Monday, April 04, 2011

Britishness, Christianity and cultural cohesion

The United Kingdom is in something of a mess: British culture cannot be cohesive when there is diversity of language, laws, traditions, customs and religion. Of course, culture can accommodate diversity, but ultimately the system of governance and jurisprudence in a liberal democracy must be expressions of pre-existing unity. As far as England is concerned, foreign encroachments have been fiercely resisted since the Reformation. Religious toleration thereafter was extended to the non-conformists, and the gradual accommodation of Roman Catholics developed of necessity to the extent that they agreed to abide by the laws of the state. And they did. A logical corollary of this is that immigrants to the UK ought now to adapt their cultural traditions and religious expression to accommodate ‘English toleration’ or conform to those aspects of ‘Britishness’ which make society cohesive.

A Briton has the right to oppose or support British policy in Iraq or Libya and may campaign to that effect, write, agitate and stand for election towards the chosen end. It is also elementary that he does not have the right to stone adulterers to death, bomb the underground or attempt to blow up aeroplanes. But religious practices which conflict with traditional British liberties are forcing politicians to address what it means to be British and to question the discriminatory anachronism of maintaining the Established Church with a Protestant Head of State in an increasingly plural and multi-faith society. While few would defend such abhorrent practices as forced marriages, ‘honour killings’, female genital mutilation or child abuse, there is emerging an increasing tension between the assertion of individuality over the common good, and ‘human rights’ over community cohesion. Since there are no agreed criteria by which conflicting religious claims can be settled, religion is increasingly relegated to the private sphere: morality thereby becomes largely a matter of taste or opinion, and moral error ceases to exist.

The modern era is obsessed with three themes – autonomy, equality and rights. These are the values that allow each to be whatever he or she chooses. Left unfettered, the assertion of these leads to anarchy, so a values system has to be imposed for society to function at all. As society expands to encompass ever larger numbers of religious, ethnic and linguistic groups, rigid social structures are stretched to breaking point. The church requires either cultural homogeneity or an élite sufficiently powerful to enforce conformity. But this negates the limited degree of Christian religious pluralism which the passing of the 1689 Act of Toleration specifically permitted. Dissenting traditions have gained in number and influence and have weakened the grip of state religion. The costs of coercing religious conformity are no longer politically acceptable: the state is not willing to accept the price in social conflict and so adopts a position of ‘neutrality’ on the competing claims of various religious bodies and moral values.

The ultimate source of the state’s values system is the subject of much debate. In order to constrain religious expression in the public sphere, the Republic of France has legislated to prohibit the display of all religious symbols and articles of clothing from its public buildings. More recently, President Sarkozy stated that burqas are to be banned, which comes into effect next week. He asserts that the garment 'demeans and debases women’.

In the UK, customs to do with dress, food laws or daily prayers have long been considered inoffensive as long as there is no compulsion or imposition. But the advent of shari’a courts, while considered ‘unavoidable’ by the Archbishop of Canterbury, are, according to former Bishop of Rochester Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, perceptibly inconsistent with what have become inalienable values such as equality between men and women in the sight of the law, inheritance rights, the education and employment of women, and the freedom of young people to chose themselves whom they will marry. There have been rabbinical courts (Beth Din) in the UK for three centuries, and the Protestant state has similarly granted to Roman Catholics the right to take account of their own religious sensitivities. But these judicial provisions have always been subject to Statute Law, and appeal has always been possible from their judgements. This settlement is now being challenged by shari’a courts, some proponents of which insist that their dispensations are superior to parliamentary statute.

There is no doubt that some religious practices may coerce some, especially women through such conventions as child marriage or inequitable divorce settlements. But mindful of minority ethnic voting communities, politicians are treading carefully along the via media between religious liberty and cultural prohibition. On this model of Britishness, there is no demand for assimilation. But it does require integration: cultural relativism cannot be justified when the outcome is a moral injustice. And if the Established Church is not the ubiquitous and cohesive antidote to that, God knows what is.

145 Comments:

Anonymous Steve Plumb said...

O God, please have mercy on this once great nation. We pray in the name of your dear Son, our Saviour, Jesus Christ, Amen.

4 April 2011 at 09:49  
Anonymous Voyager said...

The Church of England lost its way with The Anglican Communion with US Episcopalians paying the bills in return for advancing a liberal agenda of women priests, then gay priests, then heresy after apostasy.

The Church became a comfortable sinecure for failed socialist politicians who flirted with the spirit of the age and lost their male congregations, especially those 45+ because they tired of half-witted sermons and socialist activism in place of Christian Faith.

That is why the Church of England has no real hold beyond a faded institutionalism and a physical presence from byegone benefactors who funded churches and donated lands.

Within 80 years of your execution Your Grace the country was in Civil War; I do not believe a repetition can be averted. Historians will note each step, every bizarre decision, but the inexorable drive towards upheaval is now unstoppable.

Margaret Thatcher removed many of the pillars holding up the state and unleashed global market forces onto a class-ridden society. I suggest you read Amy Chua "World on Fire" to understand how different tribes have benefited/suffered from such turmoil.

The backlash is coming in North Africa as Western biofuels make food expensive; in Japan where technical incompetence and lies create fear; and in Europe where economic lunacy will return us to the 1920s.

There is no credibility in Monarch or Church; Elizabeth II has been a failure compared to Victoria or Elizabeth I

4 April 2011 at 10:07  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

Since there are no agreed criteria by which conflicting religious claims can be settled, religion is increasingly relegated to the private sphere

Why beat about the bush here YG? - the word is Islam and Islam is all about 'in your face' public proclamation. There is nothing compatible in the core philosophy of Islam and the cultural Christianity with which the UK will always be associated.

The building of pug ugly mosques like the one in Harrow or over the top ones like Regents Park are statements of intent that British society is being reminded every day that Islam is here in force and is set on changing British culture and visage permanently.

Successive governments have permitted this as you so rightly point out for the price of a vote, oil supply interests and arms deals.

The difficulty now is that 'First Nation Brits' are branded racist bigots if they dare complain. It is little wonder that the English Defence League is on the street or that the BNP has achieved political status in local government and Europe.

I feel that there is grudging but unspoken support amongst many ordinary people, who would never be openly associated with either group but will admit privately to the fact that support their right to give voice to that which not dare speak its name.

How come Christians don't take to the streets and demonstrate against
the persecution of their fellow believers or the marginalisation of their religion at home - if no one speaks out it is assumed everything is all right. Make no mistake - the rules have been changed by accommodations afforded to the Muslims.

Yer pays yer money and takes yer chance.

4 April 2011 at 10:12  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

HG: "Since there are no agreed criteria by which conflicting religious claims can be settled, religion is increasingly relegated to the private sphere: morality thereby becomes largely a matter of taste or opinion, and moral error ceases to exist."

That's not really true is it? It's not a matter of taste or opinion whether stealing is wrong, or assault is wrong, or murder is wrong, or fraud is wrong, or bearing false witness is wrong, or criminal damage is wrong, [...]

What's the commonality in that list of actions? Might it be that they involve one or more citizens harming one or more other citizens? It's basically intuitive, isn't it? No religious guidance required.

How do we arbitrate in a neighbours dispute about (say) building a new extension, or installing a large fence, or not cutting back a tree? We look at the consequences. As that's quite a common dispute, one can probably generate a general rule e.g. blocking out light and change someone's quiet enjoyment of their residence requires a specific justification.

Why can't we do something similar with religion? In fact, we have after a fashion with Sikh turbans and safety headgear. It's not hard to justify banning burqas in buildings like banks and schools whilst leaving them be in private or private-public space. These aren't insurmountable issues.

4 April 2011 at 10:23  
Anonymous Gerard Tibercross said...

Your Grace misunderstands the history of freedom of religion in this country. Over a very long period first dissenters, then jews, and finally catholics were first not punished for not attending the CofE, allowed to practise their own religion and finally restrictions on participating in public life and politics were lifted, but there were almost no changes in the law to accomodate any of these groups - the only exception I can think of were to Sunday trading laws to enable jews to open shops on Sundays. The Beth Din deals with purely religious matters. A divorce from the Beth Din has no more legal effect in English law than a decree of annulment from the Papal Court.

Arbitrations accordiing to Shari'a have been going on for years - the parties to an arbitration are free to pick whichever system of law they choose.

The trick for us is to distinguish the cultural from the religious, and to have the courage to face down political pressure to permit the impermissible.

4 April 2011 at 11:05  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

‘Of course, culture can accommodate diversity, but ultimately the system of governance and jurisprudence in a liberal democracy must be expressions of pre-existing unity’.

That is of course correct. The expressions of pre-existing unity were based on Judaeo-Christian values that were embedded in statute and case law that informed most people’s behaviour patterns.

But that Judaeo-Christian consensus on values was evicted by cultural relativism: anything goes so long as it doesn’t hurt your neighbour. At first sight that seems attractive as it enhances personal liberty. However, when one examines that concept it turns out that it is harmful in the long term. Take for example, the recent case based on ‘human rights’ that is making its way through the Canadian courts. Mormons are claiming that given there is no consensus on what constitutes a family then polygamy should be accepted as a legitimate family structure.

But if polygamy is accepted as a legitimate family structure then in two generations’ time we may have a tribal society. And a tribal society is inimical to democracy.

Conservative politicians need not be:

‘… mindful of minority ethnic voting communities, politicians are treading carefully along the via media between religious liberty and cultural prohibition. On this model of Britishness, there is no demand for assimilation. But it does require integration: cultural relativism cannot be justified when the outcome is a moral injustice’.

