BS: Christian Persecution

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 13 - 05:54 PM

Churches do not control hospitals.

Apparently you've never heard of Catholic hospitals? Or hospitals run by other "Christian"[sic] denominations? Get a clue, Keith & stop the bullshit.

I suppose you also deny that "Christians" are at the forefront of persecuting gay, lesbian, and trans-gender folks?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 13 - 06:07 PM

This thread is about the evil of persecuting people for their faith.


No, Keith, its about the evil of persecuting people for their beliefs - which includes those who subscribe to no religion whatsoever.

These last are regularly persecuted by "Christians"[sic] such as yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket with straight bat
Date: 29 Sep 13 - 06:34 PM

I do not know about other countries, but in England, where many of the contributors to this thread reside, religious organisations can fund and manage hospitals but cannot control them on religious grounds.

The Health and Social Care Act 2008 requires registration of what are hospitals by definition of overnight care of health needs, curative or palliative. Non overnight care can also come under hospital care, but the categories can be complicated as to day case and clinic based invasive care. They are then inspected and regulated by The Care Quality Commission where the regulations for equality of access, consent, patient control of care and myriad other regulations are monitored and enforced. Registration is required by both NHS and non NHS bodies. Other bodies, including religious bodies were previously registered under The Care Standards Act 2000. In short, it is 13 years since healthcare on religious grounds has been legally acceptable here.

I can say from what I suppose is a professional view, having been a regulator and now a director of a hospital trust, that it would be extremely difficult to have policies and procedures affecting patient care that either discriminated on religious grounds or didn't reflect upon publicised best practice by bodies such as NICE or The Academy of Royal Colleges. Similar structures exist in other parts of The UK.

I have inspected and held to account religious bodies providing both health and social care, and in my own experience, religion has provided the funding rather than the vision. I speak regularly with our multi faith chaplaincy team about their wish to provide more holistic care to those without religious faith, and to be honest, if our local experience was translated generally, I could see a far more relevant future for those who use faith as their guide in helping society at large.

Some of the people professing faith on this thread show themselves to be incapable of raising their vision to such a level. Hence my dismissal of them as blustering irrelevance.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 13 - 08:16 PM

Well, Musket, in the old U S of A, no such prohibition exists against religious organisations controlling hospitals. For one example of many Catholic hospitals routinely - on the basis if religious docterine- will allow a mother to die rather than aborting a foetus in a life threatening pregnancy.

Now, there's real; "Christians"[sic] in action.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 13 - 08:17 PM

"First Jim, not all Christians oppose abortion."
This is not about "all Christians" it is about a church who totally opposes abortion/termination in any shape or form, who opposes contraception in any shape or form other than abstention and insists on controlling sex education (what there is of it) should be carried out by a clergy made up (supposedly) of celibates.
Sexual promiscuity was met with extreme punishment ranging from shaming - banishment beatings, ostracising..... to being confined into the slavery of the Magdalene Laundries which administered beatings, sexual abuse, harassment, constant humiliation and forced labour - the last Laundry closed in 1996.
Who gives a toss what you think (do you think?) - this is the most powerful Christian Church on this planet
"no church has any say in what procedures are carried out in British, and I am sure, Irish hospitals."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ireland/9679840/Pregnant-woman-dies-in-Ireland-after-being-denied-an-abortion.h

