BS: Christian Persecution

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 05:37 PM

The reason keith is that Christians are perceived by the "liberals" who inhabit a large part of this forum, as conservatives.

Christianity and the Christian churches are seen as the only organised opposition and a danger to the the "liberal" ideology, which is turning the people of this country into an ineffectual irresponsible waste of space.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 06:27 PM

Christianity and the Christian churches are seen as the only organised opposition and a danger to the the "liberal" ideology...

??-

What planet do you spend most of your time on, Pharoah?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 06:49 PM

Help us out then Greg.
On the Muslim Prejudice thread, you were quite defensive towards Muslims, and very critical of Christians.
You never abused Muslims for having an imaginary friend.
On the Christian Persecution thread, you expressed nothing but contempt for Christians without mentioning Muslims at all.

Why the difference Greg?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Lighter
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 07:13 PM

I see things that disgust, offend, and anger me every day of my life, from addiction to crime to idiot politicians to cancer and tsunamis. Is anyone in favor of these things? I hope not.

Unless you're a transcendent mystic, feeling disgusted, offended, and ticked off by one thing and another is part of the price you pay for being alive. I recommend turning such feelings to less contentious purposes.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 08:24 PM

"You won't find real atheists expressing certainties."

There seem to be a fair number of unreal atheists in that case.

I couldn't agree more. To be fair, a lot of people who, rightly, utterly reject God do so with the same certainty as the religion that riled them in the first place preached God to them. I don't for one minute deny that certainty-atheists are really atheists, but they have yet to articulate their atheistic arguments fully. A bit of thought tells you that you can never prove God doesn't exist. The odds against his existence are absolutely huge, of course, but there will never be definitive proof.   

As for "I have to look at religious iconography wherever I go" I'd be inclined to say that all of us are exposed to a far greater amount of materialist and implicitly anti-religious (and for that matter anti-humanist) imagery everywhere we look. Papers, TV. advertising...

True again, but you are not comparing like with like. Religion is a completely human construct, and there's nothing more most of its adherents like than to impose it on the rest of us willy-nilly. There's even a current thread here "asking for prayers." If I'm on this very secular board and I have to read that rubbish I could well feel quite insulted as an atheist, but I'd far sooner ridicule it for what it is, or just ignore it. It's very rude, isn't it, but it happens all the time, and we accommodating pagans just fart in its general direction. The stuff you refer to is entirely reactive. But for religion it would not exist. To criticise it is to suggest that religion should get a free ride. Heaven forfend. I could suggest to you that the whole of nature, in its glorious ordinariness, is the ultimate anti-religious testament, and it certainly far outweighs all that stuff you're moaning about, if only all those blinded believers could see it.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 08:27 PM

The reason keith is that Christians are perceived by the "liberals" who inhabit a large part of this forum, as conservatives.

Christianity and the Christian churches are seen as the only organised opposition and a danger to the the "liberal" ideology, which is turning the people of this country into an ineffectual irresponsible waste of space.

Congratulations for winning the "mindless rant of the week" award.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 11:10 PM

It is interesting to me, Steve Shaw, that, dismissive as you are in your argument, in *print* you are respectful to God and Christianity- you capitalize the words. I would have expected you to say "a god" rather than "God".

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 02:09 AM

Steve, on this thread you say "I think that most of our major religions deserve all the attacks they receive."

On the other thread, you suggested in your early posts that all criticism of muslims was racist, and you defended Islam from all criticism.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 03:57 AM

Steve and Greg.....If my opinions seem so outlandish to you, why don't you have a stab at answering Keiths main point?

In reality, the Muslims are even more "conservative" than the Christians, by are not YET a danger to Western "liberalism"

Try to get your heads out of the sand....one doesn't have to live on another planet to see and understand what's happening on this one. :o)

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 04:39 AM

From Fluids: "I could get the full file down but "to add to debate in a folk music forum" isn't a good enough excuse. I do know, as was made public by her employer, that after due warnings as per their HR polices, she was referred to the Nurses and Midwifery Council (NMC) and the case was dropped after she agreed that her approach was not consistent with the expectations of her registration. As a result, she was reinstated."

