BS: Militant Atheism Threads

Subject: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 04:27 AM

Another nail in the coffin of free speech I see! Sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 07:22 AM

From the membership page. This explains what speech is "free" on this forum and what isn't. You "nail in the coffin" accusation seems unfounded. I don't see it as part of a larger trend. I also suppose that there are lots of places on the Internet to go and be rude and unkind. You certainly have the option of starting your own forum or Facebook page for that purpose.

Be aware that our forum is Free.

Anonymity and Guest Posting are permitted.

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 08:53 AM

I guess any thread based on an oxymoron will have polarised views.

Snag is, keeping quiet just encourages ignorance to flourish if unchallenged.

Still, they come in useful for those who enjoy finding and quoting small print and rules eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 09:29 AM

I wonder if I pass up this chance to bicker with Musket over his arbitrary interpretations of words will another come along? :-D

There are adjustments to be made on your computer to make the print as large as you need to read it.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 09:50 AM

Oh my joint Messiahs! Not another. PLEASE!!!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 10:23 AM

:-D

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 12:55 PM

iPhone not computer. Do you think I hump a computer up a chairlift to the top of Grande Mot?

Returning to Blighty Saturday.

Why not co Messiah Emeritus with Gnomish attributes? Co Messiah S needs cheering up with the divine retribution he is being dealt, floods etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 01:09 PM

I thought he was dealing them :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 01:19 PM

Gotta admire and agree with the sentiments expressed here regarding censorship and bickering amongst ourselves.Goddamn it !! aren't we all grown ups//? do we really need this thread policing over a little harmless banter?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 01:30 PM

Dammit, dammit, dammit - agreeing with Blandiver and Mither again.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 01:34 PM

Look, God-botherers have oppressed tortured and murdered all who do not follow their own little sects for millennia.

Payback is richly deserved.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 02:00 PM

Richard Bridge,

You think being rude to a couple of people on this forum is retribution for all of that? That's funny :-)


concerened, for once is right the threads were closed for the bickering amongst yourselves.

And I am sure that you would be allowed to get all of the payback you wish as long as you can do so without being unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

It is really a very small thing to ask for the many social benefits you receive from this forum.

Here is a place that you can go and share your attacks on religion with others who believe as you do.   


https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Militant-Atheist-Forum/119901301503878

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 04:06 PM

Hello? I dip in here once a day usually and I appear to not know what this thread is about. Has some dipstick censored religion talk? Is pete not to be called a twat? Is Wacko not to be called Wacko (even though his chosen soubriquet is even stupider)? Are we not allowed to say that anyone who decries in-your-face evidence is deluded? Are we not to condemn those who declare that they care not for the near-certainty that God does not exist because there are "greater truths"? Are we not allowed to state that the indoctrination of children by "christening" them, forcing them to pray, sing hymns, sit in classrooms under a crucifix and attend church services is tantamount to an abuse of human rights? Are we not allowed to say that we respect the boundaries of free speech but that none of these issues even remotely get to that point? Tell me what's going on, somebody. And not you, pete or Wacko, as you never have the faintest idea about what's going on anyway!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 04:31 PM

And so it begins

>>>Is pete not to be called a twat? Is Wacko not to be called Wacko<<<



"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 04:54 PM

Hi, parrot-face!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 06:46 PM

"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 06:54 PM

Remember, Steve Shaw doesn't accept that this is "real life", so I suppose nothing he says posts can be considered to be relevant to anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 07:18 PM

Do you think this is real life, Bill, ol' fruit?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 07:22 PM

ol' fruit?

"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 08:00 PM

I do not assume the words I read here are generated by Max... or by a program created by Alan Turing... and I know *I* am real, so I treat every post I choose to respond to as if I were talking to someone at a party.

If I hurl insults at someone face-to-face, they would probably either hit me, or walk away. If the topic is worth my effort to discuss (as in THIS reply to YOU), I try to keep it going with a modicum of restraint.

(and I really have no idea if " ol' fruit" is meant AS an insult by you.... it's kinda strange, as I am neither 'gay' nor do I resemble a banana.)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 08:14 PM

Hows about "don't be such a po-faced ol' git" then! Come off it, Bill. Less of the yankee imperialism if you don't mind. If you don't know what "ol' fruit" means, look it up!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 08:15 PM

Hi there, Polly Wacko Parrot, by the way!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 08:36 PM

"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 10:14 PM

Okay

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_(slang)

So... what part of that am I? Or am I just a Yankee imperialist? And what IS it in your personality that requires you to call anyone & everyone you disagree with by some stupid insulting sobriquet?

( I didn't remember I knew 'sobriquet' until I got to that part of the post.)

Anyway, I'll repeat what I said months ago: I'd rather spend an hour in a pub disagreeing politely with ol' creationist Pete than be insulted for 5 minutes by you.

And I think I'll take my own advice and not waste my poor typing fingers replying to any more insults. Your hobby has begun to wear on me.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:31 AM

Try to understand that American English is not the original or only version, Bill. Fruit may be a term in use for other things but old fruit is an affectionate address around these parts.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 04:03 AM

We had a loco driver down the pit called Fruit. Buggered if I recall his real name but Fruit was named thus on account of calling everyone else Fruit.

I'm disgusted at you Steve! Fruit is a term of endearment. Since when did our nautical censorship officer deserve such affection? Oh, hang on. It was Bill. He reckons the internet is real. Oh grapefruit......

I assume Mr Sailor must send pm messages telling the homophobic and misogynist members how the rules work, because whenever anybody advocates bigotry, offending large numbers of people, some being Mudcat members, he doesn't shout.

Yet when my learned Co Messiah or I ditch the diplomacy in retaliation to awful comments, we get some rules or other thrown in our faces.

Here's a rule. William the Bastard. 1066 - 1087.

Last day enjoying the piste and the Savayard hospitality. Back up reality tomorrow.

Mudcat never was.

Ok I'll qualify that. BS section never was. I get a hell of a lot from the real Mudcat above. It's just the pompous bullshit down here that makes me laugh. Together with certain people abusing knowledge if my email address gleaned through access to membership details in order to say privately what they don't have courage of conviction of to say publicly.

That was disappointing. Not least as it tends to alter opinions of people you thought were the good guys.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 05:26 AM

Hmmmm. When the Jack the Sailor objected to something I said once he opened a whole fecking thread about 'understanding me' & thus embarrassed me into politeness. That was a real mean thing to do, JtS - you exploited my good nature by dark & devious tactics & I really wish now I'd told you to fuck off, which, as an adult, I can do without implying any lack of humanity or respect, much less fear the editorial hand of Silly River Sage who considers such things to be beneath his / her prissy dignity.

*

For the record - religion is STILL to spirituality what pornography is to sexuality. They are manipulative and exploitative of that which is the unique birthright of every single one of us, and they make fools & victims of those they exploit. No one was born on this earth to be a fool or a victim, and any militancy among we atheists is born from the need to redress a serious imbalance with a view to restoring a common order of humanity that hasn't been enjoyed since the egalitarianism of the Badarian farmers circa 4000 BCE.

Our time will come again!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 07:06 AM

Oh come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 you lot!! you have started again with your third form bickering and carping and posturing.

Of course I do agree with sweetcheeks when he makes that fine remark

"It's just the pompous bullshit down here that makes me laugh. "

I think some of you like shaw and blandiver..or whatever his bloody silly name is( why is it that sites like this attract the really crass inventors of names? is that because in real life they aint got one? a life that is..) are particularly obnoxious, provocative and unkind to poor old jack.


I may not agree most of the time with what he says but he does have a right to be treated with respect and i will defend to the
last his right to have a published opinion on this site.

Some of you seem to act like self elected post police...how very dare you!!

Come on people fair shakes for everyone i say..time to bury the hatchet and get along like civilised human beings

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 07:17 AM

Yeah, religion has made such a brilliant job of making itself the default condition of humanity that redressing that balance is going to be a long journey, one strewn with religious bigots, delusional types claiming Greater Truths, fundamentalists of all belief systems, some quite nice people who can't accept that they are feeding their children anti-education, and people who would like to bring back the heresy laws when either their faith or their Jesus is "insulted". And, of course, those who would protect religion from us nasties by means of the parroting out of "forum rules". (How many times is that now?!)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 07:20 AM

why is it that sites like this attract the really crass inventors of names? is that because in real life they aint got one? a life that is.

Steve here. So what's your name then?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 08:29 AM

Easy that shaw.. even for you.. Con,,short for Conceppta...Cerened..get it? ..chump?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 08:51 AM

The posts were not deleted because of the insults to people of faith.
They were kindly deleted, because I requested them to be so.

There are some things, which even on a relatively unregulated forum like this, are beyond the pale.
Throughout these threads, I have treated fellow members and guests, respectfully, my views are not popular here, I never expected them to be, but they are VALID views and worthy of discussion.
On the post which I asked to be deleted, I was subjected to the vilest of abuse and more importantly the poster had dug up some information regarding my family. My family do not contribute to this forum and have nothing to do with my personal views on any issue debated here.
Stalking is against the rules of any civilised forum and why the poster is still allowed access is beyond me.

However the matter is in hand.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 09:40 AM

Oh, finally an explanation of the "polly" nonsense.


I will continue to point out the rules which were written by Max, the owner of this forum, until you learn them. It might speed things up if you read them. Go to the top of the page and click "membership."

Mr Shaw, you seem to have an odd fixation with names, getting upset when Darwin's is taken in vain, but then when are you not upset? Complaining about or people's Mudcat handles. On that same membership page there is a section on the handles allowed here. Turns out you can be anything you want to be except unkind, impolite etc etc..

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 09:47 AM

Hi conc! Getting a bit serious if you don't mind your sweet cheeks saying so.

Here in France, the papers are full of a Catholic Bishop saying that militant atheists should be resisted, by force if necessary. He also said he answers to a higher authority than France.

If there are any militant atheists reading, I suggest you pop over and start a crusade of your own.

Except that you probably only exist in the heads of dangerous lunatics such as the aforementioned bishop. He is also the one uniting with the fascist party to criminalise people for being gay.

Still , the wine is nice. The savoire cuisine is nice. Nobody said the people had to be nice.

In Scotland next week. Now there's a much nicer place. They practice the equality Napoleon advocated. Although the sectarian divide is still there in places sadly. Although whilst they all hate Alistair Darling, they stop hating each other.

I've often wondered how hate is propagated as "god is love."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 10:05 AM

The Militant Atheist Forum

You can tell these people, who unlike some scardy cats on this forum are embrace their beliefs.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 10:21 AM

...are embracing...

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 10:46 AM

who unlike some scardy cats on this forum are embrace their beliefs

I'm not normally pedantic, JtS, but in the light of your earlier persecution of me I'll make an exception. So, please explain to we lesser mortals - what the name of Sweet Holy Fuck does that actually mean?

*

Akeneaton's not much better, mind. On Christmas Day he cruelly slandered me as being mentally ill / on drugs for some comment I made in answer to one of his insufferable homophobic diatribes.

How does that, not to mention his noxious propagandist hatemongering, fit in with the Mudcat Rule book I wonder?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 11:03 AM

Whoever the pete was, it wasn't me.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 11:07 AM

"... but old fruit is an affectionate address around these parts."

But Dave, I am not exactly from around those parts. I have a few odd little terms of endearment and 'affectionate address' that I have used in THESE parts, but I don't use them without explanation on an international forum.


" Oh, hang on. It was Bill. He reckons the internet is real. Oh grapefruit......"

As I said, Musket, I assume 'real' people make these posts. I don't even understand the concept involved in saying **the internet** is not real. Sounds to me like a cultural eccentricity employed to justify being rude when you can't be looked directly in the eye.
   (Now... do I have to look up "grapefruit" also? One of my terms of 'affectionate address' is "fruitcake". Makes me wonder if I oughta use it. Or maybe my friend Catspaw could offer a few suggestions.)
   In the last year or two I have been watching old English TV comedy shows... most notably "The Last of the Summer Wine", and I hear a lot of "affectionate address" used in not-quite-so-affectionate ways. If that is a common game in the UK, you should understand that it does not translate well in this "unreal" medium, and like rhyming slang, it seems a waste of effort to try to teach it to we poor colonials.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 11:25 AM

Bloody good job for you I'm not a shackledragger - oops, Aussie - Bill, or else I'd have been greeting you with "G'day, you old bastard!"

Just thought I'd mention that the interwebby thingie is a wonderful resource for looking up unfamiliar terms. Beats immediately getting on your high horse any day.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 11:42 AM

Jack B,

I don't recall persecuting you, I do recall discussing something that you said that I did not like with you. As I recall it, you gave as good as you got.

As for "shaming you into being polite." Max has shamed me into being much much more polite than I was. If I was rude to you I am sorry. But I am glad that you and I are now more polite.

"who unlike some scardy cats on this forum are embrace their beliefs"

should be

"who, unlike some scardy cats on this forum, embrace their beliefs"

I meant that the people on the Militant Atheists forum act like militant atheists (the modern definition) and are proud to be called that. While there are a couple of people on this forum who embrace the philosophy but deny that "Militant Atheism" even exists. Which makes them more like pete than anyone else on this forum. pete acts like someone who cares about science but denies the evidence, even when you virtually shove it in his face. Certain members of this forum deny simple concepts like militant atheism and forum rules even when they are shown examples of such things repeatedly.

I am not saying that what pete is doing is bad. I really admire him for his patience and faith. (though I feel the faith in Ken Ham and his confederates is misplaced.) It's up to the rest of us to politely judge for ourselves the veracity of his claims. I find it a little ironic that some of the same people who complain about free speech are people who will try to shout down pete pretty much every time he enters the conversation.

The people who vilify pete, blindly share the same blinkered doggedness that they vilify.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 11:42 AM

If you're going to invoke my name for insults on threads in which I am not participating, Blandriver, at least get it right. Stilly, i.e., Stillaguamish.

Thank you.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 12:01 PM

No-one is shouting anyone down, Wacko. We are simply offering the alternative point of view with considerable directness, having decided to eschew gentle diplomacy and indulgence with those who spout idiotic, bigoted and potentially hateful nonsense. The same treatment that non-believers or non-compliers have been handed down for centuries, minus the violence, of course. Incidentally, Wackers, the day I come here and "get upset" about anything is the day I cease posting.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 12:08 PM

"Just thought I'd mention that the interwebby thingie is a wonderful resource for looking up unfamiliar terms. Beats immediately getting on your high horse any day. "


More predictable impolite unkindness form Mr. Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 12:12 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Militant atheism has become a religion p
From: GUEST,Jack Blandiver - PM
Date: 25 Dec 13 - 06:48 AM

Homosexuality IS perverse as we, male and female, were given the organs of reproduction, solely to reproduce....the pleasure we gain from sexual intercourse is an added incentive for reproduction.
So sexual intercourse with someone of the same gender is in essence a perversion of the true purpose.

This is as tragic a example of misinformed hogwash as I've experienced for some time; the sort of fascistic idiocy that underwrites small-minded hatred in which ignorance masquerades as 'informed'.

Reproduction is, at best, a random by-product of the universal procedure known as sexual intercourse. In itself reproduction is statistically insignificant given the amount of instances of sexual intercourse as against the instances of actual conception. Moreover, who has sexual intercourse to reproduce? Indeed, the mechanism of sexual intercourse is designed solely - utterly and totally - to give transcendent pleasure to the participants. It is not an 'added incentive' - it is the be-all and end-all of why we fuck.

There is nothing more 'natural' about heterosexual sex than homosexual - both are about deep instinctive sensual pleasuring to the point of orgasmic delirium (and beyond) and both work flawlessly to that end. Everything humanity turns its hand to is about using nature in such a way to enrich our lives. You hardly find steam engines, TV sets or laptop computers growing on trees, and yet these things 'work' according to the same natural universal laws that govern our bodies, with which we can do what we damn well wish in the pursuit of Peace, Love, Joy and Goodwill Toward All.

The possibilities are endless, so it's always a shame when some small-minded ill-informed fecking idiot comes along spreading their message of hate based on a complete misunderstanding of what is natural, or not natural, based entirely on their own fucked up miserable world-view which is the only true perversion here.



Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


Subject: RE: BS: Militant atheism has become a religion p
From: akenaton - PM
Date: 25 Dec 13 - 09:17 AM

And a Merry Christmas to you too Jack, no matter which planet or substance you're on....Ake

My response to your insulting post, was because I could make little sense of what you had written, or how it applied to myself.

It was also intended as slightly TiC, as I thought you would have gathered from the smiley?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 12:15 PM

"Wacko" "spout idiotic, bigoted and potentially hateful nonsense. ", "Wackers,"



>>

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 06 Feb 14 - 07:49 PM

You see, twat features, this is the thing: there is no parallel, no equivalence whatsoever, between your adherence to evidence-free, creationist, believer bullshit and good, honest science. None. Actually, I think I might just have mentioned that before. Now, pete babe, you rattle on elsewhere about irony. Well let me tell you a bit about irony, you silly, useless, thoughtless, brainless twerp. You diss science at every opportunity. Yet you are desperate to make equivalence between science, which you abhor so, and religion, which you mindlessly love so. Can't you see it? You are making a fool out of your own beliefs. Hardly surprising, since you are such a fool yourself. Have you a hole you can crawl into? <<

The above is 3 days ago. Using Mr. Nye's standard of what "a reasonable man" would conclude. A reasonable man would conclude that you were upset, certainly you acted upset, three days ago. A reasonable man would probably conclude that you are lying when you say this.   

>>Incidentally, Wackers, the day I come here and "get upset" about anything is the day I cease posting. <<

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 12:42 PM

I meant that the people on the Militant Atheists forum act like militant atheists (the modern definition) and are proud to be called that.

I had a look at the link. A rather hysterical Facebook sight which is most definitely NOT my idea o' fun! As a regular Facebook type (come friend ME!), I wouldn't have anything to do with this garbage.

*

If you're going to invoke my name for insults on threads in which I am not participating, Blandriver, at least get it right. Stilly, i.e., Stillaguamish.

A genuine slip o' the finger there; unfortunate in that context I admit. Sorry!

*

My response to your insulting post, was because I could make little sense of what you had written, or how it applied to myself.

Nothing insulting there, Ake - I'm not alone in these enlightened times in finding your propagandist homophobia is beneath contempt. I was simply answering your idiotic idea that heterosexuality was somehow more natural than homosexuality just because the former sometimes (rarely / insignificantly) results in pregnancy.

That you insult my mental health and imply that I am on drugs for so saying - or for not being able to grasp so basic an idea - contravenes the very laws you're forever banging on about.

We have a word for that sort o' thing, do we not?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 01:12 PM

I'm with Jack on the "beneath contempt" line.

I'd add accusing those who dismiss his bigotry and homophobia of posting in names of others. Best bit is that then someone abuses membership knowledge to back the worm up!

Just in case anyone is interested, Akenaton thinks I am a guest called Seaham Cemetry. Well I'm not. Ironically, the person who is, someone in the greyhound racing fraternity who knows him well, contacted me. For what it's worth, I sincerely believe Akenaton doesn't kill puppies not needed for racing.

My contempt is merely based on his bigotry and astonishing belief that hate is a valid view.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 01:28 PM

"I had a look at the link. A rather hysterical Facebook sight which is most definitely NOT my idea o' fun!"

Fair enough,


There are plenty of atheists on this forum. Only a couple of them are militant. They are not much fun either. I think you might appreciate that their same tired repetition of the same insults and jokes is tiresome. At least the people on that Facebook forum are proud to be vilifying others in the name of Darwin, or whatever rather than running away from their beliefs when asked to admit that they have them.

I don't have much problem with what you said to Ake above, it is a proportional rebuttal to his comments. A little bit of sharpness in your commentary, sticking to criticism of his words and actions, stopping well short of calling him "the worm" seems like a good balance to me. I congratulate you for finding that balance and showing the proper respect for the rules.

I don't agree with you Ake if you are saying the other Militant Atheism Threads were closed because you requested that. The reason given was the bickering. Lord knows there was plenty of that in those threads for pretty much the whole duration of both of the threads which were closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:12 PM

"vilifying others in the name of Darwin"

That's interesting! Give me one example of that. I've never seen it, ever. And stop worrying about me. I'm fine. It's chune and beer night!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:41 PM

Well I'm certainly not going to replay that thread over again.
It's in the archive for anyone to read, I of course stand by everything I said, and I certainly believe Blandriver is associated with another abusive poster on that thread.
To say that Reproduction is at best a random by product of sexual intercourse is extreme foolishness, sex can be used in various unhealthy ways, especially commercially, but reproduction determines the survival of the species.
Jack....I never said the thread was closed because I requested it, what I said was that two posts were kindly removed at my request.

I have kept copies of these.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:55 PM

Look at what the imported religions have done to Africa.

Why is it that you god-botherers have no shame?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:55 PM

Akenaton, My apologies. I was concerned that you may have been posting in the context of and the title of the thread :-) I, at least, felt obligated to eliminate that possibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 03:01 PM

>>From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:12 PM

"vilifying others in the name of Darwin"

That's interesting! Give me one example of that. I've never seen it, ever. And stop worrying about me. I'm fine. It's chune and beer night! <<

Why do I see this post where you are clearly upset about what I posted? Enjoy your beer. Don't worry about me.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 04:03 PM

To say that Reproduction is at best a random by product of sexual intercourse is extreme foolishness,

No it isn't. I have two kids and yet I can't count the amount if times I've have sex even in the last twenty years (neither of my children were conceived in that time; I had a Vasectomy in 1993). The same is true of everyone who is sexually active, Gay or Straight - we do it to have mutual joyful fun with someone who turns us on, otherwise, what cultural need of contraception?