Ireland's laws governing sexual practices and all other moral issues were passed only with the blessing of the church, just as those in the North were dominated by the Church there - a throwback to the Scots Presbyterian churches there.
Would you like a peep at what happened throughout Wales?
You have been given the story elsewhere of the 10 year old Bolivian child who was raped by a farmer, became pregnant and contacted 2 sexually transmitted diseases. These facts were hidden by the Nuns who ran the hospital until it was too late for a legal termination to be performed, despite the fact that her age and condition guaranteed that attempting to give birth would certainly kill her.
When the parents applied for a dispensation from the church, they were told that "she should embrace her martyrdom".
Tell me about Christianity - I seem to have missed something.
"This thread is about the evil of persecuting people for their faith."
Thread drift again
The title of this thread is " Christian Persecution" and it can equally be applied to persecution by Christians
How dare you attempt to steer this thread into your comfort zone - we can discuss any aspect of this term we wish to DO NOT ARTTEMPT TO CENCOR THIS DISCUSSION - YOU HAVE NO AUTHORITY ON THIS FORUM AND YOU HAVE LOST ANY RESPECT THAT YOU MIGHT ONCE HAVE HAD.
"Third, other religions, e.g. Islam, are anti-abortion, so why single out Christianity for your attack?"
The title of this forum indicates it to be about Christians ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU HAVE JUST SAID - we all run the risk of being accused BY YOU of being accused of "THREAD DRIFT" if we try to bring Islam into the equation.
What planet are you living on?
"England, where many of the contributors to this thread reside, religious organisations can fund and manage hospitals but cannot control them on religious grounds"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1570344/Catholic-hospital-bans-abortion-referrals.html

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 29 Sep 13 - 10:02 PM

Christian Persecution. When my wife began classes to join my church, they told her she couldn't vote for a pro choice candidate. Sounds like persecution to me. She looked into another religion; atheism

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 13 - 10:59 PM

"This thread is about the evil of persecuting people for their faith."

Yes, you wouldn't think that would be too controversial. But I suppose if there was a thread about apple pies it'd likely turn into a heated series of exchanges about how they represent a range of evil characteristics of society, and seek to marginalise those who prefer bananas or muesli...

The word faith is hardly the exclusive property of religion. It's pretty common to speak of faith in the future, or faith in democracy, or in someone's word.

But in any case persecution of people belonging to any kind of minority typically has nothing to do with what they believe, but rather with how they are perceived. That applies whether the persecution is tied up with the religious affiliation of the victims, the colour of their skin or their sexual identity.

And in no case do they "deserve it".

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 01:46 AM

The attitude here (at least from one one individual) seems to be, "why can't we just be allowed to go on persecuting the Muslims - Christian persecution doesn't count")
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 02:51 AM


No, Keith, its about the evil of persecuting people for their beliefs - which includes those who subscribe to no religion whatsoever.

These last are regularly persecuted by "Christians"[sic] such as yourself.

I accept that inclusion Greg.
I do not accept that Christians are persecuting atheists.

Freedom of belief (and of non-belief) is a basic human right.
All of you shouting down debate on this denial of rights usually defend human rights.
Why not this one?

This is not the place to debate abortion or discrimination against GLBT.
FWIW my views on those issues coincide with yours.
Start a thread and I will support it.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 03:03 AM

Jim.
The attitude here (at least from one one individual) seems to be, "why can't we just be allowed to go on persecuting the Muslims - Christian persecution doesn't count")

I do not know what you have been reading, but it is not this thread.
You have reverted to making shit up.
Again.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 03:45 AM

"You have reverted to making shit up."
Then why do you keep squealing "thread drift" whenever you have been given something you can't handle.
"other religions, e.g. Islam, are anti-abortion, so why single out Christianity for your attack?"
"Finally, this thread is about religious persecution so please start your own threads instead of hijacking this one."
TWO CONSECUTIVE STATEMENTS ON ONE POSTING
If this forum is to continue being a place where we can all speak our minds freely you have to be stopped from constantly attempting to steer it into your own comfort zone.
"This thread is not about....", and "why don't you talk about persecutions by other religions" (am I alone in seeing a totally contradictory nonsense in putting these two statements into one posting, as you have just done?) has now become a regular attempt to censor these threads
You refuse to atop your constant attempts at censorhip - in future I will just respond with CENSORSHIP ALERT, and continue, and if that doesn't stop you, I will trawl this forum and publicly announce the hundreds of times you have attempted to use it.
YOU HAVE NO AUTHORITY WHATEVER TO TO STAGE_MANAGE THESE DISCUSSIONS TO SUIT YOUR IGNORANCE AND BIGOTRY - STOP NOW
If you are unable to see why refusing to terminate a life threatening and unviable pregnancy on religious grounds is not an extreme form of Christian or any persecution, you really should not be here interfering with those of us who do.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 04:00 AM

