Friday, February 18, 2011

"Parliament is accountable not only to the electorate but to God"

According to Johann Hari in The Independent, that is the defence of the Rt Rev Lord Harries of Prentregarth for the retention of 26 Church of England bishops in the House of Lords.

He pours scorn upon it, of course, as one might expect of someone of his political disposition and liberal inclination with a whole packet of chips on each shoulder. But he discloses for the first time what His Grace has long expected: that Nick Clegg's reforms to the Upper House will not remove the bishops, but will instead halve their number and 'complement' them with a multifaith mishmash of unelected religious types, including an imam, a rabbi and a couple of enlightened pundits. It cannot include a cardinal, unless by special papal dispensation, and it remains to be seen if the Jedi Master will be treated equally.

Throughout his secularist rant, Johann Hari mentions (again and again) that only Iran and the UK have unelected clerics in their legislatures, as though the benign Anglican theocracy were equivalent to the malignant Islamic theocracy of the ayatollahs. To Hari, defending the religious conscience against aggressive expressions of homosexualism is tantamount to hanging homosexuals by the neck until they are dead.

The Church of England has defended the role of bishops in the Lords saying it helps 'connect the second chamber with the people, parishes and regions of England, not just their own worshippers. In an age where the role of religion in shaping social and moral attitudes is increasingly recognised to be highly significant, the idea of shaping the second chamber on a purely secular model would be a retrograde step'.

Prayers before each session of Parliament to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and to the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ are not some anachronistic absurdity in need of relegation to the private realm: they remind politicians that they are not omnipotent. Prayer moves us to the spiritual realm, and encourages politicians to reflect on their transience and relative insignificance: in short, it keeps them humble.

To tamper with the Anglican bishops or to grant other faiths an equivalent privilege in the House of Lords is a further step on the road of disestablishment: there will be a plethora of unintended consequences. Yet it is ironic that an atheist deputy prime minister, instead of secularising the Chamber, is intent on making it even more religious in its expression.

122 Comments:

Anonymous DanJ0 said...

I thought His Grace might have a view on that. :)

I have to say that I'd have the bishops out of the chamber as a matter of principle. However, reforming the second chamber seems quite a difficult task.

18 February 2011 at 10:17  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

So just a week after Dave's call to ditch multiculturalism, his deputy calls to make the 2nd chamber of our legislature more multi-cultural?

18 February 2011 at 10:22  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

Change, change, change, change....
No wonder this country has gone down hill. Not change for the better, just change because it looks as though those in authority are doing something. Health, education, defence; all a complete shambles, but Imams in the Lords! God help us.

The Lords should be a place for the great and the good, noted for their wisdom and contribution to our democratic society. It is no place for those who regard non-Muslims as inferior and wish death on those who fail to convert to Islam.

18 February 2011 at 10:30  
Blogger D. Singh said...

DanJo

'I have to say that I'd have the bishops out of the chamber as a matter of principle'.

I see that bigotry is on full display here.

Nothing is too much trouble to comment upon for those who would bring in the authoritarianism not seen since the days of the Reich.

18 February 2011 at 10:52  
Blogger Botogol said...

as it stands I don't lose much sleep over the bishops in the Lords.. certainly if designing from scratch I wouldn't include them, but we are where we are..

but if we start including imams etc as ex officio appointments, then the whole thing has got silly and I would lose sleep over it, and I would campaign to get ALL the religious appts out of the Lords

18 February 2011 at 11:01  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

D Singh, still smarting from the slap about your reductio ad hitlerum the other day?

I'm in favour of a secular UK. I think it's a necessity now, actually, given our diverse population.

Removing bishops from the second chamber naturally follows from that position.

If you think that warrants your slightly hysterical reference to the Reich then so be it.

18 February 2011 at 11:14  
Blogger D. Singh said...

It is but one small step to banning our church leaders to banning the Judaeo-Christian from Parliament.

Further Magna Charta - pregnant with Judaeo-Christian principles would be under threat - the foundation stoe of our democracy.

That is why your principle applied consistently will lead to a fascism.

18 February 2011 at 11:20  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

"However, reforming the second chamber seems quite a difficult task."

My dear Danjo, reforming the Lords is not a difficult task. All that is required is :

1. Bring back the herediary peers into the chamber,so that they may once again take their rightful place in governing this great nation of ours.

2. the appointed party hacks and so called life peers to be expelled from the Lords.

3.bring back the Law Lords

and

4.keep the Bishops where they are now.

Seems quite simple to me.

18 February 2011 at 11:27  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

DanJ0 said ..."I'm in favour of a secular UK. I think it's a necessity now, actually, given our diverse population."

But secularism is a shrinking proportion of that diverse population. Surely you should be arguing - as Clegg does - for a MORE religiously diverse legislature, not a completely religion-less one.

Sadly (for you) the world is becoming more religious, not less.

Kicking the secularist habit. (and things have moved on a lot even since then)

18 February 2011 at 11:32  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Bravo Lord Lavendon

18 February 2011 at 11:33  
Anonymous Paul C said...

When the issue of civil ceremonies in religious places and/or with religious language was voted on in the Lords this time last year, the Bishops were split down the middle-one for, one against...

I wonder which half will be removed from the House..?

18 February 2011 at 11:35  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

D. Singh, goodness knows how we've avoided having a Fuhrer instead of a Prime Minister so far given how many slippery slope arguments seem to lead to that. Whatever would we have done in debates and discussions if Adolf hadn't done his thing? We'd have had to use the normal bounds of likely outcomes, and everything. Blimey, the horror.

18 February 2011 at 11:45  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Rebel Saint: "But secularism is a shrinking proportion of that diverse population. Surely you should be arguing - as Clegg does - for a MORE religiously diverse legislature, not a completely religion-less one."

Not at all. A secular state would guarantee areas of freedom for all religions equally, thus protecting them from each other, and leaving the rest of us free of the lot of them.

18 February 2011 at 11:50  
Blogger jdennis_99 said...

I do agree with bishops sitting in the House of Lords, but it is slightly perverse that if one religion should have special recognition, then others are to be denied that.

I would welcome the addition of imams, rabbis and so on. But only proportionate to the number of those who follow their particular religion in the country - their voices should not be disproportionately loud.

In that case, I would expect the number of Anglican bishops to far outweigh the others put together.

18 February 2011 at 11:54  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

@DanJ0, Ahhh ... I see, so as a population grows more diverse & religious, only secularists know what's best for us. Only a secularist can remain entirely objective and neutral. Thank you for saving us from ourselves!

And presumably, if a population was to grow more secular, we should be governed by a theistic legislature for the same reasons, or do all secularists speak with one voice?

18 February 2011 at 12:07  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace

'Acording to Johann Hari (a circular mechanism used to open or close a door) 'in The Independent'. But he discloses for the first time what His Grace has long expected: that Nick Clegg's reforms to the Upper House will not remove the bishops, but will instead halve their number and 'complement' them with a multifaith mishmash of unelected religious types, including an imam, a rabbi and a couple of enlightened pundits.
(Nothing a secular atheist does is ever directed by chance or goodwill but serves a greater, hidden purpose).

'The Church of England has defended the role of bishops in the Lords saying it helps 'connect the second chamber with the people, parishes and regions of England, not just their own worshippers. '
(Indeed it should but as the CoE has arrived at a disconnect with the Almighty Himself, it therefore follows that they cannot connect to the people they are called to serve and pass on to the two houses what the people in the parishes and regions of England require of their representatives).

'Prayer moves us to the spiritual realm, and encourages politicians to reflect on their transience and relative insignificance: in short, it keeps them humble. '
(It is certainly meant to achieve this but unfortunately I see a distinct lack of humility, regularly, from said politicians).