What an extraordinary concept, even by your standards, Fluids.   Can you cite the prohibition the nurse was alleged to have breached?    There was a long thread here that set out the alleged offence and the excuses for the management. The NMC had the power (being judge, jury, and executioner in its own cause) permanently to exclude Nurse Petrie from her job, and she was thereby blackmailed into a "soft option".   I have some parallel experience in that I successfully saw off a trumped up allegation against me to the SRA by a judge who was displaying racial prejudice against a barrister instructed by me, and who tried just the same sledgehammer approach to head off my reporting him on the grounds of his prejudicial conduct. If what you say about your regulatory activities is true, it seems that you are on the side of the oppressors. Now why doesn't that surprise me?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 04:50 AM

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=118245

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:06 AM

Steve to a certain extent I agree that Songs of Praise is a waste of money spent on a licence fee but speaking from my elderly parents perspective they are not able to get to the nearest church now so they are happy for it to come to them. Personally I would rather it not be on, the theme tune alone grates on my nerves.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:22 AM

From BBC
Songs of Praise was an overnight success and on some Sundays as many as 12 million viewers viewed the programme. The average audience today, is still a remarkable 2.5 million, a great achievement in our multi-channel world.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:51 AM

The stuff you refer to is entirely reactive. But for religion it would not exist.

Newspapers, advertising hoardings, TV adverts all implicitly promoting a materialist vision of what our lives are all about?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:15 AM

It is interesting to me, Steve Shaw, that, dismissive as you are in your argument, in *print* you are respectful to God and Christianity- you capitalize the words. I would have expected you to say "a god" rather than "God".

I'm probably inconsistent and careless in this regard. Hey ho. I'm respectful to respectful Christians, as it happens, but that's setting the bar quite high you understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:17 AM

Steve, on this thread you say "I think that most of our major religions deserve all the attacks they receive."

On the other thread, you suggested in your early posts that all criticism of muslims was racist, and you defended Islam from all criticism.

What utter tripe. Show me!

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:22 AM

As for Songs Of Praise, etc., I'll never be joining a campaign to have it banned or anything like that. There are lots of things I don't subscribe to that suck away my tax money (like charitable status for private schools - don't get me started). In the order of things it's just a silly programme that probably never killed anyone, and I'm sure that tossers like Jonathan Ross suck away far more of my dough.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:28 AM

>The stuff you refer to is entirely reactive. But for religion it would not exist.

Newspapers, advertising hoardings, TV adverts all implicitly promoting a materialist vision of what our lives are all about?

Materialist does not equate to anti-religious, unless you're a religious neurotic. You've fallen into the trap of accepting that religion is the default position, the reference point against which everything must be judged. Well I'm an atheist and I don't accept it. Truly anti-religious stuff relies on religion for its very existence. The girl on page 3 with the huge norks does not have a caption underneath saying "Choose either me or God."

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:38 AM

A while back, Songs Of Praise came from Morwenstow church, near here. I've been inside that lovely old church countless times. The churchyard is a delight in spring, filled with primroses and celandines, and you can stroll out to the cliffs and Hawker's Hut afterwards. I sang lustily along, though I usually only know the first verse, if that. You can always practise your harmonising by humming. I watched all that sanctimonious guff in the Island Parish series, too, when it came from the Isles of Scilly, which I love to bits. I could always look over the vicar's shoulders at the scenery to work out where I'd been.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:42 AM

Or just stick "Islamic" in front of any negative word or phrase (or one you've worked on to make negative). Islamic suicide bomber. The Islamic group Hamas/Hezbollah. Easy innit. "Islamic" is not automatically a race-word, so you can get away with this.