"but it is not this thread."
Incidentally - the word MUSLIM has appeared forty times in your postings on this thread.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 04:02 AM

You are shouting down discussion of religious persecution, the subject of the thread, and demanding we discuss abortion instead.
That is the real censorship going on here Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 04:14 AM

Incidentally - the word MUSLIM has appeared forty times in your postings on this thread.
39 times by me out of 139 mentions altogether, and I have the most posts.
Mine were mostly in response to others.
What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:14 AM

"demanding we discuss abortion instead."
Depriving awoman of a pregnancy termination needed on medical grounds for religious reasons is an extreme form of (by) Christion persecution
Attempting to prevent discussion of this on a thread on Christian persecution is an extreme form of censorship i.e. persecution.
CENSORSHIP ALERT - WATCH OUT - BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:19 AM

Christians do not control what treatments or procedures are given in hospitals.Abortiont is an issue worthy of discussion, but this thread is about something else.

You are shouting down discussion of religious persecution, the subject of the thread, and demanding we discuss abortion instead.
That is the real censorship going on here Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:19 AM

Incidentally
My point is that you are attempting to have us just discuss persecution against Christians - (YOURS IS THE LARGEST NUMBER OF MENTIONS BY FAR OF THE WORD MUSLIM BY ANY ONE INDIVIDUAL) while attempting to prevent us discussing persecution BY Christians - making my point perfectly, that you are once again attempting to make this yet another of your Islamophobic Muslim-bashing platforms.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:45 AM

So, in Carrollesean, any mention of the word 'Muslim' leads instantly to the conclusion that the mere iteration of the term infallibly indicates a full agenda of "Islamophobic Muslim-bashing"? And who, pray, is drawing all these racist pictures?

Oh, I do always enjoy the Keith&Carroll show, watching the increasingly convoluted knots of irrelevance & irrationality one of the participants ties himself into, to the (☺·almost·☺) unfailingly cool & controlled & courteous responses of the other.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:47 AM

you are attempting to have us just discuss persecution against Christians

Not true Jim.
The contention is that Christians are the most persecuted, but that can be, and has been, challenged.
Any discussion of the denial of freedom of belief is entirely appropriate.

Abortion is an entirely separate issue.
I hope you get a discussion going, but on a new thread please.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 07:28 AM

"So, in Carrollesean, any mention of the word 'Muslim' leads instantly to the conclusion that the mere iteration of the term infallibly indicates a full agenda of "Islamophobic Muslim-bashing"? "
Ansd along comed the tail for the dog to wag
No Mike - any attempt to confine discussion headed "Christian Persecution" only to persecution of Christians by other groups, particularly Muslims (39 mentions by Keith so far) is a form of extreme censorship and a continuation of his (ad sadly your) Islamophobic crusade.
Feel free to join in and bless us all with your superior wisdom, and try not to scurry off next time.
Are you really saying you approve of this sort of shit?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 07:46 AM

Not true Jim.
The contention is that Christians are the most persecuted, but that can be, and has been, challenged.
Any discussion of the denial of freedom of belief is entirely appropriate.

Abortion is an entirely separate issue.
I hope you get a discussion going, but on a new thread please.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 08:26 AM

Washington Times, August 2, 2013 — Vladimir Putin said last week that he observes "with alarm" that "in many of the world's regions, especially in the Middle East and in North Africa, inter-confessional tensions are mounting, and the rights of religious minorities are infringed, including Christians and Orthodox Christians."
The Russian president made his comments at a meeting with Orthodox Christian leaders in Moscow. He urged the international community to take steps towards preserving the rights of Christian people worldwide and preventing the violence that they suffer routinely in dozens of nations around the globe.
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/high-tide-and-turn/2013/aug/2/putin-world-leaders-should-unite-end-anti-chri


Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/high-tide-and-turn/2013/aug/2/putin-world-leaders-should-unite-end-anti-christia/#ixzz2gNV4iTiU
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: bobad
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 08:51 AM

As counterintuitive as it may seem for Westerners long accustomed to thinking of Christians as oppressors, not the oppressed, empirical confirmation of the point is depressingly easy to find.