The strategic aim should be to intersect with the natural conservative values of all religious communities (indeed I would suggest nearly all men are natural conservatives – they long for social peace). Michael Gove’s plans for free schools are a marvellous idea. The majority of the pupils, in Jewish and Christian schools, are likely to do far better than their counterparts in the BOG standard comprehensive.

The question that will be asked is why?

Here is a clue.

Take for example, the reading of the Collect on a Sunday morning. When the teenagers’ ears hear it and subconsciously absorb its majestic language (that can be traced back to Archbishop Cranmer’s Book of Prayer) and so to with the passages read out from the Bible – they will be familiar with the rhythms, cadences, moral and spiritual values of the works of Shakespeare – even though they are being introduced to them for the first time.

They will all ready have a head start compared to pupils in other schools.

Success breeds emulation: integration and a new generation of social conservatives.

4 April 2011 at 11:26  
Blogger D. Singh said...

It should read 'already'.

4 April 2011 at 11:29  
Anonymous MrJ said...

Cranmer's survey, analysis, discussion is very much to the point concerning its chosen topic, and must become of increasing concern when, to the policies espoused in connection with the "three themes – autonomy, equality and rights....", there have been added policies, in the guise of reform, which continue to weaken the constitution as it was evolved from the formation of the Parliament of Great Britain in the reign of Queen Anne to the Parliament Act 1949.

These policies play into or across each other in ways which make them more difficult to be reckoned with.

How many of our present legislators in either House of Parliament have an adequate understanding of the issues (including Lords Spiritual and life baronesses and barons) ?

The proposals being brought forward by Mr Clegg and others (including collaboration on the part of Mr Cameron and his unelected political aides/advisers) are consistent with taking further the project for converting the United Kingdom from a sovereign state to a set of constituencies of the European Union.

Do they know this? Is the public willing to resist, or content to acquiesce? After so many years from 1972, can these still be open questions?

And add to that, the Amy Chua warning (Voyager 4 April 10:07).

4 April 2011 at 11:30  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

GT says -
Arbitrations accordiing to Shari'a have been going on for years - the parties to an arbitration are free to pick whichever system of law they choose

That is simply not the half of it.

Social pressure is brought to bear on the individual to conform or face ostracisation or worse.

Under Sharia, a woman's word is regarded as less than that of a man. A woman is regarded as an adulterer even if she has been raped; to prove she has been raped she needs four male 'witnesses'.

She is first obligated to accept the rule of her father no matter what her argument may be. If no father, she is still subordinate to the will of her brother/s and other male members of the extended family.

Sharia is regarded by Muslims as being the law of Allah and above all man made laws. Whatever apologist for Islam say about it being a voluntary code is using that statement as a blind to buy time, until all opposition to it has been terminated.

There is only one law that need be observed in the UK and that is the law of the monarch - the law of the land. Neither Sharia or Beth-din or any other arbitary code should ever have been permitted in the UK.

4 April 2011 at 11:34  
Anonymous Preacher said...

Dr Cranmer.
The Church in general needs to wake from its slumber, count the cost of being a member of Christs universal body & preach the gospel to all mankind. There will be dispute & confrontation, but that is what we learn from scripture is to be expected. If this is not our experience then we are not fulfilling our role as the Lords people.
As a supposedly 'Christian' nation we should expect support from our leaders, not abstention, or as is often the case, opposition, by obscure 'laws' that are open to misinterpretation or abuse.
It seems that the British Lion has grown old & lost its teeth, dozing in the sunset of its years.
The Lion of Judah aka the lamb of God does not grow old or infirm. His roar still echoes through the universe. May His cubs emulate their Father.

4 April 2011 at 11:56  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Cranmer said

.....And if the Established Church is not the ubiquitous and cohesive antidote to that, God knows what is.

A good question. However for all but a minority of people religion and especially the CofE plays little part in their day to day lives and GB hasn’t fallen apart. Life goes on without the need for most to belong to a national tribe. We share a vague notion of Britishness or perhaps Englishness or other regional identities. The family continues as the base unit of cohesion and parents form the largest single group in society. Our values are forged within the family and that is where we place our allegiance.

We simply don’t need religion, political affiliation or any other supra identity for social cohesion. However we still respond on masse to what we see as a threat to this vague notion of British identity and values. For example the majority of people are opposed to Sharia even when applies only to Islamic communities. It is easier for us to define what we are against than what we are for.

4 April 2011 at 12:06  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

With (Hopeful) permission from HG - This documentary from Norway but well subtitled says so much.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld_ZRCMf1ek&feature=player_embedded

4 April 2011 at 12:07  
Anonymous yarnefromhorsham said...

I think Dreadnaught is right. What I fail to understand is that the Muslims come to this country, usually from countries where democracy and other rights are limited and then look to impose their will on us. I doubt if we would enjoy the same freedoms in Afghanistan,Yemen of Sudi. Yet nevertheless we roll over and provide this multicutural liberalism which they see as weakness
If muslims wish to come to this country fine but its our rules. Yet the policticians go round as those they are walking on egg shells - which only leaves the likes of the BNP and EDL to promote the extreme viewpoint. If the politicians fail to develop a cultural backbone then the only action the disenchanted can take is to vote with their feet.

4 April 2011 at 12:23  
Anonymous Gordo said...

Excellent post. A pleasure to read.

4 April 2011 at 12:23  
Anonymous martin sewell said...

Whilst it is undoubtedly "politically correct" for the debate to be largely conducted in general terms, an honest discussion needs to be clear that we are primarily having difficulty because of the particular areas from which one specific faith group has immigrated.

We have few cultural legal clashes with Hindus or Sikhs.

The crux of the problem is what Michael Nazir Ali has identified as the essential "arabness" of Islam, to which I would add the cultural interpretation thereof from Pakistan/Afghanistan. If our Muslim population were largely Bosnian or Turkish, then the cultural difficulties would probably be different and perhaps easier to resolve. I am sure we all know Muslims, and have them as our friends, with whom there is no problem in reaching a modus vivendi

4 April 2011 at 12:42  
Anonymous Voyager said...

For example the majority of people are opposed to Sharia even when applies only to Islamic communities

But halal applies to ALL communities if they eat chicken or imported NZ lamb. Only by eating pork are you free of halal imposition

4 April 2011 at 13:55  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Graham Davies said ..."the CofE plays little part in their day to day lives and GB hasn’t fallen apart."

The CofE plays a decreasing role in the lives of many people (but still more than sport does). However, there is more to the Church in England than the Church of England.

I would profoundly disagree with the latter part of your sentence though. There are huge swathes of our country - urban areas in particular, though not exclusively - where social order is barely held together at all. And that is because - as you correctly identified - the family is the basis of social cohesion. And I could take you round many of the housing estates that I work on where the overwhelming majority of families are completely fragmented & dysfunctional. I'm sure a moral & social relativist like yourself would still call them "families" by virtue of the fact that they live in the same property, but the relationships of kinship are completely & utterly destroyed.

The divine order of the family has been replaced with some shallow, man-made, socialist counterfeit. It will be the ruin of this nation as surely as it is ruining so many of the children's lives that I encounter. Every socialist & atheistic revolution has sort to destroy the bonds of kinship directly. The modern socialists & new atheists have taken to doing it by subterfuge & by incremental steps. The results are utterly devastating on a personal level & at a national level

4 April 2011 at 13:57  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

‘The costs of coercing religious conformity are no longer politically acceptable: the state is not willing to accept the price in social conflict and so adopts a position of ‘neutrality’ on the competing claims of various religious bodies and moral values’.

The State does not exercise ‘a position of ‘neutrality’’. The Human Rights Act 1998 (which has replaced Magna Carta as the cornerstone of Englsih law by impsoing humanistic values) ensures that a new hierarchy of group rights is being imposed. Every rights based legal order produces a hierarchy of rights. In other words, the State is moving towards social conflict with the majority.

Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (imported into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998) states:

‘The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status’.

Article 34 of the CONSTITUTION OF THE USSR (1977) states:

‘Citizens of the USSR are equal before the law, without distinction of origin, social or property status, race or nationality, sex, education, language, attitude to religion, type and nature of occupation, domicile, or other status.

‘The equal rights of citizens of the USSR are guaranteed in all fields of
economic, political, social, and cultural life’.

You can see how the provisions of both measures are similar. The USSR used Article 34 to first cut down the rights of Christians and then terminate them by elevating the rights of other groups over them.

The same is happening in the UK.

As the Christian Legal Centre have stated in the Johns case for fostering:

‘Following the ruling there is almost no scope now for the Council to approve the Johns or other orthodox Christians as foster parents, not least because the judgment strongly implied that orthodox Christian ethical beliefs are potentially harmful to children:

‘“Article 9 [of the European Human Rights Act] only provides a ‘qualified’ right to manifest religious belief and ... this will be particularly so where a person in whose care a child is placed wishes to manifest a belief that is inimical to the interests of children” (Para 102).

‘The Johns application was not directly terminated by the Court. Instead, the Court loaded the gun and passed it back to the Council’.

4 April 2011 at 14:23  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

The bottom line is that we can forget cultural cohesion and a united society until such time as Muslims form the majority and Islam has become Britain’s official religion. In the meantime, Allah expects Muslims to integrate and co-operate as little as possible: ‘Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful—he that does this has nothing to hope for from Allah—except in self-defence’ (Qur’an 3:28); ‘Mohammed is Allah’s apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another’ (Qur’an 48:29).

