BS: Christian Persecution

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 11:58 AM

Imagine for a moment that I have no hidden agenda.
Just imagine that what I say here is indeed what I actually feel.

Persecution of any group is abhorrent.
Religious persecution no less so.

I singled out Christians because they are said to be suffering most and their plight under reported.

We should be able to agree on this.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket gettin.. can't be arsed
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 11:31 AM

Well. That flushed out a few bigots.

I really am proud of Musket.

Very early on in this thread, Keith said he didn't notice much agreement just hate.

Methinks he doesn't understand debate. The object of the exercise isn't to read sycophantic agreement and idiots fighting your corner for you, it is to explore.

I have explored and like many have concluded that this thread was nothing to do with the awful plight of people in what Keith's fellow UKIP members call Bongo Bongo Land but far more to do with UK Christians moaning about normal people not being taken in by their group nonsense any more.

Every time someone ill informed idiot tells me this is a Christian country, I tell them it can't be because I was born here. So was my mate Tahir.

Mind you , I could agree there is more press coverage of Christian persecution. Sells newspapers and frightens the white majority.

Also, there may well be more persecution of Christians overall this year, but it would be a guess. The only figures quoted here are opinion column inches in the Tory press.

Either state your agenda or fuck off.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 10:49 AM

"You have shown none at all here Musket.
Likewise Jim, Greg and Don."
On the contrary - we have condemned all forms of religious persecution - you only want to discuss the persecution of Christians by Muslims - the old usual of Muslim bashing.
You have denied the persecution BY Christians and have done your level, undemocratic best to allow us even to discuss what we believe to be the cause of all religious persecution - the enormous power possessed by some Churches over the minds and bodies of its followers.
Your mate has waffled on in the background attempting to make persecution by the Christian Church a thing of the past and not large enough (at this present time) to be counted as real persecution - it is neither - it is happening now and it remains a threat where eny religion has influential access to our and our childrens' minds (and bodies - as has been proved by long-term and ongoing revelations)
Compassion is more than empty hand-wringing - it is genuinely wanting to do something about it.
It is certainly not about attempting to use the persecution of the people of one faith to denigrate and persecute the devotees of another
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 09:58 AM

If you started a thread about people being persecuted for their belief you would draw responses undoubtedly there would be some of the other variety. Regardless of the religious identity of the persecuted minority. I suppose if they were Muslim the identity of the people reacting with hostility might be different, but the essential message would be more or less the same.

The word "cult" in this context, as I pointed out, is perceived, and I suggest, intended, as offensive. Of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: bobad
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 08:11 AM

"If you started a thread about people being persecuted for their belief you would draw intelligent responses"

"I did, but I got you."

ZING!

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 08:00 AM

If you started a thread about people being persecuted for their belief you would draw intelligent responses

I did, but I got you.

If persecution of people with an odd number of moles on their arse was happening, no compassionate person would find it hilarious.

Christians are being persecuted to the point of extermination because of their belief.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 07:41 AM

Excuse my enquiring, Musket [esp in such terms as I am about to use, much opposed to my general principle with regard to the content & expression of my posts], but

WHAT THE FUCKING SHITTY BUMHOLES ARE YOU ON ABOUT?

Just asking...

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 06:53 AM

Ah. The deconstruction of the word laugh.

Wondered what your next distraction would be.

Persecution is awful. Christian persecution is hilarious. Why? Because it is about as much a topic as persecution of people with an odd number of moles on their arse.

If you started a thread about people being persecuted for their belief you would draw intelligent responses I suppose but your agenda is loud and clear. Pointing and laughing is about you, not the people killed and maimed whom you see as fodder to push a sectarian point.

This is about relevance of one cult as opposed to others to society, not counting the baptism certificates of victims of hate. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 05:27 AM

So, what was I wrong about on this thread Musket, and what is there to laugh about?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 05:02 AM

Yeah but bad enough you think you are right but without intelligent people pointing and laughing at you, you'd be unbloodybearable.