The Pew Forum estimates that Christians face persecution in a staggering total of 133 countries, representing two-thirds of all nations on earth.

The Germany-based International Society for Human Rights, a secular organization, estimates that 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination in the world are directed against Christians.

Some 150,000 Christians are killed for their faith each year, according to both the Catholic relief agency Aid to the Church in Need and the evangelical group Open Doors.


BTW, as an atheist I have no dog in this race.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 09:14 AM

"The contention is that Christians are the most persecuted, but that can be, and has been, challenged."
The facts are that any religion, given the opportunity, will persecute non-believers, and their behaviour in Ireland prove that Christianity is no different.
It is shameful that to you attempt to suppress that fact and it is purely protecting your own product that you attempt to stop discussion on their persecution, just as you attempted to suppress information on British arms sales.
You cannot be allowed to go on attempting to censor these discussions as part of your extremist nationalism - you are no mean persecutor yourself - censorship is persecution - don't do it again
It doesn't really matter to this argument that Christians are being persecuted MORE than other groups - you have spent a great deal of time on this forum persecuting Muslims, harassment of the type you go in for makes the lives of those fleeing exactly the same type of persecution miserable and dangerous in Britain - you really have no room to criticise anybody
I don't expect an honest response to this, not from you or your poodle - who appears to have slunk off again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 09:39 AM

The facts are that any religion, given the opportunity, will persecute non-believers, and their behaviour in Ireland prove that Christianity is no different.
It is shameful that to you attempt to suppress that fact

Is it a fact that non-believers are persecuted by Christians in Ireland Jim?
It is shameful if true, and relevant to this thread.
What do the bastards do to you Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 09:40 AM

"Censorship is persecution" sez Mr Jim Confused-of-this-Parish. So he disapproves the provisions of the Race Relations Acts, I take it, which constitute, since the demise of the Lord Chamberlain's department, about the only actual instance of legal censorship remaining on our statute books?

He doesn't seem to know the difference between rational criticism [such as objecting to the perils undergone by Christians in many Islamic societies - see post from bobad a few back - or preferring that our soldiers be not hacked to death on our public streets by those with a self-declared Islamist agenda], and 'persecution' of an entire demographic.

Trouble is, he is a right Humpty Dumpty when it comes to persecution, which he overdefines to the point where the term loses all meaning.

But I expect he will feel I am persecuting him by saying so. Ooohhh dear!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 10:48 AM

"Is it a fact that non-believers are persecuted by Christians in Ireland Jim?"
They certainly have been in the past and they would be again if the Christian Church hadn't shat in its own nest by allowing their clergy to help themselves to our children - not just in Ireland of course, and certainly not just Catholics.
"What do the bastards do to you Jim?W
More to the point - what have they done to you.
Bastards - a term of abuse aimed at children born out of wedlock - the church doesn't approve of them either and so, apparently, neither do you.
Religions are prospective terrorists by their very nature and the mindset that places them above the rest of us never really goes away, it just lies dormant until the next time.
Still "he hit me harder sir" Mike - a bit pathetic, even for you.
You have about the same level of imagination as your friend.
Jim Carroll

"NOT SORRY AND WILL DO IT AGAIN
Even in the 20th century, Catholic authorities have tried to present the Inquisition in an undeservedly flattering light. Cardinal Lépicier, expressly supported by Pope Pius X, (Pope from 1903-14) declared the church's reign of terror was right, just because the church did it:
"The naked fact that the Church, of her own authority, has tried heretics and condemned them to be delivered to death, shows that she truly has the right of killing ... [W]ho dares to say that the Church has erred in a matter so grave as this?"
In fact, many have dared to say so.
Charles Leland wrote, "When people believe, or make believe, in a thing so very much as to torture like devils and put to death hundreds of thousands of fellow-beings, mostly helpless and poor old women, not to mention many children, it becomes a matter of very serious import to all humanity to determine once for all whether the system or code according to which this was done was absolutely right for ever, or not." Anthropologist Jules Henry said, "Organized religion, which likes to fancy itself the mother of compassion, long ago lost its right to that claim by its organized support of organized cruelty." G.G. Coulton said of the Inquisition, "History affords few plainer examples of the demoralizing effects of absolute power upon fairly ordinary men."
http://freetruth.50webs.org/A2d.htm

and

http://darylilbury.wordpress.com/2011/11/19/anti-abortion-activism-the-hidden-terrorism/