'Yet it is ironic that an atheist deputy prime minister, instead of secularising the Chamber, is intent on making it even more religious in its expression.'

(He must first destroy the unique position of the CoE by watering down its effectiveness as a barrier to secular change by mixing it with all types of minority faiths and philosophical entities before then abolishing this mishmash of disparate views that are an irrelevance and will be shown as such.)

You always better destroy the perceived 'Enemy Within' by not martyring them in the public's eyes by possible attracting a wave of sympathy to their cause but by adding to their number what cannot be unified, so they become the problem rather than a solution!

Oh the craftiness of the secularist agenda. DanJo, Graham Davis and others should be very proud of their secularist co-horts.

Are the CoE upto the challenge??

The Man Who Never Was??

18 February 2011 at 12:08  
Blogger Maturecheese said...

Lord Lavendon 11:27

Hear! Hear!

Parliament has only gone downhill since the 'progressives' got hold of it.

18 February 2011 at 12:08  
Blogger D. Singh said...

DanJ0

You would do well to read more history. Adolf is not your only bedfellow: Mao, Stalin, Caesescu, Hussein.

18 February 2011 at 12:15  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lord Lavendon is absolutely right!

The House of Lords was destroyed by the mountebank Blair and his criminal cabal - and, never forget, Sunny Jim Callaghan's daughter, Margaret Jay - and whatever it turns into from here it has lost its legitimacy. Hereditary peers were appointed by God, for God's sake, not just a few lefty C of E bishops whose grasp of doctrine in many cases is pretty shaky and whose liberal lefty secular sympathies have destroyed the Church during the last few decades of wrongheadedness.
If the hereditary peerage is not allowed to sit in their House I can see no justification for a rag-bag of so-called religious types being there, whether imams, mullahs, wiccans, rabbis or whatever else Clegg comes up with in the interests of diversity, equality fraternity multiculturalism or other spurious rationalistic justification for doing something wicked and stupid.

We are a Christian nation or we are nothing - which is what I suspect we are now.

Anyway, what about the Jedi? According to the last census there are an awful lot of them about. And Scientologists, Christian Scientists, Quakers, Moonies (are they still with us?) and a host of other weirdo non-conformists?

Silly little adolescents like Johann Hari (who I would ask to fetch me a newspaper, never mind write in one) with far too much to say for themselves, and not a lot between the ears, should be shouted down and made to look like the vacuous fools they are, instead of taking anything they say seriously.

These people do not have our best interests at heart - it's high time somebody said they are out to destroy England.

18 February 2011 at 12:18  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There should have been a not in the brackets after Johann Hari.

Sorry.

18 February 2011 at 12:19  
Blogger John R said...

"accountable to God" - which God and why?

Is it decided on numbers? There's more than just your faith represented in the country now. So why would it have to be your God?

Surely there's an equally strong case to be made for one of the other versions? Or numerically speaking no God at all, as most folk have no true belief (just ticking C of E on the passport form really doesn't count).

What about history? Then surely the Celtic or Roman Gods have a much better case. They were here a long time before your God turned up.

It's pretty obvious that this is a self-serving argument that is only being made to justify the status quo.

What we need in the second chamber (I've pretty much given up on the lower house) are good people, from a diverse range of backgrounds, independent of the government and electorate who can look at the issues they are called upon to debate from an ethical standpoint. Not sure that anyone who turns up already pre-loaded with a set of out-of-date beliefs is right for the role.

18 February 2011 at 12:48  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

I have to say that I'd have the bishops out of the chamber
You don't have to do anything of the kind. Anyway, I expect you have put the wind up them.

18 February 2011 at 12:53  
Anonymous WhiteKnight said...

Anonymous (TMWNW)18 February 2011 12:08


I could not have said it more concisely myself.

Well Said!

18 February 2011 at 13:02  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"You would do well to read more history. Adolf is not your only bedfellow: Mao, Stalin, Caesescu, Hussein."

D Singh, I have no bedfellows like that. I'm a liberal atheist, not a meglomaniac. Hope this helps.

18 February 2011 at 13:21  
Anonymous Philip said...

I agree with HG. And somewhat with Lord Lavendon above!

The HOL should be kept as an appointed chamber, even with heriditaries, to continue to act largely as a revising chamber asking the elected, and thus supreme, HOC to think again. As for the permanent place of the CofE Bishops, I agree keep them, but wonder if there's a case for them to be complemented by some from other protestant groups due to this nation's roots in protestant reformed Christianity.

18 February 2011 at 13:27  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Anonymous 18 February 2011 12:08

Bless You

18 February 2011 at 13:27  
Anonymous John Smyth said...

Kohcs

Surely more could be said for putting together such a fine comment.

18 February 2011 at 13:30  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

DanJ0 said 18 February 2011 13:21

'D Singh, I have no bedfellows like that. I'm a liberal atheist, not a meglomaniac. Hope this helps.'

Sorry D Singh, DanJ0 is correct. This would be ME. *He said, stroking white pussy..Ooh I say*

18 February 2011 at 13:35  
Anonymous Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin said...

DanJO said 18 February 2011 11:50

Not at all. A secular state would guarantee areas of freedom for all religions equally, thus protecting them from each other, and leaving the rest of us free of the lot of them.

EXACTLY COMRADE, EXACTLY.

хорошó скáзано!

Хорошó смеëтся тот, кто смеëтся послéдним.

С уважением, Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin

18 February 2011 at 13:44  
Anonymous Michal said...

Face up to the facts. Your bronze age religion is nothing special, it's not somehow more beneficial to the public than other bronze age religions.

18 February 2011 at 13:53  
Anonymous Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin said...

For my fellow Bolshevik who cannot speak the one true mother tongue;

хорошó скáзано! Well Spoken

Хорошó смеëтся тот, кто смеëтся послéдним. He Who Laughs Last, Laughs Longest.

С уважением, Goodbye XXX Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin

Michal said 18 February 2011 13:53

You tell em Comrade, My Son!

18 February 2011 at 13:56  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

"Bronze Age religion".
This obviously cannot mean Christianity, so which religion does it refer to, and who practises it?

18 February 2011 at 14:11  
Anonymous Mao Zedong said...

michal said 18 February 2011 13:53

Keep the faith.

We shall have our 'Great Leap Forward ' if You, DanJO and others maintain the party line.

They tell me that People in your superstitious country are being driven to near suicide with despair at the changes but I once stated : "People who try to commit suicide — don't attempt to save them! . . . China is such a populous nation, it is not as if we cannot do without a few people."
Same in your country.

Let them 'Grow A Pair'

Worship Men because as I once stated:
'There are two kinds of personality cults. One is a healthy personality cult, that is, to worship men like Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin ~(You could include Dawkin/Hawking if you so wish, fine men from my own heart). Because they hold the truth in their hands. The other is a false personality cult, i.e. not analyzed and blind worship (Bronze Age Religions?).

Yours Very Sincerely

毛泽东

18 February 2011 at 14:12  
Anonymous Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin said...

Michal said 18 February 2011 13:53

Answer Little Black Sambo..Do Not Fear the funny little Icon with the jolly umbrella.

'Grow a Pair' as My beloved fellow comrade has just stated.

Fellow Secularists, come to his aid!!

18 February 2011 at 14:17  
Blogger D. Singh said...

John R

'What about history? Then surely the Celtic or Roman Gods have a much better case. They were here a long time before your God turned up'.

Don't be daft. Haven't you read Gibbons?

Rome fell because its gods weren't big enough.

18 February 2011 at 14:23  
Anonymous Mao Zedong said...

Michal said 18 February 2011 13:53

Come, why you delay in answering the funny little Icon with the jolly umbrella.

