BS: Christian Persecution

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 11:42 AM

There are now more than 45.2 million displaced people — 15.4 million refugees, 937,000 asylum seekers and 28.8 million forced to flee within the borders of their own countries. The crisis is at its worst since 1994, according to a report released today by the United Nations. And more unaccompanied children sought asylum last year than ever before.
The report, based on data collected from governments, nongovernmental organizations and the UN's refugee agency, says about 7.6 million people were displaced during 2012 alone because of conflict or persecution. On average, about 20,000 people were displaced every day in 2012.
War continued to be the major cause of displacement in 2012. Five countries mired in conflict — Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Syria and Sudan — accounted for 55 percent of all refugees in 2012. Of those displaced last year, 1.1 million are refugees and 6.5 million are internally displaced people.
Among the more shocking data released by the United Nations was this: of all refugees, almost half were below the age of 18 and more than 21,000 new asylum applications were submitted by children in 2012, the highest ever number recorded by the UN's refugee agency.
Many countries are stepping up aid and seeking solutions to end the growing refugee problem, which can be a heavy burden for still developing nations. Typically, more than 80 percent of refugees find asylum in developing countries. In 2012, however, Germany hosted the most refugees outside of Pakistan and Iran.
The numbers do not reflect those displaced this year by the spiraling conflict in Syria. The United Nations says 1.6 million Syrian have fled the country since the conflict began in 2011. The UN Deputy High Commissioner for Refugees T. Alexander Aleinikoff said he expects there to be 3 million total Syrian refugees by the end of 2013.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/war/130619/refugees-worldwide-numbers-stats-displaced-people-afghanistan-somalia-sudan-syria-iraq

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 11:22 AM

What the hell does "boutique Christian" mean?

I don't suppose it can be this

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 11:16 AM

What the hell does "boutique Christian" mean?

I don't suppose it can be

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 10:17 AM

And yes (sob) calling me a boutique Christian is soooo hurtful (sob)...

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 10:10 AM

Again you demonstrate your profound ignorance of religion.
I would be happy to educate you on the subject, but not on a thread devoted to religious persecution.

Restart one of the many threads on the subject and I will accommodate you.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 09:59 AM

I'm confused. Are you a Christian or aren't Catholics Christians?

You neatly sidestepped the women bishops mind.

Are you a Christian or are people who quote the Bible to justify the points I just raised Christians?

Are you comfortable being dismissed as a boutique Christian?

If the Church of England do what you claim, then some of their branches need management attention for not following policy. Or management needs changing for being weak.

You are describing an ideal church or perhaps your local hangout. You are not describing what Lambeth Palace are quite happy to perpetuate.

To permit is to promote.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 06:12 AM

I questioned the reasons behind highlighting it in preference to persecution of minorities based on their human rights of choice of Creed.
Why?
Just say if you accept it or not.

" Does The Church of England accept the will of the people yet and accept the human rights of gays?"

Yes.

" or divorcees?"

Yes

" what about the religions that still subjugate women in the way CofE used to accept?"

What about them?

" What does your Bible tell us about gender equality?"

That it was not considered an issue thousands of years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket between courses
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 05:28 AM

I never disagreed with the first point. I questioned the reasons behind highlighting it in preference to persecution of minorities based on their human rights of choice of Creed.

I would fight to the death (verbally and not really) your right to enjoy your religion or indeed the right to do whatever you want so long as it hurts nobody else. Just because religion is made up shit on the intellectual level, not everybody can think on such a level. So yeah, I do accept that. Please accept that religion does affect and in many cases compromises the human rights of others.

Any news on the lady Bishops yet? Does The Church of England accept the will of the people yet and accept the human rights of gays? or divorcees? what about the religions that still subjugate women in the way CofE used to accept? What does your Bible tell us about gender equality?

Stop challenging me by saying I support the opposite view of what I actually say. If anyone was arsed to scroll up, your paper tiger looks absurd.

This is a discussion thread. People either read a view and accept it or read a view and research it. Feel free.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 02:52 AM

Musket, if you accept that religious persecution is a real issue and that Christians are over-represented, then we are in agreement.

Supposing religion IS just made up shit, freedom of belief is regarded as a fundamental human right.
Do you not accept that Musket?

You say I rely on "subjective analysis of news stories."
That suggests I reject stuff that challenges my view.
Not true.
I have found nothing to challenge my view, and neither you nor anyone else has produced a single snippet that challenges me or supports you.
You just use made up shit.

I do not need to be selective.
There is nothing to select from.

You say " Don't take my word for it, Google ex Bishops of Canterbury or published minutes of general synod or the proposed poll of Catholics"

There is nothing in there to challenge me or support you.
If there was you would google and post it.
But you can't.
More made up shit.

