Census: Less than half of England and Wales population identifies as Christian

So you count the unbaptized mass killer Jeffery Dahmer amongst your creed? That's important to know.

this a juvenile “argument.” Dahmer, who became a Christian is no more a representation of atheism than Vlad the Impaler is of Christianity
He was indeed an atheist. He despised Christianity and had no other religion except his own cult.
no

he was a Christian

the Nazis were Christian
 
I don't know where you got that jingle from.

Bad things should go away, and I think that religion is a bad thing.
That is why your atheeist Komrades blew up thousands of churches and killed thousands of clergy.

Wicked atheeist fundies.

Then they even punished citizens who fed and supported retired clergy.'

Killer hatred.
 
That is why your atheeist Komrades blew up thousands of churches and killed thousands of clergy.

Wicked atheeist fundies.

Then they even punished citizens who fed and supported retired clergy.'

Killer hatred.
Didn’t you used to claim to be of Russian descent?
 
this a juvenile “argument.” Dahmer, who became a Christian is no more a representation of atheism than Vlad the Impaler is of Christianity
Vlad the Impaler was fighting a genocidal war against the Ottoman turks, who were intend on invading Europe. The circumstances of his impaling thousands of muslims in a time of war were exceptional.

no

he was a Christian

the Nazis were Christian
You are absolutely clueless, and dangerous, as this proves you to be a deluded slanderer. The Nazis put Christians who wouldn't fight to death.

Hitler hated Judaism. But he loathed Christianity, too.
 
this a juvenile “argument.” Dahmer, who became a Christian is no more a representation of atheism than Vlad the Impaler is of Christianity

no

he was a Christian

the Nazis were Christian
Do you know what a nazi is? Do you know what a Chtistian is?
 
this a juvenile “argument.” Dahmer, who became a Christian is no more a representation of atheism than Vlad the Impaler is of Christianity

no

he was a Christian

the Nazis were Christian
Except that Hitler is no more representative of Christianity than Dahmer is of atheism or Vlad is of Christianity

I dont see your point
 
Vlad the Impaler was fighting a genocidal war against the Ottoman turks, who were intend on invading Europe. The circumstances of his impaling thousands of muslims in a time of war were exceptional.


You are absolutely clueless, and dangerous, as this proves you to be a deluded slanderer. The Nazis put Christians who wouldn't fight to death.

Hitler hated Judaism. But he loathed Christianity, too.
Never heard anyone defend Dracula before

Hitler and the Nazis were Christians
 
Didn’t you used to claim to be of Russian descent?
No.

Our people moved from Germany to Russia 500 years ago. All the history I have in books is written in German. Left Russia after 1860's
Didn't you say I claimed to be the largest organic farmer in Texas?
 
Vlad the Impaler was fighting a genocidal war against the Ottoman turks, who were intend on invading Europe. The circumstances of his impaling thousands of muslims in a time of war were exceptional.


You are absolutely clueless, and dangerous, as this proves you to be a deluded slanderer. The Nazis put Christians who wouldn't fight to death.

Hitler hated Judaism. But he loathed Christianity, too.
killing millions of Christians is 5 million proofs he wasn't one.
 
No.

Our people moved from Germany to Russia 500 years ago. All the history I have in books is written in German. Left Russia after 1860's
Didn't you say I claimed to be the largest organic farmer in Texas?
so when you say “no,” you are lying?

I mean you directly contradict yourself
 
Never heard anyone defend Dracula before
Dracula was the product of an unforgiven degenerate gay atheist Bram Stoker. Vald Dracul refused to be ruled by muslims. He was certainly a major sinner (probably mentally unstable), but not in the Bram Stoker way.

Hitler and the Nazis were Christians
Your lying propaganda. In saying so you disclose yourself to be a Nazi apologist.
 