4 April 2011 at 14:45  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Rebel saint said

I'm sure a moral & social relativist like yourself would still call them "families" by virtue of the fact that they live in the same property, but the relationships of kinship are completely & utterly destroyed.

Of course families vary in their structure as well as their effectiveness. I’m sure that, as you say there are many dysfunctional “families” but I don’t accept the right wing press view that we live in “broken” Britain any more than I subscribe to the left wing view that capitalism is responsible for the ills of society.

Our society is very different now from that which I knew as a child, some of it worse and some better. Would you agree that the reasons for this change are complex and cannot be altered by a single political, religious or any other change?

If the family is the most important unit is society then perhaps public policy should be organised so as to support it more. Not by public handouts but perhaps by discouraging unplanned or unsupportable families (using the tax and benefits system) so that children are more likely to be born into stable, loving families and by making the study of responsible parenting a fundamental part of the education system.

I don’t know if you have watched the current TY series “One born every minute”, a fly-on-the-wall documentary about a maternity unit. The thing that strikes me is the universal optimism that surrounds the birth of every new life, regardless of the class, income or education of the parents. If we can nurture and support families so as to give them the best possible chance of success then we will have a society in which both you and I, with very differing “beliefs”, can be content.

4 April 2011 at 15:31  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

IMO, if you do not know why something is happening, or who is doing it, you can have little chance of even slowing it down, never mind stopping it.

The simple answer is socialism, and socialists. As to ultimately create a socialist Utopia, the old structures of a cohesive society must first be destroyed, or sufficiently undermined, so that they eventually fall under their own weight.

Classic Marxism, in other words.

However, if it were only a few crazed Marxists on the fringes on The Labour Movement trying to achieve this, we could all sleep soundly in our beds. This in the safe and sound knowledge that they would not have a chance in hell of achieving any such thing, any time soon, if at all.

The problem is that this kind of Utopian thinking is the product, and long held plan of our entire establishment, along with their corporate military, financial, intellectual, religious, and industrial complexes.

Which is clearly a force to be taken very seriously. Indeed a force that cannot be ultimately beaten, but at best can only be somewhat slowed down.

It is my contention that the first step to slowing these people down, is to know who they are, what they are, and why they are doing what they are so clearly doing.

With the added advantage of at least preparing the common people for what they are about to receive in the not to distant future.

We must guard against ever deluding ourselves into wrongly thinking that this or that is impossible, because the people will not allow it or put up with it.

Because history tells us that the people will put up with absolutely anything, or situation that they find themselves presented with in the 'correct' fashion. The London Blitz, being a prime example, our current very deliberately caused boom and bust economic situation, being another. However the list could be very much longer, and much worse.

4 April 2011 at 16:40  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Not by public handouts but perhaps by discouraging unplanned or unsupportable families (using the tax and benefits system) so that children are more likely to be born into stable, loving families and by making the study of responsible parenting a fundamental part of the education system.

Eugenics has a long tradition....favoured in the US, tried in Germany and practised in Sweden......which ethnic groups have the most unstable family structures ?

Which ethnic groups are most dependent on welfare ?

Keith Joseph said something similar on 19 October 1974 in Edgbaston. His argument had some validity, as does yours.

4 April 2011 at 17:02  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Voyager said

Eugenics has a long tradition....favoured in the US, tried in Germany and practised in Sweden......which ethnic groups have the most unstable family structures ?

Which ethnic groups are most dependent on welfare ?

Keith Joseph said something similar on 19 October 1974 in Edgbaston. His argument had some meritHis argument had some validity, as does yours.

I’m not sure that using the tax/benefits system to alter behaviour counts as eugenics, if so the Bank of England must be engaged in it!

As regards ethnic groups ironically some immigrant groups have the most stable family structures. The best method of supporting families is to “encourage” them to start later when couples are ready to make a long term commitment and when they are more financially secure. I would penalise irresponsible pregnancies by denying benefits, tough but likely to alter behaviour.

You don’t have to be from the extreme left or right to use public policy to alter behaviour, governments of all hues do it all the time. What I would like is for it to be more explicit and transparent.

4 April 2011 at 17:27  
Anonymous MrJ said...

With thanks to Dreadnaught (4 April 12:07) for link to documentary from Norway which "says so much"...

and even more when seen together with D. Singh (4 April 13:57) "USSR used Article 34 [of its constitution] to first cut down the rights of Christians and then terminate them by elevating the rights of other groups over them. The same is happening in the UK."

4 April 2011 at 18:19  
Anonymous not a machine said...

I am not sure wether I am feeling remorse or anger on this post , but it certainly outlines the rupture and changes that have occured.

There is often this reference in the bible to us being like a vessel or new wine into old wine skins.

Yet what we are being poured into, as a nation is somthing the CofE has useually had a view on , it has been a buffer to the worst of politics , upholding somthing of the individuals life and struggles as defined by the bible.The church was once a refuge , however in order to keep such a position , it has to have a function of being strong enough to define the realtionship of god ,individual and state.

The loss of this relationship has perhaps not being the visible biblical plague some may have thought .We shop ,we live we have all the satisfaction of a consumer paradise seemingly without much need for the church to tell us anything.

We have moved out of the moral pastoring society into one that claims to be an undoubtable improvement .It may persecute less ferocously , but equally it is no longer taught as meaning from cradel to grave and heaven.
The useual trick of the progressive argument is that in liberating from christian moral code , the failiure of what it once taught will be obvious.

The instructional biblical care by which to live ones life has ended up not so much being an alternative , but antimodern and irrelevent (which may be what some would like).

Previously when this country has been afflicted by moral lasscitutde , the right has come to rescue and reshaped the institutions to work on the problem , society up until the 90s was still based around a living social institutions , some perhaps not as they should , but representaive groups of fractured subtle anti church teaching did not exist.

personal liberties have replaced christian quality , and it seems we cannot go back , indeed a new gospel is in operation. I greatly miss those more contempletive days , to me they seemed more full of kinder people who were more positive and relaxed about life , grateful for good service and community , knowing that the christian moral code had value in keeping us cohesive.
We are perhaps far less innocent , yet information addicted and spiritually limited , unsure of what words to pray into troubled lives , where most people think money will solve the problem and not attitude or thought.

If individuals are behaving differently any attempt to impose externally does not address the dwindling internal resource which as christian is our treasure .

Nor can it be compared as being a form of pshcology , that the socialist concepts of everyform of external control (nudgests take note) try and pass ,as the faux improvements they ultimately are .

Our best weapon is prayer and some hope that will may at least be allowed to continue unpersecuted the search and belief , that jesus christ is our saviour , in the midst of such powerful tools who see it as an obstacle .

4 April 2011 at 18:31  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Except in the particular, there will never be a 'united society' in the general; at least not in the sense portrayed within the 'differing hands' pic.

It has not, it is not, it shall not, and never will be.

It's a numbers game, and we've got all the wrong numbers! Which is BOTH bad for us, and bad for those immigrants who would genuinely wish to become truly BRITISH.

That is, 'British' without any other attachment/appendage. There can be no such thing as a 'British Muslim'; accepting that is, their possible victory over us - may God forbid!

4 April 2011 at 18:52  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

You're welcome Mr.J.

4 April 2011 at 19:04  
Anonymous Dick the Prick said...

Your Grace

I find much of this argument, as with most others, is circuitous and goes through the ECHR and the judiciary's interpretaion of it. Couple that with boundary changes of the Labour government and their use of immigration to in-build their urban advantage and Sharia law almost seems like a side show.

If we are to engage in 'liberal-interventionism' in places like Afghanistan, Iraq & now the middle east does it follow that we should police those communities back home, too? If they remove themselves from the law; however distressing, however misogynistic, medieval, unjust - does the law of this land set in another, interpreted by liberal judges with no respect of preceadence or parliamentary statute then...surely, we have the rights to allow their courts to execute their own, to stone their women, to honour kill their sisters.

It can't be universal when the law isn't legitimate. Perhaps Shar'ia is best for them. Our laws have been traduced, their haven't.

Hmm...not too sure though.

DtP

4 April 2011 at 19:27  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Too many 'liberal' scholars, chipping away at the foundations of the church, deconstructing everything, and it has been going on for some time. This has helped enormously to bring us to the situation we are in today. Professor Lewis and others were pointing these things out a long time ago, and the rotten trees that began to infest are now bearing fruit.

"These men ask me to believe they can read between the lines of the old texts; the evidence is their obvious inability to read, in any sense worth discussing, the lines themselves. They claim to see fern-seed and can't see an elephant ten yards away in broad daylight."

"I thought there would be a grave beauty, a sunset splendour
In being the last of one's kind: a topmost moment as one watched
The huge wave curving over Atlantis, the shrouded barge
Turning away with wounded Arthur, or Ilium burning.
Now I see that, all along, I was assuming a posterity
Of gentle hearts: someone, however distant in the depths of time,
Who could pick up our signal, who could understand a story. There won't be.

Between the new Hominidae and us who are dying, already
There rises a barrier across which no voice can ever carry,
For devils are unmaking language. We must let that alone forever.
Uproot your loves, one by one, with care, from the future,
And trusting to no future, receive the massive thrust
And surge of the many-dimensional timeless rays converging
On this small, significant dew drop, the present that mirrors all."


"In my world, men and women live for a considerable time - 70, 80, even 100 years - and they are equipped with a thing called memory. In their i.e. Deconstructionists, world (it would appear) they come into being, write a book, and forthwith perish, all in a flash, and it is noted of them with astonishment that they 'preserve traces of a primitive tradition' about things which happened well within their own adult lifetime." (A.H.N. Green-Armytage)


The CofE needs a leader, which it hasn't had for some time.

4 April 2011 at 19:35  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

When in Rome, ask yourself are you Roman.

When in Britain, ask yourself did this use to be my town.

4 April 2011 at 20:07  
Anonymous Bede said...

LobotomySpoon82 (19:35)

You have a good point citing C. S. Lewis. I have long thought that he, and G. K. Chesterton, were remarkably prescient in pointing out the direction our society was heading towards.

On another point, to be pedantic, the CofE is the established church only of England. Wales does not have one and Scotland has the (Presbyterian) Church of Scotland.

4 April 2011 at 20:14  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Good point Bede. These days, for some reason, I just tend to think of England rather than Great Britain. I think it's because everything is becoming so fragmented now with the UK.

4 April 2011 at 21:14  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

Your Grace

Thank you for TBFF tweets. Loked it up and what a giggle. The man is deluded beyond measure!

"# "In a world that is fast changing we need to be prepared to change quickly" says Tony Blair in #Germany about 1 hour ago via web

# "I'm still an optimist, there are challenges but we have a world full of excitement and opportunity says Tony Blair in #Germany about 1 hour ago via web

# "Whether you r open v closed is the most important question in the modern world" says Tony Blair about 1 hour ago via web

# "The 21C is more likely to see differences over culture and religion than political ideology." says Tony Blair about 2 hours ago via web

# "We have our #traditions and #faiths but also values we hold in common, that bind us together" says Tony Blair about 2 hours ago via web

# We need to understand that there can be space where we are different but also space where we come together says Tony Blair about 2 hours ago via web

# How do we balance #diversity with #integration? asks Tony Blair about 2 hours ago via web "

It's only when you see it written down instead of tripping off his charismatic lips do realise 'What a load of old GUFF'! 100 percent, PURE ATLAS SHRUGGED gold.

How on earth did we let him get away with this gibberish for soooo long, with the media treating it as near 'Shakespearian eloquence'.
Satanic delusion, perhaps.

A very tickled Old Ernst

4 April 2011 at 21:34  
Anonymous MrJ said...

Yes, and... "Tony Blair: 'I left Downing Street convinced that religion was an incredibly important force shaping the modern world.' about 1 hour ago via web" ... What a gem of banality from such a personage. Is he boasting that he lacked the conviction before becoming PM, or did not lose it while PM?

4 April 2011 at 22:15  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

I blocked him from my Twitter just in case he suddenly gets it into his head to start adding more followers. Better safe than sorry!

4 April 2011 at 22:22  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Hang on, that makes no sense. I meant adding more followings, but that sounds worse now. In case he starts linking...oh you know what I mean!

I hope his wife doesn't use Twitter.

4 April 2011 at 22:26  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not under the impression that the Soviet machine ever succeeded in overcoming belief or believers? The Gates of Hell never overcome The Kingdom. Of course, extreme atheists assume it is possible to stamp out Christians and the Christian Faith. Where does that impression come from?

Few, if any atheists, would actually prefer living under Soviet-style atheism to living in colorful Christian England. Nor do they grasp that "winter without Christmas" is what happens to a society, or a community or family, when Christianity is suppressed. We are taught in the NT that this is due to "spiritual blindness" which God visits upon those who reject Him, alongside a kind of sclerosis of the heart.

Thus, I would argue that we urgently need not a "leader" but warriors of "spiritual battles" who are the prayerful, spiritual teachers and great preachers....

4 April 2011 at 22:35  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

Lobotomyspoon82 made Ernsty chuckle 4 April 2011 22:22

LOL, my boy, Big Time.

Mind you, I think he needs all the friends/followers/following he can get. as if he played no part in any of the problems besetting us.
What a Janus..Teflon Tone indeed!

Ernsty

4 April 2011 at 23:18  
Anonymous len said...

Our Society is having its foundations destroyed in the vain hope of a re construction more in keeping with the moral code of fallen man.
Gods moral guidelines were given for the healthy and peaceful functioning of a Society.
We are beginning to see the foolishness of rejecting Gods Moral Law and the chaos and family breakdown that ensues when we depart from it.
The Christian moral principles which form the bedrock of our Society are being constantly attacked whether it is from the theory`s of Darwin ,Marx ,or the Atheists who are attempting to forge a 'brave new Godless World'.

Will they never learn?

Perhaps the only way they will ever learn is for God to withdraw completely and leave them to their own devices.

(I just hope I am not here to see it!)

4 April 2011 at 23:19  
Anonymous MrJ said...

The trial before Pilate seems to show a difficulty about expecting or calling for a "leader" (or "duce")?

For the time being, the English/British/UK monarch is proclaimed "by the Grace of God"

4 April 2011 at 23:23  
Blogger magog said...

If so why is your web site based in the USA????

5 April 2011 at 00:18  
Blogger The Last Dodo said...

Isn't the break down of spiritual cohesion an inevitable consequence of fragmenting theological authority? An inevitable outcome of the 'Protestant Reformation'?

Islam and other minority religions pose a threat because our own sense of morality has become a search for ethics and rights rather than appreciating God's purpose and plan for mankind and trusting in church authority.

An established church that gives tacit and explicit consent to homosexuality, divorce and abortion has failed in its ministry. Senior church leaders who openly cast doubt on the virgin birth, the incarnation, the physical resurrection of Christ and ascension without discipline?.

God knows the Roman Catholic church has committed many grave errors in its 2000 year history but at least today it retains a sense of common vision and purpose. It adherents know its teachings. This comes from a strong spiritual and theological leadership.

Protestantism's fundamental flaw is surely leaving each of its adherents to pick and choose what the 'spirit' informs them to be 'true'. A recipe for doctrinal anarchy and bound to create confusion.

The Anglican so called middle way between continental protestantism and Catholicism is a compromise of the worst kind. Its ultimate conclusion is a Monarch in waiting, the future Head of the Established Church, who as Defender of the Faith, a title removed by Rome but vainly reinstated by Henry VIII, ranks christianity on a par with other faiths.

No, the Established Church is no promoter of moral cohesion. Indeed, it has contributed to moral confusion.

5 April 2011 at 00:31  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

Last Dodo mysteriously said??5 April 2011 00:31

"God knows the Roman Catholic church has committed many grave errors in its 2000 year history but at least today it retains a sense of common vision and purpose. It adherents know its teachings. This comes from a strong spiritual and theological leadership. " LOL, old boy.

Ernst can only presume you are upto some mischief.
As If Rome has no fractures and all is well in it's world.

Rome is broader than C of E in it's allowed disputes over 'irrelevant' doctrinal differences so long as it's adherents reject any other christian authority as equal and they remain committed to papal supremacy.

Charles is indeed as plant talking traitor as that druid, Dr Williams is, however this does not invalidate Protestantism but only shows a lack of faith in the truth held in B of C P etc, instead it wrongly prefers 'Common Worship in it's place'. Diluted Faith!

It merely mirrors the society it is in..tragic!

You naughty Dodo you.

Ernst

ps

Ernst is NOT C of E.

5 April 2011 at 01:26  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Thankyou Bede , my first thoughts are perhaps somthing unexpected has occured in the transition from the 1000s of years of written work and the mind , to this sort of constant cyber constant personality (ill leave the knowingly deliberate actions to the conspiracy theorists) .The wrtten word is clearly different to the visual one , the latter perhaps having a more powerful effect.
The bible is about internal building , C S lewis and G K Chesterton had the ability to explain in words , words are essential , they can build us up or pull us down and yet from these great works , there is still the intimate beginning and ending of life for the indivdual to deal with which knowledge sometimes seems like a foisted tourist map , robbing one of our own joy of understanding .
I have just read an article on Evil being too vague a term and that it is low empathy that causes problems , that would be just too delicious to contemplate that socialist systems of control create and end up being run by low empathy people who only see the system.

This is such an epic question ,and some good efforts on here.

On a side note I fail to see why Lansleys reforms have had such a bashing , I am quite sure he wants a less beaurocratic system that offers patient care and not just processing .It is an interesting thought that a proportion of the budget is spent just having managers there ensuring , that it is overseen as the government wishes. Most people see there GP or nurse , we trust our GPs not just to perscribe drugs that gave them a free golfing holiday , but to diagnose the condition and effect a remedy . I suspect it where the remedy is or its resource utilisation that is the cost. labours polyclinics would have been a disaster if you analyse them , and yet GPs will have to have remedies in shared clinics .It is perhaps these clinics that will need the thought , as GP practice is now very refined mine seems now more IT expert than GP , but it has gone that way because labour blew a load of money promising this IT utopia. The pause is necessary , and a reflection on the real world operation has to be better than what labour did or envisaged , for they were trully suckered by beaurocratic imporvement university , no doubt as funded by them also and cost to us .

5 April 2011 at 01:39  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

Anonymous wistfully stated 4 April 2011 22:35

" Few, if any atheists, would actually prefer living under Soviet-style atheism to living in colorful Christian England. Nor do they grasp that "winter without Christmas" is what happens to a society, or a community or family, when Christianity is suppressed. We are taught in the NT that this is due to "spiritual blindness" which God visits upon those who reject Him, alongside a kind of sclerosis of the heart. "

A moral, methinks would assist;

In Aesop's short and simple fable, a scorpion, who couldn't swim, asked a frog to carry him across the river on her back. The frog hesitated, saying, "I'm afraid you will attack me." But the scorpion pointed out that it wouldn't be in his interest to do that, because, if the frog died in the water, he would drown. So she consented.

As they were half way across the water, the scorpion suddenly whipped up his tail and stung the frog hard. As the poison spread through the frog and she began to sink, she whispered, "Why? Why did you do that, when now we must both die?"

"Because," the scorpion replied sadly, "it's in my nature to sting. I'm sorry." As he spoke, they both disappeared beneath the water. The moral of the fable is that we can't overcome our nature (Secularist/Atheist belief), even if it works against our interest with the final outcome.

Moral? When all facades and pretensions are gone...he/she is simply a scorpion. They are what they do!

Eat your heart out, Atlas Shrugged.

The wisdom of old Ernst.

5 April 2011 at 01:41  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Anonymous: "Few, if any atheists, would actually prefer living under Soviet-style atheism to living in colorful Christian England."

That's true of me. But it's the Soviet bit, you see. The USSR operated under a specific and intrusive and inefficient political ideology. I know it doesn't suit religionists who favour slippery slope and guilt by association fallacies but a liberal society which is predominently atheist is not the same sort of thing as a communist society which is predominently atheist. It's the liberal and communist bits, you see. They mostly define the society, not the atheist bit. So, rather than a colourful Christian England under (say) Mary Tudor, or even a less colourful one under Victoria Saxe-Coburg [1], I'd prefer a colourful and diverse and modern England where religion is just a special interest for those who want it, protected but not privileged.

[1] -Saalfeld?

5 April 2011 at 07:00  
Anonymous MrJ said...

"If so...." : Does anyone know what is the "so" magog (5 April 00:18) has referred to?

...and if the locus of the website is USA why is that of significance, or of a blogger's search engine?

Or is this a joke too early in the morning? (From which time zone came magog's message?)

5 April 2011 at 08:48  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I live in Edinburgh. What the hell has the Church of England to do with me? (answer: nothing)

5 April 2011 at 11:01  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

DanJo, my strange boy said 5 April 2011 07:00

"I'd prefer a colourful and diverse and modern England where religion is just a special interest for those who want it, protected but not privileged."

My strange atheist, aren't you the odd one..and ever so generous?...protected but not privileged..Never heard of your kind or double speak before?.

However dear scorpions, by your actions, you will descend into the bottom of the pond, taking us christians with you, most unfortunately, if the current trend persists. Gribbitt, Gribbitt.

Old Ernsty will do everything he can to stop this happening.

Nothing personal, old boy, just business.

Old Ernsty.

5 April 2011 at 11:10  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Mr J I was wondering the same thing, lol.

Are you still having problems with your animated pic Ernst?

5 April 2011 at 11:18  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

"Mr J I was wondering the same thing, lol." Ernst was as well but to scared too ask, as I saw no logical reason for the person to blog it..Too much miaow-miaow perhaps..bless.

"Are you still having problems with your animated pic Ernst?" Gave up, my lad.
Altered colours, size etc but Blogger still converts to png file...Bah. I hate Blogger for it's lack of setting control.

The pic you have has special code wrapped around it, allowing it to not be converted but Ernst is not a rocket scientist like DanJo..you know he will say he is and was trained at Harvard if you asked. By the way, it's still not animating on this blog since I mentioned it..Have you altered it?

Thanks for inquiring, old boy.

Ernsty

5 April 2011 at 11:28  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

It' still animated when I view it. That's a puzzle then. Plus, I was experimenting with other animated pics and was able to get them to work, when previously they wouldn't, if I stripped them down to a bare minimum, and made them as simple as possible. What browser are you using?

5 April 2011 at 11:32  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

And lol at the DanJ0 comment.

Funnily enough my father actually was a rocket scientist, lol!

5 April 2011 at 11:34  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"And lol at the DanJ0 comment."

Lordy, I leave you be and you're at it again.

5 April 2011 at 11:41  
Blogger BanJ0 said...

Yeth Mathtar, ath you with Mathtar.

5 April 2011 at 11:47  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"My strange atheist, aren't you the odd one..and ever so generous?...protected but not privileged..Never heard of your kind or double speak before?."

There's nothing generous about it, it's a necessary position of liberalism. You have protection under Article 9 and rightly so. You have undue privilege too at the moment but we'll have that removed soon I think. Nothing unusual or unexpected there, I've said it enough times. You lot will be like (say) Labour Party members or (say) football supporters if I have my way i.e. pursuing your own private interests in public, perhaps lobbying if you must, but essentially out of the way where you can't cause too much harm to the rest of us.

5 April 2011 at 11:51  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Well, Spoon, I think that's carte blanche for me. You're still responsible for your actions whatever else you are.

5 April 2011 at 11:58  
Blogger BinG0 said...

Yeth Mathtar. Wahtever you thay Mathtar. All hail Lord DanJ0, M.U. (Master of the Universe, University of Eternia).

5 April 2011 at 12:03  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Carry on Spoon. Let everyone see what some self-identifying Christians are like when their Holy Spirit supposedly shines through them. Not great, is it? All those so-called gifts of the Spirit which have passed you by. All those bits of the bible you take a hairy dump on with your actions. You carry on, matey. It's the little chips at the religion over time that do the damage and it's you with the little hammer. Show the electronic world what it means to be your sort of Christian. You're one of an atheist's better weapons. ;)

5 April 2011 at 12:17  
Blogger BonG0 said...

Yeth Mathtar. Your with ith my command Mathtar.

(And in response to your next, nextht, question: No I am not smoking anything. The medication I am on is quite sufficient thank you.)

5 April 2011 at 12:28  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

*chip* *chip* *chip*

;)

5 April 2011 at 12:38  
Blogger jonBonJ0vi said...

Yeth Mathtar you are tho right Mathtar.

You're the one with the fixation sunshine, not me. Anyone else mentions your name and you ignore them. I mention your name and you're there like a ... a ... a tune from an ipod that works (for want of a better expression).

But yeth, your wordth are muthic to my earth Mathtar.

5 April 2011 at 12:43  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

That's the beauty of it.

I can point at the unncessary immensity of universe. I can point at the evidence and results of evolution. I can point at the social evolution of the religion. I can point at multitude of other religions now and over the ages. I can point at religionists of different types who are completely committed to their different religions. I can point at the disagreements within your religion. I can point at the hoops religionists jump through. I can point at the damage religion beliefs often seem to do. I can point at the similar crime rates between similar styles of country where there are variously many or few self-dentifying religionists. [...]

But the most damning of everything is the fact that an unforgivably large number of you lot are simply and demonstrably not nice or good people at your core despite what you ought to be if the religion were true.

It's why without State power to back it your religion is doomed.

5 April 2011 at 12:50  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

I deliberately let you be, Spoon. Truth be told, I felt I was being a bit cruel plucking your strings, knowing what effect it obviously has. But up you pop again today, trying it on again. You're still responsible for your actions despite your inclination to quirks.

5 April 2011 at 12:55  
Blogger jonBonJ0vi said...

DanJ0, I have been consulting with Harley Street doctors and they tell me that at some time in your life you went through something called a 'sense of humour by-pass'. You need immediate treatment as apparently it can be fatal in the right circumstances. Other people have likened it to another condition known commonly as 'walking around with a stick up your butt.'
I cannot stress this enough - please seek help immediately.

5 April 2011 at 13:13  
Anonymous MrJ said...

Looking at today's comments (leaving aside taunts or ad hominem remarks) is a reminder that there is practically nothing that has not been exhaustively argued about religion and atheism since 30 CE (AD) or before: in the time of the Apostles, of the Councils and Early Fathers, of the Scholastics, of the Reformation, of the Enlightenment, of the 19c. Sages (pick-your-own).

It is curious that there remain so many who consider themselves not to be among "you lot" who fail to see that the basis of religion, or at least as shown in the Book of Common Prayer, is the very fact that a large number of them are less than nice or good people despite what they know and feel they ought to be, given that they hold their religion to be true; and that they are aware that religion which relies on State power to back it is a doubtful quantity.

5 April 2011 at 13:18  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Excellent. Well, just consider it humour in return over the coming days and weeks and we'll all be happy as larry, you little Counterfeit Christian. Hurrah! ;)

5 April 2011 at 13:25  
Blogger William said...

Danj0

"I can point at the unncessary immensity of universe. I can point at the evidence and results of evolution. I can point at the social evolution of the religion. I can point at multitude of other religions now and over the ages. I can point at religionists of different types who are completely committed to their different religions. I can point at the disagreements within your religion. I can point at the hoops religionists jump through. I can point at the damage religion beliefs often seem to do. I can point at the similar crime rates between similar styles of country where there are variously many or few self-dentifying religionists. [...]"

I can point to God. Do I win?

By the way, what's the problem with Mr L'Spoon? Is it the scary blinking eyes?

5 April 2011 at 13:26  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Mr J: "Looking at today's comments (leaving aside taunts or ad hominem remarks) is a reminder that there is practically nothing that has not been exhaustively argued about religion and atheism since 30 CE (AD) or before"

Well, not so much about atheism it has to be said. The penalties, you see. Not really inspiring if one wanted to speak out or challenge Christianity for a fair portion of that time. Heck, even pointing out that the earth revolves in some fashion around the sun wasn't much appreciated because it appeared to undermine the theology of the day.

5 April 2011 at 13:32  
Blogger TanG0 said...

Oh DanJ0, lol, I have already proven time and time again, how much I can laugh at myself. Even Srizals can back me up on that. So again, Yeth Mathtar, as you thay Mathtar.

