Not soccer at all. It's football. It started in the UK, apparently, where it's called football. The World Cup is run by FIFA, not FISA - the second F is for football.
Yes I'm a pedantic twit, and I don't even like football.
Yes I'm a pedantic twit, and I don't even like football.
Yet our society celebrates abortion....
Celebrates it? No I don't think so. You need to give your head a severe wobble! 😡 What our society does is give a woman CHOICE. No woman would abort at such a late stage without very good reason. And NOBODY would celebrate it. This has to be the most moronic comment I've ever read, and I've read a lot of comments for a lot of years!
Celebrating abortion is exactly what was all over the media a few weeks ago when Ireland had their referendum. Call it choice if you like, but over 99% of the time, a woman already made a choice (to have sex - since less than 1% of abortions are due to rape) - I don't think that killing a tiny humans a choice that should be available, yet after the referendum result, people were cheering and crying with happiness
Pathetic indeed. Do some research before posting crap. But then again it requires a brain. Something you clearly don't have and never will.
No ireland was celebrating the fact that women don't have to flee their own country or buy unregulated abortion pills online! They were celebrating the fact that women have a say in over their own body, the fact that women are no longer forced to carry a baby with fatal abnormalities or forced to carry a baby that's a product of rape. Get it right fool!
Did you ignore what I wrote? Less than 1% of abortions are "products of rape" - and all of the other women already had "control of their bodies" and made a choice (to have sex). If you care about bodily autonomy, how can you argue that people should be able to destroy other humans' bodies?
I'm well aware that foetal anomalies occur - but they're obviously incredibly rare. They've obviously been heavily reported during the referendum campaign -but the vast majority of abortions happen simply because the woman doesn't want to go through pregnancy. There are many infertile couples who desperately want to be able to adopt a child at the beginning of their life, so the woman wouldn't need to raise the child if they didn't want to.
Of course I know that contraception can fail, people still make a choice to have sex.
Of course I know that contraception can fail, people still make a choice to have sex.
You know you really couldn't make it up. This female spouts about god and quotes the bible everywhere, so in that case I have a few words for her. I'm sure she'll be able to fill in the blanks...... Let (s)he who is without sin.....
I'm saying abortion is wrong, that's not the same as judging individuals. That quote is from an incident in which a woman is about to be stoned to death - I'm commenting, not killing, and I'm not attacking anyone, only a procedure. Do you not think that we should criticise actions that are wrong? Do you think that Jesus' command means that we shouldn't criticise rape, paedophilia etc? Critiquing a practice is not the same as being judgemental of people.
Grace would clearly have us all living "under his eye". Thankfully we don't have to!
This is nothing like the Handmaid's tale - nearly every pregnancy the result of consensual sex, not rape; and no one's advocating for the other aspects of the Handmaid's tale, it's an illogical thing to comment.
I was in the position myself! I was pregnant with twins I miscarried 1 twin which in turn could have caused me to have an internal hemorrhage so I was advised to abort my son. I refused because I wanted to which was my choice! But what about the irish woman who weren't given the choice and have sadly died due to circumstances like mine? You're sitting there on your high horse talking about something you have no experience with! I've been through it and refused but the difference with me is I don't judge people who choose the other option! Women are not incubators for other people either if they don't want to be pregnant that's up to them.
I'm so sorry that you went through that. But the law already allowed for abortions when genuinely necessary to save the mother's life; the law change in reland is specifically so that abortion on demand can be made available.
Savita Halappanavar Google her. It's sad but this woman dying is actually what caused a chain of events which introduced a new law to protect women! And also it's thanks to her women in ireland actually stood up to their government to repeal the 8th! Stop speaking on a subject in which you have no knowledge or experience.
Those women didn't necessarily die because they were refused an abortion, almost all died because of medical complications. Abortions themselves, whilst supposedly "safe" and legal, are seriously dangerous - indeed women have died, and 466 ambulances were called to abortion clinics last year in London alone; there's also literally immeasurable psychological harm done.
I'm disgusted that you have used the grief of these parents to get on your soapbox. Hang your head in shame, you're a pathetic excuse of womanhood.
I think you need to show a more Christian attitude to your fellow women. Jesus would be ashamed of you!
People’s ignorance really baffles me 😡 I have such respect for this mother and father for sharing their heartbreaking story and yet there appears to be an uneducated moron making comments which clearly show they actually don’t have a clue
What an utterly ignorant comment. No, we don’t,, Grace. No one does. If you’ve had children, you’ll understand and should be in no position to judge any woman. It’s a personal, individual choice, that you have no right to judge any woman on. There is always a reason why a woman has one. And there are many varied reasons why I woman would choose to have one. You’ve no right to judge them. Lest you be judged.
Why have so many of you missed my point? There aren't words enough for my condolences to the family in the OP. I desperately hope that the pain heals -to the extent that pain from such horrendous tragedy ever potentially could- and the pain fades.
But it's because tiny, preterm (younger than the 9 month point at which babies are usually born) humans are pricelessly precious, as shown by this story, that I'm bemused by how many people were praising the referendum result in Ireland recently. People around the world were giving words of support, and in Ireland, people were crying with happiness in the streets, because of the option to kill tiny humans.
If this were only about instances in which there are serious medical problems, I wouldn't be arguing. Those instances have been all over the media recently because those are the abortion cases that make money for magazine publishers. But the law change in Ireland, and abortion activist groups, are for abortion on demand. And we all know that the vast majority of abortions happen because the mother hadn't intended to get pregnant when she chose to have sex (and sex is a choice, not a necessity - it only exists because of the reproductive function).
Our culture tells us that it's only a medical procedure, like having a cyst removed, because a foetus is "just a cluster of cells" - but the unseen developing human is in fact, as the OP^ shows, precious.
I'm not judging, because I'm not discussing any person, only a procedure. And I've not used derogatory adjectives - I've not said that anything or anyone is "evil" "selfish" etc. So it's unwarranted to call me judgemental, though I don't care if you do; but I'm upset that you've so misunderstood me. Call me a moron and a disgrace all you like, I don't mind at all; but I wish you wouldn't so misinterpret and make assumptions.
And know that, contrary to one of the above comments, I'm firmly against the cruelty happening right now at the US border, and have spent most of the last few days debating that - though usually, I spend my time arguing in favour of overseas aid and fairer international trade. We all need to stop putting each other into left and right boxes.
But it's because tiny, preterm (younger than the 9 month point at which babies are usually born) humans are pricelessly precious, as shown by this story, that I'm bemused by how many people were praising the referendum result in Ireland recently. People around the world were giving words of support, and in Ireland, people were crying with happiness in the streets, because of the option to kill tiny humans.
If this were only about instances in which there are serious medical problems, I wouldn't be arguing. Those instances have been all over the media recently because those are the abortion cases that make money for magazine publishers. But the law change in Ireland, and abortion activist groups, are for abortion on demand. And we all know that the vast majority of abortions happen because the mother hadn't intended to get pregnant when she chose to have sex (and sex is a choice, not a necessity - it only exists because of the reproductive function).
Our culture tells us that it's only a medical procedure, like having a cyst removed, because a foetus is "just a cluster of cells" - but the unseen developing human is in fact, as the OP^ shows, precious.
I'm not judging, because I'm not discussing any person, only a procedure. And I've not used derogatory adjectives - I've not said that anything or anyone is "evil" "selfish" etc. So it's unwarranted to call me judgemental, though I don't care if you do; but I'm upset that you've so misunderstood me. Call me a moron and a disgrace all you like, I don't mind at all; but I wish you wouldn't so misinterpret and make assumptions.
And know that, contrary to one of the above comments, I'm firmly against the cruelty happening right now at the US border, and have spent most of the last few days debating that - though usually, I spend my time arguing in favour of overseas aid and fairer international trade. We all need to stop putting each other into left and right boxes.
Even though there are people aborting for reasons of irresponsibility/inconvenience, I'd rather that was an option (till they address/sort that issue) than have them forced to have unwanted kids, abused kids etc. Don't even get me started on the whole kids in care homes issues we have already as it is.
I'm well aware that there are children in need of adoption - but that's because they've been removed from unstable families; parents wanting to adopt want new babies, so that they can bond with their adopted chiild from the beginning of their life and because they worry that children (older than babies)might be harder to integrate because the dysfunctional home from which they've been removed could have impacted them.
I'm not saying that that's right - it would be wonderful if all adopting parents had no preference as to the age of the child (children in the care system are just as valuable and deserving of a home as anyone else, obviously) - but it is a very understandable reality.
Thus, if women who were accidentally pregnant offered the baby for adoption, rather than killing it in the womb, it would bring immeasurable joy to a couple who can't have their own children, rather than adding to the foster care system as you suggest.
I'm not saying that that's right - it would be wonderful if all adopting parents had no preference as to the age of the child (children in the care system are just as valuable and deserving of a home as anyone else, obviously) - but it is a very understandable reality.
Thus, if women who were accidentally pregnant offered the baby for adoption, rather than killing it in the womb, it would bring immeasurable joy to a couple who can't have their own children, rather than adding to the foster care system as you suggest.
It’s a collection of cells ffs not a baby! Get some education or speak to a medical professional. And foetal abnormalities are common place not rare actually...I have friends that have had terminations because they would not have been viable. And your imaginary sky daddy doesn’t exist and that book is a vile pile of hatred and division.
Have you studied embryology? There was quite a lot of it on my uni course. How have you concluded that "it's a collection of cells"? We're also collections of cells, BTW. Which stage of pregnancy are you referring to? Abortion is allowed here up to 24 weeks - but at 20 weeks, the offspring look like the above photo - do those twins look like only "a collection of cells"? http://www.ehd.org/science_main.php?level=i
And just so you know Christmas was originally Yule....a pagan festival stole by the Christians. Eostre was changed to Easter and we are forced to live by the Christian calendar even though the earth is billions of years old. I’m with Stephen Fry on God, if he did exist he would be a vile, evil God giving children cancer etc. Speak to a midwife or doctor. They would disagree with you. Take it you are childless and have never been pregnant? So you know absolutely nothing.
LOL of course I know about the history of the festivals, have you actually studied the history of Jesus? The Church made use of days on which people were already using as celebration days, that doesn't change the facts about Christ.Indeed I have no children, I'm too malnourished from anorexia to even have periods. It's illogical to use that fact as an argument - my personal physiology doesn't change whether or not abortion is OK. Why do you think that a doctor or midwife would disagree with me? Have you just ignored the science? The midwives I have spoken to agree with me, I'll ask a doctor when I get the chance
There are no “facts” about Christ, it is a work of fiction. Doctors and midwives do indeed disagree with you as they are medically qualified. Ignored the science? Erm no that’s exactly what I’m alluding to...medicine and science don’t agree with your viewpoint. So you are childless but you have spoken with extremely busy midwives? Yeah I’m calling BS on that one! 😂I’ve got 4 children and had numerous midwives and consultants they all disagree with you. Again abortion is ok and no one should feel guilty about it. So why does the imaginary sky daddy give children cancer? Please do answer.
So you asked all of the doctors and midwives involved in your pregnancies whether the foetus was just “a collection of cells” and they all agreed that it was? The midwives I was referring to, that I‘ve discussed this with, are my mother and aunt.
You are ignoring the science – seriously, dis you even look at the link I added? Have you read any textbooks or articles about foetal development? You claim that what’s aborted is just “a collection of cells”, but any research will show you that that’s only the case for several days-by 7 weeks it’s heart is beating, by 20 weeks it looks as we can see from the photo n the original post^ - but abortions are allowed up to 24 weeks.
So you’ve not actually investigated the reasoning behind Christianity at all? You’re just presuming that it’s fiction, but haven’t actually looked at the academic work relating to it –scientifically, philosophically and historically?
Where do I start? Would you even read any of it if I did?
You are ignoring the science – seriously, dis you even look at the link I added? Have you read any textbooks or articles about foetal development? You claim that what’s aborted is just “a collection of cells”, but any research will show you that that’s only the case for several days-by 7 weeks it’s heart is beating, by 20 weeks it looks as we can see from the photo n the original post^ - but abortions are allowed up to 24 weeks.
So you’ve not actually investigated the reasoning behind Christianity at all? You’re just presuming that it’s fiction, but haven’t actually looked at the academic work relating to it –scientifically, philosophically and historically?
Where do I start? Would you even read any of it if I did?
Yes they did. It is fiction and horrid fiction at best. It’s hatred and division. I’m highly educated and so are most people I know including doctors and scientists. No one I know that is educated thinks it’s any better than social control. I prefer TLOTR. And to be brutally honest I know someone who had a much desired and longed for baby terminated beyond 12 weeks. Do you know why? Because they would have been born with part of a brain and a fully exposed brain at birth and would have died immediately. They only found out at the scan. They didn’t want to lose their baby but you cannot force someone to go through a pregnancy knowing the baby will definitely die at birth. It’s cruel. So how dare you judge people when you haven’t even been pregnant.
I'm not judging people -I never mentioned any people, nor did use judgemental words. Ii only said that abortion is wrong, but I also said that I wouldn't argue about it in cases where doctors are certain that there's a serious medical issue, as in the case of your friend.
The Bible is a complicated array of very distinct texts, iincluding poetry and historiical records. Historians have been studying and debating it in universities around the world for centuries, and new archeological discoveries have added support to the events the Bible records. Why do you thiink that ignoring a huge feild of academc study is the "educated" way to reach a conclusion?
The Bible is a complicated array of very distinct texts, iincluding poetry and historiical records. Historians have been studying and debating it in universities around the world for centuries, and new archeological discoveries have added support to the events the Bible records. Why do you thiink that ignoring a huge feild of academc study is the "educated" way to reach a conclusion?
Now you're claiming to be an authority on adoption too. Adoption carries a whole set of issues itself. Nor are all children from dysfunctional families. How dare you! 
😡 You think because you've been to university you know it all. Let me tell you young lady you know Jack $hit about the real world. Having been involved in adoption your comments turn my stomach. Maybe you should learn the meaning of your name (and not the acronym you made up) and practice it, because you have shown no grace here!
😡 You think because you've been to university you know it all. Let me tell you young lady you know Jack $hit about the real world. Having been involved in adoption your comments turn my stomach. Maybe you should learn the meaning of your name (and not the acronym you made up) and practice it, because you have shown no grace here!
Grace is undeserved forgiveness – theologically, it’s used to refer to ultimate forgiveness offered to us through Jesus’ death. Though we deserve to be destroyed after death (hell), we are offered eternal life (heaven) because of the sacrifice Jesus made in our place. That’s why my dad named me Grace, and the acronym (which was not made up by me) happens to summarise it well.
It doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t say that killing developing humans is wrong – which is all I’ve done here.
It doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t say that killing developing humans is wrong – which is all I’ve done here.
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”" Matthew 22:37-40
Me too - however, given how quickly new medical advances are being made (and the rate is continually increasing), it is genuinely possible that new treatments will be able well within our lifetimes.
I think that, given she's been an ambassador for World Vision USA, that she might rather media coverage was given to the people who have nothing to eat, than to what she doesn't eat.
Here in the UK, they're completely illegal. It's basic genetics - aggressive behaviour is partly the result of genetics, and some dog breeds have far more of the genes predisposing to aggression. Stopping their use as service dogs will mean fewer are bred, so gradually harm can be reduced without any dogs actually being harmed.
That's barking mad. She's really taking the piss. Obviously telling tails.
The Handmaid's Tale was referenced several times in the recent House of Commons debate on abortion; how have we reached a point where fiction is used as a political argument?
It's centuries of greed by nations like ours that has created the conditions migrants are trying to flee. We need to do far more to help their nations develop, with genuinely fair trade deals; action on corporate tax dodging and misinvoicing (https://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/aid-in-reverse-how-poor-countries-develop-rich-countries/), and effective aid programs that enable future self sufficiency.
For how long have the wealthier countries poured aid money into the less fortunate countries? Is there no greed and corruption amongst their people and governments? Europe cannot accommodate the rest of the world.
"Poured"? 0.7%, in case you weren't aware, is absolutely tiny. And in fact, amazing progress has been made because of that aid, eg. http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/datablog/2015/jul/06/what-millennium-development-goals-achieved-mdgs - the corruption that exists is mainly the result of Western colonialisation and corporate interference.
“Now, a lot has happened since I was last in Ireland. I became a grandmother twice over, which is just about the greatest thing in the world. As you may have heard, I ran for president. That didn’t exactly work out how I had hoped.
“I’ve also seen what’s possible when young people participate, and make your voices heard. The Irish abortion referendum was an inspiring sight. People flew home to vote from all over the world.”
Some words from former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Trinity College where she is receiving an honorary doctorate today.
“I’ve also seen what’s possible when young people participate, and make your voices heard. The Irish abortion referendum was an inspiring sight. People flew home to vote from all over the world.”
Some words from former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Trinity College where she is receiving an honorary doctorate today.
"I've become a grandmother twice over.... isn't it wonderful that people voted to kill other offspring?"
Perhaps. But dangerous things can happen when Apprentice presenters leave that role..
I seriously don't understand why anyone would want to eat in one of these places when the cost of one meal could instead feed a dozen starving children for a month.
Maybe because they have WORKED HARD for their money..and want to enjoy it
Whether they worked hard or not, none of us needs restaurant meals to enjoy life. People working harder in developing countries, providing things that we use, are living in slums and struggling to survive - why doesn't the privilege of helping them excite you
Why should we not enjoy restaurant meals ? Best they stop breeding And feed the kids they have
We are born into wealth, others are born into extreme poverty. To spend completely unnecessarily on our own enjoyment makes no sense. "Stop breeding"? What's wrong with you? Those who have many children do so in part because they know that some will be lost to disease, and also because they don't have the privilege of contraception and sex ed that exists here.
According to what evidence? The research mentioned is hardly substantive, particularly since it only looks at adolescents, whose brains are confused about sex anyway. If "suppression" is unhelpful, it's because we should instead replace some of those thoughts. If people thought about sex less, it's conceivable that STI rates, sex abuse, heartbreak and accidental pregnancies would be reduced. Like junk food, just because something's tempting doesn't mean that more of it is best for health and happiness.
Wouldnt it be the opposite? if people thought about sex more it would be more premeditated this youd be prepared with protection? just seems like logic to me though
Interesting point - someone should research it. I'd have thought that it wouldn't lead to safer sex, since thoughts are more likely to be about acting impulsive, the act itself, rather than planning protection. But I'm hypothesising, I have no experience.
Teenagers aren’t confused about sex unless they’ve been misinformed or repressed. Brain adolescence also lasts until one’s mid-twenties. The adolescent brain is only developing in its prefrontal cortex, which has to do with executive function, not sexual impulse. It makes total sense to teach them to healthily embrace sexual thought instead of repressing their impulses as though they are shameful.
Casual sex is not healthy. It literally has serious health risks.
The problem with the bible is it's open to any interpretation you would like to attribute. Those that claim it own it and can do with it what they will. It's been used to justify some of the most horrible crimes in history yet snowflakes like you Grace just won't bloody learn.
How do you conclude that I'm a snowflake? And how have you reached that conclusion about the Bible? Indeed, some people have misquoted it for selfish purposes, but if you take the time to study it thoroughly, there are clear messages, most importantly, Jesus said that the greatest command is to love God, and the next most important is to love our neighbours. There's nothing that could justify cruelty to immigrants.
Will Ferrell to star in Eurovision film Our prayers have been answered 
I know that you're not serious, but still, I feel compelled to say - this^ is not what prayer is about. This^ isn't an answer to prayer, God is more concerned about other things. But I'm glad that Eurovision silliness is to be extended.
What is he concerned about, dying children in Africa? Can't really be that concerned can he
Sam Baker Those children are suffering because of our nation's greed. But have you asked Him(God)? Seriously, sometimes we understand things better when we pray. God is incomparably more knowledgeable than we are, yet we frequently presume that just because we don't know the reason that God allows something, there is no reason, and we act like children who won't talk with their parents about things they don't understand. A parent will do/allow many things that their toddler might not like at the time; in the same way, God can have reasons that we don't understand now.
Ultimately, God wants us to choose to follow Him, so that we'll spend eternity with Him in heaven. That is infinitely more significant than the brief time we spend on Earth. The tragedies of life are, for many of us, what we need to be prompted to seek Him. When life is perfect, we ignore God, and will miss out on heaven. When we seek God in difficult times, He gives amazing comfort, and we can find eternal life.
Throughout history and around the world, there have been/are many people whose lives have been far, far, far less comfortable than ours are in 21st century Britain, but who've followed God, and consequently had the deep inner joy and strength - and who'll have endless joy free of sadness as a result.
In the meantime, God helps those suffering through us, if we're not complacent - but as a nation, we are.
Ultimately, God wants us to choose to follow Him, so that we'll spend eternity with Him in heaven. That is infinitely more significant than the brief time we spend on Earth. The tragedies of life are, for many of us, what we need to be prompted to seek Him. When life is perfect, we ignore God, and will miss out on heaven. When we seek God in difficult times, He gives amazing comfort, and we can find eternal life.
Throughout history and around the world, there have been/are many people whose lives have been far, far, far less comfortable than ours are in 21st century Britain, but who've followed God, and consequently had the deep inner joy and strength - and who'll have endless joy free of sadness as a result.
In the meantime, God helps those suffering through us, if we're not complacent - but as a nation, we are.
Support for Art School rebuild but not at public expense
It's not up to me - but WHY would public money be used?! More money is needed for healthcare and the homeless, why on Earth spend it on an artefact???
Solving the hospital bed crisis won't stop death, giving money to the poor won't stop poverty. Maintaining a culture that allows free expression and contemplation of the soul is a way to cultivate the type if compassion that means people won't stop trying and becoming apathetic. Religions have lost alot of their credibility so we need all the help we can get.
Lucca Ferla they both need to be better managed - but are you genuinely saying that ore money for housing the homeless and funding the NHS wouldn't make a difference?
More interestingly, what do you mean by "Religions have lost alot of their credibility so we need all the help we can get"? Some Churches have had terrible things happen in them - but there are plenty that haven't. Either way, given that we all have entertainment and culture available through television and the internet, we don't need galleries/museumms/art or music events to enjoy life and feel fufilled - or at least, not if we have a relationship with God, which is not the same as religion, and gives more life satisfaction than anything else.
More interestingly, what do you mean by "Religions have lost alot of their credibility so we need all the help we can get"? Some Churches have had terrible things happen in them - but there are plenty that haven't. Either way, given that we all have entertainment and culture available through television and the internet, we don't need galleries/museumms/art or music events to enjoy life and feel fufilled - or at least, not if we have a relationship with God, which is not the same as religion, and gives more life satisfaction than anything else.
The SPLC is dangerous, divisive and dishonest. This isn't about free speech so much as it's about truth and harmony. Labelling Maajid Nawaz as the SPLC did is deceitful, and will only worsen societal tension.
The bible also says to adhere to the laws of the land
It's God's land, not Trump's. Lawmakers aren't entitled, so far as God's concerned, to break His laws.
The Israelites were also told to be careful who they allowed into their society.
When God instructed the Hebrews not to mix with other tribes, it was because they turned away from God (Jehovah/ Yaweh) to the pagan gods of those neighbouring tribes when they mixed. That doesn't apply now. Very few Americans are in love with God now, and the decline is to do with materialism, modern paganism and atheism, not the influence of refugees or economic migrants.
Ultimately, commands to keep themselves separate from other tribes was instruction for a specific time, in the Old Testament -then, Jesus came and told us to love our neighbours as ourselves, and taught the parable of the good Samaritan. Peter and Paul both gave clear teachings about the fact that we shouldn't isolate ourselves from other racial groups.
Ultimately, commands to keep themselves separate from other tribes was instruction for a specific time, in the Old Testament -then, Jesus came and told us to love our neighbours as ourselves, and taught the parable of the good Samaritan. Peter and Paul both gave clear teachings about the fact that we shouldn't isolate ourselves from other racial groups.
Republican hypocrites, especially Evangelicals twist the Bible to say whatever they want to hear.
How do you define evangelical? There are plenty who are not Trump fans at all. The way that the label has been used in the media has linked it to people with certain political views, but that's not what it means at all. t's more about trying to put following God and EVANGELising before religiously enforcing Church traditions (as in Catholicism). Look at this, for example:http://www.eauk.org/connect/about-us/basis-of-faith.cfm
refugees? These are illegals
They're human beings, just as much as you. What does "illegal" mean exactly? The only laws they've supposedly broken are cruel and unjustified claims to dominion over pieces of land. I know that immigration needs restrictions - but compassion should be the foundation.
Right but not illegal aliens.
They're only "illegal" in the sense that selfish lawmakers have decided that they are - but those lawmakers don't overrule God, and they have no more right to a safe place to live than the refugees.
We treat natives that break the law by putting them in jail, and their children go to family, or foster care, or remain in the care of the government. The children in the custody of ORR are safe and well fed, compared to their trek across a dangerous desert. We welcome LEGAL immigrants. But you must follow the law to avoid being arrested and separated, whether native or guest. Jesus was not a lawbreaker.
"The law"? That human beings are banned from a land mass that they're desperate to enter to escape extreme crime and violence?
God is definitely not OK with all human made laws - do you think that Germans should have willingly handed over their Jewish neighbours because the government told them to? Is that what you think Jesus would have done?
God is definitely not OK with all human made laws - do you think that Germans should have willingly handed over their Jewish neighbours because the government told them to? Is that what you think Jesus would have done?
Because porn is a horrific thing, and leaves some of its victims feeling unable to go on. One of many, many ways that commercialisation of sex has destroyed lives
Jesus gave His life - and suffered beyond imagination - to make it possible for us to go to "heaven". With all due respect to Hayley^ it is not witty, just stupid, to call her the lesbian jesus.
Nah. So far as phone messages go, safety trumps privacy - it should be possible for messages to be accessed for the sake of tackling terrorism. Why would I care if police read my messages?
Part of the issue is sex-obsessed media. The Independent is constantly desperate to contribute to this.
Or perhaps they're not actually about sexuality, and you should stop presuming that everything is?
Encourage and facilitate the actual game, don't let the daft football-as-religion culture that we have (in the UK) infiltrate. People enjoying playing the sport is great - people going wild over other people playing it (and paying insane amounts of money for tickets and merchandise) sucks.
Obviously, this is good - but I wish that the government would prioritise letting in the people who most need to come, not those who we think will benefit us most.
There are innocent human beings suffering beyond imagination because of ISIS, Boko Haram, trafficking/slavery, drug lords and more - we should prioritise giving them refuge, not put first the lucky individuals who are safe and well paid in their home countries.
Whilst our NHS may be struggling, we still have far, far, far better healthcare access than the vast majority of humanity. The need for more medical staff is in middle and low income countries, we shouldn't be taking them away from home countries where they're more needed.
There are innocent human beings suffering beyond imagination because of ISIS, Boko Haram, trafficking/slavery, drug lords and more - we should prioritise giving them refuge, not put first the lucky individuals who are safe and well paid in their home countries.
Whilst our NHS may be struggling, we still have far, far, far better healthcare access than the vast majority of humanity. The need for more medical staff is in middle and low income countries, we shouldn't be taking them away from home countries where they're more needed.
Yuh, bonkers - but it's also bonkers to feel the need to fly a flag.
It's a shame that Deniro couldn't make a more intelligent criticism - all this will have done is add to the hatred that Trump supporters have for the left. There are plenty of good reasons to object to some of Trump's policies - saying F*** Trump doesn't show how Trump is wrong, it just adds to the hostile atmosphere.
Excuse me? We (Christians) don't imagine God's face. He's generally beyond comprehension, and he's not comprised of atoms reflecting light as we are, so we don't expect to see Him. If people were to try to imagine a human face for Him, it makes sense that they would picture something familiar; so if people think that He's white, that's merely because more Americans grew up looking at white faces. Any actual racial bigotry is antithetical to what genuine Christianity teaches.
It breaks my heart that we live in a world where there are still people in need of clean water, food, healthcare, homes and education - and that many of those able to work are labouring tirelessly to produce more and more STUFF for us, though we already have what we need. Many of clothes on the high street have been made by insanely underpaid, overworked women and children, who should have the opportunity to use their time building up living standards in their communities and brightening their futures.
Perhaps this happens in some Churches - but ^Ozanne is deliberately misleading. The Bible says that people should not have gay sex - but being gay doesn't mean you're obliged to do so; and whether or not people do, it's not Christlike to bully anyone. We ALL sin, and that's why Christ died for us. He made religious leaders to leave alone a woman they'd been about to stone to death for her sexual sin, and told her to "Go and sin no more"
2 examples don't "prove" a point. I completely agree that it's abhorrent how NFL players are being restricted, but there are freedom of speech inconsistencies across the political spectrum. And there are a-political people like the Ashers bakers being forced into speech by huge legislated fines.
The vast majority of police are good (or heroic), and plenty of people could interpret this campaign as suggesting that police in general shouldn't be trusted. It's not only offensive, it could well be seriously dangerous, since it could reduce the trust that some young people - who are impressionable - have for police. That, in turn, could mean that someone, somewhere, decides not to pass on information (to police)vital for stopping a crime, even a terrorist attack. This campaign just isn't the way to address the issue it's aimed at - and it has nothing to do with bath products.
We didn't need Kim to know that white privilege is real - but in this case it's more celebrity/ attractiveness privilege; especially given that by many peoples' definitions, she's not white. (she's partly Armenian). Also, individual cases aren't a good way to come to conclusions - proof is more to do with statistics - those are how we can highlight white privilege.
The baker refused only to make a cake that specifically celebrated an action that God warned against. The baker wasn't refusing to bake for the people, it was a cake for a specific purpose that he refused. Christianity is to follow Christ, who made it clear that we should love everyone - but caring about people doesn't mean endorsing all of their sexual practices.
No - beauty is in the eye of the beholder, whilst some people find none in modern worship music, others do. What matters is the heart being engaged with God.
Why? We're incredibly privileged if we have enough wealth to be able to spend $hundreds on a week's entertainment - why not do something more exciting with that money? I'd far rather fund a year's sponsorship for an impoverished child than spend a week somewhere sunny. Apologies if I sound like I'm trying to be self righteous, I'm truly not, and hate myself for not be more useful to the world's poor - I just genuinely don't understand why holidays that cost as much as they do for such brief unnecessary amusement is normal.
I can't believe how heartless some people are - I know that there's not unlimited space for migrants, but how can anyone not at least have concern for these people^?
Nope.I am more concerned about pensioners and homeless vets than 3rd world freeloaders
Pensioners and vets should indeed receive far more help - but they already have far, far more than those who try to get here from the 3rd world in dinghies. And they're not freeloaders - they don't come expecting handouts, most are keen to work hard.
No, the old age pensioners are having a very hard time..Are you kidding? Most are dying because of cold or not enough to eat! Let their countries take care of them, start with Birth control would help....
Elderly people are suffering because they're now living far longer than ever. When pensions were introduced, people would only be receiving them for a few years because life expectancy was shorter. We'd go a long way towards dealing with the situation if we moved our elderly relatives in with us so that we can care for them.
1) Why don't they work to improve their own countries? Surely the 3rd world needs all it's hard working, talented people to drive it forward.
2) Most of them work cash in hand jobs contributing no taxes, while using the NHS
3) Money is a finite resource. Every penny we spend on them is a penny we can't spend on our own. Raise taxes too high and the talented leave.
4) Importing cheap Labour brings down working class wages
They are not our problem
2) Most of them work cash in hand jobs contributing no taxes, while using the NHS
3) Money is a finite resource. Every penny we spend on them is a penny we can't spend on our own. Raise taxes too high and the talented leave.
4) Importing cheap Labour brings down working class wages
They are not our problem
Not our problem? Of course they are. Our nation is one of the very welathiest, largely because of greed by previous generations and our inetrnational corporations grossly exploiting impoverished communities in the developing world (historically the slave trade; now sweatshops, plantations, stealing people's land, misleading new mothers into using all their money on powdered milk, etc and see - http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/aid-in-reverse-how-poor-countries-develop-rich-countries/). But by providing people with clean water, education, farming tools, vital healthcare (and contraception +sex ed, which they otherwise often don't have) we can make a thrilling difference. https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/myths-about-aid/
I'm really, really hoping that the death being in the news so much will make a few burglars somewhere think twice and not break into homes again.
There's no point crying over spilled milk.
(do you guys say that or is that just a British phrase?) sorry if that sounds insensitive, it's not intended to! Everything that we do wrong should be thought of a lesson in helping us to do things better, and avert other mistakes, in the future.
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
(do you guys say that or is that just a British phrase?) sorry if that sounds insensitive, it's not intended to! Everything that we do wrong should be thought of a lesson in helping us to do things better, and avert other mistakes, in the future.
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
Televangelist asks for $54M for private jet
Please ignore idiotic un Christlike actions by those who falsely claim to be Christians. Jesus continually taught us not to pursue wealth, eg.
"What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit His life?" Luke 9:25
"Do not store up treasure on earth" Matthew 6:19
"If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor" Matthew 19:21
"What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit His life?" Luke 9:25
"Do not store up treasure on earth" Matthew 6:19
"If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor" Matthew 19:21
It's great that he's concerned about the planet - but why is he not more concerned about whether people have eternal life? Whatever happens to the planet, we'll all die. Jesus demonstrated victory over death And to us that He is The Way. Why doesn't the Pope put more tie into encouraging people towards Jesus so that they don't miss out?
It enrages me that some Neo Nazis, and other nationalists, claim to be Christians defending Christian tradition, whilst living entirely opposed to the teachings of Christ. I've seen that there are plenty of non Christians, especially of my generation and particularly across the pond, who judge Christianity on the basis of unChrist-like racists.
Jesus turned over tables in the temple; perhaps if He were physically in the US now, He'd rip up KKK hoods and smash guns.
Jesus turned over tables in the temple; perhaps if He were physically in the US now, He'd rip up KKK hoods and smash guns.
With all due respect to Muslims, a few tweets aren't news. The Independent seems constantly desperate to prove to us that Muslims are heroes - and indeed many of them do brilliant things, but this isn't balanced journalism.