To say people fuck to have kids is akin to saying people drive on motorways to die in RTAs.

Accidents will happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 05:43 PM

"To say people fuck to have kids is akin to saying people drive on motorways to die in RTAs."

Your analogy but I think you could take it a tad further,

Isn't it more like the reason we have the motorways is so that the ambulances can take us to hospitals to have our kids?

We do have motorways for that reason but that is no reason why we can't use them for recreation.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 06:02 PM

Don't be stupid. Since the 70 limit motorways are unsuitable for recreation - unless you know anywhere there are no cameras or Q-cars. I know a few places there are are no cameras, useful for testing boost adjustments. I also know the two most commonly seen Q-cars round here - a boy racer SEAT Leo Cupra and a HUGE BMW 4WD.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 06:03 PM

Keep your eyes one the road buddy!!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 06:57 PM

"To say people fuck to have kids is akin to saying people drive on motorways to die in RTAs.

Accidents will happen."

That must be one of the most cynical pieces of writing that I have ever seen on these pages.

Sex is used, bought and sold joylessly, as a tool to exploit children, to sell all manner of consumables.
Do you think sex between the prostitute and his/her client......"gives transcendent pleasure to the participants" or "deep instinctive sensual pleasuring to the point of orgasmic delirium (and beyond)?"

Promiscuity is destructive, to health and to society.
The vast majority pick their partners to produce children together, to continue their genetic line, to construct a family. It has always been thus.
A few chose not to have children, or sadly are unable to do so for medical reasons.....they are not lesser people for their choice, or their unfortunate circumstances, but they are none the less a very small minority; and if that minority ever becomes a majority, the human race is really in trouble

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 07:16 PM

All of that is more or less true. But the fact is that most of the time people have sex it is not to have children.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 08:50 PM

Can any sane person believe that Ake and Wacko could really have engaged in the tosh contained in their last few posts? It truly defies belief!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 09:46 PM

>>From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 08:50 PM

Can any sane person believe that Ake and Wacko could really have engaged in the tosh contained in their last few posts? It truly defies belief! <<



You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 03:25 AM

Sex is used, bought and sold joylessly, as a tool to exploit children, to sell all manner of consumables.

Sex is the core of our existence, and, as with most things in life, the vast majority of our species handle it pretty well, and have done so since the first primate got a hard-on circa 65myr. Since then it's EVOLVED to be all consuming - at least as we Happy Homo Sapiens are concerned. We wouldn't exist without it and it's pretty much the be all & end all of our short existence on this planet that defines our notions of beauty, joy, love, economics, art, music, culture, folklore, spirituality and holy communion. We are driven to fuck and to be fucked by the occult persuasions of a Nature which even now according to the Tabloid Theology of the Catholic Church regards is the work of Lucifer.

It MIGHT be argued that it was discovery of the causal links between Sexual Intercourse & Pregnancy that resulted in extreme patriarchy & the enslavement of women to ensure the purity of male bloodlines - after all, there is never ANY doubt who the mother of a child is, is there? This enslavement leads us to the sort of reactionary piffle that typifies your Average Ake Post (see above) in which his misinformed tabloid sensationalism goes into fevered overdrive on account of his faith in third-hand propagandist bullshit that only exists to sell papers & keep people too frightened to leave their homes.

Bad shit lurks therein, however : I'm sure we're all aware by now that in Russia Homosexuality and Paedophilia are synonymous. In many minds it's that way over here too. Reality (which includes Prostitution) is very different. Perhaps it's something Ake ought to look into (i.e. REALITY) to shine a bit of light into his white-washed tabloid tomb?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 04:27 AM

Jack, I thought we were discussing the original purpose of reproductive organs.....in relation to the species.

I know that most sexual intercourse is not to conceive children, but that is because we have worked out ways of stopping conception taking place.

If we had not worked out how to short circuit our natural functions, promiscuity would be less common.
That is not to say that I am against contraception, the human species has devolved to such an extent that contraception has become an absolute necessity to stop over population in confined areas, but with the benefits come the consequences. As society, and I must say the power of the church disintegrates, huge rates of promiscuity pertain, anything goes, and the most promiscuous sections of society are affected in epidemic proportions.

Blandriver lives in fairyland, or Mills and Boon Land, if he believes
the sort of sex being experienced by very many people today gives transcendental pleasure , or orgasmic delirium. Most of it is deeply exploitative, to say that "sex" is an end in itself, is foolish and
dangerous to individuals and the survival of our society.

Promiscuity is bad for all of us, that should be clear to everyone in this day and age.....Pope Benedict tried to make this very point, only to be howled down by the "liberal" media.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 05:32 AM

Just an observation here. How come these threads, which are ostensibly about religion and atheism, always turn to the subject of homosexuality?

Anyway, addressing Bill D's point. Yes, it is an international forum. So why would you assume 'my old fruit' has the same meaning in the UK as in your neck of the woods? Besides, Google is always to hand and I assume you are capable of using it. Now, I'm just nipping outside to roll a fag...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:37 AM

I didn't assume anything, except that the poster of the terminology regularly does use language designed to be insulting... and I did use Google, as instructed. It gave me several variations which did not totally clarify his intent.... and none of that addressed my concern, which was why certain people feel the need to toss out language which NEEDS to be looked up and interpreted to determine how deeply one has been insulted... or not.


And them fags are bad for you, as is being outside in Winter, don't cha know? (No charge for the medical advice)


(I kinda miss Martin Gibson. Being from Chicago, there was ever any doubt when HE insulted you!)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:56 AM

Be in no doubt about whither or not it was an insult Bill.
It was indeed; it's what we term "condescension".

Not often used on this forum by Steven granted, but always lurking around somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 10:15 AM

Bill, I too think it was an insult. It was certainly disrespectful. It was designed to draw you into a favorite game of a few Englishmen on this forum; "The bickering over definitions game."

In my experience, it is easy to tell whether it is an insult or not. Did he apologize for the confusion? If he did it must have been in PM. If he didn't, he is still playing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 10:28 AM

Oh deary me..after getting two posts closed down the playground gobshites are at it again.

Now look here, i am an everyday sort of a chappess as sweetcheeks will tell you, wink wink, say no more!!

I have got a bit serious here Muskett 'cos of the likes of the unspeakable clown shaw and the like picking on poor old jack.I see the deranged gnome corrector has come out of his winter sleep to harangue the poor old mariner.

I am really with jack on this; why is it some on this site, akkenenton, the muff blandiver, shaw particularly with his "twat features" and "bastard" very low that: and can get away with using apropriose epithets like "fuck" with frequent impunity?

Not that i am really bothered but it does bring into question the rules?

"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

please discuss..I cant be bothered I have e some paint I want to watch dry.....

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 11:58 AM

the deranged gnome corrector

Not seen her yet. I like a bit of correction :-) Where is she?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 12:13 PM

"don't be such a po-faced ol' git" then!

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

"yankee imperialism "

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

"If you don't know what "ol' fruit" means, look it up!"

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

There is no doubt in any member's mind that you intended "ol' fruit" as an insult. This is the same silly game that you play where you take the word out of context to argue.

You used "ol' fruit" to refer to Bill in exactly the same way that you used "whacko" to refer to me. I recall that you tried to tell me "Whacko" was not an insult some time ago. It is my impression that you will take any excuse to bicker and call people names.

But I enjoy pointing out how stupidly you are behaving. But for the good of the forum....

Please read and try to absorb the membership rules posted above.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 02:59 PM

Huge difference between Whacko and ol' fruit. One is similar to Jerk the Sea Cadet, Seaman Stains, Master Bates etc, the other is a friendly term when speaking in the old colloquial. Just out of interest, assuming Jack's interpretation of "rules" for a moment; there is nothing wrong with "Yankee imperialism" as it is in the abstract. Although if the cap fits ....

Fascinated as ever with the "sex for reproduction" nonsense. Viz magazine may he of help for those of that absurd belief.

"Beer! Helping ugly people have sex since 1847".

Anyone with the poster may correct me regarding the arbitrary date.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:06 PM

Ah yes, another Wacko-dominated thread that is descending into the ridiculous (but such fun!). Actually, I've never insulted anybody, ever. All I've done is provide sharp riposte to people who are proud of being total idiots - and insulting the rest of us, serially and routinely, by requiring us to consider their utter inanities (we must be mad). If you are not a total idiot you will recognise yourself as not ever having been the recipient of such riposte (and not just from me - I have no ego, you know!). I'm not too keen on the indulging of fools such as pete, Wacko and Ake. If only more of us told these idiots to ditch their stupid bigotry and prejudices, and cut out the defensiveness, in as direct a manner as possible, we wouldn't have these threads (though what fun we'd be denying ourselves thereby!). Saddest of all is to see the likes of Bill, fine fellow though he is, who does everything in his power, possibly unknowingly, to keep these idiots on board, by dint of his indulgence of them (the indulgence is often close to patronising, which is a good thing, but ol' fruit Bill doesn't realise that they're too thick to see it). We need a world in which bullshitters are afforded no quarter. Too many of them hold far too much sway. The Christian militants have been telling us atheists like it is for millennia (and, often, doing us in, violently, in the process). They should cut out the whingeing and fight back - if they can - if they don't like it up 'em!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:14 PM

I never read such unadulterated, self satisfied, self promoting, smug crap shaw.....it is obnoxious even for you..Oh, if only we all had your wisdom and in depth perception..does beg the question though, if you are as good as you boast, why are you infesting these pages with your particular brand of bullshit?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:38 PM

"Wacko-"

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.


Does anyone agree with Mr. Shaw's statement?

" I've never insulted anybody, ever."

He seems to think that by insulting people on this forum who don't care a think about his opinions or grievances, he can right all of the wrongs that "Christian Militants" have been doing to his poor downtrodden people for so so long. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:52 PM

"Yankee imperialism" as it is in the abstract. Although if the cap fits"

I think the problem in this case is insisting that the cap fits.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:41 PM

I come home from a day at a folk music festival to find myself assured ...twice ... that I HAVE BEEN insulted... but then I read from the source that he has never, ever insulted anyone. Then he proceeds to insult me far worse than name calling by asserting that I indulge and patronize 'idiots' by participating in debate with people whom I know are NOT anything near idiots.

"Be in no doubt about whither or not it was an insult Bill.
It was indeed; it's what we term "condescension"."

Yeah... it does feel a bit like condescension *shrug*... but if no one deducts too many points for my flawed approach... *giggle*... I won't fret over it.

It must be ... nice?.... interesting?....humbling?.. naaawww, not humbling... to be so competent and smug that one can identify and categorize the innate mental capacities of those with whom he disagrees.

I suppose that all I can do as an indulgent 'ol fruit is to shrug and be whatever *I* choose to be and focus on the discussions and not the 'ratings' supplied from the sidelines.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:53 PM

I'm afraid Bill that in Mr. Shaw's universe yer either fer 'm or agin 'm.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 03:03 AM

The scenario.

Someone comes up with pompous shit or weird takes on reality.

The geography and reaction.

Pub - Smile , turn your back and talk to someone else.

Family - Smile, review your Christmas card list.

Interwebby thing - Put them out of their misery by telling them rather publicly what you think of their opinion.



You know, the less diplomatic approach, as seen on these threads is possibly in the long run the best approach after all.



(For the pub scenario, I would add , as I do, that when in the company of odious bigots, you may wish to leave your pint and walk out , wiping your feet as you leave.)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 07:16 AM

Jack, I thought we were discussing the original purpose of reproductive organs.....in relation to the species.

We are. We operate as a species through sexual pleasure & the joy of our genitalia. Homo, hetero, auto - it makes little difference. Consequently there's little chance of us dying out through contraception or STDs, BUT the ORIGINAL PURPOSE of our sex organs is for nought but PLEASURE. Reproduction is an occult & random consequence, as it is throughout all of nature from pollination to full on humping. I sure ain't heard no HORSE talk about no reproduction.

Homosexuality is not just restricted to the human realm, but we Homosexual Sapiens have made it a fine, noble and glorious art. As someone said, if God was so offended by BUGGERY, why did he put a G-spot up the male arsehole? And even the BIBLE celebrates Anal Sex... (Song o' Solomon 5:4). As someone else said, women are Lesbian by default.

Sex defines our culture & our spirituality; it is our very raison d'etre - all Nature expects of us is to have fun in a random scatter gun fashion & it will do the rest quite nicely.

*

Promiscuity is bad for all of us, that should be clear to everyone in this day and age.....Pope Benedict tried to make this very point, only to be howled down by the "liberal" media.

Pope Benedict covered up for paedophiles - anything else he said is invalid. He also headed an organisation responsible for the death & suffering of countless thousands (2 if you include the Catholic Church, in which case the number is MILLIONS). He also fast-tracked that sadistic old bitch & death fetishist Mother Theresa to becoming a saint. That is BAD.

There are no IDEALS here, just LIFE, what IS, and what has EVOLVED to be in this GODLESS REALM where the only problems are in the foetid imaginations of censorious tabloid tossers (like yourself) who take such offence at it.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 07:57 AM

Interwebby thing - Put them out of their misery by telling them rather publicly what you think of their opinion, but on Mudcat do it without gratuitous abuse in respect for the wishes of the selfless people who provide the service.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 08:03 AM

the ORIGINAL PURPOSE of our sex organs is for nought but PLEASURE.

No.
Reproduction is their original purpose, but if it did not stimulate the pleasure centres of the brain, no-one or thing would use them.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 08:56 AM

Oh, if only we all had your wisdom and in depth perception..does beg the question though, if you are as good as you boast...

No it doesn't. It raises the question. I'm not as "good" as anything. I'm just enjoying meself.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 12:25 PM

I was actually responding to Jack the Sailor Mr Blandriver, I am certainly not about to carry on a debate with some one as abusive as you.

Anyway there is no need to debate you, your frenzied post says everything we need to know about you.

I am amazed though, that there are still people who hold your views on sexual conduct in todays climate.
If you are really a homosexual, as you claim, do the MSM infection rates not give you pause for thought?
If these rates are not caused by extreme promiscuous behaviour, perhaps you can enlighten us as to their actual cause?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 12:38 PM

Ake, I think that people, any people getting AIDS is disturbing to all of us. I've pointed out before that you have not shown a link between that and Gay marriage, yet you use it as an argument against it.

Near my small home town in Canada a man was convicted and jailed for knowingly having unprotected sex with multiple female partners while being infected with the virus. I know for a fact that AIDS is not just a gay problem and the causal factor for the epidemic was promiscuity and recklessness not homosexuality.

If you want to say that MSM infection rates are alarming and that young men are reckless, I doubt you will find many who will argue the point. But the conflation of that and gay marriage is taking the argument beyond the evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 12:45 PM

Oy! Odious worm!

Earlier on in this thread, you moaned about personal abuse. You said I was a poor NHS manager despite the fact I am neither poor, nor an NHS manager. Your beef was, I presume, that The academy of Royal Colleges don't recognise your false and misinterpreted health figures that you use to persecute gay people in a most despicable and awful manner. The NHS deals with reality, not your wish to criminalise people for merely existing.

So.. If you can't take it, stop giving it out.

Here's a fact. More women love it up their arse than men. Factor that into your homophobia you worthless creep.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 01:30 PM

The academy of Royal Colleges don't recognise your false and misinterpreted health figures

They use HPA data, same as Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 01:35 PM

Musket leave out the first and last lines and your post has some credibility. As it is you are just a rule breaking name caller.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 02:31 PM

But the middle bit is misleading.

"British HIV Association (BHIVA), British Association for Sexual Health and HIV
(BASHH)/Royal College of Physicians, Medical Foundation for AIDS & Sexual Health
(MedFASH)
British HIV Association (BHIVA), British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH)/Royal College of Physicians, Medical Foundation for AIDS & Sexual Health (MedFASH)
Written evidence from The British HIV Association (BHIVA) (HAUK 53)
1. Monitoring
Please also refer to the evidence submission by the 'Halve It Campaign' of which BHIVA is a member
We wish to emphasise the following points:
i)
The quality of HIV surveillance in the UK provided by the Health Protection agency (HPA) is high and internationally recognised. The HPA provides information on the epidemiology of HIV infection across different populations and localities. Reporting of HIV surveillance data is voluntary, but both participation and reporting is high.
ii)
Under the proposed public health reforms it is important the quality and extent of the current surveillance provided by the HPA is maintained and enhanced. It is vital sufficient resources are made available, and that fragmentation of surveillance and monitoring systems does not occur.
iii)
The development of clinical outcome indicators by the HPA in collaboration with the London specialist commissioning group has been a significant initiative in the monitoring of treatment and care outcomes and will help inform the commissioning of services.
iv)"

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 04:11 PM

I don't see any response to the valid point about promiscuity spreading HIV

Jack.... if over 60% of new cases of HIV (70% in the US), are from the MSM demographic, surely that says something about the sexual behaviour of male homosexuals?
I have always deduced from these figures that sexual intercourse between males is dangerous and unhealthy and should not be promoted as "safe and healthy".....the legislation to promote homosexual "marriage" through the church is in my opinion flawed.

The church is supposed to give moral guidance on matters like sexual behaviour....how can they do so without studying and understanding these figures

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 05:16 PM

Ake, You do not have enough data to reach that conclusion.   

What are the infection rates among monogamous couples neither of whom were previously infected?

How about female homosexual couples? Are they to have their rights abridged because of male to male infection?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 05:32 PM

I am referring only to male homosexual infection rates Jack.

The church defines marriage as between a man and a woman exclusively

I suppose the infection rates for totally monogamous male homosexual couples would be nil.....if you could find one.

Various studies have shown male homosexuals to have large numbers of lifetime sexual partners, over 100 is common some give figures of over one thousand.
Even in "committed" relationships monogamy among male homosexuals is not common.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 08:23 PM

I suppose the infection rates for totally monogamous male homosexual couples would be nil.....if you could find one.

Various studies have shown male homosexuals to have large numbers of lifetime sexual partners, over 100 is common some give figures of over one thousand.

These remarks reveal you to be one of the most repugnant, bigoted, lying, prejudiced, vile, sub-human, nasty pieces of work I've ever encountered.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 11:14 PM

>>These remarks reveal you to be one of the most repugnant, bigoted, lying, prejudiced, vile, sub-human, nasty pieces of work I've ever encountered. <<

You say that you have never insulted anyone. I think I might start counting the insults.

1 (7 actually but lets keep it simple and stick to incidences)

Perhaps you are unaware of the rules of this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 11:31 PM

>>From: akenaton - PM
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 05:32 PM

I am referring only to male homosexual infection rates Jack.

The church defines marriage as between a man and a woman exclusively

I suppose the infection rates for totally monogamous male homosexual couples would be nil.....if you could find one.<<

So I guess you are saying that the only reason that women and Gay men who intend to remain faithful is a definition of the church?

I know that not all churches are as rigid in their definition of marriage. So let me ask you this. Would you have an object to two gays getting married if they pledged monogamy (as most couples do) and could find a church to marry them?

I think that if your objection is simply your morals and if you are not insisting that your morals be opposed on others then it is your right to express your opinion. MSM infection is a separate issue. I'm sure that all can agree it is a bad thing. Forcing a legal abridgement of equal rights of a citizen because of the a definition imposed by a church they do not follow does not seen like you Ake. You come across as a lover of liberty and equality to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 04:25 AM

Keith is being literal again. Of course the data supplied by HPA is mostly accurate. After all, it is gleaned largely from NHS data in the first place. As ever, bigots confuse trajectory based on history with trajectory based on meta analysis. The latter being what public Health consultants use when planning local services.

Keith keeps referring to a paper published using HPA data from a one year period as being the definitive data. No. It is a published opinion. Just that. A very good one by the way and most useful, but merely one factor.

The other factors are the excellent take up of screening by male gays, which skew figures, and the appalling late presentations by promiscuous women. Sexual health services are concentrating on the latter. Look for the new adverts just starting up. Unlike our more odious contributors, my comments on this subject do tend to be on the basis of fact. After all, I advise on healthcare planning as a small part of what I do. When I said more women take it up the arse than men, it is based mainly on complication presentation at emergency departments and colo rectal referrals, not gut (or colon..) feeling.... Oh, and the internet funnily enough. The exposure of more people to porn makes anal sex seen more a a norm and is more expected than before. An interesting paper about that the other year in a medical journal I read.

But not worth arguing with Keith or the worm. Keith is just plain ignorant and believes what he wishes to believe, so long as he can google something with a glimmer of fact about it and the worm just hates people who are on the wrong side of his personality disorder.

Sigh....

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 04:43 AM

By the way Keith.

The BHIVA are expressing their wishes in a submission to a consultation in the quote you gave. A very good one, as the epidemiology of sexual health does require trend and incidence analysis, as well as regional variation. Our people do have concerns that HPA data may be less valid if the quango bonfire affects their ability.

But the same people are the first to decry those who dangerously use HPA data to satisfy false assumptions. There is a similar issue on recall for breast screening, where data is being misinterpreted by pressure groups who want screening expanded on other than clinical appropriateness.