William, he does appear to feel threatened by me for some reason doesn't he? lol!

5 April 2011 at 13:40  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

William: "I can point to God. Do I win?"

Only if you point at something we can all at least recognise otherwise I'll just point at Allah or Shiva or Zeus or Gaia.

"By the way, what's the problem with Mr L'Spoon? Is it the scary blinking eyes?"

No problem at all. He and I are just having a laugh as ever. We're a comedy double act, like Cannon and Ball. He's Ball today, obviously.

5 April 2011 at 13:45  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ DanJ0 (07:00)—I’d prefer a colourful and diverse and modern England

Colourless, uniform England somehow managed to be sufficiently modern to instigate the Industrial Revolution but if we must have colour and diversity as well, we find ourselves stuck with the antithesis of modernity: Islam.

Now that we are stuck with Islam, and as 80 per cent of Muslims actively practise their faith, the chances of religion retreating to being ‘just a special interest for those who want it’ are growing more remote by the year.

The irony is that atheism may have flourished in a colourless, uniform England. In colourful, diverse England it hasn’t a hope in Hell.

5 April 2011 at 13:56  
Blogger DinG0 said...

Yeth Mathtar, we believe you Mathtar. All hail DanJ0, thourth of all info in the Univerth.

5 April 2011 at 14:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Atheism is true!

Hitler, Mao and Stalin have proved it.

5 April 2011 at 14:24  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Johnny: "Now that we are stuck with Islam, and as 80 per cent of Muslims actively practise their faith, the chances of religion retreating to being ‘just a special interest for those who want it’ are growing more remote by the year."

Not passively retreating, actively pushed back. In fact, the Christian Institute is helping out rather nicely by the look of it. One might even think secularlists have infiltrated it. Of course, if adherents of other religions knew what's good for them in the long term then they'd be aiming for a secular state themselves with the sort of protections that gives.

5 April 2011 at 14:33  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

LobotomySpoon82? said 5 April 2011 11:32

"What browser are you using?" Mozilla Firefox and IE.

Just checked in IE and you are right. Your Gif is flashing.
Firefox must be the problem.

Back to the drawingboard. Where's that genius DanJo when you want the lad. LOL. No doubt has a degree in GIF design and technology.. I love the crazy lad but a tad headstrong, me thinks.

Old Ernsty

ps

Love the karloff lisp, reckon anybody else is old enough to remember the joke?
Your humour reminds old Ernsty of himself, eccentric..We could be brothers..mind you, your birthday is the same as mine except the year..hang on..Son? lol.

5 April 2011 at 15:00  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ DanJ0 (14:33)—I don’t think ‘the chances of religion being actively pushed back … are growing more remote by the year’ differs to any great degree from ‘the chances of religion retreating … are growing more remote by the year’.

The Muslim population is growing the fastest, Muslims are the most devout worshippers, Islamic law punishes atheism and apostasy but, according to you, British atheism has a bright future. I’ll book you in for a reality check.

5 April 2011 at 15:02  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"The Muslim population is growing the fastest, Muslims are the most devout worshippers, Islamic law punishes atheism and apostasy but, according to you, British atheism has a bright future. I’ll book you in for a reality check."

Well, they seem to worry you considerably more than me. That much is certain at least.

5 April 2011 at 15:13  
Anonymous MrJ said...

DanJo( 5 April 13:32) will know, perhaps, that Classical studies would be incomplete without including such as Theodorus the Atheist, and that in Europe what is called atheist thought appeared from about 5c. BCE (also in Asia). Then again, consider Giordano Bruno condemned for "the heresy of pantheism".

5 April 2011 at 15:22  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Ernsty and Sad Tiddles

Dad? Perhaps twin brothers but born decades apart and with different mothers? Lol!

Personally I prefer Chrome as, for me at least, it is super fast and efficient. I went right off Firefox several years ago when I was designing my own blog site, as it used to demand special rules and would ruin the css/html all the time. It ruined colours, animations, page design...it was very frustrating. So I switched to Chrome and have used it ever since.

And yes, 'he that is not allowed to be named' does sort of grow on you doesn't he? lol.

5 April 2011 at 15:27  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Blofeld: "Where's that genius DanJo when you want the lad. LOL. No doubt has a degree in GIF design and technology.. I love the crazy lad but a tad headstrong, me thinks."

I mostly ignore your posts to be honest. Too much trouble to read, you see. I 'springboard' comments for the most part but there's no point with yours given the buffoon-like content. Hope this helps.

5 April 2011 at 15:29  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

Lobotomy Spoon82 5 April 2011 15:27

"And yes, 'he that is not allowed to be named' does sort of grow on you doesn't he? lol."

Like a malignant cyst, bless him.

"I mostly ignore your posts to be honest. Too much trouble to read, you see. I 'springboard' comments for the most part but there's no point with yours given the buffoon-like content. Hope this helps.

DUDJO blurted again..5 April 2011 15:29"

Springboard to what exactly? After an armstand, several smomersaults, a pike and a final pirouette, you manage to crash into the concrete majestically, everytime.

Well done you!

At least make sure the swimming pool has water in, my lad.

Thank God (oops) you are not GB's entry into the blogging olympics. A Wooden spoon would be more than your effects ever deserve!

Overall Impression, including degree of difficulty;

•2½ - 4½: Utterly Deficient


Old Ernsty

5 April 2011 at 15:51  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

*chip* *chip* *chip*

5 April 2011 at 16:05  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

"My names chip daddy chip
i dont ever tolerate lip diddy lip
i dont play around im just trying to do ma music
but say the wrong thing n i'l flip diddy flip
some say its luck but i dont give a ...
something or other but I'm not using a rude word here.
wave to ma haters like see you at the top
im the best in the bizz rite next to the kid
everybody say ma name now Chip Daddy Chip

5 April 2011 at 16:13  
Blogger William said...

Careful LobotomySpoon82. I don't think DanJ0 is impressed with your "religion". If you carry on like this you'll turn him into an atheist.

Oh no.

Too late.

:(

No wonder Tiddles is sad today.

5 April 2011 at 16:41  
Anonymous Sigmund Freud said...

"Thank God (oops) you are not GB's entry into the blogging olympics. A Wooden spoon would be more than your effects ever deserve!

Overall Impression, including degree of difficulty;

•2½ - 4½: Utterly Deficient "

I have read the posts from danjo and think you are spot on with that excellent assessment.

"*chip* *chip* *chip*" In my opinion he appears to have a whole potato field on his shoulders.

Conclusions;
After analysing DanJo I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father’s protection and the need of being entirely honest with oneself is a good exercise to start from.
The sexual life of confused adult men is a “dark continent” for psychology.



Siggy

5 April 2011 at 16:41  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Oh bottom! So it's all my fault then? I had hopes that we might have been looking at a latter day St Paul in the making too. Oh well never mind. I had hoped he'd see the funny side and join in, but no. Some people just cannot shake off their adultness, strangely. They do say that the devil hates to be laughed at though.

5 April 2011 at 17:06  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"Careful LobotomySpoon82. I don't think DanJ0 is impressed with your "religion". If you carry on like this you'll turn him into an atheist."

Indeed. I'd like to see the IP address log now too. ;)

But anyway. Here I am, an atheist wondering what's going on with regard to the Holy Spirit in this tag team of alleged Christians. Does the Holy Spirit permanently 'reside', or do you guys call it up for advice when you fancy it, or does it intrude when you do something un-Jesus-like?

What's happening with Spoon and Blofeld when they respond to my prods? Does the Holy Spirit register disapproval? Sadness at the crapness of their spirituality? Hoping they'll turn the other cheek and then feel disappointed when they behave just like, well, a godless heathen might be expected to?

Or does it whisper: "Go on lad, try to kick 'im in the nuts on my behalf for dissing me. I may have constructed the universe nearly 14 billion years ago but I need you guys to show 'im what my wrath feels like!!1! Yeah, yeah, of course, I love him unconditionally but a set of sore nuts ought to bring him into the fold."

What actually goes on in your personal spirituality departments? This could be a revelation for me! :)

5 April 2011 at 17:14  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

Dear boy, if you are a genuine communicant trying to discuss the be all and wherewithall then Ernst is Dawkins godfather.

You bring it on yourself dear boy with your crass statements and unwillingness to ever answer anything put to you.

DanJo's perfect world be a planet full of DanJo clones. Not mine or Lobotomy's ideal scenario I guess, so please grow up.
You are merely a village atheist as your intellect reveals and why people converse with you stumps Ernst most of the time..Who says Christians don't care for their fellow lost and lonely mankind does not know the depth of patience exhibited towards you.

So, if you can't hand out the pathetic taunts and take it back in good grace like we do, please find another playground to bully little girls in.

There's a good boy, Master Snodgrass. Now wipe your snivelling runny nose.

Hope that helps?

Ernsty, my child

5 April 2011 at 17:39  
Blogger William said...

DanJ0

"Indeed. I'd like to see the IP address log now too. ;)"

Are you suggesting that I and LobotomySpoon82 are one? He may be behind BanJ0, BinJ0, BonJ0, JonBonJ0vi (my favourite), TanJ0 and DinG0, but not William. That's me see?

"What actually goes on in your personal spirituality departments? This could be a revelation for me! :)"

Apparently you're the one with the spirit level (geddit?). You tell us.

Oh you have already :(

5 April 2011 at 17:40  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

William: "Are you suggesting that I and LobotomySpoon82 are one?"

No, not at all.