Elmore, you are too hard on yourself.
I did omit a question mark and you did spot it.
Good job Elmore!
No-one can say your contribution was irrelevant.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 01:02 AM

Just out of interest, who precisely is denying there is no persecution? Must be some of that made up shit you find so fascinating.

There again, in the final analysis religion per se is made up shit and you find it far more fascinating than I do. Although I find it very fascinating how sometimes intelligent people can fix their blinkers and get their bit firmly between their teeth.

The basis for your argument seems to be subjective analysis of news stories. The basis of mine is the drive to win back privilege. Don't take my word for it, Google ex Bishops of Canterbury or published minutes of general synod or the proposed poll of Catholics. A colleague who used to be a Jehovas Witness mentioned recently that if he were still there, the door knocking commitment has increased lately to combat the lack of God in UK society.

Quite.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 10:06 PM

Youse is too smart for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 09:54 PM

Incidentally I was amused to see how Elmore's response to my comment on a grammatical howler echoed what I said about the way we are likely to respond to identified error.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 09:49 PM

I'd quite agree that the distinction between persecution and lesser things which make minorities feel uncomfortable ought not to be blurred. Though there is a relationship between them. Making anti-semitic or anti-Islamic or anti-Catholic jokes, for example, isn't the same as burning down places of worship or mobbing people in the streets, and in most cases does not indicate those things are on the way. But there are commonalities in the mindset of intolerance.

And so far as I have seen that distinction between persecution and the lesser unpleasantnesses is generally recognised in the kind of stuff Musket airily dismisses in that scatter-gun post.   

Of course there have been plenty of examples in this thread of attempts to blur such distinctions by people who would evidently see genuine persecution as insignificant when the minority under attack are Christians.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 05:48 PM

Happy Birthday, Lenny Slye.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 05:38 PM

Decent organisations don't refer to their increasing irrelevance as persecution.

Nor does any church.
More made up shit.

Then point out real persecution

How can you deny that there is real persecution?
You make yourself ridiculous!

You're not that important.
I'll get ten minutes at some stage this week.

You have had since last May.
That is when I told you you were wrong that I ever spoke about UKIP as "we."
SIX MONTHS later you are still pushing what you have known for months is a LIE.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 10:44 AM

You're not that important.

I'll get ten minutes at some stage this week. This posting is nice distraction between commitments in what for a lazy bastard like me is a long day.

Any organisation would. Decent organisations don't refer to their increasing irrelevance as persecution. Then point out real persecution wishing us to link them somehow.

Pathetic.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 09:17 AM

"The Christian Holocaust" Canada Free Press last year.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/49757

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 08:44 AM

"Israel Today" today.
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/24227/Default.aspx?hp=readmore

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 07:58 AM

The Christian main churches, Anglican, Catholic and looney fringe are all calling for attempts to assert credibility with society at large

Any organisation would.
What has that to do with religious persecution?
Nothing.

calling Hansard made up shit doesn't help your credibility either

If I ever did!
But of course I did not.
I just said that " the drive by Christian bodies to highlight persecution in order to gain relevance. It's all there to be seen in church newsletters and even Hansard. ...." was made up shit.

It is.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 05:59 AM

So your "10 minute trawl" of my posts failed to find any justification for your baseless accusations.
You were wrong and should withdraw and apologise.
I would have done the trawl BEFORE making the accusation.

Re holocaust, from the The Age piece I linked to yesterday.

"Todd Johnson, of Gordon Conwell's Centre for the Study of Global Christianity, estimates 70 million Christians have died for their faith, 45 million of them in the 20th century.
John Allen notes that ''this boom in religious violence is still very much a growth industry. Christians today are by some order of magnitude the most persecuted religious body on the planet,'' suffering not just martyrdom but all forms of intimidation and oppression in record numbers.
The US Commission on International Religious Freedom, which monitors religious persecution and names the worst offenders in an annual report, listed 16 nations guilty of ''heinous and systematic'' offences in its 2012 report.
Only one group is under attack in all 16 nations: Christians."

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket gettin.. can't be arsed
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 05:47 AM

Don't be so bloody pathetic.

Christian Holocaust. .......

If I were Jewish I'd find that rather insulting. As I am not. . Oh. I still find it insulting.

Grow up. Stop asking people to deny popular held opinions on the basis they don't accord with your blinkered view. The Christian main churches, Anglican, Catholic and looney fringe are all calling for attempts to assert credibility with society at large. Oh and calling Hansard made up shit doesn't help your credibility either. I am sure Lord Runcie would like his speeches to be recognised.

Prat.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 02:51 AM

I can't acknowledge I am wrong regarding the drive by Christian bodies to highlight persecution in order to gain relevance. It's all there to be seen in church newsletters and even Hansard.

