GREAT BRITAIN OR UK
19 November 2006, 10:30 AM
#121
And working in London and a few other cities around the world I can honestly say that I have no problems with immigrants, the Chinese, Eastern Europeans, Indians, Lebanese, Greeks, etc. Usually they are hard working and want to integrate and contribute to society.
19 November 2006, 11:25 AM
#122
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rannoch,
The reason that Christians wanted to convert the world was what they felt was was the right thing to do, ie spread the word in the way that the early missionaries did, risking their own lives in the process. I don't think it was in the sense that Catholicism or Protestantism were the only way to worship God, just that the members of individual religions preferred to do it their way. Certainly we don't find that attitude from those sources now, in fact there is instead a spirit of working together these days. I get on perfectly well with those of other religions including Jehovah's Witnesses, because although those religions are different at least we accept that we are all Christians and that in itself is not bad. Muslims have another way to worship their version of God and they are entitled to do so of course.
We are all entitled to believe what we feel is right and I personally would not denigrate an agnostic or an atheist for their beliefs. I therefore do not think it is fair for non believers in religion to castigate those who do follow such beliefs.
When it comes to fanaticists who preach terrorism and the like, that is wrong of course and against religious and natural laws. These are people who use religion for their own ends and I suspect it has little to do with the teachings of their own professed religion. These are the people who have publicly claimed that their ambition is for their religion to rule the world, but this is a political statement for their own selfish purposes. If you are honest you have to agree that there is not a good reason to run down religion as a whole. Biased arguments are just not valid for that very reason. Carry on with your own beliefs by all means, but don't rail unfairly against us for ours as a general excuse for your own following.
I find it disappointing that some on here feel they have to snigger and deride a man for his grammar and spelling when he is talking sense anyway. I feel it shows the height of personal superiority and ill manners.
Les
The reason that Christians wanted to convert the world was what they felt was was the right thing to do, ie spread the word in the way that the early missionaries did, risking their own lives in the process. I don't think it was in the sense that Catholicism or Protestantism were the only way to worship God, just that the members of individual religions preferred to do it their way. Certainly we don't find that attitude from those sources now, in fact there is instead a spirit of working together these days. I get on perfectly well with those of other religions including Jehovah's Witnesses, because although those religions are different at least we accept that we are all Christians and that in itself is not bad. Muslims have another way to worship their version of God and they are entitled to do so of course.
We are all entitled to believe what we feel is right and I personally would not denigrate an agnostic or an atheist for their beliefs. I therefore do not think it is fair for non believers in religion to castigate those who do follow such beliefs.
When it comes to fanaticists who preach terrorism and the like, that is wrong of course and against religious and natural laws. These are people who use religion for their own ends and I suspect it has little to do with the teachings of their own professed religion. These are the people who have publicly claimed that their ambition is for their religion to rule the world, but this is a political statement for their own selfish purposes. If you are honest you have to agree that there is not a good reason to run down religion as a whole. Biased arguments are just not valid for that very reason. Carry on with your own beliefs by all means, but don't rail unfairly against us for ours as a general excuse for your own following.
I find it disappointing that some on here feel they have to snigger and deride a man for his grammar and spelling when he is talking sense anyway. I feel it shows the height of personal superiority and ill manners.
Les
19 November 2006, 11:55 AM
#123
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: shine on you crazy diamond
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
Rannoch,
The reason that Christians wanted to convert the world was what they felt was was the right thing to do, ie spread the word in the way that the early missionaries did, risking their own lives in the process. I don't think it was in the sense that Catholicism or Protestantism were the only way to worship God, just that the members of individual religions preferred to do it their way. Certainly we don't find that attitude from those sources now, in fact there is instead a spirit of working together these days. I get on perfectly well with those of other religions including Jehovah's Witnesses, because although those religions are different at least we accept that we are all Christians and that in itself is not bad. Muslims have another way to worship their version of God and they are entitled to do so of course.
We are all entitled to believe what we feel is right and I personally would not denigrate an agnostic or an atheist for their beliefs. I therefore do not think it is fair for non believers in religion to castigate those who do follow such beliefs.
When it comes to fanaticists who preach terrorism and the like, that is wrong of course and against religious and natural laws. These are people who use religion for their own ends and I suspect it has little to do with the teachings of their own professed religion. These are the people who have publicly claimed that their ambition is for their religion to rule the world, but this is a political statement for their own selfish purposes. If you are honest you have to agree that there is not a good reason to run down religion as a whole. Biased arguments are just not valid for that very reason. Carry on with your own beliefs by all means, but don't rail unfairly against us for ours as a general excuse for your own following.