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 11:00 AM

Not for the first time, Jim, I have not the remotest idea what your last comment addressed to me means. I genuinely can make nor heads nor tails of it. It is entirely opaque to me. Were it written in Martian it would make much more sense...

But pleased don't trouble to explain. I am sure it would turn out to be of not the least interest to me whatsoever.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 11:25 AM

Jim, asked to give details of non-believers being persecuted by Christians in Ireland, you tell us about the Spanish Inquisition!
No-one was expecting that.

I have complained before about you relying on out of date, discredited evidence, but I think you are now taking the piss.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 11:44 AM

"m, asked to give details of non-believers being persecuted by Christians in Ireland, you tell us about the Spanish Inquisition!"
I did not tell you about the Spanish Inquisition - I poo#inted out that the people in charge to day still support in the name of Christianity all those centuries ago and would do it again should the circumstances and opportunity arise - my point all along.
Nothing here is "either out of date" or "discredited"
You don't think refusing 11 year old rape victims and women with life threatening and unviable pregnancies on religious grounds worthy of being described as "religious persecution"
You have no right to expect sympathy for Christians being persecuted if you sneer at you own brand of persecution.
If it's permissible for your lot - why should anybody give a toss when you get it done to you.
As I said - damn you all and may you all roast in your own self-created hell.
Stick your pisoges up you hole, every last one of you and stop making our world a superstition-ridden minefield.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 12:17 PM

certainly looks like this thread has been over-run by a certain someone.
maybe disagreement equates to persecution in some minds.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 02:09 PM

What would you think of a thread about persecution of Muslims in certain countries which was derailed by a constant series of posts about Islam being repressive towards women and gay people, and hostile to all kinds of things? And how addressing persecution of Muslims was a way of diverting attention from persecution of Christians and others, especially by Muslims?

Any significant difference from this thread, when you come down to it?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 02:59 PM

"Any significant difference from this thread, when you come down to it?"
It's what we constantly get including here - nobody is defending the inarguable abuses carried out by Muslims in the name of Islam - why should we accept inarguable abuses by Christians in the name of Christianity?
This is a thread about religious persecution - to separate this persecution from all other religious persecution is wrong.
It is not exclusive to any one religion, but it goes with the territory - religious bodies persecute non and contrary believers, the criticism of one and defence of the other is hypocritical.
This is a territory war between international organisations, not an attack on either Christians or Muslims (or it shouldn't be).
Religion - any religion and politics (any politics) is a toxic mix and ignoring that fact is to perpetuate the situation
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 04:02 PM

So you would see it as perfectly appropriate for what I described in my post to happen? A thread specifically about persecution on minority Muslim communities to be used as an occasion for hostile posts about a range of issues about Islamic society and religion?

Imagine in such a thread, arising from some appalling massacre of Muslims, finding the following posts from this present thread with the word "Christian" replaced by "Muslim":

I've had just about had it with the whining about persecution from so-called "Christians".

Personally, I think that most "Christians"[sic] richly deserve any persecution they may get.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:39 PM

a thread about persecution of Muslims in certain countries which was derailed by a constant series of posts about Islam being repressive towards women and gay people, and hostile to all kinds of things

We've already had exactly that thread and situation several times, Kevin.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:41 PM

"It is not exclusive to any one religion, but it goes with the territory - religious bodies persecute non and contrary believers"
.,,.
Accepted! But seriously, Jim; NOT all to the same degree. This was the point of my asking whether anyone could name a Xtn government who executed apostates today. You hummed & hawed & turned yourself inside out & tied yourself in knots to name other objectionable things they do, before ceding me a grudging, hedged about with 'but previously & maybe some time in the future', negative.