It may have very poor taste in liking 'Girlie' books but this is no excuse! (Mind you, the film choices are pretty good and well liked here in China, we love Ealing comedy)

Yours Very Sincerely

毛泽东

18 February 2011 at 14:25  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Your Grace puzzles me. On the one hand, you embrace diversity and reject arguments to make Britain less diverse (by encouraging Muslims to leave, for example) but, on the other, you attack Clegg’s plan to appoint representatives of other faiths to the House of Lords. If there is diversity of faith in the country, why not in the Lords?

My perfect House of Lords would retain the bishops, trash the life peers and reinstate the hereditaries (who would fulfil John R’s ‘independent of the government and the electorate’ requirement). But, sadly, the uni-racial, uni-cultural, uni-faith nation that gave that perfect House of Lords its legitimacy is no more. The politicians, whether through ignorance or design, have given us a diverse society with all its attendant dysfunction, and that diversity should be represented in Parliament. Who knows, the sight of mullahs in Parliament may bring home to Your Grace the future that lies in store for this land under Islam.

18 February 2011 at 14:32  
Anonymous Mao Zedong said...

John R 18 February 2011 12:48

Respond to D Singh 18 February 2011 14:23 immediately with the truth as we have instructed you.

He is an infidel..Oops. He is a superstitious, deluded fool who tricks others.

The fool states;
'Rome fell because its gods weren't big enough.'

I Am Big Enough. Worship Me and all secularist states.

Yours Very Sincerely

Your Always Loving Chairperson

毛泽东

18 February 2011 at 14:37  
Blogger D. Singh said...

DanJO

You have already expressed the fascist principle of eliminating our church leaders from the House of Lords.

What difference is there between you a liberal atheist and a meglomaniac?

18 February 2011 at 14:40  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

I am Supreme Commander of SPECTRE, the Special Executive for Counterintelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion. Clegg is merely my covert operative.

Mr D Singh, You killed my only other double on this blog, I'm afraid.
As you can imagine, after his death, volunteers were understandably... rather scarce.
Such a pity. All that time and energy wasted, simply to provide you with one mock, heroic moment.

Liked your last comment, Right idea, Mr. Singh ...But wrong pussy.
As La Rochefoucauld observed, "humility is the worst form of conceit." I do hold the winning hands Mr D Singh.

As if DanJO could possibly understand the difference between liberal atheism and meglomaniacal brilliance.

Goodbye, Mr. Singh!

18 February 2011 at 14:51  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Lord Soper was worth all the bishops put together.

18 February 2011 at 15:23  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

D Singh said 18 February 2011 14:40

You appear to be oblivious to the fact you are Dai Singh with danger here?

Please note the names on the blog comment section here; they will confirm the truth.
Your weapons of deterrence did not deter us from our objective! A terrible catastrophe now confronts you in the United Kingdom.

However, it can be avoided by paying a tribute to our organization, amounting to twenty-five percent of your country's annual oil purchases paid directly to the EU (our bagboys).
We have accomplished two of the functions that the name SPECTRE embodies: terror (Tony Blair) and extortion (Gordon Brown). If our demands are not met prior to the May Elections in 2011, we shall ruthlessly apply the third: Aternative Voting!

What, no pithy retort Mr Singh?

Always remember that SPECTRE is a dedicated fraternity whose strength lies in the absolute integrity of its members. (Siamese fighting fish, fascinating creatures. Brave but of the whole stupid. Yes they're stupid. Except for the occasional one such as we have here who lets the other two fight. While he waits. Waits until the survivor is so exhausted that he cannot defend himself, and then like SPECTRE... he strikes! )


Blofeld

18 February 2011 at 15:32  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Manfarang said 18 February 2011 15:23


Desist immediately Number 0055.

You have given away our covert operative '0036' who did much to further our cause amongst the 'Religious Community' in the UK.

Donald Oliver Soper, Baron Soper (31 January 1903 – 22 December 1998) was a prominent Methodist minister, socialist and pacifist.

He was instructed to solely use the House of Lords, which he was able to do very easily, as a platform for the expression of OUR views.

You are advised to expect a visit from your regional commander to remove your SPECTRE ring at the very the minimum.

You have my word you shall not be harmed, operative 0055!

Goodbye Manfarang!

Blofeld

18 February 2011 at 15:50  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Northern Tradition Pagans should have a seat or two before newly arrived middle eastern cults.

18 February 2011 at 15:59  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

bred in the bone said 18 February 2011 15:59

Well said Operative 0666.

Return to the dormant volcano for your reward.

Number One.

18 February 2011 at 16:03  
Anonymous Voyager said...

However, reforming the second chamber seems quite a difficult task.

Of course it is because reforming it as per Earl Grey's Foreword to the 1911 Parliament Act would mean repealing the Parliament Acts 1911, 1949 and permitting the Upper House to reject Budgets.....as in every other ELECTED Upper House.

They simply do not want to have proper scrutiny of expenditure and taxation

18 February 2011 at 16:34  
Anonymous Voyager said...

A secular state would guarantee areas of freedom for all religions equally

Only by imposing a Religion of Secularism which would claim Infallibility and Superiority and encroach upon Doctrine of all other religions.

Hebert 1793 Fete de la Raison is the basis of this absurd doctrine and it has ended the same way every turn of the cycle

18 February 2011 at 16:40  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"What difference is there between you a liberal atheist and a meglomaniac?"

Well, I think I have much better dress sense for starters and I'm not inclined towards facial hair either. I suppose we should all be thankful that the weekend is about to start. Perhaps next week the worry of a imminent Fourth Reich occurring in the UK and girly liberals taking over the world will feel less pressing for you.

18 February 2011 at 16:49  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Voyager said 18 February 2011 16:40

From what you have to say, I like the 'Cut of your Gib', Sir/Madam.

As I am expecting an unfortunate mishap to one of my operatives shortly, I will be in the position to offer a post in a fast moving international organisation.

Do you like glamorous foreign 'Babes', traveling to exotic places, intrigue and espionage etc.

Well then, SPECTRE might just be for you?

Look forward to your interest..'Girlie' liberalism is not a downside but a positive in our organisation.

Ernst X

18 February 2011 at 17:19  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

DanJO said 18 February 2011 16:49


My Operative said;

Well, I think I have much better dress sense for starters (You will wear the ill fitting SPECTRE uniform provided at great cost by myself, Operative ;-)1010) and I'm not inclined towards facial hair either (Unfortunately a downside for operatives in the Middle East regions during covert operations). I suppose we should all be thankful that the weekend is about to start (Indeed, we have work for you, Operative ;-)1010, at Annabel's Wine Bar with Neil and Portillo). Perhaps next week the worry of a imminent Fourth Reich occurring in the UK and girly liberals taking over the world will feel less pressing for you. (Desist immediately from releasing them from their angst..Let them stew!)

Blofeld..Your Leader

18 February 2011 at 17:33  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Perhaps we should get it all out of the way in one go now. If I said I supported the repeal of the blasphemy laws a couple of years ago then would that mean I'm on my way to becoming Pol Pot, bearing in mind that everything was apparently down to Marxism here a week or so ago?

18 February 2011 at 17:43  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Cranmer said

Prayers before each session of Parliament to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and to the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ are not some anachronistic absurdity in need of relegation to the private realm: they remind politicians that they are not omnipotent.

Some anachronistic absurdity is exactly what they are. Superstitious mumbo jumbo. whether Christian or any other should play no part in our legislature.

18 February 2011 at 17:45  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...
"Well said Operative 0666."

The irony is Blofeld that like it or not Judeo Christianity is proving too weak a faith for defending Albion, as prophesised it would.

It views itself as having more in common with other semitic cults than with the British Isles.


Our salvation may be in throwing off the Abrahamic faiths and returning to our roots.

18 February 2011 at 17:45  
Anonymous Oswin said...

DanJo @ almost everywhere:

Most of us here blow hot and cold according to the issue at hand. Often we become overly excited and transgress good manners. However, I really must congratulate you on your consistency; your comments are consistently smug!