I find it disappointing that some on here feel they have to snigger and deride a man for his grammar and spelling when he is talking sense anyway. I feel it shows the height of personal superiority and ill manners.
Les
The reason that Christians wanted to convert the world was what they felt was was the right thing to do, ie spread the word in the way that the early missionaries did, risking their own lives in the process. I don't think it was in the sense that Catholicism or Protestantism were the only way to worship God, just that the members of individual religions preferred to do it their way. Certainly we don't find that attitude from those sources now, in fact there is instead a spirit of working together these days. I get on perfectly well with those of other religions including Jehovah's Witnesses, because although those religions are different at least we accept that we are all Christians and that in itself is not bad. Muslims have another way to worship their version of God and they are entitled to do so of course.
We are all entitled to believe what we feel is right and I personally would not denigrate an agnostic or an atheist for their beliefs. I therefore do not think it is fair for non believers in religion to castigate those who do follow such beliefs.
When it comes to fanaticists who preach terrorism and the like, that is wrong of course and against religious and natural laws. These are people who use religion for their own ends and I suspect it has little to do with the teachings of their own professed religion. These are the people who have publicly claimed that their ambition is for their religion to rule the world, but this is a political statement for their own selfish purposes. If you are honest you have to agree that there is not a good reason to run down religion as a whole. Biased arguments are just not valid for that very reason. Carry on with your own beliefs by all means, but don't rail unfairly against us for ours as a general excuse for your own following.
I find it disappointing that some on here feel they have to snigger and deride a man for his grammar and spelling when he is talking sense anyway. I feel it shows the height of personal superiority and ill manners.
Les
but please thet them who mock about spelling and grammer dont realise its having no effect, absoloutly none. if thats all they can come up with then ......i dunno but i know i couldnt give a shi*!
19 November 2006, 12:19 PM
#124
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
Rannoch,
The reason that Christians wanted to convert the world was what they felt was was the right thing to do, ie spread the word in the way that the early missionaries did, risking their own lives in the process. I don't think it was in the sense that Catholicism or Protestantism were the only way to worship God, just that the members of individual religions preferred to do it their way. Certainly we don't find that attitude from those sources now, in fact there is instead a spirit of working together these days. I get on perfectly well with those of other religions including Jehovah's Witnesses, because although those religions are different at least we accept that we are all Christians and that in itself is not bad. Muslims have another way to worship their version of God and they are entitled to do so of course.
We are all entitled to believe what we feel is right and I personally would not denigrate an agnostic or an atheist for their beliefs. I therefore do not think it is fair for non believers in religion to castigate those who do follow such beliefs.
When it comes to fanaticists who preach terrorism and the like, that is wrong of course and against religious and natural laws. These are people who use religion for their own ends and I suspect it has little to do with the teachings of their own professed religion. These are the people who have publicly claimed that their ambition is for their religion to rule the world, but this is a political statement for their own selfish purposes. If you are honest you have to agree that there is not a good reason to run down religion as a whole. Biased arguments are just not valid for that very reason. Carry on with your own beliefs by all means, but don't rail unfairly against us for ours as a general excuse for your own following.
I find it disappointing that some on here feel they have to snigger and deride a man for his grammar and spelling when he is talking sense anyway. I feel it shows the height of personal superiority and ill manners.
Les
The reason that Christians wanted to convert the world was what they felt was was the right thing to do, ie spread the word in the way that the early missionaries did, risking their own lives in the process. I don't think it was in the sense that Catholicism or Protestantism were the only way to worship God, just that the members of individual religions preferred to do it their way. Certainly we don't find that attitude from those sources now, in fact there is instead a spirit of working together these days. I get on perfectly well with those of other religions including Jehovah's Witnesses, because although those religions are different at least we accept that we are all Christians and that in itself is not bad. Muslims have another way to worship their version of God and they are entitled to do so of course.
We are all entitled to believe what we feel is right and I personally would not denigrate an agnostic or an atheist for their beliefs. I therefore do not think it is fair for non believers in religion to castigate those who do follow such beliefs.