No it is not.
Made up shit.
I never said "we" in reference to any political organisation.
Made up shit.

Instead of challenging the truth of what I say, you make up shit about me to imply a sinister motive for telling the truth.

You deny that there is an ongoing Christian holocaust because they are just the largest minority, just as the Jews were the largest minority put up for extermination by Hitler.
Do you deny the Jewish Holocaust too?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 12:57 AM

I have acknowledged already (BBC grammar) that I could have been wrong. I cannot however confirm that, hence question mark ending or command ending, I am unable to satisfy Keith. I cannot acknowledge something that falls outside of my experience.

The balance of probability alone puts a synergy between Keith and views I hear from people of that political inclination. I will however, to be fair, find a spare 10 mins and trawl Keith's posts. You never know, I may get lucky. A rather nice fellow mudcatter did similar for someone who denied their stance and rather kindly pm'd them to me. As I rarely log in, it was sat for some time. ..

Oh. By the way, I can't acknowledge I am wrong regarding the drive by Christian bodies to highlight persecution in order to gain relevance. It's all there to be seen in church newsletters and even Hansard. ....

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 08:00 PM

P.S. Hey GUEST: Nice to correspond with Keith of Hartford's mother. Did he enjoy the Phish concert over the weekend.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 07:56 PM

"Will you acknowledge that you were mistaken in both claims please."

Of course he won't. But then very few of us seem able to do that. Typically we tend to avoid the actual instances where we've been demonstrably wrong and divert the argument to some other safer territory. Time and time again it happens on both sides. ("sides"! That's what happens when discussions are replaced by adversarial contests, arguments or debates.

(Incidentally "I and everyone else knew that" is perfectly correct grammar.)

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 07:54 PM

Hey Guest, Perhaps I have become redundant, but, at the very least, I know that organised religion is a scam improvised by the wealthy and the patriarchs to keep the workers and the women in line. Regards, ELMORE.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 06:55 PM

Hey Elmo, you have become redundant.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 05:36 PM

"I and everyone else" is ungrammatical and redundant.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 05:11 PM

Quite right.
You have done us all a great service.
Thank you Elmore.
Obviously I and everyone else knew that, and that it was an accidental omission, so were you just being malicious?
Do you never make such horrendous mistakes yourself Elmore dear?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 04:14 PM

"Will you acknowledge that you were mistaken in both claims please." Should be concluded with a question mark, unless you meant it as some sort of command.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 03:13 PM

take appalling circumstances and blow them out of proportion in an attempt to blackmail society into seeing their presence as relevant to normal people any more.

No-one does that Musket.
And I have never linked myself to UKIP.
Will you acknowledge that you were mistaken in both claims please.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 02:26 PM

LOL.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 12:23 PM

I'm beginning to think my willy is shorter than this thread.....






Oh.














Bugger

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 12:10 PM

War And Peace, Les Miserables, Nicholas Nickleby, The Bible, The Quran. All sorter than this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket smiling
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 11:44 AM

For someone who reckons the thread has passed its sell by date, you seem quite happy to find articles supporting the rearguard action presently in progress.

I especially like the bit asking why western governments, media and churches are reluctant to acknowledge persecution? Strange, but even some churches don't take appalling circumstances and blow them out of proportion in an attempt to blackmail society into seeing their presence as relevant to normal people any more.

The Romans fed them to the lions allegedly. The majority of the population of The UK merely fail to listen to their message. Both protagonists seem to be lumped together as persecutors.

Pass me that bag of nails eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 07:57 AM

Returning to the subject, this appeared in "The Age" on Saturday.

"Not so, rights observers say: they are all part of the biggest human rights challenge now facing the globe - religious intolerance - and also part of a largely unobserved global war on Christians. Things may be worse now for more Christians than at any time in history, including under the Roman Empire.
''War'' does not mean a unified campaign directed by a single co-ordinating mind. But it is no exaggeration,.....


What is happening? Why are Christians especially at risk, and why are Western governments, media and churches so reluctant to acknowledge it, let alone act? And, as some observers suggest, is religious persecution heading back to the West?"
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/age-of-intolerance-the-war-on-religion-20131101-2ws4o.html

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Van
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 07:14 AM

Guest Peter should do a little research into benefit law and a little less reading propaganda. It ain't laid out on a plate. And by the way all the east Europeans I know are catholic. Last time I looked they count as Christians.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 06:59 AM

I am not inclined to put together a large number of illustrative posts which you can easily find for yourselves, but I assure you they are there.

You could not "put together a large number of illustrative posts" because there is not a single one.
Same old lie.
Same old baseless accusation, because you can not address what I really post.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 06:54 AM

yet sees no persecution in confining another group in an open prison camp
Of course incarceration is a kind of persecution.
Who do you claim denies that obvious truth Don?
Irony??