I agree with Mr.Singh @ 10:52, you really are becoming a most fearful bigot.

18 February 2011 at 17:45  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Danjo"A secular state would guarentee areas of freedom for all religions equally ,thus protecting them from each other ,and leaving the rest of us free from the lot of them"

And there we have it Danjos great inquiry and solution into why 1bn people across the world hold the christian faith,they are all idiots to be subjected to his lack of qualtive thinking. Ah but Danjo what if they are right and god exists ? do you have any right to impose your secular state in such circumstances ??.

The bishops have perhaps have had rather a difficult time in that they have taken a view of politics as being policy approval or disapproval almost forgettting the role of the church and teaching.It is of little use being despondent at the arrival of politics that wants to dispose of bishops when they have lost to ability to explain there role.
The rest of the lords scenarios are interesting in that it has become in need of thinning for cost pressures , but I so far fail to see why an elected chamber would serve us any better, as in a way it is required to behave non political ,despite the recent labour tactics used . I dont have much objection to experienced people having position , to bring skills and finesse to legislature process ,its lack of popularist subjection perhaps having saved the country from all too rash politics many times , if we had realised it .A second chamber full of vying ex charity and lobby groups might not be such a clean place either .The only one I may favour is a committe to appoint members from to fullfill certain skills/experience , who have the correct powers of judgement and intelligence to inquire and revise legislation. Lobbying should perhaps be for commoms members ,evidence for lords to revise . This may also bring the law judges back into accountability in the lords .The Lords should be free to enquire about substance differently to popularist vote pressures and may I ad at reasonable cost effectiveness to the public purse.

18 February 2011 at 17:53  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

Nobody knows God, who it is, and most certainly not what it thinks. Yes, people will read the Bible and other man-made accounts of the Gods and project their imagination about their subjective interpretations, but this is not God. This is just delusion, at best, and psychosis at worse. If you hear voices in your head then you have problems. If you don't hear voices, then what is your faith based upon except imagination? I have a strong belief that people can, and do experience the numinous, which may, or may not be imagination, but to manufacture an entire theological universe from writings in a book, and then create rules and punishments that are based upon this is just lunacy. I don't want my life to be governed by people who are incapable of functioning in the modern world without having to resort to fantasy fiction, and who consult ancient oracles that were based upon primitive superstition. I want level-headed, intelligent and rational thinking people at the helm of society.

I think that if we are going to have psychotic fools having a say about our governance, then let's have a diversity of delusions so they can negate each others fanaticism. Religion will always be with us no matter how unpleasant it may be for those of us who do not share the delusions, so it seems like an excellent move to do a way with the monopoly that the Christian bigots have enjoyed for much too long a period of time.

Johann Hari's article is excellent and puts everything into perspective. It's interesting how everything has to be a 'rant' when it has a medicative effect upon the psychotic and deluded mind.

18 February 2011 at 18:11  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

bred in the bone said 18 February 2011 17:45

Again, Well Said Operative 0666, your political fluency in gibberish is truly outstanding.

We have needs for the likes of your kind.

1 Star granted!

Blofeld, your supreme leader

18 February 2011 at 18:18  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Now Jared gaites said 18 February 2011 18:11

As offered to Voyager Sir,

From what you also have to say, I like the 'Cut of your Gib', Sir/Madam.

As I am expecting many unfortunate mishaps to some of my operatives shortly, I will be in the position to offer you a post in a fast moving international organisation.

Do you like glamorous foreign 'Babes', traveling to exotic places, intrigue and espionage etc.

Well then, SPECTRE might just be for you?

Look forward to your interest.. any pretensions towards a 'Girlie' liberal disposition is NOT a downside but a positive in our organisation.

Ernst X

18 February 2011 at 18:59  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"However, I really must congratulate you on your consistency; your comments are consistently smug!"

Oh no, that's terrible. I try for sarcastic, not smug. :(

18 February 2011 at 19:18  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"And there we have it Danjos great inquiry and solution into why 1bn people across the world hold the christian faith,they are all idiots to be subjected to his lack of qualtive thinking. Ah but Danjo what if they are right and god exists ? do you have any right to impose your secular state in such circumstances ??."

What if the 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide are right and the 1 billion Christians are wrong? Do you have any right to continue to impose your Christian state in such circumstances?

18 February 2011 at 19:21  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

'Sides, I want a secular state here in the UK because we have an increasing number of Muslims and Hindus and Sikhs. Together with the Christians, that has the potential to cause an almighty religious ruck. As a secular state nominally over-arches the lot, we might have some means to resolving issues.

18 February 2011 at 19:24  
Anonymous Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin said...

18 February 2011 19:18 & 18 February 2011 19:21 & 18 February 2011 19:24


Go Comrade Go.

Don't hold back on the superstitious fools.

Da, Da! *Red Flag sounding in background*

хорошó скáзано!

Comrade Stalin

18 February 2011 at 19:52  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Thank you, Your Grace. I especially like: "Prayer moves us to the spiritual realm, and encourages politicians to reflect on their transience and relative insignificance: in short, it keeps them humble," and would hope it might even incline them to remember Truth, and so honesty.

One can pray - in other places.

18 February 2011 at 20:01  
Anonymous Michal said...

Little Black Sambo: Does Christianity not originate from the old testament?

18 February 2011 at 20:02  
Anonymous Voyager said...

What if the 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide are right and the 1 billion Christians are wrong? Do you have any right to continue to impose your Christian state in such circumstances?

There are NOT 1.5 billion Muslims and Christianity is the world's largest religious group by far even before the large Christian fellowship in China is included.


Islam is dying. It is a religion for losers which is why it is going through a violent upsurge to frighten off those converting to Christianity.

Islam relies on illiteracy and oil money but the number of Muslim women seeking Hindu husbands on the Subcontinent shows how they seek a life better than as a shrouded serf

The milquetoast Christian Churches of the West are not really Christian, simply slavish State-worshippers subsumed into Marxist dialectic.

Real Christians do not accept The State, it is Hegelian and is antithetical to Freedom but relies upon Monolithic compulsion. It is LEVIATHAN

18 February 2011 at 20:03  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...Again, Well Said Operative 0666, your political fluency in gibberish is truly outstanding"

I am not political supreme leader Blofeld, just a realist who sees the futility of a Country that Subjects themselves to a load of old duffers like those in the photo above, when the Arab World are getting off their knees.

18 February 2011 at 20:17  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"There are NOT 1.5 billion Muslims and Christianity is the world's largest religious group by far even before the large Christian fellowship in China is included."

Wikipedia claims there are. But it doesn't matter to the argument I was presented with, does it? I was just bouncing it back in the same style, thus showing it for what it was: a bit silly.

18 February 2011 at 20:18  
Anonymous Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin said...

Michal said 18 February 2011 20:02

You took your time, Comrade.

You are not a banker are you?

'Little Black Sambo: Does Christianity not originate from the old testament?' even the funny little Icon with the jolly umbrella should be able to answer this. Da?

хорошó скáзано!

Comrade Stalin

18 February 2011 at 20:20  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

By the way, a quick update on the prisoner vote thing a week ago:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/feb/18/prisoners-vote-compensation-claims-blocked

18 February 2011 at 20:31  
Blogger Hazel said...

To tamper with the Anglican bishops or to grant other faiths an equivalent privilege in the House of Lords is a further step on the road of disestablishment: there will be a plethora of unintended consequences.

“Equivalent privilege” - what an interesting term.

Interesting in that, in questions of equivalence, it is not only the faith of the bishops that is at question, but their gender also.

Were an "equivalent privilege" of women to be instigated (a counter-acting gender quota of 26 women say) would there also be a 'plethora of unintended consequences' related to such an action? Hmm, people asking for equity rather than equivalence in religious hierarchies perhaps?