When it comes to fanaticists who preach terrorism and the like, that is wrong of course and against religious and natural laws. These are people who use religion for their own ends and I suspect it has little to do with the teachings of their own professed religion. These are the people who have publicly claimed that their ambition is for their religion to rule the world, but this is a political statement for their own selfish purposes. If you are honest you have to agree that there is not a good reason to run down religion as a whole. Biased arguments are just not valid for that very reason. Carry on with your own beliefs by all means, but don't rail unfairly against us for ours as a general excuse for your own following.
I find it disappointing that some on here feel they have to snigger and deride a man for his grammar and spelling when he is talking sense anyway. I feel it shows the height of personal superiority and ill manners.
Les
Leslie,
I agree with everything you say and absolutely support your view - except in a couple of areas.
In what way have I tried to put down religion?
My argument, like yours, it that all religions have political extremists that carry their sword in the theoretical support of their religion. It has been true throughout religious age. I merely use examples of Catholic 'Holy Wars', terrorism and crusades as another form of quasi-religious political extremism.
I certainly find the blind view that all Muslims want to take over the world or that Islam is evil just as ridiculous as condemning all Catholics because of the Provisional IRA.
Which would you choose, blind condemnation (in itself a form of extremism) or open constructive and moderate dialogue.
I would also contend that many truly religious and not political Muslims also want to convert the world because they feel it is the right thing to do. There are far more similarities between religions at their core than differences, I am sure you will appreciate that.
I would also observe that tolerance is widespread amongst the religious community however it is naive to suggest that there are not exclusive religious movements that are alive and thriving today. My examples would be the Creationists in North America and the Catholics in South America.
Whilst these may seem removed from the argument in the UK today, sadly at least one if very tied in. The leading Creationist preacher in Utah has a weekly conference call with Bush as one of his leading religious advisers. With such activities going on it is easy to see why Iraquis may feel that Bush is in some way promulgating a Holy War.
Finally I hope your comments regarding denigrating Gatty's grammar or spelling were not directed at me!
Rannoch
19 November 2006, 12:26 PM
#125
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: shine on you crazy diamond
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rannoch
Leslie,
I agree with everything you say and absolutely support your view - except in a couple of areas.
In what way have I tried to put down religion?
My argument, like yours, it that all religions have political extremists that carry their sword in the theoretical support of their religion. It has been true throughout religious age. I merely use examples of Catholic 'Holy Wars', terrorism and crusades as another form of quasi-religious political extremism.
I certainly find the blind view that all Muslims want to take over the world or that Islam is evil just as ridiculous as condemning all Catholics because of the Provisional IRA.
Which would you choose, blind condemnation (in itself a form of extremism) or open constructive and moderate dialogue.
I would also contend that many truly religious and not political Muslims also want to convert the world because they feel it is the right thing to do. There are far more similarities between religions at their core than differences, I am sure you will appreciate that.
I would also observe that tolerance is widespread amongst the religious community however it is naive to suggest that there are not exclusive religious movements that are alive and thriving today. My examples would be the Creationists in North America and the Catholics in South America.
Whilst these may seem removed from the argument in the UK today, sadly at least one if very tied in. The leading Creationist preacher in Utah has a weekly conference call with Bush as one of his leading religious advisers. With such activities going on it is easy to see why Iraquis may feel that Bush is in some way promulgating a Holy War.
Finally I hope your comments regarding denigrating Gatty's grammar or spelling were not directed at me!
Rannoch
I agree with everything you say and absolutely support your view - except in a couple of areas.
In what way have I tried to put down religion?
My argument, like yours, it that all religions have political extremists that carry their sword in the theoretical support of their religion. It has been true throughout religious age. I merely use examples of Catholic 'Holy Wars', terrorism and crusades as another form of quasi-religious political extremism.
I certainly find the blind view that all Muslims want to take over the world or that Islam is evil just as ridiculous as condemning all Catholics because of the Provisional IRA.
Which would you choose, blind condemnation (in itself a form of extremism) or open constructive and moderate dialogue.
I would also contend that many truly religious and not political Muslims also want to convert the world because they feel it is the right thing to do. There are far more similarities between religions at their core than differences, I am sure you will appreciate that.
I would also observe that tolerance is widespread amongst the religious community however it is naive to suggest that there are not exclusive religious movements that are alive and thriving today. My examples would be the Creationists in North America and the Catholics in South America.
Whilst these may seem removed from the argument in the UK today, sadly at least one if very tied in. The leading Creationist preacher in Utah has a weekly conference call with Bush as one of his leading religious advisers. With such activities going on it is easy to see why Iraquis may feel that Bush is in some way promulgating a Holy War.