Anyway, nice to be almost on the side of Mr Carroll for a change. My detractor's detractor and all that.

Abstaining is seen by shallow people as agreeing. Ever seen a UK government with 51% of all possible votes? I'd hate to think you have a mandate to talk bollocks on behalf of the church.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 03:24 AM

You have shown none at all here Musket.
Likewise Jim, Greg and Don.
That was my point.

You could have just abstained.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 03:08 AM

Yeah that's me. I lack compassion.

Although the million and one Jung type character profiling exercises the public sector put me through reckon otherwise.

But you must be right. After all, you keep telling us you are.

Excuse me whilst I shut a few wards and knock off a few old biddies by underfunding. I never wanted to put something back when I sold up and retired. Perhaps the little baby jesus made me do it.

Zzzzzzzz



I was riding on an elephant earlier. My mind was wandering as it does. I saw a temple in the clearing of the jungle and my mind went to the "what is the best religion" thread. At that point my elephant decided to have a shit. No big deal except the angle of my seat meant I almost fell in it.

I reckon that Buddha chap was telling me something? Back in Bangkok on Thursday. He can keep more of an eye on me there. More ruddy temples than there are obscenely rich Catholic churches in Malta.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 13 - 02:43 AM

Musket, you refer to this comment.

"The indifference to their suffering by those on the left, like Jim and Musket (but not McGrath let it be said), disgraces them."

Both you and Jim felt the need to challenge that you on the left, but not that you are indifferent to the suffering of people who happen to be Christians.

What was your point?
That you lack compassion.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 10:26 PM

Religious persecution is something different from the various requirements religions may make of adherents, sometimes reflected in civil laws where such adherents are in a majority. And it is not to be confused with the situation where religious organisations may be associated with governments that are politically or economically repressive.

Plenty to criticise there, whether we are talking about Protestant fundamentalists in the USA, Catholic bishops in South America, Mullahs in Iran, or monks in Burma. But persecution of religious minorities is significantly different, and it is best to recognise the difference.

It's analogous in a way to the distinction between xenophobia and racism.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 08:40 PM

Keith seems to struggle with his arguments. He says I am on the left.

No idea what he is trying to infer by that but many on Mudcat.org reckon I am a dirty rotten bleeding capitalist.

It's true too.

What was your point? We can't have the likes of Bridge reading that I sit in an adjacent armchair. ......

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 08:00 AM

A link was given Jim.
You point out the Catholic background of the author, but can not challenge anything he writes.
It is all true, yet mainstream journalists will not touch the story.
Why?
They report individual atrocities, but never the bigger picture that is an ongoing extermination.

Again you express outrage at what you allege is persecution by the Catholic Church, but the same old indifference to real, unrelenting persecution and extermination, because the hapless, friendless, poverty stricken victims pray to Jesus.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 06:39 AM

A footnote
Keith's unlinked quote comes from a writer who works for the Vatican (still one of the world's front-runners in religious persecution) who has dedicated his writings to persuading us that the answer to all the world's problems lie in becoming Catholicism - a faith ruled by a church that historically has brought suffering to some of the "world's poorest people and continues to do so.
"That is equally true in relation to Muslims as it is to Christians. And vice versa."
My point exactly Mac.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 06:06 AM