But maybe this does not matter, after all, a privilege is not; by definition; a right.

18 February 2011 at 20:49  
Anonymous not a machine said...

danjo : I dont think you would be able to even propose what you did in an Islamic state.
Whilst sarcasm may be your thing , the ability to answer questions isnt and I rather fear you have done the same trick quite a few months ago on here.
If god is real danjo what do you think is the best course of action.

18 February 2011 at 21:53  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Jared Gaites said..."This is just delusion, at best, and psychosis at worse."

Jared I respect you as one of the most clear minded and stable in your comments, however are you not forgetting the illusion that there ever was a time you were not here and its in your own interest to make a btter World?

When we convince people of that delusion we have acheived the level-headed, intelligent and rational thinking people at the helm of society we need.

A society that puts it own best interests first by making sure the World we live in will be one worth living in.

18 February 2011 at 21:55  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Ive just been reading an article on council waste and why Mr pickles may be onto somthing funnily enough i never did get to the bottom of my councils budget from Darlings last budget as they started getting vague about specific budgets and released only general reductions which seemed in line. I have since found out that some budgets to certain vulnerbale groups (and I am talking about real social needs)have been cut by 50% in what would certainly be deemed front line and that the proganda businesses have come through unscathed , indeed a lot of the complaining from some of the community groups we have seen may be entirely due to cutting before election to pressure it .
if this is true and the budgets were instructed to "hit the vulnerble" then if the lib dems have been in on it as well that will not look very good . I had wondered if council CEOs and there accountants could be brought in before commitiee in closed sessions ,as i fear also that we may have had politcal council budgets because no one can round em up from clientel state land.

18 February 2011 at 22:15  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Thats some interesting stuff not a machine and what happened to all those councils that had been raising the community charge year on year even though they had tax payers money stashed abroad.

We will never know because we play politics instead of playing catch the dirty criminal scoundrels.

18 February 2011 at 22:44  
Anonymous Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin said...

hazel (Nikita) said 18 February 2011 20:49

You are indeed fortunate to be blogging from the UK, comrade.

Should this be Saudi Arabia, your photo would give you away as an israeli spy and you would be beheaded. Then what use would you be to the cause.

Caution or Siberia, you choose?

С уважением,

J Stalin

18 February 2011 at 22:59  
Blogger Luckywood said...

Out of interest, your Grace, which would you prefer: the removal of the Bishops from the house of Lords, or them having to share the bench with assorted imams, rabbis, etc.?

18 February 2011 at 23:05  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Bred in the bone said 18 February 2011 21:55 & 18 February 2011 22:44

Excellent Operative 0666.

Your smarm offensive with the miscreant Jared Gaites may yet produce results and sway him to the SPECTRE cause?

'Jared I respect you as one of the most clear minded and stable in your comments,' suitably brown nosing to gain his interest.

'however are you not forgetting the illusion that there ever was a time you were not here and its in your own interest to make a btter World?' Philosophical rubbish, Excellent.

'When we convince people of that delusion we have acheived the level-headed, intelligent and rational thinking people at the helm of society we need.' SPECTRE'S secret 10th Ammendment. Brilliantly laid out, 0666.

'A society that puts it own best interests first by making sure the World we live in will be one worth living in.' EXEMPLARY, Operative 0666.

I reckon the target may yet be brought into the organisation.

It looks like a job in India maybe more to your vedic take on life, 0666.

2 Stars granted

Your supreme leader

Blofeld

PS

Who said you may try to target Not A Machine. This target obviously has a mind of their own and of superior intellect to yourself and would be a 'James Bond' given half a chance. Desist.

Your life now hangs in the balance, 0666.

18 February 2011 at 23:14  
Anonymous Cardinal Richelieu said...

Luckywood said 18 February 2011 23:05

Sorry, are you asking me or Cranmer.

If I, "His Eminence, Cardinal Richelieu" if you please.

Either way, you are asking a question way above your 'Paygrade', my secularist stirrer.

His Eminence

18 February 2011 at 23:32  
Anonymous len said...

As our Society(pushed by minorities with vested interests)lurches towards Secular Humanism we are starting to see the seeds of our own destruction sprouting.
Ours is a broken disintegrating Society with people self destructing through drink,drugs, violence,sexual immorality and family breakdown.
The moral chaos and confusion resulting from Society abandoning God and Biblical principals lays bare the myth than man can be 'moral' without God. In 2 Peter 2 we read of the false prophets who will come in the last days of this age. ‘While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage.’ A fitting assessment of the teachers of the New Tolerance.What is taking place in our society is part of a process which is happening across the western world. Education, the media and governments backed by international organisations like the UN and the EU are imposing a new world view which claims to be ‘tolerant’ of minorities, but is actually extremely intolerant of dissenters.

To stand for the truth will be increasingly unpopular for Christians as Jesus said, ‘You will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake.’ Matthew 24.9. The ‘New Tolerance’ is one factor in bringing hatred and persecution of Christians to the nominal Christian countries of Europe and America.

18 February 2011 at 23:50  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Ernst Stavro Blofeld said..."Your life now hangs in the balance, 0666"
Thanks for taking the time to respond, as Jared said ignore the voices in your head!

But I say if the muslims can be so organised and attack after Friday prayers maybe its time we started thinking about worshiping on Thors Day.


Or is such a suggestion beyond my remit in this lifetime supreme leader.

18 February 2011 at 23:57  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Bred in the bone said 18 February 2011 22:44

Operative 0666.

Your life being held in the balance is on hold until you answer this question.

'Jared Gaites' This IS the ex choirboy who appeared in Pop Idol and was the runner-up to Will Young (DanJO) on the first series of Pop Idol in February 2002. Correct?

If he can slip under Katie Price's sheets we might be onto a winner here.

Your answer is urgently required to hold off any visit from Mr. Osato 0911.

Pray you don't disappoint Operative 0666.


Blofeld

18 February 2011 at 23:58  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Bred in the bone foolishly stated 18 February 2011 23:57

'Thors Day'.

Sloppy Operative 0666., very sloppy.

THURSDAY.

I am embarassed I handpicked you from all the others outside Labrokes bookies in Rochdale.
Are you really Eton educated, I am having my doubts, 0666.?

Please answer my question, IS this Jared Gaites..the chanteuse purveyor of Unchained Melody.

I will be merciful, I assure you 0666..

Blofeld

19 February 2011 at 00:07  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

len said..."The moral chaos and confusion resulting from Society abandoning God and Biblical principals lays bare the myth than man can be 'moral' without God"

Len our society has not been given an alternative, true leaders are not those who want you to follow them but those who show you the leader within yourself.

That is why in these Isles our Britishness melded together the concept of Christ and the Arthurian Legend.

This is the Britishness we need today, whatever creed or colour, that is what the World is waiting for.

19 February 2011 at 00:16  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...
Bred in the bone foolishly stated 18 February 2011 23:57

Dont worry you still have my vote.

19 February 2011 at 00:19  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Bred in the bone said 19 February 2011 00:16

Len, whoever you are, ignore Operative 0666 Aka Bred in the bone.

He is a rebellious SPECTRE agent who is off message and will therefore be most severely dealt with!

Our (Well, MY) agreement states quite clearly Operative 0666, that no harm will come to you if Jared Gaites is the chanteuse from Pop Idol.
I do not want to hear about 'Voices in your head' Operative 0666, as insanity is not a term that HR at SPECTRE recognises in a Doctor's Letter prior to termination (of your contract of employment, silly).

Our organisation did not arrange for you to come over from Rochdale via India just for amusement, 0666.

The firing power inside my crater is enough to annihilate a small army.

This organisation does not tolerate failure, Operative 0666..