So, Brian, let's hear you judging the whole of white Britain on the strength of what Fred West did. Perhaps you'd care now to make the case, with full evidence of course, that Ashraf Azad was typical of male Muslims and is supported in his actions by the Muslim community.

I repeat. Show me that these young men did what they did in the name of Islam and I'll let you off saying your intolerant things like "Pakistani Muslim men towards young British girls..."

If you're not anti-Islam tell me why you single out Muslims for this responsibility to speak out.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:48 AM

Steve and Greg.....If my opinions seem so outlandish to you, why don't you have a stab at answering Keiths main point?

Achy, old chap, do you never learn? Just look at what happened on the Muslim Prejudice thread when anybody tried to answer "Keith's main point." Keith doesn't have one "main point". He has a large number of "main points", and if you try to address any one of them he simply shifts to another "main point."

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:53 AM

Keith, you should make it clear when you're quoting someone. Those bleeding chunks are me on that other thread, to remove confusion, and they have absolutely nothing to do with Keith's ridiculous accusation that I think all Muslims should be exempt from criticism. Try harder, Keith, and also try explaining the context of quoted remarks as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 09:20 AM

Sorry Steve, but it did follow your request.
Your posts do suggest that criticism of Islam tends to be racially motivated, if you will forgive the weasels.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 09:32 AM

My posts suggest that racially-motivated criticism of Muslims is racially-motivated. You were attacking people because they just happened to be of Muslim origin ("BPs" to use your ugly representation of them, as if you're scared to type the word "Pakistani") committing a particular crime and who were definitely not acting in the name of Islam. That's racially-motivated criticism. I've been posting a lot on another forum this week on which I criticise Hamas and Hezbollah for certain actions that they pretend to do in the name of Islam, and for their silly and counterproductive rhetoric at times. I could just praise them and ignore their faults as I see them, couldn't I. Anyway, to cut to the chase, you simply cannot demonstrate that of which you accuse me, because I simply didn't say it (and I don't think it). Try harder.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 10:06 AM

Meanwhile, to get back to the subject of the thread, from Pakistan Christian Post dated today: PCC condemn killing of Christian blasphemy victim in Karachi jail.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 11:11 AM

Why the difference Greg?

No, Keith, I expressed contempt for supposed "Christians"[sic] who as a matter of course expressed contempt for Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,999
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 11:17 AM

Have any of you ever been trapped in a revolving door?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 11:35 AM

Many's the time, Bruce- suppose I should know better.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: olddude
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 11:45 AM

No, Keith, I expressed contempt for supposed "Christians"[sic] who as a matter of course expressed contempt for Muslims.

They are not Christians Greg ... that's the difference. No more than the Taliban are Muslims

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 11:54 AM

That's right, and it pays to remember that when we routinely, as we do, smear Islam every time alleged "Muslims"/people who look like they may be Muslims/people who are Muslims but not acting like Muslims get up to something we disapprove of.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 12:32 PM

They are not Christians Greg ... that's the difference.

You Bet! and this Keith dude is among their number, whining about so-called "Christians" being "Persecuted".

Enough, already!

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 12:34 PM

Steve, the first of those posts predated the paedophile gang rapists discussion, which you also considered to be racist.

Greg,
On the Muslim Prejudice thread, you were quite defensive towards Muslims, and very critical of any and all Christians.
You never abused Muslims for having an imaginary friend.

On the Christian Persecution thread, you expressed nothing but contempt for any and all Christians without mentioning Muslims at all.
Why do you treat them so differently?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 12:39 PM

Why do YOU, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: olddude
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 12:53 PM

People who persecute other people have no faith, they follow leaders. They can arise in any denomination, in any political movement, and yes can be atheists also. They come from all walks of life. I know of no person of faith that persecutes anyone, a faith based life is one of compassion and helping others ... anything less is simply not correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 01:01 PM

Steve, the first of those posts predated the paedophile gang rapists discussion, which you also considered to be racist

You're now saying that I regarded a whole discussion as racist? Huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 01:35 PM

The thing is, we sometimes get corrupt governments and corrupt legal systems who cosy up to the racism and bigotry you can find in most places - as with the old South in America, or the (let's hope)defunct dictatorship in Egypt, and the current regime in Pakistan.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 03:09 PM

Steve, I said that on the other thread you suggested in your early posts that all criticism of muslims was racist, and you defended Islam from all criticism.