Honestly, I genuinely wouldn't feel any differently about it (if he were white). know that I need to constantly check myself for bias, but it just doesn't necessarily apply here. I don't think that trying to bring racism into every debate is necessarily conducive to tackling it. There's a serious discussion that needs to be had about the impact of gun imagery on how young people grow up feeling about guns - to ignore that discussion so that you can make accusations of racism is surely not the most helpful way to approach this story?
Christians are attacked in numerous countries.
What a shameless C*Unt ,knowing nothing & playing victims FFS smh
How am I playing victim? Saying that some Christians are attacked doesn't mean that I'm saying I'm attacked. With all due respect, you say I know nothing, but if you knew about Christianity you'd know that those who call themselves Christians but kill others, as in this^ case, are proving by their violence that they aren't following Christ at all, so they aren't genuinely Christians. Thus the fact that the killers^ in this case claim to be Christian is of little meaning.
My point was that Christians are persecuted seriosly in various parts of the world - something that many people in our nation where Christians aren't violently attacked aren't aware of. Approximately 215 million Christians experience high, very high, or extreme persecution.
My point was that Christians are persecuted seriosly in various parts of the world - something that many people in our nation where Christians aren't violently attacked aren't aware of. Approximately 215 million Christians experience high, very high, or extreme persecution.
Indian economy grew at 6.7% in FY18, its slowest since 2014
You're still growing many many times faster than we - the UK - are, I hope that you can keep going, and distribute the wealth as fairly as possible
You're still growing many many times faster than we - the UK - are, I hope that you can keep going, and distribute the wealth as fairly as possible
How is it healthy to use our kids as political propaganda and decide for them what they must believe? People have been complaining for a few decades that parents "brainwash" kids into "religion" - now the same thing is happening, and corporations get to make money from the merchandise.
Though there are some funny pieces on the site, the nature of the internet means that some of the non Christians who see the titles of the articles when they're shared on social media, unaware that's satire, will have their opinions influenced by the daft headlines.
"Every Sentence In Youth Pastor’s Sermon Punctuated With Desperate Attempt To Quiet Kids Down"
"Episcopal Priest Forced To Resign After Revealing He Believes In God"
"Progressive Church Replaces Pew Bibles With Adult Coloring Books"
etc - are amusing to us. But outside of the Christian community, many people presume that Churches are ridiculous, and many presume Christianity, in general, to be ridiculous as a result. Some will see these headlines, think they're true, and be even less inclined to explore Christianity.
"Every Sentence In Youth Pastor’s Sermon Punctuated With Desperate Attempt To Quiet Kids Down"
"Episcopal Priest Forced To Resign After Revealing He Believes In God"
"Progressive Church Replaces Pew Bibles With Adult Coloring Books"
etc - are amusing to us. But outside of the Christian community, many people presume that Churches are ridiculous, and many presume Christianity, in general, to be ridiculous as a result. Some will see these headlines, think they're true, and be even less inclined to explore Christianity.
Why not start by addressing the pay gap between the NHS workers on 6 figure salaries and the NHS workers on the minimum wage?
Feminism isn't a positive if it means ignoring the rights of other humans that have made no choice. I really, desperately want May to be more concerned about those who are disadvantaged. Why would you, if you actually care about them, direct attention instead towards this horribly controversial issue?
Why should a woman - in a nation with free contraception - who's chosen to a particular leisure activity (sex) have the right to the suctioning to pieces of a tiny human?
Why should a woman - in a nation with free contraception - who's chosen to a particular leisure activity (sex) have the right to the suctioning to pieces of a tiny human?
It seems bizarre to me that we don't all sponsor children - we can provide a child with protection, lessons, health checks and more for £25/month, why is it normal to instead spend that amount on a restaurant meal?
I'm bemused by the extent to which we allow corporations to lure us into spending quite so much as we do on things we don't need. There are human beings living in slums, without clean water, with barely enough to eat, limited education and no healthcare. It's thrilling that we can use our money to genuinely help them, yet our media almost only discusses poverty here. When we can feed a starving child in African refugee camp for weeks for £4/$6; we can sponsor a child for the cost of just a few takeouts per month. While Trump urges America First, we can put helping the poorest of humanity first, rather than feeding capitalism
It's darn difficult to assess because plenty of people who regret something they've done won't want to participate in research on it. So it's very likely that those women included in research following abortions won't be accurately representative of all women who've had abortions, and data may suggest less regret than there truly is. Still, there is some evidence of abortion predisposing to mental health issues, even if not suicidality.
It really should be called Lust Island. It's depressing that the meaning of Love has been entirely dismantled by my corporately porn reared generation.
She's right, there's a serious risk of spoiling kids. But she should be trying to tackle that she herself is spoiled. Why on Earth not fly in economy class too? Especially since she could make a significant difference in the lives of people too poor to ever get to fly at all with the money saved. That would in turn be a great lesson to her kids, and she'd have more family bonding time with them on the journey. As a child, I found the journey to family holidays special - she's throwing away part of the memory making experience.
It's painfully frustrating that the media is so much more concerned by the selfish human flaws of people who call themselves Christians than Jesus' actual example and teaching. To be Christian is to follow Christ, to abuse others is antithetical to genuine Christianity.
Our culture now ignorantly presumes that belief in God is merely wishful thinking or brainwashing - though it certainly can be, there are substantial historical, scientific and philosophical arguments to consider. The irony is that people that belief in God is unintellgent, so they in fact remain uninformed (about the reasons to conclude that God does exist)
Culture is the problem, not virginity itself. We're constantly being fed the lie that sex is vital to happiness.
It's evident that the change in attitudes to sex over the last few generations has done a lot of harm - suffering and healthcare costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - in sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc. I blame the corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners.
Human beings are so much more than that.
It's evident that the change in attitudes to sex over the last few generations has done a lot of harm - suffering and healthcare costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - in sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc. I blame the corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners.
Human beings are so much more than that.
Breastfeeding: woman’s choice must be respected, midwives told
Yes - but we mustn't let corporations milk mothers' wallets by flogging formula when it's not needed.
Indeed, some people genuinely can't breastfeed, and they absolutely shouldn't be stigmatised. However, they should try to overcome the hurdle of getting started, since breast feeding is hugely beneficial. Obviously, the body soon stops producing milk if it's not feeding - so formula selling corporations can lure those mothers finding it difficult to start breastfeeding into buying formula, and soon they have no option but to keep on buying formula 
Slavery was everywhere and unquestioned in the times and places in which the Bible was written - yet God issues commands to force slave owners to not mistreat slaves, and at points to free them. The Bible also tells us repeatedly to help the poor - including those from other nations - and to treat others as we would want to be treated. This pastor^ is very, very, very wrong.
As a chronic anorexic, I think it's the posed pictures that are the biggest problem. IIf I watch some of the programme, I'm shown a healthier body shape that reminds me not to starve myself so much - but photos, where people contort and are airbrushed, can be harmful.
Nah, robots will take over, or humanity will be destroyed by nuclear war/global warming/ antibiotic resistance before I reach old age, regardless of what I eat 
Theresa May’s deal with the DUP is under pressure as Sinn Féin changes its stance on abortion
We should be fighting for fairer distribution of wealth and opportunity, not divert energy into enabling a procedure that requires 466 Ambulance call outs to clinics each year in London alone; and which destroys tiny humans.
We shouldn't be fighting for Northern Irish women to have the same basic human rights as a woman in England, Scotland and Wales?
Riiiiiiiight.
Riiiiiiiight.
It's a basic human right not to be sucked to pieces, or chopped up with surgical instruments - why, if you're concerned about human rights, do you feel that it should be made possible for this to be done to defenceless humans?
I think equality is one of the more fundamental principles to fight for to be frank. A zygote or a bundle of cells is not classified as a human being, the mother is. Therefore, they should be allowed to decide what they do with their bodies. You've made your perspective clear... let other women decide what they would like to do. Sounds fair, eh?
I'm not talking about zygotes. I'm talking about foetuses with nervous systems and brains. They are human, and even the NHS's website describes them as fully formed (though obviously it means that they have all their organs - there's still growing to do) at 12 weeks.
I guess other people's choices do not matter to you do they? As long as you're holding on to mental images of babies/foetus being sucked up and chopped to pieces by these terrible terrible mothers.
Other people's choices can matter to me, but that doesn't mean that my opinion should give choice preference over life. Why do you think that one human should have the choice to kill another?
None of your business what another woman chooses to do with her body really is it?
NHS guidelines on abortion and the like are drawn up by medical/ ethical experts and are evidence based, your opinions seem to be exactly that YOUR opinions, based on your religious beliefs from the look of it. Feel free to do what you want with your body but how about keeping your nose out if other people's uteruses?
NHS guidelines on abortion and the like are drawn up by medical/ ethical experts and are evidence based, your opinions seem to be exactly that YOUR opinions, based on your religious beliefs from the look of it. Feel free to do what you want with your body but how about keeping your nose out if other people's uteruses?
Of course the NHS allows it, it's an option that some of the voting public wants - there's no "evidence" or "ethics" that can somehow prove that killiing a foetus, with its own genome and brain, is OK. And at least 99% of the time, the woman has already made a choice; her offspring has no choice.
Much more importantly, what do my "religious beliefs" have to do with this, given that I never mentioned them? What do you mean by "religious"? What do you assume I believe?
Much more importantly, what do my "religious beliefs" have to do with this, given that I never mentioned them? What do you mean by "religious"? What do you assume I believe?
You well and truly have your head deposited in your rear end if you think that you should have a say in what other people choose to do.
We're not getting anywhere - you think that choice entitles a woman to kill another human,
We're not really are we?
You think YOU should have any say in what another women chooses to do with HER body, little bit of an authoritarian approach that isn't it?
Deciding that you know better for some reason then presuming to force your will upon another.
Does this just apply to abortion or are you also happy to stomp your jackboot down on other's faces in regards to other issues of bodily autonomy? The NHS bases it's policy and cut off points on up to date evidence based research not public opinion, that's a bit of a silly statment on your part there isn't it?I keep seeing the pro-life rabble banging on about this "unique DNA/genome rubbish.
You are aware most single celled organisms will have their own "unique DNA", so what?
Totally irrelevant, awful argument.
You are aware anyone can look at your profile right?
It's not particularly hard to ascertain that you're quite clearly a Christian.
I assume we're to believe that has zero influence on your stance here?
You think YOU should have any say in what another women chooses to do with HER body, little bit of an authoritarian approach that isn't it?
Deciding that you know better for some reason then presuming to force your will upon another.
Does this just apply to abortion or are you also happy to stomp your jackboot down on other's faces in regards to other issues of bodily autonomy? The NHS bases it's policy and cut off points on up to date evidence based research not public opinion, that's a bit of a silly statment on your part there isn't it?I keep seeing the pro-life rabble banging on about this "unique DNA/genome rubbish.
You are aware most single celled organisms will have their own "unique DNA", so what?
Totally irrelevant, awful argument.
You are aware anyone can look at your profile right?
It's not particularly hard to ascertain that you're quite clearly a Christian.
I assume we're to believe that has zero influence on your stance here?
As I said, over 99% of the time, a woman who's pregnant has already chosen what to do with her body. I'm not saying that she should do something with her body, I'm saying that she shouldn't actively destroy another human's body.
The point of mentioning that the abortion victim has its own genome is that it is a unique, complete human - it isn't a piece of the mother, like an appendix or tumour, as many abortion activists suggest.
Of course I know that you can see my profile - but I'm not referring to Christianity in this debate, I'm arguing that we shouldn't kill other humans. What is it that you think I believe BTW?
The point of mentioning that the abortion victim has its own genome is that it is a unique, complete human - it isn't a piece of the mother, like an appendix or tumour, as many abortion activists suggest.
Of course I know that you can see my profile - but I'm not referring to Christianity in this debate, I'm arguing that we shouldn't kill other humans. What is it that you think I believe BTW?
That fetus would not survive outside of the mother's body. It therefore is not viable "life" as it is dependent on the mother. I know you won't accept this point, so, there really is no need to labour over it. Anyway, as people have rightly stated above, it is an individual's right to choose. Not anyone else's. As it stands in Northern Ireland, that luxury is not available to women, as it is in the rest of the United Kingdom. As an aside, it's been proven that the astronomical collapse in the crime rate in the USA in the 90's can be attributed to the Roe V Wade decision. It may be prudent to reflect on that. Equality is on the way at least.
"An individual's right" according to what universal standard? There's no way to establish it empirically, it's simply an opinion, and it would be logically qualified if it were only the individual's own body. I don't dispute that people have a right to do what they want with their own body - but abortion is to destroy another human's body, having already made a choice (to have sex) whilst the victim gets no choice.
The fact that laws on abortion are different around the world and have changed over time shows that this isn't as simple as being right because of the law - just because something's legal doesn't mean it's OK, the law bends to suit what voters ask for.
You're really going to have to show me that evidence RE crime and RoevsWade - I can't see how it could be certain that falling crime was due to abortion access rather than to modernisation, contraception and other factors.
The fact that laws on abortion are different around the world and have changed over time shows that this isn't as simple as being right because of the law - just because something's legal doesn't mean it's OK, the law bends to suit what voters ask for.
You're really going to have to show me that evidence RE crime and RoevsWade - I can't see how it could be certain that falling crime was due to abortion access rather than to modernisation, contraception and other factors.
Is this what Matt le Blanc is leaving Top Gear to do?
Disappointing? Seriously? I'm so, so, so grateful to be able to watch TV -which has more than enough great entertainment to choose from- in a comfortable home; the vast majority of humanity doesn't have the privilege. We don't need cinemas to enjoy life, let alone films by a certain date, so it's truly tragic if anyone is "disappointed" by this^
It says something about a movement when it's using fiction to prop up its cause.
(Please note, Re MeToo, I'm utterly opposed to sexual harassment - but I'm amused and angered by how The handmaid's tale is being used to promote abortion, including in our parliament)
(Please note, Re MeToo, I'm utterly opposed to sexual harassment - but I'm amused and angered by how The handmaid's tale is being used to promote abortion, including in our parliament)
How to meet new people in London
Churches. Seriously. if you've only been to an unpleasant few in the past, try others. They're entirely varied - plenty are welcoming, some will have genuinely enjoyable music and talks to listen to - most will have time for chatting with tea/coffee/biscuits (sometimes cake/chocolate/fruit), which is honestly perfect for meeting friendly people.
The subject matter - God, Jesus - is incomparably better than any other clubs/events/experiences - but even if you don't connect with Him right now, most Churches will be hospitable.
The subject matter - God, Jesus - is incomparably better than any other clubs/events/experiences - but even if you don't connect with Him right now, most Churches will be hospitable.
-Comment Deleted -
the article is about meeting new people. You can't do that at a panto, but Churches have a designated chunk of the morning specifically for chatting over refreshments. Many also have things during the week that give more opportunities for socialising.
More importantly - if you think that Christianity is "fairy stories" you've been sadly misinformed. How much have you studied it?
More importantly - if you think that Christianity is "fairy stories" you've been sadly misinformed. How much have you studied it?
Sarra Gleeson it's the rare incidences that make the headlines; do you have data showing that people in Churches are any more likely to be sex offenders than the general population? Has news over the last year (#Metoo etc) made clear to you that there are sex offenders throughout society?
How do you know I've been brainwashed? How much have you studied the arguments supporting Christianity yourself?
How do you know I've been brainwashed? How much have you studied the arguments supporting Christianity yourself?
Avoid Churches, just people brainwashing, and spiritual abuse. Too many criminals go there too.
-Comment Deleted -
It's the rare incidences that make the headlines; do you have data showing that people in Churches are any more likely to be sex offenders than the general population? Has news over the last year (#Metoo etc) made clear to you that there are sex offenders throughout society?
How do you know I've been brainwashed? How much have you studied the arguments supporting Christianity yourself?
How do you know I've been brainwashed? How much have you studied the arguments supporting Christianity yourself?
To presume that all who believe in God do so entirely because of "unsupported claims and ancient superstitions" is amazingly ignorant. Though I know that he knows better than that, and simply can't be bothered to engage with the complex arguments regarding theism. But those of us who truly do believe in God, know that whether or not others choose to "tiptoe around" is trivial. I couldn't care less if atheists have no respect for me. All I'm concerned about is whether they'll explore the evidence thoroughly and without bias for themselves, in the hope that they don't miss out on what Christ offers.
What the devil are you talking about? 
Evidence?
But there is no serious objective evidence for those superstitions though.
the only life lesson anyone needs is 'dont be a cunt'. no fairy tale required.
But...there are no gods and that is a fact, if people belive is just because unsupperted claims because there are no actual proof
Wow, so you've all ignored the scientific, philosophical and historical arguments for God too? It's up to you what conclusions you come to (though I know that anti God bias and wishful thinking - hoping that there's no God - influences plenty of peoples' conclusions). But to simply state there's no evidence shows simply that you don't know about the evidence (or want to ignore it)
http://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2015/10/08/hypernaturalism-the-improbable-reveals-god-s-handiwork
It even states in the article YOU posted that nothing it says is proof
I didn't say that article is proof. It's just one summary of points to consider. There are scores of articles and lectures exploring these points and others - this isn't a discussion for one Facebook argument. Grayling and others don't debate the arguments for God, and offer better counter arguments, they just ignore them..
You said there was evidence?? Where is it? I’m waiting
How do you define evidence?
I personally believe in God first and foremost because of science; we can't test forGod directly because He's not composed of the matter/energy that scientific instruments measure, but what we can measure demonstrates that the universe and biological world have a designer. "If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, it would have recollapsed before it reached its present size. On the other hand, if it had been greater by a part in a million, the universe would have expanded too rapidly for stars and planets to form." (Stephen Hawking) And there are many other things about the universe, such as the ratio of the masses of protons/neutrons that are similarly remarkably correct against the odds. One of Hawking's closest colleagues, Sir Roger Penrose, calculated that the odds of our universe - given the values of numerous parameters (such as the cosmological constant, the proton/neutron mass ratio etc) occurring by chance are around 1 in 10^123 (10 with 123 more zeros). Within the bilogical world, there is too much interdependence for it to have developed by chance Of course, there are plenty of lectures and writings by maths/science PHDs that explain this far more thoroughly, but I presume that it would be pointless for me to add hyperlinks, since you'll just ignore them, won't you? (rhetorical question mark, I really don't want to spend more time arguing )
I personally believe in God first and foremost because of science; we can't test forGod directly because He's not composed of the matter/energy that scientific instruments measure, but what we can measure demonstrates that the universe and biological world have a designer. "If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, it would have recollapsed before it reached its present size. On the other hand, if it had been greater by a part in a million, the universe would have expanded too rapidly for stars and planets to form." (Stephen Hawking) And there are many other things about the universe, such as the ratio of the masses of protons/neutrons that are similarly remarkably correct against the odds. One of Hawking's closest colleagues, Sir Roger Penrose, calculated that the odds of our universe - given the values of numerous parameters (such as the cosmological constant, the proton/neutron mass ratio etc) occurring by chance are around 1 in 10^123 (10 with 123 more zeros). Within the bilogical world, there is too much interdependence for it to have developed by chance Of course, there are plenty of lectures and writings by maths/science PHDs that explain this far more thoroughly, but I presume that it would be pointless for me to add hyperlinks, since you'll just ignore them, won't you? (rhetorical question mark, I really don't want to spend more time arguing )
Still no evidence, how surprising.
You need to actually address the points I've made - have you even read them? Have you ever bothered to look at some of the endless arrays of articles and lectures online that discuss the reasons supporting God's existence? You might disagree, but just ignoring them is, literally, ignorance.
Stephen Hawking was an atheist. I would never pretend to understand even a fraction of what Stephen hawking understood about the universe but what you’ve quoted is not proof of intelligent design. If anything it’s talking about the random nature of creation and how one tiny difference at that exact moment in time would have lead to a completely different outcome. You keep trying to use science to prove your point of view but scientists don’t decide the result before they conduct the experiment. You’ve already decided god is real and you’re working back from there, that is the polar opposite of science. Scientists begin with a question or hypothesis and use scientific method to either prove or disprove their theory.
No, I thought God couldn't exist, then further examined science and realised that He must. Yes the quote supports intelligent design - if there was no intelligence, it is overwhelmingly more likely that the conditions immediately after the big bang would have been one of the combinations that made it impossible for life to develop. And there's much, much, much more to be said about how biology shows design before we even discuss the philosophical, historical and experiential reasons for concluding that God exists. But ultimately, you, Stephen Hawkings and others don't want to believe in God, and since He can't be directly measured with scientific instruments (as He's not comprised of the matter or energy that scientific instruments detect), you reassure yourself that He's not there.And I really, really don't want to argue anymore - leaving one comment on a post, as I did, doesn't mean that I have time for an endless debate. And winning an argument means nothing - I'm just desperately concerned for you, but I know there's nothing I can do
The brain releases oxytocin - the pair bonding hormone, also involved in familial relationships - during sex; we're designed for monogamy.
As opposed to the other things he says that aren't weird?
Barbie' Who Spent Inheritance On G-Cup Breasts Makes Over £50K A Year On Webcam
Meanwhile, most of humanity doesn't have access to surgery that's actually medically necessary. Also, Barbie dolls only have B or C cup proportions.
Giraffe who killed Brit ‘had a history of violence and tried to kill before’
Has anyone else noticed that have suddenly been far more recent news stories about animals attacking people?
Has anyone else noticed that have suddenly been far more recent news stories about animals attacking people?
Caitlyn Jenner doesn't agree with critics who call her 'privileged'
Apologising and acknowledging are not the same thing.
A person who's been far luckier than others doesn't need to apologise, no one's asking for that. But they should acknowledge that they're lucky - and though they aren't obliged, they really should do/give to help those who are less privileged. We - in the UK - are privileged compared to most of humanity, we've been lucky enough to be born into a country where living standards, public services and opportunities are incomparably better than what most others. It's exciting how much we can do when we donate to the most efficient charities.
Apologising and acknowledging are not the same thing.
A person who's been far luckier than others doesn't need to apologise, no one's asking for that. But they should acknowledge that they're lucky - and though they aren't obliged, they really should do/give to help those who are less privileged. We - in the UK - are privileged compared to most of humanity, we've been lucky enough to be born into a country where living standards, public services and opportunities are incomparably better than what most others. It's exciting how much we can do when we donate to the most efficient charities.
Kate and Gerry share poignant tribute to mark Madeleine’s 15th birthday
I really, really don't want to seem uncaring to her parents - but thousands of children die each day because they lack clean water and food. The money spent on Maddy would save thousands of lives. Why doesn't the media put more time into telling us about them, so that we'd be prompted to help?
I really, really don't want to seem uncaring to her parents - but thousands of children die each day because they lack clean water and food. The money spent on Maddy would save thousands of lives. Why doesn't the media put more time into telling us about them, so that we'd be prompted to help?
Mayim Bialik - appeal for donatiions for child's medical treatment
I desperately hope that you guys get a health system more like the one that we're privileged enough to have - it's far from perfect, because illness is an ongoing reality of life; but we're lucky to have a National Health Service (funded by taxes) so that people's treatment isn't determined by how wealthy they are. And thankyou for using this heartbreaking situation as a positive reminder.
Oh, you mean the kind that prevents parents from seekig treatment anywhere else to the point where the child dies? Yeah, we'll pass on that.
It wasn't the government, nor the NHS that made the decision, it was the highest courts. The point is that there was enough evidence provided by medical experts for senior judges to agree that it was better for Alfie not to go to Italy since it would increase his suffering, and he'd still pass away. As all of humanity throughout history has learned, tragically disease can kill. It was a tragedy, not anyone's fault. What I really, really don't get is how much time and money people have expended on fighting for Alfie, when we can actually help some other children who are suffering because they don't have basic healthcare. It's thrilling how much difference we can make when we fund medical help for those with none (such as by donating to Save the Children US, Mercy Ships, Doctors Without Borders/ Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Doctors of the World UK, Children's Heart Project etc)
I desperately hope that you guys get a health system more like the one that we're privileged enough to have - it's far from perfect, because illness is an ongoing reality of life; but we're lucky to have a National Health Service (funded by taxes) so that people's treatment isn't determined by how wealthy they are. And thankyou for using this heartbreaking situation as a positive reminder.
Oh, you mean the kind that prevents parents from seekig treatment anywhere else to the point where the child dies? Yeah, we'll pass on that.
It wasn't the government, nor the NHS that made the decision, it was the highest courts. The point is that there was enough evidence provided by medical experts for senior judges to agree that it was better for Alfie not to go to Italy since it would increase his suffering, and he'd still pass away. As all of humanity throughout history has learned, tragically disease can kill. It was a tragedy, not anyone's fault. What I really, really don't get is how much time and money people have expended on fighting for Alfie, when we can actually help some other children who are suffering because they don't have basic healthcare. It's thrilling how much difference we can make when we fund medical help for those with none (such as by donating to Save the Children US, Mercy Ships, Doctors Without Borders/ Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Doctors of the World UK, Children's Heart Project etc)
Krispy Kreme Tops Starbucks as America’s Best Coffee Shop Brand in New Poll
We can feed a starving child for a month with £4/$6 - so why is it so normal to spend that amount on a coffee and doughnut?
All You Needed To Know About Intermittent Fasting And Why It WorksThis makes me angry. I was diagnosed with anorexia 10 years ago and have had it ever since. Things like this^ contribute to ruining lives.
What are the BMIs of the woman in the left and right image? Having obsessed about weight and shape, and spent much time in an eating disorders unit (against my will, under the mental act) I'm fairly certain that the right side image shows a BMI below the healthy range (healthy as determined by standard medical charts). And it doesn't necessarily matter - because you can't necessarily stop there. If you train yourself to fast then, particularly since fasting itself impacts the brain (like an addiction) you can become unable to make yourself eat enough, even when you don't want to lose any more weight. That's why people end up with a medically recognised mental health issue, that can give us jutting bones - thinner than this^, and not what we ever wanted, but as a result of the slippery slope we get on.
I don't mind that how I look now is unattractive by most peoples' standards - but I do mind that I've been a burden to my family and the health service; I do mind that I have osteoporosis (a result of the anorexia - .so I could far more easily break a bone) and I do mind that I can't concentrate or get food out of my mind. I have always desperately, desperately wanted to help those people in our world who are starving because of famine and war - and right now I'm useless and loathe myself for it.
Apple is almost a $1 trillion company, but watch out for Amazon
It seems odd to me - most things that people buy from Amazon can be bought more cheaply via businesses on ebay, and most Apple gadgets have cheaply Android equivalents. And that we're pressurised to upgrade our smartphones so frequently, and to buy any item that crosses our minds and have them delivered with Amazon, isn't doing our planet any good.
Tim Farron just can’t escape gay sex
He's said that he's a Christian - and whilst many people have said this purely for show, perhaps he genuinely wants to follow Christ, who didn't discuss homosexuality, it wasn't a topic of debate at the time. Jesus prompted religious to leave a woman they'd been about to stone to death for her sexual sin, and said to her "Go and sin no more" - so Christians should be welcoming everyone, and urging everyone to consider God. Neither Christians, nor politcians, should be pressurised as Tim Farron has to make pronouncements on sex -they have incomparably more important things to discuss.
Independent Online: “Historians are questioning if Jesus ever existed at all.” Is there any substance to it?The Independent is unbelievably keen to brain wash us into believing conspiracy theories. Try this - https://etimasthe.com/2018/04/23/independent-online-historians-are-questioning-if-jesus-ever-existed-at-all-is-there-any-substance-to-it/
A few writers have published books with that conspiracy theory in recent years - it's absurd enough to get them some book sales and for the hoax to spread around the internet. It doesn't change the fact that there's no dispute amongst actual historians that Jesus lived. I urge you to get informed. https://is.gd/m6MzKK . And though the notion that He rose from the dead sounds daft, there is remarkably good reasoning, based on history, to conclude that it's true -but it takes a bit of investigation (I've personally found the books The Case for the Resurrection and Who Moved the Stone very helpful - but there are many more books, as well as articles and lectures by academics about it) https://is.gd/Bax24f
I've not asked every human who's lived if they've returned to life, or know anyone who has, have you? Were I to meet someone who claimed such, I would presume that they were near certainly wrong and seek testimonies from others who knew them. That's not the point - you're presuming that Jesus didn't return to life because it runs contrary to what we naturally observe - but if a creator exists, the laws of nature are part of what they've designed and they are not bound by them. Had those in the area, at the time, when Jesus supposedly returned to life not seen that he'd returned to life - and given that those proclaiming that He had were being persecuted and killed for doing so - I don't see that it's possible that Christianity would have survived, and become the biggest movement in human history. But of course, this all needs far more discussion, and I really need to get on with other things ATM.
Scots outraged over Donald Trump’s Irn-Bru ban
Obviously, he's deeply concerned about the well-being of others, so he's endeavouring to address the health impact of sugary drinks.
The ‘gay cake’ fight: why the bakers had a right to refuse this order
There was in fact no discrimination – Ashers only refused to put particular words onto a cake, they didn’t refuse the order because of the customer. There’s no logic in forcing 1 human being to do something that another human being requests when it’s not at all a necessary service. I’ve never eaten customised cake and I’m coping just fine – like most of humanity. Much of humanity has no access to cake at all, and has to live on little more than rice.
Ashers didn’t cheat the customer out of his money, or refuse to make him a cake without the wording. Only a minority of celebratory customised cakes have wording on them. The customer could have had cake without words, have applied the words himself, or have ordered from another bakery. It’s plainly obvious that he’s persecuted Ashers to make a point.
God instructs humanity not to have gay sex – marriage implies sex, Ashers couldn’t endorse something that God has told humanity not to do, because God knows better than we do what’s best for us and loves us more than we can imagine.
Not being able to fly abroad is not a crisis. With the cost of a flight abroad, we could seriously help people who actually are experiencing crises, which is why I've not been overseas since I was a child, and don't feel deprived at all - I'm tremendously grateful to live in a country where there's somuch to enjoy
"Between Her and her doctor" entirely ignores the reality that there's another human involved, and it's that human who's most affected by the decision, but gets no say. Something being a constitutional right doesn't make it morally right - gun ownership being another example.Not a human. It's a fetus.Yes IT IS HUMAN - that's just biology. Call it a foetus, fine, but iit's a human foetus just as we are human aults (or teenagers). How much biology have those of you saying that it's not human studied science, and embryology BTW? SO often people say that it's "just a clump of cells" - how do you define a "clump"? We're also composed of cells. think that some people have been genuinely misled about human development in the womb - and I've seen utterly false diagrams that show total nonsense about what the foetus looks like at various stages. But it's not rocket science to use Google - there are scores of pregnancy websites and scientific textbooks online that will tell you about development in the womb. I'm very much in favour of better access to contraception, and though I hate the idea of it, I won't argue about abortion after several weeks - but the foetus starts to sense touch at around 2 months.Though indeed there are children lacking adequate care - who MUST be helped more by the state - there are many couples who specifically want to adopt newborrns.Only 1% of abortions follow rape (according to Planned Parenthood's own research) - so those who are pregnant have already made a choice. Corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners. In reality, it's perfectly possible to enjoy life without sex; and even more possible of course to go without sex until you're ready to be a parent. The abortion problem is ultimately most of all a result of our being collectively conned into thinking we need sex, and not being able to cope the the natural biological result.So when you begin demanding the end to war which kills humans by the millions, you will gain credibility. Otherwise, the hypocrisy stinks!!!Hypocrisy how exactly? I'm not pro-war. Why on Earth are you assuming that me being anti abortion means I'm republican? Take a GD science class! A clump of cells with no awareness feelings or consciousness is not a human. For fucks sake!Seriously, you can F***'s sake at me all you want, it is human - do you want me to start quoting science journals? I've been studying biomedical sciences at university, how about you? When most of the country lives below the poverty line and cannot even afford to feed themselves, making something like abortion illegal is irresponsible. Thats my opinion, and maybe I am a pessimist.No one forced the woman to have sex - other than in cases of rape which, as I've said, is no more than 1% of cases - therefore no one has forced her into anything, carrying a baby is the natural biological result of her own choice. I'm in the UK, so I don't know enough about how your health care system works, but I'm doubtful that it's necessary to pay $10 000 - doesn't medicaid help with basic maternal healthcare if the woman has no health insurance? And I FIRMLY believe that far more health care support should be given to those who aren't wealthy. Our healthcare system is seriously struggling ATM, but I know that we're extremely lucky (in the UK) to have what we do, and desperately hope that are fairer system is put in pkace in the US ASAP. Also, as I said, though I hate the idea of it, I'm not arguing against morning after pills or abortion within the first month, so I'm really not suggesting that anyone be "forced" to carry a pregnancy.As is her biological choice to end a pregnancy. Don't believe in it, don't do it. "Don't believe in it, don't do it" - but the same could be said about murder. You could say to someone that if they don't think murder is morally right, they should just not murder, but they have no right to tell others not to murder. The point is that in murder, an also in abortion, it's not just the active person who's affected, then murder victim and the unborn human are at risk of being killed.Just what is the man's role in this discussion?The man should provide for more than half of the child's material needs (more than half because the woman is bearing the physical aspect) - and be loving and supportive to the extent that the child wants.Many women die in child birth, even today. So any pregnancy is a risk to the woman's life. And a lot of abortions are done to end the product of rape, incest or a non viable fetus. Most in fact. So saying a woman got herself into the situation of being pregnant is completely ignorant......no woman wants to get raped or be the victim of incest or carry a non viable fetus. Abortion is not murder, it is terminating a clump of cells, vastly different from ending the life on an intelligent, autonomous individual."most"? No, as I already said, PP's own data has found that only 1% of abortions result from rape. I'm aware that women die in pregnancy - but exactly how many, in developed countries, since you're so certain that it's a significant number? And surely you're aware that women still die in the process of abortion? This is about 2 miles from where I live - https://mailchi.mp/.../woman-bled-to-death-after-ealing...You don't dig up a seed and say that you've cut down a tree. Stay out of other people's medical decisions.So? The biological progression from a fertilised egg to a baby is entirely different from the progression from a seed to a tree, so that argument doesn't work. And I'm not in other people's medical decisions, I'm just commenting - but it's not just the woman's medical decision, it's abother human's life.