So do think of the qualitative difference, please, I beg you, between denying a girl an abortion on religious grounds, which all except those perpetrating it will regard as appalling, and sentencing someone to be publicly beheaded for leaving Islam & embracing Xtnty & actually carrying out the sentence when they refuse to recant.

Here is a recent, well documented & authenticated instance: I found this, including video, just with a brief google ~~

Man Beheaded by Tunisian Muslims for Converting to Christianity
Posted on June 6, 2012

http://www.bestgore.com/beheading/man-beheading-tunisia-muslim-convert-christian/

We are all sorry for the girls who couldn't get abortions in Ireland; particularly the one told to 'embrace her martyrdom'. Sickening indeed. But do you really regard such abuses as deserving absolutely equal condemnation & obloquy, Jim? Completely objective relativism can be counterproductive in conveying one's point convincingly, you know.

~M~


























Man Beheaded by Tunisian Muslims for Converting to Christianity
Posted on June 6, 2012 by Vincit

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 05:55 PM

We've already had exactly that thread and situation several times, Kevin.

And a pretty unsavoury situation it is too, at times. Those quotes ( as adjusted to change the name of the religion ) would I am sure fit very well on a website of the English Defence League.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 06:18 PM

I have never supported any single religion in my life, not have I ever supported atrocities committed in the name of any religion
I believe the definitive nature of all religions to be the problem, not the particular philosophies or values espoused by the followers of any particular group - which usually don't count for very much anyway.
The persecution of any group is wrong per se, doesn't matter mtter if the culprits are Muslims, Christians, Zionists...... wrong.
Numbers don't matter very much either..... any group who will persecute for their beliefes are just as likely to kill a thousand as kill ten people if they believe their cause is just.
Islam and Christian fanatics are basically no different - the difference lies only in the opportunity offered to persecute.
What is wrong is to point to another group and say "they're worse than us because they killed more" - that has happened over and over again on this forum.
Or;
"What they do is bad, what we do is excusable" or to deny it altogether, which is exactly what what is happening here.
The argument being put here is that "it's wrong to kill and persecute Christians" which it is, on the other hand, "It's not important that a pregnant woman is allowed to die, or at least two 11 year old rape victims faced certain death" because treating them goes against the beliefs of some particular bunch of religious nutters.
All these case us debase us as human beings, and all of them open the door to further and escalating abuses and atrocities.
There is no black and white in any of this - all religious persecution is equally evil, as are those who support one side or the other.
A plague on all of them, all black cats are still black, in darkness or in sunlight.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 07:04 PM

Priest told us if we didn't raise our children in the Catholic Church our marriage the would be invalid. Is that Christian persecution? Is Catholicism Christianity? The Baptists around here don't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: bobad
Date: 30 Sep 13 - 08:53 PM

"He doesn't seem to know the difference between rational criticism [such as objecting to the perils undergone by Christians in many Islamic societies - see post from bobad a few back"

It seems that some of our more strident posters would prefer to remain unencumbered with facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 12:46 AM

Jim ~~ Zionism not a religion, in any sense whatever; even if most of its adherents belong to one particular faith, there are plenty within that faith who do not adhere: and it is a tendentious muddying of the waters to call it so. Might as well call KKK 'a religion'. You know this perfectly well, and I suspect are being deliberately provocative. Why? You have enough quite good arguments without going in for all this relativism and truculent come-on-ery. Can't you see how the whole tenor of the thread is becoming increasingly and pretty well ubiquitously hostile to you? All v well being the lone voice crying in the wilderness; but not much use when the whole of the rest of the world has just stopped listening.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 03:01 AM

"Zionism not a religion, in any sense whatever"
I'm aware of that Mike - but it has become a political pressure group claiming to represent the Jewish people
"Can't you see how the whole tenor of the thread is becoming increasingly and pretty well ubiquitously hostile to you"
Not really - it has become obvious that our in-fighting has once again had the usual effect of driving other posters away.
Even if I were in the minority, it has never put Keith, or to a lesser extent you off from taking the stances that you have because nobody backed your arguments.
Argue the facts, stop counting heads - this includes the fact that people are persecuted and killed by religious persecution of all shapes and sizes, not that some are less important than others because there aren't as many of them effected.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 03:22 AM

I don't believe it has ever made any such claim of exclusive representation, Jim; and will permit myself to observe, with all modesty, that this is a topic on which, for obvious reasons, I may claim to be better informed than you.