If you are a decent man, and your track record hasn't been sparkling it has to be said, you at least should accept that the epidemiology of a health aspect in a population size such as ours is more complicated than looking at history and trajectory and carving the results in stone.

I wish it were. We'd need to spend less on expensive consultant doctors. Public health consultants aren't cheap, but the planning and forecasting they give at a local level helps target services far better than far right groups, priests or politicians could ever do.



Jack. Sorry but Steve Shaw was both accurate and I think constrained in his condemnation of the worm above. To think that anybody could be so sinister and repugnant as to assume gay people, the ones who fought hard to be accepted, allowed to marry, aren't worth the effort because they are all adulterous anyway?

He makes my skin crawl.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 05:09 AM

Keith keeps referring to a paper published using HPA data from a one year period as being the definitive data. No. It is a published opinion. Just that.

The HPA statistics ARE definitive.
Raw data is obviously supplied by clinicians, but HPA/PHE produce the statistics AND NO-ONE ELSE!
That is why you can not produce any others despite repeated requests.

In your position you must know this, but you hope to hide the fact from the forum because the figures undermine your position.
You are a thoroughly dishonest person.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:49 AM

You gormless stupid ill informed pillock.

HPA get HRG data from commissioning returns. They then produce statistics and offer scenarios to support trends.

This morning, my first day back at my desk, I am reviewing cancer data from January. It will hit national recipients possibly by April.

PHE don't do anything yet in that regard as they haven't even got their funding yet. My wife was appointed a regional cancer lead back in July and the sessions she is being paid haven't hit her paycheck yet. When they do carry on the work of national and regional planning, they will, as the SHAs did before, use HPA type data to inform planning of services and refine their raw numbers source with other pertinent intelligence. I shouldn't use that last word with you, it might confuse you, sorry. You know, if you were right, I wouldn't have the contract I have, as I am leading long term planning of NHS services for a huge region of England, and am in constant contact with, and use information from the organisations you keep quoting. I think I know a wee bit more than someone who reads two books and thinks he knows everything about anything eh?


I tried. You just can't educate pork.

There again, your agenda is clear Keith. You just don't let the mask slip as often as Akenhateon do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:18 AM

"You gormless stupid ill informed pillock"
HPA have been part of PHE since April last year.
PHE are the "authors" of the last annual HIV report, still on the HPA site.

They supply the definitive statistics.
No-one else.
You are a thoroughly dishonest person.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:24 AM

"HIV in the United Kingdom: 2013 report
Authors:
Public Health England
Publication date: November 2013 "

"From 1 April 2013 we are part of Public Health England
We are still maintaining this website until further notice."
http://www.hpa.org.uk/Publications/InfectiousDiseases/HIVAndSTIs/1311HIVintheUk2013report/

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:26 AM

From the definitive study by Bell and Weinberg.

Females were more likely than males to be monogamous. One third or more of the lesbians were monogamous, while the rest fell into the other categories. There were even larger differences between males and females in sexual behavior. Nearly half of the males had over 500 different sexual partners in a life time, another third had between 100 and 500, and over 90 per cent had at least 25 (black gay men were on average slightly less promiscuous than white gay men). Much sex between men took place between strangers, met in baths or bars. 25 per cent of white gay men at some time had sex with boys who sixteen or younger, after they themselves reached the age of 21. Most lesbians, however, had fewer than 10 same-sex partners over a life time, and very few cruised or looked for casual sex. Little lesbian sex took place between strangers.[19][20] Women's sexual behavior showed a relatively greater level of heterosexual activity and a relatively lower level of homosexual activity compared to that of men.[21]

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:58 AM

Wrong as usual. You can't change your source and use the same argument hoping that nobody notices you are lying Keith. Not lying about your sources, which includes me by the way as I am paid from the same pot and helped set PHE up, but lying because you quote sources that agree with the reality I state then say I am lying.

You are one fucked up individual.

Why can't you be like that nice person Akenaton and quote the DEFINITIVE study?

Excuse me whilst I throw up. Fucked up individuals and sick puppies. What price equality for all eh?

Bastards.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 09:54 AM

Changed sources?
Just added to them.
HPA/PHE produce the definitive statistics on UK infection.
If you deny that you are lying.
They are the statistics used in NHS planning whatever you say.

That is why you have failed to produce any source to support your claims, or any other statistics on UK HIV infection.
Will you now?
Of course not.
You can't.

Some of the organisations who use those and only those UK HIV stats.
NHS Choices.
Terrence Higgins Trust.
Avert.
National Aids Trust.
In fact, every single organisation with a need for those stats.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 10:05 AM

>>Keith or the worm. Keith is just plain ignorant<<



You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 10:16 AM

I guess you all have a reason to bicker like this over subtle differences of opinion on the meaning of words like "accurate" and "author."

Please try it without the name calling.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 11:23 AM

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

I am pretty sure that quoting the same thing over and over again when it is obviously having no effect is unkind, impolite, argumentative and snooty all the same time. Give it a rest, Jack. You are doing no good whatsoever. I Suggest that you email Max every time you feel the need to whinge about someone. Let's see how long he can put up with it.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 11:34 AM

"I am pretty sure that quoting the same thing over and over again when it is obviously having no effect is unkind, impolite, argumentative and snooty all the same time." DtG

I am sure that it is not. I am sure those rules were put there because that is how respectful members are supposed to behave.


Dave, ally of Mr. Steve Shaw, nice try. Did he put you up to that?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 11:55 AM

Something good about putting down bigotry and malign intent all the same.

Keith gets more stupid with each post. His absurd claim that statistics are er... The only things people use as er... Statistics....

Want to try again Keith?

Who knows, you might even eventually get as far as your tubular mate. At least he admits to hating without hiding his views. Mind you, I wish he would.



Here Jack! You say that respectful members are supposed to behave etc. What about disrespectful members then? Is the worm allowed to promote hate because he is disrespectful?   Is it disrespectful to be disrespectful to disrespectful people then?

You seem to have all the fucking answers so why don't you ask our homophobic bigots that follow me round the threads to respect your so called rules?

There again, fuck 'em. Let them carry on. Nobody on Mudcat gives a rats arse about their odious diatribe, nobody cares how much they upset members. No. Because they say it without shouting so we must respect them. If we don't, Joe Offer sends us abusive emails. I guess that is the bit that disappoints me most of all.

Here's a stance. Bigotry, misogyny and homophobia get the reaction it deserves in the only way the ignorant tossers understand.

Live with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 12:12 PM

"Here's a stance. Bigotry, misogyny and homophobia get the reaction it deserves in the only way the ignorant tossers understand."

Here is a stance.

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

It puzzles me that you seem to think that calling people names somehow mitigates the damage of people expressing unwanted ideas.

Its like they have started a bonfire and you deal with that by throwing horse turds into the flames.

I also wonder who you and Steve think appointed you to try to drive people off this forum with insults.

It doesn't work. It just makes them worse. They just think that you are mentally undisciplined and therefor may be persuadable. If everyone was countering their ideas with reason than they would not have any reason to think that saying unreasonable things would work. Simply put. When they make you angry, they win.

Try this, calm down. When they say something unreasonable, counter it with reason. Stay calm. Don't call them names. Don't ad fuel to the fire.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 12:29 PM

Dave, ally of Mr. Steve Shaw, nice try. Did he put you up to that?

Unkind, uncalled for and untrue, Jack. Do you get to not only repeat the rules over and over again but also decide which statements fall foul of these rules? If so, under who's authority do you act as law enforcer and judge?

Moreover you are evading the fact that your constant parroting of the same mantra is becoming very monotonous and therefore impolite, unkind and argumentative. Being 'holier than thou' while repeating it is probably one of the snootiest things I have come across.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 01:00 PM

I don't think either Keith or myself are saying anything "unreasonable" Jack.
Keith is not even expressing an opinion, he is simply pointing out when others are being inaccurate or deliberately lying.

I take your point about lesbians, they seem to be more or less similar to heterosexual couples when in a committed relationship.

But the church has other issues about same sex "marriage", regarding family structure and theological teaching.
Children are the crux of the matter, it is regarded as the "ideal", if children are brought up by their natural parents in a secure family structure.....the Church wishes to reinforce this ideal, not weaken it.
Traditional marriage should always be between man and woman, to reinforce the family structure. All the "rights" are available through civil union and the institution of marriage should be supported in the interests of children everywhere.

it is my personal opinion, that the issue is really an attack on the Church and conservatism by "liberal activists" like those we see on these pages, do you not see the link in their continual attacks on religion...... it is estimated that only 0.04 of the population will avail themselves of homosexual "marriage", and of those who do 75% will be women.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 01:14 PM

Jack is correct to point out abusive language and name calling whenever it occurs Dave.
If this behaviour was taken to its "logical" conclusion, we would have no discussion forum, just a bear pit of abuse, sensible discussion of controversial issues would be impossible.
I can't understand why you would want this sort of childish behaviour to continue, you have always seemed a sensible guy in the past?

The shutting down of civil discussion is always bad, regardless of whether we like what we hear or not.
On this forum ANY subject is up for CIVIL debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 01:22 PM

Jack is correct to point out abusive language and name calling whenever it occurs Dave.

Anyone is free to do so. Once. Maybe twice. Occasionally three times if the need arises. But over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over? To do so is unkind to others and therefore impolite. It is certainly argumentative and anyone trying to come across as better than others by, seemingly, quoting and sticking to the rules is certainly being snooty.

And once again I ask the question. Who appointed Jack as law enforcer and judge all in one?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 02:30 PM

You don't need to be a judge to see and point out name calling and abusive language Dave.

I think Jack has made a big difference here, name calling and cursing at fellow members had all but gone.....a better feeling pervades the forum. It takes time and effort to push people in the civil direction.
Well done Jack, someone had to do it and you stepped up to the plate.

Moderators have let too much go ....I know they cant read everything, but they should keep an eye on threads which could be controversial.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 03:09 PM

You don't need to be a judge to see and point out name calling and abusive language Dave.

Anyone is free to do so. Once. Maybe twice. Occasionally three times if the need arises. But over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over? To do so is unkind to others and therefore impolite. It is certainly argumentative and anyone trying to come across as better than others by, seemingly, quoting and sticking to the rules is certainly being snooty.

And once again I ask the question. Who appointed Jack as law enforcer and judge all in one?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 03:14 PM

Anything is up for civil debate eh?

Let's have a civil debate about your attitude to people you don't know but feel you can sit in judgement of?

Let's have a debate about Musket being a liar for knowing more about sexual health than you know about labouring for stonemasons.

Let's have a civil debate about the far right hate sites you use to draw false conclusions about the accurate HPA data you spew without knowing how it is collected nor indeed why.

Let's have a civil debate over your claim that not many gay people will want to marry, because they are naturally promiscuous. We could segue in a side debate about not letting niggers go to school because they don't need education when they end in prison. Or even letting pakis in public places in case they offend you by wearing rucksacks.

Hey! It's easy this bigot lark! I think I could ge..............

Excuse me, I need to throw up.

Then get a shower.

My skin is crawling.





Nobody is name calling you worm. Some of us don't like the company of lowlife scum and aren't afraid to say so. Read what the more civil members are actually saying. I applaud their self control, though I don't share their approach.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 03:31 PM

Nobody appointed Jack, Dave, he took it upon himself to try to bring civility back to this forum and has made a damn good job of it IMO.

I think Jack should be offered a chance at moderating.

As I said already, somebody HAD to do something, we all like to argue the toss here, but if we are going to behave like infants the forum will surely break up, nobody LIKES discussion with people who constantly insult them personally.

If I start to push my socialist views, I expect conservatives to say I don't live in the real world, or that my ideas are unrealistic, or that I'm a Utopean dreamer......I don't expect to be personally abused.
Most people here would not like to be addressed in that fashion.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 03:33 PM

His absurd claim that statistics are er... The only things people use as er... Statistics....

My only claim is that the HPA/PHE stats are definitive and the ones used by NHS for all purposes including planning.

That contradicts your knowingly false claim.
You just hope to be believed by obfuscation and smears.


You have failed to produce any source to support your claims, or any other statistics on UK HIV infection.
Will you now?
Of course not.
You can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 03:55 PM

"But over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over?"

You do realize that I only point it out when it occurs?

I've told the concerned parties that I am going to point it out until they learn and abide by the rules.

Who appointed Mr. Shaw to try to drive people off the forum by insulting them? Who appointed to to join with Mr. Shaw in that quest with several solid months of of non-stop mocking?

One or two jokes about being the Messiah may have been funny. "But over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over?"

Nice try ally of Steve. Please consider how that argument sounds like to me coming from you. Please consider how long I let you do that without appointing myself as law enforcer and judge all in one for you? Please be warned that if you persist in calling it impolite for me to repeat things, I shall watch to see if you do it.

I didn't make up the rules, did I? A respectful and polite member of this form would learn the rules, respect the rules and abide by the rules. Wouldn't they?   

Steve Shaw and Musket appointed me the "Law enforcer and Judge" for them by attacking me and currently for Steve and up until recently for Musket

How is what I am doing argumentative? I'm not arguing with them. I am just showing them Max's words and asking them to stop insulting people. I am not inviting a discussion. I am not provoking a response. I am simply and persistently trying to educate. I am simply using a tool that Max gave us to fight back against badgering without arguing and without running to the admins and asking them to babysit our tormentors.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 05:24 PM

You do realize that I only point it out when it occurs?

Anyone is free to do so. Once. Maybe twice. Occasionally three times if the need arises. But over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over? To do so is unkind to others and therefore impolite. It is certainly argumentative and anyone trying to come across as better than others by, seemingly, quoting and sticking to the rules is certainly being snooty.

And once again I ask the question. Who appointed Jack as law enforcer and judge all in one?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 05:39 PM

BTW, in case anyone lost count, that is three times :-)

Now. What about Please consider how long I let you do that

You did not 'let me' do anything, Jack. If you believe that you did, you are more deluded than the others believe. Nothing you can do, ever, will stop me from posting my own views. Please note. My own views. Not those of either Co-Messiah. That they happen to occasionally coincide is a matter of chance. No matter what nonsense about 'allies' and being 'put up' to things you keep posting.

As to Please be warned that if you persist in calling it impolite for me to repeat things That is truly terrifying. Not the threat. The fact that someone could seriously believe I may be remotely worried about it. At the risk of repeating myself, again,

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 05:54 PM

I don't think you are worried. I know that you are being argumentative. So I am not going to take the bait. I think you are arguing both sides of this and accomplishing nothing. As I said you and your pals tried to pull the same Messiah joke constantly for several months. I let that pass with very little comment. Virtually none of it aimed at you.

Now you say it is rude for me to point out the rules when and only when someone insults me or tries to break up a conversation I want to have with silly childish forbidden insults.

Weellllll EXCUUUUUSSSSEEE MEEEEEE!

If you don't want for me to tell them to stop being childish why don't you attack the problem at its source and tell them to stop being so childish?

I am sorry if I am ruining your entertainment and your childish mocking of religion. But there are plenty of places on the Internet without being exposed to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:17 PM

"Homosexuality IS perverse as we, male and female, were given the organs of reproduction, solely to reproduce....the pleasure we gain from sexual intercourse is an added incentive for reproduction.
So sexual intercourse with someone of the same gender is in essence a perversion of the true purpose."

THe usual puritanical blether!

If the above were in any sense logical, why is it that in the whole of the animal kingdom, mankind alone has sex throughout the year and the result is only infrequently pregnancy, while animals in the main only have sex when pregnancy CAN occur?

The logical conclusion is that human sex is not simply for procreation, but that the pleasure derived is a means of finding, selecting, and bonding of a long term partner, such as might be needed for offspring which will be dependent for 18 -25 years upon the parents.

Such a system would naturally throw up a small percentage who would tend to bond outside of that structure, either on a same sex, or a no sex level.

All perfectly natural.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:21 PM

"The church defines marriage as between a man and a woman exclusively"

It will be a sad day when the followers of an invisible friend are given the right to enact law.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:25 PM

"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

And you are FREE to take your pompous, posturing pontifications elsewhere, but of course you won't.

You are too busy being argumentative and snooty!

Cast out the beam...........

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:36 PM

"Moderators have let too much go ....I know they cant read everything, but they should keep an eye on threads which could be controversial."....Ake

Where are you Jack?

If you are serious about pointing out rule infringements, why are you not taking the Pharaoh to task for being "either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

The truth is that you are only interested in the rules which others than you and your pals break.

You are a failure!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:48 PM

I see this thread is going the way of the other two..sad but inevitable when you have so called adults/men usually, loose with a computer..

Begrudgery, inane posturing, testosterone fueled chest thumping hominids..and that is just the class clown shaw, the totally waste of space gmomet and now the latest no mark buffoon Troubadour..with his own cut and paste cracker barrel wisdom?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:05 PM

Ake doesn't insult me so I discuss my differences with him civilly.

"either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

Do you what "that" is, I don't. Don't want to know.

"If you are serious about pointing out rule infringements,"

I am not. I said this a couple of posts ago. It still applies now.

I didn't make up the rules, did I? A respectful and polite member of this form would learn the rules, respect the rules and abide by the rules. Wouldn't they?   

Steve Shaw and Musket appointed me the "Law enforcer and Judge" for them by attacking me and currently for Steve and up until recently for Musket

How is what I am doing argumentative? I'm not arguing with them. I am just showing them Max's words and asking them to stop insulting people. I am not inviting a discussion. I am not provoking a response. I am simply and persistently trying to educate. I am simply using a tool that Max gave us to fight back against badgering without arguing and without running to the admins and asking them to babysit our tormentors.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:05 PM

Fuck off ducky!

Unless you fancy doing something useful?

Mine's white with two sugars!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:20 PM

"Do you what "that" is, I don't. Don't want to know."

You're a liar Jack! Everybody (even guests like me ) knows that the subject not to be discussed is the way the forum is run.

Ake is consistently sniping at the mods and you use feigned ignorance to selectively harangue others.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:23 PM

Just for clarity, "Ducky" is the twit formerly known as concerened

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 09:52 PM

Dave, ally of Mr. Steve Shaw, nice try. Did he put you up to that?

Well, I love the fun we have here and I don't get cross about Jacko's multifarious stupidities - usually. But, for once through gritted teeth, Wacko, let me clear this up for you. I've just checked: I have never sent Dave a PM. Dave has only ever sent me just the one PM, last September (forgive me a little here, Dave), literally a one-liner, saying that he'd enjoyed the fun of the new religion jape and that he was sorry it was coming to an end. I don't quote PMs verbatim but I can do if Dave wants me to. That single message aside, every exchange I've ever had with Dave has been in public, up here on the forum for you and everybody else to read, Wacko. You really are getting desperate, aren't you? Not only do your posts increasing read like those of a man totally losing it, but you're now resorting to nasty little slurs such as the one above. Tell me: how does this fit in with you sanctimonious parrotting of "the forum rules"? Do tell us, briefly, why we should not think that you're just a hypocrite. Alternatively, do consider a short period of red-faced silence, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 09:54 PM

"increasingly". The word needed a little increasing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 10:22 PM

" Everybody (even guests like me ) knows that the subject not to be discussed is the way the forum is run."

I'm sorry, but that is NOT the forbidden topic. It (rules) is a contentious topic, and a useless one, because it involves infinite regress of debating the rules ^{about the rules}. Threads that drift into too much of that often get closed.

I am not sure whether to explain the forbidden topic, because that would lead, inevitably, to opening it up. I would explain it 'briefly' to someone who I could PM- but those who decline to be 'members' are at that disadvantage... (have done so twice, and they kindly refrained from remarking on it openly.) It is an awkward situation from several years back, but Max asked for it to be observed.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:26 AM

Jack. You say that Akenhateon doesn't insult you. He demonises a section of society and because you don't fall into that section, it's not a problem ?

When they found the concentration camps, the allied armies took local townsfolk to see what they had been ignoring because. "They hadn't come for them."

A bit of a severe comparison but if his wish of rounding up gay people and putting them on a register has a precedent it is Germany 1937. Oh, and Uganda 2014.




Keith. Leave it. If you can't read what the grown ups write, wait till your balls drop eh? My tolerance of precocious children was never that high. You make it sound as if PHE, who I increasingly work with, are somehow different to me? Stupid prick. I expect NHS commissioning to take HPA / PHE data into account. Like anybody within The Dept of Health in any capacity, I don't expect services to be modelled on anything so crude.

If Keith was accurate in his mental leaps , I and a few thousand others should resign and make way for real people, appointed by Keith and his role model Farage.



Hey! Marriage is between one man and one woman eh? Now... I don't live in The USA and I have no time for religious nonsense when it comes to legislation but I notice Utah has just turned the clock back in support of Christians who er.. Didn't read the script?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:52 AM

tell them to stop being so childish?

I think Steve has already explained but just in case it did not sink in...

I cannot tell them to stop being childish. You seem to have the mistaken impression that Musket, Steve and I actually know each other. We do not. I have no influence over their posts any more than you have over mine. As Steve said, I have sent one PM to both Co-Messiahs and that was simply because I did not want to prolong the nonsense being preached in a specific thread. Other than I believe that Steve was raised a couple of miles from where I was dragged up we have no connection whatsoever.

Having said all that, my views are far closer to theirs than they are to yours. I would not hold that against you though. Some of my best friends have views on major issues that are disparate to mine. I would also happily put up with any amount of bad language in place of someone childishly repeating 'You are not allowed to do that. Mum says so'. Or insults over incitement to hatred.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:18 AM

My only claim is that the HPA/PHE stats are definitive and the ones used by NHS for all purposes including planning.