So what. Even one forced pregnancy by rape is one too many. Shame on you! Why don't you get raped and have a baby? Then we'd see how you would feel about it. Oh but wait, you must be a religious right winger with no empathy, until it happens to you.
So you're just going to assume I'm a "religious right winger" because I disagree with abortion? That's illogical. Personally, I have my own opinions on each issue, rather than merely following one party and agreeing with everything they say. How about you? And how do you define "religious"? I'd really love to know, questions about God are far more important and interestiing than all of this arguing about abortion. Since you mentioned it, if I were raped, I wouldn't get pregnant as I'm too malnourished to menstruate. But aside from that, if I were pregnant from rape, I would absolutely keep it (unless there were a couple desperate for a baby who'd be able ton give it a better life than I could)
I don't mind that how I look now is unattractive by most peoples' standards - but I do mind that I've been a burden to my family and the health service; I do mind that I have osteoporosis (a result of the anorexia - .so I could far more easily break a bone) and I do mind that I can't concentrate or get food out of my mind. I have always desperately, desperately wanted to help those people in our world who are starving because of famine and war - and right now I'm useless and loathe myself for it.
Conservatives - It's time you had your say. Join us today ️My say is that wealth should be far, far more equally distributed. Will joining you bring that about?
The government could, for example, tax the very richest 5%slightly more, so that it can use the funds to help those who've not been so lucky - but that's insane, right? You could develop ways of helping those without opportunities to do more with their talents - such as linking up people with disabilities or small children with the jobs that could be done from home - but why bother, eh? You could stop letting so much of tax payer's money end up in the pockets of business chiefs by outsourcing so many public services to private companies, but I guess you'd rather not.
The government could, for example, tax the very richest 5%slightly more, so that it can use the funds to help those who've not been so lucky - but that's insane, right? You could develop ways of helping those without opportunities to do more with their talents - such as linking up people with disabilities or small children with the jobs that could be done from home - but why bother, eh? You could stop letting so much of tax payer's money end up in the pockets of business chiefs by outsourcing so many public services to private companies, but I guess you'd rather not.
Brexit has made UK more racist, UN representative says
Racism is to subconsciously feel dislike of people of other races, and to fail to challenge those feelings, such that one might end up treating people of other races differently. Racism is not determined by the result of a vote to leave the EU. It may be a substantial number of those who voted for Brexit did so in part because of racism (even subconsciously - and some Brexiteers voted only for non race related reasons) - that would imply that racism contributed to Brexit, not the other way around.
Racism is to subconsciously feel dislike of people of other races, and to fail to challenge those feelings, such that one might end up treating people of other races differently. Racism is not determined by the result of a vote to leave the EU. It may be a substantial number of those who voted for Brexit did so in part because of racism (even subconsciously - and some Brexiteers voted only for non race related reasons) - that would imply that racism contributed to Brexit, not the other way around.
Christian charities warn of ‘forgotten crisis’ in South Sudan
It drives me nuts - the media, rightly, reports often on problems in the Middle East, but suffering in Africa is almost entirely ignored, despite the fact that we can genuinely help people there if we donate to the right charities.
It drives me nuts - the media, rightly, reports often on problems in the Middle East, but suffering in Africa is almost entirely ignored, despite the fact that we can genuinely help people there if we donate to the right charities.
Why we need to see more women having affairs on screen
No, we sodding don't. To give in to temptation and disregard promises made and the emotional suffering that will be caused is not something we should be encouraged to think of as OK.
No, we sodding don't. To give in to temptation and disregard promises made and the emotional suffering that will be caused is not something we should be encouraged to think of as OK.
What I learnt sleeping with other women’s husbands
To give in to lust, and disregard promises made and the emotional suffering that will be caused is not something we should be encouraged to think of as OK. This^ is selfishness and cruelty - we can become more prone to doing things that we previously would have had moral inhibitions about when they're shoved in faces through media - but The Times, and countless films and TV programmes do it constantly because sex sells.
To give in to lust, and disregard promises made and the emotional suffering that will be caused is not something we should be encouraged to think of as OK. This^ is selfishness and cruelty - we can become more prone to doing things that we previously would have had moral inhibitions about when they're shoved in faces through media - but The Times, and countless films and TV programmes do it constantly because sex sells.
We all need to admit that gender is a complicated thing
We each have our own interests, style and skills. Some of us have XX chromosomes, some of us have XY chromosomes (and a very, very few have another combination) - the former are female, the latter are male; that's biology. It doesn't matter - in that each human is equally and immeasurably valuable and must feel no obligation to conform to stereotypes. And if a person isn't happy with the genitals they're born with, it's understandable; all genitals are disgusting. Fortunately, they don't actually impact what we do in life, so people should be helped to overcome that anxiety and encouraged to focus on other things, rather than have surgery on them.
We each have our own interests, style and skills. Some of us have XX chromosomes, some of us have XY chromosomes (and a very, very few have another combination) - the former are female, the latter are male; that's biology. It doesn't matter - in that each human is equally and immeasurably valuable and must feel no obligation to conform to stereotypes. And if a person isn't happy with the genitals they're born with, it's understandable; all genitals are disgusting. Fortunately, they don't actually impact what we do in life, so people should be helped to overcome that anxiety and encouraged to focus on other things, rather than have surgery on them.
Apple is almost a $1 trillion company, but watch out for AmazonIt seems odd to me - most things that people buy from Amazon can be bought more cheaply via businesses on ebay, and most Apple gadgets have cheaply Android equivalents. And that we're pressurised to upgrade our smartphones so frequently, and to buy any item that crosses our minds and have them delivered with Amazon, isn't doing our planet any good.
Where Have All the Protestants Gone? Poll Shows Dramatic Drop in U.S. Christians: Reason Roundup
I'd read weeks ago that this was coming, yet still feel sad seeing people so keen to desecrate "Church" tradition.
However, what they're abusing is not an accurate following of Christianity anyway, so I shouldn't let it bother me - though this Gala does absolutely prove that most of the celebrities are happy to take advantage of Christianity to gain reputation points, even if they don't realise that the costume they're endeavouring to parody isn't Christian.
In the desert, God gave the freed Hebrews instructions for precise, elaborate priestly attire to illustrate to the people an iota of His glory. But once Holiness had entered humanity in Jesus, ornate outfits and places of worship were no longer a requirement. Rather, Paul tells us to dress "modestly" - as opposed to showing off with ornate outfits; and the Bible tells us repeatedly to help the poor, not spend many $thousands on dresses whilst other humans live in rags.
So the Gala is mocking tradition that's not entirely Christian, and looking hilarious doing so.
1 Peter 3:3 "Your beauty should not come from outward adornments such as braided hair or gold jewellery or fine clothes, but from the inner disposition of your heart, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God’s sight."
1 Timothy 2:9 "dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds"
James 1:27 "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world."
Micah 6:8 "He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God"
I'd read weeks ago that this was coming, yet still feel sad seeing people so keen to desecrate "Church" tradition.
However, what they're abusing is not an accurate following of Christianity anyway, so I shouldn't let it bother me - though this Gala does absolutely prove that most of the celebrities are happy to take advantage of Christianity to gain reputation points, even if they don't realise that the costume they're endeavouring to parody isn't Christian.
In the desert, God gave the freed Hebrews instructions for precise, elaborate priestly attire to illustrate to the people an iota of His glory. But once Holiness had entered humanity in Jesus, ornate outfits and places of worship were no longer a requirement. Rather, Paul tells us to dress "modestly" - as opposed to showing off with ornate outfits; and the Bible tells us repeatedly to help the poor, not spend many $thousands on dresses whilst other humans live in rags.
So the Gala is mocking tradition that's not entirely Christian, and looking hilarious doing so.
1 Peter 3:3 "Your beauty should not come from outward adornments such as braided hair or gold jewellery or fine clothes, but from the inner disposition of your heart, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God’s sight."
1 Timothy 2:9 "dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds"
James 1:27 "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world."
Micah 6:8 "He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God"
Tim Farron just can’t escape gay sex
He's said that he's a Christian - and whilst many people have said this purely for show, perhaps he genuinely wants to follow Christ, who didn't discuss homosexuality, it wasn't a topic of debate at the time. Jesus prompted religious to leave a woman they'd been about to stone to death for her sexual sin, and said to her "Go and sin no more" - so Christians should be welcoming everyone, and urging everyone to consider God. Neither Christians, nor politcians, should be pressurised as Tim Farron has to make pronouncements on sex -they have incomparably more important things to discuss.
He's said that he's a Christian - and whilst many people have said this purely for show, perhaps he genuinely wants to follow Christ, who didn't discuss homosexuality, it wasn't a topic of debate at the time. Jesus prompted religious to leave a woman they'd been about to stone to death for her sexual sin, and said to her "Go and sin no more" - so Christians should be welcoming everyone, and urging everyone to consider God. Neither Christians, nor politcians, should be pressurised as Tim Farron has to make pronouncements on sex -they have incomparably more important things to discuss.
Government urged to change law to protect households from junk mail deluge
We ought to keep elderly friends/relatives/neighbours in mind. For us, as people who are online, cold calls and junk mail are mostly just an annoyance. For older people who aren't as familiar with scams and how to check authenticity, and/or may have reduced short term memory (or dementia), things that arrive in the post can be a serious source of extreme stress and/ or danger of scamming. If we get a call/junk mail telling us that we won a prize and should call to claim our prize, or that we need to invest in certain services ASAP, etc, we know to ignore them, and we can use advisory websites and forums to find out more. But for some of our neighbours or grandparents, these predators could seriously con them (or just cause extreme anxiety). Far more than ever before (as there are far more older people), plenty of companies are actively targetting OAPs through catalogues and flyers in the post, cold calls and door-to-door sales, so that they can vastly overcharge or even steal from them.
Many of us know elderly people who we could help by giving them some gentle warnings, such as not to trust unexpected calls or mail that they receive.
All this is V obvious - but I'm certain that a reminder might do some good.
We ought to keep elderly friends/relatives/neighbours in mind. For us, as people who are online, cold calls and junk mail are mostly just an annoyance. For older people who aren't as familiar with scams and how to check authenticity, and/or may have reduced short term memory (or dementia), things that arrive in the post can be a serious source of extreme stress and/ or danger of scamming. If we get a call/junk mail telling us that we won a prize and should call to claim our prize, or that we need to invest in certain services ASAP, etc, we know to ignore them, and we can use advisory websites and forums to find out more. But for some of our neighbours or grandparents, these predators could seriously con them (or just cause extreme anxiety). Far more than ever before (as there are far more older people), plenty of companies are actively targetting OAPs through catalogues and flyers in the post, cold calls and door-to-door sales, so that they can vastly overcharge or even steal from them.
Many of us know elderly people who we could help by giving them some gentle warnings, such as not to trust unexpected calls or mail that they receive.
All this is V obvious - but I'm certain that a reminder might do some good.
I don't think the picture is enough - we really can't get our heads around the horror, but everyone should be shown footage of the fire to get an iota of the trauma so that our brains can process more sympathy. I was watching it live (on BBC news in the middle of the night) and had nightmares - it's good that I did, it's human nature to struggle to grasp things we've not been through ourselves so we need to force ourselves to.
Tim Farron just can’t escape gay sex
He's said that he's a Christian - and whilst many people have said this purely for show, perhaps he genuinely wants to follow Christ, who didn't discuss homosexuality, it wasn't a topic of debate at the time. Jesus prompted religious to leave a woman they'd been about to stone to death for her sexual sin, and said to her "Go and sin no more" - so Christians should be welcoming everyone, and urging everyone to consider God. Neither Christians, nor politcians, should be pressurised as Tim Farron has to make pronouncements on sex -they have incomparably more important things to discuss.
Independent Online: “Historians are questioning if Jesus ever existed at all.” Is there any substance to it?The Independent is unbelievably keen to brain wash us into believing conspiracy theories. Try this - https://etimasthe.com/2018/04/23/independent-online-historians-are-questioning-if-jesus-ever-existed-at-all-is-there-any-substance-to-it/
A few writers have published books with that conspiracy theory in recent years - it's absurd enough to get them some book sales and for the hoax to spread around the internet. It doesn't change the fact that there's no dispute amongst actual historians that Jesus lived. I urge you to get informed. https://is.gd/m6MzKK . And though the notion that He rose from the dead sounds daft, there is remarkably good reasoning, based on history, to conclude that it's true -but it takes a bit of investigation (I've personally found the books The Case for the Resurrection and Who Moved the Stone very helpful - but there are many more books, as well as articles and lectures by academics about it) https://is.gd/Bax24f
Yes, but that statement suggests that you've (Kurt V has) fundmentally misunderstood what Christianity actually teaches. Are you not familiar, for example, with Sola Fide?
Huh? That's just the Protestants and it is the teaching of pure faith, something atheists don't abide by. We would like to see proof, at least some highly suggestive evidence. There is none. You can just be a nice, decent person because that's the right way to be. No inducements, no threats necessary.
Schools teach, colleges and universities teach. Churches preach.
Schools teach, colleges and universities teach. Churches preach.
just protestants? Jesus said that He is The Way - thus, irrespective of denominational labels, genuine Christianity (following of Christ) is NOT to believe that one gets to "heaven" by earning their way there (as the quote implies). How do you define faith and proof?
Are you followingHumanistsUK?
Yyes I follow it. Are not understanding and dialogue better than tribalism and echo chambers?
I don't go on Christian pages to criticise your science errors
If you did address Christians for stating untruths about science, I wouldn't object. But if a person fundamentally misunderstands a scientific concept that genuinely is true, it's usually not consequential; if it turns out that there is a heaven, and some people have rejected the opportunity to go there, it's more of a problem. I'm bothered that a significant proportion of the reasoning that I observe atheists to give for rejecting Christ rests on misunderstandings.
Has anyone come back to tell us - apart from Jesus of course.
I've not asked every human who's lived if they've returned to life, or know anyone who has, have you? Were I to meet someone who claimed such, I would presume that they were near certainly wrong and seek testimonies from others who knew them. That's not the point - you're presuming that Jesus didn't return to life because it runs contrary to what we naturally observe - but if a creator exists, the laws of nature are part of what they've designed and they are not bound by them. Had those in the area, at the time, when Jesus supposedly returned to life not seen that he'd returned to life - and given that those proclaiming that He had were being persecuted and killed for doing so - I don't see that it's possible that Christianity would have survived, and become the biggest movement in human history. But of course, this all needs far more discussion, and I really need to get on with other things ATM.
Yeah like what did the fig tree did to jesus for him to urse and pray for it to burn. Isnt he green or nature loving? Or the useless fig tree is just a metaphor like always?
LOL, fun question 
:) He was giving evidence to His disciples that He wasn't only human.
:) He was giving evidence to His disciples that He wasn't only human.
Children said they witnessed Mary at Fatima and people have said they witnessed all sorts of thing over the centuries: ghosts, witches, poltergeists and holy people of all kinds. We are also looking back many many years and reading accounts written by devoted followers of Jesus. Jesus said many good things and his ideas have prevailed, but this does not make him immortal in the physical sense.
Of course - but Jesus was seen by many people, and many were willing to give their lives to proclaim the news. His life fufilled prophecies made centuries earlier, such that after Jesus had re-ascended, Paul (who himself had been killing the early Christians, yet became the most prolific evangelist when He had a supernatural experience of hearing Jesus') was able to convince academics who'd not seen Jesus that Jesus was the Messiah. Why is the fact that followers of Jesus wrote about His life and resurrection? Does it not make sense that the people who saw Him and wrote about Him were the same people who, as a result of seeing His resurrection, became His followers? It wasn't like situations today where bias for one's group might lead them to skew the truth, because the followers weren't gaining anything from telling about Jesus - they were being killed. So today, we might not trust an account if written by a source linked to the subject matter, because of the writer stands to benefit from convincing the public of a skewed version of reality- but there was no reason for the Gospel writers to lie, they were dying, literally, to share what they'd seen.
Can you explain how your condition of genuinely following Jesus is not itself a process of earning your way to reward? I fail to see how it can't be exactly that and only that. You seem to be suggesting that your point opposes Vonnegut's.
That's been something theologians have debated for centuries - simplistically, my point was that Christianity teaches that Jesus offers The Way (to heaven - and demonstrated victory over death by rising from it). Those who love God in turn feel genuine desire to do things to help other humans He created - we don't help humans/follow God's laws because we think that doing so will be the reason we get to enter heaven.
"a significant proportion of the reasoning that I observe atheists to give for rejecting Christ rests on misunderstandings". Then you misunderstand Atheists Grace. Atheism simply means the absence in belief in the existence of God. The reason that they do not believe in the existence of God is that they have not been convinced by the Theists claim that God exists. I am sure that there are plenty of Atheists who don't know much about Christ but there are plenty, such as myself, who know more than some Christians. My Atheism is certainly not due to a lack of knowledge. In fact, the more I learn, the more certain I become that there is no God. I have read books by some of the best Christian apologists and nothing I have read comes even close to convincing me that Christianity is true. I could still be wrong though and so I will wait until a Christian who claims that God does exist meets their burden of proof.
No, I'm well aware that some atheists are better informed than the quote ^ suggests -but there truly are many, many people who think that Christianity means to follow rules in order to get to heaven; and who never examine the many philosophical and historical debates that serious atheists and Christians have. How do you define "meeting the burden of proof"?
Really not going to waste my time getting into a debate with a delusional person. Delusional people cannot be reasoned with so I'd rather do something that has a point instead.
And yet you chose to reply to my comment, twice. I wonder how you've concluded that I'm delusional since you know almost nothing about what I believe, and don't know what reasoning and evidence has led me to my conclusions. But I know you won't answer. Have a nice evening
Whole argument by grace is a no true scotsman fallacy(A TRUE CHRISTIAN BELIEVES X), therefore is intrinsically false(self defeating), therefore not worth the time to debate.
I've seen numerous people claim I make the No True Scotsman fallacy lately - it seems your tactic of trying to define Christianity how you want so that can attack it (which is, of course, the straw man fallacy). I'm not making the No True Scotsman fallacy, because I'm not rejecting an action as unChristian on the basis of what's frequently been observed in Christians (as in the NTSF, where one rejects someone is a Scotsman because they don't behave in a way that Scotsmen have been frequently observed to behave).
Rather, I'm objecting on the basis of what Christianity actually is by definition - which is a follower of Christ; the word came into use, as you'll know, to mock Jesus first followers, who themselves also asserted that we're saved because of choosing to follow Jesus, as opposed to adhering to rules and trying to score brownie points with God, as the people around them believed, and as the quote^ suggests.
If someone does something uncharacteristic of a Scot, they're no less a Scot because a Scot is someone from Scotland, that's the point of the NTSF. Christianity is not defined by where one is from, or anything else that they've not chosen: Christianity is specifically to follow, through choice, Christ - and His teaching is distinctly different from Kurt V's assumption^ of theists.
Rather, I'm objecting on the basis of what Christianity actually is by definition - which is a follower of Christ; the word came into use, as you'll know, to mock Jesus first followers, who themselves also asserted that we're saved because of choosing to follow Jesus, as opposed to adhering to rules and trying to score brownie points with God, as the people around them believed, and as the quote^ suggests.
If someone does something uncharacteristic of a Scot, they're no less a Scot because a Scot is someone from Scotland, that's the point of the NTSF. Christianity is not defined by where one is from, or anything else that they've not chosen: Christianity is specifically to follow, through choice, Christ - and His teaching is distinctly different from Kurt V's assumption^ of theists.
Instead of a confession and 5 holy mary just say 5 democracy and 2 human rights and you are a decent person and can feel good with yourself
Indeed, the notion that someone could absolve their misdeeds by speaking certain words certain numbers of times is illogical an UnChristian.
Intrestingly the quote did not even mention Christianity so unsure how its misunderstood it, but im sure you must have connected the 2 somehow to be defencive of Christianity
We live in a society where Christianity is the predominant version of theism, and Humanists specifically aim to critique theism, most often Christianity. The reason that the quote appeals to people is that it opposes a common, but an incorrect understanding of Christianity, which was historically prevalent.
OK... so your answer to me utterly removes any concept of any gods, basically, it's a Humanist answer with Jesus as a mere mentor. Unfortunately theologians debating things will never come to that realisation because they sit within a box of faith in gods.
Jesus is absolutely not merely - or primarily - a mentor. First and foremost (so far as humanity is affected that is) He offers The Way to "heaven" (nothing to do with fluffy clouds an harps, obvs). He was witnessed to have risen from death by those in the area at the time, demonstrating His having defeated death, so that His followers knew they could let go of their lives to spread the news about Him.
Scots outraged over Donald Trump’s Irn-Bru ban
Obviously, he's deeply concerned about the well-being of others, so he's endeavouring to address the health impact of sugary drinks.
GRIME 4 Corbyn #JC4PM Labour tomorrow is firing Shoots over the Bow of the DUP/Tory alliance. Will they vote against the DUP and support equal Marriage in Northern Ireland? Support them blocking it? or be cowards and abstain from the vote altogether?
We need to keep issues like this^,and abortion, which I've seen much about from the Irish Labour Party recently, separate from the Tory/Labour war. They're not part of the economic injustice that needs more opposition. If it weren't for the Democrats support for abortion and gay marriage, Trump wouldn't be in the White House.
'Sadistic' nuns arrested for torturing 65 children
Nuns should be in italics too - someone who's genuinely trying to follow God will naturally want to behave as He's told us, not the very opposite
Nuns should be in italics too - someone who's genuinely trying to follow God will naturally want to behave as He's told us, not the very opposite
'Should my 16-year-old be allowed to sleep in the same room as her boyfriend?'
The change in attitudes to sex over the last few generations has done a lot of harm - suffering and healthcare costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - in sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc. I blame the corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners
The change in attitudes to sex over the last few generations has done a lot of harm - suffering and healthcare costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - in sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc. I blame the corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners
Esther McVey to appear on Question Time so let’s all go out instead
Seriously? You genuinely think that you can make things better by sticking your fingers in your ears when people you disagree with are talking? How will you convince swing voters to vote left if you don't study the right to perfect explanations of how it's wrong?
I was in the QT audience in March - I got to look Liam Fox straight in the eye and urge him to have concern for the world's poorest people as he negotiates the international trade deals resulting from Brexit. We can't resolve problems by blanking those we disagree with/who are wrong.
Seriously? You genuinely think that you can make things better by sticking your fingers in your ears when people you disagree with are talking? How will you convince swing voters to vote left if you don't study the right to perfect explanations of how it's wrong?
I was in the QT audience in March - I got to look Liam Fox straight in the eye and urge him to have concern for the world's poorest people as he negotiates the international trade deals resulting from Brexit. We can't resolve problems by blanking those we disagree with/who are wrong.
Could Kanye West's latest backlash put his career in the sunken place?
Doesn't using the sunken place as a reference to a career disregard the incomparably more serious issues that Get Out was endeavouring to illustrate?
Well, no, I said "result" not"advocate". "Result" does therefore not refer to the statements of religious authorities, but the actual reported and observable behaviour of adherents of all of the major religions with the possible exception of Buddhism. I make no presumption about your religion, I wonder at the source of your approach to this question. And I offer this further tenative and somewhat wild observation. There is something self-abnegatory, self-denying, self-contradictory about religious inspired bodily shame. It works this way. The attitudes you express necessarily entails a revulsion for your own genesis. I would call this "self-abuse". Oddly, among all organised religions, the term self-abuse is reserved for the perfectly harmless recreational friction of masturbation. It is odd to be simultaneously a self-abuser and against self-abuse. And I note Grace that in the graceful manner in which you expressed your argument, you directly revealed no religious affiliation or belief, which is very nice argumentation ... but I wouldn't be wrong, would I, in guessing that Christopher Hitchens is not among your favourite authors?
No, science explains the details of how the universe works, not how iit came to exist in the first place. More intriguing to me, is that science shows that numerous parameters of the universe have to be so precisely correct, that it's evident that it didn't form by chance. This is also true of biology - the rate at which mutations happen and the number of mutations required for us to develop from nothing by chance - combined with the fact that each gene is entirely reliant no, science explains the details of how the universe works, not how iit came to exist in the first place. More intriguing to me, is that science shows that numerous parameters of the universe have to be so precisely correct, that it's evident that it didn't form by chance. This is also true of biology - the rate at which mutations happen and the number of mutations required for us to develop from nothing by chance - combined with the fact that each gene is entirely reliant on many others to function, and each complex organism reliant on other organisms to live - mean that it's not possible that unguided chance brought about the biological world. There are many esteemed scientists who explain this far better than I can, one of my favourites is a colleague of Richard Dawkins http://www.johnlennox.org/guide-to-resources/on many others to function, and each complex organism reliant on other organisms to live - mean that it's not possible that unguided chance brought about the biological world. There are many esteemed scientists who explain this far better than I can, one of my favourites is a colleague of Richard Dawkins http://www.johnlennox.org/guide-to-resources/
[facebook url="https://www.facebook.com/BuzzFeedNews/videos/1883320755022267/" /]
Doesn't using the sunken place as a reference to a career disregard the incomparably more serious issues that Get Out was endeavouring to illustrate?
“I don’t like how some Christian groups meddle in politics”
I've wasted several hours debating abortion this afternoon after making the daft mistake of commenting on a U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders post and immediately had a barrage of furious replies. I should have learnt by now. What's most frustrating, is peoples' immediate assumption that, because I contradict the statement that abortion is just "between the woman and her doctor" (I pointed out that there's another human involved, who's affected more than the adults but has no say in whether an abortion happens) I must be a "religious" "Republican" "hypocrite" who's pro-war and anti welfare. Obvs it doesn't matter at all if they believe nonsense about me - but I'm heart broken that so many people reject Christianity entirely because they lump together everyone who wears that label. They don't care what Jesus actually said and did, they just feel angry about what some people who call themselves Christians have done and think that's a reason to ignore Christ.
I've wasted several hours debating abortion this afternoon after making the daft mistake of commenting on a U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders post and immediately had a barrage of furious replies. I should have learnt by now. What's most frustrating, is peoples' immediate assumption that, because I contradict the statement that abortion is just "between the woman and her doctor" (I pointed out that there's another human involved, who's affected more than the adults but has no say in whether an abortion happens) I must be a "religious" "Republican" "hypocrite" who's pro-war and anti welfare. Obvs it doesn't matter at all if they believe nonsense about me - but I'm heart broken that so many people reject Christianity entirely because they lump together everyone who wears that label. They don't care what Jesus actually said and did, they just feel angry about what some people who call themselves Christians have done and think that's a reason to ignore Christ.
Emily Thornberry vs Mr Men is just the start of taking down patriarchal kids’ cartoons
As a Labour voting female who grew up with these books, it never crossed my mind at all that they're demeaning. Can't Emily Thornberry focus on demanding equality annd help for genuinely oppressed people?
As a Labour voting female who grew up with these books, it never crossed my mind at all that they're demeaning. Can't Emily Thornberry focus on demanding equality annd help for genuinely oppressed people?
NHS will no longer have to share immigrants' data with Home Office
OUTRAGEOUS - immigrants are using 0.3% of our NHS's resources!
(I hope my sarcasm is clear enough)
OUTRAGEOUS - immigrants are using 0.3% of our NHS's resources!
(I hope my sarcasm is clear enough)
Melania trolled for #BeBest speech
Apparently the leaflet is a copy of one created by the Obamas. Many people have criticised Donald Trump's lack of green credentials, yet when Melania recycles she gets berated. Poor thing.
Apparently the leaflet is a copy of one created by the Obamas. Many people have criticised Donald Trump's lack of green credentials, yet when Melania recycles she gets berated. Poor thing.
Living on £1 a day for 7 days
We should remember that there are people around the world who have no choice
:( And they've no benefits system, NHS, food banks/soup kitchens/homeless shelters - or opportunities to work their way out of poverty. It's incredibly exciting how much we can help them. For example, many of us spend on coffees/ take aways/ gym memberships (we can exercise with free weights and cheap exercise bikes/treadmiulls at home) - but we can sponsor a child for £25/month, which means that they get meals, lessons, health checks, and protection from the trafficking (inc sex slavery) that many of the world's poorest kids are at substantial risk from.
We should remember that there are people around the world who have no choice
:( And they've no benefits system, NHS, food banks/soup kitchens/homeless shelters - or opportunities to work their way out of poverty. It's incredibly exciting how much we can help them. For example, many of us spend on coffees/ take aways/ gym memberships (we can exercise with free weights and cheap exercise bikes/treadmiulls at home) - but we can sponsor a child for £25/month, which means that they get meals, lessons, health checks, and protection from the trafficking (inc sex slavery) that many of the world's poorest kids are at substantial risk from.
We must try to understand how unwanted virginity leads self-hating incels to murder
Yes, they are born. All human beings are born virgins. If an evil or disturbed person does something evil and blames it on involuntry celibacy, why presume that their claim is accurate? Have not a number of murders also been by sexual partners/ exes? I think that the reality is that many people are conned -by commecial forces, magazines and TV/film/music sell by excessively featuring sex- into thinking that sex will make life happier. In fact the net benefits of the changes in attitudes to sex over the last century are outweighed by the net harm done. The immeasurable sum of suffering and healthcare costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - in sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc are what we should be concerned by.
Yes, they are born. All human beings are born virgins. If an evil or disturbed person does something evil and blames it on involuntry celibacy, why presume that their claim is accurate? Have not a number of murders also been by sexual partners/ exes? I think that the reality is that many people are conned -by commecial forces, magazines and TV/film/music sell by excessively featuring sex- into thinking that sex will make life happier. In fact the net benefits of the changes in attitudes to sex over the last century are outweighed by the net harm done. The immeasurable sum of suffering and healthcare costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - in sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc are what we should be concerned by.
I’m 20 and the pressure of being a virgin is overwhelming
Why? With all due respect, at at 20 what's concerning is not being a virgin, but caring what peers think.
I'm 26 and I never stopped feeling grossed out by the idea of sex, and the hypersexuality of our society has added to that. And it's evident that the change in attitudes to sex over the last few generations has done a lot of harm - suffering and NHS costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - iin sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc. I blame the corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners.
We each need, desperately, to find identiity and joy outside of our sex lives.
Being asexual is legitimate and fine, but how about letting others enjoy what they like too? I do agree that sex education, especially around health and consent, need massive improvements.
Why? With all due respect, at at 20 what's concerning is not being a virgin, but caring what peers think.
I'm 26 and I never stopped feeling grossed out by the idea of sex, and the hypersexuality of our society has added to that. And it's evident that the change in attitudes to sex over the last few generations has done a lot of harm - suffering and NHS costs due to STIs inc. HIV and cervical cancer(and the tests/treatments); HPV vaccines; abortions; emotional suffering (the brain releases oxytocin - pair bonding hormone - iin sex, so people are far more likely to feel depressed later on after a broken relationship if it included sex) etc. I blame the corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners.
We each need, desperately, to find identiity and joy outside of our sex lives.
Being asexual is legitimate and fine, but how about letting others enjoy what they like too? I do agree that sex education, especially around health and consent, need massive improvements.
I'm not stopping anyone "enjoying what they like" - although I think that the reality is that many people are conned -by commecial forces- into thinking that sex will make life happier, and in fact the net benefits of the changes in attitudes to sex over the last century are outweighed by the net harm done.
I never stopped feeling grossed out by the idea of sex, -- That's not logical or natural.
Of course it's logical - for the reasons I explained and because genitals are disgusting. It's natural because I've not had therapy or medication that's brought about the disgust. What it isn't is normal, I'm well aware of that
And allow me, if I can Grace Dalton, to be as admirably clear as you have managed. I am struggling to think of a single monotheistic organised religion which does not result in its adherents loathing their own bodies and those of others, of feeling disgust and revulsion at lust and the idea of lust ... and yet without the phenomenon of the desire for the body of another, without lust, we would not be here to carry on this jolly fascinating discussion
Very interesting :) How have you concluded that all monotheistic religions advocate loathing the body? And what are your presumptions about my stance on "religion"?
:) How have you concluded that all monotheistic religions advocate loathing the body? And what are your presumptions about my stance on "religion"? Well, no, I said "result" not"advocate". "Result" does therefore not refer to the statements of religious authorities, but the actual reported and observable behaviour of adherents of all of the major religions with the possible exception of Buddhism. I make no presumption about your religion, I wonder at the source of your approach to this question. And I offer this further tenative and somewhat wild observation. There is something self-abnegatory, self-denying, self-contradictory about religious inspired bodily shame. It works this way. The attitudes you express necessarily entails a revulsion for your own genesis. I would call this "self-abuse". Oddly, among all organised religions, the term self-abuse is reserved for the perfectly harmless recreational friction of masturbation. It is odd to be simultaneously a self-abuser and against self-abuse. And I note Grace that in the graceful manner in which you expressed your argument, you directly revealed no religious affiliation or belief, which is very nice argumentation ... but I wouldn't be wrong, would I, in guessing that Christopher Hitchens is not among your favourite authors?
Indeed - and thankyou for acknowledging that - there's a vital distinction between how self-proclaimed followers live, and what a "religion" (I hate the word religion - it has so many connotations that are antithetical to what Jesus actually taught and demonstrated) teaches.
Whilst it may appear that Christians are opposed to sex, I'm in a tiny minority in this. The vital distinction is that - in doctrine and in the minds of most Christians - it should only happen within marraige. St Paul even says that married couples should not deny each other. So a Christian could have a very active sex life - with their spouse. Whilst this sounds bizarre and boring to those who've not tried it amidst our sexualised society, Christian couples have enjoyed monogamy and avoided the emotional and medical problems that sex outside of marraiges can cause (not only near the time, but later on and for children).