Blofeld

19 February 2011 at 00:39  
Anonymous not a machine said...

You have a point Bred and bone , whilst I can see how you might want some sort of vetting for local third sector groups , my local district council is becomming a bit schizo , you enquire and they start getting all "cant find anyone in office" , have you visted our web site , we are web based etc etc , cant get to know who is responsible for what or how approval took place without specifics . But looks like it was budget before election in so called safe seats may have even been moving some budgets from 2007 onwards to make em look ok now .

As for Blofeld : good to meet you again , hows tiddles .mmm perhaps make better journalist than secret agent (although I may be being a bit harsh accusing my local council of being spectre/smirsch and my spelling has improved since blogging despite risable treatment by correspondents).

Len my apollogies seem to be having an all too political day even though I know this is a religiopolitico site.

19 February 2011 at 00:55  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

And always remember whether ye be Atheist or Godly, if you call yourself Judge or claim to be Lord be sure it holds water.

Cheers for the Blofeld job.

19 February 2011 at 00:59  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

not a machine said...
You have a point Bred and bone , whilst I can see how you might want some sort of vetting for local third sector groups , my local district council is becomming a bit schizo , you enquire and they start getting all "cant find anyone in office"

not a machine this crap is happening everywhere, the number of people coming to me lately claiming they have been given forms to fill out because the company they work for has lost all their details?

I say to hell with supplying them again, tell them to get the details found and rapid!

This is the World of the hoodwinked we live in, believe in a Master either atheist or Godly and you will be the one who answers and not the one who questions.

19 February 2011 at 01:09  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Not a Machine said 19 February 2011 00:55

Ah, we meet again, Mr Blonde! Tiddles says Hi!
If only you would come and work for SPECTRE rather than have me trawl through this blog at the miscreants on offer..So many unemployed but so little real talent to choose from. (Smirsh? Do you mean THRUSH..Too much telly perhaps and not enough reading??). It is a fictional organisation meaning T.echnological H.ierarchy for the R.emoval of U.ndesirables and the S.ubjugation of H.umanity.
SPECTRE is the REAL thing, Not a Machine!

Ex Operative 0666 said 19 February 2011 00:59

'And always remember whether ye be Atheist or Godly, if you call yourself Judge or claim to be Lord be sure it holds water.'
If you are still trying to brown nose with your philosophical rubbish that miscreant 'Jared Gaites the chanteuse' it's all too late, 0666.

My disappointment is all too obvious in your lacklustre performance.

I even think that the 'English Viking' or 'Srizals' characters could outperform you based on your inability to accomplish the simplest of tasks.

From a very disappointed Meglomanic, Operative 0666.

Ernst

19 February 2011 at 01:25  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Ex Operative 0666 said 19 February 2011 01:09

'not a machine this crap is happening everywhere, the number of people coming to me lately claiming they have been given forms to fill out because the company they work for has lost all their details?' But this is good, this is good. CHAOS!

'I say to hell with supplying them again, tell them to get the details found and rapid!' Anarchistic..Hmm. I like this..No, No, I will not re-employ you. I have made up my mind, Ex Operative 0666.

'This is the World of the hoodwinked we live in, believe in a Master either atheist or Godly and you will be the one who answers and not the one who questions.' I might have been too harsh with you, 0666.
Could you really be capable of spreading confusion, by using multiple personalities displayed in the comment section here?? It is indeed a mouth watering prospect!

Give me a few days to think about this, 0666.
Mr Osato will be put on hold.

Ernst

19 February 2011 at 01:36  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

That is why your principle applied consistently will lead to a fascism.

18 February 2011 11:20


This will not lead to fascism, it will simply lead to a tiny bit more of it.

This has essentially been a fascist country since way before Adolf Hitler hit the front cover of Time Magazine.

It is only a matter of degrees, and precise definitions.

For those that have been running socialism in this country for now well over 100 years, are the richest corporatist capitalists this planet has ever known.

These people long since worked out that controlling either the left or the right was a pointless hinding to nothing. This as the people whould eventually side with any wing that they believed was uncontaminated with the interests of big money, and the International aristocracy/oligarchy that control much, if not all of it.

So they took over, subverted, or just plane invented their own opposition, then carefully, and fairly neatly divided even that between the two political wings, many moons ago.

For a building to be stable, it must have at least 2 pillors. One on the right, and one on the left. This is what gives The Establishment their stability, and us our unwitting slavery.

While we hold up either the right or the left hand pillors, the people who own the ENTIRE building can walk right through the porchway entrance at will, doing anything they damned well please from within, as well as virtually anything they wish from without.

This is perfectly fine, as long as the establishment can be trusted with such absolute power, and the people know that this to be the case.

Our problem is that we the people as a whole, do not have the slightest clue, as well as being far to thick to understand what is REALLY happening, even when people like myself quite literally SPELL it out to them.

While of course, the people would have to be even more stupid then they self-evidently are, to trust anything that had quite that amount of absolute power over their minds, as well as their material, and spiritual existance.

The establishment do not just think we are as collectively stupid as a nation sized corporate farm stuffed to over-flowing with spring lambs, ripe for slaughter, THEY KNOW WE ARE.

This mainly through several thousand years of experience of keeping the masses as essentially sheep-like as humanly possible.

In this particular regard, very little has changed since classical times, and beyond.

19 February 2011 at 02:46  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Wikipedia claims there are. But it doesn't matter to the argument I was presented with, does it? I was just bouncing it back in the same style, thus showing it for what it was: a bit silly.

That same Wikipedia lists 2.2 billion Christians but you mentioned only 1 billion.........

19 February 2011 at 03:32  
Anonymous Voyager said...

This has essentially been a fascist country since way before Adolf Hitler hit the front cover of Time Magazine.

True. We have certainly lived under Fascism since 1969 with its corporatist focus, it has simply evolved inexorably into more areas of life....but Monnet's conception of the EU was essentially Fascist, his viewpoints were such pre-war as was his conception of the League of Nations as template for European Government

19 February 2011 at 03:35  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"That same Wikipedia lists 2.2 billion Christians but you mentioned only 1 billion........."

You're not getting it, are you? The 1 billion was the figure I was presented with. But it doesn't actually matter! If 1 (or 2) billion Christians matter then why wouldn't 1.5 billion Muslims matter? The argument is silly.

19 February 2011 at 07:29  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"Whilst sarcasm may be your thing , the ability to answer questions isnt and I rather fear you have done the same trick quite a few months ago on here. If god is real danjo what do you think is the best course of action."

First off, I'm fairly new here and so I wasn't here a few months ago. Next, am I supposed to take the question seriously even given its silly argumental framework? You said: "Ah but Danjo what if [1 billion Christians worldwide] are right and god exists ? do you have any right to impose your secular state in such circumstances ??."

If god definitely exists then I'd be very happy to have the bishops in the House of Lords. I'd be very happy to have whatever state it wanted. I'd perhaps even sacrifice my firstborn son in lieu of a lamb if it asked. I'd probably ditch everything to follow him, my being certain of it and all. Be penniless, and focused. Perhaps live in a cave, or a monastery.

But of what relevance is your point? We set up the state ourselves because we're essentially a liberal democracy. Most of us don't believe in the Christian god in all its intricate detail. It may or may not exist, and almost certainly doesn't to my mind. So, we must proceed as best we can ourselves for all of us together.

The Christian god chooses not to set up a hustings on parliament square, it appears instead to require a man-made book to argue its points and it supposedly makes an impossible-to-detect modification to an impossible-to-detect spirit thing so that some people know internally that he exists. It's not a great vote winner, is it?

Now, if Muslims worldwide are right that Allah exists then do you have any right to maintain the state as it is now with Christian bishops in the second chamber. I notice you didn't answer that question either. Surely 1.5 billion Muslims can't be wrong ... can they?