I am entirely unaware that any infighting on our parts is going on to the exclusion of others ~~ tho every now & again, to be sure, the Keith'n'Carroll Show gets into swing, with admitted occasional interpolations on my part, which you are pleased to characterise, with oh such consummate wit[!], variously as ☤-Godmotherhood or Poodlefakery!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 03:28 AM

Jim, non-Muslims living or working in Saudi are expected to live by the Sharia like everyone else.
That is not persecution.

Someone denied an abortion in Ireland is being treated the same as everyone else.
It is not persecution.
Furthermore, your laws are not imposed by any church, but by elected politicians in a secular, democratic parliament.
There is no persecution of non-Christians by Christians in Ireland.
Your claim does not stand.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 04:28 AM

Keith - laws forced on people influence all and are no less oppressive laws because of that fact - they are still persecution.
The laws of pregnancy termination here are equivalent to those in Britain in the last century; they remain in place largely due to the influence of the church - there is no secret of where the influence keeping them in place comes from.
Go and ask the families of the young women whose daughters still flee to Britain in their thousands for a pregnancy termination whether they consider themselves persecuted by ancient laws; go and ask the husband of Savita Halappanavar how fairly he feels his wife was dealt with by Irish law....
In Britain we have laws which deal fairly with pregnancy; if they do change here it will be despite the dedicated opposition of the Church
Specific discrimination against non believers was a reality well into my lifetime and is quite likely to return again should the church ever get over the results of its own particular brand of (child) persecution and return to its former position - my point all along
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 04:30 AM


Keith - laws forced on people influence all and are no less oppressive laws because of that fact - they are still persecution.

Then you have a different definition.
That is not the persecution referred to in the title.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 04:47 AM

Quite, Keith. You really are being a bit of a HumptyDumpty when it comes to defining 'persecution', Jim; and failing to admit that, even if one accepts all or any of your take on the word, there are still degrees of severity within the category.

You really must sort out this confusion of yours: or you shall not go to the Ball to meet Prince Charmin; and the Poodle might bite you on the bum!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 05:37 AM

"Then you have a different definition."
We have indeed - mine includes to oppress, worry or harass - political or religious persecution is given as only an example, not a definitive condition - what's yours?
"there are still degrees of severity within the category"
Not witin the definition there aren't (you pair raised it) - persecution is persecution.
There is also the fact that persecution remains an option to religious groups and is only checked by prevailing circumstances, the statement by the churchman on the Inquisitions makes it quite clear that in his opinion the church never did anything wrong and, if allowed to, would continue that policy were it left off it were only allowed to do so.
Grounds enough for disbarring any church from having a say in the running of any country as far as far as I'm concerned.
However Mike - I'll do my best to sort myself out - thanks for the heads up again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 05:52 AM

what's yours?

The word in the title refers to kidnap, forced conversion, rape, extreme violence, murder, imprisonment and the destruction of churches and homes.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 13 - 06:12 AM

"there are still degrees of severity within the category"
Not witin the definition there aren't (you pair raised it) - persecution is persecution.~~~
.,,.

Oh come on, Jim; all categories have their degrees:-

Punishment is punishment. But staying in for half an hour to write out 'I must be good' 50 times is not the same as 500 lashes of the cat or 20 years banged up in Parkhurst, is it?

So neither is making people go abroad if they want to buy a condom the same as beheading them slowly with a blunt knife* for converting to another religion.

Try not to be a silly boy: it would be such a shame to miss the lovely Ball.

~M~

*I didn't watch the video ~~ just reading the description was enough for me. & I didn't care for the site it was on either; a sort of porn-site. But that doesn't mean that the account wasn't accurate or authentic; seemed indeed to appear on several different sites in the same google index.