2.3 million years ago. 7) Our own species, Homo sapiens, goes back a little over 100,000 years. Now CM, please, please tell me: - 1) Do all the animals that have ever lived also have an afterlife in heaven or hell? 2) Assuming that’s a ‘no’, then, what’s so special about our species (evolved as we have, like ALL others, by Darwinian natural selection) that after billions of years your god decides s/he is going to ‘create’ heaven and hell, but give it to just this one very recently evolved species? 3) And, why did s/he take 100,000 years of our species existence to let us about this? Perhaps you can now reveal some ‘facts’ to answer these questions?[/p][/quote]I'm going to take you questions and ask around at the church (Highfield Church out of interest) to see what people think. There are a few uni professors there that could answer your questions, sadly I'm an arts graduate so won't do the responses the justice they deserve. Actually, Highfield Church run seminars during the year which discuss the questions you've raised. If you like I could send you some details?[/p][/quote]So. You have no answers to offer the other poster. So. You are totally bereft of a single response to any question they posed you. Instead, you opt for a cop-out by wanting to scurry off to your local church and ask for answers from church brethren with enhanced educational qualifications to your own or super superior brains such as university professors who also happen to be religious nuts. Where or where is your belief in yourself? Why stop at canvassing a bunch of locals? Why not kneel down and with your direct line of communication to your Almighty, pray to your God to provide answers[/p][/quote]Well, in all fairness, I don't see why people should be obliged to justify their faith to others. As an atheist myself, I find it quite embarrassing when others put so much effort into ridiculing religion, and trying so hard to point out the logical flaws in it. Not to mention, of course, the extreme pointlessness of trying to use reason in a discussion with someone who you already know doesn't really buy into the whole "reason" thing in the first place. The evidence is well-known, if it's mere existence isn't enough to change some people's minds, I doubt having it presented to them in an argument is going to do any better![/p][/quote]Valid observation ;-) This particular religious nut is a shallow, one-dimensional representaion of religious nuts in general. He has nothing to offer apart from a dog-eared script given him by someone-else and appears incapable of original thought or grown-up thinking at all. He invited comment and derision by his outrageous statment that atheists are bigots whilst expressed that view with bigotry! You offer a timely reminder that to get carried away in debating such a fool is a pointless activity and really just a form of self-indulgence. Thanks.[/p][/quote].. agreed. But a somewhat pleasurable self-indulgence all the same.[/p][/quote]Is it pleasurable? I just find it irritating, myself. Each to his own, though![/p][/quote]Steady on! You risk sounding pious, nay, a tad smug in your gentle wrist-slapping. Now, that COULD be irritating. :-)[/p][/quote]Not a wrist-slapping, sorry if it came off as such.[/p][/quote]Text on a computer screen is a flawed and notoriously limited medium to accurately convey sentiment and the essence of what the writer means with that text. Misinterpretation on my part. Sorry. clausentum

7:55am Mon 20 Feb 12

clausentum says...

Stella Bell wrote:
to clausentum We are peering through the chocking smoke of dishonesty that wafts around them. I believe it is beginning to clear. This article about prayers just shows the arrogance of our hypocritical council leader, but money talks and I fear that until the smoke clears completely he will continue in his usual manner.
(The humility in the posed expression in the accompanying photograph is underwhelming.)

The photographic image has potential as a rich source of tongue-in-cheek humour. Can you think of a suitable "thought bubble" to attach to the photograph?

How as bout, for starters:

"Its simply smoke and mirrors, dear voter, but mainly smoke"
[quote][p][bold]Stella Bell[/bold] wrote: to clausentum We are peering through the chocking smoke of dishonesty that wafts around them. I believe it is beginning to clear. This article about prayers just shows the arrogance of our hypocritical council leader, but money talks and I fear that until the smoke clears completely he will continue in his usual manner.[/p][/quote](The humility in the posed expression in the accompanying photograph is underwhelming.) The photographic image has potential as a rich source of tongue-in-cheek humour. Can you think of a suitable "thought bubble" to attach to the photograph? How as bout, for starters: "Its simply smoke and mirrors, dear voter, but mainly smoke" clausentum

9:14am Mon 20 Feb 12

Stella Bell says...

He does look very sad, for a caption how about " I am so worried, I need to say my prayers, to get help for the May elections"
He does look very sad, for a caption how about " I am so worried, I need to say my prayers, to get help for the May elections" Stella Bell

3:44pm Mon 20 Feb 12

alan.of.eastleigh says...

Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice.

I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God.

The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?
Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice. I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God. The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)? alan.of.eastleigh

5:13pm Mon 20 Feb 12

Georgem says...

alan.of.eastleigh wrote:
Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice.

I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God.

The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?
Fun fact: Darwin believed in God. Now, to business: proof that apes don't believe in God, please
[quote][p][bold]alan.of.eastleigh[/bold] wrote: Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice. I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God. The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?[/p][/quote]Fun fact: Darwin believed in God. Now, to business: proof that apes don't believe in God, please Georgem

5:44pm Mon 20 Feb 12

anonymous coward says...

I think it's lovely that Sean Woodward has a prayer at every meeting.

When it's the atheist's turn, perhaps he could invoke the tooth fairy.
I think it's lovely that Sean Woodward has a prayer at every meeting. When it's the atheist's turn, perhaps he could invoke the tooth fairy. anonymous coward

5:58pm Mon 20 Feb 12

freefinker says...

Georgem wrote:
alan.of.eastleigh wrote:
Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice.

I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God.

The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?
Fun fact: Darwin believed in God. Now, to business: proof that apes don't believe in God, please
.. er!! Almost certainly NOT.