It's only ludicrous because you support doing all of those (beyond the pedophilia), as if there is nothing immoral or improper with them. That is the difference between thee and me. I believe in a moral standard. You do not.
We both have a moral standard. They just aren't the same.
So if I tell a homosexual he or she is not welcome around my grandchildren am I abusing either of the homosexuals? Is that discrimination to prohibit them from being around my grandchildren?
No, but it is crazy. A homosexual isn't the same as a paedophile, and homosexuality isn't contagious. Statistically speaking your grandchildren are much more at risk from you than from a random stranger, whatever their sexuality.
Is that threatening in some way? None of those apply. And yet, I would be called a "homophobe", a "hate monger" and equal to the taliban or isis and guilty of "hate speech".
Someone with an irrational fear or loathing of homosexuals is by definition a homophobe. Not equal to the Taliban, and not guilty of hate speech, unless your actions actually included hate speech. Frankly, the people who would condemn you the most would be your grandchildren. They presumably are not fools. They go to school and mix with other kids. The read and watch TV. They will see society's moral views , not just yours. You may well find to that intemperance on your part on this subject will drive them away, both from you and your faith.

p.s. I'm no martyr. Just a man who will not compromise his faith. Obviously that offends you or you wouldn't have ended your paragraph with what you wrote.
A martyr is someone who will not compromise his faith in the face of hardship and suffering. Sometimes, the hardship and suffering is imaginary. That's the point I was making.
 
The vitreol and law suits between lgbt and lgb, between ideologues and many homosexuals, shows it hasnt finished.
Your data is old bro!
I didn't say it had finished. Even the fight against racism isn't finished. The pockets of vitriol are shrinking, however.
 
So if people can choose to use traditional pronouns associated with the sexes, transactivists cant insist they dont? Right?
No. But they can call them out for deadnaming and abuse, and in certain circumstances, not all, there would be justification in further action. This could be bullying or harassment.
 
Just your opinion again
That's what we have here. This whole debate is just opinion. That's all I have, and all you have. You don't affect the argument at all by saying "just your opinion" . It's just facile burbling, like a three-year old saying "Look at me! Look at me!"
 
I suspect that practicing Christians are tiny minority among the elites who run things in London.

Britain fought WW2 and the Cold War to save Christian civilization. Now woke governments are doing everything they can to destroy it.

Consider what would happen today if a British political leader made quotes like these from Churchill:
Britain fought against the Nazis, as did the rest of the allies, even the Americans, eventually. They fought because they were in danger of being overrun by a foreign country led by a cruel and dangerous regime. They did not fight to uphold Christian values. The Christian values experienced by European countries over the centuries were those exemplified by the Nazis.

Churchill was an excellent war leader but a truly awful human being, absolutely typical of the "elites" it is fashionable to decry these days, a lousy politician and a dreadful economist. We were lucky to have him when we did, but we got shot of him as soon as the war ended for good reasons.
 
I would suspect Churchill is now considered a racist xenophobe bent on Christan nationalism. In other words a fascist of some sort.

When they run away from reality they run right into the stupid wall.
Actually, he was regarded as such when he was alive. Not fascist as such, but terribly right wing, certainly racist and responsible for a great deal of hardship in his own country before the war. An excellent orator of course, and just what you want as a leader in wartime, but hagiography is not warranted in his case.
 
We both have a moral standard. They just aren't the same.
No, but it is crazy. A homosexual isn't the same as a paedophile, and homosexuality isn't contagious. Statistically speaking your grandchildren are much more at risk from you than from a random stranger, whatever their sexuality. Someone with an irrational fear or loathing of homosexuals is by definition a homophobe. Not equal to the Taliban, and not guilty of hate speech, unless your actions actually included hate speech. Frankly, the people who would condemn you the most would be your grandchildren. They presumably are not fools. They go to school and mix with other kids. The read and watch TV. They will see society's moral views , not just yours. You may well find to that intemperance on your part on this subject will drive them away, both from you and your faith.

A martyr is someone who will not compromise his faith in the face of hardship and suffering. Sometimes, the hardship and suffering is imaginary. That's the point I was making.
The reality is that when one refers to sexual orientation its the feeling of the individual. That would apply to any sexual desires whether it be a husband for his wife, the wife for the husband, a man for another man or a paedophile for child.
 
Back
Top