But my apologies if I seem moralistic - I'm not judging those who've not restricted sex to marraige, I'm well aware that this is entirely the norm now.I've not heard Christians refer to masturbation as self-abuse - and having attended Church all my life and listened to many hundreds of sermons/ read articles by Christian leaders online, I've only encountered one message on masturbation. It's not in the Bible, so most Christians don't have views on it. Though I know atheists have created satire about Christians condemning it that may well have been believed to be factual. I personally am opposed to masturbation of course, in that I find the idea gross, but it's none of my business what other people do, and my objection isn't related to my being a Christian.
Whilst it may appear that Christians are opposed to sex, I'm in a tiny minority in this. The vital distinction is that - in doctrine and in the minds of most Christians - it should only happen within marraige. St Paul even says that married couples should not deny each other. So a Christian could have a very active sex life - with their spouse. Whilst this sounds bizarre and boring to those who've not tried it amidst our sexualised society, Christian couples have enjoyed monogamy and avoided the emotional and medical problems that sex outside of marraiges can cause (not only near the time, but later on and for children).
But my apologies if I seem moralistic - I'm not judging those who've not restricted sex to marraige, I'm well aware that this is entirely the norm now.I've not heard Christians refer to masturbation as self-abuse - and having attended Church all my life and listened to many hundreds of sermons/ read articles by Christian leaders online, I've only encountered one message on masturbation. It's not in the Bible, so most Christians don't have views on it. Though I know atheists have created satire about Christians condemning it that may well have been believed to be factual. I personally am opposed to masturbation of course, in that I find the idea gross, but it's none of my business what other people do, and my objection isn't related to my being a Christian.
IIndeed, Christopher Hitchens is not my favourite writer - and the flaws in many of the arguments of the new atheist brigade frustrate me immeasurably. But I share their keenness to believe only in things for which there is good reasoning/evidence, as opposed to simply having faith. I came, gradually, to believe in the factual truth of God's existence, and then of Christ's resurrection, through examination of science and history respectively. I've been trying to become better acquainted with the many debated issues in apologetics since.
You must be heaps of fun at parties...
LOL, I'm far too boring to go to parties 
I think you may need to re-examine science and history, neither of them support any gods existence or any resurrection, the later goes against science and has no credible historical basis.
How have you reached that conclusion?
Which conclusion? The god one well science explains the universe naturally with no need for the supernatural, and the only “historical” source for god is the Bible which we know contains many contradictions, scientific and historical inaccuracies. For the resurrection, rising from the dead 3 days later goes against science Historically once again you’re relying on the Bible, which was written decades after the events with no eyewitnesses, the writers at best are relying on hearsay at worst totally made up, neither of which are considered reliable methods. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, neither of them have what could be considered even semi decent evidence hence requiring faith to believe them.
No, science explains the details of how the universe works, not how iit came to exist in the first place. More intriguing to me, is that science shows that numerous parameters of the universe have to be so precisely correct, that it's evident that it didn't form by chance. This is also true of biology - the rate at which mutations happen and the number of mutations required for us to develop from nothing by chance - combined with the fact that each gene is entirely reliant no, science explains the details of how the universe works, not how iit came to exist in the first place. More intriguing to me, is that science shows that numerous parameters of the universe have to be so precisely correct, that it's evident that it didn't form by chance. This is also true of biology - the rate at which mutations happen and the number of mutations required for us to develop from nothing by chance - combined with the fact that each gene is entirely reliant on many others to function, and each complex organism reliant on other organisms to live - mean that it's not possible that unguided chance brought about the biological world. There are many esteemed scientists who explain this far better than I can, one of my favourites is a colleague of Richard Dawkins http://www.johnlennox.org/guide-to-resources/on many others to function, and each complex organism reliant on other organisms to live - mean that it's not possible that unguided chance brought about the biological world. There are many esteemed scientists who explain this far better than I can, one of my favourites is a colleague of Richard Dawkins http://www.johnlennox.org/guide-to-resources/
And that would be an argument from ignorance fallacy, you don’t understand it therefore god. Yes parameters have to be precise otherwise we wouldn’t be here, that’s not evidence for a designer much like Douglas Adams puddle example. Simply if it didn’t occur as it did we wouldn’t be here, the probability of it happening so precisely is tiny but so is you being born yet you are here. As for your biology you do understand you are going against what the actual experts who study and research this their whole lives say, are you saying your understanding of biology is better than theirs? You are going against what scientists say yet claiming science supports you. Now even if we pretend you are correct and your fallacious arguments are proof of a designer that would not be proof for your very specific designer the Abrahamic god.
I'm well aware that resurrection breaks scientific laws - but iif, as I explained there is reason to think, a designer created the universe, that designer can choose to overrule those laws. How much have you investigated the resurection accounts? it takes a bit of investigation (I've personally found the books The Case for the Resurrection and Who Moved the Stone very helpful - but there are many more books, as well as articles and lectures by academics about it) https://is.gd/Bax24f There are many points to make and I need to get off FB, but consider this one; The New Testament was written by iindividuals whose lives were much endangered by their sharing about Jesus. Why do you suppose that enough of them would have willingly given up their lives to tell others about Jesus if they'd not actually seen that He'd defeated death, for the movement to become the biggest in human history?
The endlessly complex, unfathomably iinterdependent and improbable dynamic universe is not comparable to a puddle. I'm not opposing biology, I'm saying that it didn't come about purely by unguided chance because that's what it demonstrates. How much biology have you done yourself, by the way? I've been studying biomedical sciences at UCL, and learning more has only made it clearer that it couln't have developed without a designer. But anyhoo, I need to go, have a nice day
Cliches suck, but no, a hair streak is not a huge problem. People not having clean water or enough food is a huge problem. People being trafficked into slavery is a huge problem. People working in sweat shops and comparably horrendous plantations and factories for almost no pay, so that we can enjoy our cushy Western lifestyles, is a huge problem.
The ‘gay cake’ fight: why the bakers had a right to refuse this order
There was in fact no discrimination – Ashers only refused to put particular words onto a cake, they didn’t refuse the order because of the customer. There’s no logic in forcing 1 human being to do something that another human being requests when it’s not at all a necessary service. I’ve never eaten customised cake and I’m coping just fine – like most of humanity. Much of humanity has no access to cake at all, and has to live on little more than rice.
Ashers didn’t cheat the customer out of his money, or refuse to make him a cake without the wording. Only a minority of celebratory customised cakes have wording on them. The customer could have had cake without words, have applied the words himself, or have ordered from another bakery. It’s plainly obvious that he’s persecuted Ashers to make a point.
God instructs humanity not to have gay sex – marriage implies sex, Ashers couldn’t endorse something that God has told humanity not to do, because God knows better than we do what’s best for us and loves us more than we can imagine.
Letters to the Editor: Religion and Marxism could coexist in the modern world
How are you defining "religion"? Following Christ is very different from religiously trying to earn one's entry to heaven. Many aspects of Marxism and the early Church (before power lust turned parts of it away from prioritsing Jesus) are similar. But ultimately, Marxism can only be of any use in this lifetime - why don't we spend more time trying to find out what happens next?
UK tourists hit by 'disaster warning': EU deadlock to trigger FLIGHT CRISISHow are you defining "religion"? Following Christ is very different from religiously trying to earn one's entry to heaven. Many aspects of Marxism and the early Church (before power lust turned parts of it away from prioritsing Jesus) are similar. But ultimately, Marxism can only be of any use in this lifetime - why don't we spend more time trying to find out what happens next?
Not being able to fly abroad is not a crisis. With the cost of a flight abroad, we could seriously help people who actually are experiencing crises, which is why I've not been overseas since I was a child, and don't feel deprived at all - I'm tremendously grateful to live in a country where there's somuch to enjoy
Shunned by corporations, U.S. gun entrepreneurs launch start-ups
I live in London. I heard what Trump said at the NRA address about blood baths in London hospitals, and now understand why Trump gets accused of lying. His description was so inaccurate it was almost laughable - except it's not funny, because he's deceiving people to encourage support of guns. We have knife crime problems because Christianity has mostly disappeared from our culture and because of drug wars - everyone knows that it's a good thing that guns are banned. We (British) also agree (not just left leaning voters) that our healthcare system is far, far, far better as a public "social/single payer" institution.
I live in London. I heard what Trump said at the NRA address about blood baths in London hospitals, and now understand why Trump gets accused of lying. His description was so inaccurate it was almost laughable - except it's not funny, because he's deceiving people to encourage support of guns. We have knife crime problems because Christianity has mostly disappeared from our culture and because of drug wars - everyone knows that it's a good thing that guns are banned. We (British) also agree (not just left leaning voters) that our healthcare system is far, far, far better as a public "social/single payer" institution.
Opinion | How Long Have I Got Left?
None of us knows when we're going to die - so why don't we spend a bit more time trying to find out what happens next? It was well known enough in the area where he was that Jesus had defeated death (rising again) that His followers were willing to die to spread the message, and it became the biggest movement in human history. isn't it worth looking at the evidence, so one can decide about following Jesus, who offers eternal life (heaven) before it's too late?
This is a really eloquent and searing collection of essays, don’t devalue them by vomiting religion all over them. Aren’t there some perky GodVine videos you should be watching?
Why would are you assuming that I watch Godvine? I don't, I don't - but whether I do is irrelevant - whilst you may not have been 100% serious, you clearly are making assumptions with no evidence. You accuse me of "vomitting religion" - but I never mentioned religion. How do you define religion? I mentioned history and metaphysics, and you're choosing to ignore them - surely you want to explore and discover what's true? You might disagree with me, but is simply rejecting ultimate questions really prudent?
None of us knows when we're going to die - so why don't we spend a bit more time trying to find out what happens next? It was well known enough in the area where he was that Jesus had defeated death (rising again) that His followers were willing to die to spread the message, and it became the biggest movement in human history. isn't it worth looking at the evidence, so one can decide about following Jesus, who offers eternal life (heaven) before it's too late?
This is a really eloquent and searing collection of essays, don’t devalue them by vomiting religion all over them. Aren’t there some perky GodVine videos you should be watching?Why would are you assuming that I watch Godvine? I don't, I don't - but whether I do is irrelevant - whilst you may not have been 100% serious, you clearly are making assumptions with no evidence. You accuse me of "vomitting religion" - but I never mentioned religion. How do you define religion? I mentioned history and metaphysics, and you're choosing to ignore them - surely you want to explore and discover what's true? You might disagree with me, but is simply rejecting ultimate questions really prudent?
The whole, "spend more time trying to find out what happens next" begs a religious interpretation. The focus of the essays is around coming to terms with death and not a walk down a nonexistent garden path.
How do you know that the path is non existent?
If the path is extant, then we'll find out, and if it's not, then we we'll never know the difference. This is what kind of makes it fun, don't you think?
If we're trying to follow the path and there turns out to be nothing at the end of it, then we'll never know the difference, and have lost nothing. If we're not following the path and it turns out that it was leadiing somewhere, we'll have thrown away the ultimate offer.
That might depend on your conception of the Almighty. All-knowing? Perhaps your intentions, then, if well-meant, will be recognized as such. You do your best; it would seem more could not be expected.
That's what most religions have presumed - that we reach heaven through doing good things. But there's no evidence to support the idea, sensible as seems. If Jesus rose from the dead, He's actually evidenced victory over death, and we have reason to believe Him; and He said that He is The Way (to eternal life with God; heaven). A person who is genuinely following Jesus will increasingly want to do good - but it's decision to accept Christ that determines whether we spend forever with God. If we do good, but choose to reject Jesus, God won't force us to spend eternity with Him.
Your argument is faith based, as you are certainly aware, but as such, "evidence" doesn't figure into the picture. We contemplate the world and try to make sense; where "evidence" exists, it constitutes proof, independent of that which we may choose to believe. There is no incontrovertable proof pertaining to religious beliefs, for that would obviate the need for hope as well as faith.
How do you define evidence and proof exactly? Indeed my statement that Jesus' resurrection is evidence of Him offering victory over death is only valid if He actually did rise from the dead. I've come to belive that He did through examining the evidence and reasoning, as opposed to just having faith that He did, but I know that some will examine evidence and draw different conclusions. Frustrating though, is that most people presume it to be faith based fiction and don't examine the evidence at all.
Plea to ban 'vile' anti-abortion posters
Why? It's a reality. Our society is struggling enough already to discern what's truth, without hiding it because of squeamishness.
The fact is that people realise that abortion is horrific, and they want to ignore their consciences.
Why? It's a reality. Our society is struggling enough already to discern what's truth, without hiding it because of squeamishness.
The fact is that people realise that abortion is horrific, and they want to ignore their consciences.
"Sneering Leftwing Racists" Are Prejudging Sajid Javid's Appointment As Home Secretary
I think that race may be a side issue here; that the underlying issue is that if someone's on the right, the left are immediately certain that they're evil and must be criticised and mocked severely. Of course, if someone's on the left, the right are immediately certain that they're dangerous and must be criticised and mocked severely.
I think that race may be a side issue here; that the underlying issue is that if someone's on the right, the left are immediately certain that they're evil and must be criticised and mocked severely. Of course, if someone's on the left, the right are immediately certain that they're dangerous and must be criticised and mocked severely.
‘Jesus loves me and my guns’: Faith and firearms touted at the NRA’s prayer breakfast
Jesus told us that those who live by the sword will die by the sword; there's no way He'd be pro gun.
Jesus told us that those who live by the sword will die by the sword; there's no way He'd be pro gun.
Psychologists Point Out 11 Clothing Colors That Reveal Your Personality
No, clothing colour really, really doesn't reveal your personality. But congrats to those who've managed to profit from selling books about this lunacy.
No, clothing colour really, really doesn't reveal your personality. But congrats to those who've managed to profit from selling books about this lunacy.
Bernie Sanders By passing a six-week abortion ban—the strictest abortion law in the country—the Iowa legislature is undermining women's constitutional right to control their own bodies. We must do everything we can to defend women's right to health care across the country. The decision to have an abortion is between a woman and her doctor, not extremist politicians.
"Between Her and her doctor" entirely ignores the reality that there's another human involved, and it's that human who's most affected by the decision, but gets no say. Something being a constitutional right doesn't make it morally right - gun ownership being another example.Not a human. It's a fetus.Yes IT IS HUMAN - that's just biology. Call it a foetus, fine, but iit's a human foetus just as we are human aults (or teenagers). How much biology have those of you saying that it's not human studied science, and embryology BTW? SO often people say that it's "just a clump of cells" - how do you define a "clump"? We're also composed of cells. think that some people have been genuinely misled about human development in the womb - and I've seen utterly false diagrams that show total nonsense about what the foetus looks like at various stages. But it's not rocket science to use Google - there are scores of pregnancy websites and scientific textbooks online that will tell you about development in the womb. I'm very much in favour of better access to contraception, and though I hate the idea of it, I won't argue about abortion after several weeks - but the foetus starts to sense touch at around 2 months.Though indeed there are children lacking adequate care - who MUST be helped more by the state - there are many couples who specifically want to adopt newborrns.Only 1% of abortions follow rape (according to Planned Parenthood's own research) - so those who are pregnant have already made a choice. Corporate forces than have been profitting - magazines and TV/film/music sell by featuring sex, and now everyone's convinced that it's healthy to start ASAP and have plenty of different partners. In reality, it's perfectly possible to enjoy life without sex; and even more possible of course to go without sex until you're ready to be a parent. The abortion problem is ultimately most of all a result of our being collectively conned into thinking we need sex, and not being able to cope the the natural biological result.So when you begin demanding the end to war which kills humans by the millions, you will gain credibility. Otherwise, the hypocrisy stinks!!!Hypocrisy how exactly? I'm not pro-war. Why on Earth are you assuming that me being anti abortion means I'm republican? Take a GD science class! A clump of cells with no awareness feelings or consciousness is not a human. For fucks sake!Seriously, you can F***'s sake at me all you want, it is human - do you want me to start quoting science journals? I've been studying biomedical sciences at university, how about you? When most of the country lives below the poverty line and cannot even afford to feed themselves, making something like abortion illegal is irresponsible. Thats my opinion, and maybe I am a pessimist.No one forced the woman to have sex - other than in cases of rape which, as I've said, is no more than 1% of cases - therefore no one has forced her into anything, carrying a baby is the natural biological result of her own choice. I'm in the UK, so I don't know enough about how your health care system works, but I'm doubtful that it's necessary to pay $10 000 - doesn't medicaid help with basic maternal healthcare if the woman has no health insurance? And I FIRMLY believe that far more health care support should be given to those who aren't wealthy. Our healthcare system is seriously struggling ATM, but I know that we're extremely lucky (in the UK) to have what we do, and desperately hope that are fairer system is put in pkace in the US ASAP. Also, as I said, though I hate the idea of it, I'm not arguing against morning after pills or abortion within the first month, so I'm really not suggesting that anyone be "forced" to carry a pregnancy.As is her biological choice to end a pregnancy. Don't believe in it, don't do it. "Don't believe in it, don't do it" - but the same could be said about murder. You could say to someone that if they don't think murder is morally right, they should just not murder, but they have no right to tell others not to murder. The point is that in murder, an also in abortion, it's not just the active person who's affected, then murder victim and the unborn human are at risk of being killed.Just what is the man's role in this discussion?The man should provide for more than half of the child's material needs (more than half because the woman is bearing the physical aspect) - and be loving and supportive to the extent that the child wants.Many women die in child birth, even today. So any pregnancy is a risk to the woman's life. And a lot of abortions are done to end the product of rape, incest or a non viable fetus. Most in fact. So saying a woman got herself into the situation of being pregnant is completely ignorant......no woman wants to get raped or be the victim of incest or carry a non viable fetus. Abortion is not murder, it is terminating a clump of cells, vastly different from ending the life on an intelligent, autonomous individual."most"? No, as I already said, PP's own data has found that only 1% of abortions result from rape. I'm aware that women die in pregnancy - but exactly how many, in developed countries, since you're so certain that it's a significant number? And surely you're aware that women still die in the process of abortion? This is about 2 miles from where I live - https://mailchi.mp/.../woman-bled-to-death-after-ealing...You don't dig up a seed and say that you've cut down a tree. Stay out of other people's medical decisions.So? The biological progression from a fertilised egg to a baby is entirely different from the progression from a seed to a tree, so that argument doesn't work. And I'm not in other people's medical decisions, I'm just commenting - but it's not just the woman's medical decision, it's abother human's life.So what. Even one forced pregnancy by rape is one too many. Shame on you! Why don't you get raped and have a baby? Then we'd see how you would feel about it. Oh but wait, you must be a religious right winger with no empathy, until it happens to you.
So you're just going to assume I'm a "religious right winger" because I disagree with abortion? That's illogical. Personally, I have my own opinions on each issue, rather than merely following one party and agreeing with everything they say. How about you? And how do you define "religious"? I'd really love to know, questions about God are far more important and interestiing than all of this arguing about abortion. Since you mentioned it, if I were raped, I wouldn't get pregnant as I'm too malnourished to menstruate. But aside from that, if I were pregnant from rape, I would absolutely keep it (unless there were a couple desperate for a baby who'd be able ton give it a better life than I could)
Someone I don't know added this comment to one of my photos yesterday -
"It's always easily discern when somebody is insecure but desperately seeking falsified reassurances. They slather their not naturally pretty face in clown paint (oh, pardon, I meant make-up!) Your contouring is WAY off & your eyes look like the lost demon child of Satan. The shag bang thing isn't working for you either to be fair. It's sad, why is your self-esteem so low, Grace?
You look like the 80's singer Tiffany if she didn't get enough in food benefits, not really a compliment, more like a suggestion to not go for this, er look(?) again, as it were. Rethink your selfies toots!!
I could send you some non-thrift shop bracelets if you need, no point in advertising how minimal your budget is. Also, if you need a meal we should do lunch as the whole intentionally Auschwitz appearance is just a cry for attention. :) "
......
- but I've also had considerable criticism on comments I've made on public posts (not necessarily relating to my comments, but some replies have shown that people have looked at my timeline, seen that I'm pro life and/ or Christian and feel the need to berate me for it). In the last few days, I've been called evil, a moron (numerous times), ghastly etc. Someone sent me a private message to tell me to kill myself.
I'm not complaining - apologies if this post seems attention or sympathy seeking, that's not my intention. The point is that, if you too see things that I've written which you feel are wrong, please don't hesitate to PM me about it - I don't want friends to feel annoyed with me without me knowing so I can hear (read) your objection. I want to better understand opposing views and learn how to best make a point without stirring up quite so much anger.
I know I’m ugly. I began wearing makeup aged 12, and was so distraught when implored by a teacher one day to take it off that the school arranged that I start weekly psychiatry sessions. I look worse than I would now that my eating disorder has wrecked my cheeks and teeth. My make up is still very poorly done –but I like my eyeliner, I’m aware that some people don't and don’t care at all. I buy makeup for around 50p per item (in bulk, from China) - I won’t start spending more money and time by taking up contouring as suggested. I already get criticised by plenty of other strangers on Facebook for making comments about how we have the potential to help people in extreme poverty whilst wearing make up. Why this woman thought I’d care about her disdain for thift shops is beyond me I’ll continue to try to do as much of my spending as possible in Oxfam (they sell online too) – not because of my budget as she presumes (it’s not particularly cheap) but because the difference that can be made to those people helped with that money obviously outweighs the luxury of buying from other shops. I now have Macklemore’s Thift Shop playing in my head. (https://is.gd/LSyOmm)
Obviously thift shop is an Americanism I’m familiar with, but it’s bemusing how often Americans on Facebook presume that everyone else on Facebook is in America – such as this commenter suggesting that we meet for lunch, and another yesterday suggesting that I’d failed Kindergarten.
It’s also a mystery to me that the commenter asked why my self esteem is low immediately after declaring that I’m not pretty.
I was genuinely upset when people shared hideous screenshots of me on Twitter when I was in Question Time last month. That they called me ugly, and said that I looked like a drug addict that had been dragged through a hedge, didn't bother me much - but it makes me genuinely angry that people would create still images from a strangers' appearance on television, at the most unflattering moments they could, and put them online.But I got to look Liam Fox in the eye and urge him to have concern for impoverished farmers in developing countries whilst making trade deals, so I'm still psyched that I got to be on the programme
All this discussion about appearances is unimportant (I desperately wish that I could feel as unconcerned about my appearance as I know I ought to be). What really hurts is that people hate things I’ve written so much. Not that I care what they think of me – but that they hate the points made themselves. It breaks my heart that so many people harbour so much anger against overseas aid, pro life stances, and Christianity. Which is why I posted all this – in case anything that I’ve written makes anyone reading this feel angry; please let me know, I may have come across in a way that I didn’t intend, and need to learn to communicate better; or if you hate my opinions, I want to learn why and develop a better understanding of those with differing views.
Yesterday another stranger PM'd me - "Why don’t you change your profile photo to one of Cinderella or Snow White if you believe in fairy stories
Instead of trying to post obviously STONED OUT YOUR FUCKING BRAIN"
I replied "LOL, how is it obvious that I'm stoned out of my f***ing brain?"
And she responded "Look at your photo thicko it is that your usual thick as fuck expression"
So whilst many people think I'm too thin (esp. my grandmother, who this week rebuked me yet again for not wearing jeans instead of leggings because my legs are unattractively thin) apparently some people think I look thick
I feel so sorry for her - but no one "put her life at risk", she had cancer. The NHS needs to get better - but we need to stop blaming it when it's not perfect. Illness, tragic as it is, a part of life, not the fault of the healthcare system that helps us so much. Most humans who've lived on this Earth have had no where nearly as much healthcare as we receive. My grandmother died from breast cancer 30 years ago (I never met her) simply because treatments weren't as developed than as they are now. There are still innocent children who don't receive basic vaccinations; plenty of people who have no A&E access at all when their lives are depending on it; and no treatment for diseases when they become fatally ill. I'm sure that there are politicians and NHS managers who were wrong regarding this^ situation, and yes they should apologise - but please can we remember how lucky we are to have the NHS at all, rather than blaming it for disease?
This is ridiculous. I'm in Britain - it's amazed me how US media has reported on Alfie Evans. He had an incurable fatal condition - he was kept alive for months because of our NHS (National Health Service) - without it he'd have passed away far earlier, there's no way his young, underprivileged parents would have had an insurance plan that would have covered all of the treatment he received. Illness caused his death, everyone in Britain knows that we're lucky to have a publicly funded health system.
Then when Italy offered to treat him why didn't the UK let him go? It would have been no burden on the UK then. I think the US media has this absolutely right. Your health system murdered this little boy.
Your health system prevented him from getting healthcare elsewhere and people all the time are healed of "uncureable" diseases. So yes by preventing him from leaving they did in fact murder him.
you fail to answer the basic question of why British beaureaocrats refused to allow the parents to even attempt to get the full treated elsewhere. Your only response is "hey someone else knows better". Typical Statist Mastermind mentality. Socialism is evil and you have no defense.
"your health system murdered"? Seriously? He was ill, disease killed him, surely you're familiar with the concept people dying from illness? He didn't go to Italy because doctors, who actually know about his medical condition - unlike commentators - knew that it would cause more suffering, and that it wasn't going to be possible to treat him successfully regardless of which country he was in. It was thoroughly examined by numerous judges - who weighed up the information from the many medics; this wasn't the governent's descision.
Why do you all think that you know better than a team of specialist pedatricians? Alfie was -tragically- essentially dead, he was only "alive" because a machine was stopping him passing away. Going to Italy would have just prolonged suffering. Now he's with God, free of pain. Meanwhile, millions of children are suffering and thousands die each day because of poverty. They actually could be saved, but instead we're all fussing about a single child who couldn't. Why? (Presumably because we're more concerned with our emotions - on knowing the story of Alfie - than actually doing what can be done to help children; and because Alfie was a Western child)
I think that race may be a side issue here; that the underlying issue is that if someone's on the right, the left are immediately certain that they're evil and must be criticised and mocked severely. Of course, if someone's on the left, the right are immediately certain that they're dangerous and must be criticised and mocked severely.
We can probably cope, as awful as they are - it's those elderly people who may be confused and/or lacking online advice that are at serious risk
I live in London. I heard what Trump said at the NRA address about blood baths in London hospitals, and now understand why Trump gets accused of lying. His description was so inaccurate it was almost laughable - except it's not funny, because he's deceiving people to encourage support of guns. We have knife crime problems because Christianity has mostly disappeared from our culture and because of drug wars - everyone knows that it's a good thing that guns are banned. We (British) also agree (not just left leaning voters) that our healthcare system is far, far, far better as a public "social/single payer" institution.
I have questions so the crime rate is still high I hear you describing a people problem not a gun problem bc there are still crime. But it sounds like even your criminals do not have guns is that true? Also I understand ethics but some of the things I have heard coming out of Brittans health care show it more government run than people run what do you think about this? Just looking for thoughts and feedback not trying to argue. Thank you for your time.
I'm a bit confused by your question - guns are illegal, and not on sale, so only a tiny, tiny proportion of people (a fraction of criminals) manage to get hold of them. Knife attacks can happen anywhere, since everyone has knives in kitchens - but you can only hurt one person at a time with a knife, if close to them, whereas when a maniac carries out a gun attack, there are often many victims. What do you mean by "more government run than people run"? Are you referring to Alfie Evans? His case has been absurdly wrongly reported by some US bloggers.
I also understand the media blows things out of proportion. Not just Alfie although I do not fully understand why parents could not move him to another hospital if they had a MD to accept him and we're paying for it. But I have spoken to people ex. choices being made based on age 65 year old breaks hip it is repaired but due to age doesn't qualify for therapy so he doesn't recover full use. Granted that is second hand info also. I think that is one of America's biggest fears about one payer. No choices and do you still pay for your insurance or do the taxes just go up to cover everything?
Oh yes, it's all from taxes (the NHS). So - apart from a tiny few who buy private insurance - rich and poor get the same. People who are the very poorest will still get the best healthcare that their local health trust can budget for. But both sides of the pond, there are more and more health issues - esp. because of obesity and more elderly people, so it would never be possible, under any system, for everyone to get everything.
How do you define fat shaming? Genuinely being unkind is wrong; but it's also wrong - and far, far more dangerous in most cases - to allow children to become unwell for life by not warning them about obesity.
There was in fact no discrimination – Ashers only refused to put particular words onto a cake, they didn’t refuse the order because of the customer. There’s no logic in forcing 1 human being to do something that another human being requests when it’s not at all a necessary service. I’ve never eaten customised cake and I’m coping just fine – like most of humanity. Much of humanity has no access to cake at all, and has to live on little more than rice.
Ashers didn’t cheat the customer out of his money, or refuse to make him a cake without the wording. Only a minority of celebratory customised cakes have wording on them. The customer could have had cake without words, have applied the words himself, or have ordered from another bakery. It’s plainly obvious that he’s persecuted Ashers to make a point.
God instructs humanity not to have gay sex – marriage implies sex, Ashers couldn’t endorse something that God has told humanity not to do, because God knows better than we do what’s best for us and loves us more than we can imagine.
Ashers didn’t cheat the customer out of his money, or refuse to make him a cake without the wording. Only a minority of celebratory customised cakes have wording on them. The customer could have had cake without words, have applied the words himself, or have ordered from another bakery. It’s plainly obvious that he’s persecuted Ashers to make a point.
God instructs humanity not to have gay sex – marriage implies sex, Ashers couldn’t endorse something that God has told humanity not to do, because God knows better than we do what’s best for us and loves us more than we can imagine.
Trump is a useful memo to all of us to eschew the traits he's been cricised for. Trump's been tremendously criticised for selfishness; lack of concern for those less privileged; pride; perversion; being economical with the truth and for steryotyping people - but we are ALL guilty of some of these to some extent. Feeling morally superior because we fill up our headspace with criticism of Trump hinders us from addressing our personal foibles. Instead, keeness to be more unlike Trump should cause us to aim to become more selfless, compassionate, humble, clean minded, honest, and impartial than we are currently. We need to be the change that we want to see in the world. If Trump, of all people, can be suggested for the Nobel Peace prize, what are we doing to bring peace?(sorry, I'm just thinking out loud, I need to heed this instruction myself)
How are you defining "religion"? Following Christ is very different from religiously trying to earn one's entry to heaven. Many aspects of Marxism and the early Church (before power lust turned parts of it away from prioritsing Jesus) are similar. But ultimately, Marxism can only be of any use in this lifetime - why don't we spend more time trying to find out what happens next?
Not being able to fly abroad is not a crisis. With the cost of a flight abroad, we could seriously help people who actually are experiencing crises, which is why I've not been overseas since I was a child, and don't feel deprived at all - I'm tremendously grateful to live in a country where there's so much to enjoy.
Thankyou for reporting on this - I don't understand why the MSM virtually ignores it. Now we need to know if there are any organisations able to help that we can donate to/campaign with.
Plaquards won't change anything, only make Trump fans more angry with the left. Protesting is useful - but not when it's aimed at politicians who aren't dependent on our votes. All that collective energy would enable serious fundraising for people we worry about Trump's movement causing harm to. We should each aim to become more compassionate, truthful, clean-minded and selfless - rather than concentrating obsessively on Trump's flaws in those areas. Seriously - if this event was used to raise money (donation buckets, food stalls, fair ground games, musicians) for charities helping refugees; people wiith no access at all to healthcare (Doctors Without Borders/ Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Mercy Ships, Medair etc) we could show Trump what we care about and actually save lives.
None of us knows when we're going to die - so why don't we sp
end a bit more time trying to find out what happens next? It was well known enough in the area where he was that Jesus had defeated death (rising again) that His followers were willing to die to spread the message, and it became the biggest movement in human history. isn't it worth looking at the evidence, so one can decide about following Jesus, who offers eternal life (heaven) before it's too late?
This is a really eloquent and searing collection of essays, don’t devalue them by vomiting religion all over them. Aren’t there some perky GodVine videos you should be watching?
Why would are you assuming that I/Kay watch Godvine? I don't, I don't know whether Kay does, whether we do is irrelevant - whilst you may not have been 100% serious, you clearly are making assumptions with no evidence. You accuse me of "vomitting religion" - but I never mentioned religion. How do you define religion? I mentioned history and metaphysics, and you're choosing to ignore them - surely you want to explore and discover what's true? You might disagree with me, but is simply rejecting ultimate questions really prudent?
the whole, "spend more time trying to find out what happens next" begs a religious interpretation. The focus of the essays is around coming to terms with death and not a walk down a nonexistent garden path.
How do you know that the path is non existent?
If the path is extant, then we'll find out, and if it's not, then we we'll never know the difference. This is what kind of makes it fun, don't you think?
If we're trying to follow the path and there turns out to be nothing at the end of it, then we'll never know the difference, and have lost nothing. If we're not following the path and it turns out that it was leadiing somewhere, we'll have thrown away the ultimate offer.
I can’t imagine what the parents are going through. All the media hype and protesting will only have made this natural tragedy more agonising for them. If Alfie’s Army cared about saving children, they'd be running fundraisers - cake sales etc - to provide food and education for kids who don't have them – rather than refusing to accept that some illnesses can’t be cured and attacking medical staff. We actually can save childrens’ lives- any of us provide one of the world's poorest children with health checks, protection from trafficking, education, supplementary food and bedding for £25/month. Which means that the energy that’s gone into reporting, protests and vigils could have genuinely prevented children dying. Each of those children is just as precious as Alfie – but people have been spending their time battling about Alfie to satisfy their own emotion (and bias for a British child). Apparently people in Poland and the US have been leaving teddies at their UK embassies for Alfie. Meanwhile, there are many children in our world who are so poor that they don't have teddies.
I can only hope that Alfie’s parents aren’t hindered further in the grief process by all the hysteria.
I can only hope that Alfie’s parents aren’t hindered further in the grief process by all the hysteria.
Oh please... Why couldn't your woowoo skygod and his vampiric son have saved him or just ensured that he was born a normal little boy? What arrant tosh. Its a tragedy for the little boy and his family... One, of course, that would never have had so much attention in a third world country. God doesn't give a crap about them either... Really
Have you asked Him? Seriously.