His wife was very religious. He was only lightly indoctrinated into christianity – his father, Robert, and grandfather were actually freethinkers (look it up on Wikipedia) although his mother’s side were unitarian.

Increasingly, as he developed his theory over many years, he began to doubt and then dismiss organised religion, particularly its origin story. He stopped going to church for over 30 years before he died, quite a courageous thing to do in a 19th century rural community.

The claim that he reverted back to christianity on his death-bed was always denied by his own children.

Asking for 'proof that apes don't believe in god' is a bit cart before horse. christians insist god was there first - I say, let them prove there is a god, then ask the ape question.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]alan.of.eastleigh[/bold] wrote: Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice. I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God. The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?[/p][/quote]Fun fact: Darwin believed in God. Now, to business: proof that apes don't believe in God, please[/p][/quote].. er!! Almost certainly NOT. His wife was very religious. He was only lightly indoctrinated into christianity – his father, Robert, and grandfather were actually freethinkers (look it up on Wikipedia) although his mother’s side were unitarian. Increasingly, as he developed his theory over many years, he began to doubt and then dismiss organised religion, particularly its origin story. He stopped going to church for over 30 years before he died, quite a courageous thing to do in a 19th century rural community. The claim that he reverted back to christianity on his death-bed was always denied by his own children. Asking for 'proof that apes don't believe in god' is a bit cart before horse. christians insist god was there first - I say, let them prove there is a god, then ask the ape question. freefinker

8:34pm Mon 20 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

alan.of.eastleigh wrote:
Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice. I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God. The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?
As I pretty much said previously on here, the religionists are on the run and they (you) don't like criticism.

Re: Richard Dawkins;

Anyone who saw the man on yesterday morning's 'The Big Questions' on BBC One, will have seen what a reasonable and decent debater he is, one might even say, a well mannered gentleman of the old school. Nothing a-t a-l-l like Condor Man's description of him in his post of '4:56pm Sat 18 Feb 12', as one of his "...bigoted atheists...who want to provoke difference".
[quote][p][bold]alan.of.eastleigh[/bold] wrote: Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice. I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God. The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?[/p][/quote]As I pretty much said previously on here, the religionists are on the run and they (you) don't like criticism. Re: Richard Dawkins; Anyone who saw the man on yesterday morning's 'The Big Questions' on BBC One, will have seen what a reasonable and decent debater he is, one might even say, a well mannered gentleman of the old school. Nothing a-t a-l-l like Condor Man's description of him in his post of '4:56pm Sat 18 Feb 12', as one of his "...bigoted atheists...who want to provoke difference". Scrutinizer

8:59pm Mon 20 Feb 12

Scrutinizer says...

freefinker wrote:
Georgem wrote:
alan.of.eastleigh wrote: Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice. I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God. The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?
Fun fact: Darwin believed in God. Now, to business: proof that apes don't believe in God, please
.. er!! Almost certainly NOT. His wife was very religious. He was only lightly indoctrinated into christianity – his father, Robert, and grandfather were actually freethinkers (look it up on Wikipedia) although his mother’s side were unitarian. Increasingly, as he developed his theory over many years, he began to doubt and then dismiss organised religion, particularly its origin story. He stopped going to church for over 30 years before he died, quite a courageous thing to do in a 19th century rural community. The claim that he reverted back to christianity on his death-bed was always denied by his own children. Asking for 'proof that apes don't believe in god' is a bit cart before horse. christians insist god was there first - I say, let them prove there is a god, then ask the ape question.
You know what they say about if an ape was sat down at a type writer (theoretically) indefinately, he'd eventually knock out the full works of Sheakespeare? Well, I dare say if said ape was given enough time, he'd eventually knock out the full works of the bible too - having never previously heard of the concept of 'him'/'her'/'it' and crucially with no belief in 'him'/her'/'it' either! Then what do you think he'd do? He'd just keep on typing and knock something else out then the next... Who knows, he might even eventually stop taking LSD! ;-)
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]alan.of.eastleigh[/bold] wrote: Amazing how everyone has missed the real point of the story. It is about a law permitting prayers not forcing them on people. The story hit the headlines when an athiest tried to impose his non religious beliefs on others - depriving them of their right of choice. I'm not particularly religious but find it interesting that the abusive and hostile posts above all come from people who do not believe in God. The ability to have faith and belief is one of the things that distinguishes us from apes. So why should we snigger at anyone who has a belief - be it God or Darwin (or both)?[/p][/quote]Fun fact: Darwin believed in God. Now, to business: proof that apes don't believe in God, please[/p][/quote].. er!! Almost certainly NOT. His wife was very religious. He was only lightly indoctrinated into christianity – his father, Robert, and grandfather were actually freethinkers (look it up on Wikipedia) although his mother’s side were unitarian. Increasingly, as he developed his theory over many years, he began to doubt and then dismiss organised religion, particularly its origin story. He stopped going to church for over 30 years before he died, quite a courageous thing to do in a 19th century rural community. The claim that he reverted back to christianity on his death-bed was always denied by his own children. Asking for 'proof that apes don't believe in god' is a bit cart before horse. christians insist god was there first - I say, let them prove there is a god, then ask the ape question.[/p][/quote]You know what they say about if an ape was sat down at a type writer (theoretically) indefinately, he'd eventually knock out the full works of Sheakespeare? Well, I dare say if said ape was given enough time, he'd eventually knock out the full works of the bible too - having never previously heard of the concept of 'him'/'her'/'it' and crucially with no belief in 'him'/her'/'it' either! Then what do you think he'd do? He'd just keep on typing and knock something else out then the next... Who knows, he might even eventually stop taking LSD! ;-) Scrutinizer

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree