Re deities (my other reply truncated due to thick thumbs)
It is indeed very difficult to believe in a supernatural deity, without some sort of blind faith.
However when we look at our existence within our own universe we have to ask some pretty impossible to answer questions. It is for instance speculated with some justification that the very fabric of our own multidimensional spacetime is itself a physical manifestation of the physical characteristics of some higher level of 'universe'. Where does all this end, how does it all work? Where does physics end and God begin?
We exist (perhaps) but where and in what? Can we ever even begin to understand this vast deep impenetrable cosmos?
But where in all of this is there space for or need for an interventionist God?
Church of England "bewildered" by refusal of cinemas to show Church of England advert featuring the Lord's Prayer. It is considered that it may cause offence to other religions and atheists.
CofE now considering legal action.
This will be interesting especially if it gets a legal hearing. Lots of cans of worms in this one.
That is really appalling. Which cinemas exactly? Vue ones, Odeon ones? All of them?
Appalling in which way? The ban, or the protest?
The ban, obviously.
At a time when religion is killing people I'm not so sure.
I don't know if you're a religious person or not. However I find people that have irrational beliefs generally unfit for polite conversation. It does rather scare me.
People are killing people. People who classify those who don't share their own beliefs as apostates and infidels. Wherever belief is the core of a violent conflict (as opposed to money and power masquerading as religion), it is not belief that's the problem, but intolerance of the beliefs of others. Something that your post is considerably closer to on the spectrum than someone who wishes to promote the Lord's Prayer.
I tend to find people with glib, intellectually sloppy, 'trendy' views of the impossibility of their being a spiritual realm rather scare me. Not because of their own rather weak-minded arguments, but because they're so easily manipulated by God-haters like that nutter Dawkins for their own ends.
How can Dawkins be a god hater if he doesn't believe in god?
Presumably by hating the concept of deities. 'god-hater' not 'God hater'
Itnis indeed very difficult to believe in a supernatural deity, without some sort of blind faith.
Having defended Dawkins earlier re not hating God. I'd like to make it clear that I do hate the vile f*cker. I'd rather burn in the fires of hell than worship the c**t that created them.
Sorry: are you saying Dawkins is a vile fucker, or that God is?
Sorry rcs, let me clarify... I have no opinions regarding the fuckery of Dawkins. God on the other hand is a massive Bell-End.
As that well known philsopher Dave Gahan said "I don't want to start any blasphemous rumours, but I think that God's got a sick sense of humour"
BBC DG set to say we should have public vote on changes to the BBC.
Will need two thirds majorities in both Houses of Parliament and an online vote to endorse the changes (a dual lock)
That is ludicrous. Is the BBC more important than the NHS, education, the armed forces, the police, welfare, pensions and so on? NO.
It just shows you how up themselves the BBC is. I'd cut them another 5% just for suggesting such nonsense.
I like your idea. And the 2/3 majority is silly. Couldn't you amend the law with a simple majority?
Did you like the morning thread that mentioned the Quasi-AV the Tories use to elect their leaders?
Unfortunately I was asleep for what must have been a glorious moment. I must say, the "stop X" voting system wouldn't do us any good in the country at large
Church of England "bewildered" by refusal of cinemas to show Church of England advert featuring the Lord's Prayer. It is considered that it may cause offence to other religions and atheists.
CofE now considering legal action.
This will be interesting especially if it gets a legal hearing. Lots of cans of worms in this one.
That is really appalling. Which cinemas exactly? Vue ones, Odeon ones? All of them?
Appalling in which way? The ban, or the protest?
The ban, obviously.
At a time when religion is killing people I'm not so sure.
I don't know if you're a religious person or not. However I find people that have irrational beliefs generally unfit for polite conversation. It does rather scare me.
People are killing people. People who classify those who don't share their own beliefs as apostates and infidels. Wherever belief is the core of a violent conflict (as opposed to money and power masquerading as religion), it is not belief that's the problem, but intolerance of the beliefs of others. Something that your post is considerably closer to on the spectrum than someone who wishes to promote the Lord's Prayer.
I tend to find people with glib, intellectually sloppy, 'trendy' views of the impossibility of their being a spiritual realm rather scare me. Not because of their own rather weak-minded arguments, but because they're so easily manipulated by God-haters like that nutter Dawkins for their own ends.
How can Dawkins be a god hater if he doesn't believe in god?
Presumably by hating the concept of deities. 'god-hater' not 'God hater'
Itnis indeed very difficult to believe in a supernatural deity, without some sort of blind faith.