5 April 2011 at 17:41  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

William said 5 April 2011 17:40

""Indeed. I'd like to see the IP address log now too. ;)"

Are you suggesting that I and LobotomySpoon82 are one? He may be behind BanJ0, BinJ0, BonJ0, JonBonJ0vi (my favourite), TanJ0 and DinG0, but not William. That's me see?"

And this is old Ernsty, my paranoid friend.

Ernst

5 April 2011 at 17:43  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

If the posts in this thread by Blowers and the Spoon are anything to go by its little wonder that Christians aren't taken seriously any more. It wouldn't be so bad if what they wrote contributed anything to discussions resulting from the OP - but that of course would be asking too much to expect.

I wouldn't mind betting that they both secretly wish that they had the intelligence and wit to create their own blog rather than try to monopolise someone else's.

Like DanJO, I fast forward whenever I see their inane posts.

5 April 2011 at 17:44  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

Dread0 blubbed 5 April 2011 17:44

Ditto.!

Contributions are regularly made regarding OP however as you ever hardly stop and read..?

Bless You and all the fools who have sailed in you.

Ernst

5 April 2011 at 17:47  
Blogger William said...

"No, not at all."

I wonder if HG would confirm that LobotomySpoon82 and William are separate? He's probably got more important things to do than deal with the children fighting in the sand-pit though.

5 April 2011 at 17:50  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

I see the false hilarity has worn off now, Ernst. I was a bit close to the truth there, I reckon. What's the Holy Spirit feeding back to you now?

I was doing there what I usually do: put in a marker post, cough, and point. You guys do most of the work in these situations. I just encourage you to reveal youselves.

As to taking it, I've took 'it' since I got here and I'm still happily here so it's all good this end. Carry on matey.

Undoubtedly there are Christians who truly believe and who try hard to live by their creed but I think they're relatively rare things. I salute them, though I still don't want them in political power.

5 April 2011 at 17:52  
Blogger William said...

Dread naught but the Dreadnaught!

Nice to "see" you again. Thanks for posting the Norwegian You Tube clip, by the way. Most illuminating!

5 April 2011 at 17:52  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

DanJ0, you seem to have misunderstood Jesus' instruction to turn the other cheek. Read and learn from it within the context it was said, then you'll realise he was not telling people to be doormats (as much as you might like us to be so). Basically, you try to insult me, so I let you insult me and actually encourage you (and Dreadnought) to insult me even more, which you happily do, lol. And I am the one at fault?

He also frequently and very publicly pointed out injustice and hypocrisy, so I am merely copying Him and following His lead.

5 April 2011 at 17:56  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

William: "I wonder if HG would confirm that LobotomySpoon82 and William are separate?"

William, I have no doubt you are separate. What I do suspect is that Ernst was replying to himself under a different name, probably as a joke of sorts but in the current 'sandpit' as you call it that's a bit dubious to do. Especially as Spoon has (quite rightly) moaned bitterly about that sort of thing already in the past when someone anonymous was rude to him. It's not important but I'd just be amused if one of his tag team were doing it now.

5 April 2011 at 18:00  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

"I see the false hilarity has worn off now, Ernst."

Another dive that smashes into the concrete. Will you never learn, what with the olympics around the corner.

Overall Impression, including degree of difficulty and hitting the intellectual mark.;

•1½ - 2½: Utterly Pathetic!

"It's not important but I'd just be amused if one of his tag team were doing it now." You obviously watch too much TNA WRESTLING..ooohh


Ernest..Hilarity since 1908

5 April 2011 at 18:15  
Blogger William said...

DanJ0

You bring new meaning to the term lost.

*sigh*

5 April 2011 at 18:34  
Blogger William said...

I think it was that naughty Siggy Freud. Really shook him up.

5 April 2011 at 18:50  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Thanks, William. That's probably a blessing for me as it goes if the meaning is a 'cultural Christian' one.

5 April 2011 at 18:54  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Never one to pull His punches, I am sure that the loud accusation 'White-washed tombs full of dead men's bones' got the Scribes and Pharisees reacting in self-righteous indignation, similar as happened here. But that's the trouble for people that take themselves too seriously, lol. I'll bet a few of Jesus' listener's laughed though, and that was probably one of the intentions. No one had ever stood up to them before, but here He was, making fun of them with impunity. Laughter, the best way to disarm.

I've had a lot of laughs today, so even though you might not see it that way, thank you DanJ0. And that is genuine.

5 April 2011 at 19:14  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"I've had a lot of laughs today, so even though you might not see it that way, thank you DanJ0. And that is genuine."

Of course you have. You've been having a great time, just like on previous days.

5 April 2011 at 19:26  
Anonymous len said...

Danjo,
Atheists have a purpose in the Christian life.
In fact all those who oppose Christianity are used by God to polish and hone Christians.I find this ironic that God would use secularists to accomplish His purposes!

You see Christians although they have a perfect spirit are in the soul area (Mind, will, emotions) a 'work in progress'.We need some of the rough edges knocked off.

So God will bring Christians into contact with cantankerous, stubborn, wilful ,proud, arrogant,obstinate, people which in effect will push the Christians ( as a last resort) to fall back into the Holy Spirit in a state of despair!
So opposition is good it defines us and proves our faith.
I am not saying our responses are perfect, we may not have arrived but we have left the station!
All throughout the Bible we see Christians being persecuted ,harassed ,and all sorts of evil intended towards them( not you of course)but God turns evil intentions into good results for the Christian.
So really the Christian cannot lose if he bears this in mind.

5 April 2011 at 19:53  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Glad to be of help, Len.

As a bit of a tangent, I read this earlier:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/why-a-lack-of-empathy-is-the-root-of-all-evil-2262371.html

Interesting topic. The comments are always worth a skim too. :)

5 April 2011 at 20:14  
Blogger William said...

DanJ0

"That's probably a blessing for me as it goes if the meaning is a 'cultural Christian' one."

Not sure what a 'cultural Christian' is, but it sounds dreadful. - all the trappings of religion without the salvation of the Spirit.

Yikes!

5 April 2011 at 20:36  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

"All throughout the Bible we see Christians being persecuted ,harassed ,and all sorts of evil intended towards them( not you of course)but God turns evil intentions into good results for the Christian.
So really the Christian cannot lose if he bears this in mind.
"
I get you Len, so DanJo is to be thought of as a 'blessing' rather than a naughty little twerp? Got that Lobotomy!

He really spouts 'blessing' all over this blog. I had another word in mind, naughty Ernst!

DanJo, We all look forward to another 'blessing' tomorrow and maybe Graham Davis can add further blessings if he so wishes..

Forgive old Ernst, Len.

5 April 2011 at 20:52  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Stop it you lot I'm starting to feel sorry for DanJ0 now, lol.

OK DanJ0, I'll tone it down if it makes you happy *sigh*. Just lighten up a bit will you?

I don't feel sorry for Dreadnought though. He sounds like a Pharisee :(

5 April 2011 at 21:05  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

"Stop it you lot I'm starting to feel sorry for DanJ0 now, lol."

Thanks Lobotomy..Now I feel bad about the poor lad.

I know, to show our caring for the wastrels who are trying to get rid of the one, true faith as DanJo keeps saying we are shallow.

Lets have 'Adopt an Atheist Day'..any longer would be unbearable but Ernst could do 24 Hrs.

Oh HANG ON A MINUTE... I forgot, we are not allowed to adopt, even a tarnished old atheist.

Drat those darn secularists.

Miffed Old Ernst

5 April 2011 at 21:57  
Blogger William said...

"I don't feel sorry for Dreadnought though. He sounds like a Pharisee :("

Yea. He's quite good on the middle east, but mostly it's standard atheist/secularist blah-de-blah. Apparently you can say what you like though as he always fast-forwards these comments. Not serious enough you see. I don't think atheists like Christians having a laugh. They prefer fire and brimstone. It fits nicely into their "religion" box.

5 April 2011 at 22:03  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

William said 5 April 2011 22:03

"I don't think atheists like Christians having a laugh. They prefer fire and brimstone. It fits nicely into their "religion" box."

Nothing would give DanJo greater pleasure than for christians here to display the wicknedness and vileness of that Christian cult on Louis Theroux last night. Sorry DanJo, not us!

That we are nothing like this but can be serious one moment or full of fun the next, probably punctures their little bubble about us more than nasty words..as if we would.

Far too serious DanJo..Chill out.

Ernst

5 April 2011 at 22:15  
Blogger William said...

"Lets have 'Adopt an Atheist Day'..any longer would be unbearable but Ernst could do 24 Hrs.
Oh HANG ON A MINUTE... I forgot, we are not allowed to adopt, even a tarnished old atheist."


What about kidnapping an atheist for the day? It gets around the Christian adoption ban and should be right up your volcano Ernst. Or am I being silly now? Could even try a little bit of extortion with Dawkins on the side. "Send the loot or the atheist gets brainwashed about God." Oh no, but that's not being nice is it? Shame. It'd be fun though.

5 April 2011 at 22:23  
Blogger Ernsty and Sad Tiddles said...

"Could even try a little bit of extortion with Dawkins on the side. "Send the loot or the atheist gets brainwashed about God." Oh no, but that's not being nice is it? Shame. It'd be fun though."
LOL.

Hmm..Sort of 'Silence of The Lambs' meets 'Elmer Gantry'..'It puts it in the collection basket... It puts the book of common prayer in the collection basket'.

Dawkins would'nt give a hoot for a fellow atheist..Survival of the fittest, red in tooth and claw..blah..blah.