"The Christians being persecuted are the poorest people in the poorest countries."
And some of the poorest people in the world are still being persecuted with the full co-operation of the Catholic Church - including their active support for fascist regimes - notably by savages like Mrs Thatcher's friend Augusto Pinochet. (note for Mike there unless the Chile massacres are out-of-date too, and the present collusion of the church in atrocities carried out in South America today to exploit natural resources like timber dont count as atrocities
Russia, who leapt the Iron Curtain over a decade ago to become part of the 'Free World' has lent her weight to a mass murderer gassing his people.
"The indifference to their suffering by those on the left, like Jim"
You dishonesty really has no limits, does it - the indifference to suffering is perfectly illustrated by hand wringing hypocrites wept for the slaughter of Homs yet who directed their attentions to hiding the role of the West in supplying weapons to the perpetrators and then persuaing us that there was nothing we could do about it.
I suppose you have evidence of any political views expressed by me other than those of Humanism - no, course you can't.
Dividing the injustices and persecution of the world into divisions like 'left and right' is as stupid as dividing them into Muslim and Christian - all need to take their share in the blame
The US and Britain have no problems in giving open support and friendship to Feudalist Monarchs who maintain their positions with the use of Sharia Law, nor do they have any problems trading arms with extremist Muslim despots who use them to mete out there despotism - they've admittted as much.
Stop attributing political positions to me which you haven't the faintest idea about and make your arguments.
"Why are no left wing publications printing reports like that in the Spectator?"
As stupidly partisan a statement has yet to be made.
I can and have accessed this information in any area of the press I care to look - I tend not to go to (the "left" whatever that means nowadays), not because I don't trust them but because people like you and Mike will use it as an argument rather than dealing with the real issues.
I do know damn well I will never get a whiff of information on atrocities such as those described above and fully supported by the Church from The Universe or The Catholic Monitor.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 05:49 AM

Persecution of religious minorities appears to have very little to do with their relgious beliefs and everything to do with their being perceived as minorities available as targets.

Comments such as "As far as I'm concerned, these are the important factors that give rise to religious persecution - uncompromising absolutism in church teachings and how that absolutism is put to use for gain and political power" are both irrelevant as explanations of persecution - and also implicitly appear to imply some justification for persecution.

That is equally true in relation to Muslims as it is to Christians. And vice versa.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 04:19 AM

Some x-posting. I obviously meant your 0354 post, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 04:16 AM

I agree with every word of your last post, Jim, and its 'conclusion'; but nevertheless consider it tangential to the actual topic of this thread, which is that, admitting there is as ever much 'persecution' going on of & by various ethnic & ethical entities, much respectable & authoritative research would seem to point inevitably to the fact that it is the Christian elements living under authorities hostile to them who at present constitute numerically by far the highest demographic of persecutees. Nobody is trying to deny that it wasn't always so, or that it almost certainly will not remain so in perpetuity. But such is the situation; NOW, TODAY, not at the time of the Crusades or the Inquisition or the Spanish Civil War, but RIGHT NOW, this moment.

You seem determined, on what you continually admit are doctrinaire grounds deriving from your own upbringing & experience, to refuse to take this vital point, the actual topic & gravamen of this thread, on board.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 04:12 AM

As far as I'm concerned, these are the important factors that give rise to religious persecution - uncompromising absolutism in church teachings and how that absolutism is put to use for gain and political power.

The Christians being persecuted are the poorest people in the poorest countries.
Talk of "absolutism" and "political power" are utterly meaningless in their desperate grinding poverty and helplessness.

The indifference to their suffering by those on the left, like Jim and Musket (but not McGrath let it be said), disgraces them.

Why are no left wing publications printing reports like that in the Spectator?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 04:07 AM

"Extract.
" Just as one didn't have to be Jewish in the 1970s to care about dissident Jews..."
There is no suggestion that Christians are not being persecuted today - just that they are only part of a bigger picture.
Your (un-linked) quote is a representative from a Church body that has a bit of a reputation as a major persecutor itself - "glass houses maybe?
See below
Jim Carroll

The Global War on Christians JOHN L. ALLEN JR
Dispatches from the Front Lines of Anti-Christian Persecution

"JOHN L. ALLEN JR. is the senior correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter and the senior Vatican analyst for CNN, and writes for other national and international publications. He speaks at nearly fifty engagements a year and is the author of seven previous books, including his most recent A People of Hope: The Challenges Facing the Catholic Church and the Faith That Can Save It.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 04:00 AM

Kevin ~~ I take your point re Telegraph- & Mail- reading bloggers &c. But I sense a certain defensiveness in their position, a knowledge that many despise & envy them, seeing them as privileged beyond their merits & deserts; so rather than denouncing those of opposite views as 'evil', they sort of surreptitiously admit, as I see it, to feeling that their opponents might just have something to feel aggrieved about, & attempt to justify themselves to them.