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket the radical hippy
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 06:52 AM

One thing I do agree with Keith about is that this thread has run its course.

Which is why I would love to tackle the rather silly points made by guest Peter, but errands to run, dog to walk, work to do, paint to watch dry......

Oh bugger, can't resist.

Yeah, the old black and white days. When you were black or white. Poufs were thrown in prison, immigration was actually very high, but you didn't feel ashamed to call it the banana boat and tell jokes in working men's clubs between songs about wogs and pakis. Good old Enoch, a clever posh bloke eh? Rivers of blood! Mind you, he didn't say that shallow fools will spend the next forty years trying to make it so.

Yeah, we didn't have the issues of today, zzzzzzzzzzzzz



The UK has always been a multicultural melting pot and always will. Tolerance and mutual understanding is what keeps sixty million people in, in international standards, decent civilised abodes. Hate exists still, but like the bigotry that spawns it, it will die. Already, religious intolerance is shunned by most respectable folk, and barriers to equal living are falling.

Perhaps one day we can read Mudcat threads without seeing defensive xenophobic racism eh? I suggest going into settings and set your screen to black and white, if it helps. It might also be good to try beginning your sentences with "I'm not racist but..." Lots of older people will show you how to do it. Then you can be British! Or at least the small narrow minded few who call themselves British At the expense of .. Err..   The British.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 05:49 AM

""I do wish we could have a ironic typeface available to us here...""

No irony McGrath! Would you say that there is no sign of an agenda, when somebody whines about the persecution of a minority which happens to be a group of which he considers himself a member, yet sees no persecution in confining another group in an open prison camp, because he doesn't consider their lives to be as important as those of his own persuasion?

I realise that the poster in question is considered one of the good guys by many here, which means that nobody will take the trouble to examine the basic attitudes displayed.

I am not inclined to put together a large number of illustrative posts which you can easily find for yourselves, but I assure you they are there.

Beating one's head against the wall is all very well, but I've had enough, so I'm out of this thread.

If you care about putting the bits together, RTFM.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 04:19 AM

This thread was about religious persecution.
The discussion has run its course.
I only posted to refute some false statements made about me personally (again!).

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Peter
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 04:07 AM

Let us all take one step back guys. Yes we would all like to see harmony and a multicultural society, but I fear it is never going to happen. Britain has become a powder keg over the past decade. Extremists on both sides are using the issues of immigration and the right to practice their faith for their own agenda.

No one seems to want to face the truth about what is happening in the UK today. UKIP seem to be making remarkable advances in any region they stand, which is a reflection of feeling. The current coalition government are responding by hijacking UKIP polices.

Britain is in a mess, hospitals and schools simply can't cope with the numbers coming in from Eastern European countries let alone anywhere else. Bulgarian and Romanian newspapers are currently advising people what benefits to claim for once they arrive in the UK in 2014.

We can't bury our heads in the sand, immigration is a problem in the UK and will continue to be so until the government face up to the problem and introduce stringent measures such as not allowing immigrants the right to claim benefits and blocking them from obtaining housing benefit.

Did you ever watch an old Black and white British film set in the 1940's, a time of pride in our culture, heritage and tradition, not you are also afraid to mention your pride to be British in case some old hippy or radical accuses you of being racist or xenophobic, oh how the love these words.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 02:49 AM

Why do you need to "assess the agenda" Don.
Why not just refute what I say?
Too hard right?
You think that if you "assess" that I have an "agenda" you are absolved from addressing what I actually say.
Useful if you are unable to address what I actually say!

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 03 Nov 13 - 09:48 PM

Did you hear about the horse who walked into a bar? Bartender says "Why the long face?"

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 13 - 08:44 PM

So which was "the previous poster"?

But as for When assessing the agenda of a poster, one only has to look at his reactions to similar events involving different groupings, and his comments about those groups, whether positive or negative, along with general tendency to apply either the same, or different values depending on the particular groups. Do people actually do that kind of thing? Or is Don testing out his irony muscles.

I do wish we could have a ironic typeface available to us here...

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 03 Nov 13 - 08:43 PM

Damn! Thought I had outlived this dreadful divisive thread. I'm not sure that I will now.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: bobad
Date: 03 Nov 13 - 06:47 PM

The previous GUEST post was mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 13 - 05:30 PM

As the previous poster himself has amply illustrated.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Nov 13 - 05:10 PM

When assessing the agenda of a poster, one only has to look at his reactions to similar events involving different groupings, and his comments about those groups, whether positive or negative, along with general tendency to apply either the same, or different values depending on the particular groups.

The denied agenda will appear with inconvenient clarity from such research.

Don T.