God is incomparably more knowledgable than we are, yet we frequently presume that just because we don't know the reason that God allows something, there is no reason, and we act like children who won't talk with their parents about things they on't understand. A parent will do/allow many things that their toddler might not like at the time; in the same way, God can have reasons that we don't understand now.
Ultimately, God wants us to choose to follow Him so that we'l spend eternity with Him in heaven. That is infinitely more significant than the brief time we spend on Earth. The tragedies of life are, for many of us, what we need to be prompted to seek Him. When life is perfect, we ignore God, and will miss out on heaven. When we seek God in difficult times, He gives amazing comfort, and we can find eternal life.
Throughout history and around the world, there have been/are many people whose lives have been far, far, far less comfortable than ours are in 21st century Britain, but who've followed God, and consequently had the deep inner joy and strength they needed to persevere - and who'll have endless joy free of sadness as a result.
God is incomparably more knowledgable than we are, yet we frequently presume that just because we don't know the reason that God allows something, there is no reason, and we act like children who won't talk with their parents about things they on't understand. A parent will do/allow many things that their toddler might not like at the time; in the same way, God can have reasons that we don't understand now.
Ultimately, God wants us to choose to follow Him so that we'l spend eternity with Him in heaven. That is infinitely more significant than the brief time we spend on Earth. The tragedies of life are, for many of us, what we need to be prompted to seek Him. When life is perfect, we ignore God, and will miss out on heaven. When we seek God in difficult times, He gives amazing comfort, and we can find eternal life.
Throughout history and around the world, there have been/are many people whose lives have been far, far, far less comfortable than ours are in 21st century Britain, but who've followed God, and consequently had the deep inner joy and strength they needed to persevere - and who'll have endless joy free of sadness as a result.
The same God who says women are worth 50 pieces of silver when raped, condones slavery and needed blood over doors to know which babies to kill is suddenly concerned with one clinically ill child?
God didn't say that women are worth 50 pieces of silver. God gave rules to the Hebrews designed to help them best manage society at the time given deeply held attitudes at the time. Their culture presumed that women were property - God's laws for them at that time were to challenge those attitudes, He couldn't force people to immediately view the world entirely diifferently.
Jesus shows us how God actually wants us to live and treat others.
Jesus shows us how God actually wants us to live and treat others.
As a Christian, I'm embarrassed by how they acted. Basic Christian principles include trusting God's timing; knowing that He comforts those who turn to Him amidst mourning; and that all humans are equally valuable - so they should have used that time to help children who can be saved.
Why? It's a reality. Our society is struggling enough already to discern what's truth, without hiding it because of squeamishness.
The fact is that people realise that abortion is horrific, and they want to ignore their consciences.
The fact is that people realise that abortion is horrific, and they want to ignore their consciences.
Legalised abortion reduces crime rates. FACT!
It's a fact that you can't draw certain conclusions from data that reflects numerous differing factors, and that correlation does not equal causation. Claims that legal abortion has positive effects on society is based on comparison of different times/places which differ in many other ways that might influence crime.
Wow. Way to speak for all of society, Grace Dalton. What about the society that outlaws abortion but refuses to fund health care, dental care, or even ensure that children have proper food and shelter?
Which society is that? I agree that more should be done in the USA to help the poor - but here, we have the NHS and an -albeit very imperfect- welfare state. Still, the ultiimate issues are that, whether or not a government is supportive enough of parents, people have sex by choice (in at least 99% of pregnancy cases), and the images are only showing a reality.
Or perhaps Labour's policies are better, so the Torygraph is doing all it can to blame Corbyn for a minority of twits that aren't reflective of his views? Which is, of course, not to say that any anti-semitism is OK - but unfortunately there are racists in all sectors. According to surveys, Tory voters are more anti semitic than Labour voters.
Meanwhile, most of humanity has no access to surgery that's actually medically necessary....
£750 can provide sponsorship - with lessons, health checks, supplementry food and bedding, for a child for over 2 years. We're no where near as stupidly privileged as this girl^ most of us are privileged compared to much of humanity, and if we forgo the unnecessary spending that our commercial culture has normalised, it's exciting that we can make an amazing difference to others' lives
The cost of tickets can save lives in developing countries, so I'll opt for that thankyou.
Clearly he's trying to draw attention to the need for more investment in education.
So, so many of society's problems are partially, or entirely, because salaries are so varied. If the very poorest received some of the excess that the richest receive, so many things could be resolved. But we should think globally - some of the very poorest human beings work labouriously to produce things we take forgranted, and they get paid barely enough to survive.
Whatevs. I have nothing against Harry and Megan, but reporting on wedding carraiges will only add to a few people feeling frustrated that they don't get one at their own wedding.
Why so many people follow a religion only because of their family background is beyond me - we should each investigate the evidence and reasoning ourselves, and follow The Truth. Most people in the West now presume that all belief in God is nonsense - they're simply following the faith of their culture too (atheism). Why don't we all spend longer investigating what are the very most important questions?
The Independent should stop obsessing about sex and get a life.
Seriously, stop with the underhanded attempts to make readers think that people in impoverished countries are stupid. These^ people may not have had the privilege of education; we all have, yet still plenty of Britons read horoscopes and tarot cards, or have "lucky" items or lottery numbers.
He's right, too many people complain of being offended without good reason. But there are also peoole who complain because of things thast genuinely are offensive, and his character is one of those things.
Please judge Christ by His actions and teachings, and not by the politician people who claim to be His supporters are fans of.
What's most upsetting is that they aren't given enough incentive to provide healthcare for the people in less wealthy countries they're often coming from, where medics are desperately needed. Our NHS may be struggling, but we still have far, far better healthcare provision than many -often very hard working- Indian people. We all too easily forget how lucky we are. Our government should be doing more to insure that trade with India is fairer; and that UKAid is better managed (and more substantial) so that more Indian people have the opportunities that we have.
Our government gives scumbag countries enough money! That India spends it on a space program instead of healthcare for its people really isn't our governments fault. If you feel that strongly about it, feel free to go to India and protest outside their government buildings although I doubt you'd live very long.
"scumbag countries"? How can a country be "scumbag"? Each country has a complete mixture of human beings. There are plenty of British scumbags. And I have no right to judge any of them.
Aid needs to be better organised and monitored (as does every other area of gov. spending) - but per £, it makes more positive change than anything else. The suffering that people in the poorest countries experience makes all our issues with NHS waiting times, overstretched schools etc trivial by comparison. They're born into it, and have no way of helping themselves (unlike here, there aren't job centres, a welfare state etc). Our nation is one of the very welathiest, largely because of greed by previous generations and our inetrnational corporations grossly exploiting impoverished communities in the developing world (historically the slave trade; now sweatshops, plantations, stealing people's land, misleading new mothers into using all their money on powdered milk, etc and see - http://www.filmsforaction.org/.../aid-in-reverse-how.../). But by providing people with clean water, education, farming tools, vital healthcare (and contraception +sex ed, which they otherwise often don't have) we can make a thrilling difference.
Aid needs to be better organised and monitored (as does every other area of gov. spending) - but per £, it makes more positive change than anything else. The suffering that people in the poorest countries experience makes all our issues with NHS waiting times, overstretched schools etc trivial by comparison. They're born into it, and have no way of helping themselves (unlike here, there aren't job centres, a welfare state etc). Our nation is one of the very welathiest, largely because of greed by previous generations and our inetrnational corporations grossly exploiting impoverished communities in the developing world (historically the slave trade; now sweatshops, plantations, stealing people's land, misleading new mothers into using all their money on powdered milk, etc and see - http://www.filmsforaction.org/.../aid-in-reverse-how.../). But by providing people with clean water, education, farming tools, vital healthcare (and contraception +sex ed, which they otherwise often don't have) we can make a thrilling difference.
It bothers me that it's become the new morality for many of our peers - whereas previously, people knew that the moral thing to do was to follow God's guidance, now people think that it's morally superior to be vegan. Some become less concerned to actually help humanity(people spend more money on vegan food than on giving to charities that feed the starving); and proud, which can make anyone less open to following Jesus.
I'm used to comedians making sex jokes - though a good comedian can write jokes that don't rely on sex for laughs. But Wolf got laughs for killing babies - that's not funny.
Ok fine, but there is nothing off limits to a comedian except when they personally attack someone unwarranted. These women deserve all the brutal attacks coming their way, even at dead baby jokes expense. Btw I find dead baby jokes pretty stupid but still funny
I'm not saying that comedians shouldn't make jokes at the expense of politicians, obviously. However, I'd love for society to be less rife with hatred and resentment, and I'm sure that comedy that's quite as direct as Wolf adds to some Republican voters' hatred of democrats; and in turn theiir unwiillingness to listen to calls for social justiice. I'll bet that there are some voters who are in the poliitical middle, and will feel less inclined to vote Democrat because they're angered by that routine - not that they should associate Wolf with a party, but some will - they're unnerved by the rise of "liberals" and Wolf will have stoked that fear.
And Trump is a pussy grabber- care to comment on that 
and say what? The fact that Trump has done some vile things doesn't mean that unborn humans deserve to be killed.
If it's unborn, how can it be killed? Makes no sense. It's either born or not and you can't kill something that hasn't been born yet because it's not alive.
Of course it's alive, ask anyone who's done any biology. Its heart is beating, its cells are respiring and multiplying, its organs are functiioning, and its nervous system and brain are increasingly active. http://www.ehd.org/science_main.php?level=i
Glad it got your attention. Abortion is a bad word to you. We get it. Here's a thought.. provide proper sex ed and free or cheap contraceptives, and see abortion decrease. Something repubs don't get.
I completely agree there should be sex ed and free contraceptives, that doesn't make it OK to kill a tiny human. Also, sex ed and contraceptives don't necessarily help much - talking to teenagers about sex will lead to a few more of them considering having it sooner - and plenty don't use contraception successfully. I'm in the UK - sex ed is on the national curriculum, and the National Health Service provides free contraceptiive pills, condoms and more - but there are still plenty of accidental pregnancies that people want to abort.
We should stop spending billiions on nuclear weapons and use that money to actually help the world.
There are so many awesome things that could be done with the money spent on those candles/flowers etc - or lonely people who'd appreciate being given them as gifts. What this ^ is is deifying a deceased human.
It's because liife is so s*** for some of the people born into those countries that we should have far more compassion and seek effective methods to help them develop livelihoods that are sufficient for them to have a better standard of living. Ultimately, the reason that some countries are so much less comfortable to live in than ours is that some of our ancestors bled what are now impoverished countries of their resources; and corporations from our nations are continuing the theft.
I really, really don't want to seem uncaring to her parents - but thousands of children die each day because they lack clean water and food. The money spent on this investigarion would save numerous lives if it went to charities working with children born into grotesque poverty - instead it'll be used for police work that is unlikely to help anyone.
Her resignation isn't Labour's acheivement - she was uncovered as having lied.
Please note - it calls itself a Church but it's absolutely opposed to Christianity.
Why Britain is in the midst of a new crime wave
Yeah religion has historically always resulted in less violence and war..?
I never said anything about "religion". I was talking about Jesus.
You can't seperate the two..
Of course you can. You couldn't say that Jeremy Corbyn is responsible for the UK having nuclear weapons because politicians authorised trident. Just because Jesus is part of "religion" doesn't mean you can associate Him with religious violence, since He taught us to love our enemies - just as although Corbyn is a part of politics you can't associate Him with nuclear weapons since He's always opposed them. Plenty of people have claimed to be fighting for Jesus - but they're opposing His teaching and example, their claims of being Christians are only an attempt to feel noble.
I think if people should be more like any other made up fictional character it should be Santa personally despite the fact Britains already suffering with an obesity problem.
Do you honestly think that Jesus was fictional? A few writers have published books with that conspiracy theory in recent years - it's absurd enough to get them some book sales and for the hoax to spread around the internet. It doesn't change the fact that there's no dispute amongst actual historians that Jesus lived. I urge you to get informed. https://is.gd/m6MzKK
The brain gradually becomes desensitised (neuronal/ neurochemical pathways are altered) when if we watch porn - so people need more and more extreme images to get turned on. Thus the porn industry includes far more extreme content, including violence, than it did decades ago; now girls whose boyfriends see porn and then expect girls to perform uncomfortable/dangerous acts end up hurt, (and more and more young adults have erectile dysfunction, though that doesn't bother me). It's horrendous.
Trump, Brexit, and whether it's OK to kill tiny developing humans are entirely separate topics - don't lump them all together to put pro-lifers in a bad light, explain your opinion honestly.
Grace, love, why you always gotta be publishing your batty Christian shit on abortion posts?
I don’t even know you but your name has become synonymous with these posts. We get it: you wanna protect babies because you love God and hate women having autonomy as a result. It’s a shitty argument that we’ve had to put up with for thousands of years and thankfully people are finally getting fucking bored of it.
Can you go bang your drum elsewhere and let the progressives handle this?
I don’t even know you but your name has become synonymous with these posts. We get it: you wanna protect babies because you love God and hate women having autonomy as a result. It’s a shitty argument that we’ve had to put up with for thousands of years and thankfully people are finally getting fucking bored of it.
Can you go bang your drum elsewhere and let the progressives handle this?
I didn't mention Christianity. What I think about God doesn't change whether it's OK to kill developing humans. Why should pro lifers "let progressives handle this" when it's ultimately other human beings, that can't speak for themselves, who are being killed? Would you tell someone trying to stop an abusive parent to but out, because a parent should be able to do what they want with their child?
More interesting though - what do you mean by "batty Christian s***" exactly? Is it batty because I'm stupid, or because you consider Christianity to be stupid?
More interesting though - what do you mean by "batty Christian s***" exactly? Is it batty because I'm stupid, or because you consider Christianity to be stupid?
Yuh, but we'll all die in the end. Why does he not make more statements about Jesus' offer of heaven and encourage Christians to spread the Gospel? If Francis genuinely believes that Christ defeated death, and told us that He is The Way to eternal life, why is the Pope not more keen to make this known to the world? Most people in the West seem to presume that the resurrection is a myth, and don't ever bother to examine the historical accounts. The Pope should surely be more concerned about that than about how healthy we are.
Yet many people want late term abortions to be more accessible
Conservatives: Only Christian when they want to be.
Me? I'm not conservative - I'm British and vote Labour. (In case you weren't aware, Conservative an Labour are our 2 parties) - I'm desperate for wealth to be more equally distributed, but also am against abortion. We don't all fit into boxes.
I don't care what you oppose or support for yourself. You worry about your own uterus and let everyone else worry about theirs. Did you fail kindergarten?
How does telling people that they're unintelligent (failing kindergarten - why, in your superior intellect, you're unaware that not everyone who comments on US Facebook posts is American is beyond me) or in need of seeing a mental health professional prove that killing small humans is OK?
Conservationists in Uganda will hold a vigil later for the country's oldest captive chimpanzee. The 54-year-old male, called #Zakayo, succumbed to a stomach bug on Thursday.
Thousands of humans die each day in Africa from stomach bugs - why use time mourning 1 chimpanzee? Rather than news coverage of individual apes to satisfy our own interest, society and the media should be putting it's energy into accelerating provision of clean water and healthcare to the very poorest people.
He Zakaayo was a source of tourism to the country and my heart breaks coz of his death.He was something to the National dont mk it about water, healthcare......wait for healthcare posts....its time for zakaayo
but there rarely are "healthcare posts". I'm in the UK (where the BBC is) - and the media, including the BBC spends as much, if not more, time telling us about stories like this^^ as it does about the many human beings without any healthcare access at all. We like to look at animals, and that entertainment is put before the potential to help human beings that are suffering - it makes me furious.
Jst mind of ur own business Grace n stay focus on ur royal wedding things.
Why would it be logical for me to be more concerned with the royal wedding than with people dying of poverty?
@Grace go away colonizer! We don't need you here
How have I suggested wanting to colonise? I'm arguing that my nation's broadcaster should be encouraging tackling the remnants of colonialism. I'm well aware that there's endess creativty and ingenuity in Africa, and many people have escaped poverty. But there are still many who are suffering because Western theft of land and natural resources. The BBC should put more time, esp. here in the UK, into reminding us Westerners that, because of historical injustice, many people never have the opportunities and amenities that many Britons take forgranted. We should be making trade fairer, and helping the very poorest people to receive healthcare, clean water, tools etc, so that they can earn enough for their families.
Please don't conflate pregnancy prevention with Planned Parenthood, which, in financial terms, is mainly an abortion business. They also work hard to encourage teenagers to have sex - which will increase their profits.
Says the UK citizen who proves to know nothing about this issue, but yet spews global propaganda. If Hitler would of won the WWII and took Britain than I would expect this kind of propaganda now shut up and go away you bloody twisted twat.
Do you really think it's in any way logical to somehow link me being opposed to killing developing humans to being a Nazi?
Why aren't phone providers making efforts to address ethical issues in production? They ought to be ending the conflict minerals mess; and stopping the exploitation of impoverished workers who provide the metals for phones, and who assemble phones in factories.
Sick of Labour anti-Semitism? Let’s talk about Tory Islamophobia instea
We need to have the common sense to distinguish between Islam and Muslims - most Muslims only follow parts of Islam. Muhammed is agreed by historians as having undertaken extremely violent acts, but the vast majority of Muslims are Muslims because they've been born into Muslim families, and many endeavour to do good in the community. We need to get it through our thick skulls that though Islam is evidently dangerous, Muslims are as varied as the rest of us.
Islam is a religion it is no more dangerous than Christianity. All religions have some nutjob followers who take it to the very extremes but there is only one race; the human race, anyone trying to tell you otherwise is trying to establish a divide to somehow feel superior
How have you concluded that they're equally dangerous? Have you studied them both? Or even just compared their respective impact on humanity? How many Christians have carried out suicide bombings? Have you not compared the lives and teachings of Jesus and Muhammed?
"Young people are benefiting hugely from the new economy. They're Uber-riding, Deliveroo-eating, freedom fighters," says Liz Truss
Benefitting hugely??? I really wish that my peers would stop spending money on Uber and Deliveroo - but even if they did, we'd still be unable to be likely to ever own homes. It's virtually impossible to get work if you don't have experience - and we can't get experience since we can't get work. We are extremely lucky compared to most of humanity because we're in a country with better living standards and state services than most - but older adults have arguably had a far better deal in the terms of the economy.
It really should be so, so, so much more. Most of ournatio's wealth is result of past, or current, greedy exploitation of countries like these^. 212mil is a tiny amount. HS2 has a projected cost of £56 billion
Christian MPs weigh in on emergency Syria debate We can’t even begin to imagine what it must feel like to be going through what those in Syria (and Yemen, Congo, Gaza…) – I hope we can be reminded how privileged we are to have safe, comfortable homes (and state services, healthcare, food, TV etc). Commercial culture dupes us into forgetting how much we already have to be grateful for and to stress about minor things; but we have so much to enjoy even without spending on tickets/coffees/pampering…. Perhaps we could spend some of this money instead on helping those who’ve been bombed out of their homes?
Given that Trump won the election on the premise that he’d stop fighting overseas, it seems unlikely that the recent chemical attack was a US hoax – and children in the footage are too young to be acting. Russia has prevented the UN from investigating the site - why would they if the chemical attack wasn’t genuine and orchestrated by Putin or Assad?
I’m not certain as to whether the airstrikes should have gone ahead – but I’m bemused that so many comments are ignoring that these were specifically striking weapons facilities, no civilians have been hurt. If we care about the Syrian people, surely something had to be done to try to reduce further tortuous chemical weapons deaths? Aside from chemical attacks, Assad has killed 100 000s of innocent Syrians, for being on a different branch of Islam from him.
Are those who are opposed to the targeted strikes opposed because they’re certain that it’s better for the Syrian people to do nothing; or because they don’t want British funds spent on something that doesn’t directly benefit us, and/or because they hate Trump?
Sorry if I sound like I’m pro-war, I’m certainly not and am not going to vote Tory, ever – I just wish more was being done actively to help the Syrian people. Britain should now do more for the refugees – such as scrapping Trident and using savings to build homes for those whose homes have been destroyed.
Obviously, he absolutely should accept more refugees; but if he should at least donate substantially to providing better shelter and help for them in the middle East.
How many of these refugees would you welcome in your home?
LOL, I wish I was privileged enough to own a home. I'm desperately seeking work (I'm slightly limited in what I can do because of long-term illness), and am incredibly lucky to live with my parents whilst I have no salary. Although, if I had a salary, I'd only leave if they wanted me to, I'd rather donate the cost of a property to overseas development charities than spend it on a place of my own. Unless my parents want me to leave, it makes no sense to spend an amount on a place of my own that could provide homes for dozens of impoverished families who are currently in slums or refugee camps. Plus, this way I can do housework for my parents, and help them when they're elderly
Well maybe you should make room for your parents to bring in a few.
I can't decide for my parents what they do with their property. And they're too overworked, thus stressed, to entertain the idea of people they don't know moving in. But you're ignoring my point - the way to help the greatest number of people is to pay for good shelters to be built near to their home lands. There should be higher taxes on the very richest people so that the very poorest can be provided with necessities so that they become able to provide for themselves.
Congo violence forces thousands of refugees to flee to Uganda, in picturesWow, there are laughter reactions to this? What is wrong with you? Our nation is so often so blind to this extreme suffering of innocent fellow human beings. Any of us could have been born in Congo. Why don't we care more? Why are there so many people here who care so much about British people suffering, but don't care at all about African people suffering far more severely?
What makes you believe they are all innocent?what makes you think that they're any less innocent than the British population?"Congo violence', there's a clue there, someone isn't so 'innocent', so no, they aren't all innocent are they? Nice to see a bit of African unity eh?every society has some thugs. In Congo, a few more people are lured into because people are desperate, and because children are forced into fighting and grow up brainwashed. Meanwhile there isn't the police force or justice system that we have. So the vast majority who are innocent, have no protection and are forced to flee their homes by fighters who brutally rape and murder. If our country had been exploited for centuries and left without stable democracy in the way Congo has, things would end up similar here.oh I don't know maybe the newest slum areas that have popped up in London because of A reckless immigration policy. The murder rate shooting up accordingly. Maybe you should take A stroll down there and seecrime doesn't happen more often in those areas because different races have different levels of morality, it happens because in poverty-stricken communities, criminals lure some desperate young people into lives of crime.
Why provocateur Katie Hopkins is the perfect symbol for our tribal age
We seem to love demonising individuals - forgetting to tackle our own flaws and the actual issues that need addressing.
We seem to love demonising individuals - forgetting to tackle our own flaws and the actual issues that need addressing.
Labour eyes victory in local government elections
Well Labour's lost my vote in the May elections, though I'm a member. But 1 vote is statistically irrelevant anyway
Well Labour's lost my vote in the May elections, though I'm a member. But 1 vote is statistically irrelevant anyway
Art that specifically glories genitalia is something that primitive tribes did (no disrespect to them) - why is humanity going backwards?
It is not possible to call people 'primitive' and NOT be 'disrespectful'.
Can I clarify - by primitive, I did not mean unintelligent, simply primitive in the sense of being an earlier stage.
Religion is very primitive. Why are we still going backwards with it?
explain? How do you define "religion"? Arguably, yes, we are going backwards in that respect - prior to Christianity, paganism was the norm, and people worshipped material things - and sex. Now Christianity is mostly gone from Western society, there genuinely is a rapid trend of people who classify themselves as pagans, and our culture, in general, worships material things, and sex
India Is Heartbroken Over The Rape And Murder Of A Young Muslim Girl
"Muslim"? How any 8 year olds have explored scripture and history to determine what they believe about God? Perhaps she was, and I'm not trying to oppose Muslims, but I feel frustrated by how people label children by their parents' faith - the tragedy here is that an 8 year old has been raped and murdered
"Muslim"? How any 8 year olds have explored scripture and history to determine what they believe about God? Perhaps she was, and I'm not trying to oppose Muslims, but I feel frustrated by how people label children by their parents' faith - the tragedy here is that an 8 year old has been raped and murdered
They raped her because she was Muslim, that's why they've used it.
thankyou for the clarification, though I was aware, and I still don't think that an 8-year-old should be labelled with any religion; my parents' faith is fundamental to who they are, and I always went to Church, but I wasn't a Christian until I examined the evidence in my teens - I can't see how one can have come to a conclusion about God by 8. I'm sure it would have been far better to say that the attack was ethnically motivated? We need to understand the horrific tribal conflicts that people suffer from outside of our privileged bubble, not lump people together as "Muslims" because it's a word we're more familiar with.
We should rein in abortion clinic protests without threatening free speech
The clinic is less than 2 miles from me. I'm furious. I'm a card carrying Labour member but there's no way I'm voting in May. Since when is labour in favour of banning peaceful protest? Has it not occurred to anyone that the reason people don't like seeing the pro-choicers signs is that it strikes their conscience, and they'd rather try to ignore their feelings of guilt? Why is it OK to kill when you can't see or hear the human you're killing? The pro-choice campaign is profit driven - Marie Stopes, BPAS and others are, literally, making a killing.
The clinic is less than 2 miles from me. I'm furious. I'm a card carrying Labour member but there's no way I'm voting in May. Since when is labour in favour of banning peaceful protest? Has it not occurred to anyone that the reason people don't like seeing the pro-choicers signs is that it strikes their conscience, and they'd rather try to ignore their feelings of guilt? Why is it OK to kill when you can't see or hear the human you're killing? The pro-choice campaign is profit driven - Marie Stopes, BPAS and others are, literally, making a killing.
Many Tories are in favour of PSPO's outside clinics you know. Just telling it like it is, there is cross party support for these changes. Except maybe the BNP. Their priority is harassing Muslims outside Mosques. Sounds as though you have something in common, hanging outside places you have no want or need to visit to cause upset to those who do. It's a match made in heaven
oh I know, I won't vote Tory either :) But what do you mean about "hanging outside places you have no want or need to visit to cause upset to those who do"? I haven't been hanging out anywhere. But those who having been hanging out outside abortion clinics haven't been doing it to cause upset, they've been doing it to save lives.
It's incredible that they can't find something better to do with their time than harass people going about their private business. There are needy children all over the world who need help. They could go and help in a food bank, raise funds for their local hospital, help at a youth club or a surestart centre. They don't want to help, just push their religion on to those who don't share it and aren't interested. Children in the middle east are dying from weapons sold by the British Government. Huge numbers of British children are ill from living in damp and dangerous housing. If they cared about children they would be out doing something useful to help. Not shoving their noses in to the business of strangers.
how exactly? To be involved in youth groups/ surestart etc means complex checking processes, which cost money, and require finding existing youth clubs etc to join, or the enormous task of finding and funding facilities. And it's still, though awesome, a very different thing - the pro lifers are standing outside the clinic in their free time because they know that sometimes, doing so saves lives. 500 children are alive today because of the Ealing vigil over the last 2decades.
Why have you not mentioned kids elsewhere? Seriously, I personally don't usually spend much time on this issue, because I'm trying to use my time to raise awareness/funds for the world's poorest children, who live in slums outside of our privileged island.
Why do you think that the pro lifers are trying to "just push their religion"? How do you define religion, why does it make you so angry?
Why have you not mentioned kids elsewhere? Seriously, I personally don't usually spend much time on this issue, because I'm trying to use my time to raise awareness/funds for the world's poorest children, who live in slums outside of our privileged island.
Why do you think that the pro lifers are trying to "just push their religion"? How do you define religion, why does it make you so angry?
Peaceful protest is fine, psychologically torturing women who have gone through enough is not. What gives you the right to dictate what others should do with their body?
I'm not, I'm telling them what not to do with somene else's body, and life. How do you define "torture"? How do you, Mike Darwoc, define "harassment"? It's only upsetting because they're reminding women of what they're about to do, it's still peaceful protest.
how many children have you adopted? Unless all of these pro-lifers are willing to take in many adopted children from parents who can’t care for them for whatever reasons, abortion is the only way.
I have several sponsor children. I'm job seeking and have chronic anorexia, so no, I can't adopt. But that's not the point - it wasn't me that had sex. And there are couples desperate to adopt newborns - children tragically stuck in the care system are those whose parents weren't able to look after them, but there's not an excess of newborns to adopt because most adoptive parents want babies.
Yeah...i think sitting outside clinics andbut the pro lifers aren't outside people's homes, women only have to walk past them on one day, and I'm not killing an un born human when I walk into my house. haranguing women trying to get in qualifies as harassment...It isn't peaceful at all...i'm sure it's very peaceful for the judgmental freaks doing it, but for the women forced to deal with them it's very much harassment...
anyone can walk past people with plaquards - it's only upsetting because they're being reminded of what they're about to do.
I bet if you had 15 men with placards outdide your house every night you wouldn’t just say ‘oh well I can walk past them’
but the pro lifers aren't outside people's homes, women only have to walk past them on one day, and I'm not killing an un born human when I walk into my house.
I thought you said women could just walk past people holding placards? If so, you can just walk past the people holding placards outside your house and you wouldn’t mind a bit. Right?
yes, I could, but as I've explained, t's not at all comparable.
Well, when it happens to you, I think you’d change your tune.
it won't, I don't have sex. If I were raped, I wouldn't get pregnant because I'm too underweight to have periods. If, hypothetically, I did, I'd have the baby, no question. We should be angry with the corporate forces that have led to everyone thinking that it's good to have sex early in a relationship, the pro lifers are only there because they want to stop deaths.
Oh, so you mean that you’re fine so you don’t care about anyone else. Classic. Bye.
Personally i think you get a sexual kick out of your preaching. I think that you couldn't care less about the babies in question...certainly not enough to adopt any of them (once they're born they're on their own right?). I think that you, and all the other pervertrs who obsess over the sex lives of strangers, do it for a voyeuristic thrill.
LOL, you think I'm the one who needs to find out what I'm talking about? Yes they are human beings, not at all comparable to tumours - they have an entirely independent genome, and have their organs within months. On what basis can you know that I'm "joyfully glaring down my nose"? I'm angry about deaths, that's not the same thing. Accuse me of voyerism all you want, your accusations are baseless, you're using stawman fallacies. What's really sad is that The Labour Party is apparently more concerned about enabling abortions than about helping the planet's poorest people.
"Your accusations are baseless" - So is your entire position. Scientifically it's a nonsense, morally it's cruel, and you're as informed on the lives of the women using these clinics as i am on yours, but that doesn't stop you judging for one second so why should it stop me? like i say you just seem to get a little too much enjoyment out of this, which makes me question your motivations.LOL, you don't like it when other people judge you do you...you know how it feels now.
how is it scientifically nonsense? How is it morally cruel when having a baby having chosen to have sex is just biology? How can you seriously consider the pro life position to be the side that's cruel when abortion is killing an innocent developing humans - and, if you weren't aware, leaves many of those women who have abortions seriously emotionally scarred. You're accusing me of voyerism know nothing about me, I'm arguing that abortion is wrong because I know that an abortion is destroying a human - it's not baseless/comparable judgment. Of course, I really don't care if you judge me, I don't know why you think I would. I'm not enjoying this, I'm too frustrated to have ignored the original post because killing and pretending that doing so is moral makes me angry.
23 Low-Carb Snacks To Eat When You're Trying To Be Healthy
Vegetbles with sweetener. I know it's weird, but I really enjoy them :) Dipping them into ketchup instead would work well if you prefer savoury flavours. Of course, carbs in themselves aren't bad and we all need to stop stessing so much about what we eat - esp. when there are people who have no choice about what they they eat - or barely anything to eat at all. But the rationale for reducing carbs is to reduce calorie intake, since it's calories that our bodies store as fat tissue; so it's bizarre that "healthy fats" have become so popular, when fat has more than twice as many calories per gram as carbohydrates.
Vegetbles with sweetener. I know it's weird, but I really enjoy them :) Dipping them into ketchup instead would work well if you prefer savoury flavours. Of course, carbs in themselves aren't bad and we all need to stop stessing so much about what we eat - esp. when there are people who have no choice about what they they eat - or barely anything to eat at all. But the rationale for reducing carbs is to reduce calorie intake, since it's calories that our bodies store as fat tissue; so it's bizarre that "healthy fats" have become so popular, when fat has more than twice as many calories per gram as carbohydrates.
Nasa has made Friday the 13th seem a little bit scarier. It has revealed that a huge asteroid will zoom past Earth tonight at about midnight UK time.FYI, those who claim to be Christian and then declare exactly when the Earth will end are mistaken - if one follows the Bible, one knows that Jesus says that "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" Matthew 24:36 Revelation is largely symbolic - in the culture in which it was written, many of the numbers and creatures mentioned had elblematic meaning, so the dream - if anything - was an allegory about what will happen, not a literal forecast. Whatever happens to the planet, none of us knows when we're going to die - so why don't we spend a bit more time trying to find out what happens next? It was well known enough in the area where he was that Jesus had defeated death (rising again) that His followers were willing to die to spread the message, and it became the biggest movement in human history. isn't it worth looking at the evidence, so one can decide about following Jesus, who offers eternal life (heaven) before it's too late?
He's a human being, he doesn't have magical powers. Blessing a car sounds more pagan than Christian.
Human beings have power.
If you meditate and develop your mind. You can do a lot magical things
If you meditate and develop your mind. You can do a lot magical things
the Bible specifically warns us not to. The Bible calls it divination - it's demonic and very dangerous. We should be used by the Holy Spirit, who will sometimes do miraculous things through us; but I'm certain that blessing a race car doesn't fall into this category.
rot in Hell
LOL what do you mean by hell? How have you concluded what you believe about it?
Heretic' is an ironic title for this insightful documentary about Rob Bell - Premier Christianity
Really? He's done some brilliant work, but I think that universalism is pretty heretical, and potentially dangerous.
Really? He's done some brilliant work, but I think that universalism is pretty heretical, and potentially dangerous.
Universalism is heretical. Faith in God’s Universal Reconciliation isn’t. Universalism is heretical because it says that sacrificing goats to Kali is a valid approach to God. Universal Reconciliation believes that God’s love pursues us eternally until hell is empty. The latter isn’t heretical because it doesn’t contradict the creeds and councils and was held by many church fathers.