With the left, OTOH, their conviction as I perceive it is that virtue resides exclusively on their side; they are absolutely confident of being the good guys in the white stetsons & their opponents the baddies in the black ones; which is why I find their unvarying truculently self-righteous tone so rebarbative.

Hope I have made my point comprehensible. Agree this a drift, but drifts are nothing new around these parts, eh!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 03:54 AM

"Hence my suspicion over the perpetuation of a thread pointing out religious persecution of one particular cult. Christianity"
Put n a nutshell Musket.
Two problems with the way all religions are spread.
1. We are taught from the beginning that there is only one god and that it is wrong to even question that "fact", immediately creating a them-and-us situation.
No choice is given in this; if you don't follow the instruction book you are a "sinner" - this is driven into you from the minute you begin to think - not reasoned choice, simply conditioning, and admitted as such - see Jesuit quote ""Give me a child for for his first seven years....".
I have known 'lapsed Catholics' who spent their lives in fear of eternal damnation because they abandoned the rule book they had been hnded at the beginning of their lives - "guilt" is the most powerful and widely used weapon of the church - this I something I have witnessed in family, friend, acquaintances, throughout my life
My father became a confirmed atheist, but he often said he didn't know if he would take last rites on his deathbed - the manner of his death never gave him that choice

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_guilt

Elsewhere, an old W.W.1. quote boasted "there are no atheists in a foxhole"
Absolutes from day one.
This situation polarises even those who call themselves 'Christians' or 'Muslims'.... into different, often hostile sects - look at Northern Ireland or the different interpretations of Islam.
2. This divide is often seized on by political, economic groups and used as a manipulative tool of self interest - don't have to go further than this forum for discussions on this one - oil and arms sales, territorial expansionism, or national or international dominance.
As far as I'm concerned, these are the important factors that give rise to religious persecution - uncompromising absolutism in church teachings and how that absolutism is put to use for gain and political power.
Until all religions are taught as philosophies and removed from the political and economic arenas we'll continue to tear each others heads off in the name of our various gods.
As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing whatever 'anti-religious' about that conclusion.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 03:10 AM

Extract.
" Just as one didn't have to be Jewish in the 1970s to care about dissident Jews in the Soviet Union, nor black in the 1980s to be outraged by the Apartheid regime in South Africa, one doesn't have to be Christian today to see the defence of persecuted Christians as a towering priority."

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 03:06 AM

I am not part of a conspiracy to recruit Mudcatters into Church.
The OP and the re-OP were inspired by news reports.
Take a look.

If I were a conspirator, the persecution would still be an issue worthy of discussion.
There would still be "the war on Christians."
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9041841/the-war-on-christians/

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly
Date: 07 Oct 13 - 02:47 AM

But but. ...

Surely religion is in itself censorship?

Accusing someone of trying to censor you when you question their invisible friend is a bit bleeding obvious to begin with. .. pouncing on you and trying to wear you down is not just what scientology advocates do. Other religions, especially Christian ones are very good at it too.

My responsible adult took her mum to our local church when she was up last as she likes church but her care home keep forgetting to take her.

I was told the vicar was imploring those present to challenge anybody who dismisses faith and fight to keep the church as a force in society. I have found since that this call to arms is as a result of a synod discussion into decreasing membership and influence.

Hence my suspicion over the perpetuation of a thread pointing out religious persecution of one particular cult. Christianity. Funny that.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 07:02 PM

peculiar in my experience to those of that particular political orientation, that any who do not share their views cannot possibly be motivated by any sort of ethical belief or genuine principle, but must be evil people driven to their views by a combination of selfishness & ill-will.

I'm afraid I'd totally disagree with Mike's assertion that that is an attitude that is either confined to or particularly characteristic of "left wingers".