Greg, I hope and believe I do treat them the same.
Unlike you, I treat neither with contempt, and I consider neither above criticism.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 03:28 PM

Greg, I hope and believe I do treat them the same.

Right. See Jeremiah 5:21, Isaiah 6:9-10, Matthew 13:13

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:01 PM

I am afraid that sneering remark about "whining about so-called "Christians" being "Persecuted" does rather tend to colour anything that Greg F says in this context.

There is no question but that there is a situation in Pakistan in which members of a minority community can find themselves routinely subjected to murder, prosecution and imprisonment. The fact that the victims are Asian Christians rather than Black Americans or European Jews does not make that remark any less repellent.

I hope that on consideration Greg will recognise that and withdraw it. I don't think he is really the kind of person that it implies he is.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:10 PM

Kevin, members of all manner of minority communities all over the face of the earth- including Gays, Lesbians, agnostics, athiests, women &of late sentient beings capable of rational thought &c &c &c find themselves on the short end of the stick.

This is news?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:24 PM

is there any room for remarks regarding jewish persecution here?

the st. valentine massacre of jews in germany in retribution for be blamed for the black death (plague) is a particularly horrifying and fascinating tale. a tale i call 'when flagellents go wild'

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:31 PM

So it's "whining" to mention such things, and inverted commas should be placed on any description of that kind of thing as "persecution"?

Maybe the victims in such cases were"asking for it"?

I don't actually believe Greg thinks that.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 07:12 PM

AFAIK many different minorities in Pakistan are routinely persecuted.

The minorities minister was however murdered not because of his religion but because of his political activity.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:20 PM

"The minorities minister was however murdered not because of his religion but because of his political activity."

That's not a million miles from saying that Martin Luther King was shot for his political activity and not because he was black. In one way that would be true, but at the same time it would distort the truth about the circumstances. The two went together.

Here is the very impressive video clip of Shahbaz Bhatti speaking about the likelihood of his own assassination.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:44 PM

Well said Mr McGrath.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 07:33 AM

Methinks M'Unlearned friend should quit whilst he's behind....

Political activity and religion may be different things in a dictionary but in Pakistan, the line is more than blurred.

Oh, and yeah... I am on the side of the oppressor. Every time mate, every time. if she worked for me, I would have been uncomfortable reinstating her. (Sorry everybody, a parallel thread is in danger of occurring here.) Like The NMC, I put safeguarding rather high on my agenda. A pity you weren't acting for her really, we could have a safer service if she had been struck off.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 12:05 PM

Fluids - check your facts. I know it's not your speciality, but for once do us a favour. You've already gone from purporting to know about that case to admitting your prejudice.

Martin Luther King was assassinated because it was to his assassins unacceptable for a black man to be a political activist.

Bhatti was assassinated purely for his political stances. If he had once been Muslim apostasy would have been added to the list of his alleged crimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 12:22 PM

...it was to his assassins unacceptable for a black man to be a political activist.

I rather suspect that if his politics had been pro-segregation and pro-war the fact that he was black might have been seen in a different light.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 12:52 PM

Yep, Kevin , but he probably still would have been shot for being "uppity". You need to experience Dixie at first hand.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 03:29 PM

A Christian GP who asked a troubled patient if he had considered faith in Jesus appeared before medical watchdogs today.

Dr Richard Scott spoke about the matter of religion to the 24-year-old, who has been described as 'suicidal' and 'vulnerable', at the end of a consultation at his surgery, the General Medical Council (GMC) heard.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040567/Christian-Dr-Richard-Scott-fights-job-asking-suicidal-patient-faith.html