What's your answer, 'not a machine'?

19 February 2011 at 07:58  
Anonymous len said...

There are groups of predators who have a vested interest in the disruption and the disintegration of our Society.
These predators are of a sexual and a financial nature. Their prey are the unsuspecting 'joe public'.
This is all done under the name of 'liberty', and 'freedom of choice 'and even 'Human Rights'.All these are carefully manipulated to bring about the desired ends.
If we continue on this downward path towards Libertinism it is inevitable that Paedophilia will eventually be'legalised'.
If you think this improbable then look back (a short while ago) and realise how this'progression' is Happening!
All this is prophesied in the Bible the'book'held in contempt by the 'enlightened'intellectuals who wish to depose God and replace Him with 'reason'.
Atheists and others spiritually dead(to God, but alive to other spirits ) are oblivious and ignorant of the Spiritual dimension(only recognising what their five senses tell them)and totally unaware of the Spiritual war going on for the hearts and minds of men.We see evidence of this 'spiritual war'everywhere.God working through people( Christians(followers of Christ)

and followers of Satan ,( the adversary ,working through people) who are anti- against Christ.

Until you are aware that this is the reality situation you will NEVER be able to change things!

19 February 2011 at 08:23  
Anonymous tony b said...

Your Grace, sometimes I wonder if you mischievously post these things to derive amusement from the hysteria it stirs up.

19 February 2011 at 08:38  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"If we continue on this downward path towards Libertinism it is inevitable that Paedophilia will eventually be'legalised'."

Despite the fact that children cannot consent so it is therefore a form of rape, and despite the fact that most of them seem to be harmed by it and we operate a harm principle as part of the philosophy?

The slippery slope argument thankfully doesn't inevitably lead to the Reich this time but doesn't it also lead to rape of adults being legalised in the same spirit? Is that likely?

19 February 2011 at 08:44  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"If we continue on this downward path towards Libertinism it is inevitable that Paedophilia will eventually be'legalised'."

Despite the fact that children cannot consent so it is therefore a form of rape, and despite the fact that most of them seem to be harmed by it and we operate a harm principle as part of the philosophy?

The slippery slope argument thankfully doesn't inevitably lead to the Reich this time but doesn't it also lead to rape of adults being legalised in the same spirit? Is that likely?

19 February 2011 at 08:46  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...
SPECTRE is the REAL thing, Not a Machine!


"To think that the SPECTRE you see is an illusion does not rob him of his terrors: it simply adds the further terror of madness itself -- and then on top of that the horrible surmise that those whom the rest call mad have, all along, been the only people who see the world as it really is."

C.S. LEWIS, Perelandra

19 February 2011 at 09:42  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

DanJO said 19 February 2011 08:46

Operative ;-)1010

I trust you are now wearing the ill fitting SPECTRE uniform provided by myself, however, I will permit a small silver brooch to accomodate your rather 'exotic' tastes, except the feather boa. It gives all the wrong impressions, Operative ;-)1010!.

Operative ;-)1010, Neil and Portillo will be propping up the bar nearest the female toilets at Annabel's Wine Bar tonight at 20.00 hrs. Engage the wet tory with anecdotes about his betrayal of Thatcher. He cannot but help talk about her 'deserving it'. Ply him profusely with 'Blue Nun', he loves it! A piece of cake! ).

You appear to suffer from the same sloppiness as operative 0666.
Duplication of comments shows a weak, unfocussed mind. Sharpen up, Operative ;-)1010.

I am trying to enlist the Chanteuse ' Jared Gaites ', who you beat to win Pop Idol in 2002, I trust you will act professionally should he be enlisted to our cause?

In your comment posted 19 February 2011 07:58 it appears you want to engage the Not A Machine character. Desist immediately, as N A M is far above your intellect, he even makes basic spelling mistakes to lull the foolish to challenge any posts he leaves. It is a TRAP.

Do Not Engage, Operative ;-)1010. I admire your tenacity though, the reason SPECTRE employs you.

1 Star granted!

Do not disappoint at Annabel's.


Blofeld..Your Leader

19 February 2011 at 11:42  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Ex operative 0666 stated 19 February 2011 09:42

Hate to 'Burst your bubble' 0666 but it is FICTION!

The 'Voices in your head' the miscreant chanteuse 'Gaites' spoke of may indeed have taken root. I will speak to HR for you..Sometimes a small projectile fired from a Walther PPK can cure the problem but it usually is a last resort.

I am starting to have my worries for you and your many personality disorders, operative 0666.

What to do, What to do?

Try to leave off reading fiction for the time being, it is clouding your simple, lancastrian judgment.

Supreme leader

Blofeld

19 February 2011 at 11:53  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Ex Operative 0666 impersonated 19 February 2011 02:46

Excellent 0666.

I stumbled by chance upon your impersonation of the famous 'Atlas Shrugged', not a great impresssion but passable. However your philosophical abilities are letting you down, ever so slightly.

The real Atlas Shrugged does indeed talk in many paragraphs but Atlas ALWAYS arrives at a logical conclusion.

5/10 for effort, see me after class.

Your supreme leader

Blofeld

19 February 2011 at 12:04  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Rebel Saint: "And presumably, if a population was to grow more secular, we should be governed by a theistic legislature for the same reasons, or do all secularists speak with one voice?"

I missed this one earlier.

No, secularists do not all speak with one voice but I dare say we say fairly similar things regarding secularism and governance even if we are atheists, agnostics, Christians or whatever.

I want religions to be treated as any other special interest group as far as politics and governance are concerned. That is, I want special privilege removed for religious groups.

The 'absolute' morality much vaunted here suffers from a problem: there are multiple 'absolute' moral codes around in the UK and the fundamental moral principle from which each code is supposedly derived is a different god.

As most of the population seems to reject some of the ethics of the Christian one, and the majority of us don't believe in the detail of the god from which that code is derived, it seems rather odd to give special place to its adherents in our law-making.

Obviously this stands at the top of a slippery slope to the Fourth Reich to one poster and it variously seems to herald the End of Days, or a Islamic Caliphate, or a Marxist revolution to others. To me, it just seems like a fairly trivial modernisation. Such is life on the internet forums.

19 February 2011 at 12:23  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

DanJO posted 19 February 2011 12:23

'I missed this one earlier.' Sloppy, Sloppy!

'As most of the population seems to reject some of the ethics of the Christian one, and the majority of us don't believe in the detail of the god from which that code is derived (Easily disproved Operative ;-)1010
, you forget that blasted consensus saying that over 70% believe in superstitious christianity, even nominally, similarly to some of our own weakminded secularist adherents) it seems rather odd to give special place to its adherents in our law-making. Excellent Operative ;-)1010, keep plugging away, despite the facts..We will grind them down or bore them. Either way, WE WIN!

**Meglomanical laughter**

Annabel's can be claimed on the special SPECTRE operative expenses form SPY00045. Make sure it's in HR's possession by 16.30 HRs Monday 21 February 2011 with attached compromising photo's of said Tory wet!

Blofeld

19 February 2011 at 12:42  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Hence why I wrote "don't believe in the detail of the god" rather than "don't believe in the Christian god". Rather fewer of those census self-identifiers actually bother to attend church for instance. Considerably fewer, it seems.

How many of the 37.3 million people in England and Wales who identify as Christian in the census would tick the box if it said: "I believe in the God of the Bible, who around 2000 years ago became man, did miracles such as raise the dead, was crucified to death, rose from the dead having changed the spiritual world, and ascended to heaven. I believe that if I don't accept him as my personal saviour, interceding before God on my behalf for my sins, then I will be deleted / descend to hell (delete as appropriate) rather than enter heaven / spend time in purgatory (delete as appropriate)." and had an alternative option which said: "I don't really know much about all that god stuff but I suppose Christian will do".