Thankyou for that clarification, that's fascinating. But what about "Just as man is appointed to die once, and after that to face judgment,"? Is not the purpose of our time on Earth that we have the opportunity to decide about Jesus - why would that be extended after death? Personally, I don't think that people stick around in Hell anyway; fire consumes.
Absolutely, but what if God’s judgement is mercy? What if his love and his wrath are indistinguishable from each other? Hell isn’t a consuming fire, Hebrews tells us that God is a consuming fire. What if, as many in the ancient Church taught, Heaven and Hell are both, God! The Church father Isaac the Syrian wrote the attached as an example...
Justice and mercy are in contradiction – that’s the point of grace. Jesus offers to take the just punishment for sin so that we can receive mercy – but some choose to reject Him. I agree that it’s possible that some of those who never hear of Jesus may still enter heaven – either God will judge them based on whether they’ve been seeking Him, or they’ll be presented with te Gospel and an opportunity to accept Christ immediately after death. But why would God sustain the existence of those who’ve rejected Him, in His presence? You mentioned the parable of the sheep and the goats in the other thread – surely this parable, as well as others, demonstrates that Heaven and Hell are not indistinguishable? The evil tenants are thrown out by the farmer; the rich man is separated from homeless Lazurus who he failed to help. Paul clearly tells us that certain groups will not inherit the kingdom – and obviously his list includes everyone, but there’s forgiveness and transformation through Christ – but surely this passage contradicts the idea of universal reconciliation? Why would Jesus tell us not to fear man, but to fear God who can destroy body and soul in hell, if hell is somehow indistinguishable from heaven?
You mentioned that some might “embrace Christ in your lifestyle and actions” – but there are plenty of people who are rejecting Him Himself and also living entirely contrarily to His teaching. You mentioned people worshipping an unknown God – but most of our fellow Britons are aware of God and are of the True God (unlike those at Mars Hill) and are choosing to worship no God (of course, they end up worshipping things of Earth).
Regardless of what a few Church fathers may have thought, I really don’t see how the idea of universal reconciliation can be aligned with the Bible – and, obviously of primary importance, Jesus’ teachings. Why would He tell us that He is The Way to ever lasting life if those who reject Him have eternal life also?
PS – sorry that I seem so argumentative! I think that it would be best for us to agree to disagree. I’m very privileged to have any conversations with you at all, I really don’t want you to resent me.
You mentioned that some might “embrace Christ in your lifestyle and actions” – but there are plenty of people who are rejecting Him Himself and also living entirely contrarily to His teaching. You mentioned people worshipping an unknown God – but most of our fellow Britons are aware of God and are of the True God (unlike those at Mars Hill) and are choosing to worship no God (of course, they end up worshipping things of Earth).
Regardless of what a few Church fathers may have thought, I really don’t see how the idea of universal reconciliation can be aligned with the Bible – and, obviously of primary importance, Jesus’ teachings. Why would He tell us that He is The Way to ever lasting life if those who reject Him have eternal life also?
PS – sorry that I seem so argumentative! I think that it would be best for us to agree to disagree. I’m very privileged to have any conversations with you at all, I really don’t want you to resent me.
Steve Chalke claims heaven not just for Christians - Premier
He ‘is the way’, he isn’t ‘in the way’.
He ‘is the way’, he isn’t ‘in the way’.
sorry, could you please clarify? I didn't say that He's in the way. Surely “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me" implies that people can't reach eternal life in God's presence if they choose to reject Jesus? In Acts, we're told that "Salvation exists in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”.
When is the Right time to have a baby?When you get pregnant? There are benefits to having kids early and later - and we're lucky to live at a time when online discussion/support groups and advice pages can help with learning and arranging practicalities. An unexpected pregnancy will still result in an equally precious member of the human race who'll add joy and fufilment to the life of the mother and countless other people, even if the circumstances seem far from ideal at the time.
Country music singer RaeLynn claims American Airlines flight attendant harassed her over diabetes service dog
I'll need to research why havig diabetes means that you need a dog..... Our PM (Theresa May has type1 diabetes) and never has a dog with her. I wish she did, it would make politics far more interesting.
I'll need to research why havig diabetes means that you need a dog..... Our PM (Theresa May has type1 diabetes) and never has a dog with her. I wish she did, it would make politics far more interesting.
Pope begs abuse victims for forgiveness over 'grave errors'
People need to ignore Church leaders who act contrary to Christ's teaching and just figure out what they think about Him. Jesus is incomparably ore important than the Pope, or any one else.
People need to ignore Church leaders who act contrary to Christ's teaching and just figure out what they think about Him. Jesus is incomparably ore important than the Pope, or any one else.
Nikki Benz sues porn company after she was 'struck on the face and breasts hard enough to cause her to bleed'
The brain gradually becomes desensitised (neuronal/ neurochemical pathways are altered) when if we watch porn - so people need more and more extreme images to get turned on. Thus the porn industry includes far more extreme content, including violence, than it did decades ago; now girls whose boyfriends see porn and then expect girls to perform uncomfortable/dangerous acts end up hurt, (and more and more young adults have erectile dysfunction, though that doesn't bother me). It's horrendous.
The brain gradually becomes desensitised (neuronal/ neurochemical pathways are altered) when if we watch porn - so people need more and more extreme images to get turned on. Thus the porn industry includes far more extreme content, including violence, than it did decades ago; now girls whose boyfriends see porn and then expect girls to perform uncomfortable/dangerous acts end up hurt, (and more and more young adults have erectile dysfunction, though that doesn't bother me). It's horrendous.
Here’s what the Mayor is doing to tackle violent crime
There are, obviously, many factors. But aside from political bickering, consider; decades ago, most people, at the time when our minds are most impressionable - as kids - were being fed the message that we should aspire to be like Jesus. That's gone now. When I hear testimonies of ex-gang members who've turned their lives around, they almost always mention coming to God as a crucial factor in their life change. Obviously there needs to be strict regulation of knife sales; and social media and music videos are ifluences on violence that need to be addressed - but I'm certain that the secularisation of our society is part of the problem.
There are, obviously, many factors. But aside from political bickering, consider; decades ago, most people, at the time when our minds are most impressionable - as kids - were being fed the message that we should aspire to be like Jesus. That's gone now. When I hear testimonies of ex-gang members who've turned their lives around, they almost always mention coming to God as a crucial factor in their life change. Obviously there needs to be strict regulation of knife sales; and social media and music videos are ifluences on violence that need to be addressed - but I'm certain that the secularisation of our society is part of the problem.
I don’t believe in a god nor do my grown up children but they’ve not turned to crime. Effective parenting, guidance, love, support and non-violent discipline put them on the right path. I did that, credit goes to me not some ‘god’
thats's a logical fallacy - the fact that there are many atheists live good lives in no way disproves that if people genuinely try to follow Jesus, they're more likely to avoid violence.
Jesus was not always non-violent; I refer you to John 2:15 and Luke 12:51 and 22:35. The trouble with looking outside yourself to scripture, gods and prophets for your own morality is that other people's words and actions are always open to interpretation. Developing a personal ethics and internal morality requires an individual to go through a process of moral exploration, self-examination and decision-making; "being good" is then an act of personal choice founded on personal values, rather than something an individual does because they've been told to.
you're honestly lumping together Jesus turning over tables in the temple with stabbings? Surely you see how nonsensical that is? And you really need to understand the fundamental point; He was angry because the traders and money changers in the Temple were making money for themselves out of peoples' belief that they needed animal sacrifices to worship God. Why do you think that the sword references in Luke espouse violence? It's very clear that in the passage about brining a sword, He's referring to distinction being made between people who make 1 choice and people who make the opposing choice - to use sword in a non literal sense is perfectly legitimate in a society where they were regularly around for use in marking teritorial lines and cutting meat/crops/sacking etc. Jesus gave the teaching to buy a sword in a specific situation, we can’t conclude that it either applies universally, or means using swords against people. The apostles were being sent out into an environment where it was normal to have a knife; there weren’t the protections (police and legal systems) that we have here and now; and they were undertaking a vital and deadly task. When Jesus is unfairly arrested, to be executed, a disciple tried to defend Him by slashing one o the soldiers - and Jesus reprimands Him, with a more probably universal teaching is that “Those who live by the sword will die by the sword” . We should indeed develop a good internal morality - but each of us has our own ieas about what this should be and has natural instincts of greed and retaliation, so when people each try to navigate how we should behave, things can go horrendously wrong. Hitler believed he was morally right to try to cleanse humanity, and many who carry out hate crimes truly think that they're right to challenge what their personal "moral exploration" has deemed bad. More people genuinely aspiring to emulate Jesus would reduce these problems.
Or you could just give the police forces the thousands of officers sacked back and restart government funding rather than putting your hopes on a fictitious beardy bloke on a cloud?
you seem to have faithfully adhered to culturally enforced presumptions - when did I say anything about a fictitious beardy bloke on a cloud?
Secularisation isn't the problem. By the logic that belief in God stops crime the Middle Ages should have been a time of unprecedented peace
with all due respect, no, that's a logical error - surely you can appreciate that many problems have solutions that reduce but don't eliminate aproblem? Ie. more people believing in God could reduce crime, but it's too complex a problem for any one thing to eradicate it. More importantly, surely you realise that everyone within a population has their own views/ morals and brain chemistry? Ie. in the Middle ages, most people believed in God, but not everyone; and because it was the societal norm, most people called themselves Christians an attended Church - that in itself is meaningless, what matters, and what I was referring to is whether individuals genuinely choose to follow Jesus.
No, you're the one making illogical assumptions. There's no evidence that a religious society has less crime, yet you're suggesting that there's significant correlation between faith and the crime rate; all I've done is point out that such a suggestion is absurd and one need only look at British history to see that.
I'm not advocating a "religious" society. I'm advocating genuinely following Jesus, which is a very distinct concept. If you read the NT, you'll see that Jesus repeatedly argues with religious people because they boasted about religiosity and their hearts weren't actually seeking to follow God.
I'm an Atheist , I don't believe in 3000 religions. If you are religious then you don't believe in 2999 religions. Which would indicate you're just a less committed Atheist ;)
;)
don't you think I've heard that one before? It's a laughable misunderstanding of basic philosophy. (no offence, seriously). Besides, if you have a key to your house, you can get into it - I have just one less key than you, but it makes all the difference. What do you think I mean when I mention God? Do you really think that the concepts and reasons I have are the same as those who follow/followed polytheist/mythical belief systems?
I'd rather believe in Odin and Thor and polytheism , unfortunately I like logic and reality also. You have a key and so do thousands of others that believe in different Deities to you , but your arrogance allows you to dismiss those people. In truth I made a Joke because while I respect religion, we have real issues to deal with and praying isn't going to change legislation or house the 300,000+ homeless. The Church could end poverty and homelessness not only in Britain but worldwide with the resources at their disposal. Praying won't change anything, maybe you should try asking your golden city to give up it's rooms and gold to the meek.yes, the Church should absolutely do more for the poor - but you seem to be unaware that it is doing a lot. Most soup kitchens, food banks and charities have been started, and are largely run, by Christians. If it were up to me, Churches would sell their large buildings, hold services in normal, cheap buildings and give the money to the poor - but then they'd be harder for people suddenly wanting prayer to find, and they couldn't be hired out for weddings etc. I wish that more of them would let homeless people sleep in them at night - but this would be very, very risky, and most Churches simply wouldn't have the staff to deal with the practicalities. But many are night shelters in winter. And still you're missing the point - people who call themselves/are Christians are far from perfect, but when they make an effort to follow Christ, that means good is done, since God tells us repeatedly throughout the Bible to help the poor.
Give over. Deluded people believe in deluded crap,
how do you know that what I'm referring to is a delusion?
If it cannot be proved to exist, it can be accepted that it does not exist.
not at all. The fact that one doesn't have the particular proof that one claims should exist is not legitimate grounds that it doesn't exist. There are many things, in all areas of life and knowledge that we can't prove, but believe in because of probable conclusions from available evidence assessed rationally/logically. How much have you examined the arguments of those who've come to believe in God for intellectual reasons?
There are indeed many things that cannot be proved to exist, therefore we do not assert that they exist either. We can keep our minds open to the possibility that they may exist if there is evidence that suggests that they may exist, but we do not convince ourselves and others that they do exist until we are able to provide credible evidence, and in the case of God there is no evidence whatsoever, credible or otherwise. Not a smidgen.
Intelligent people are just as likely to become infected with irrational belief as stupid people, if not more so. Intelligent people can put forward all of the clever reasoning they want but if they are unable to put forward any evidence or proof of their claims, their claims are nothing but hypothetical.
Intelligent people are just as likely to become infected with irrational belief as stupid people, if not more so. Intelligent people can put forward all of the clever reasoning they want but if they are unable to put forward any evidence or proof of their claims, their claims are nothing but hypothetical.
so I'll take from that that the answer to my question is no, you've not investigated this at all.
Of course not. Why would I read the ramblings of someone who is unable to provide evidence or proof of God? Whatever they may have said changes nothing, as without evidence or proof their thoughts on the matter are nothing but thoughts on the matter.
As for 'investigating' God: I have given much of my life to that. I have looked high and low and the imaginary sky goblin just pointblank refuses to make itself known. We will be far more likely to find absolute proof of extra-terrestrials than we will ever be able to find evidence of something that only exists in the minds of certain people.
As for 'investigating' God: I have given much of my life to that. I have looked high and low and the imaginary sky goblin just pointblank refuses to make itself known. We will be far more likely to find absolute proof of extra-terrestrials than we will ever be able to find evidence of something that only exists in the minds of certain people.
you don't know whether the"ramblings" contain anything that serves as evidence if you refuse to read them.
Actually, I do. Evidence of the existence of something is not obtained by word of mouth; evidence of the existence of something is obtained through empirical information that is provided in accordance with the scientific method. The evidence must then withstand statistical analysis and scientific controls, and must then be capable of being successfully repeated time and time again anywhere in the world, and by any person using the same stringent methods.
"word of mouth"? I suggested that you should listen to peoples' reasons and assess them rather than base views on literal ignorance (and I really don't mean that as an insult but that is literally what you're doing). You know full well that there are many things that we believe which simply can't be analysed in the way you described. But yes, I personally believe in God first and foremost because of science; we can't test forGod directly because He's not composed of the matter/energy that scientific instruments measure, but what we can measure demonstrates that the universe and biological world have a designer. "If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, it would have recollapsed before it reached its present size. On the other hand, if it had been greater by a part in a million, the universe would have expanded too rapidly for stars and planets to form." (Stephen Hawking) And there are many other things about the universe, such as the ratio of the masses of protons/neutrons that are similarly remarkably correct against the odds. One of Hawking's closest colleagues, Sir Roger Penrose, calculated that the odds of our universe - given the values of numerous parameters (such as the cosmological constant, the proton/neutron mass ratio etc) occurring by chance are around 1 in 10^123 (10 with 123 more zeros). Within the bilogical world, there is too much interdependence for it to have developed by chance Of course, there are plenty of lectures and writings by maths/science PHDs that explain this far more thoroughly, but I presume that it would be pointless for me to add hyperlinks, since you'll just ignore them, won't you? (rhetorical question mark, I really don't want to spend more time arguing :) )
:) )
Word of mouth = thought from head. That is all that theists have as their 'evidence' of God, regardless of their intellectual capabilities; nothing more than thoughts. Thoughts are not evidence, and they are certainly not proof.
The only people who are ignorant in this respect are people like yourself who believe stuff just because it suits you to believe stuff. Those of us who demand evidence and, better still, proof before we allow our minds to become convinced of something, are the complete opposite of ignorant. I hate to inform you of the obvious but that is THE correct mindset, and it is high time for everyone to get on board.
Belief means: "an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without evidence or proof." so actually I think that everything that is 'believed' is held to be true by some people without evidence or proof. The smart folk who believe that something may be true then try to find evidence to support their beliefs and if they are successful in obtaining evidence they then try to build up that evidence to establish proof, but if unsuccessful in obtaining evidence they accept that the belief was nothing more than a belief, whereas the not-so-smart people just simply believe and never seek to prove their belief or even dare to contradict their bias.
Science does not provide anything to give any person any reason to believe in God. Please do not sully the name of science by claiming that it gives you reason to claim that God exists, because it doesn't.
How the fuckery would you know what God would be composed of if it existed? Where is your evidence to support your claim that God is not composed of the matter/energy that scientific instruments can measure? The Universe is energy and matter right the way through so if God really did exist it would be perfectly reasonable to assume that God is also energy and matter in composition, therefore God would actually be detectable. If God really exists it is likely that it will be floating around somewhere in the dark recesses of space, ffs. Maybe if certain religions tried spending their vast wealth on finding God instead of spending it on earthly pleasures maybe they could find evidence of God, in which case it would be perfectly reasonable for those of us who are atheists to change our minds and embrace the magical possibility.
The intelligent designer argument for God is complete crap. Please take a look at the Douglas Adams quote on my cover photo to get an idea of why such assumptions are so incredibly absurd. If God was such a great intelligent designer how come so much in our world is so poorly designed? If the Universe was designed by God you would have thought that God would have been smart enough to design me so that I wasn't allergic to a common metal found on our planet such a nickel, wouldn't you?
Just because something has the odds stacked against it that doesn't mean that it is impossible. People have more chance of seeing Elvis fly past in a spaceship than they have of winning the lottery, and yet people do actually win the lottery because it is actually possible to win the lottery. Just so long as something is feasibly possible, the chances are it will happen at some point. That is what happened with the Universe, because the Universe is feasibly possible. God isn't; God is just an imaginary being conjured up in the minds of ancient people who were not intellectually developed enough to form rational conclusions of their world.
It's quite funny that you should mention two academics who didn't/don't believe in God; didn't their lack of belief in God tell you something?
Provide as much evidence or proof of God that you can find. Just so long as it is evidence or proof, that is. Hypothetical thought is neither.
The only people who are ignorant in this respect are people like yourself who believe stuff just because it suits you to believe stuff. Those of us who demand evidence and, better still, proof before we allow our minds to become convinced of something, are the complete opposite of ignorant. I hate to inform you of the obvious but that is THE correct mindset, and it is high time for everyone to get on board.
Belief means: "an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without evidence or proof." so actually I think that everything that is 'believed' is held to be true by some people without evidence or proof. The smart folk who believe that something may be true then try to find evidence to support their beliefs and if they are successful in obtaining evidence they then try to build up that evidence to establish proof, but if unsuccessful in obtaining evidence they accept that the belief was nothing more than a belief, whereas the not-so-smart people just simply believe and never seek to prove their belief or even dare to contradict their bias.
Science does not provide anything to give any person any reason to believe in God. Please do not sully the name of science by claiming that it gives you reason to claim that God exists, because it doesn't.
How the fuckery would you know what God would be composed of if it existed? Where is your evidence to support your claim that God is not composed of the matter/energy that scientific instruments can measure? The Universe is energy and matter right the way through so if God really did exist it would be perfectly reasonable to assume that God is also energy and matter in composition, therefore God would actually be detectable. If God really exists it is likely that it will be floating around somewhere in the dark recesses of space, ffs. Maybe if certain religions tried spending their vast wealth on finding God instead of spending it on earthly pleasures maybe they could find evidence of God, in which case it would be perfectly reasonable for those of us who are atheists to change our minds and embrace the magical possibility.
The intelligent designer argument for God is complete crap. Please take a look at the Douglas Adams quote on my cover photo to get an idea of why such assumptions are so incredibly absurd. If God was such a great intelligent designer how come so much in our world is so poorly designed? If the Universe was designed by God you would have thought that God would have been smart enough to design me so that I wasn't allergic to a common metal found on our planet such a nickel, wouldn't you?
Just because something has the odds stacked against it that doesn't mean that it is impossible. People have more chance of seeing Elvis fly past in a spaceship than they have of winning the lottery, and yet people do actually win the lottery because it is actually possible to win the lottery. Just so long as something is feasibly possible, the chances are it will happen at some point. That is what happened with the Universe, because the Universe is feasibly possible. God isn't; God is just an imaginary being conjured up in the minds of ancient people who were not intellectually developed enough to form rational conclusions of their world.
It's quite funny that you should mention two academics who didn't/don't believe in God; didn't their lack of belief in God tell you something?
Provide as much evidence or proof of God that you can find. Just so long as it is evidence or proof, that is. Hypothetical thought is neither.
why are you still wasting time with this?I don't care if you call me ignorant, but you seem not to understand what I was trying to say - you are uniformed about the intellectual reasons that some people have for believing in God because you're choosing to ignore them. Is it not better to examine both sides of a debate than faithfully hold to your chosen conclusion without trying to understand the conclusions of others? You claim that all theists have as reason is "thoughts" whilst stubbornly refusing to actually find out about their reasons.
You've made some intriguing unjustified assumptions; "People have more chance of seeing Elvis fly past in a spaceship than they have of winning the lottery" how on Earth can you measure and compare the likelihood of these? Of course, it doesn't matter, you're trying to argue that God is not feasibly possible, but you're simply stating that without reasoning; you're relying entirely on faith in your personal choice. And you assume that God must be comprised of the same matter/energy of the universe – on what grounds? You’re creating your own definition of God and trying to argue about it, but I’m not advocating the God you’ve made up.
Why should we expect that creation would be “better” if it were designed? God knows the entirety of the past and future, including what’s going on in hearts/minds – His purpose for Earth is that as many people as possible freely choose to follow Him, so that they’ll spend eternity in perfect joy. Making the few years that we spend on Earth perfect is irrelevant by comparison. So there are many things that you consider flaws of creation that in fact have reasons on Earth that you’re unaware of – but ultimately there are reasons that flaws are necessary for people ending up in “heaven”. In our privileged Western world, we have relatively few problems to contend with – and we mostly ignore God like spoilt brats, on course to miss out on something better and incomparably longer lasting; whereas many people who experience disease or natural disasters turn to God, and they will have endless joy free of all suffering. And I’m well aware that all of that sounds like nonsense to someone who religiously believes that nothing beyond this life time exists – but you have no proof of that.
I’m intrigued that you’re concerned that “certain religions tried spending their vast wealth on finding God instead of spending it on earthly pleasures” – firstly, I’m not defending what “some religions” do – indeed, many religious people and institutions have done a lot of wrong – what matters is what Jesus did. If you presume that this life is all there is, why would you object to people spending on “Earthly pleasures”? And if you believe that this life is all there is, why waste any of it arguing with me? But you’re seriously mistaken if you presume that “religious” institutions spend mainly on “Earthly pleasures” – Church income, for example, is spent mostly on simply running buildings and paying staff, but a huge amount is also done for charitable purposes – most food banks, for example, are Church based, as are many soup kitchens, night shelters, youth clubs, hospices and international charities.
And since you didn’t answer my earlier question, I’ll presume that I was right – you won’t bother to look at lectures or writings by academics about reasons for belief in God.
I know that I can’t change your mind at all, so I’ll get on with my afternoon, I’ve wasted far too much time on this debate.
Have a nice evening, seriously
Rejection by C of E has driven LGBT people to suicide, bishop says
There's a crucial distinction between people and actions. We are human beings, not sex objects. The Bible says that people should not have gay sex - but that doesn't mean that gay people are to be excluded. We ALL sin, and that's why Christ died for us. He prompted religious to leave a woman they'd been about to stone to death for her sexual sin, and said to her "Go and sin no more" - so the Church should be welcoming everyone, and urging everyone to fight the sin in their lives (which God helps us with)
There's a crucial distinction between people and actions. We are human beings, not sex objects. The Bible says that people should not have gay sex - but that doesn't mean that gay people are to be excluded. We ALL sin, and that's why Christ died for us. He prompted religious to leave a woman they'd been about to stone to death for her sexual sin, and said to her "Go and sin no more" - so the Church should be welcoming everyone, and urging everyone to fight the sin in their lives (which God helps us with)
The preacher who used Christianity to revive the Ku Klux Klan
CHRISTIANITY IN NO WAY JUSTIFIES RACISM. The Bible makes it clear that we're to treat others with love and compassion, and race is rarely mentioned, but when it is, it only suggests that all people are entirely equal.
CHRISTIANITY IN NO WAY JUSTIFIES RACISM. The Bible makes it clear that we're to treat others with love and compassion, and race is rarely mentioned, but when it is, it only suggests that all people are entirely equal.
The bible talks about being able to sell one's own children into slavery. It entirely endorses the institution, and admonishes slaves to be obedient. The bible also supports rape and the kidnapping of girl children in war (for rape later, though it's not spelled out). Honestly, the bible is a "how-to" manual for all sorts of evil. They were iron-age people, it's how things were back then. That's why it could never be a guide to modern morality, it's immoral.
would you explain why you think that "The bible talks about being able to sell one's own children into slavery". It doesn't "entirely endorse the institution," it was written in a society where slavery was the unquestioned norm, and it compels slave masters to treat their slaves well, contrary to other cultures at the time, and to ultimately to free them. It specifically outlaws kidnapping - so taking slaves is banned; slaves already existed, more equivalent to employees today than the slave trade's victims.
While true that Jesus was neither sexist nor racist, the Bible is filled with sexism and racism.
but it's Jesus' teachings that we're intended to follow - the rest is largely accounts of what people did, as opposed to what God wants; or situation specific guidelines. It's Jesus who shows us God in the flesh, and actually tells humanity how we should live.
you quite clearly did not live in apartheid South Africa where Christian Churches supported the apartheid regime and upheld its segregation laws. How do I know, because I lived here in South Africa during apartheid.
I'm so sorry you went through that.In various cultures, Christianity has been a predominant label and people would refer to themselves as Christian, because the label was respected - but clearly, they weren't following Christ. I don't care what you think about those hypocrites, all that matters is Jesus. And if a person is genuinely trying to follow Him, they'll not stab anyone, and they'll gradually become more selfless and compassionate.
My point wasn't about slavery, or party poltics, important as those are to discuss - my point was that it's ridiculous to suggest that the Bible advocates racism. I'm well aware that racists claim that it does - they grossly missuse it because they feel pride in claiming they're in line with God's word. They're dellusional.
From Circe to Clinton: why powerful women are cast as witches
Trying to legalise the killing of viable unborn humans is, honestly, quite witchlike.
Having an abortion isn't always a sad or difficult decision, and that's okay
No, it's not simply OK to kill a living human. You presume that it's OK because you don't see it's agony when its limbs are ripped off. We rightly consider killing newborns as theepitome of wrong without question, a human being only weeks younger can be killed and our society considers it a right. The "right to choose" is an invention of those who want that right - but even when it's a right in the legal sense, why do you presume that that authority is of absolute moral authority? It used to be a right to own slaves - would you argue that that was OK?
No, it's not simply OK to kill a living human. You presume that it's OK because you don't see it's agony when its limbs are ripped off. We rightly consider killing newborns as theepitome of wrong without question, a human being only weeks younger can be killed and our society considers it a right. The "right to choose" is an invention of those who want that right - but even when it's a right in the legal sense, why do you presume that that authority is of absolute moral authority? It used to be a right to own slaves - would you argue that that was OK?
Yoga, Catholic faith can't go together: Kerala church report
Yaweh/Jehovah tells us not to commune with spiritual forces other than Himself/the Holy Spirit - true yoga is spiritual practice that is incompatible not only with Catholicism, but all of the Abrahamic faiths. But Yaweh/Jehovah welcomes absolutely eveyone into a spiritual relationship - He can be verified via historical events, and He offers forgiveness and eternal life in paradise IF we choose to accept Christ's offer.
Yaweh/Jehovah tells us not to commune with spiritual forces other than Himself/the Holy Spirit - true yoga is spiritual practice that is incompatible not only with Catholicism, but all of the Abrahamic faiths. But Yaweh/Jehovah welcomes absolutely eveyone into a spiritual relationship - He can be verified via historical events, and He offers forgiveness and eternal life in paradise IF we choose to accept Christ's offer.
A judge denies a Christian teacher her job back after she made 'upsetting' 'homophobic' remarks to pupils | The Canary
Come on Canary, you can do better than this - either the headline or capotion need to tell us what was actully said, otherwise we really can't know who's been wronged here. Looking at the story, what's reported as having said clearly should not have been said - but good journalism should tell us what she said in response to the testimony - ie does she deny it, apologise for it, or stand by uit? We're needing Independent Media to give us honest, balanced journalism, not one sided over simplications to stoke division.
Come on Canary, you can do better than this - either the headline or capotion need to tell us what was actully said, otherwise we really can't know who's been wronged here. Looking at the story, what's reported as having said clearly should not have been said - but good journalism should tell us what she said in response to the testimony - ie does she deny it, apologise for it, or stand by uit? We're needing Independent Media to give us honest, balanced journalism, not one sided over simplications to stoke division.
China bans online sale of Bibles
Note - although Christianity is extremely repressed in China, numbers of Christians are rapidly increasing. Here (in the UK) most people ignorantly (which I don't mean as a slur, as in people literally ignore information) assume that belief in God is all nonsense, and don't ever look at the reasoning/evidence. We're indoctrinated into atheism. In China more people are open minded enough that they personally experieence His presence and want to follow Him despite hostility.
Note - although Christianity is extremely repressed in China, numbers of Christians are rapidly increasing. Here (in the UK) most people ignorantly (which I don't mean as a slur, as in people literally ignore information) assume that belief in God is all nonsense, and don't ever look at the reasoning/evidence. We're indoctrinated into atheism. In China more people are open minded enough that they personally experieence His presence and want to follow Him despite hostility.
reasoning is the very thing religious believers are not supposed to do
according to who? And how do you define "religious"? I never mentioned religion, We were talking about the Bible - which has numerous verses telling us to reason and to be wise.
Martin Luther, for one: "Belief must trample all reason, senses and mind."
But I will not invest further energy in reasoning with a radical Christian (or Muslim, Jew, Sikh, Hindu etc. etc.).
But I will not invest further energy in reasoning with a radical Christian (or Muslim, Jew, Sikh, Hindu etc. etc.).
and? Martin Luther had an opinion, and his way of expressing it - it doesn't mean that all Christians agree with him on everything. And clearly, he's using the word differently to how either I, or the Bible verses I was referring to, use it. He's talking about holding on to belief in something one knows to be true even when it doesn't feel like amidst the frustrations and materialism of life. I was referring to the reasoning for believing in God in the first place, which many people now seem oblivious to. The Bible is talking to the audience at the time about how the Gospel makes sense. But thankyou for "not investing further", I genuinely don't want to offend or argue
Culture Seeds
Culture is great - but now that there's so much technonolgy that makes it cost efficient, tax funded grants shouldn't be necessary. Money should be used for helping the very poorest people to get into homes and for linking them with right jobs. We can all enjoy plenty of culture via documentaries, digitalised museums, and the cost of tickets being fed back into galleries/theatres etc.
Culture is great - but now that there's so much technonolgy that makes it cost efficient, tax funded grants shouldn't be necessary. Money should be used for helping the very poorest people to get into homes and for linking them with right jobs. We can all enjoy plenty of culture via documentaries, digitalised museums, and the cost of tickets being fed back into galleries/theatres etc.
Trump is on a tear about immigration. What's really behind it
Leviticus 19:33-34 “When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: [says] the Lord your God. " Matthew 25:35 “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,” Galatians 5:14 “For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.””
Leviticus 19:33-34 “When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: [says] the Lord your God. " Matthew 25:35 “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,” Galatians 5:14 “For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.””
Why are white curators still running African art collections?Because there are more white people applying for the roles, and skin colour doesn't matter. More to the point, whilst many of the world's black people are born into inescapable poverty, why isn't more news time and funding put towards addressing that injustice? Why does the media virtually ignore those without clean water, food, or any of the state services that we take forgranted? Isn't their sufferiing more concerning than who curates art galleries?
The reason why black communities are kept in institutional cycles of oppression are because their heritage and cultural identity have been almost exclusively presented through an Anglo prism.
obviously - but white curators won't necessarily perpetuate that - it's that African art that's being displayed, the curator isn't. But I think you've missed my point; why don't we care more about the very poorest people - those who aren't in the West? By no means am I suggesting that we shouldn't address racism and inequality here - but it makes me angry that humanity's most impoverished are generally ignored. We lucky Westerners get the privilege of wandering around art galleries, whilst there other human beings stuck in slums.
Easter tirade: Trump attacks Nafta and says 'No more Daca deal'
Yes, but he's been saying things like this for 2years. What the government will actually enforce is what matters. Fortunately, him saying that DACA is off doesn't necessarily mean that it is, or that there won't be other options for those impacted.
Leviticus 19:33-34 “When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: [says] the Lord your God. " Matthew 25:35 “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,” Galatians 5:14 “For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.””
people need to understand some things of in the Old Testament doesn’t apply today for all. People always trying to quote scriptures and lack understanding themselves.
of course the OT doesn't all apply directly today - but as I'm sure you're aware, Matthew isn't in the OT. And there are plenty of other NT verses that apply. Jesus gave His life up - how can it be Christian to not even share the nation we're lucky enough to be born into?
Most people ignorantly (which I don't mean as a slur, as in people literally ignore information) assume that belief in God is all nonsense anyway, our society needs more discussion about the reasons for belief in God, and Jesus' resurrection, first and foremost. There is good evidence that Jesus rose from the dead, and He told us that IF we follow Him, we can have eternal life with God. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/.../the-resurrection-of.../
Happy Easter
Happy Easter
Outside of the Bible, there is not one piece of evidence that Jesus even existed.
according to who? How much have you studied this? A few authors have claimed that Jesus never existed - it's an unusual enough idea to sell plenty of books. But no serious historian would agree to that - you might not have studied history for decades, but that doesn't mean that those who have and are ths familiar with the evidence are wrong.https://www.theguardian.com/.../what-is-the-historical...