Having defended Dawkins earlier re not hating God. I'd like to make it clear that I do hate the vile f*cker. I'd rather burn in the fires of hell than worship the c**t that created them.
Sorry: are you saying Dawkins is a vile fucker, or that God is?
Sorry rcs, let me clarify... I have no opinions regarding the fuckery of Dawkins. God on the other hand is a massive Bell-End.
So you agree with the Riddick (Vin Diesel) quote upthread?
BBC DG set to say we should have public vote on changes to the BBC.
Will need two thirds majorities in both Houses of Parliament and an online vote to endorse the changes (a dual lock)
That is ludicrous. Is the BBC more important than the NHS, education, the armed forces, the police, welfare, pensions and so on? NO.
It just shows you how up themselves the BBC is. I'd cut them another 5% just for suggesting such nonsense.
I like your idea. And the 2/3 majority is silly. Couldn't you amend the law with a simple majority?
Did you like the morning thread that mentioned the Quasi-AV the Tories use to elect their leaders?
Unfortunately I was asleep for what must have been a glorious moment. I must say, the "stop X" voting system wouldn't do us any good in the country at large
I shall schedule the main AV thread for the afternoon UK time
Church of England "bewildered" by refusal of cinemas to show Church of England advert featuring the Lord's Prayer. It is considered that it may cause offence to other religions and atheists.
CofE now considering legal action.
This will be interesting especially if it gets a legal hearing. Lots of cans of worms in this one.
That is really appalling. Which cinemas exactly? Vue ones, Odeon ones? All of them?
Appalling in which way? The ban, or the protest?
The ban, obviously.
At a time when religion is killing people I'm not so sure.
I don't know if you're a religious person or not. However I find people that have irrational beliefs generally unfit for polite conversation. It does rather scare me.
People are killing people. People who classify those who don't share their own beliefs as apostates and infidels. Wherever belief is the core of a violent conflict (as opposed to money and power masquerading as religion), it is not belief that's the problem, but intolerance of the beliefs of others. Something that your post is considerably closer to on the spectrum than someone who wishes to promote the Lord's Prayer. realm rather scare me. Not because of their own rather weak-minded arguments, but because they're so easily manipulated by God-haters like that nutter Dawkins for their own ends.
How can Dawkins be a god hater if he doesn't believe in god?
Presumably by hating the concept of deities. 'god-hater' not 'God hater'
Itnis indeed very difficult to believe in a supernatural deity, without some sort of blind faith.
Having defended Dawkins earlier re not hating God. I'd like to make it clear that I do hate the vile f*cker. I'd rather burn in the fires of hell than worship the c**t that created them.
Sorry: are you saying Dawkins is a vile fucker, or that God is?
Sorry rcs, let me clarify... I have no opinions regarding the fuckery of Dawkins. God on the other hand is a massive Bell-End.
As that well known philsopher Dave Gahan said "I don't want to start any blasphemous rumours, but I think that God's got a sick sense of humour"
You will rue the day you ever posted that tweet on here. Mark my word
I'm sure there'll be one of the Nats on here soon say the money was taken by English tax payers because of the VAT charged on donations or some shite like that
BBC DG set to say we should have public vote on changes to the BBC.
Will need two thirds majorities in both Houses of Parliament and an online vote to endorse the changes (a dual lock)
That is ludicrous. Is the BBC more important than the NHS, education, the armed forces, the police, welfare, pensions and so on? NO.
It just shows you how up themselves the BBC is. I'd cut them another 5% just for suggesting such nonsense.
I like your idea. And the 2/3 majority is silly. Couldn't you amend the law with a simple majority?
Did you like the morning thread that mentioned the Quasi-AV the Tories use to elect their leaders?
Unfortunately I was asleep for what must have been a glorious moment. I must say, the "stop X" voting system wouldn't do us any good in the country at large
I shall schedule the main AV thread for the afternoon UK time
A true gent. Although I'll be back in the sceptered isle on the expected date of publication!
BBC DG set to say we should have public vote on changes to the BBC.
Will need two thirds majorities in both Houses of Parliament and an online vote to endorse the changes (a dual lock)
That is ludicrous. Is the BBC more important than the NHS, education, the armed forces, the police, welfare, pensions and so on? NO.
It just shows you how up themselves the BBC is. I'd cut them another 5% just for suggesting such nonsense.
I like your idea. And the 2/3 majority is silly. Couldn't you amend the law with a simple majority?
Did you like the morning thread that mentioned the Quasi-AV the Tories use to elect their leaders?
It's not AV - it's termed an "Exhaustive Ballot". You only have one vote per round!