Might give him ideas for a new book against us though..bah!

Atheists..cant adopt em, can't kidnap em!

Ernst

5 April 2011 at 22:39  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

So the only time he might notice something I write is if I go DREADNOUGHT IS A when I say something if he skims past? I didn't know he was atheist/secularist. Hmmm. That explains his puritanical streak then, lol.

5 April 2011 at 22:51  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Atheists..cant adopt em, can't kidnap em!

Perhaps we ought to ask Len's advice as to the best course of action. He can be very wise sometimes.


(WV hates me! It's calling me dopy zedi!)

5 April 2011 at 23:08  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"Nothing would give DanJo greater pleasure than for christians here to display the wicknedness and vileness of that Christian cult on Louis Theroux last night. Sorry DanJo, not us!"

The Westbro bunch, I suppose? They're unusual for being so public and single-minded about it but you can see much the same sort of stuff from alleged Christians in the Telegraph comments section when certain articles come up.

In a physical church, one can see the self-regulation going on by the community as people are worried about being personally judged. It's online when people are anonymous behind monikers that one truly sees what's underneath.

Here's a thought experiment. What would St Paul write in one of his letters to the Cramner Comments Section Church for the community of alleged Christians in this particular bit? Have you been edifying the church and yourselves in what you write?

6 April 2011 at 03:51  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Yes indeed. Was St Paul greater than Jesus? You have very selective reading skills (again), and have chosen to ignore what I said about the way Jesus treats the hypocrites and self-righteous. I have shown that the self-righteous are still just as humourless as they always were, that they still lay burdens on other peoples backs without lifting a finger themselves, that they still refuse to listen to Him but still set themselves up as the arbiters of right and wrong, that the joyless are the ones to be dreaded (and pitied) most of all, and so it goes on...

6 April 2011 at 08:03  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Spoon, I try to make allowances for you now but almost everything you say seems to apply more to you than anyone else. It's like you have an out-of-body experience when you type. The other day you were saying unlike me you can walk away and then kept coming back to comment, which was quite funny but bizarre nonetheless. Now, you're talking about hypocrites yet you're the alleged Christian for whom Jesus-like conduct ought to apply but apparently doesn't in reality. I'm not obliged to try to emulate Jesus, my being an atheist and all. You realise that, right?

6 April 2011 at 08:33  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

You know, the internet shines a pretty harsh light on ideas versus reality for most things, and especially for religion and the religious. This is perhaps why the usual defences for the established church these days are just: 1. it's tradition, isn't it? 2. at least it's not Islam.

So much for it being a leading light in inspirational behaviour these days, as we can see here in microcosm in the comments. No, we have these days is the fairly clean baby and we're looking at the bathwater which, now the suds have gone, is looking pretty grimy really. Time for the State to pull the plug and let the water drain somewhere more out of sight, I think.

6 April 2011 at 08:38  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

That's a really pathetic response, even by your standards DanJ0, lol.

6 April 2011 at 08:59  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Oh no! As you know, I value your opinion very highly, your being a paragon of stability and good sense and obvious righteousness, so that has hit me very heavily. :(

6 April 2011 at 09:21  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just be sure to continue to vote Tory, Labour and Lib Dem to ensure the utter and irreversible destruction of the native British people and their culture and Christian heritage, history and values.

6 April 2011 at 09:29  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Back at you DanJ0, lol.

6 April 2011 at 09:31  
Blogger William said...

Danj0 the light appears to be shining on you - your teeth are showing again.

FYI

When the Holy Spirit condemns it is about specifics. It is usually something that has been said or done for which forgiveness/apology/repentence is required. When the devil condemns it is usually about generalities e.g. you're not a very good person/Christian, or that person is a much better Christian than you are etc

I have often found these rules of thumb useful for discernment.

6 April 2011 at 09:35  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

William: "Danj0 the light appears to be shining on you - your teeth are showing again."

Thanks, William. It's because I'm generally quite cheerful I suppose. We atheists are an optimistic bunch. :D

You description is interesting. Am I supposed to be the devil there? Should I try your cap to see if it fits? Obviously, to an atheist the presence of the actual Holy Spirit is pretty suspect for anyone but I assume that lots of people believe it is there for some reason or other. My charge here, based on behaviour, is not really that someone is a good or bad Christian but that someone is a faux Christian i.e. knowingly godless and just along for the ride.

Why would they do that? Well, perhaps for the sense of belonging, especially if one is a bit, well, odd? Perhaps to give them justification for holding strong views about minorities? Perhaps because belonging is thought to be part and parcel of being somehow quintessentially English? [...] My elderly neighbour is a church-goer who doesn't really believe but goes for the company.

The comments area here is an odd corner of the internet, it has to be said. Interesting in its own way, of course, independently of the much more mainstream articles.

6 April 2011 at 11:23  
Anonymous Oswin said...

DanJo : what have you got to be optimistic about? Surely you are just going to die, and mould in your grave? (or whatever alternative you have planned...)

6 April 2011 at 13:09  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Oswin: "DanJo : what have you got to be optimistic about? Surely you are just going to die, and mould in your grave? (or whatever alternative you have planned...)"

Yes. Though I don't suppose I'll know about the mould. Or perhaps the devil will offer to take me back. ;) Seriously, the fact of that is what makes ultimately life worth living. The idea of living for eternity in some other state, whatever all that might mean, sounds dreadful.

I've thought before now that there may be some sort of genetic predisposition to religion/non-religion where people who don't psychologically need the idea of an afterlife aren't drawn to religion. I honestly don't mean to be rude by saying that.

6 April 2011 at 15:03  
Anonymous Oswin said...

No exception taken DanJo, although I'd question the word ''need'' - a predisposition is, after all, a predisposition.

As for eternal life being dreadful, I'm not that enthused about the one we've got up-front either. I do rather hope for some improvement yet to come ... hopefully with some good beer available at reasonable prices; pork scratchings too, come to think of it.

6 April 2011 at 15:39  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

In that case DanJ0, you might want to start building a shelter to get away from everyone, lol. The atheists/agnostics will be in a minority before long if this theory holds any water:

Religiosity Gene?

6 April 2011 at 15:45  
Anonymous Oswin said...

L'Spoon:

Will he have the beer and pork-scratchings in his shelter???

6 April 2011 at 15:52  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Eh? Sorry Oswin you've lost me there, lol! I bet it was a joke and I've gone and spoilt it now haven't I?

6 April 2011 at 15:57  
Anonymous Oswin said...

L'Spoon: eh?

Have you been at the beer and scratchings already ??? :o)

6 April 2011 at 16:00  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

I'm not allowed beer as I'm allergic to it. All I have to do is drink anywhere between four to ten pints and I start being violently ill for some reason. And pork scratchings aren't good for my teeth, which aren't in the best of care due to all the sparring I used to do when I was younger.

6 April 2011 at 16:04  
Anonymous Oswin said...

''Britishness, Christianity and cultural cohesion'' - DanJo's probably in for two out of the three, so I reckon we can trust him to 'play the white man' albeit a slightly 'pink' version. Should he be wrong re' the 'Afterlife' it behoves him to be a stand-up guy and buy the beer (and pork scratchings) in recompense etc. Then we can all 'cohese' in his bunker ... Wednesday evenings would suit, my weekends might be full.

6 April 2011 at 16:12  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Fear not, DanJo can suck your scratchings beforehand, and I'll oblige with your beer beyond the first four pints.

Ps. The object of ''sparring'' is to teach one to avoid being punched in the mouth, yes?

6 April 2011 at 16:16  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Well, not so much avoiding being punched/kicked in the mouth as to seeing who can withstand the most punishment really, lol. Even with a gum-shield, made by my very frustrated dentist, he was still forever having to put my teeth back in. And now I am paying for it *sigh* The things we did/do eh?

DanJ0 sucking my scratchings sounds vaguely obscene, no offence DanJ0. But I sort of don't like eating things that other people have eaten first :s

He's wrong re the Afterlife, but he needs to find that out for himself. From what I saw of it though it actually looks quite nice.

6 April 2011 at 16:28  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Only ''vaguely obscene'' ?

Wholly accidental on my part, of course. I'm a nice boy me.

6 April 2011 at 16:44  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Nice bottle of whisky will do me, with a bowl of rice as a side dish. That'll keep me happy, lol.

6 April 2011 at 16:59  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Rice? Rice and whisky?

No offense but, you and DanJo both, are seemingly weird. I'll hunker-down in non-mouse's bunker instead...I'll wager no quibbling there re' celestial snacks and honest beverages!

6 April 2011 at 17:19  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Ah but is weird what I do, or who I am? No actually yes (no actually yes???), I am weird aren't I? :O

Rice is my staple diet, I eat it every day, lol. Although I could forgo the whisky and drink mead or a few bottles of sake instead.

6 April 2011 at 17:53  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Oswin: "As for eternal life being dreadful, I'm not that enthused about the one we've got up-front either."

Well, I enjoy it anyway. As I always say to the JWs (and Len), the world is a wonderful place if you live in the moment.

6 April 2011 at 17:56  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Aye laddies, ye are both weird ... whereas I am decidedly DRUNK,
on good Northern ale! Huzzar!

Yes, two packets of pork scratchings, a brace of pickled eggs and a steak and onion pie ... now that IS living! :O)

7 April 2011 at 01:02  
Anonymous Adolfo said...

Mr. Cranmer,
Great post! Honest, articulated and clear. And this is the opinion of an Atheist! Good luck!
Yours.

8 April 2011 at 17:26  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older