It is not enough to claim otherwise.
Your assurances are worthless.

You have failed to produce any source to support your claims, or any other statistics on UK HIV infection.
Will you now?
Of course not.
You can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:51 AM

It's true.



I can't recall swigging horns of mead served by buxom wenches with Dave or any other gnome for that matter.

Mores the pity.

Anyway, back to the grind. Coincidentally, for the benefit of my UKIP troll, today's light reading includes a study commissioned by WHO using primary care data previously not used outside of clinical audit to find cluster criteria for, amongst other things, STDs. Put the kettle on Keith. Might as well be useful for something. I in the meantime might highlight a few bits from the report for when I meet with the regional commissioning support unit (CSU) tomorrow.

Isn't it weird that as someone on record for promoting openness, candour and access to information on health, I see irresponsible stupid comments in public by the likes of Keith A Hole of Hertford and wonder if there might just be a case for dumbing it down before armchair professors with political agendas read it? I mean, I'm no healthcare professional myself. It's my business / governance background that they make use of, yet even a bog standard engineer like me can tell the difference between source and conclusion.

Best not tell him I am allowed to teach this shit to medical students, junior doctors and post grad nurses.......

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:26 AM

Funnily enough, I own a drinking horn. My lovely wife bought it me, from an online shop in Russia, for a birthday some time back. Along with a Ushanka and a Cossack knife. Not sure what the message coming across was there:-) Anyway, should you happen by Gnome Towers any time I will gladly treat you to a horn of mead or any other beverage of your choice. Same applies to you, Jack, although I am not sure if treating you to a horn full would be classed as kind or polite :-)

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 06:42 AM

I am sure you have a position of great importance Musket, but if you say that HPA/PHE statistics are not definitive, or that there is another source used in preference, you are a liar.

Lying about me personally does not change that fact.
Nothing you said about me has any truth in it at all.
You are indeed a thoroughly dishonest person.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 08:50 AM

CSE English module. Question 1

If a source is definitive, does a definitive conclusion have to stem from it?

Answer.

There is nothing definitive about statistical conclusions, so it is correct that this is in English rather than any other subject as the aim of the question is to point out stupid use of language.

If I were as dishonest as Keith, I'd possibly be well qualified for selection committees.



Eyup Dave! I'll bring my clay tankard I spun and fired at the Stainsby Folk Festival circa 1981. It holds exactly one pint. Amazingly enough. The problem with drinking horns is that once you get a pint of cookin' in them, you can't put them down till they are empty.

Thinking on, got a spare horn?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 09:32 AM

There is nothing definitive about statistical conclusions,

HPA/PHE do not put up "statistical conclusions."
They do provide statistics.
They are the only providers of HIV stats. for UK.

Unless you know of another Musket?
Will you share it with us?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 09:50 AM

The Office For National Statistics do publish HIV statistics.
"Source Health Protection Agency"

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:01 AM

Keith and Musket, I still can't figure out what your difference is. I've studied statistics for three different academic subjects, and in two of the four courses the purpose of the course was to prevent being mislead by false conclusions.

I have to disagree Musket. On this thread, Keith is not being stupid or an A Hole. Keith, Musket is not lying. I don't see either of you being stupid about the stats, who reports them or what data they represent. The pattern of the argument seems to be , Do you two think that the two of you can figure out a way to leave out the personal attacks? I am tempted to side with Dave about the rudeness of repetition.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:05 AM

Sorry guys a piece of my post got lost in the upload.


The pattern of your argument seems to be ,

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:12 AM

Jack, a few weeks ago I put up a figure published by our Health Protection Agency.
Musket tried to rubbish it by telling blatant lies about it.
Preliminary report, out of date, superseded, and much more.

It was the very latest and only set of statistics on that topic.
To deny that, knowing it is true, is to tell a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:30 AM

Dave the Gnome, I think you are a good person and I generally enjoy what you have to say.

Whether you conspired with Steve and Musket in private or not, you did join in their months and months of mocking of me and my religion. I certainly understand your point that the same thing repeated enough times can get very tedious. Imagine it all being aimed specifically at you, going on whether you are reading it or not and with third parties gleefully joining in.

Imagine how many times Steve Shaw has called me a mocking name? Imagine how tired I am of that.

I am not calling to "mommy." If you haven't noticed by now, no one comes when I call.

I am trying to convince Steve that there are rules to this forum which are a good idea that we all should learn and abide by. That Max wrote those rules and that if he is grateful to Max for this forum then he should indeed respect the rules.

Steve saying, that pete deserves to be vilified, calling this a "pointless" forum, saying that he has never insulted anyone and continuing to rant at people and call them names indicates to me that I have a long and daunting quest ahead of me. But I am not going to stop until Mr. Shaw stops "vilifying" people (his word) or finds somewhere else to do it.

You telling me that repeatedly telling the rules to someone who hasn't learned them is rude (in your opinion) is not going to deter me.

Steve is stubbornly asking for this treatment. He asks for it every time he is rude and unkind, which on these threads is pretty much every time he posts. I told you before, I'll tell you again, if you want it to stop. You have a much higher likelihood of making that happen by working on Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 12:10 PM

How can someone in healthcare planning who uses the data lie about it, you stupid prick? I don't make decisions on things I am not qualified in. Professionals do and I give them the freedom to do so , that's it. Considering the use of the data informs service provision I'd soon look the fool you seem to be if I didn't understand what I have to do.

You wished to dogmatically use data falsely to support the bigoted lies nasty shits such as Akenhsteon use to demonise gay people. In doing so, you seem to think that the data The NHS releases to HPA is then used exclusively to plan health provision. It isn't how these things work.

Public health epidemiology is rather complicated which is why I see so much money spent on interpreting many sources of data.

Stop saying the national collator and advisor of particular sections of health data (about 20% of what is collected for commissioning purposes) is the bible for commissioning. If it is, I for one will be able to propose making 268 people redundant in one region alone.

You have been caught out telling lies to support homophobia. If you have an issue with that, take it out on the worm whose views you appear to support.

Jack. Nobody is trying to give an opinion on how health care planning is done in England. I am merely correcting false assumptions by people with political agendas in my other role as an advisor to NHS England on certain matters and ex Chair of the then Dept of Health body responsible for developing commissioning and planning of services.

Granted, using my real name. It's because of slanderous bigots that I keep such things separate. Sadly, I occasionally pop up in the media and gave already had my words quoted at me to call me a liar. You cannot begin to realise how much enjoyment I get out of that. In reality, I have to smile and indulge political agendas so it is nice to say what I think from time to time.

Keith A Hole of Hertford and the worm like to discuss sexual health. My pet subject too but from a perspective of reality and indeed responsibility. I am not however responsible for using historical data to demonise sections of society in a country where rights of all are enshrined in law.

Ian is my name by the way. I don't have a false name , more of an aka for professional purposes. A bit like my wife being Miss and then her maiden name , as most surgical consultants over here tend to.

But I don't wish to be stalked on reality by weirdos and mental health sufferers, so best that Keith doesn't make links. He too has more than one persona by the way. The one that said on Mudcat that he supports a right wing political party and the back pedalling fool who doesn't like it when his views are compared to his politics.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 01:45 PM

You both seem to agree on the stats and their source and the only agenda either of you are putting forth is that you don't like the other.

Ian, I don't see how you can hide from your identity in real life and use it in an argument. That doesn't make any sense at all to me but that is your business. If I ever get the chance to buy you a beer. Just tell me which name to use.

Musket, Please stop calling Keith names. It doesn't help your argument and it is annoying to the forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 02:38 PM

Whether you conspired with Steve and Musket in private or not, you did join in their months and months of mocking of me and my religion.

Jack, how many times do I have to say it? I don't want to continue until you see the light but you do seem to have set a precedent :-) Maybe I will try it in big letters this time.

THERE IS NO WHETHER OR NOT ABOUT IT. I HAVE NOT, DO NOT AND WILL NOT CONSPIRE IN SECRET WITH ANYONE. ANYTHING I SAY IN HERE IS OPEN FOR ALL TO SEE.

Shout mode off. Now, how about this mocking you business? I don't recall having mocked you personally but you could put me right. If so I will apologise and put it down to the heat of the moment. I will mock religion happily. Not just yours. Any organisation which tries to control the minds of innocent and vulnerable people by telling them fairy stories are true deserves everything it gets . But I accept that people at your level are not the organisation. I have said many times that I am happy for anyone to practice whatever religion they like. Pretty much like their sexual preferences, as long as it is between consenting adults and does not affect me I am happy with it. However, as soon as someone tells me that I should also worship their imaginary friend I will treat them with the contempt they deserve. What is more, any organisation that allows it's leaders to get others to kill, maim and torture is, quite simply, evil and should be spoken against.

Any clearer now?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:08 PM

I am trying to convince Steve that there are rules to this forum which are a good idea that we all should learn and abide by.

Hows about a rule that says that trying to smear people groundlessly with nasty slurs is approx. ten times worse than "calling you a mocking name"? Sticks and stones...? You are a hypocrite, aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:08 PM

How can someone in healthcare planning who uses the data lie about it, you stupid prick?

Your job prevents you lying?
Good argument Musket!

HPS/PHE statistics are definitive.
There are no others that are better, more reliable, etc.
That is why you can not produce any such.

You lied about it because the figure contradicted the wrong figure that you put up, and you were embarrassed.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:13 PM

Steve and Musket made it plenty clear many times, who and what they were mocking. You participated. Whether or not "conspiring" is exactly the right word does not matter. You "cooperated." You were their confederate? You played along. Choose your own words. It doesn't matter.

The fact that you were involved in the process of mocking me for so long and that you, like Steve and Musket seemed to have no idea of the boundary between funny and tedious, makes me believe that you are not the best person to criticize my manners for being repetitive?

Got it?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:24 PM

>>>From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:08 PM

I am trying to convince Steve that there are rules to this forum which are a good idea that we all should learn and abide by.

Hows about a rule that says that trying to smear people groundlessly with nasty slurs is approx. ten times worse than "calling you a mocking name"? Sticks and stones...? You are a hypocrite, aren't you? <<<

Please show me this rule.

In the mean time...

"You are a hypocrite, aren't you?"

If you click on the "membership" link you will find this rule.

"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

I think that calling me a hypocrite is unkind and impolite. It is also inviting an argument on whether I am one or not and also argumentative on the grounds that it is meant to provoke me into argument through anger.

You have a unique talent to be able to break so many rules so thoroughly with so few words. You also have a talent for making things up and then arrogantly presenting the things you have made up as things we should have known already. This is not a method conducive to clear and reasoned communication.
Please do not do this in future.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:49 PM

Got it?

No.

Whether or not "conspiring" is exactly the right word does not matter.

Yes it does, We only have words to put across our meanings on this forum. The right words matter a lot.

You participated.

Of course I did. As I just explained, religions deserve all they get. How is mocking a religion mocking you exactly?

seemed to have no idea of the boundary between funny and tedious

Are you criticising my sense of humour by any chance? Surely that is unkind. Or impolite at least?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerend
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:29 PM

How does it not surprise me Gnomet that you are the kind of dork that would even admit to OWNING a drinking horn?How very average it must be to actually meet you..

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:09 PM

Did someone just fart?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:37 PM

"It doesn't help your argument and it is annoying to the forum."

Supreme monomania and arrogance to assert that what annoys you is per se annoying to "the forum".

Who gave you the right to speak for all of us?

You are far more irritating with your constant attempts to police this site.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:42 PM

The only smell my wee manneen is the smell of your Buuuuuuuuuuuuullshit!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:50 PM

No DtG,

I am criticizing the boring repetition of the three of you going on with the same lame joke for months on end.

Since that is what I am criticizing, what you choose to call your participation in that matters little to me.

Got it now?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 06:11 PM

I think that calling me a hypocrite is unkind and impolite.

But what if it's true? And how unkind and impolite is it to smear a person with a groundless accusation?

In fact, as yet I haven't called you a hypocrite. First off, I asked you why we shouldn't regard you as a hypocrite. Second time, I asked you if you were a hypocrite. The words "Wacko, you are a hypocrite!" have not passed my lips (or keyboard), nor will they. This is one of those "if the cap fits" thangs, Wacko!

And might I ask you again: do you think one of the forum rules should be that we shouldn't try to smear others with groundless, snide little slurs? Incidentally, what makes you think you're so important that Dave and I would even dream of getting our heads secretively together to gang up against you? Cor, if that cap does fit it must be a bloody big cap! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 02:15 AM

If you say "hypocrite" or "liar" in response to a specific statement that justifies that description, then it is not gratuitous abuse.
It is a different issue to random abusive name calling.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 03:29 AM

Got it now?

No.

I am criticizing the boring repetition of the three of you going on with the same lame joke for months on end.

Very impolite and unkind to criticise someone else's sense of humour. Just as it would be unkind and impolite to criticise someone else's taste in music. I found it very funny BECAUSE it went on for so long. Maybe it could go on for as long as religion has been subjugating others? Now, that would be hilarious:-)

We are all different. Can you just not accept that? Or is it one law for Jack and another for everyone else?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 04:22 AM

You are missing the point Dave.
Jack is rightly saying that if the abusive language and name calling continues, the forum will suffer, as people will just stop contributing.
Most of us come here to discuss issues...some of them are controversial, but serious discussion cannot continue while two or three people indulge their strange sense of humour by personally insulting other members.

Just stick to addressing the issues, tell your friends to stop trying to "throw their weight about", it doesn't impress anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 04:41 AM

The only thing definitive here is science. Even then, we are only observing and drawing conclusions till they get refined.

Religion on the other hand, insults by it's very existence.

No problem in saying that. No concerted effort to deny people their delusion. I'd rather be happy and deluded than sad and realistic. I doubt however I'd wish to delude others and get annoyed at those who don't share it.

But some do.

Which is why it isn't a bad idea to laugh at them, rather than with them. The sweet old biddy arranging the flowers is one thing. Using misogyny and homophobia as a tool of a religion in order to influence laws we all have to abide by.... That's an invitation to point and laugh.

Pointing and laughing is far better than suggesting Marquis of Queensbury rules apply.




Jack. I will continue to treat Keith with the contempt he deserves whilst ever he keeps repeating unhelpful tosh that feeds bigotry. His belief that an ex organisation charged with protecting the public are the only source of health information would be funny if it weren't said for sinister reasons. Don't forget, one of his elected mates claimed last month that the bad weather we are having here is God's retribution for gay marriage.

You don't have the exclusive franchise on mental health in The USA after all..... We have a few slip through the net here too.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 06:12 AM

His belief that an ex organisation charged with protecting the public are the only source of health information would be funny if it weren't said for sinister reasons.

It is a fact that HPA was, and PHE is, the only source of statistics on HIV UK.
If it is not, produce another.
You can not, because there is none, and you know it.

You continue to link me with UKIP when there is no link.
You know that too.

You are a despicably dishonest person.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:05 AM

Tosh, tosh and ever more predictable TOSH!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:22 AM

I found it very funny BECAUSE it went on for so long. Maybe it could go on for as long as religion has been subjugating others? Now, that would be hilarious:-)

We could resurrect it, Dave (am I allowed to mention resurrections in a militant atheist thread?) Betty Swollox is available again as she's just been sacked from the Poundland plastic knickers factory for prancing around the warehouse bollock-naked with a pair of plastic knickers on her head shouting "how about this for a special offer!" Did you retrieve all the bingo balls from that car park or is Two Fat Ladies still missing? People were beginning to notice it never seemed to come up...

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:37 AM

She's never been the same since the caretaker at the Knott End Working Men's Club made a pass at her. Probably the most romantic thing anyone has ever said to her really. "You don't sweat much for a fat lass."

Anyway, our religion doesn't need resurrecting, we'll have no resurrection bollocks getting in the way of the true path.

Just bingo, drinking horns and a wheel barrow for the co messiahs and co messiah emeritus with gnomish attributes to load the cash from the collecting plates / bingo takings.

Two fat ladies, Betty Swollox and a misogynist mirror.

Six and six, two thirds of you will burn in hell.

On its own, you are never alone with an imaginary friend.

Key of the door, the bible.

Four and two, the answer to life, the universe and everything.

Cameron's den, full of bigoted bishops.

One and three, you are unlucky, and here's some guilt to pile onto your woes.

Two little boys, you are getting the hang of this religion lark, aren't you?

LINE!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:47 AM

Apparently Poundland are now selling vitamins and they have gone online. Maybe Betty had overdosed on the vitamins. Hopefully the incident will never get online...

Ake. I am not missing any point. Jack is asking everyone to be kind and polite while criticising my sense of humour. If I could keep a straight face while saying it I would suggest I was deeply offended. As it is I can simply point out the hypocrisy.

You, on the other hand, have quite spectacularly missed my earlier point that I have nothing whatsoever to do with anyone else on this thread. My exact phrase, to save you having to go all the way back, ooooh, the whole of 18 posts, was

THERE IS NO WHETHER OR NOT ABOUT IT. I HAVE NOT, DO NOT AND WILL NOT CONSPIRE IN SECRET WITH ANYONE. ANYTHING I SAY IN HERE IS OPEN FOR ALL TO SEE.

Yet you are quite happy to perpetuate the lie that we belong to some sort of clandestine organisation by asking me to tell your friends to stop trying to "throw their weight about"

I can no more tell anyone to do anything than Jack can. I have no alliances on here. I do not try to kid myself that I have any influence either.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 09:33 AM

I didn't say you were a member of any clandestine organisation Dave, I give you more credit than that.
I did think you would see the problem of abuse on a discussion forum?

OK maybe you dislike religion or people who discuss HIV infection rates, but do you really think that obfuscation, abuse and outright lying, serve any purpose other than making the perpetrator look unhinged?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 10:03 AM

I didn't say you were a member of any clandestine organisation

So, when you say tell your friends to stop trying to "throw their weight about" the implication is not that I have some sort of influence over a number of people? If not, why even suggest it? Unless to infer that there is some sort of "club" to which we all belong.

OK maybe you dislike religion or people who discuss HIV infection rates

I have asked before and no-one has yet supplied any sort of answer, let alone a sensible one. How come all the threads on atheism have become linked with HIV rates amongst male homosexuals? The two have nothing to do with each other. How come they are even in the same sentence?

Most of the arguments on here, including my own, are part sense, part opinion and a good pinch of complete bollocks. The only reason I stay with them is that they are mildly entertaining and when you are waiting for other things to happen it can while away a few minutes. The thing that surprises me the most is how seriously some seem to take it all.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 10:50 AM

Dave, you have no trouble telling me how to behave, and since you spent several months mocking me, we can hardly be friends.

Yet when told that it would be more effective to reign in the people you openly conspired with to mock, the people you are friendly with you say that have no influence.

You say there was no secret conspiracy. No one has said that it was secret. It is still all there to read. It was a conspiracy. It was a team effort. It was planned.

I am not criticizing your sense of humor. I am criticizing the repetition. Just as you CLAIMED y criticizing me pointing out the rules, but just the repetition.

You are certainly being argumentative and are using the Steve Shaw technique of focusing on specific words to bicker about.

It seems pretty clear that you miss the old Steve and Musket and you want to attack me to get them to come back.


I urge you, if that is the case, to find a forum that welcomes your tag team abuse rather than inflicting it on this one. If you click on "membership" you will find the rules of this forum which do not include or allow nonstop badgering of members to try to shut them up. You participated in that and your claiming now that you did not know it was rude does not pass the smell test. If you do not believe that mocking people or their religion is rude, find someone with good manners and ask them. Send a letter to "Miss Manners." Look it up on the Internet. This is information you really should have.

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 11:03 AM

"How come all the threads on atheism have become linked with HIV rates amongst male homosexuals? "

Because every time Akenaton posts to one of those threads, one of your former allies brings that topic up and calls Ake a bigot. You have
no influence on him obviously.

"Most of the arguments on here, including my own, are part sense, part opinion and a good pinch of complete bollocks. The only reason I stay with them is that they are mildly entertaining and when you are waiting for other things to happen it can while away a few minutes. The thing that surprises me the most is how seriously some seem to take it all."

This is worth knowing. So you are admitting to being a troll, but only while other trolls are not active. That explains a lot.

I'm going to put the whole "it is rude to repeat argument" you have been wasting my time with in the "complete bollocks", "mildly entertaining and when you are waiting for other things to happen it can while away a few minutes.", categories.

See you in the funny papers Mr Gnome.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 11:07 AM

"Jack is rightly saying that if the abusive language and name calling continues, the forum will suffer, as people will just stop contributing."

Boy, are you up your own arse or what?

I am an ex member who quit contributing because of the bigotted language and denigration of the different displayed by you, Keith and the misguided hangers who endorse your hateful attitudes.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 11:18 AM

There does seem to be a subtext within your little group Dave....a subtext that no one else can understand.

As I said before, it's like a very bad Python script...nudge nudge, :0).....Isn't everybody awfully stupid except us? We are the only ones who know what the naughty words really mean! :0)

1 "Betty Swollox is available again as she's just been sacked from the Poundland plastic knickers factory for prancing around the warehouse bollock-naked with a pair of plastic knickers on her head shouting "how about this for a special offer!"

2"She's never been the same since the caretaker at the Knott End Working Men's Club made a pass at her. Probably the most romantic thing anyone has ever said to her really. "You don't sweat much for a fat lass."