I studied the history of the period for my degree. There is a bit shoved into Josephus that doesn’t fit stylistically with the rest, and a reference to a group of Jews in Tacitus. Everything else is from later centuries. Nothing in the NT is externally verified, and many things referred to in it did not happen, such as the census. There is more proof for Atlantis and King Arthur. It’s the biggest hoax in history.Someone outside of Matthew might have noticed the zombie apocalypse he mentions, too. If you want to believe in this stuff, that’s fine, but don’t kid yourself that there is evidence for it. Without faith, there is nothing.
how does it not "fit stylistically" exactly? Why do you presume writings from later centuries to be void? How have you concluded that nothing from the NT is externally verified, and why do you dismiss the NT as being of no value as a historical document? How do you know that the census didn't happen - to say categorically "there is nothing" - it's a logical error to affirm an absence with certainty when it's not possible that you have all of the information. How do you explain the movement that began and grew despite extreme persecution and slaughter if it weren't well known locally at the time that Jesus had been seen alive? Why would scores of Jews have left their ancestral religion to be tortured by the Romans if it were only an idea propogated by a few fishermen?
If it had been a real thing, there would be evidence for it from the first century CE. You don’t assume something is true from a document that was assembled three centuries afterwards - the NT was created in the 300s with nothing surviving from before that. If you are happy to believe in something for which there was no evidence, that’s your business, but don’t expect people to share it. There really is more evidence for Atlantis, King Arthur, Martians, and Bigfoot.
the NT is far more reliable than other ancient historical works. If the NT was assembled in the 300s, why does that disprove it? Christians were living in a time with none of the systems/tech that we have now for such organisation; they were being chase daround by religious leaders and Romans who were trying to kill them and were destroying as much of their writing as they could get their hands on. http://www.bible.ca/.../topical-the-earliest-new...
Are you presuming 2 on the basis that 1 in 3 women have, and there are 6 princesses in this montage? I didn't realise Jezebel is so brain dead. I honestly thought that most young adults able to get jobs in media would have been better educated than that. By no one's definition are there exactly 6 Disney princesses - who on Earth fails to include Cinderella and Snow White? And Tiana (from The Princess and the Frog)? The latter being a glaring omission since she was rightly celebrated as the first black Disney princess - shall we presume that Jezebel is racist towards black people? It could well be argued that Merida (from Brave) should also be included; Anna from Frozen is a Disney princess by definition (and arguably, Elsa who they've included, is a queen, not a princess), and so on... Even if all Disney princesses were included, it's still far too small a sample to apply a population wide statistic to and say "Statistically, x Disney princesses have..." - one can't assume that such a small group is definitely representative of a population.
More importantly, none of the Disney princesses live in the present day Western world, to which the 1in3 rough statistic applies.
More importantly still it is the epitome of evil to suggest to the target audience of Disney princesses that it's normal to be impregnated (how many girls have sex because society has taught them that they should let boys use them?) and then destroy the life growing inside them.
More importantly, none of the Disney princesses live in the present day Western world, to which the 1in3 rough statistic applies.
More importantly still it is the epitome of evil to suggest to the target audience of Disney princesses that it's normal to be impregnated (how many girls have sex because society has taught them that they should let boys use them?) and then destroy the life growing inside them.
Stephen Hawking ; "If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, it would have recollapsed before it reached its present size. On the other hand, if it had been greater by a part in a million, the universe would have expanded too rapidly for stars and planets to form." (Stephen Hawking) And there are many other things about the universe, such as the ratio of the masses of protons/neutrons that are similarly remarkably correct against the odds. One of Hawking's closest colleagues, Sir Roger Penrose, calculated that the odds of our universe - given the values of numerous parameters (such as the cosmological constant, the proton/neutron mass ratio etc) occurring by chance are around 1 in 10^123 (10 with 123 more zeros).
Well I see some religious people are changing their tune as science (led by great people such as Hawking) unlocks more and more present day 'secrets'. Now it seems god didn't just make the Earth, he orchestrated the big-bang! Seriously, you guys will stop at nothing.
LOL, you seem to have very much misunderstood belief iin God, and science. The big bang was apparently an idea of a Catholic monk. More importantly, it's not in any way opposed to belief in God, it's a way of describing what God did. The beginning of Genesis is a different way of describing the same thing, written at time where poetic language and imagery was how important concepts were more familiar to people than science. Most of history's greatest scientists were Christians - science is to understand what God has made in greater detail.
God of the gaps is the desperate last gasps of ignorance.
you seem to have misunderstood - this isn't God of the gaps, this is drawing the logical conclusion that if something is too improbably to have happened by chance, a conscious being was involved.Well I see some religious people are changing their tune as science (led by great people such as Hawking) unlocks more and more present day 'secrets'. Now it seems god didn't just make the Earth, he orchestrated the big-bang! Seriously, you guys will stop at nothing.
LOL, you seem to have very much misunderstood belief iin God, and science. The big bang was apparently an idea of a Catholic monk. More importantly, it's not in any way opposed to belief in God, it's a way of describing what God did. The beginning of Genesis is a different way of describing the same thing, written at time where poetic language and imagery was how important concepts were more familiar to people than science. Most of history's greatest scientists were Christians - science is to understand what God has made in greater detail.
God of the gaps is the desperate last gasps of ignorance.
Maybe universes are popping up billions of times every second (or what we would call a second in our universe). What are the chances of it happening once in 10^500 times? How long had it been going on?
but then it would be as unlikely that we'd be in the right one. Besides, there's no evidence of other universes, and as Hawking said, there was nothing before the big bang. Further, the biology of our world and how it enables us to live is endlessly complex - with each protein of each cell of each tissue of each organism being reliant on proteins in cells in tissues in other organisms, and reliant of an array of environment factors also. How have you developed such faith in your atheism?
Yes, include everyone - and urge them to draw closer to God. Transgenderism opposes God's design; we need to condemn the ideology but act as Jesus would towards the individuals.
According to YouGov data, anti-Semitism is far worse among Tory voters, and has been falling rapidly among Labour voters under Corbyn. Corbyn should have done more than he has to criticise anti-semitism - but that doesn't mean he's anti-semitic. He's a politician trying to spend limited time fighting for to make life fairer – and that there's so, so much effort going in to labelling Corbyn as anti-semitic shows that his opponents are struggling to prove his policies wrong. Plenty of Jewish groups have spoken up about how this is a ridiculous smear campaign - they know that Corbyn is very much opposed to racism. https://evolvepolitics.com/yougov-polls-show-anti-semitism-in-labour-has-actually-reduced-dramatically-since-jeremy-corbyn-became-leader/
Throughout my childhood, there was an image of the original graphic of heron the side of the HMV in my town centre - so I walked past it countless times, and it certainly didn't help my developing brain form a healthy idea of the female shape.
Back? If fewer young people did more jobs in the past, we can't compare it to now, because now there is far more homework and revision.
So lovely :) But please note - baptism is a symbol, of being cleansed/ dying and rising to new life, possible because of Jesus death in our place - an act of heroism isn't a requirement, we are all offered forgiveness and eternal life.
It amazes me how so many people presume that we're here by unguided chance. https://is.gd/xNpUbL
It amazes me how so many people presume that we're here by unguided chance. https://is.gd/xNpUbL
This is missing the point - Jesus also suffered supernatural torment, having the sin of humanity heaped upon Him so that the just penalty deserved because of things that we do wrong could be paid.
so why is there still hell?
because plenty of people refuse to accept Jesus' offer. But I'm fairly certain that the idea that people are consciously suffering in hell eternally is a misunderstanding of the Bible, rather I think that the Bible says that Hell will be annihilation. - http://rethinkinghell.com/explore/
And EVERYONE is offered salvation through Christ, who showed that He'd defeated death when He rose.
And EVERYONE is offered salvation through Christ, who showed that He'd defeated death when He rose.
why doesn't He get rid of sin and hell?
He gives us free will. If He didn't, we'd be robots and goodness would be meaningless.
Free will? Wrong again. "Everything is gawds plan". Guess what that means! You have delusions about your delusion. #ReligionIsPoison
no, it means God, who created human brains, is more complex than human brains can fully grasp, hence theologians have been debating Arminianism vs Calvinism for centuries. But why should God's plan and free will be incompatible? If a parent leaves their child's favourite food in the fridge, it could their plan that their child eat it, and also the child's choice.
why do i need to worship Jesus or I will be annihilated? That sounds so abusive, worship me or die?
what's abusive? You exist because God created you, and He gives the option of spending eternity in bliss in His presence. If you choose to reject that offer, you cease to exist. Why is that abusive? Why do you presume worship to be a chore? It doesn't have to be the type of Church services you find dull. Experiencing God's presence is more enjoyable than anything.
so you either spend eternal bliss with him (by the way, in what form? If you have dementia do you spend eternity like that??/), or you stop existing because you didn't love him enough. That is like a boyfriend saying love me unconditionally or i will end you.
no, it's not like that at all - we exist because God created us, and the resources we need to survive (and the biology of our world and how it enables us to live is endlessly complex - with each protein of each cell of each tissue of each organism being reliant on proteins in cells in tissues in other organisms, and reliant of an array of environment factors also). A boyfriend didn't. And eternity with God is incomparably better than a relationship with any boyfriend. And unlike a boyfriend, Jesus offers to take the punishment that we deserve, so that we don't have to; and so that we can receive heavenly joy that we don't deserve.
Nothing breaks my heart more than the fact that people ignore Jesus. Whether Easter appears on packaging is itself irrelevant, Jesus offered everyone eternal life when He died for us, and most Brits don't even now that there's evidence. That's ridiculous.
They don't ignore jesus Grace Dalton they have simply outgrown such childish ideas.
"childish ideas"? How is it childish? How much have you personally examined the evidence?
Grace Dalton I've examined in totally.. as in nothing is presented at all.lets take the bible for instance
It isn't a book at all just a collection of writings stuck together in 12 languages. A few of which we don't even understand..then it was cherry picked and put together.Thats not evidence that's writing by committee..If Jesus or Muhammed were such great all powerful guys why didn't they write it themselves.
Oh yeah Muhammed was illiterate and I suppose jesus couldn't be bothered
It isn't a book at all just a collection of writings stuck together in 12 languages. A few of which we don't even understand..then it was cherry picked and put together.Thats not evidence that's writing by committee..If Jesus or Muhammed were such great all powerful guys why didn't they write it themselves.
Oh yeah Muhammed was illiterate and I suppose jesus couldn't be bothered
you've proven my point perfectly- your comment makes clear that you've not studied this at all. I could link a few summaries if you're interested but I presume that you aren't(?)
Evidence my arse. He didn't even leave his corpse behind.
LOL exactly. He returned to life. That's the point.
Ill make this easy
1.the bible was not written by one person..do you agree Yes or No.
It's a collection of writings ..do you agree Yes or no.
They are written in many languages..yes or No.
1.the bible was not written by one person..do you agree Yes or No.
It's a collection of writings ..do you agree Yes or no.
They are written in many languages..yes or No.
Yes, it's a collection of writings, everyone knows that. What's your point?
Oh yes please! I would love to see the evidence of Jesus returning to life. And so would the fucking nobel prize judges
so you don't know about the history of the Bible, or what Nobel prizes are? Sorry, I'm not trying to argue, but your point doesn't work - Nobel prizes are awarded for deliberate research carried out and recorded within the last year or so - that Jesus' resurrection doesn't come into that category doesn't in any way serve as evidence against it. Do you presume other historical documents to necessarily be untrue? Though I know you presume that it's events are unbelievable; as a text itself, the New Testament is far more credible as a historical document than comparable works
Your happy with the story's of incest, rape, murder and child abuse that happens in the bible - Yeah, your bible sure is a great excuse for wanting to believe in a magical sky fairy. Oh wait, it's all taken out of context isn't it, my mistake.
what's your point? Newspapers have stories of rape, murder and child abuse- do you choose to believe that they're all untrue? The teachings of God opposed the evil that those not following Him were participating in. And yes, context is entirely relevant, even if you can't be bothered to study it.
No And should be necessary - we need to fight inequallity. More women are unable to access education and employment in developing countries, so we should help them because they're disadvantaged - not because they're women - along with those men in developing countries who are also unable to get education and work. Helping the very poorest people, as efficiently as possible, must be the aim.
Most people ignorantly (which I don't mean as a slur, as in people literally ignore information) assume that belief in God is all; our society needs more discussion about the reasons for belief in God, and Jesus' resurrection. They may not conclude that you want to follow Christ, but most are first seriously, seriously in need of getting informed. We can each read tonnes of different articles about that evidence for the resurrection to form a conclusion - presuming that it's fiction is to ignorantly ignore, rather than evaluate complex archeology. https://is.gd/m6MzKKhttps://is.gd/LTVzAj
I'm so, so, so sick of seeing people use being a pastor as a ploy to con people. This is utterly anti-thetical to what Christ taught, and yet plenty of people use things like this^ as a reason to ignore Jesus.
Religion is the big con.
how did you reach that conclusion? What do you mean by "religion" exactly?
Please stop making out that cheating is OK. Countless people have been hurt - including children when their parents cheat. And the NHS has to pay when STIs are spread. TV and films have glamourised affairs - we mustn't let their greed (they put it on screen because it sells) to ruin lives. Far too often, people think that they're married the "wrong person" and give up. But all human beings are far from perfect, and marriage means working together to overcome those hurdles. It's worth it - people who work to sustain their marriages have companionship in old age, and are statistically happier and healthier. There are many cases where people divorce though there's no violence, but because our culture - inc. films/tv/books - lies to us that we're destined to be with someone, so it's fundamentally the right thing to do to to end a marriage if the person we're married to isn't that person. It's as though there's some superstitious belief that cupid has a divine plan, and it might be necessary to divorce to follow it.
I'd rather give the money that tickets cost to save lives in developing countries. Several months of food and education beats several hours of live music.
Donald J. Trump It's time to REBUILD, and we will do it with American WORKERS, American GRIT, and American PRIDE!
Pride comes before a fall. Friday is about God demonstrating ultimate humility by willingly dying for all the many things that we should that we should each be ashamed of. He wants us to put others before ourselves, not ourselves first. And though it shouldn't be our aim to be happy, there is in fact incomparably more joy in seeking to glorify God, not ourselves
David Bowie Monument Vandalised
I wouldn't vandalise - but I agree with the statement. And it should be extended - when so much culture an entertainment can be transmitted and enjoyed so cheaply with television and the internet, why is so much spent on physical art displays whilst there are people in the world without even clean water? £4 can feed a starving child for a month. How is it right to use so much money on a statue when innocent people are suffering and could be helped? What would David Bowie have wanted?
I wouldn't vandalise - but I agree with the statement. And it should be extended - when so much culture an entertainment can be transmitted and enjoyed so cheaply with television and the internet, why is so much spent on physical art displays whilst there are people in the world without even clean water? £4 can feed a starving child for a month. How is it right to use so much money on a statue when innocent people are suffering and could be helped? What would David Bowie have wanted?
People should know. I constantly see people arguing that it's not killing; that the feotus isn't human; or that it's just a "clump of cells" - basic biology seems unapparent to plenty of people.
Wow. Roses [in photo] for babies killed?
Nobody is killing babies. Do try to educate yourself.
wow, according to ...? I didn't use the word baby, though I don't disagree with it. I said that it's killing a tiny human, and if you think that it isn't, you've been seriously lied to. Educate myself? There's been plenty in my UCL course about embryology and development. You shouldn't let yourself be informed by marketing materials from organisations that make money out of abortions - although even they were more honest in the past - https://twitter.com/obi.../status/855059216784084992/photo/1
A zygote/fetus is not a human. It is a bunch of cells. It can't sustain life outside of the womb; it relies on the host body (ie the mother) to live. If the mother doesn't want it there, she has every right to remove it. It's not murder in the same way that removing a tapeworm isn't murder.
yes it is a human. To say it doesn't is to deny biology. What convinced you that it's "a bunch of cells"? We're each bunches of cells, BTW. If you think that a fetus is just a clump, you've been lied to. Have you not tried Googling pregnancy development? You can see that organs and sensations develop week by week - it's only a "clump of cells" for several weeks.
It shouldn't be a matter of control laws, guns should be made entirely illegal and as difficult as possible to get hold of. And that still wouldn't fix the issue entirely, but it would help.
I know that gun control laws don't work, that's why I'm saying that guns should be banned completely and no longer available to buy easily. Jesus gave the teaching to buy a sword in a specific situation, we can't necessarily be certain it applies universally. The apostles were being sent out into an environment where it was normal to have a knife; there weren't the protections that we have here and now; and they were undertaking a vital and deadly task. We don't need weapons here and now. A more probably universal teaching is that "Those who live by the sword will die by the sword" But those protesting guns should realise that what's really needed is for people to Jesus - laws won't fix society.
We have 0.23 gun fatalities per 100, 000, whilst the US has 10.45. Jesus drove traders out of the temple because they were interfering with peoples' relationships with God. Indeed, debating people being in the army was unimportant by comparison. That doesn't mean that people should now be allowed guns. But it does mean that relationships with God are incomparably more important than the gun situation - and it's heartbreaking that our society pays no attention to the former.
Peter drew a sword, and Jesus reprimanded him. I wasn't advocating pacifism - in the sense of having no army - but that Jesus is commanding individuals to refrain from using weapons (war being a very different situation). So our army should have guns, individuals should not. And you're right - knife crime is rising here, so anti-gun campaigners are right to oppose guns, but are sadly mistaken to think that eliminating guns will completely resolve the issues. Jesus is the solution.
Could you please stop failing to specify that it's RELATIVE poverty? Not that that makes it OK at all, obviously - but it's entirely different from what children in poorer countries are going through. There are children sleeping on the streets, trafficked into the drug and sex trades, lacking education and even basic healthcare, with growth stunted from starvation and only dirty water to drink. And they have no opportunity to help themselves - but we can. I'm NOT saying that issues here shouldn't be addressed - but please can we stop ignoring the children who are suffering most simply because they aren't British?
What the Pope thinks is unimportant by comparisom to following Jesus' teachings and example. If everyone did that, the protests to which the Pope was referring wouldn't have been necessary since people wouldn't be using guns. Yet most people have never even bothered to study the evidence for Jesus, and plenty of the people who call themselves Christians, esp. in the US, aren't actually following Him.
Her support for abortion was a significant factor, and our media seems unaware.
I wouldn't vandalise - but I agree with the statement. And it should be extended - when so much culture an entertainment can be transmitted and enjoyed so cheaply with television and the internet, why is so much spent on physical art displays whilst there are people in the world without even clean water? £4 can feed a starving child for a month. How is it right to use so much money on a statue when innocent people are suffering and could be helped? What would David Bowie have wanted?
£4 here?
no, in a the world's poorest places. There, there aren't the welfare state and food banks that we have here, but where the people are just as human, contrary to what plenty of Brits (who say that we shouldn't give overseas) seem to think.
But surely we shoyld sort the situation at home first? Child poverty, homelessness. Why should the tax payer send money abroad? Surely that should be down to each individual.
why (should we give here first)? Doesn't it make more sense to give to those suffering the most? Or those who have least opportunity to help themselves? Or to those for whom each £ makes the most difference? Those are people in developing countries.
Look to the governments where there is still no clean water, see how corrupt they are and what happens to the donations they receive for the purpose of benefitting their people
yes their governments should do more to help people in developing countries; but that doesn't mean that it's OK that we leave those innocent people to suffer. It's not their fault that they've been born into countries with evil politicians and rigged elections. Part of the blame lies with Westerners - in previous centuries, but now Western based corporations- have facilitated the corruption; by stealing land and resources and taking slaves, and paying the most immoral individuals to assist them. Innocent people have been left powerless and impoverished, ruled over by tyrants. When we give to credible charities, we can help the people whose leaders haven't had the humanity and or resources needed to help them.
No one is sure why? What? Because guns kill people and so glamourising them to kids and teens is dangerous, perhaps? The image of a hero waving a gun will lead some teenagers to think less negatively about guns, and if just one of them ends up using a gun, people could die.
Newest? Keep up, the pro-life movement has been talking about this for years. And face it - our culture can't handle this; most people think that abortion should be allowed, but most people pro-port to care about people with Down's syndrome. So what's right - "morally"? I'm anti-abortion, but I wonder how those who support in can answer this conundrum.
I don't understand why there are NHS staff struggling to make ends meet, and others on 6 figure salaries. I also don't understand why the school curriculum doesn't do more to help the NHS crisis - why not add more teaching about first aid; dangers or fast food/alcohol/smoking/drugs; when a person should make an appointment with a GP, when they should go to casualty - and when they shouldn't etc.Ultimately, even with the problems it has, we are extremely fortunate to have as much healthcare as we do. The vast majority of humans who’ve lived, or do live now elsewhere, could only dream of having what we do. Illness is part of life – not to dismiss those suffering – so we should be grateful when it’s treated, not angry when it isn’t. I love that we have the opportunity to fund basic healthcare for those in developing countries with none at all.
Sexualising a teenager's pet rabbit and reducing the amount raised for childrens' healthcare and anti-trafficking work is not a nice thing.
Surely if Britain is so superior, they wouldn't want to travel to inferior countries so they don't need passports?
A person who chooses to be a Chaplin should love God so much that they want to follow His guidance, and will happily give up sex to do so. Jesus doesn't discuss homosexuality at all in the New Testament - it wasn't a matter of debate among the Jewish people. But He made it clear that we should follow God's guidance about marriage; and also be loving and respectful. When the Jewish leaders asked Him if a woman caught in adultery should be stoned, as this was their law. He said that whoever hadn't sinned could throw stones, meaning that none of them could, and they left ashamed. Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. Thus genuine Christianity isn't to endorse active homosexuality, but it's also not to mistreat gay people at all. God has said that gay sex is wrong, but He loves all gay people - just as He loves all straight people, though we also sin.
Yet you're so free and independent that you need to declare your personal relationship decisions to the world?
Of course it is. Only the richest percentile of humanity would spend so much on several hours of entertainment. £25 could sponsor a child for a month - and there's enough to watch and enjoy with Freeview
It's so, so tragic that culture has led so many of us to feel unhappy with our natural faces/bodies :( Knowing that much of humanity can't access surgery that they actually need for medical/injury reasons, I know I mustn't spend money on cosmetic surgery - but I desperately wish I could. Images of perfection everywhere, constantly, is a new phenomenon of only the last few decades, we're not designed for it. And it's continually worsening - I fear for children growing up (with their minds developing and most sponge like) right now.
Such an important point - God knows what's in our hearts/minds, and the future, so when things suck, He can have reasons unfathomable to us.
People starting petitions about Katie Hopkins are giving Katie Hopkins what she clearly wants (all and any publicity)
I've always thought that it's odd how people use "nanny state" as a criticism - nannies are great.
I still have my Barack-Obama-England-Football-Team mug
If I ever threw anything at anyone (I'm very much a pacifist), it would be at him for that petition. Nothing in British politics makes me as angry as what he's campaigning for in that ^ photo[stopping Aid]
Robots, climate change, superbugs, terrorism. nuclear weapons...there's no way I'm going to live to 101. But whatevs
It's vile - if they haven't talked about having sex, no one should be presuming they have and putting it on screen. And it's seriously creepy how obsessed so many people are with other peoples' sex lives.
1 less force influencing girls to put themselves at risk of sex abuse. (which is to say, their videos tell girls that it's great to shake their backsides in guys faces; it's inevitable that some teenagers - and quite possibly pre-teens - will emulate them, and then be groped, or worse)
Far too often, people think that they're married the "wrong person" and give up. But all human beings are far from perfect, and marriage means working together to overcome those hurdles. It's worth it - people who work to sustain their marriages have companionship in old age, and are statistically happier and healthier.
Why is our society often more interested in popes - and other Church leaders - than Jesus?
Maajid Nawaz, as someone well informed on Islamic texts and history, can you offer insight into why a tiny minority of Muslim men target Western girls? I've heard that some view white girls, as being disposable, and that men are entitled to sexually abuse them, more than those of their own ethnicity. But OBVIOUSLY, I need to study Islam further for evidence of that; and OBVIOUSLY the vast majority of Muslim men are respectful of women whatever the texts say. But I'm certain that better understanding of Islam is crucial to addressing both abuse like this, and Islamophobia.
I wonder what % of non LGBT people refuse to consider Christianity a)on the basis of the LGBT debate and b)for entirely different reasons but claiming that it's because of their anger at it. And I wonder what proportion of all of those people (LGBT and non) who are angry with Christianity because of this issue, base their anger on un-Christ-like behaviour by supposed Christians/"Christians"; and what proportion are in fact angry about Christianity's teaching.
No, it doesn't. Jesus says clearly that there's no way of knowing when the world will end.
The more people watch sex, the more the brain is densitised (it genuinely impacts our neuronal circuitry) to sex, so only more and more extreme things provide excitement. Thus sex in TV/films/porn increasing has led to more and people being pressured by partners into things that they don't want to do - sometimes harmful - and doctors are reporting sharp rises in erectile dysfunction among young adults.
I am so sick of people using OCD as an adjective.
Yuh, but our sex lives don't define us - there's generally too much attention to people's sexual orientation it proportion to their actual art.
If someone wants to talk about being gay that shouldn't offend you.
I didn't say it offends me. But we're listening to his music, not him having sex. Our society is creepily obsessed with other peoples' sex lives.
I really, really don't understand why people would want to spend £thousands on several weeks on the water, when they could use that money to provide water for dozens of people who don't have it.
Contrary to what our screens suggest, it's not necessary to have sex before marriage to enjoy life - and if more people did wait until marriage, there's be far, far less heartache, and less STIs (which also mean less NHS funding can be spent on other things) and accidental pregnancies. We've been conned into thinking everyone needs sex ASAP by the corporations that profit from doing so (not only companies selling condoms etc, but more so entertainment producers - sex sells, so it now floods media, and it's misled our society about what produces the greatest amount of long term happiness)
Christianity teaches that supernatural forces -demons- do exist, but also to be wise. The vast, vast majority of sleep paralysis and other neurological illnesses are not demonic, though some eccentrics who are (or who falsely claim to be) Christian will wrongly attribute these issues to demonic possession.
My 86 year old grandmother wanted a jacket potato in her order when I started organising her supermarket deliveries - she described what was obviously the McCain jackets above^, an seemed unaware, when I suggested it, that one could actually buy a large potato and bake it.
I'm 25 and I'm sick of my peers moaning about being offended. There are serious issues of injustice and discrimination in our world, yet many of my contemporaries use their time and energy to complain about inconsequential things, like Friends characters' sexism, and multimillionaire women on screen earning less than men. I really don't understand why we aren't using that time to discuss extreme poverty and slavery instead.
We should indeed boycott it - esp. since there are plenty of Russian football fans who intend to fight as brutally as they can outside the matches. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/feb/16/england-fans-2018-world-cup-russia-hooligans I can’t understand why anyone ever pays to watch live football – but if people do, it shouldn’t be limited to those who can afford flights
Obviously kids need to be taught about birth control. But they should also be taught that, contrary to what our screens suggest, it's not necessary to have sex before marriage to enjoy life - and if more people did wait until marriage, there's be far, far less heartache, and less STIs (which also mean less NHS funding can be spent on other things) and accidental pregnancies. We've been conned into thinking everyone needs sex ASAP by the corporations that profit from doing so (not only companies selling condoms etc, but more so entertainment producers - sex sells, so it now floods media, and it's misled our society about what produces the greatest amount of long term happiness)
But you can't punish people for the perversion of other people who happen to be born in the same country as them. We need to crack down on sex offenders (such as by introducing chemical castration), not disallow people fleeing war entry on the basis that some people from the nations are pervs. We have sex offenders here, if the UK suddenly became a war zone like Syria is, would you be OK about being rejected a safe place to escape to on the basis of British pervs?
"Conversion therapy" is seriously misleading. Decades ago, some people used electric shock treatments; there's an entirely different practice now, of talking therapies. It's daft and frustrating that the latter is hated because it's wrongly associated with the former.
God has said that gay sex is wrong, but He loves all gay people - just as He loves all straight people, though we also sin. The Church needs to stand against bullying, but not affirm actions that God has instructed should be avoided.
Only a religion could encourage the doublethink of calling certain people abominations and then preaching that they are loved as all God's children.
The truth is, if you make a sacred decree that people are morally and spiritually inferior on the basis of their sexuality i.e. abominable and hellbound, you are enabling and empowering the worst kind of tribal bullying and hiding behind a cloak of self-righetousness in the process.
The truth is, if you make a sacred decree that people are morally and spiritually inferior on the basis of their sexuality i.e. abominable and hellbound, you are enabling and empowering the worst kind of tribal bullying and hiding behind a cloak of self-righetousness in the process.
no, you've completely ignored what I wrote. When did I call "certain people abominations"? I know that some Churches have done that but they aren't following Christ, so don't let them influence your decision about Him. And I suspect, given that you've misread my comment, that you might also have misunderstood some of the Churches you've believed to be hateful. It's the action that's wrong, that doesn't mean that the people are "an abomination" - they're loved beyond comprehension by God like everyone else.
What makes it worse, is they'll utterly waste many £millions more by holding tribunals when people appeal the erroneous decisions.
And yet Ricky Gervais manages to do so.
calling Ricky gervais stupid is a ridiculous comment, he is undoubtably more educated and enlightened than you are, hence his success.
perhaps he is more educated and enlightened than me, but that you state that to be "undoubtable" when you don't even know me demonstrates that you base your views on preference and not on information. I've observed Gervais make numerous seriously fallacious statements about the very most important things, and that many people happily trust him upsets and infuriates me.
I am woefully uniformed about the complexities of he NHS - and having been forced (by parents and doctors) to have NHS mental health treatment for over a decade, I'm not convinced that it's always a good use of limited funds. But obviously, it is sometimes vital, and what I really can't grasp is why some NHS money is spent on six figure salaries. The consultants and managers earning the very most should have pay cuts rather than expenditures like this ^ being cut.
David Suchet's audio Bible is something I listen to most days. But from endless discussions about Christianity on social media, it seems that most people haven't studied the Bible; they've found a few parts/verses that they object to, and use those as grounds to reject the entire thing, never investigating the contexts of the Bible's books, nor the huge field of philosophy and theology around Christianity. It would be like someone with no medical background picking up a high level book on surgery, seeing a line saying that an incision should be made and writing the entire field of surgery off as evil violence because it instructed cutting.
ALL humans sin. Jesus offers forgiveness, so that we can have eternal life with God (heaven) to EVERYONE. If we truly accept His offer we will naturally want to become more and more as He wants us to be. He accepts us all as sinners, but calls us to turn from sin, and gives us help in overcoming temptation, as well as far greater joy than anything else can.
I'd not realised that any kids were ever led to believe that the Easter bunny exists. What's insane is that the vast majority of people never investigate the actual miracle of Easter.
It didn't "backfire spectacularly" - some people tweeted angrily because they hate his beliefs. All public figures get angry tweets from the public. Perhaps Mike Pence gets more than most, that doesn't mean that his tweet yesterday was a spectacular mistake. All you do with articles like this is add to the division in society encouraging people on the left and right to hate each other more and more.
It baffles me that the media almost entirely ignores conflict in Africa, given that conflict in the Middle East is in the news often. Obviously, there should be no less concern about the latter than there is, but why is the former seemingly considered so much less tragic?
It is possible to support a person without agreeing with the choices they make in their sex life.
Why does she need a romantic/ sexual storyline at all? There's so much more to life, especially when you're the age of the target audience. There should be more characters who don't suggest that sex/romance is essential for enjoying life
This is tragic. Please don't let me come across unsympathetic, what these parents must be going through will be horrendous. But each day thousands of children die from totally preventable causes, due to poverty. Why don't they get more attention and funding? They could be saved for incredibly little money if only we valued children beyond our tiny island.
But the Bible makes it clear that marriage is good. St Paul says that singleness can be ideal in that it may leave more time for following God - but that singleness is not right for everyone, and that if a person feels romantic/sexual inclination, they should get married. The Bible also tells us not to break promises. I don't know breaking up with his fiance is the most Christian thing to do.
Tweets won't change the fact that Labour voters/ most of us millennials, firmly want for wealth and opportunities to be more equally distributed. I commented this on the original Telegraph piece, and had loads of people telling me that I want everything to be free and am lazy. Obviously it's fine if they think that I'm lazy, but it's disturbing that so many people seem to be under the delusion that all of us who are concerned about justice just expect handouts and that effort and wealth are perfectly correlated.
Well work for it instead of trying to just take other people's hard earned belongings and cash.
I agree, we absolutely should work. But you make the assumption that work and wealth are directly correlated, which is blatantly false. The reality is that the money one earns is very, very much determined by where they were born, which school they were sent to, which social contacts they/their parents have, what they inherit, and other things out of their control. There are plenty of people who work far, far harder than average, yet earn far, far less than average, because they've pulled short straws in terms of opportunities and life circumstances. So, the wealthiest people in the world, and in the UK, aren't those who put in the most hours of strenuous work, they're the people who happened to be born with a fantastic gene, very wealthy/well connected parents, amazingly lucky school/job offers etc.
The people who work hardest in the world are those in factories and farms in developing countries - they work 10-14 hour days, in grossly uncomfortable, often dangerous conditions, and still get paid so little that they live in slums and subsist mostly on rice. The situation in the UK is a microcosm of the Global problem - opportunities and circumstances out of a person's control in fact matter as much, or more, than whether they work hard.
This is just illustrative of what seems to be very, very common now - getting very angry about things rather than trying to actually do positive things in the world. If my generation put the time that we put on criticsing previous generations/ the right into actually helping those who are suffering, we might actually make he world slightly better. War is indeed horrible, kicking wreaths won't help those hurt by it. Similarly, protesting Trump (here in the UK) won't help the refugees etc that he's a threat to. Moaning about the sins of celebrities isn't in any way helping anyone. If we actually care about suffering and injustice, why aren't we instead using our time/energy to fundraise for people in need, and send letters/petitions to people in power on behalf of those who are disadvantaged?
