Danmagnet wrote:Well regardless of whether the book can be considered indecent or not I would support the notion that the Bible should be banned for under 18s, as should any religious book. I do wonder how many people take up religion because of their own free will and what percentage is just because they were brought up with it and not to question it.
I think baptisms or any form of religious indoctrination should also be banned for under 18s. If you're not old enough to cast a meaningless vote for a government that will ignore you anyway you're certainly not old enough to decide what to believe with regards to your existence, worldly conduct and the afterlife.
you really do not know what you are talking about. Banning the bible and other religious texts for those under 18 will not stop their parents and other members of society from influencing them with religion. I know people who are christians, who go to church every sunday and pray basically every night and still have not read the bible all the way through. Banning the book would do nothing.
You don't know what you're talking about. I said all sorts of religious events, thus including baptisms or indeed church attendance for under 18s. Please read what I say before criticising it.
So banning baptisms and going to church are going to stop the parents from influencing their kids? You don't need to go to church or read the bible to be influenced by christianity if your parents are christian and the same goes for every other religion. Half of the people who are christian at my school don't go to church on a regular basis. Also, most baptisms happen when the child is very young, usually too young to even remember it or even know why it happened.
I also doubt that barring people under 18 from churches would be a very popular suggestion anyways.
Dancing Mustard wrote:Oh I see. So ten minutes ago it was order of the day to ban mentioning homosexuality. But now it's the Bible getting banned, that sort of thing isn't so cool?
C'mon Jay. Sort it out mate. This is hypocrisy of the highest order.
2dimes wrote:Jay, you've seen very few churches even mention hell yet somehow read the word into my post.
I truely hope there is no hell but it makes no difference to me if there is or not.
Not following. "read the word into my post"? I do read the Bible for myself. I have heard a sermon by John Haigi (sp) about hell. I have read a few books on the subject as well. But most churches I've been in over my lifetime seem to exclude this topic from Jesus' teachings. (Maybe I just attended them on the wrong day)
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
Dancing Mustard wrote:Oh I see. So ten minutes ago it was order of the day to ban mentioning homosexuality. But now it's the Bible getting banned, that sort of thing isn't so cool?
C'mon Jay. Sort it out mate. This is hypocrisy of the highest order.
I never called for the banning of anything. Showing it to kids in school yes. But the movie itself no.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
heavycola wrote:So it's kind of like scientology - don't tell them about the really far-out stuff until you have them well and truly snared, and have relieved them of as much cash as possible...
I guess it's a lose-lose situation. If they talk about hell people say "scare tactics", if they don't it's "money-snitching"
2dimes wrote:Jay, you've seen very few churches even mention hell yet somehow read the word into my post.
I truely hope there is no hell but it makes no difference to me if there is or not.
Not following. "read the word into my post"? I do read the Bible for myself. I have heard a sermon by John Haigi (sp) about hell. I have read a few books on the subject as well. But most churches I've been in over my lifetime seem to exclude this topic from Jesus' teachings. (Maybe I just attended them on the wrong day)
Jay i think you're supposed to attend on Sunday
The church may exclude hell from sermons but that doesn't mean they don't believe in it wholeheartedly.
The bible isn't concrete about hell; readers believe what they want (as with sooooo much else in there). Seems to me reading some guy's fire and brimstone interpretation is just going to scare you pointlessly. Course, if you're Anne 'Look at me! Look at me!' Coulter, hell is a source of unending joy as it is where all liberals/lefties/disagreers are going to suffer unimaginable torment for all eternity.
2dimes wrote:Jay, you've seen very few churches even mention hell yet somehow read the word into my post.
I truely hope there is no hell but it makes no difference to me if there is or not.
Not following. "read the word into my post"? I do read the Bible for myself. I have heard a sermon by John Haigi (sp) about hell. I have read a few books on the subject as well. But most churches I've been in over my lifetime seem to exclude this topic from Jesus' teachings. (Maybe I just attended them on the wrong day)
Jay i think you're supposed to attend on Sunday
The church may exclude hell from sermons but that doesn't mean they don't believe in it wholeheartedly.
The bible isn't concrete about hell; readers believe what they want (as with sooooo much else in there). Seems to me reading some guy's fire and brimstone interpretation is just going to scare you pointlessly. Course, if you're Anne 'Look at me! Look at me!' Coulter, hell is a source of unending joy as it is where all liberals/lefties/disagreers are going to suffer unimaginable torment for all eternity.
Always liked Anne "cute conservative" Coulter.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
She is an attention whore. And much as I would like to f*ck her over by projecting feelings of loving kindness and compassion towards her, I end up laughing at her instead. Paxman tore her a new arsehole, bless him. I mean I know we have our barneys on here about evolution vs creationism, but listening to her try and stick up for ID was like listening to a plumber discuss string theory.
No offence to plumbers, they are much more use than Ann 'can i get on tv again now please?' coulter ever will be, except as an object of laughter and derision. I cannot believe anyoen serious about progressive politics gives her any time at all, no matter what side of the spectrum they come from.
jay_a2j wrote:Always liked Anne "cute conservative" Coulter.
Oh come on Jay, I would have thought even you wouldn't have sunk this low...
She's a racist and a bigot of the highest order.
She uses the words 'raghead', 'jihad monkey' and 'camel jockey' to refer to Muslims.