3 "Apparently Poundland are now selling vitamins and they have gone online. Maybe Betty had overdosed on the vitamins. Hopefully the incident will never get online..."

"The Three Messiahs"

It's all a bit tiresome and infantile when people want to discuss things like "faith" or morality...is it not?

You may think these issues are of no importance, but most adults want to learn things....want to hear other opinions...This group of people are an amazing mix of nationalities, religions, creeds, I love it here, though my views are not that of the average Mudcatter.

I wouldn't like to see it disintegrate through the actions of a couple of wreckers.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 11:29 AM

GUEST....The threads on "Gay Marriage" Religion, Morality are of great interest to a large number of Mudcatters, most of these threads run to thousands of posts, and are contributed to by many members
If you feel you cannot contribute to these threads, or can't bear to hear the truth, why do you not stick to threads which interest you?
If there are rules about which subjects we may discuss, I will stick to those rules, I will not abuse others for voicing differing opinions....especially anonymously!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 01:03 PM

Akenaton just said he will not abuse others

Ha Ha Ha.   Err.   Bbwwrrrrthhhrrrrrrrrwwwaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh.

Oh God, I've just thrown up.

Every time he types something he abuses gay people.

The only time Akenaton is capable of discussing morality is in the abstract. His appalling hatred towards sections of society make me ashamed to fe involved in a website that doesn't police what is propagation of hate, a criminal act where he lives.

A pity really, because if it weren't for that unforgivable attitude, I could have fun laughing at his weird takes on religion, morality and the state of society.

Me? I have a great life, enjoy myself and have faith. Faith? Aye, faith in human nature. Not everybody is a bitter twisted lump of malign hatred. Most people are a good laugh, non judgemental and contribute well to the greater good.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 01:54 PM

Oh good grief. At least I admit to talking bollocks occasionally. Some cannot help themselves and don't even realise it.

So you are admitting to being a troll

Bollocks.

It seems pretty clear that you miss the old Steve and Musket and you want to attack me to get them to come back.

Complete Bollocks.

It was a team effort. It was planned.

Complete and utter Bollocks.

Just as you CLAIMED y criticizing me pointing out the rules, but just the repetition.

Not even a language I understand but comes across as bollocks anyway.

Tell you what, Jack. I know there is no conspiracy. Musket knows there is no conspiracy. Steve knows there is no conspiracy. Every man and his dog apart from you seems to know there is no conspiracy. I give any moderator full permission to check my PMs, my own email, my Facebook page and even my internal orifices for any evidence of conspiracy. Yet you say we have been conspiring and planning. How about you put your money where your mouth is and come up with some evidence for this conspiracy eh?

Oh, hang on. You probably don't need proof do you? You have faith! Of course. That explains everything :-S

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 02:09 PM

There's always a conspiracy.... You just need to be in the know.

Sorry Dave, not helping...

Look, from where Jack lives, we are all next door to each other. Especially me & thee. Steve might be closer to us than when he woke up if that wind lifts him. Bloody hell, it's like God farted.

Here we go... Tin hat at the ready.

I wish Betty could blow like this bloody gale.



Jack. You say that every time Akenaton posts I call him a bigot. Not true. I call him a bigot when he speaks as a bigot. Sometimes he waffles on about things that clearly confuse him and I do him a favour by keeping quiet. But no, he knows when he says something about gay people.

It's a pity we don't have a member who might, you know, point out the rules to him? If Max would only give ground rules asking people not to be unkind. Some well meaning member could then ask the worm to stop being unkind to gay people by calling them perverted and wishing they undertook clinical testing against their will and be put on a register.

I'm like a broken record player. But I'll carry on till bigotry dies out if it's all the same to you..

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 02:47 PM

Musket, It seems to me that on threads not about "HIV", you usually bring up the HIV.

Maybe not. If you say so, I'll take you at your word. I'll take your word as you telling me you will not do it in future and I'll take that as proof that I was mistaken.

Who ever brings up HIV stats first on the next thread will be responsible for the change in subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 02:52 PM

Dave, you are obviously continuing the argument while you are waiting for other things to do.

I have better things to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 05:16 PM

Dave, you are obviously continuing the argument while you are waiting for other things to do.

Not this time, Jack. I made a special effort just for you :-)

I have better things to do.

Obviously not, seeing as you just posted that message. Caught out again I'm afraid Monsieur Matelot.


DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 05:19 PM

I have better things to do than answer the points of a person who is arguing for the sake of arguing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 11:57 PM

So this thread is just to continue the previous fights? Not to talk about the aspect of atheism that someone evidently, in the mists of time, found repugnant?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 02:44 AM

Ok SRS, I take your point.

Atheism is two words.

It is literately a stance of a person who rejects theism.

It is colloquially a dismissive term used to label people who don't share a religious person's commitment.

I think the latter is used in the main by people who were brought up rather hard wired as seeing faith at a superstitious level but are somewhat inwardly ashamed of themselves for not being able to apply the logic they use elsewhere to this subject.

Hence the sneering use of the word atheist.

So by extension a militant atheist must be, to them, someone who questions rather than humours them.

You see this with some Muslims where questioning the prophet is such a big thing. The origins of heresy seem to be where people 's intellect started developing and questioning whether we need the extra baggage of superstition to get on in life. The Christians who say "you wouldn't question Islam as openly as you question us" being a case in point. I often wonder if they are decrying violence by others or wishing they could give a similar response, to prevent people questioning their faith.

As their faith is built on the infallibility of their God, I doubt that sticks and stones could break his bones , so we come to the other explanation.

A secret guilt that they are bound up in something ultimately rather silly and are embarrassed to be reminded. Those comfortable with their private faith don't need to convince others.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 02:48 AM

Looks that way SRS. Although this one was actually created to have a go at the other two being closed and the actions of the moderation team.

Jack, do you not realise that by saying you have better things to do than respond, in a response, the more ridiculous you become? Please carry on :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 04:17 AM

I will stick to those rules, I will not abuse others for voicing differing opinions....

You did though, Ake. On Christmas day you said I was mentally ill and / or on drugs for voicing an opinion you later admitted was beyond your rather small-minded comprehension.

Opinions (such as your own) which are effectively hateful & inhumane propaganda don't tend to garner much respect, and you will be abused for voicing them, which is only right and proper.

Your cowardly hypocrisy is sickening.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 08:31 AM

The threads on "Gay Marriage" Religion, Morality are of great interest to a large number of Mudcatters...

Indeed, but you typed this statement all wrong. Choose from the following options, both getting it right:

The threads on "Gay Marriage", "Religion", "Morality" are of great interest to a large number of Mudcatters

The threads on Gay Marriage, Religion, Morality are of great interest to a large number of Mudcatters

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 10:02 AM

Gay marriage is in quotes because it is a controversial term. Not all people agree with the validity of it. Recognizing that fact by showing it in quotes is the polite thing to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 10:20 AM

So not putting it in quotes in the above post is impolite?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 10:26 AM

Still waiting for something to happen Dave? Please forgive me for declining your invitation to bicker.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 10:46 AM

Still not responding by responding Jack? Please forgive me for laughing my socks off.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 10:51 AM

Laugh if you want Dave,

but anyone who read
what I actually said,
They all knew
that the joke is on you

So carry on and don't forget to put your socks in the laundry hamper.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 10:54 AM

It is true
I have better things to do
Thank to bicker with you
Poetry is slicker
Than your propensity to bicker.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 12:16 PM

Since when was equality and upholding the law controversial Jack?

Name one decent member of the human race with a valid counter argument to people being able to marry the person they meet and wish to grow old with in a loving relationship?

Nobody thinks it is controversial. Not a single person. Why? Because we don't have to respect the views of those who would oppress others. They have no view, and at least here where the worm lives, we have equality of marriage. I notice that The Archbishop of Canterbury yesterday at last said that opposition is mere bigotry. He's woken up to reality at long last.

Please take this opportunity to preach your rules at Akenaton, or why should anybody bother reading them when you only shout them when you disagree with a post. Err.. You don't oppose marriage equality for all by any chance, do you?


Watch out Dave. The last time I wrote a poem for Jack, Joe Offer thought it was funny and Jack went off on one.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 12:31 PM

Canterbury said opposition to blessing gay marriages might be seen that way by others.
"The Archbishop of Canterbury has warned the Church of England that refusing to allow blessings for gay married couples could be seen as "akin to racism"."

"Same-sex marriages will begin from the 29 March. Under the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act, the Church of England is explicitly banned from performing the ceremonies, as part of Maria Miller's 'triple lock'."
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/02/12/archbishop-canterbury-warns-church-allowing-blessings-gay-marriages-akin-racism/

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 03:33 PM

The thing is, the Archbishop also recognises he needs collecting bowl contributions from his congregations.

I think he said what he did rather cleverly because those who support bigotry such as Keith A Hole of Hertford are comfortable with the distinction that criminals in the church forced weak politicians to drive through and at the same time, Keith is so far up his own arse he doesn't realise how fucking funny his post is.

Oh , let's not have God botherers think their homophobia isn't free speech.

Disgusting low life scum.

(I reckon that gets me a round robin on your rule list Jack.)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,jts
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 03:42 PM

Ah we have proof of the multiverse theory.

On this side of the cosmic string, Mr Musket, "Gay" is a controversial term "Gay Marriage" is even more so. But you may be surprised, that on this side of the divide, "atheist" is not controversial at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 04:02 PM

There are a large number of people in the UK who are banned from marrying one another...the argument of course comes from the UK judicial system.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 04:09 PM

Musket.

My wife just pointed out that many people don't like the term "Gay Marriage" because they think marriage should simply be called "marriage." Perhaps you know someone who holds that opinion. Perhaps the person Mr. Shaw was correcting was being polite to them.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 04:13 PM

Ake, let's go back to the topic of the thread. I take it you consider yourself an atheist but you do not feel that you are a militant one? How do you feel about the term Militant Atheist? What does it mean to you? Do you feel that the topic deserves multiple threads on this forum where the validity of the term is almost never discussed?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 05:41 PM

Certainly not Jack.   I'm an "atheist", but I get on well with Christians....our local minister is one of my best pals....and he favours homosexual "marriage" :0)
I admire people of faith, its just that I am trapped in a world of selfish reality.

I find people of faith more open minded than the political slaves we see on these pages, They wear their atheism like a suit of armour demonising all we dare to profess a different view....militant? I suppose they are but it is a militancy aimed at ideas which do not correspond to the dictum of their "liberalism".

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 08:35 PM

Gay marriage is in quotes because it is a controversial term. Not all people agree with the validity of it. Recognizing that fact by showing it in quotes is the polite thing to do.

Gay marriage, Wacko, is a fact. This comment of yours is both disingenuous and homophobic. Putting gay marriage in quotes, especially alongside other practices NOT in quotes, is a snide way of having a nice little sneer about it because you don't agree with it. We expect that from Ake, who is a noted homophobe par excellence. I'm dismayed that you are rushing to his defence. Can that mean only one thing, Wacko?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 08:44 PM

>>>Gay marriage, Wacko, is a fact. This comment of yours is both disingenuous and homophobic. Putting gay marriage in quotes, especially alongside other practices NOT in quotes, is a snide way of having a nice little sneer about it because you don't agree with it.<<


From: Jack the Sailor - PM
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 04:09 PM

Musket.

My wife just pointed out that many people don't like the term "Gay Marriage" because they think marriage should simply be called "marriage." Perhaps you know someone who holds that opinion. Perhaps the person Mr. Shaw was correcting was being polite to them.


Steve, be ashamed

For the love of God! Think for HALF A SECOND before you post. I'm starting to think that Whacko is a compliment coming from you. Are you TRYING to look like a raving idiot?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 08:49 PM

You were rushing to the defence of serial homophobe Ake. I mean, what are we to think of you, Wacko?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 09:03 PM

"You were rushing to the defence of serial homophobe Ake. I mean, what are we to think of you, Wacko? "

Nice punctuation. Would you care to edit?

By the way, I'm not defending anyone. I am saying that your correction of "Gay Marriage" was incorrect in terms of grammar and manners. Not that it is a big deal, you get a lot of things wrong. But that wouldn't be of any concern to me, if you weren't constantly correcting me and calling me names.

Here is a thought. Instead of futily trying to correct people and calling them names why don't you think for a minute and try expressing a cogent thought of your own once in a while. I believe that the vast majority would appreciate it if you did.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 09:12 PM

Akenaton,

I don't agree with some of your characterization of others, but I can understand why you feel that way.

Thanks for the insight about you and your minister pal.

You say that he disagrees with you on "gay marriage" Does he thing that it should be simply called marriage as long as it s union between two human adults? Would he leave out other qualifiers as well? Is "mixed" marriage just "marriage" to him? "interracial marriage?" All just marriage?

Does he call you a "serial homophobe?" I guess not? Imagine that.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 09:18 PM

I put homosexual "marriage" in inverted commas Steven, as I do not see the relationship of two people of the same gender as marriage.
In this case, I think the law is an ass.....in much the same way I suppose that you would have regarded the law which criminalised homosexual practice?

Why don't you just calm down and relax, everyone has notions of what "aught to be"..... :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 01:30 AM

Glad to see you don't like the idea of people you don't even know enjoying the right to marry each other. We have a word to describe people who oppress others through self opinionated judgement, we call it bigotry.



Jack. Whilst taking your point that your wife said marriage is marriage so why have a qualifier, the debate here is about when gay people marry, as opposed to ginger people or old people. It is also about putting the term in parentheses as a sneer towards innocent people who deserve better.

Your comment that I have an issue with the word atheist is interesting too. Especially as you factor in my pointing out issues of marriage. I don't quite understand where you are coming from, or at least I hope I don't. Literally, atheist means having a view, negatively, on theism. However, most people painted with that pot don't have any view on theism one way or another. For most of us , religion is an irrelevance practiced by others. Not quite anti theist is it?

People wonder why these threads get eventually to gay equality? I'll tell you. Because religious bigotry supports the denigration of others. Shallow small people such as the worm grasp at this respectability for their hatred. "Militant atheist" is a rather wide ranging term for superstition to denigrate rational thought.

Hence the circle is closed.

And the circus begins.

If you were a guest at a wedding and there were people outside with placards saying it isn't a real wedding, would you feel uncomfortable or not?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 02:16 AM

Keith is so far up his own arse he doesn't realise how fucking funny his post is.

My post was purely factual to correct errors of fact that you posted Musket.
The source of the facts was from the gay press.
I myself am in favour of marriage being open to same sex couples as I have stated on previous occasions.

All the vile, gratuitous abuse in your post is undeserved, as usual.

" those who support bigotry such as Keith A Hole of Hertford are comfortable with the distinction that criminals in the church forced weak politicians to drive through and at the same time, Keith is so far up his own arse he doesn't realise how fucking funny his post is.

Oh , let's not have God botherers think their homophobia isn't free speech.

Disgusting low life scum."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 02:52 AM

As an aside, I do not think posts like yours should be allowed on our forum.
The forum rules say they are not allowed on our forum.
I am disappointed that you and your ilk are tolerated.
The forum would be better without you.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 07:13 AM

Opinion would benefit from not having your two faced comments for that matter. One minute you are for equality, the next supporting your church's stance. You see the detail in The Archbishop's comments as being more important that the general olive branch he clearly waves, within the confines of his job.

There was no reason to qualify the thrust of the archbishop's comment other than to support the stance of our resident homophobic hate mongerer. None whatsoever. Your pedantry had a purpose, and it came over loud and clear.

In the meantime, you call me a liar for reading, hearing or seeing the news, based upon whether the item falls to hand easily in your google searches.

You write inclusively of a political party, agreeing with their points and them spend the next six months disowning hem. Fine, you resigned, or you just said you are a member when you wasn't. In any case, the damage is done.

You have zero credibility in your WW1 outpourings, and by hanging onto a couple of radical opinions of journalists and the odd historian, you shout down any attempt by anybody to proffer the truth. Michael Gove must be very proud of you.

And then you come over all hurt when you are weighed up accurately. Not nice is it? Let me tell you, it can be even worse when people don't deserve it, like every member you shout liar! at each time they reveal your arse.

Pathetic.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 08:17 AM

Musket, you stated "The Archbishop of Canterbury yesterday at last said that opposition (to gay marriage) is mere bigotry"

He said no such thing.
He was talking about blessing such marriages.
He said opposition might be seen as bigotry, not that he did.

Your statements were factually incorrect, so I provided the truth.
Deja vous?

All you attacks on me, including those in your last post, are untrue and unjustifiable.
Dishonest actually.
Like you.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 09:06 AM

You can read what the Archbishop said here.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 09:18 AM

Funny. I said what I read.

I suppose that is dishonest, relying on Media. I should have stuck to The Church Times whatever.

zzzzzz

He said;

"The church of England's stance on same sex is akin to racism." He went on to say "welcome same sex couples or be damned as bigots."

He purposely, in my opinion, didn't use words such as blessings in those particular statements. He accepted that bigots in the room and elsewhere in congregations don't want him to go any further than blessings, but he said what he said. He made it quite clear that reliance on scripture to justify homophobia is wrong and that the church was "untidy."

He said it in his address to the general synod so even you can find the text.

Unlike me, he wraps his feelings in words. I just think that opposition to equality is criminal, full stop. And I say so. Full stop. He made a point though and let his feelings be known.

Now, don't get me wrong. He has the opportunity to bring the church into the 21st century by saying that he resigns unless women bishops and gay marriage become part of the church. But he is himself and if he is comfortable morally leading bigotry, misogyny and homophobia, that's his failing not mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 09:48 AM

Musket, I thought it was be simpler if I found the quotes rather than the two of you paraphrase and call each other liars.

I don't think either of you are lying.

>>
Jack. Whilst taking your point that your wife said marriage is marriage so why have a qualifier, the debate here is about when gay people marry, as opposed to ginger people or old people. It is also about putting the term in parentheses as a sneer towards innocent people who deserve better.<<<

Sorry, but no. The debate here is about "Militant Atheism Threads" Steve Shaw has brought it off topic, with another nasty, overblown little rant over a couple of quotation marks.


>>>Your comment that I have an issue with the word atheist is interesting too. Especially as you factor in my pointing out issues of marriage. I don't quite understand where you are coming from, or at least I hope I don't. Literally, atheist means having a view, negatively, on theism. However, most people painted with that pot don't have any view on theism one way or another. For most of us , religion is an irrelevance practiced by others. Not quite anti theist is it?<<<

Again sorry, no. "atheism" literally means without theism. Asexual means without sex, amoral means without morals. I think that Atheist is a neutral label do describe people for whom deities do not exist at all. That's what I believe, that's what the sweet little Anglican minister and choirmaster at our high school taught in comparative religion class. Go ahead, look it up.

Aren't you without theism? Isn't that how you essentially just described yourself? I can see where you would have trouble being described as anti-theist, I do not understand your problem or stringsinger's with "atheist".

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 09:52 AM

I think you have said you take The Independent Musket.

Musket's version,
"The church of England's stance on same sex is akin to racism"

Canterbury's actual statement according to Independent
"And there is also a great fear that our decisions will lead us to the rejection of LGBT people, to irrelevance in a changing society, to behaviour that many see akin to racism."

Independent headline quoted by Musket,
"welcome same sex couples or be damned as bigots."
See actual quote above.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/welcome-samesex-couples-or-be-damned-as-bigots-archbishop-of-canterbury-justin-welby-tells-church-of-england-9124915.html

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 11:48 AM

There was an old sailor called Jack
Who was really quite taken aback
When his rants on abuse
Proved no fucking use
Because others morals were so slack

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 12:24 PM

Yeah I call myself Sailor and Jack
And some folks don't like my knack
Of quoting the rules
to bickering fools
But its better than bickering back.


Still waiting for something to happen? You might appreciate this cartoon.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AaPpkh98D5I/TTxfD334obI/AAAAAAAAA2M/_HqlhY6_490/s1600/rad0A18AG2D1660PCPatienceMyAss.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 12:34 PM

"If you were a guest at a wedding and there were people outside with placards saying it isn't a real wedding, would you feel uncomfortable or not?"

I would feel very uncomfortable at a wedding where a harmonica player was complaining about it being a gay wedding and not a "gay wedding" unless he meant a happy wedding in which case I would smile quietly to myself.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 08:38 PM

Remind me to put speech marks around everything I don't like. So from now on, in my posts, you might observe the following:

The "Tory" party

the "Archbishop of Canterbury"

the "Pope"

The secretary of state for education "Michael Gove"

"Catholic" schools

the former presidential candidate "Sarah Palin"

the "Temperance" League

"Sheffield" Wednesday

"pete"

"Wacko"

Ake, you knew bloody well what you were doing with those quote marks, and, as for you, Wacko, you are defending the indefensible. The indefensible in this case being a rabid homophobe. So what conclusion about your own predilections are we to come to, Wacko? At the very least you are in sympathy with the disgraceful outpourings of a very nasty homophobe. So are you a homophobia apologist? Or worse?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 09:23 PM

>>>"Wacko"

Ake, you knew bloody well what you were doing with those quote marks, and, as for you, Wacko, you are defending the indefensible. The indefensible in this case being a rabid homophobe. So what conclusion about your own predilections are we to come to, Wacko? At the very least you are in sympathy with the disgraceful outpourings of a very nasty homophobe. So are you a homophobia apologist? Or worse? <<<

Excuse me for not being stupid and arrogant enough claim to be able to read Akenaton's mind, or Newton's for that matter.