It crops up in people with all kinds of political opinions. If anything I suspect it's more characteristic of people with rightwing views, though that's no more than a hunch. But just look at any set of comments on the blog of the Telegraph or Mail, let alone any number of American blogs.   It's probably more a question of personality than politics.

Jim keeps on saying stuff about Keith attempting to impose censorship on him, but i can't see how disagreeing with someone, or even telling them to belt up is censorship of any kind, aside from someone in the chair at a meeting etc.

We are drifting aren't we? It's getting a bit like the Life of Pi, bloodshed and all...

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 03:13 PM

Nope - given the up after reaching 70 - much appreciated anyway
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 02:07 PM

Is it really your birthday, by the way, Jim? Or was that just a manner of speaking?

If so: then Very Many Happy Returns from Emma & Me.

If not: then Happy Unbirthday...

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 02:01 PM

" as bobad appears to agree"
He eould say that, wouldn't he
"I repeat, where he chooses to live & I can't imagine what can have led anyone to comment on that."
I can't believe that you are claiming for a minute that I am accusing you of such - against my better judgement I went into a long description of why we live where we do in order to prevent Keith from using it to suppress my point of view.
Your ranting about my so-called left-wing leanings
"that peculiar left·wing conviction, peculiar in my experience to those of that particular political orientation, that any who do not share their views cannot possibly be motivated by any sort of ethical belief or genuine principle"
only echoes previous statements of yours, along with your demansds that I reveal my politics a sort of 'Mudcat un - whatever activities witch-hunt' by both of you.
"quite such obloquy & ill temper"
I don't react well to witch-hunts.
I understand Brecht sat and repeated told Joe McCarthy and his team to "**** off" repeatedly, for which, my admiration.
As there seems little point of our having anything to say to each other now you seem to have returned to your self-appointed role of 'Fairy Godmother' I suggest you do the same
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 01:36 PM

Slow burn

From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 10:44 AM

... my politics, or your imagined assessment of my politics is not in any slightest way your business.

From one whose posts on non-musical topics are universally [see umpteen comments above & on other threads] recognised as doctrinaire & agenda-driven, isn't that a bit rich?

Not really thinking of trying to make the leftward inclination of your views a "TOP SECRET, Highly Restricted, authorised personnel only" item were you, Jim?

☺~M~☺

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 01:04 PM

Jim, As long as I have been a member of this forum you have been using the accusation of "thread drift" as an attempt to silence opposition

How does my observation that you are going off subject silence you?

You have until sundown to answer.

Happy birthday.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 12:29 PM

I broke off that post prematurely, as half-time in West Brom v Arsenal was drawing to a close [with W Brom leading 1-0, cheeky buggers!]; so I went down to pause the tv.

Further to String's unimpressive & officious intervention: as Jim knows, I have the utmost respect for his musical attainments & career, as member of the fine Critics Group & so on; so don't see what String thought he was achieving by diverting the topic in that direction. It is my impression that Jim likewise remembers some of my writing on folk. And indeed we have often both expressed regret on these threads that our mutual respect, and the things we have in common folk-wise, should be so unfortunately vitiated by other matters having led to a certain amount of contumacy over matters ideological. I remember Jim once remarking in that connection that the old Officers' Mess rule about no politics & no religion had much to be said for it.

But alas that would not do on Mudcat, would it? & so the matter remains. I wish Jim well in all his endeavours. It is absolutely no business of mine, I repeat, where he chooses to live & I can't imagine what can have led anyone to comment on that.

But, alas, our ideological differences persist. I fear I can't see that much can be done about that (can you, Jim?); but could wish it might lead him to fewer manifestations of quite such obloquy & ill temper, like inaccurate accusations of my having endeavoured in some way to prevent his speaking his mind!

As if...!