She called Edwards a 'faggot' and accused Obama of being a supporter of Al-Quaeda...
Instead of airlines, she said Muslims should use 'flying carpets'.
She said North Korea should be 'nuked for fun'.
Cute, eh?
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
heavycola wrote:She is an attention whore. And much as I would like to f*ck her over by projecting feelings of loving kindness and compassion towards her, I end up laughing at her instead. Paxman tore her a new arsehole, bless him. I mean I know we have our barneys on here about evolution vs creationism, but listening to her try and stick up for ID was like listening to a plumber discuss string theory. No offence to plumbers, they are much more use than Ann 'can i get on tv again now please?' coulter ever will be, except as an object of laughter and derision. I cannot believe anyoen serious about progressive politics gives her any time at all, no matter what side of the spectrum they come from.
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
jay_a2j wrote:That's sensationalism. She doesn't mean it... but she sure has gotten popular because of it (kinda like Howard Stern).
And even if she does mean it...she's still cute. I was commenting on her looks not her politics.
Meh... Unfortunately as well has her views her voice bypasses her mouth and comes out of her nose...
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
vtmarik wrote:I still think that it's all an act along the lines of the Andy Kaufman and Jerry Lawler feud.
Its a bloody insensitive act is she's calling 9/11 widows 'witches' and suchlike
It would be OK if no-one took her seriously, but she has bestsellers and cons all over the world (in the UK too) hanging on her every word!
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
heavycola wrote:She is an attention whore. And much as I would like to f*ck her over by projecting feelings of loving kindness and compassion towards her, I end up laughing at her instead. Paxman tore her a new arsehole, bless him. I mean I know we have our barneys on here about evolution vs creationism, but listening to her try and stick up for ID was like listening to a plumber discuss string theory. No offence to plumbers, they are much more use than Ann 'can i get on tv again now please?' coulter ever will be, except as an object of laughter and derision. I cannot believe anyoen serious about progressive politics gives her any time at all, no matter what side of the spectrum they come from.
heavycola wrote:She is an attention whore. And much as I would like to f*ck her over by projecting feelings of loving kindness and compassion towards her, I end up laughing at her instead. Paxman tore her a new arsehole, bless him. I mean I know we have our barneys on here about evolution vs creationism, but listening to her try and stick up for ID was like listening to a plumber discuss string theory. No offence to plumbers, they are much more use than Ann 'can i get on tv again now please?' coulter ever will be, except as an object of laughter and derision. I cannot believe anyoen serious about progressive politics gives her any time at all, no matter what side of the spectrum they come from.
I thought she did well. Paxman obviously leans to the left. No surprise there!
Mainly because when asked to justify her beliefs in creationism she just went 'meeehhhhrhrhhh...'
I've heard much better arguments out of you or Luns. She seemed to have no knowledge of, well, of anything really! I could mount a better defence for ID!
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
vtmarik wrote:I still think that it's all an act along the lines of the Andy Kaufman and Jerry Lawler feud.
Its a bloody insensitive act is she's calling 9/11 widows 'witches' and suchlike
It would be OK if no-one took her seriously, but she has bestsellers and cons all over the world (in the UK too) hanging on her every word!
Everyone took Kaufman's Intergender Wrestling thing seriously, it basically ruined his career.
If it does turn out to be a satire, the cons are going to be the butt of every joke for decades to come. Humor is very personal, and I think she's hilarious. If she is serious, it'll be less funny.
Initiate discovery! Fire the Machines! Throw the switch Igor! THROW THE F***ING SWITCH!
heavycola wrote:She is an attention whore. And much as I would like to f*ck her over by projecting feelings of loving kindness and compassion towards her, I end up laughing at her instead. Paxman tore her a new arsehole, bless him. I mean I know we have our barneys on here about evolution vs creationism, but listening to her try and stick up for ID was like listening to a plumber discuss string theory. No offence to plumbers, they are much more use than Ann 'can i get on tv again now please?' coulter ever will be, except as an object of laughter and derision. I cannot believe anyoen serious about progressive politics gives her any time at all, no matter what side of the spectrum they come from.
I thought she did well. Paxman obviously leans to the left. No surprise there!
Mainly because when asked to justify her beliefs in creationism she just went 'meeehhhhrhrhhh...'
I've heard much better arguments out of you or Luns. She seemed to have no knowledge of, well, of anything really! I could mount a better defence for ID!
I think she was saying that there is no evidence for Darwinism and did not endorse an "alternative". Just that Darwinism is taught as science and she is saying its faith not science.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
heavycola wrote:She is an attention whore. And much as I would like to f*ck her over by projecting feelings of loving kindness and compassion towards her, I end up laughing at her instead. Paxman tore her a new arsehole, bless him. I mean I know we have our barneys on here about evolution vs creationism, but listening to her try and stick up for ID was like listening to a plumber discuss string theory. No offence to plumbers, they are much more use than Ann 'can i get on tv again now please?' coulter ever will be, except as an object of laughter and derision. I cannot believe anyoen serious about progressive politics gives her any time at all, no matter what side of the spectrum they come from.
Yeh. Paxo is known for giving pretty much everyone a hard time. He's a hardline interviewer and journalist, and he doesn't stand for any shit, but it would be hard to pin a political agenda on him.
He's an equal opportunity hater!
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.