Whacko, is a complement right? You are saying that I am like you! That is sweet of you. Happy Valentines day buddy! Please keep in mind that even if Ake were a "rabid homophobe" which he isn't, it is unkind and impolite for you to say so.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 04:07 AM

The worm isn't a raving homophobe? You haven't been reading Lewis Carroll books again have you?

In order to be theist, with theism, atheist or without theism, or even anti or pro theism, you need to have a view.

I could use google of course to see what theism means and then give you my view, but judging by Keith A Hole of Hertford's track record, googling isn't always the key to reality. I doubt I have the definition in my head. What's more, as I'm not a member, I can't see why I should. I am aware of the word atheist as a term of contempt used by those supporting organised religions and I note it is rarely used by those who have personal rather than strength in numbers belief.

Am I without theism? I assume stamp collectors have a term they use for those who haven't collected many stamps yet, but I doubt I would use my score of zero in order to give myself such a label.

So I'm not an atheist. I'm Musket. The idiot behind Musket isn't an atheist either. I hear the term irreligious and wonder if that is a comfortable jacket to wear? But again, on the basis that religion is and can only be existing in the minds of those who believe it, or selected parts of it, which makes me smile, I don't think I can lay claim to any label one way or another. The pigs on the farm over the way can't be classed as having faith (two main reasons spring to mind) so why should I have a label?

Indeed why should that label be extended to include an adjective on the basis of me pointing out religion is delusional if it contradicts observed and proven reality?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 09:39 AM

Musket,

In a discussion about religion or the lack thereof, for example a comparative religion class, when a kid puts up his hand and says, "What about people who don't believe in God? What are they called?" It is useful when the instructor has a more concise answer than... "Well in the UK there is Ian, and 15 million other people. Here are their names."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 10:15 AM

In case anyone is interested when I say "atheism" I am referring to this definition.

a·the·ism
ˈāTHēˌizəm/
noun
noun: atheism

    1.
    disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 12:14 PM

Exactly so Jack, but these people are not interested in discussing "theism" or "atheism", they are here to attack socially conservative views......they are "liberals" of the very worst kind.

They dislike the church because it opposes homosexual "marriage", they dislike me because I care about finding a solution to the epidemic of sexual disease affecting male homosexuals and I don't care who's agenda is upset in the process, .....so they hate me
They dislike you because you want to see civil discussion of controversial subjects unhindered on this forum.....Free civil discussion is their greatest enemy,... so they hate you.
They dislike Keith, because he is a stickler for accuracy in debate.
He is perfectly correct, if we all told a pack of lies and obfuscated over issues, we might as well all stop posting.....so they hate Keith.


The irony is, that they continually call us "hateful", while it is quite obvious that all the "hatred" comes from them.....their language and their vicious abuse tells everyone what they really are.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 02:30 PM

Akenaton I think that would be flattering ourselves to think it was all about hating you and me.

I think we perhaps are surrogates for phenomena in the greater world and by railing against us they are railing against, the church or whatever.

I would hate to see how some would react if they were to actually encounter a "raging homophobe" In my opinion you are simply a person with antiquated beliefs. They certainly share a very rare perception of the word "raging."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 02:44 PM

How's about calling them people?

What do you call people who don't support a particular football team?

If religion has nothing to do with you in any sense, how can you be a, b or even c theist?

I'll tell you what you tell the child. You say that when you grow up, after careful consideration, you may decide to join a religion or you may not. If you decide to, you will be known as a Christian, Muslim, Rastafarian, Pastafarian or whatever. But if you don't join a religion, you aren't called anything from a religious perspective.

Kids deserve better than indoctrination, at any level.

Your definition is clumsy, regardless of source. I don't disbelieve in stamp collecting and I don't have a lack of belief in philatelists or their cause. It just isn't anything to do with me. Ditto religion.



Out of interest, are you carrying a cross for the worm or is he carrying yours? Has Keith found out which tree the cross is made from yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 04:30 PM

Antiquated beliefs.

Wow....




















I'm fucking speechless.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 04:33 PM

Very well then Musket, if you have no interest, truck or trade with religion, would you kindly, please shut the fuck up about it?

Or if you chose, go on being asensible.

From now on when I say "atheist" on this forum. I am only referring to the people who call themselves that or are comfortable being called that. OK?

I am sure that no one on this forum who is capable of being "indoctrinated" that way.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 04:50 PM

On many topics, you being speechless would not be a bad thing. :0-)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 06:58 PM

Very well then Musket, if you have no interest, truck or trade with religion, would you kindly, please shut the fuck up about it?

Hey, Wackers, you are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative or snooty. Know what I mean? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Feb 14 - 07:36 PM

Jack did ask kindly.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 04:56 AM

An Atheist is akin a Non-Smoker.

Not smoking is the default position. No one was born smoking, just as no one was born believing. We have Religion and Smoking thrust upon us along with so much other bullshit by a society that then has the temerity to define us in the negative for acting positively. That said, of course, a Non-Smoker is a far nobler creature than a Smoker; just is the Atheist enjoys the good clean air in the absence of the foetid stench of Religion.

In the beginning, there was no God, and no religion, and no smoking; just the Cosmos and our natural born inquisitiveness that has persevered these past 50,000 years to understand it. From Göbekli Tepe, to Stonehenge, to the Large Hadron Collider - it's all of a piece, and maybe one day we'll get there. Clean air for all, with no religion to foul things up.

The essence of Atheism is not the ABSENCE of belief per se, but the presence of KNOWING. It takes its place in a Godless universe 100% certain of the fact that even though there was no religion or smoking 50,000 years ago, our distant ancestors were also naturally born as Atheists and Non-Smokers.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 05:03 AM

Keep it going, I'm writing a script for an updated "The Odd Couple." Whacko and the worm. Got a ring about it.

You see, it is to do with me because superstitious people insist on trying to influence society. I'm part of society so if it's all the same to you, I'll keep pointing out that militant atheist is an insult to the majority of people in the western world. More people are rational than keep an imaginary friend complete with weekly team meetings so the term remains derogatory.

Most people neither could nor would want to define theism. Something to do with theology, that's the best I can come up with. But don't ask me to define theology.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 10:50 AM

I'm submitting a new entry for m*sturbation to Roger's Profanosaurus: "wacking the worm".

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 11:12 AM

Musket, You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative or snooty.

"Whacko and the worm. Got a ring about it"

I've given up on Steve Shaw. He has shown that he is incapable of understanding those very simple instructions. After all one can't blame a dog for barking. Dogs, don't understand noise laws.

I see that Jack Blandiver, has no trouble using the word "atheist."

Its just a word to categorize people with no belief.

I think both you and Jack have made assertions that you cannot back up with evidence.

"More people are rational than keep an imaginary friend " Would you care to define what you mean by rational? Lots of self described atheists blow on dice and buy lottery tickets.

"100% certain of the fact that even though there was no religion 50,000 years ago,"

You have no way of knowing that and anthropologists and archeologists on the whole appear to believe otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 11:20 AM

I'll keep pointing out that militant atheist is an insult to the majority of people in the western world. More people are rational than keep an imaginary friend

Can you support that estimate Musket?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 11:37 AM

These figures say you are wrong again Musket.

"A 2010 Eurostat Eurobarometer poll, revealed that 51% of European Union citizens responded that "they believe there is a God", whereas 26% answered that "they believe there is some sort of spirit or life force" and 20% that "they do not believe there is a spirit, God, nor life force". Results were varied widely between different countries, on the one end 94% of Maltese respondents stating that they believe in God and on the other end only 16% of the people of Czech Republic stating the same."

"A 2004 BBC poll showed the number of people in the U.S. who don't believe in a god to be about 9–10%.[20] A 2008 Gallup poll showed that a smaller 6% of the U.S. population believed that no god or universal spirit exists.[37] The most recent ARIS report, released March 9, 2009, found in 2008, 34.2 million Americans (15.0%) claim no religion, of which 1.6% explicitly describes itself as atheist (0.7%) or agnostic (0.9%), nearly double the previous 2001 ARIS survey figure of 0.9%.[38] The highest occurrence of "nones", according to the 2008 ARIS report, reside in Vermont, with 34% surveyed.[39] According to a study conducted by Gallup in May 2010, 16% of Americans declared they have no religious affiliation."

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 11:39 AM

Yes I can Keith. After all, you can google my post, which is usually good enough for you. After all, as you keep saying, google never lies.

I'll tell you what I mean by rational. The odds of winning The National Lottery here are 14,000,000/1. Not good odds but still odds.

The odds of any of the umpteen thousand religions getting it right are almost infinite. I say almost on the basis of you never know. But you can't put any odds to it, whilst buying lottery tickets is calculable. Therefore rational.

I say religion is irrational because it is man made mind control freakery and make believe fairy tales. No malice there, just plain fact. If you believe in it, you are missing a vital piece of your intelligence makeup. Again, no problem with that just so long as you don't drag others down to your level of superstition.

Don't be embarrassed by it. It is a delusion shared by many. On your side of the pond Jack, It is so prevalent that politicians have to pretend they are shallow too if they want to be elected. It is a huge problem. We see people killing each other to prove their god is better than someone else's.

Rather than have a pop at those intelligent enough not to want to play, you should be grateful that the real world gets on with trying to improve society rather than think some fictitious God will provide.

If you get something out of it, great. If you think others might, try pausing before pushing it down throats.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 11:40 AM

" The Canadian Ipsos Reid poll released September 12, 2011 entitled "Canadians Split On Whether Religion Does More Harm in the World than Good," sampled 1,129 Canadian adults and came up 30% who do not believe in a god"

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 11:44 AM

You said "I'll keep pointing out that militant atheist is an insult to the majority of people in the western world. More people are rational than keep an imaginary friend "

In fact, atheists are very much a minority in the western world.
You were wrong again.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 12:17 PM

Still waiting for something to happen? You might appreciate this cartoon.

Nah, sorry. Still don't get it. Not waiting for something to happen and cannot relate the current argument to the cartoon. I guess we must be on different wavelengths. Nothing wrong with that as long as you don't try to make me think like you.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 12:32 PM

Musket,

No one who understands the odds plays the lottery or gambles against a house (or lottery commission) that makes money.

The more you gamble the more likely that you will lose your money. You are paying a very high fee to do the tedious chores of pulling levers and scratching tickets. There is nothing rational about deluding oneself into giving away hard earned money with nothing but the endorphins from getting small amounts of it back in return. You money in the collection plate pays for music, charity, and rent for the a building.

Likewise, skiing and riding jet skis are irrational wasteful acts. One who risks their body and wastes their money to put them selves in danger for no more reward than adrenaline and the endorphins released when the danger is over, is committing a self-deluded and irrational act.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 01:40 PM

Nothing delusional about skiing. Good entertaining fun. I enjoy jet skis for that matter. I say that my hobbies are not delusional. Why? Because everything about them is real. The risks are real, the fun is based on actually doing it rather than having faith that I might enjoy it in a next life.

The odds in the gambling bit are against you of course, but there are odds. Real odds and people with permatans and pampered poodles to prove you can win.

You see, it's a bit like Keith saying that lots of people are religious. The CofE itself has pointed out that for every parish, less than 3% of the population go to church. Even more so, of those who go, not every one believes in it. People go for cultural, get of the house, cuppa afterwards or to keep the peace with the family.

Mmm. No wonder Keith needs to find spurious Canadian small sample surveys, about as unbiased as drug company sponsored ones on drugs....

To say that atheists (whatever they are but I shall accept "rational" for the purpose of this) are in the minority is perhaps the biggest delusion within your delusion. I live very close to a very famous church with connections as good as it gets, home of The Wesleys. American tourists flock in their coaches to see the home of Methodism, to see the town church where their father preached and John Wesley preached on his fathers grave. Heady stuff.

They took the pews out last year and put chairs out. Out of a catchment of 12,000 people, about 20 turn up for services. Three of that twenty tell me they do to humour their better half. When the church was being renovated last year, they shared services with the Methodists. Still nowhere near full between them. This being No.1 in Methodist church terms... The only time I see mass faith is a minute before the whistle in a cup match.

Yeah, so rational people are in the minority.. About as credible as everything else you write Keith, you silly fool. Do you honestly think religion is relevant to normal people? Enjoy it, but don't assume we are missing something. We don't even notice how quiet the towns are when you thank him for your failures, because the pub next door to our village church gets far more in on a Sunday.

Endorphins? I'll release them when I get a drive in Mrs Musket's Merc SLK AMG, thank you very much. I doubt a drafty church with a smelly old tramp at the back and sanctimonious clappy happy prigs at the front will give me a stiffy if it's all the same to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 01:49 PM

Even if you do not include the Canadian surveys, it is a fact that atheists are very much a minority in the "western world."

You were wrong again Musket.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 02:32 PM

Yes obviously the rational ones are the adults who risk life and limb to scare themselves for fun.

And the ones who piss away their money on a 1 in 14,000,000 chance because that is "real odds"

and of course the alleged atheists who support the church even though you claim they have no doubt that its Teachings are false. Yes that is rational.

Keith cited polls of people TELLING THE POLLSTER WHAT THEY BELIEVE, and you claim to know what these people believe better than the poll results. That is not rational. I'll accept that religious people people are not all completely rational. But I won't accept your claim that people with your set of beliefs and values, whatever you choose to call them are any more rational. That would be irrational.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 03:11 PM

It is human nature to be rational about some things and not about others. Where the irrational means doing something that harms none it is fine. Where the irrational means killing, maiming and torturing those who do not share your foibles it is wrong. What is difficult to understand about that?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 03:58 PM

Put lipstick on a pig it is still a pig...discuss..

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 04:01 PM

I agree completely Dave. Skiing is more dangerous than church. It is expensive, flights to the alps cause carbon pollution. Many things that people do involve some level of potential and/or immediate harm. It is not rational to single out religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Feb 14 - 04:04 PM

A 2004 BBC poll showed the number of people in the U.S. who don't believe in a god to be about 9–10%.[20] A 2008 Gallup poll showed that a smaller 6% of the U.S. population believed that no god or universal spirit exists.

Gosh, this is boring. Talk about not asking the right questions. Atheists do not "believe" that there is no God. Atheists assess evidence and reach conclusions, just like scientists do. Scientists do not "believe" theories. They weigh up evidence for and against and reach a measured conclusion. So here are some examples. I spend £1 on the lottery every Saturday (a ticket is two quid now so I share with a mate of mine). The chances of our winning The Big One are just shy of 14 million to one. Of course, I might win smaller amounts, set up to keep me sweet and buying tickets, but I've known that all along. It is not irrational to buy a £1 lottery ticket once a week because I'm fully aware of the minimal chance of winning that Big One, and I can afford a £1 flutter, in full knowledge of the odds, once a week. As I type this, I have a glass of wine in front of me that cost me about £1.50. Just thought I'd mention that, Wackers, in order to provide you with the perspective on these things that you clearly lack. Turning back to your God, Wacko, in whom you profess to "believe", tell me what the odds are that he actually exists. I don't know about you, but I calculate odds based on evidence. I know that my odds of winning the jackpot (I feel a joke coming on...) are 14,000,000 to one. So let's look at the odds of your God's existing. Let's look at the evidence...

...Oh dear. All we have are dodgy old texts penned by desert dwellers, deranged people who claim to have had visions or "witness" experiences, tradition, ceremony, the sayings of holy men, edicts from religions' elders and a vague feeling that all this religious art, architecture and music "must have something in it", and a warm and woolly glow that you get from turning out to church on Sunday among your "religious community" wearing your Sunday best. Well, none of any of that adds up to evidence. So at least, unlike you and your God, I have odds to go with my lottery ticket. You couldn't even put a figure on your odds, but one thing is certain: your God's existence is almost infinitely more improbable than my jackpot chances. So less of the castigating if you don't mind. My lottery ticket might well be an almost certain waste of money (though 25% does go to charity...), but your belief in the Power and the Glory is the most irrational phenomenon ever dreamed up by the human race!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 01:06 AM

Atheists do not "believe" that there is no God.

Yes they do.
That is the accepted definition, and even in the Western world, they are a minority.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 01:28 AM

What is an accepted definition? A child doesn't believe there is no God, and doesn't believe there is till they are told a pack of fibs.

Do you honestly think that the general population believe there were supernatural people walking the earth a couple of thousand years ago, or that we should be grateful for a boil on the arse?




Jack. Flights to The Alps for skiing may well be bad for the planet. Flights anywhere are for that matter. I wouldn't know these days. Only package holidays fly to nearby airports to my knowledge. Ok if that's all your budget allows but some of us take the Eurostar. Relatively better for the old planet what?

A bit rich coming from someone living in the most wasteful country going when it comes to carbon footprint? When we went skiing in Wyoming , Delta thought it appropriate to fly us via Georgia.... Then Utah.....

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 01:38 AM

The "general population" mostly believe that there is a "spirit, God, or life force".
In Eu only 20% do not.
In US even fewer.

You were wrong to say that atheists are a majority in the Western world.
You are wrong again Musket.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 03:22 AM

Me: Where the irrational means doing something that harms none it is fine. Where the irrational means killing, maiming and torturing those who do not share your foibles it is wrong.

Jack: I agree completely Dave. Skiing is more dangerous than church.

We don't need to be impolite and unkind do we? Just let you show yourself up.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 03:32 AM

Err.. Twisting again are we Keith?

You have gone from saying most are believing in a Christian God to wondering if there is a life spirit of some description. Very clever, but insulting to the intelligence of most on Mudcat.

80% of people in the Western world believe in God?

No wonder we call it the God delusion..

Ha Ha Ha!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 04:14 AM

You have gone from saying most are believing in a Christian God

I never said any such thing Musket.
I just showed that you were wrong to state,

" militant atheist is an insult to the majority of people in the western world. More people are rational than keep an imaginary friend "

No twisting from me Musket.
You are the one twisting what I said.
I said you were wrong to claim that atheists were a majority in the western world.
You were.
Again.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 04:25 AM

Nearly 300 posts on this thread and you lot of of unspeakable nomark posers are still banging out your half baked theories and half digested facts and figures about the existence or not of the magical man; question is apart from you clowns who really cares?

You are like the self satisfied middle class hominids and telegraph and guardian readers, who infested our folk clubs in the sixties and seventies singing and talking to your self's kidding on you were preserving our culture, when all you wanted to do was sing at each other on a Friday about the honest horny handed sons of toil; polish your pipe, beard, small penis, Arran sweater, and preserve your rosy cosy property owning class..in truth the real working class frightened you all to death.

When will you lot get a grip and take up something meaningful to fill your mumpty wumpty ginger pussy empty lives.?

I verily believe half of you was bullied at school, have very small penises/brains, loud voices,small penises, big red cars, small penises are hen pecked or have very small insignificant jobs/penises were you don't have to much to say or do.

I see the unspeakable gnome creature has developed his cut and paste skills..that is something I suppose?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 05:16 AM

I can hear someone farting again.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 05:49 AM

Leave her alone. She likes me.... Mind you, she has it wrong about my willy. It's enormous. xxx

I loved getting involved in the folk scene many years ago, and yes, it was slightly surreal to see a social worker stick a finger in his ear and drone on about how hard it was down the pit. I didn't always stay till the end on account of having to be er.. down the pit early the next morning.

I see comparisons in religion. It is fashionable to find god in later life as it was fashionable to scrawl "this machine kills fascists" on a cheap catalogue guitar many years ago. That many people still turn up hoping that clever lyrics will change the world is rather nice, although the society many comment on from such perspectives is more sophisticated than they think, or sometimes comprehend.

Whether you sing on a Sunday about Jesus or sing in the week about reed cutting in Norfolk from your corner of the bar in Barnsley, it has parallels.

Mind you, I have yet to hear a retired fitter in Barnsley say he can speak on behalf of dead reed cutters, yet Christians seem to tell me the mind of Jesus. So not too many parallels eh?

Hang on. Just for Keith. Using his interpretation of atheist. There are more atheists than Christians in the western world. Full stop.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Seaham Cemetry
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 07:17 AM

Im an atheist. Just about everyone I know is, although some might put C of E on medical forms. I am a clinician and some consent forms ask your religion. When I offer the services of the chaplaincy, many look at me gone out.

There seems to be a big difference between putting C of E on forms and being religous.

I'd ask Musket for clarification but looking at my diary, by coincidence, I am attending one of his lectures later this week, (small world.) I doubt the subject includes anything as irrelevant as religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 08:00 AM

Yo! See you Wednesday. Don't be late.......

Like the people labelled as atheists, my lectures are firmly in the real world alright, but don't forget my stance, both in the silly world of Mudcat and back on planet earth, that empathy and compassion are a key factor in rehabilitation from healthcare problems.

I suppose that is one of my little anger snippets when taking five and seeing what bollocks Mudcat is waffling on about. I get angry when God botherers hijack the perfectly respectable use of faith to give alms and support, by rattling about fantasy. In the c21, it is possible to use faith as a crutch without some idiot saying faith is hand in hand with judgement.