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 12:06 PM

You can believe what you like, Jim [& live where your personal life & career take you ~~ for all String's saying, I have never mentioned a word on that subject & would not dream of doing so], and I have never accused you, just now or at any time, of attempting to prevent my saying what I wanted, and neither have I so tried to prevent you. But as to impugning my motives, and those of others, for holding the opinions we do, you show very much the intolerance and lack of respect for those of differing views typical of those of your acknowledged orientation.* And your MO, of resentment and ill-temper & ill-manners when your shibboleths are questioned & you descend to name-calling, I continue to hold that I have described absolutely accurately above, as bobad appears to agree, & do not need to repeat it. If you can't see that in yourself, well then you can't... But that is how I, & others, perceive the matter.

~M~

*Not that you are the only one, or even the worst. I well remember when I once asked Mr Bridge why he was being so unmannerly and abusive to meover what IIRC was quite a neutral matter, he explicitly stated that those who held views like mine "deserved abuse", as I was [believe me he actually used this locution or one very like it] "a would-be grinder of the faces of the poor". And him supposed to be a man of education [but you don't denounce him for being so, do you, Jim?]. I would never tell him he deserved abuse; but I certainly felt on that occasion that he deserved the utmost contempt!

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 11:44 AM

"ut you can't make me join with you in discussing something other than the subject if I want to stick with it."
Keith, I'd be as happy as a pig in the proverbial if you never wrote another word on this forum - but I would never in a million years demand that you didn't.
Where on earth did you et the notion that I was trying to make you "join with you in discussing something other than the subject if I want to stick with it."?
As long as I have been a member of this forum you have been using the accusation of "thread drift" as an attempt to silence opposition - you are the only one in my recollection to ever have done so.
Please feel free to say nothing - I don't welcome birthdays nowadays, but I would gladly receive such a present from you!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 11:14 AM

Keith's censorious attitude to who should be allowed to post on this forum and how they should be allowed to express themselves.

No one can stop you saying whatever you like Jim, but you can't make me join with you in discussing something other than the subject if I want to stick with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 10:44 AM

As with other things, my politics, or your imagined assessment of my politics is not in any slightest way your business.
You obviously share Keith's censorious attitude to who should be allowed to post on this forum and how they should be allowed to express themselves.
Whatever my politics might be it has nothing to do with my attempting to have my say unmolested on this forum.
You have tried hard enough in the past to find them out and your latest intervention shows why I refused to comply.
I have never at any time attempted to tell anybody what they should say or when or how they should say it, whether I agree with them or not.
Arguing strongly for a point of view, left, right or centre, is one thing - deliberately attempting to suppress those views from being stated is another (and attempting to smear them with ill-informed political innuendo yet another).
If you have anything to say about what I believe, please feel free to challenge it - otherwise, mind your own bloody business what my politics are.
Stringsinger says it all as far as I'm concerned.
Keith has til the end of the day to sort his aggressive and dictatorial behaviour towards other members of this forum.
There comes a time in life when parents have to let their children make their own way through the world - I suggest that time has long passed in your case.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 10:29 AM

Who has recently employed the label "leftie", String?

Thank you, bobad.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: bobad
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 10:07 AM

Mike nails it as usual.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Stringsinger
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 10:05 AM

It seems to me that Jim is making perfect sense. I applaud his history and knowledge in folk music.

I understand his need to move to Ireland to continue his studies. He would have
the same trouble in America as in Britain. Most people in the US wouldn't understand what he is talking about or be interested in his pursuit. I think
that it's important.

Labeling him as a "leftie" smacks of contemporary McCarthyism.

Every religion in the world is both persecuted and a persecutor. It's a tribal
identification that culminates in violence and warfare.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 09:35 AM

Jim also represents in ♠♠♠ that peculiar left·wing conviction, peculiar in my experience to those of that particular political orientation, that any who do not share their views cannot possibly be motivated by any sort of ethical belief or genuine principle, but must be evil people driven to their views by a combination of selfishness & ill-will. IMO the ill-will ~~ often positive vindictiveness indeed ~~ is much more exemplified in Jim's attitudes and expressions that any posted by others of us of who occupy more moderate, less doctrinaire & agenda-driven, positions. The idea of living and letting live, accepting that some opinions different from one's own might nevertheless be held disinterestedly because genuinely viewed by their holders as correct and true, does not enter the thinking of such as those whom he represents so vehemently. When he meets someone intelligent who will nevertheless not accept all his shibboleths (& remember he has more than once aggressively denounced me for being 'educated'!), his entire security & raison d'être appear threatened.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 08:27 AM