Finally I hope your comments regarding denigrating Gatty's grammar or spelling were not directed at me!
Rannoch
and leslie isnt directing comments at you about my spelling we know who they are, there the boring ones who cant chat as we are.
19 November 2006, 10:40 PM
#126
19 November 2006, 10:46 PM
#127
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Wherever I lay my hat, that's my Hutch
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a set of boring reactionary ***** you all are. With the exception of Rannoch, who seems to be the only sane poster on the whole thread. Oh and apart from Buppa, but hes a clown.
:
19 November 2006, 11:19 PM
#129
Originally Posted by Simply Reg
What a set of boring reactionary ***** you all are. With the exception of Rannoch, who seems to be the only sane poster on the whole thread. Oh and apart from Buppa, but hes a clown.
Last edited by KiwiGTI; 19 November 2006 at 11:27 PM.
20 November 2006, 06:28 AM
#130
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: shine on you crazy diamond
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Simply Reg
What a set of boring reactionary ***** you all are. With the exception of Rannoch, who seems to be the only sane poster on the whole thread. Oh and apart from Buppa, but hes a clown.
HA HA HA HA HA HA YOUR SO COOL MAN SIMPLY REG YOUR THE MAN . WOW!
so are you what they call a troll? oh we are honoured.
20 November 2006, 08:06 AM
#131
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austria
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we don't have much criminality here in Austria.. the policemen are used for speed traps and scrutineering (we must get to a civil engineer who looks if all is ok - that you must do for ALL alteration from stock (wheels, exhaust, lowering springs, bodykits, rear wings and on and on.. maybe it will come that you must get to the engineer if you got a stock car with a HKS decal on it.. who knows..) some policemen don't really have a plan.. mostly I got through with my decatted exhaust 
if something is changed and not shown the engineer you must give the policemen your numberplates, you must pay a penalty (depending what isn't stock on your car 50-1500€) - you cannot use the car anymore unless you get the car to the inspecting authority and they find ALL! technical faults, all tuning parts.. the best thing which can be done is build back to the stock car
with my impreza it's not really a problem - they mostly don't know how my one looks like original! But they know everything of VW's, AUDI's, BMW's and Hondas.. with such a car like that there you have no chance
I don't know how this is at your place.. but here the cardriver is the one who can really pay.. I pay for my impreza 870€ (about 550pounds) a year it is called engine tax and depends on the kW of the engine.. in this 550pounds there is no insurance included!! this is another 400pounds (600€) I think thats really much..
I think every country has his pro's and con's..
I stopped getting annoyed because of some of those things.. what can I do!?
if something is changed and not shown the engineer you must give the policemen your numberplates, you must pay a penalty (depending what isn't stock on your car 50-1500€) - you cannot use the car anymore unless you get the car to the inspecting authority and they find ALL! technical faults, all tuning parts.. the best thing which can be done is build back to the stock car
with my impreza it's not really a problem - they mostly don't know how my one looks like original! But they know everything of VW's, AUDI's, BMW's and Hondas.. with such a car like that there you have no chance
I don't know how this is at your place.. but here the cardriver is the one who can really pay.. I pay for my impreza 870€ (about 550pounds) a year it is called engine tax and depends on the kW of the engine.. in this 550pounds there is no insurance included!! this is another 400pounds (600€) I think thats really much..
I think every country has his pro's and con's..
I stopped getting annoyed because of some of those things.. what can I do!?
20 November 2006, 11:23 AM
#132
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rannoch.
No of course the remarks about spelling etc were not directed at you and I apologise if my post was not clear enough in that respect. Those who were included know well enough who they are.
I understand your reply fully and have no real argument with what you are saying. It is just that your original remark to Gatty gave the wrong impression.
I suppose the answer to it all is to show tolerance by all factions to other peoples' beliefs as long as they are not advocating actions which endanger or affect others in an unpleasant way. That is all that I was trying to say really.
Les
No of course the remarks about spelling etc were not directed at you and I apologise if my post was not clear enough in that respect. Those who were included know well enough who they are.
I understand your reply fully and have no real argument with what you are saying. It is just that your original remark to Gatty gave the wrong impression.
I suppose the answer to it all is to show tolerance by all factions to other peoples' beliefs as long as they are not advocating actions which endanger or affect others in an unpleasant way. That is all that I was trying to say really.
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
28
28 December 2015 11:07 PM
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
12
18 November 2015 07:03 AM