It most certainly isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 09:49 AM

This Machine Kills Fascists

"cheap catalogue guitar" what is wrong with you? Woody played a CF Martin hand crafted parlor guitar given to him by a benefactor he happened to be sleeping with at the time. He was the only person at the time to deface a beautiful piece of craftsmanship that way. It was hardly fashionable. When he sang about hard time workin men it was because he was one, both as an advertising sign paintin hard working man and as a protest song writin, radio show having singing and playing for the hoboes hard working man.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 10:43 AM

It is in homage to Woody Guthrie that the sandal wearing, fair isle sweater adorned British folk club regulars used to put such things on their guitars. You could buy them as stickers on trade stands at folk festivals. Singing about saving the world at night probably made up for having to stock take pencil sharpeners during the day.

Sorry, I keep making the mistake of aiming my posts above your head. In this case , a few thousand miles to the east too.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 01:45 PM

Any way you shape or phrase it muskett darling..the buffoons completely sanatised and degenerated the tradition.

Jack, I did have hopes for you, but the remark about Woodys guitar was pretty crass..guitars are tools, not to be admired but to be GODDAmn played!!!!!!!!!!!1or are you like the rest having them hanging on the walls?

I have told you before Mr small brain gnomet..I am way to many for you..the smell is, was and will be forever the smell of your unadulterated BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUullshit

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 01:52 PM

"guitars are tools, not to be admired but to be GODDAmn played"

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you darling.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 02:35 PM

Musket, I contend that it is your aim and lack of context that is to blame for your misfires.

I agree that pimply English dogsnoggers pretending to be Woody Guthrie is indeed a deplorable state of affairs.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 03:28 PM

Oh I don't know. I have many friends through the folk clubs and enjoyed the lifestyle. Not so much now I suppose but hey ho. I still get out, still writing and performing.

I used to have a Martin D41 that someone had put a circular sticker on the belly and it cost me £200 to get it sorted.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 03:43 PM

Maybe it isn't a fart after all? Just something that sounds like one. Doesn't make sense in any known language anyway. It does seem to leave a strange odour.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Feb 14 - 03:54 PM

I have guitars I hardly play but I used to play them. I know it is a waste. But why give them away or sell them at a loss to someone else who won't have time to play them?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 04:58 AM

Too true. A couple of months ago, including the ones my youngest stole from me when I wasn't looking, grrrr... I decided I had far too many guitars.

And one banjo which is, of course, one too many.

So you know what I did last month?


That's right.

I bought a new guitar.

Be nice to have time to play the ^%#*!! thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 05:35 AM

I have 3 accordions, 2 concertinas, 2 guitars, an array of whistles, multiple gob irons and a host of things from various strange places that are either classed as musical instruments or weapons of mass discordance. I believe that I will be able to play something resembling a tune one day. I have faith. Hallelujah!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 05:59 AM

You gotta have faith! although singing George Michael songs ain't going to get your beer bought for you....

As well as the fairly silly number (27) of guitars and single banjo, I appear to have amassed a banjo/ ukulele, banjolin, two mandolins, various gob irons including a chromatic one I gave up on, three violins, a viola, various whistles, two bodhrans and a dancing doll on a plank. Oh, and a broken rhythm pole.

Yet I usually just take the one guitar (Rainsong OM10) and occasionally the banjo out with me. I was classically trained on violin but broke my wrist and frustrated enough to hardly take them out. The viola is a better option for comfort but when you stretch the strings up to GDAE, you risk a sliced face.....

Just three guitars and the banjo are out on stands in my study. The rest are packed away in a box room. (Except for seven guitars, last seen in student digs in Liverpool Grrrr)

Fast considering letting some go, but for that, I'll have to stop buying the bloody things....

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 09:26 AM

I must admit that 27 is going it a bit. But who am I to question a divine power?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 09:43 AM

I figured I was the king of wasteful spending with 5 guitars and a bodhran. Seven guitars in student housing? When I was a student, I barely had room for myself and a stereo.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 09:53 AM

Oh yes, forgot my bodhran, tamborine and bones. Mental block I suppose :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 10:17 AM

Understandable. I bought my hran, because it has pretty celtic flowers on it and my Mom tells me I have Irish blood in my heritage. No one has ever responded in the affirmative when asked, do you want me to play it for you? While, "Is that your guitar? Can I hear it?" has occurred. :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 04:20 PM

Hran? Oh come on...

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 05:27 PM

WHAT!!!!!!HRAN? you nautical knobhead..you bought it cos it hAD PRETTY FLOWERS ON IT!!!???...Irish blood my ancient Irish arse!!! wot does it SOUND like..did you ever see any serious BODHRAN player such as Christy Moore play anything covered with flowers you goddamn imposter..

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 06:46 PM

It's a decoration concerened. Didn't I say that no one wants to hear me play it? Thank you fro your concern.

I'm pretty sure I can support my claim to Irish blood with other factors, drinking, tall tales and such.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 06:55 PM

Hran? Oh come on..

He bought it off some bod down the market. Must've got ripped off.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 06:59 PM

"Serious bodhran player", conkers? Brilliant! Two oxymorons in a three-word phrase! No serious person possesses a bodhran unless his mother bought it for him one Christmas, and there are no bodhran players, only bodhran owners! Tsk!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 07:19 PM

DtG, It seems that Steve is trashing you and your bodhran.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Feb 14 - 07:26 PM

He won't mind. After all, he's a fellow harmonica aficionado.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 03:45 AM

For the record. I do not profess to play the bodhran any more than I play the tambourine or bones. I do own them and occasionally use them to produce strange noises. BTW my spelling checker suggested Bodhidharma for bodhran. From Wiki - "Bodhidharma is depicted as a rather ill-tempered, profusely bearded and wide-eyed barbarian." A bodhran player maybe?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 04:20 AM

Should this thread not be moved to the music section?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 06:30 AM

Mine hasn't been banged for a long time now. I check it and feed the skin from time to time, as I once had one that split. My son has taste, otherwise the bloody bodhran would be in Scouseville too. He has never nicked the banjo or semi banjos for that matter... Hope for him yet.

I too made strange noises when I used to play it. But the bodhran sounded ok.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 06:47 AM

Wonder if E45 cream will moisturise a bodhran or should I use Olay?

D

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerend
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 07:43 AM

Completely and thoroughly disagree with all of you. so called musicians.

The Bodhran in the hands of a skilled percussionist is a joy to the ears.Christy Moore apart, have none of you heard Kevin Crawford, John Joe Kelly, Mel Mercier?

BTWI was the one who showed Sean o'Riada the correct way to use the tension on the skin to get different sounds

It is obvious to me that all of you know the square root of feck all about music as you do about the very doubtful subject you all spout on about here interminably

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerend
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 08:20 AM

BTW sweet cheeks, why bother banging inanimate objects when there are other more fun things wink? wink ?


Gnome you wanna use that cream to massage yer massive ego..

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 08:36 AM

There is that strange noise again! I am sure it is a fart.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 08:36 AM

corncered, I didn't say the instramint can't be played. I said that no one wants to hear me play it.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 09:28 AM

Ciarán Boyle taught me how to play it when he was still a schoolboy. In return I let him thrash me at pool at a festival. His late father Tommy was a good friend.







I think I let him thrash me. Thinking on, he probably didn't need my help.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 12:31 PM

Hiya sweetikins! xxxx

Most men bang inanimate objects, so I hear. I must admit, visions of "ancient Irish arse" don't help. Liable to give me flashbacks.....



Dave. E45 is aqueous cream and can lead to stretching and contracting anyway. I still have a pot of skin cream made by the same people who make Fretfast. I put that on and. Leave it near the aga till it is soaked in and dry. Thinking on, it has to be a couple of years since I last did it on either skin. The cream pot has a sticker on it from CV Berry in Worksop. That means I bought it prior to 1987........

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 01:45 PM

I have a J45 from 1972.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 02:02 PM

"The "general population" mostly believe that there is a "spirit, God, or life force".
In Eu only 20% do not.
In US even fewer.

You were wrong to say that atheists are a majority in the Western world.
You are wrong again Musket."

Questions.

1. Size and demographics of sample polled in EU and US.
2. Precise question(s) posed
3. Locations from which sample drawn.
4. Independent assessment of the impartiality (or otherwise) of the polling organisation.

If the Poll were carried out by Fox News outside churches on Sunday mornings, do you reckon there might be room for doubt?.....

In the absence of such information, your positivity and generalisation are at best astonishing, at worst suspicious, Mr Infallible.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 02:05 PM

Interesting strategy. Or you could ask musket for the data behind his assertion.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 02:12 PM

Troubadour, my post of 16 Feb 14 - 11:37 AM gave the details of the polls.
They were reputable polls used by industry and governments.
They are the best figures available.

On what grounds do you question them?
Have you anything that contradicts them?
What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 02:30 PM

If you are actually looking to answer the question, you can start here.

Pew poll 35,000 Americans



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

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 04:09 PM

35,000 out of 270 million.

0.013%. Highly representative.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 04:20 PM

Yeah it is impressive. It is a HUGE sample size.

Have you ever studied statistics?

Pew has a great reputation for integrity and accuracy.

I would be happy to look at any poll you can find which backs up Musket's claim. I suspect that would be difficult. I believe Musket was being hyperbolic and outrageous. Entertainingly so, I recon.

I just went out and googled some data because folks were unjustly picking on Keith. I recon Troubadour can answer all of his questions about the Pew poll with a minute or two of research. I recon you could too, if you wanted.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 07:11 PM

I reckon the poll to be about right. In my area, almost everyone has a faith, they are not Evangelical, just ordinary folk who like to keep their thoughts on God private, thy seldom talk about it but I find it is a large part of who they are.
I am like a minister to these people, when they are in trouble they phone me, or chap on my door....I stop the leaks in their roofs, fix their crumbling walls, give them warmth and comfort.

In return they tell me their stories....their hopes and dreams for their children, their aches and pains, or just a friend to take away the loneliness of a lost man or wife.

I love my job.....and I love my neighbours...Maybe I'm a Christian too?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 07:27 PM

Try a Google of

how accurate is pew polls

Read the article that is headlined

How can we trust opinion polls when so few people respond . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Feb 14 - 07:29 PM

Very nice Ake.


You seem to have a fulfilling life.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 03:38 AM

Here we go... The discussion starts with practicing Christians and gets confused with the polls of those who think there must be something spiritual. Easy when you know how eh?

Best part is, even many who would be comfortable being classed as Christian "don't actually believe in it"according to myriad polls. Recent polls are available on the secular society website according to a mate who takes his secularism seriously. I wouldn't know, I just know that the vast majority of people in The UK don't go to church, don't believe in fantasy and use churches for traditional reasons only.

Tell you what though. I did just have a look on a Christian website, and found that the number of churches closing and the rise in population at the same time says it all. The same odious site notes the rise in the number of mosques and sees that as worrying. Rational people meanwhile see their worry as worrying....

Doing a poll of people on their way out of church and extrapolating it to the general population isn't the most scientific method available, is it? Even then, a hilarious number profess to be too intelligent to go in for the superstitious side of things. A few bishops in that number too.

In any event, how many "militant atheists" are there?

Try not to include decent people who only question why a small number of the population think they can influence law and be above the law in some areas on account of their imaginary friend. That isn't being anti religious. That's merely pointing out that you need to win elections on your ticket before others can be bound by your nonsense. Even then, politicians are not likely to let superstition interfere too much. When a UKIP politician pointed out that the floods are God's judgement on gay people, every mainstream political party pointed out he was off his rocker. The church meanwhile kept quiet..

The term God delusion is an interesting one. Most god botherers try telling us that most people in the country share their delusion. really?

Er.. No. Of course they don't. I'll have to stop before I piss myself laughing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 03:42 AM

Of course polls are accurate. 2.6% of the population of Brighton are Jedi. Must be true. It is in the census.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 03:58 AM

A few years ago, 0.3% of the workforce of one of the healthcare regulators were Jedi.

That'll be those of us who said we would put it on the form and did.

The following year I put Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster but it didn't get on the annual report, as no bugger else did it, and one person gets lumped into "other." Mind you, over thirty people were "other."

Makes you think...

Makes you wonder why we collect such statistics? By monitoring which particular imaginary friend you speak with, it gives the concept of organised religions a degree of respectability they don't deserve.

Over fifty spoiled papers. I would love to think they included those who have a private faith and rightly don't think it's anybody else's business.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 04:06 AM

Polls are only shit when they show you are wrong.
They are the best figures available.
Atheists are still a minority everywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 04:38 AM

They are the best figures available.

May well be true, Keith, but it doesn't make them right. I suppose the National Socialist German Workers Party was the best available for Germany at the time. God having made the world in seven days was the best answer available for centuries. Didn't make either of them right because they were the best available.

Not saying they are wrong either. Just don't place too much reliance on them.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 05:01 AM

Polls are what government, industry and commerce use for assessment and planning.
They are accepted as the best evidence available and if they were not reliable vast sums would not be spent on them.

Musket claimed that atheists are a majority in the western world.
There is nothing anywhere that supports that.
All the polls say that they are a minority.
That is why I challenged his claim.
Why is that not a reasonable challenge?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 05:15 AM

Why is that not a reasonable challenge?

It is a reasonable challenge. But Muskets assertion cannot be simply disproved by statistics. Religion is not about where you build the new motorway. All polls can be and most often are skewed. I'll give you an example.

In polls as on any legal documentation, I find it easier to put "Roman Catholic" than "I don't really believe in any divine power but I am, at heart, a spiritual person who would like to think that I have done some good, will leave a legacy for my children and grandchildren, and some part of me will remain." I am pretty sure I am not the only one. It all comes down to what many have been saying - The divide is not simply religious vs atheist. There are as many, if not more, type of atheist as there are religious folk.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 06:38 AM

And of course there are those who need the vast majority to share their delusion so they don't look so silly themselves.

I have often wondered how a bloke with a doctorate etc feels whilst putting on a pointy hat and telling a few hundred gullible people what the big man is thinking and what his lad would have done.

If the majority are superstitious then why do twenty people walk out of our village church on a Sunday lunchtime whilst the pub next door is already bursting at the seams? Why has a church in Sheffield S6 recently shut through lack of business whilst just down the road from it, 26000 of us go to worship on a Saturday afternoon at the match?

Why does alcohol consumption not decease during lent? Why are so many people using January as a detox month when Lent would be more appropriate?

Why are Keith and others purposely confusing polls regarding spirituality with practicing Christian ? Why is he using the word atheist? After all, I'm not an atheist. My dog isn't an atheist. A new born baby isn't an atheist.

If you are saying the number of people who have thought about it and are not inclined to theism , you may be right.

The vast majority of people haven't thought about it as they don't give a toss about something that is irrelevant to them. That isn't atheism, that's irrelevance.

And so endeth the sermon.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 10:06 AM

Ian, You are an educated, man and you must see, statistical reports in the course of your work. You probably know the math of sample size better that I do. The pew poll, I posted had fair questions and a huge sample size. In the USA a majority of people, as you so wittily put it do keep an imaginary friend.

OTOH, according to the other link I posted about Europe, In the UK, things were a lot closer. Only slightly more slightly more said they believed in God than said they were Atheist.

Keep in mind please that the evidence you present is based on your own observations. Also, keeping in mind that the comparison you made was "people who are rational" vs "those that keep an imaginary friend" While the people who go to church only to slip out to the pub before the service ends, may not be the best Christians, the rational behavior would be to skip church and get a good seat before all the "God botherers" show up.

If the question is are there more Atheists and non-believers and persons who do not self identify with religion than people who believe in specific supernatural entities? (keep an imaginary friend) Then Keith is right in the USA and Europe its about 3 or 4 to 1 in favor of imaginary friend keepers.

If the question is are there more "Rational people" (people who don't really care about religion) than devout religious people (People firmly convince that their imaginary friend is real in the way that you and I are and is listening to their every prayer) in Musket's neighborhood. Then I trust Musket's judgement on that and think that he is right.

Anything between those extremes is subject to discussion, but IMHO not worth getting anyones knickers twisted.

Cheers.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 10:23 AM

If the question is are there more Atheists and non-believers and persons who do not self identify with religion than people who believe in specific supernatural entities? (keep an imaginary friend) Then Keith is right in the USA and Europe its about 3 or 4 to 1 in favor of imaginary friend keepers.

No, no, no, Jack. 3 or 4 to 1 SAY that they believe in specific supernatural entities. There are no figures to confirm if they actually do believe or are just saying that. Maybe they say it to just be on the safe side. Sort of insurance, in case they do not believe and are wrong:-) Maybe they, like me, are just used to saying they are Roman Catholic because it is easier than explaining something else. Maybe they are just superstitious. Maybe they are just winding someone up. You know, sort of like people do on here! There are dozens of reasons why the 3 0r 4 to 1 cannot be taken as fact. Sorry.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 10:29 AM

They are asked a question and they give an answer.
Why assume that any significant number say something different to what they really think?
These are mainstream survey firms with a reputation.
Are there any surveys that find a different result?
No?
On what evidence did Musket make his claim?
None.
A made up Musket fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 11:03 AM

Jack. I haven't said anything about The USA. I get the feeling that believing in a God is more widespread. It certainly struck me that far more pews are filled and it seems to be the case that to get high political office, you need to be photographed going to or from a service. Here, neither the deputy Prime Minister nor the leader of the opposition have any religious beliefs and the Prime Minister started going to church occasionally at the request of his pollster and PR people. Religion is not such a big thing here. You seem to think people leave church to get to the pub? I could be wrong but I don't think anybody in our village at least goes to the pub from church? The twenty or so that go to church have to be seen in context of a large village of 8,000 people, almost exclusively indigenous white, ancestor - Christian stock. It is typical regardless of ethnicity. More people complain about churches forcing laws to limit shop opening times on a Sunday than anything else. A retired Archbishop of Canterbury blames persecution for drops in attendances. It doesn't occur to him that people are more sophisticated than they were years ago.

In fact, there are more Muslims attend Friday prayers thanChristians attend church in most towns according to an article I read recently. For that matter, I was at a Sikh temple a few months ago and that was quite full. The free food may have helped... It was rather good. But about a hundred people. Sounds good till you notice it is the only temple for miles, in a big city with a catchment of a couple of million people.

I don't make any claim Keith. I just say you can have all the polls you want but churches are empty and population is rising. We don't have enough housing but we are closing churches. The polls are giving false assurances if they are telling the majority think there is a God who had a supernatural son who lived on earth and died but didn't etc. Like the tooth fairy and Santa Claus, it us good traditional fun but turns nasty when people start insisting on the truth of it. They don't tolerate rational thought, and that makes it worth dismissing it as nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 11:15 AM

You claimed this Musket,
"I'll keep pointing out that militant atheist is an insult to the majority of people in the western world. More people are rational than keep an imaginary friend "

There is no evidence that atheists are a majority.
There is strong evidence provided by polls that they are not.
(BTW, Muslims are not atheists. We believe in the same God)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 11:34 AM

"No, no, no, Jack. 3 or 4 to 1 SAY that they believe in specific supernatural entities. There are no figures to confirm if they actually do believe or are just saying that. "

I am sorry, but I thought I made it clear that was one interpretation at one end of the scale and that the other interpretation I gave was the other end and that there was plenty of argument in between.

Also

Are you counting the people who say that they believe something that they don't on the rational side? Do you have any source of data, any at all that most people in the US and Europe don't "keep an imaginary friend."

Are you saying that if Pew Research called you up and and told you it was a confidential survey and asked you if you believed in God, you would say yes?

The polls appear to be well constructed and with an adequate sample size. You and Musket appear to be speculating and providing anecdotes to support your preconceived opinions.

I am afraid that the best data that we have on this issue is public opinion polling. Just as the fossil record is our best data on microbe to man evolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Grishka
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 12:14 PM

If my side is strong, it shows that the others are weird and must therefore be fought. If my side is weak, it shows that the others are dangerous and must therefore be fought. Since the consequences are the same, why bother about statistics?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 12:52 PM

The religious side is very strong in some countries. It doesn't alter the odds of the dude with the white beard existing.

Sophisticated people with a rational view on religion could ultimately be wrong too. We might all be wrong for that matter and a little green man with the Lego box he built us from might be getting rather pissed off with our failure to interpret the clues properly.

All I know is, churches are empty and Christian organisations claim the majority of the country are religious. More people lobby their MP to get Sunday trading restrictions lifted than put money in collecting bowls. Vicars have been caught out adding wedding and funeral numbers to their congregation figures to increase their numbers and therefore relevance. If you are white, Anglo Saxon and claim no other allegiance, The Church of England will take your christening as proof of you being a Christian.

A widening of the term delusion methinks.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 12:58 PM

Christian congregations are dwindling, but not as fast as others are growing.
The polls show that atheists are still a minority.
You were wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 03:28 PM

You're being particularly idiotic on this, Keith, even for you. Take this wiki snippet:

Society in the United Kingdom is markedly more secular than in the past and the number of churchgoers fell over the second half of the 20th century.[48] The Ipsos MORI poll in 2003 reported that 18% were "a practising member of an organised religion".[42] The Tearfund Survey in 2007 found that only 7% of the population considered themselves as practising Christians. Ten per cent attend church weekly and two-thirds had not gone to church in the past year.[45][49] The Tearfund Survey also found that two thirds of UK adults (66%) or 32.2 million people have no connection with the Church at present (nor with another religion). These people were evenly divided between those who have been in the past but have since left (16 million) and those who have never been in their lives (16.2 million).
Currently, regular church attendance in the United Kingdom stands at 6% of the population with the average age of the attendee being 51. This shows a decline in church attendance since 1980 when regular attendance stood at 11% with an average age of 37. It is predicted that by 2020, attendance will be around 4% with an average age of 56.[48] This decline in church attendance has forced many churches to close down across the United Kingdom with the Church of England alone being forced to close 1,500 churches between 1969 and 2002. Their fates include dereliction, demolition and residential conversion.[50]

We can argue 'til the bloody cows come home about who's an atheist and who isn't (I don't even know whether I am fer chrissake!), but there's no escaping the evidence presented by the bums-on-pews stats. There may not be billions of us militant atheists, but there are truckloads of people who don't give a flying monkey's fart about religion. In fact, very few people do (and, did you know that, in this Christian culture of ours, more Muslims go every week than Christians?). Considering that most people are brought up in religion to fear the power and the glory, it doesn't say much for the pull of religion, does it?