"Do you support Jim's demand to discuss something else instead?"
Thank you for a perfect example of something I missed out from my list - your constant distortion of what your opponents' positions are.
I might have added "hatred of Britain", living 'somewhere else' and 'support for Al Qaeda, the IRA and other terrorist groups.
We'll bring this to an all-round successful conclusion for everybody, yourself included, if you keep on going in the direction you are.
Thank you again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 08:23 AM

As to the correctness of the location of Jim's ♥: we have had this conversation before IIRC. I am afraid that I cannot 100% so regard anyone who turns so nasty when he is getting the worst of an argument: see my posts of 1 Oct 1235pm, 3 Oct 0115pm, 4 Oct 0525am; in the first of these, I wrote

"It's all your usual MO ~~ you give the impression of wanting to argue intelligently till anyone asks you to question one of your fatuous OK shibboleths; then you turn illogical; when this is pointed out, you turn nasty."

I think this a fair summary of Jim's argumentative system [if it can be graced with such a designation]. I don't think such goings-on at all the mark of good-heartedness. Nor is his insistence that, if I ever take Keith's part against his blustering bullying & censoriousness, then I must be either K's 'Fairy Godmother' or his 'poodle'. I'm not worried about his fatuous animadversions; but can't help being reminded of Julian Fellowes' brilliant summary of a disagreeable character in his novel 'Snobs': "He was the sort of person who insults you and then says 'Can't you take a joke?'."

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 07:41 AM

Don,
ignoring one whose opinions you wil never alter.

My only opinion here is that Christians are being very badly persecuted.
Do you disagree?
Are you with those who object to such an opinion even being expressed?
Do you support Jim's demand to discuss something else instead?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 07:30 AM

I think presentation limitations are something we are all saddled with - few of us are professional writers, tacticians, diplomats or child-care experts, so we do the best we can.
Ignoring is not a long-term option with someone who takes a proprietorial and censorial approach to many of the subjects that interest me and which I consider important, especially with someone who invariably insists on having the last word.
Wars of attrition are just as censorial as being told that you are not allowed to discuss certain aspects of a subject
There has to be a limit to how many subjects you are prepared to leave in the hands of such people - I have now reached mine.
Anybody familiar with the 'Thousand and One Nights' story of 'Sinbad and the Old Man of the Sea' will know how I am left feeling after a prolonged session with one of these individuals - see 'Homs Horror', 'Muslim Prejudice' 'Irish Famine' and 'No Traveller Signs' threads for examples.
Sorry to disagree.
Best
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 06:02 AM

I know your heart is in the right place Jim, though your presentation often obscures that fact.

However, you might like to consider following my lead and ignoring one whose opinions you wil never alter.

I do not and will not respond to him any more, and I feel much better for having made that decision.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 04:27 AM

Cross-posted
"Perhaps you could start us off."
Hate saying it, but I told you so!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 13 - 03:59 AM

"The Jim and Keith show is getting very old, very boring and ultimately unproductive."
Not getting Don - it has been for a very long time and probably from the outset, but I suspect it will bounce along the bottom for some time yet while Keith is determined to infest these threads with the bigotry, hatred and occasionally self-confessed ignorance with which he hd dominated these threads with over and over again.
I would hope that his latest performances have put a brake on his domineering and censorial behaviour, but I fear there's a little life left in the old - whatever - yet.
I have taken some steps to prevent him from interfering with my membership rights on this forum - the rest of you may make up your own minds.
I quite enjoy the gift of being able to express my opinions openly on a public forum and learn to those of others who share my interests without being told what I can and cannot discuss, and I am prepared to put a little effort into retaining that privilege.
Sorry if that gets up any noses - but that's me!
Jim Carroll