We should challenge the killing - unfortunately kicking memorials won't do so. All he's doing is making many members of the public annoyed with pacifists or the left, as some of the other comments here show. Society just becomes more divided, no one is helped. If he wants to actually reduce the likelihood of more people dying in war, he should write to politcians explaining that he, a voter, wants their foreign policy to be less combative. Better still, he could start a petition/open letter for other people (his friends and or online) to add their names to, then send that politicians. Then the people who make the decisions might actually be slightly less likely to order the dropping of bombs.
It's clear from the desperation to smear Corbyn was accusations of Communism that the Tories know that they don't have good responses to The Labour Party's policies. Funny though, is that most of us millennials who like Jeremy Corbyn were born after the cold war, and don't have the same hatred that previous generations do of the concept of Communism. They really didn't think this smear tactic through
It's utterly vital that the problems in the aid sector are fixed - and that we don't let millions more innocent people suffer and die, because the actions of a few people within one charity lead us to donate less Aid. Foreign Aid is saving lives and of giving people in unimaginable poverty the tools that the need to become self sufficient.
Absolutely guns should be banned completely. No question. But keep in mind that here, we have frequent stabbings, and now, acid attacks. The underlying issue is human evil. In previous generations, most children's minds were influenced somewhat by being taught that we should seek to follow Jesus example and teaching; although many people became atheists or agnostic in later life, Christ as a role model when minds are most impressionable may have restrained a few people from violence. Obviously, plenty of adults who have no Christian belief, or upbringing, are fantastic human beings, and there are people who call themselves Christians but whose hearts clearly aren't trying to emulate Jesus. But a contributing factor in the current crime and conflict here and in the US must be fewer people trying to copy Christ.
The US is the most religious of any developed country and has the highest of homicides and gun crime, so I guess the answer must be elsewhere...
I'm well aware that the US is more "religious" - but those homicides are committed by people who aren't actually following Christ. Jesus Himself spent much of His time criticising that some who were most "religious" weren't actually in love with God.
If religion was based on any kind of truth, then maybe all the prayers would be working. Strange how they don't seem to be don't you think?
No, God gives people free will, so evil acts not stopping if people pray doesn't prove that He's not there. Parents don't give their kids everything that they want, even if the kids don't understand why, because the parents know far better what will be best for their children. God knows far, far, far better than humans do what is best for them. For us to claim that problems in the world disprove God is to make the assumption that there aren't reasons beyond our knowledge, and that the best thing would just be for life to be perfect. In fact, eternity in "heaven" is incomparably better than a more pleasant lifetime - but we'll miss out on it if we don't choose to accept Christ's offer. So things in life that are in themselves bad may have further effects on Earth that are positive - the recent tragedy might lead to families uniting and guns being restricted - but ultimately might be what prompts people to turn to God and spend eternity in bliss.
Americans make up less than 5 percent of the world’s population yet own roughly 42 percent of all the world’s privately held firearms. Whatever Christ, God or the Holy Spirit has to with all this is beyond my comprehension
That Americans own more guns per person can't inform us about their views or behaviour, because law and societal norms determine whether a person owns a gun. But indeed, there are plenty of people in America who call themselves Christian because it's a cultural label they like, and actually aren't following God at all. Don't base your opinion of Christ on people who simply call themselves Christians and act otherwise, base your views on Christ Himself.
Not a very convincing argument. Never heard of pedophile priests?
People without a religion are able to behave in a moral fashion just as easily as those who claim a religion are able to behave immorally.
People without a religion are able to behave in a moral fashion just as easily as those who claim a religion are able to behave immorally.
Of course I have, and you're clearly missing what I'm saying - enrolling in seminary and becoming a priest doesn't involve any test that analyses your true heart/mind, so individuals who aren't actually following Christ could become priests. If a person is a peadophile, they'll be keen to enter a profession where they have access to kids alone, so some become priests for that purpose; that doesn't change the fact that Christ taught that children should be protected, or that the Bible tells us to be sexually pure.
So who does qualify as a true Christian? Does the President qualify?
I can't tell, I really don't know what's going on in his heart/mind - certainly, if he is, he hasn't been one for most of his life, and it really doesn't appear that he is now, either. But it's between him and God.
I eat chicken and I'm ashamed, we have nothing to stand up for. If meat can be grown in a lab we should all be genuinely very, very pleased. There's nothing intrinsically good about the fact that animals are killed for our nutrition (let alone enjoyment)
Wow. The ignorance (of The Independent) is astounding. In short, Billy Graham was not homophobic, and had infinitely more important messages to deliver than anything about sex. But you'd rather just believe any prejudiced nonsense you can find, wouldn't you?
We were a Christian country - Christianity teaches that all human beings have the potential goodness (whether they're Christian or not) but also are flawed. We are no longer a Christian generation - and my generation seems desperate for new idols having abandoned God, then we can't cope when they show themselves to be imperfect. Each side of the political spectrum leaps on the failings of an idol of the other side in attempts to prove their own political stance superior, as though flaws of individuals prove whole organisations, ideologies or political parties to be wrong.
It really makes no sense that people wouldn't[give to Oxfam]. Foreign Aid does far more, £ for £, than any of the other things we can spend our money on. Sex scandals, horrifically, are evidently everywhere. I doubt that we’re going to stop feeding Hollywood money where widespread sexual crimes have been exposed. If less money is donated to foreign aid charities, scores of innocent people will miss out on relief from agonising hunger, squalor and disease.
Much of humanity have access to almost no meat (nor poultry). We in Britain can buy a kilo of chicken breast for 1/2 an hour's minimum wage. I really don't know why some people are complaining about lacking KFC. The cost of a meal from KFC could instead provide a live chicken (to lay eggs, ongoingly) for an impoverished family - which would be far more satisfying.
What one person thinks of another person's Christianity doesn't matter in itself - what matters is when it leads them to abuse those of faith, and that they usually haven't actually bothered to investigate the evidence supporting Christianity themselves.
It's such a shame that my peers can't use their concern for equality and respect for the mistreated to instead raise awareness about people who are suffering most. Why is so much time spent debating things like this instead of the injustices of Global poverty and slavery?
But I've seen tonnes of hateful comments. And I'm grieving (that is, actually crying, which I almost never do) not because Billy Graham's gone, we know that he's in a better place, and that the opinions of others won't affect him; but because I the criticism is a reflection of how utterly anti-God so much of my generation is. I can't bear it.
I don't necessarily think that they should have been told that they couldn't foster (the question should be what's best for the child, the Bible doesn't say that The Holy family needs to be mirrored)- but if the couple genuinely care about doing good, they wouldn't now be trying to sue a charity.
Not that it's not utterly unacceptable to hack/share nude photos of other people (it's evil) - but people really should stop taking taking naked pictures of themselves. (Seriously, I absolutely feel massively sorry for the victims, I just felt that compelled to say that)
It's crucial that the problems in the aid sector are fixed - and that we don't let millions more innocent people suffer - and die - because the actions of a few people within one charity lead us to donate less Aid. OverseasAid saves lives, and is giving people in unimaginable poverty the tools that the need to become self sufficient.
Why not use the time and money spent on following pop to instead campaign for and donate to impoverished Afro/Caribbean nations instead? There are children in the nations from where dreadlocks originate who don't are malnourished, unable to go to school, likely to be trapped in a life of poverty. If LittleMix fans who buy concert tickets instead used that money to sponsor those children, they could make a real difference.
Really? I'd argue that it's more ethical to buy the cheapest brands possible (I buy in bulk on ebay) and give the money saved to the world's most impoverished humans. The difference between one of these^ items, and minimum cost makeup, could sponsor a girl to receive education and more for a month.
As a Londoner, I really, really hope that you don't have to put up with with this absurdity (guns) much longer. However, please know that it's not as straightforward as I wish it were to eliminate violence; we have a rapidly rising issue with stabbings, and many teenagers taking knives to school (partly because they're scared of other kids at school with knives of course). Both of our nations need most of all to heal the conflict in our societies.
It's weird. More and more people assume that Christianity is a fairytale, without actually looking at the historical reasons that it was believed by previous generations, and instead seem to believe something for which there's no reason or evidence at all.
Seriously? You're so desperate to trash Jeremy Corbyn that you want to link him to allegations against someone he'd never even met? That Corbyn "mourned" the homeless person is because he has a heart, and cares about human beings, unlike a worrying number of Britons, it would seem. Corbyn obviously knew nothing of the man's alleged crimes, trying to criticise Corbyn like this defies logic.
Jesus rarely got angry - but people who pretended to be following God whilst in fact clearly not trying to follow God at all, made Jesus furious.
Saint or sinner? What word would you use to describe Jack these days? Don't miss today's special episode of Neighbours
Frustrating. Someone who truly loved God wouldn't just abandon Him as Jack has. If he felt that being a priest wasn't what he was meant to do then fine - but he seems to have given up Christianity entirely for no reason other than bending him for storylines. And there was NEVER ANY NEED TO CHOOSE BETWEEN PRIESTHOOD AND FATHERHOOD anyway - the Bible never commands faith leaders to be single.
Sorry but a catholic priest can not be married unless he was married before becoming a priest. So jack can not be a catholic priest and have a relationship.
I'm aware that Catholic priests are supposed to be single - I'm just frustrated that the first Christian character I've seen in a soap in years had their story line hinged on an idea that's not even Biblical - and that now he's ditched Christianity as a result. I was desperate for him to marry Paige and remain a minister. That would also have allowed for great storylines, better than his character does now. As other commenters have said, the character's naff now, he's lacking any discernable personality.
If Christians want a soap opera about people properly following their faith they can pay for it themselves and run it on a subscription only channel
Why? I wasn't demanding a Christian character, I'm annoyed by how the only Christian character mis represented Christianity. Statistically, practicing Christians are roughly as common as LGBT people, and Neighbours(along with other soaps) have far, far more of them. Even if you think Christianity is nonsense, having a few characters who follow it gives potential for a wider range of interesting storylines. Most interesting though, is why are you yourself evidently angry about Christianity? I hope that you've not been hurt by someone who called themself a Christian but acted in an unChristlike way, there are quite a few such people
It truly is tragic that The Independent feels the need to post and repost about sex so often. Someone there needs a more fufilling life and or better relationships.
If people don't talk about sex, we end up with people like the entire Catholic church though.
Why do you have to be "like the Catholic Church" if you don't discuss sex regularly? All of the people I know discuss sex less often than The Independent posts about it, and aren't Catholic.
Great - but more importantly, can our politicians crack down on exploitation of cocoa pickers? They're horrendously underpaid, so much that they're struggling to survive, and some are enslaved. Our politicians should force corporations to ensure that all of the human beings within their supply chains are treated and paid fairly - it's far, far more serious than most issues within the UK (in that the suffering of plantation workers is so extreme)
Belief in God is not hereditary. Every child must, must be informed about the arguments for and against belief in God, so that they can make up their own minds. Meanwhile our culture, including The Independent, mostly treats those who believe in God as idiots, and doesn't actually examine the scientific, historical and philosophical points that support God's existence. Each child should be enabled to work out what they personally conclude is the Truth. We mustn't simply consume the faith of parents, peers, or society.
Annually, £100 million worth / around 350,000 tonnes of used clothing goes to landfill in the UK. People have literally died because of our culture's obsession with new clothes; factory owners keen to minimise their costs disregard fundamental safety measures, and innocent workers have been slaughtered when factory buildings have collapsed or burned down. Workers have no choice but to work agonising 12 hour days, and receive barely enough pay to survive.
Micah 6:8 "He [God] has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." The extent to which some people are criticising and attacking Trump is unChristian - but Trump is indeed being UnChristian by being boastful, and lacking concern for non-Americans in poverty.
A lot us of would, to some extent really like to consume an enormous amount of chocolate, ice cream, fast food or alcohol - we don't because animalistic urges aren't actually condusive to maximal enjoyment of life. We must, must, must not let the glamourisation of sex on screen mislead us into thinking that affairs would make us happy.
Unfortunately all organisations have some unkind people within them - but of greatest significance is that we have a change of government to a party that has more concern for the underprivileged than the Tory party has.
If only the Pope could instead focus on telling the world about Jesus...
We really should more often bear in mind that we ourselves are super rich compared to much of humanity. Having access to education, healthcare, emergency services, benefits if needed, job opportunities and so much more makes us immensely privileged to the majority of the world. And it's the result of greed by our ancestors and corporations - so we really should have a bit more public discussion than we do about the impoverished people beyond our borders.
We struggle to eat healthily enough and to get enough exercise - it's still better for us to try; temptations don't necessarily provide long term happiness. Monogamy is, by far the most effective way of minimising risk of STIs, including HIV, and accidental pregnancies - and is dramatically for emotional/mental wellbeing (in part, obviously, because oxytocin is released during sex - we're designed for long term bonding). My generation is going to miss out on the happy lifelong marriages that are providing so much comfort to many of our grandparents right now.
I'm resigned to the fact that I'll never be able to afford a home. But I'm ridiculously privileged to have a roof over my head. I tell my parents regularly that they must feel free to ask me to move out, right now I'm insanely fortunate to be able to sleep on their sofa. I can get their chores done - and when their older I can be a carer for them. The government needs to make lots of bedsits and communal living homes available, ASAP; and to pair up millennials needing accommodation with elderly people needing assistance (using DBS checks and security cameras to protect vulnerable elderly from potential abuse). Most of all, I'm concerned for the human beings elsewhere who are living in slums in developing countries - with no protection from crime, no education, no job opportunities and no welfare sate.
Southbank Centre pulls advertising from Daily Mail after ‘homophobic’ column about Tom Daley by Richard Littlejohn
Why are companies only pulling out of the Daily Fail after this, and haven't done when it's repeatedly tried to stop Foreign Aid? Why aren't these companies, if they think that removing ads from the DM is a way to protest (which it is of course) stop adverstising with it when it printed many stories aimed at turning readers against the world's very poorest people?
Stop using cafes, use shop bought coffee at home, and give the money saved to the world's poorest people, who don't even have clean water to drink or comfortable homes. (Apologies that that sounded very bossy, I didn't mean it to! I only think it's exciting how much difference can be made with the cost of cafe beverages if they're donated instead - we can truly transform lives)
I wish you wouldn't share things like this. Unfortunately, some of us just can't escape anxiety about not having narrow enough waists (I've had anorexia for a decade, including being sectioned) as much as we might want to just ignore it.
Only in recent years have I been particularly aware of the practical potential of my first name - more than anything else about me I love that my name means I have easier opportunities to explain the Gospel. I only wish it were less common, I've always felt that it's nice for names to not be the same as too many other people - which is why it always seems odd to me the most commonly chosen names have stayed largely the same for years.
But will this not just make the issue less visible? This idea could truly have a seriously adverse effect on the problem, since puppy farmers will develop better online or black market methods and be harder to track than when selling through pet shops.
Justin Trudeau tells woman to say 'peoplekind' not 'mankind'
He puts desperation to maximise his reputation as progressive over respect for a citizen, and over common sense. We all know that "man" in mankind refers to species, it has nothing to do with gender. Arguably, he's alienating us women from the species.
Celebrate the centenary of women voting
Why is our society, rightly, keen for the female half of the population to have equality, yet unconcerned about the half of humanity who have so, so, so much less than we do? I'm absolutely in favour of equal rights and opportunities for women; but people born in poorer countries face serious injustice, incomparably worse than us females do here. There's almost no discussion about them, whilst there are constant headlines about actresses getting paid slightly less than actors etc. As a female, I'm far more concerned about the people suffering most of all - in refugee camps, on plantations, in sweatshops and slums - couldn't a bit more media attention and public concern be given to them?
Marriage, statistically, is closely linked to better health, longer lifespan, reduced life problems (imprisonment, depression, alcoholism and others) in children, reduced dementia risk and more. It's a tragedy that it's so often avoided or broken in our current society.
The sex that people choose to have is not related to their academic work. We need to challenge hatred of LGBTQ people, not make out that they're more different from straight people than they are. Why, why, why would you want to create anything other than unity between straight and queer people? A course on queer academia needs to be completely unnecessary, because individuals' sexuality is nothing to do with their studies.
Life for some of the human beings who happen to be born into certain countries is indeed s*** - because of the centuries of injustice that have made us - the West - rich, and left other nations impoverished, and vulnerable to corrupt governments taking power. That's why we should want to help them, not show utter inhumanity to those desperate to migrate. It’s not possible for everyone who’d like to migrate to the West to do so – but we must at least have compassion, and seek ways to help their countries develop. What would we, or Trump, have done with our lives if we’d been born into one of the countries he mentioned? Many have no options or opportunities; of course they want to come here. We need to do far more to support infrastructure and education so that their nations can become places where people can help themselves.
Does she know whether or not the skin dyes used had been tested on animals? And whether or not the tattoo artist had trained using animal skin (which I believe is common for tattoo practice)?
It makes me so, so, so angry that she so often holds up a cross; the group calls itself Britain First, but Jesus died on the cross to put others first.
Couldn't we run a big fundraising event instead of waving angry placquards? Protests are designed to affect change – but we can’t change the fact that Trump is president. If this gathering were a fundraiser, it would seriously help the countries he described as s***holes. A protest won't cause a tangible change, but WILL make some of the Brits who are fans of Trump more fervently racist. Let's have big signs at cake sale tables saying things like "Buy Cake to Support Those Who Live In S***holes Where No One Has Access To It" (but perhaps more concisely) - charity auctions, tombolas, raffles etc, with plaquards saying things like "Fundraising to Not Put Ourselves First" and "Compassion Trumps Greed"
The Gov. really, really needs to orchestrate turning existing empty buildings into homes too; create a way for young people who can't afford rent to be housed (inc. safety checks etc) with elderly people who want company/help; and to enthuse more young people about careers in construction.
Nick Vujicic was born with no limbs. He's become an internationally famous writer and motivational speaker - and seeks to tell the world about Jesus.
Atheists unwaveringly argue that illness, disabilities and birth defects prove that God doesn't exist, or is sadistic. Yet plenty of people who face the most severe difficulties are prompted to turn to God - and find deeper joy and fulfillment than the majority of Westerners. If it's true that Christ rose from the dead, He's the one human who's demonstrated victory over death. The concept of heaven has no evidence to support it; other than Christ telling us that He is the Way. So consider - perhaps physical difficulties are permitted by God, because they can be what we need for our natural stubbornness to be overcome sufficiently for us to turn to Jesus, and consequently receive eternal life, in which all suffering will have ended forever.In addition to their individual talents and personalities, people with disabilities are a blessing to the rest of us in numerous ways. One, is that they remind us of the value of human life; our society suggests constantly implies that achieving more and having "perfect" bodies is important; yet when we see individuals with actual handicaps (which is not to imply that they aren't talented and beautiful of course) we know instinctively that they are immeasurably precious. We are reminded that achieving certain standards is irrelevant; all human beings are priceless simply on account of being human. (so sorry if that sounded at all insulting, I probably haven't expressed myself well)
I HATE that she so often holds up a cross; the group calls itself Britain First, but Jesus died on the cross to put others first.
Jesus never existed!
Wow. How did you reach that conclusion? Did you also fall for the lies that Hilary Clinton is part of a pizza restaurant based peadophile ring, and that Obama is in fact a shape shifting lizard? Have you actually bothered to look at the evidence and assess it for yourself, or just clung to a statement you've heard and liked? You may not come to the conclusion that you want to follow Christ, but you seriously, seriously need to get informed. A few people have claimed that Jesus didn't exist, since it's a way to sell books. But there's more than enough evidence, and we can each read tonnes of different articles about that evidence to form a conclusion - saying that Jesus didn't exist is to ignorantly ignore, rather than evaluate complex archeology. https://is.gd/jEiYOO https://is.gd/m6MzKK https://is.gd/LTVzAj
It always seems a shame to me that those spending time with such accusations can't instead use that time to fight for justice for the black people dying in po
The gender pay gap is utterly wrong, obviously. But female BBC presenters aren't suffering. Couldn't we spend a bit more time talking about justice for the many, many human beings who earn less than 1/100th of that salary for far more tiring hours (farming the things that we consume)? Agony exists for many people because of corporations underpaying farmers and sweatshop workers in developing countries, and we’re all using the resulting items daily, yet that unfair pay story is almost entirely ignored.
Maajid Nawaaz "Eh?? Anti gay-rights conservative Muslims are using my term #RegressiveLeft to describe *progressive leftists* in Muslim majority countries who rightly criticise Muslim homophobia. This is *precisely* the opposite meaning of the phrase that I coined 🤔"
I think that progressive and regressive should never have become linked to some of the issues that they are. Progress an regress are primarily words with meaning separate from politics and morality, and I feel that sometimes, using them in contexts like this can oversimplify an extremely complex topic. Consider this - in ancient Greece and Rome, all manner of sexual relationships were socially accepted. God's guidance that people shouldn't have gay sex then arrived with Christianity, and so as Christianity "progress"ed through the ancient world, was away from liberal attitudes to sex. In individuals who ceased to follow Christ's example, sometimes human evil developed such that they abused Gay people, so they "progressive"ly became cruel, rather than Christ like to them. Today people's motivations and actions towards gay people are so varied, using progressive and regressive might, I feel, be unhelpful. Can we fight the abuse of gay people without creating division with those who simply disapprove of gay sex and never do harm?
God desperately wants us to choose to follow Him. Whether or not we go to the cinema on a Sunday is meaningless by comparison.
I reckon that if we all gave the money spent on bottled water to charities like WaterAid UK instead, it wouldn't take long to end the agony of water poverty around the world. The offshoots (reduced disease, children able to go to school rather than carry water etc) would be astounding.
Does she know whether or not the skin dyes used had been tested on animals? And whether or not the tattoo artist had trained using animal skin (which I believe is common for tattoo practice)?
But we're living in a time with tonnes of great online educational resources - parents should use these. The stress that homework causes both teachers and some students can be truly horrendous.
Eminem keeps slamming Donald Trump, saying he doesn’t care if he loses half his fans
Why does he not instead direct his anger towards greed, selfishness and racism themselves, so that some people would actually reconsider their own attitudes and perhaps make society better? Greed, selfishness and racism are the actual problems, not Trump. Trump's fans who are those things aren't that way because of him - and all of us, myself included, are sometimes greedy, selfish etc. We each need to challenge those things, instead we tend to overlook them, because we think that Trump's worse, and things aren't made better.
Why doesn't she instead use the time/media attention she's using for this cause to instead campaign for the millions of Africans currently suffering (in large part because of Western greed)?
Not that he should have to, but on an MP salary, he could offer to arrange a trip to Auschwitz for the Holocaust denier, it would be interesting to see how they responded....
Of course - Jesus's response to the woman caught in adultery is the best example we have of how to behave towards participants of sexual sin. But the greatest danger for anyone is to be tempted (such as by sex) away from God and thus missing out on eternal life. Which is of course not to say that discrimination is OK or that gay people can't have eternal life; but for every one of us, separation from God is the greatest danger, and we need to each constantly try to grow closer to God, which may well include terminating behaviours that He's told us not to participate in.
It's good that the increase in people needing elderly care is coinciding with substantial availability of home surveillance technology - hidden cameras need to standard in settings where elderly people are at risk, to deter and catch abusive "carers".
Couldn't we run a big fundraising event instead of waving angry placquards? Protests are designed to affect change – but we can’t change the fact that Trump is president. If this gathering were a fundraiser, it would seriously help the countries he described as s***holes. A protest won't cause a tangible change, but WILL make some of the Brits who are fans of Trump more fervently racist. Let's have big signs at cake sale tables saying things like "Buy Cake to Support Those Who Live In S***holes Where No One Has Access To It" (but perhaps more concisely) - charity auctions, tombolas, raffles etc, with plaquards saying things like "Fundraising to Not Put Ourselves First" and "Compassion Trumps Greed"
A meal deal costs enough more than homemade lunch to feed a starving child for a week or more. We should all avoid meal deals, cafes, sandwich shops etc so we can save lives.
Because of it, numerous people who wouldn't otherwise, have taken up dancing, thus increasing their exercise and many aspects of health - so it's had an actual positive effect beyond entertainment.
School is no where near helpful enough for careers and adulthood. Help with finding the jobs to which individuals are best suited, how to get into those sectors, and how to cope with bills, banking etc should replace curriculum material that isn't essential.
Should we, maybe, spend slightly less time (less, not none) criticising things #Trump says or does, so that we can use use that brain space to instead consider and discuss how we can make the world a better place? Wallowing in hatred to the extent that many people are isn’t healthy. We can all use a reminder to discipline ourselves to do better – him bragging about putting America first rather than aiming at the best for humanity, helps me remember that I need to do better at putting others first.
Why would I want to fight for "her" to decide? I'm glad that aid money is being directed away from killing developing humans. Clinics that have been performing abortions should stop performing abortions - claiming they've been forced to close such that vital services are lost is non-sensical. The gag isn't stopping the health care services people need, and there'd be more resources available for those services if abortions weren't being performed. Staff performing abortions should instead by working to educate about contraception. We should be helping people in developing countries - including giving far, far more aid - not supporting the slaughter of the very youngest humans.
I was given a makeover aged 12 by older students for the school magazine. I couldn't bear to be bare faced from then on, and broke down in tears when teachers eventually demanded I take off my make up. The school sent me to a psychiatrist. I sound like an idiot, and I am - but we need to be more aware of the impact things like this have on young people. If I went through it now, in the Instagram age, it would have been even worse. Makeovers like this truly are harmful.
Why are the hundreds of people who've been involved in creating these films all being punished for one person's actions?
No it wasn't. God calls us to "act justly and love mercy"; and "love others as we love ourselves" - not to cruelly, unjustly cause suffering as this couple did.
Maybe you would be better off without him now - but what about when you're 60, 70, 80...? No one reading about another person's marraige would understand it well enough to say whether it should continue or end - but I'd urge whoever wrote this to consider that if it's possible to stay together, they'll appreciate the companionship later on. Marriage, statistically, is closely linked to better health, longer lifespan, reduced life problems (imprisonment, depression, alcoholism and others) in children, reduced dementia risk and more. It's a tragedy that it's so often avoided or broken in our current society.
More intelligent people know that individual sibling pairs/groups vary significantly, so headlines like this one are fairly meaningless. I'm the eldest, but my sisters are definitely more intelligent than me.
Trump asked why the US is letting in people from s***hole countries:
Trump is partially right; there's stunning nature; but life for some of the human beings who happen to be born into certain countries is *curseword* - because of the centuries of injustice
(it’s ongoing) that have made us - the West - rich and left other nations impoverished, and vulnerable to corrupt governments taking power. That's why we should want to help them, not show utter inhumanity to those desperate to migrate. It’s not possible for everyone who’d like to migrate to the West to do so – but we must at least have compassion, and seek ways to help their countries develop. What would we, or Trump, have done with our lives if we’d been born into one of the countries he mentioned? Many have no options or opportunities; of course they want to come here. We need to support infrastructure and education so that their nations can become places where people can help themselves.
I contacted supermarkets RE Fair trade:
Thankyou for your services! Yet I am deeply aggrieved about what is the most important aspect of groceries.
Living in the UK, we are extremely fortunate. The vast majority of humanity has no where near so many products to enjoy; items that we take for granted are for many, entirely unaffordable and or out of reach. What makes this even more outrageously unjust is that amongst these people are those who provide us with so many of our staples. Cotton, coffee, cocoa products, tea, rice, sugar numerous fruits are available to us because of the gruelling labour of people who themselves have barely enough resources to survive. This MUST be fought. How can it be right that, whilst we debate which brands have the best flavour, the individuals whose toil produced them must live off rice? How can we allow innocent people to be made to endure 12+ hour long days of tortuous work?
This matters far, far more to me than any other issue; I urge you, please, to consider tackling it in any way that you can. You will improve your reputation amongst the public hugely – especially since millennials are, on average, more concerned about social justice than older generations, as well as more interconnected (including discussing purchases and food on social media etc); so it is a crucial future investment to support Fairtrade. More importantly, you have the power to influence change that will utterly transform countless lives.
Huge thanks!
Commentary on Unbelievable discussion between David Robertson and Johnathon Bartley RE Tim Farron's unfair treatment:
On what basis does he conclude that his view on homosexuality is, as he said “just as Biblical” as Tim’s? Perhaps he views the Bible verses that forbid gay sex as somehow no longer valid – but they are Biblical, there is no Biblical verse advocating his view that gay sex is fine.
How can it be that, as Johnathon suggested, people shouldn’t join a political party if they have different views to that party on gay sex? There are almost never bills in parliament relating to it, and as David said, there are no political parties with any seats that hold to the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality. And surely, as a Christian, he should want for there to be more Christians in politics? Not because we should be biased towards people like us, but because if he’s a Christian he would surely want to see God’s guidance to be considered in how our nation is run(?) I agree with Johnathon that we shouldn’t complain of “persecution”, especially given the torture endured by Christians elsewhere in the world; but it’s blatantly obvious that Farron was targeted because of being a Christian. The word Sin is used in our society now almost exclusively as a positive term in marketing lingerie and chocolate. In fact sin means to miss the mark, to not adhere to God’s standards, and so most people in Britain don’t truly believe that sin exists, they simply feel, or claim to feel, offended.
For Johnathon to suggest that homosexual sex is fine because the Church has changed views on slavery and womens’ roles is seriously erroneous – we simply cannot conflate very separate, complex issues, each of which require specific discussion, exploring their respective related Bible references and societal considerations. For example, the Bible does not directly condemn owning slaves, since it was written to a culture in which to ban slavery would have distracted too much from the Gospel; Churches several centuries ago wrongly failed to highlight the Bible’s teachings about love for one another as a basis for ending slavery – this matter is entirely different from homosexuality, which the Bible specifically gives teaching on, and which is not a setting specific societal structure in the way that slavery was.
It can’t be said enough; this debate is not about gay orientation – most voices I’ve heard/read among the general public and media presume that sex is an obligatory part of life and that Christians hate people for having an orientation that they didn’t choose. We, as Christians, must make it clear that we don’t define people by their sexuality, nor blame people for their feelings. Life without sex is very possible, and life with God is better than sex. We must make it clear that bullying of gay people is and has always been utterly inexcusable and antithetical to Christianity. And we must make it clear that, regardless of whether we deem gay sex to be a sin, we know that we are all sinners, in desperate need of Christ.Other recent comments:
It baffles me that so many people pay for gym memberships, when you could use that money to sponsor a child instead. If you buy spinlock dumbbells and a small cardio machine (small treadmill, exercise bike etc) you can exercise at home, any time without having to travel, in privacy, whilst watching TV (or listening to college lectures, audiobooks, podcasts etc), with snacks and drinks immediately available etc... And with the money you save on gym fees, you can change an impoverished child’s life – and future – entirely.
Marriage, statistically, is closely linked to better health, longer lifespan, reduced life problems (imprisonment, depression, alcoholism and others) in children, reduced dementia risk and more. It's a tragedy that it's so often avoided or broken in our current society.
Obviously the gender pay gap is utterly wrong. But couldn't we spend a bit more time talking about justice for the many, many human beings who earn less than 1/100th of that salary for far more tiring hours (farming the things that we consume)? Far, far, far more suffering exists in the world because of corporations underpaying farmers and sweatshop workers in developing countries, and we’re all using the resulting items daily, yet that unfair pay story is almost entirely ignored.
We should travel less - a £300 holiday costs enough to provide one of the world's poorest children with a year's sponsorship (education, healthcare and more) - ditching overseas holidays would enable us to change the future of an innocent suffering child, and their family, completely.. It would also be very, very good for the environment (to stop flying) and UK staycations could help the seaside towns where there's some of the most financial hardship. (and it saves us planning time, travel vaccinations, language issues etc)
Nearly all of us have somewhere comfortable to live, electrical appliances, endless entertainment via TV and the internet, an endless array of choices of food and drink to enjoy, healthcare, help from emergency services, an education, and so, so much more. Many people elsewhere in the world - and our great great grandparents - don't/didn't have these; yet we rarely remember to be happy about them. Even if the news isn't great, we still have great things and should be grateful.
Kids are growing up in a society where it is assumed that Christianity is outdated, primitive fiction. Teaching kids about the Bible is obviously, utterly wonderful – yet it may well be futile without good teaching about WHY WE CAN BE CERTAIN THAT CHRISTIANITY IS TRUE. We need to learn, from an early age, the evidence and reasoning for Christianity - our generation (millennials and younger) genuinely believe a lot of things about Christianity that are factually wrong (such as when the Bible was written) because the media, atheist writers etc have propagated misinformation (that's ultimately led most people to genuinely believe that Christianity is a "fairytale"). I was raised by genuinely Christian parents, and attended Church (with good Sunday schooling etc) - but I didn't really believe in God until I discovered the scientific, historical and philosophical evidence. Once I did, my heart was open to actually develop a relationship with Him, and now my greatest joy and goal in life is to help and to witness other people discovering Him also. This is good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCoBaM_v9aM
Meanwhile, most of the planet's are human beings can't access basic surgery when they desperately need it to survive.
I'm resigned to the fact that I'll never be able to afford a home. I tell my parents regularly that they must feel free to ask me to move out, right now I'm insanely fortunate to be able to sleep on their sofa. I can get their chores done - and when their older I can be a carer for them. The government needs to make lots of bedsits and communal living homes available, ASAP, so that more people can afford to buy a roof over their heads, even if with little space, rather than be trapped in paying rent for decades.
It's blatantly obvious that Trump is o where near close enough to God - we need to pray that he will grow closer to God, and we should look at Trump's wrong actions and attitudes and strive to avoid them ourselves; including in the far milder forms those wrongs may take. For example, we've not sexually assaulted anyone as he supposedly has, but we can be reminded by Trump having done so to become more pure of mind than however we currently are. When we witness Trump lacking compassion to refugees, it should prompt us to do more than we are right now to help them. Trump wanting to put America first should remind us to make sure we're putting others before ourselves. And he reminds us that we needn't use fake tan or sunbeds.CHRISTianity is to follow the example and teachings of Christ. Racism and lack of compassion for immigrants is not Christian. Christ died to offer us eternal life, putting us before Himself, Britain"first" cannot be Christian.
No comments:
Post a Comment