Actually, I think I'll sign up to being a Catholic again, then promptly proceed to not give a shit. I reckon the non-givers of a shit are the happiest people of all. After all, they're the people who are merely reverting to the true default position of the human race!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 05:39 PM

Actually, I think I'll sign up to being a Catholic again, then promptly proceed to not give a shit.

I never gave up, Steve. Hence I can honestly put 'Roman Catholic' on all my forms without fear of contraception yet not really give a shit whether the man with the white beard is God or Gandalf. It's great :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 07:08 PM

Actually, Dave, do you think we should call our new faith "The non-Givers Of The Shit"? You may not agree, of course, in which case I don't g....       !!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 07:17 PM

Schisms already? Y'all are a religion alright. :-)


"The Church of England will take your christening as proof of you being a Christian."

That's kind of the idea isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Ed T
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 08:31 PM

"If you want your children to be intelligent, read them fairy tales. If you want them to be more intelligent, read them more fairy tales."
― Albert Einstein

Question:
What did he mean by that?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Feb 14 - 08:45 PM

I suppose that the children were meant to know that the tales were fairy tales. If not the day they were read them, at some point before they were grown-ups. The fairy tale which is religion does the very opposite. The older you get, the more entrenched it becomes. Not just entrenched, but scary. Power and Glory keeping you in line, rapidly replacing babies in mangers and sheep in the pastures.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 03:05 AM

Oh, I don't think. Steve. I have faith that the Messiahs will tell me what to do :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 04:33 AM

Steve, I acknowledged that church attendance is dwindling.
Other religions are increasing.
The polls show that people with no belief in any kind of spirit are still a minority, so Musket's statement was factually incorrect.
Or wrong.
Where is the idiocy?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 04:36 AM

We are living in a post-Religious age. No one truly believes in God any more - certainly not the way they did (say) 700 years ago when God was common to all and faith was a matter of knowledge. In this day and age belief in God is a reactionary affectation that flies in the face of prevailing reason. Indeed, it is the fear of reason that inspires one to suspend disbelief and adopt religion and delusion as an alternative to reality in the first place.

Human Beings made up the idea of God as a Myth of Nature. Then when we got cockier we began to see Nature as a Myth of God. It is only when we learn the facts that we realise Nature is the whole of the case, and Myth is just a string of mildly entertaining metaphors, folklore and anthropomorphisms in which we have created God very much in our own image as the ultimate conceit to justify our very worst attributes.

We create the divine to reflect our own ineptitude and dysfunction, to seek comfort in it on the dexter hand, but, on the sinister, the divine is there purely as a means to justify those most Godly characteristic : persecution and intolerance. God is the stuff of our tantrum-ridden infancy and those who no elect believe in him do so with deliberate folly, like the reluctant pubescent who still gets dewy eyed over the Santa Clause he KNOWS to be a little white lie he must let go of now that he is becoming a man.

But even those who say they believe in God, do so in the knowledge that there is no God to believe in. Just a vague concept that has long since had its day.

We are all atheists now.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 04:55 AM

No Blandiver.
Ideas are subject to natural selection too.
Beliefs that have survival value for groups displace those that do not.
Religions that encouraged co-operation, trust and mutual support did that.
Beliefs that encouraged selfish individualism died out with any groups that adopted them.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 05:14 AM

Err.. Jack.

Being christened does not make you a christian. Christian churches acknowledge that and have done since Clapton knows when.

They call it confirmation.

I am not a christian, and never have been. My parents went through the tradition of a christening. After all, the lure of fish paste sandwiches and scotch eggs afterwards was about as decadent as it got then. I doubt, even with their cultural brainwashing of their time that such a ceremony brands a child. An adult makes a decision, and that is how you become a christian. As an adult.

Mind you, considering the recruiting that goes on amongst the vulnerable, it mass you wonder if the test of informed consent should apply?

Keith. You really wade in feet first don't you? "Beliefs that encourage selfish individualism die out.." The selfish individualism of Catholic priests and protestant vicars that bugger children and abuse vulnerable adults flourishes at the same level as the organisations that shield and protect them from the authorities.

tell you what though.. Dissent, or heresy or whatever you want to call it (atheism??) seems to be winning in the first world. Possibly due to altruism without a price tag eh?

zzz

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 05:36 AM

Religions that encouraged co-operation, trust and mutual support did that.

No they didn't. Otherwise there wouldn't have been so many differing ones, and even the inconsistencies within a single stripe would have been ironed out long ago. Religions survive as a superintendence of superstition owing to the vested material interests of those powerful few who promote them, be they economic, or militaristic, or (in the case of the RCC) both.

The overarching Godless reality exists regardless; it is not an idea as such, but a fact. All human life might be wiped from the planet in a single solar flash, and if anything survives at all it will be tangible nature, not supernatural mumbo-jumbo, at least not until the next wave of humans emerge and start making things up again.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 05:43 AM

Wiki.
Richard Dawkins called for a re-analysis of religion in terms of the evolution of self-replicating ideas apart from any resulting biological advantages they might bestow.

"As an enthusiastic Darwinian, I have been dissatisfied with explanations that my fellow-enthusiasts have offered for human behaviour. They have tried to look for 'biological advantages' in various attributes of human civilization. For instance, tribal religion has been seen as a mechanism for solidifying group identity, valuable for a pack-hunting species whose individuals rely on cooperation to catch large and fast prey. Frequently the evolutionary preconception in terms of which such theories are framed is implicitly group-selectionist, but it is possible to rephrase the theories in terms of orthodox gene selection."

—Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene

He argued that the role of key replicator in cultural evolution belongs not to genes, but to memes replicating thought from person to person by means of imitation. These replicators respond to selective pressures that may or may not affect biological reproduction or survival.[6]

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 07:21 AM

I wonder which memes went through star fish's thoughts as they evolved?

Do trees have a heaven where dogs that cock their legs aren't allowed in?

Dawkins makes a point and the prevalence of religion seems to bear it out. Amazonian and Indonesian communities that have not made contact with western values still have their superstition, and if they meet westerners they tend to be impressed.

You don't need to study dry text, just watch a Carry On film or two, you soon get the picture.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Ed T
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 07:56 AM

Interesting perspective on Einstein's quote.

Setting aside differing views on whether the various global religions are fairy tales or not, are there not useful messages in the core texts of most religions (my observation is major religions have similar messages) that one could learn as a youth and apply as an adult? Would that not be as useful as positive life messages in traditional fairy tales that Einstein refers to?

I ask this question recognizing that many (if not most) of the negative aspects of organized religion, come from later interpretations designed to serve a specific interest (many outside those core messages). Unfortunately,negative aspects of tribalism and greed still over-power most organizations, and likely always will.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 09:55 AM

Christ + en = Christen

Christening makes you a Christian, tentatively, until you are old enough to have free will. Confirming is when you join the Church. And CONFIRM your commitment to Christ.

Be aware,
I don't care
what the C of E
says on the BBC.

But Christening in a Christian church, indicates a commitment to Christ. The cleric makes that clear in the ceremony. There are vows and everything. Obviously you were Christened due to your parents "antiquated" views. The fact that they and your God parents broke their vows, made on that day to raise you in the Church, in no way represents hypocrisy right? Making a promise you intend to immediately break is "rational" in your books is it? So please, honor your father and mother. Don't dismiss them as "irrational" for enrolling you in an organization that they did not believe in.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 11:47 AM

Babies make commitments to rusks, the Gruffalo and the nappy industry.

Dawkins keep repeating it, so I am in good company when I say there is no such thing as a Christian child, just a child conforming to Christian parents.

There are no vows. It's all bloody make believe. Of course I made vows when I had my two christened. It's traditional to do so! They don't mean anything though. I don't need to thank a mythical concept for giving me the gift of moral guidance or altruism. I believe I have my genes etc to thank for that.

I honour the memory of my father and mother. I don't honour the traditions of their time. I share the tradition.

"Antiquated." Mmmm. I thought that was a phrase you used to describe hatred not superstition?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 11:48 AM

"Interesting perspective on Einstein's quote."

Obviously Einstein did not confine his thinking to the reality of the time. Perhaps he meant fairy tales encouraged unorthodox thinking. OTOH, he is by far the smartest person ever to be asked so many profoundly stupid questions. Maybe he was just screwing with the reporter's head.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 21 Feb 14 - 11:57 AM

>>Of course I made vows when I had my two christened. It's traditional to do so! They don't mean anything though. I don't need to thank a mythical concept for giving me the gift of moral guidance or altruism. I believe I have my genes etc to thank for that. <<

What moral principle allows you to tell a whole set of bold faced lies in the "name of" "Tradition?"

When I was an atheist I would not have considered Baptism for my kids, if I had had any. My sister did not have her kids baptized nor did she pretend to be Santa. Do you have a codified set of moral standards?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 03:01 AM

No, I have a sense of tradition.

A bit like sticking your finger in your ear on a Tuesday night in a pub and droning on about reed cutting in Norfolk when you are a retired social worker and haven't been anywhere near Norfolk. Or me playing an Irish slip jig.

Still worthy of polite applause. Thank you. That's a pint I owe you.

Anyway, assuming your parents had you baptised, how can you say you were ever an atheist, by your logic above?

If you think that a church full of wedding guests actually take in the mumbled words they are invited to repeat after the vicar, the term "delusion" strengthens.

Repeating ancient phrases in pursuit of tradition and not taking them seriously isn't lying, it's an example of a use for a church in a secular society.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 04:53 AM

Falsely making solemn promises, in front of witnesses, is not the same as singing in traditional style.
It is lying.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 10:04 AM

Musket, You say you don't need religion for morality, yet you lie in front of witnesses. I'm assuming that the ceremony was in a language you understood. You knew what you were promising and that you were promising.

CHRISTening is CHRISTIAN tradition. The purpose is to "indoctrinate" the children and get the parents and one other couple to promise to "abuse" them by bringing them up with Christian values such as not lying. I was Christened in the United Church of Canada. There was no confirmation process, I never took a vow to the Church. When I was of age, I stopped going to church and I told anyone who wanted to know that I did not believe. At the time I was a bit of a flip side of pete, I thought that what mattered was whether or not one believed the stories, literally. I grew out of that phase.

In answer to your question. All you have to do to be an atheist is believe that you are and stick to it. Getting your kids Christened does not seem like a commitment or as Frank might say a demonstration of non-belief. Doing so would get your booted from Darwin's witnesses for sure.

I ask again, do you have a written moral code? Does it allow lying? If you did come by morals independent of The Church, How and Why? and what moral code?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 10:08 AM

Oh I don't know, a revivalist singing in a traditional style is a bit of a put on as well... Such is the religiosity of folk, which can be great fun until the purism & pedantry starts up.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 10:46 AM

"The pew poll, I posted had fair questions and a huge sample size."

The Pew poll you posted involved a sample which is only 1 in every 7714.286 of the population, and is intrinsically skewed by the fact that the people least likely to bother answering are those with zero interest in the subject of the poll, i.e. Atheists and the simply irreligious like me.

Anybody who thinks that those to whom religion and deities are an irrelevance are going to rock up in droves to answer, is delusional in a quite different way.

Mr K A of H would be well advised to learn that the absence of a diametricaly opposed poll result is not evidence of the accuracy of the poll under discussion.

With his delusions of infallibility, one might conclude that he thinks HE is God.

The Pew poll tells us, reasonably accurately, how many people EXPRESSED a religion, or lack of same. It doesn't, and can't, say how many non religious, as opposed to religious, couldn't be arsed to answer the question.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:09 AM

"Christening makes you a Christian, tentatively, until you are old enough to have free will. Confirming is when you join the Church. And CONFIRM your commitment to Christ."

Christening makes you a Christian, tentatively, until fourteen years of indoctrination has made it virtually certain that you will make, not an informed, but the REQUIRED decision, thus proving that you are thoroughly under control.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:17 AM

"
The Pew poll you posted involved a sample which is only 1 in every 7714.286 of the population, and is intrinsically skewed by the fact that the people least likely to bother answering are those with zero interest in the subject of the poll, i.e. Atheists and the simply irreligious like me."

Pew publishes their methodology.

The factors you cite may be worth noting. But do you think they can be that far off changing the overall result in Musket's favor from 78 % of the USA "keeping an imaginary friend" to more than half not?

I urge all of you arguing against the validity of a specific scientifically conducted poll like this one to consider the arguments that have been used against pete. Do you have data of your own? Do your conjectures and anecdotes trump observation? Do you think that http://www.pewresearch.org/ is in some sort of conspiracy to juice the numbers.

I don't think you can argue that "people are lying to the pollsters" or your side "must be refusing the surveys" with any validity, professional pollsters can and do account for that. That is often a very early chapter in reference books on how to poll.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:20 AM

>>From: GUEST,Troubadour - PM
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:09 AM

"Christening makes you a Christian, tentatively, until you are old enough to have free will. Confirming is when you join the Church. And CONFIRM your commitment to Christ."

Christening makes you a Christian, tentatively, until fourteen years of indoctrination has made it virtually certain that you will make, not an informed, but the REQUIRED decision, thus proving that you are thoroughly under control. <<

That observation does not match my experience.

:-D What magical place do you live where 14 year olds are "thoroughly under control"? LOL!!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:29 AM

"The factors you cite may be worth noting. But do you think they can be that far off changing the overall result in Musket's favor from 78 % of the USA "keeping an imaginary friend" to more than half not?"

Neither Musket (as far as I know) nor I (definitely) are talking about the USA, living as we do several thousand miles from the lunacy of the bible belt and Utah.

What we know best is the UK.

K A just likes to expand what he hears beyond what is said, to have some chance of being almost right.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:32 AM

Troubadour, you have funny ideas about polling!
The sample is not self selected!

A large random cross section of the population is surveyed for their views.
It is how public opinion is assessed by government and by industry and commerce.
If the results were meaningless, vast sums would not be spent on them.
If different polls show similar results, it is a powerful indication that they are correct.
That is what we find here, with no poll showing any serious variation.

If you reject that hard evidence, you are just in denial.
Musket was wrong, and all you so desperate to support his false claim are also wrong.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:39 AM

My comments re te accuracy of polls when one side of the argument is unlikely to bother answering still stand.

Statistical analyses are often self fulfilling, thereby displaying an entirely spurious "accuracy".

There's a world of difference between political polls (which frequently affect election results) which can be compared to election results, and polls such as this, in which there is no end result against which accuracy may be measured.

The former are arguably useful, the latter just acceptable to those who got the result they desired, but totally unprovable and highly suspect.

If I asked the question of one person and extrapolated the answer to 7,000+, you would rightly call it idiocy, but Pew have simply done that 35,000 times.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:47 AM

"A large random cross section of the population is surveyed for their views."

Surely "large" is subjective and 1 in 7000+ doesn't seem that large.

Also, how do you allow for the likely disinclination of those who are entirely uninterested to bother answering, given that the vast majority of those would be the non religious, of whose lack numbers YOU are so damn certain?

Your record is one of latching on to the opinions of "authorities" of widely variable qualification and building their opinions into an argument which you then defend to destruction. When it is destroyed you claim it was their opinion, not yours.

Why should anybody give credence to your utterances?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 11:47 AM

Troubadour,
Neither Musket (as far as I know) nor I (definitely) are talking about the USA, living as we do several thousand miles from the lunacy of the bible belt and Utah.
What we know best is the UK.

Musket's claim was for "the western world."
How can that not include USA!?
I also showed reputable polls for EU.

You can not avoid the fact that there is hard evidence that Musket was wrong, and zero evidence to support him, because he was wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 12:01 PM

Surely "large" is subjective and 1 in 7000+ doesn't seem that large.

However it seems to you Jim, statisticians, the polling industry and their customers all find such a sample gives an accurate indication of the views of a population.

What is the value of your opinion on survey techniques and methodology?
Who the fuck are you?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 22 Feb 14 - 09:38 PM

You two can learn a little about polling or you can continue to talk out of your asses. I don't care which.

If you think that what Musket observes when he drives from the church to the pub Sunday mornings is more accurate, more power to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 03:32 AM

Musket doesn't drive to or from any church and certainly doesn't drive to or from the pub next door to it. Granted, its a fair walk to the pub but I sacrifice my body in the good cause.

So. Everybody who goes to weddings, funerals and christenings are liars? Do you really think that upholding traditions without actually believing on fairy stories is wrong? Churches can't afford to have their infrastructure based purely on the members. They need to provide community services to the general public if they aren't to be turned into bingo halls and private dwellings.

I fully accept that religion is a big thing in The USA but so is executing society's failings. You can't compare. I accept there are more chances of adults considering religion in The USA because there is usually more exposure and a concerted effort to see it as the norm.

You only have to look at cheese in a spray can and chicken served in a bucket to notice you can't compare levels of sophistication with that over here.

Have you ever thought that saying Jesus and God are this that and the other may indeed be lies themselves? If you can't distinguish, stop distinguishing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 04:35 AM

So you were wrong about atheists being a majority anywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 11:04 AM

No. If atheist means not believing in God, then i'm with the overwhelming majority.

Prat.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 11:10 AM

If that belief gives you comfort, but it is even less rational than the beliefs you vilify and ridicule.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 05:01 AM

I cant believe 'ole barnacle balls has actually accused someone of talking through their arse!!

I could just about tolerate some of his buffoonery on this site, whilst offensive, smug and judgmental in the extreme, nevertheless mildly amusing, such as being told yer granny had died and find all they have left you a small stuffed stoat.

This nautical fraud has been running riot through this thread with his nautical pretensions, his half baked semi digested crap about religion, strutting around in a self elected capacity as a thread police man and rule enforcer.

On top of everything else he is now posing as a musician and Irish chap; HRAN firmly clenched 'twixt cheeks , he roams the Folk clubs hailing every one with his shit eating grin and a breezy "faith and begorahh", cob-been rakishly tilted on his silly head in the mistaken believe he is a broth of a boy.

Catch yer self on 'staynes you are fooling no one..We have all got your number ducky..

Brilliant post sweetcheeks, love the bit about cheese spray and chicken in a bucket by the way..now Cap'n Average why not take a leaf out of musketts book and do summat sensible?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 10:00 AM

Musket, look at concerererenered's last post, let it be a warning to you. That is where you are headed.

Being ignored and information starved and making up gibberish to fill in the gaps. This is your Dickens moment, like Scrooge, you are given a second chance. Turn back before it is too late.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:42 AM

Oh by the way above post was I......

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:44 AM

And you admit to it?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:48 AM

That is your future if you continue on the path you are on Musket. Don't walk away from it, run!!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 14 - 06:10 AM

Musket I have done some searches of that thread for the last few weeks for "lie" and "liar."
Jim's posts were massively over-represented, but I could find no incident of me calling you a liar.
Did you make it up, or perhaps dream it?
Perhaps you could explain exactly the incident you referred to?
I will want to make a grovelling apology if what you say is true.
If it is not true, I hope you will do the decent thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 27 Feb 14 - 06:57 AM

You've been searching the threads?

Just when you thought it was a good day, it becomes a great one.

Let's get this right... You can't find anywhere where you have called me a liar?

It explains why you can't find anything else I suppose. For you, a single source of health data or a historian's extract really is definitive. It's all relative really.

I apologise for overestimating you.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 27 Feb 14 - 07:46 AM

"However it seems to you Jim, statisticians, the polling industry and their customers all find such a sample gives an accurate indication of the views of a population."

1. Taking my VERY recent comment and blaming it on Jim, shows just how much attention you pay to what youy are reading.

2. You can only judge the accuracy of ANY poll where there is an en result (such as elections) against which the accuracy may be gauged. In this case, not only is there no such control, but the point that non believers are more likely not to bother answering than believers is not adequately addressed.

Both you and apparently the pollsters have ignored it, leaving no possible way to show that the was or was not bias caused by it.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 14 - 07:53 AM

Musket, you claimed I called you are liar ON THE WW1 THREAD, when you just paraphrased me or something.
THAT IS THE THREAD I SEARCHED!

Nothing.
You made it up.
What is wrong with you Musket?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Feb 14 - 11:44 AM

Musket,

Keith's tactic seems to be to point out where you have said things that aren't entirely true and let that speak for its self. I doubt that you can find a recent example of him calling you a liar. I think that he is often unfairly pedantic and spends too much time on trivial differences in data and definition. But I think that he has got you on this one. No use fighting it.

Also I think that you are often unfairly pedantic and spend too much time on trivial differences in data and definition.

Don't you two tire of this?

It is painful to watch. Its like a slow motion train wreck.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Feb 14 - 08:20 PM

Its like a slow motion train wreck.

Coming from you, that's a bit like an arse bollocking another arse because it looks like an arse.