19 February 2011 at 13:00  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

The options at the time were:

"None; Christian; Buddhist; Hindu; Jewish; Muslim; Sikh; Any other religion, please write in."

19 February 2011 at 13:04  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Operative ;-)1010, 19 February 2011 13:00

Hence why I wrote "don't believe in the detail of the god" rather than "don't believe in the Christian god". 'Now you change your 'Terms of reference' to show you meant one thing whilst you actually wrote something else' Sign of sloppy logic and reasoning, Operative ;-)1010. The term you state was not in the consensus, hence you are mistaken..Stick to the facts by avoiding them!

Rather fewer of those census self-identifiers actually bother to attend church for instance. (Where in the consensus was this required, Operative ;-)1010. It asked specific questions, not explanations of superstitious statements of defined faith in minute details).

'How many of the 37.3 million people in England and Wales who identify as Christian in the census would tick the box if it said: "I believe in the God of the Bible, who around 2000 years ago became man, did miracles such as raise the dead, was crucified to death, rose from the dead having changed the spiritual world, and ascended to heaven. I believe that if I don't accept him as my personal saviour, interceding before God on my behalf for my sins, then I will be deleted / descend to hell (delete as appropriate) rather than enter heaven / spend time in purgatory (delete as appropriate)." and had an alternative option which said: "I don't really know much about all that god stuff but I suppose Christian will do".

Why do you try to explain away the facts as I have stated, AVOID THEM, it only makes your arguments foolish and easily answerable when lies will do very nicely, DanJO.

Stick to the SPECTRE Mantra and we will succeed!

Blofeld

19 February 2011 at 13:12  
Anonymous Ernst Stavro Blofeld said...

Operative ;-)1010. 19 February 2011 13:04

One word. PATHETIC.

Now you try to expain away your ill considered statement with excuses.

Grow a Pair!

Your weakminded attitude is endangering our cause.

Must I recall you to HQ for 'Re-assessment' as a lot of time and money has been expended on you, Operative ;-)1010.

Stick to the script and all shall be well.

Disappoint me no more!

Blofeld

19 February 2011 at 13:18  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Not only did I write: "and the majority of us don't believe in the detail of the god" I also wrote: "Most of us don't believe in the Christian god in all its intricate detail." earlier. To be a Christian, one has to believe the certain core details. It's absolutely crucial.

This is one of those cases where I write something like "homosexual behaviour is not inherently harmful", alluding to the harm principle of liberalism, and some numpty quotes a load of STI figures, conveniently skipping over "inherently" and ignoring the fact that heterosexuals also suffer STIs.

19 February 2011 at 14:42  
Anonymous Voyager said...

ignoring the fact that heterosexuals also suffer STIs.

You forgot the qualifier "some". The evidence on STIs is hardly one you should proclaim, it does your case no favours. We could list specific GRID ailments that no other group suffers

However it is pointless focusing on irrelevant minority proclivities at the expense of mainstream even though you have turned thread after threat into an exposition of sexual orientation

19 February 2011 at 15:33  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

HOL needs more representatives of the Judaeo Christian faith rather than abolishing those already there if we are to retain a Christian Country otherwise imagine letting loose a couple of mad mullahs, vociferous Imams and overbearing Sikhs in the upper chamber you can kiss goodbye to reasoned debate and the country as we know it. Sharia Law and halal food will become compulsory before you can blink.

It is the role of Bishops to see things and to debate from a theological view and to uphold and instil moral values as opposed to seeing things from the purely political view or not at all. They have an important part in the house of Lords which is really to me the country's safety valve.

The hereditary peers need to be reinstated to see things from the point of preservation of our country and British values (the left wing loonies scoff at those who have inherited a title but they know nothing of how hard the landed gentry have to work and the hardships they sometimes endure in order to hang on to the family estate and preserve it for future generations. Some of those peers Baron de Ros came from as far back as 1264, and the Dukedom of Norfolk in 1483)
the Law lords to see things from the judicial point of view.
We were grateful to the House of Lords in 1994 when looking at the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill this went in as an enabling act for a police state, and came out as something that was just very bad. Clause after clause had been either deleted or softened by the Lords. They have saved the country from mistakes on many an occasion.

The Lords have been associated with every great event in English history. The coordination and tensions between them and the Crown and Commons have shaped England that we still know, by creating a wholly elected House of Lords with multiculturalism at the forefront it will destroy what is left of common sense and what is left of a once Great Britain.

Reprogramming urgently required.

19 February 2011 at 15:41  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"It is the role of Bishops to see things and to debate from a theological view and to uphold and instil moral values as opposed to seeing things from the purely political view or not at all."

Ah yes. Thank goodness the bishops are there to uphold and instill moral values because otherwise those things would be absent of course. Non-christians don't have morals, do we. Up the bishops!

19 February 2011 at 16:34  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"However it is pointless focusing on irrelevant minority proclivities at the expense of mainstream even though you have turned thread after threat into an exposition of sexual orientation"

Wasn't that Len?

Besides, it makes a change from your weird Hegelian fantasies.

19 February 2011 at 16:40  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

@Danjo 16:34


Some non Christians are very immoral and some Christians have slipped into decline too therefore
The Bishops' views and stance if not to be forgotten about in the elapse of time and brushed aside in the fervour of perusing multicultural madness and the Islamic agenda of violence and barbarity rather than the gentle teachings of Jesus son of God are needed even more. (It has not been proven that there is no God)
The Bills that go through have to be examined from every perspective and the impact they will have on society discussed from many vantage points, the Bishops are an integral and vital part of this. To be able to stand up and question things without having to adhere to any political pressure is a necessary part of the House of Lords.

19 February 2011 at 17:17  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"The Bills that go through have to be examined from every perspective".

Well, it sounds like we could be adding to the repertoire there if Clegg gets his way so you are no doubt pleased.

19 February 2011 at 18:12  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

@ Danjo
No, you misunderstand me I do not support what Clegg &Co want at all. Clegg wants to turn it into a politicised extension of the Commons and a mass of indecision in the name of everyone having equal status, but in the end it's the ones that shout the loudest and the longest that will dominate.
Multiculturalism does not work, it causes increasingly complicated arguments as the boundaries become so blurred. What works are clear core values with a single definitive core religion (Christianity) with which to identify with and work from. Others can be tolerated but are secondary.

If the second house is wholly elected on the same license as the first, both will be dominated by the same party or coalition of parties; and what is approved in one place is unlikely to be properly scrutinised in the other. If, on the other hand, there are different licenses, the second chamber may fall into the hands of the opposition parties, who will block everything sent up from the first. Since both chambers will be democratically elected in some way, both can claim to be representing the
will of the people.

19 February 2011 at 20:22  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Besides, it makes a change from your weird Hegelian fantasies.


If you had an education you would understand Hegel

20 February 2011 at 10:17  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"If you had an education you would understand Hegel"

:)

20 February 2011 at 10:38  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"What works are clear core values with a single definitive core religion (Christianity) with which to identify with and work from. Others can be tolerated but are secondary."

I don't suppose most of us would care if it were just a quiet, benign, low-key Christianity hanging around from the past. It's organisations like the Christian Institute and the Christian Legal Centre which have all but done for Christianity in the political sphere.

20 February 2011 at 10:47  
Anonymous len said...

A quiet benign Christianity would be one rendered unfit for purpose.It is this sort of apathetic image that Anglicans present( apologetically) to a cynical unbelieving World.When Jesus returns it will in Judgement!.
Our God is a consuming fire! You will
either meet the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour or Judge!

There will be nothing benign,apathetic,or , conciliatory about the risen Lord returning to Judge the quick and the dead.

20 February 2011 at 22:42  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Blimey.

21 February 2011 at 07:05  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older