That's why I said quasi-AV
quasi-
a combining form meaning “resembling,” “having some, but not all of the features of"
Er, There is no resemblance whatsoever - with AV, you cast all your preference at once.
So there
Like AV, in each round, the candidate with the lowest vote is eliminated, until there are two left, and the winner is the one that receives more than half the votes.
Re deities (my other reply truncated due to thick thumbs)
It is indeed very difficult to believe in a supernatural deity, without some sort of blind faith.
However when we look at our existence within our own universe we have to ask some pretty impossible to answer questions. It is for instance speculated with some justification that the very fabric of our own multidimensional spacetime is itself a physical manifestation of the physical characteristics of some higher level of 'universe'. Where does all this end, how does it all work? Where does physics end and God begin?
We exist (perhaps) but where and in what? Can we ever even begin to understand this vast deep impenetrable cosmos?
But where in all of this is there space for or need for an interventionist God?
I am not saying there is. But ultimately we still have to confront the impossibility of existence, what is it what the blinking heck is it we are a part of and where did it come from?
BBC DG set to say we should have public vote on changes to the BBC.
Will need two thirds majorities in both Houses of Parliament and an online vote to endorse the changes (a dual lock)
That is ludicrous. Is the BBC more important than the NHS, education, the armed forces, the police, welfare, pensions and so on? NO.
It just shows you how up themselves the BBC is. I'd cut them another 5% just for suggesting such nonsense.
I like your idea. And the 2/3 majority is silly. Couldn't you amend the law with a simple majority?
Did you like the morning thread that mentioned the Quasi-AV the Tories use to elect their leaders?
It's not AV - it's termed an "Exhaustive Ballot". You only have one vote per round!
That's why I said quasi-AV
quasi-
a combining form meaning “resembling,” “having some, but not all of the features of"
Er, There is no resemblance whatsoever - with AV, you cast all your preference at once.
So there
Like AV, in each round, the candidate with the lowest vote is eliminated, until there are two left, and the winner is the one that receives more than half the votes.
Like AV, it allows a Stop X candidate to win.
And on that bombshell, I'm off to bed.
Hopefully I'll dream about AV tonight.
No, silly! There is no resemblance whatsoever - with AV, you cast all your preference at once. WITHOUT knowing who'll have the lowest preferences each "round"!!
I'm astounded the US government spends more public money on health than we do.
Perhaps the NHS haters on here can explain why if the NHS is so bloated, inefficient, filled with useless managers, etc that we do so amazingly well on a pittance and achieve similar or better outcomes to countries which spend far more.
There are rumours the biggest face amongst the Paris plotters, young Mr Abdelslam, has been firmly ID'd in Belgium but not pinned down and is mobile at the moment.
There is a general election in Gibraltar this Thursday. Good luck to Fabian Picardo and his team
I was at the GSLP rally in John Macintosh Square today and listened to Picardo speak very fluently and eloquently without notes for over half an hour. He was excellent, so it's a shame I despise his politics so utterly.
He got some classic political cliches in there ... "Read my lips" a few times, "It's the economy, stupid" (attributed) and finished off by repeating "Five Days To Save Gibraltar" very loudly. Oldies but still good value.
BBC DG set to say we should have public vote on changes to the BBC.
Will need two thirds majorities in both Houses of Parliament and an online vote to endorse the changes (a dual lock)
why such a high bar? what could possibly justify 2/3rds? no doubt the government will tell the BBC to ditch some of its non-core operations, and charging might come in for iPlayer. But it is hardly constitutional!
If the BBC resist too much it will only lead to more drastic change. Look how successful the 'carpetbagger' activists with building societies that resisted floatations. If the government offered shares in the BBC to licence fee payers they'd win a public vote by a big margin.
Comments
So relinquish the licence fee and go voluntary pay per view. Put your money where your mouth is.
Mind you those who have demanded referendums in recent years haven't received the result they wished for.
quasi-
a combining form meaning “resembling,” “having some, but not all of the features of"
So there
Like AV, it allows a Stop X candidate to win.
And on that bombshell, I'm off to bed.
Hopefully I'll dream about AV tonight.
New Thread New Thread
Perhaps the NHS haters on here can explain why if the NHS is so bloated, inefficient, filled with useless managers, etc that we do so amazingly well on a pittance and achieve similar or better outcomes to countries which spend far more.
https://twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/668467999653892096/photo/1
Very speculative.
He got some classic political cliches in there ... "Read my lips" a few times, "It's the economy, stupid" (attributed) and finished off by repeating "Five Days To Save Gibraltar" very loudly. Oldies but still good value.