Christians arrested for defending their beliefs

[Reedy]

My god .. Do the same 10 to 15 people argue on EVERY thread. Do you ever get tired? 10, 15, 20 thousand plus posts of the same thing day in, day out. Do you have time for anything else! I don't believe in God etc and I get bored after 2 posts let alone 1000 plus.

[Gary L]

You'd think he'd make an appearence and tell us all to stop fighting and arguing over him, but he never does.
I think he just likes the attention a little bit too much

[soicky]

Originally Posted by Reedy

My god .. Do the same 10 to 15 people argue on EVERY thread. Do you ever get tired? 10, 15, 20 thousand plus posts of the same thing day in, day out. Do you have time for anything else! I don't believe in God etc and I get bored after 2 posts let alone 1000 plus.

[Reedy]

Figure of speech. god with a lower case g.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Bringing the colour issue into it Xaccers ?
Been forced to go to the press ?
Total crap ( moderating my language )
She is not forced to go to the media, prove your point.

Hang on, you're the one who claimed that the couple weren't allowed to go to the press, even though they were the first to do so, and consiquently with healines of "Christians arrested for defending their beliefs" (when the evidence given by the couple and their supporting institute shows that wasn't the case) and the lack of intelligence of the great unwashed, has apparently resulted in several of them using the internet to express their anti-muslim/asian views. We've seen on here the usual unintelligent posts of "they should go back where they came from" even when it's known that the muslims they're talking about are British.
Why should anyone have to put up with such disgusting comments? Because they're muslim? Doesn't wash with me mate.

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Why should he/she? if there were any issues something should have been said at the time he/she put the post up, dont try dumming down debate.

You'll noticed I used the word "future"

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Reedy

My god .. Do the same 10 to 15 people argue on EVERY thread. Do you ever get tired? 10, 15, 20 thousand plus posts of the same thing day in, day out. Do you have time for anything else! I don't believe in God etc and I get bored after 2 posts let alone 1000 plus.

If it annoys you that much, why bother reading and replying to a thread you have no interest in?

[Reedy]

Because it's not just on this thread, it's on EVERY thread. Especially it would seem threads that have even the slightest religious content. And if it doesn't have any religious content, it usually does after 10 posts and then everyone starts bickering, thinly veiled by liberal dashings of stupid smilies.

I wonder how many posts on here are just pointless bickering about religion? 30% to 40%?

The hardcore group of 10 or so members who spend all day everyday arguing and trying to inflame the situation should be ashamed of themselves, and that includes the two moderators who should know better.

It really doesn't make it a happy place reading the same people day in day out, having a ding-dong.

This is the most volatile forum I've ever seen! I'd like to start a poll to gauge how many people like the fighting between members, and how many would like it clamped down on, but it would just turn into the usual bun fight.

[Flyboy]

So, why do you give a damn? It's not doing you any harm, so why bother reading the thread in the first place, or are you just trolling for a re-action?

[dilli-theclaw]

Return to the topic NOW.

As always, if you find a thread, post a problem REPORT it.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Hang on, you're the one who claimed that the couple weren't allowed to go to the press, even though they were the first to do so, and consiquently with healines of "Christians arrested for defending their beliefs" (when the evidence given by the couple and their supporting institute shows that wasn't the case) and the lack of intelligence of the great unwashed, has apparently resulted in several of them using the internet to express their anti-muslim/asian views. We've seen on here the usual unintelligent posts of "they should go back where they came from" even when it's known that the muslims they're talking about are British.
Why should anyone have to put up with such disgusting comments? Because they're muslim? Doesn't wash with me mate.




You'll noticed I used the word "future"

Xaccers, it was not the couple that went to the press, their spokesperson/representative gave the details of what had apparently happened, while the accuser claimed in the press that she had all but been called a terrorist.
Please get your facts right.
In your infinite wisdom, feel free to tell me why they were arrested?
Their arrest followed an alleged discussion about two religions, it seems that to me the one who spat her dummy out when she was faced with some unsavoury truth then decided " Hey! this is england, racist card ! "
They are british?
They are so proud of being British that they hide themselves away and follow a leader who was known for paedophilia?
If you feel happy supporting the rights of that type of religion be my guest.
Why should they have to put up with such disgusting comments?
Because Xaccers not everyone in this country is treated the same, that is why.
Yes its abhorent, but tell me who is to blame?
If I have a gang of yobs outside the door I call the police they are not quick to respond.
But mention that I stayed at a hotel and I was subject to a racist attack and the police are brushing the yobs aside to get to the hotel.
If she did not like what was being said she could have walked away, end of imo.
http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/?p=15520

And just to add, if there was a problem with the heading of the post it should have been sorted earlier.
I mean, if you want me to start trawling the topics on this forum for headings that are " questionable given the so called facts " ?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Xaccers, it was not the couple that went to the press, their spokesperson/representative gave the details of what had apparently happened, while the accuser claimed in the press that she had all but been called a terrorist.
Please get your facts right.
In your infinite wisdom, feel free to tell me why they were arrested?
Their arrest followed an alleged discussion about two religions, it seems that to me the one who spat her dummy out when she was faced with some unsavoury truth then decided " Hey! this is england, racist card ! "
They are british?
They are so proud of being British that they hide themselves away and follow a leader who was known for paedophilia?
If you feel happy supporting the rights of that type of religion be my guest.
Why should they have to put up with such disgusting comments?
Because Xaccers not everyone in this country is treated the same, that is why.
Yes its abhorent, but tell me who is to blame?
If I have a gang of yobs outside the door I call the police they are not quick to respond.
But mention that I stayed at a hotel and I was subject to a racist attack and the police are brushing the yobs aside to get to the hotel.
If she did not like what was being said she could have walked away, end of imo.
http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/?p=15520

And just to add, if there was a problem with the heading of the post it should have been sorted earlier.
I mean, if you want me to start trawling the topics on this forum for headings that are " questionable given the so called facts " ?

They were arrested and charged under Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and Section 31 (1) (c) and (5) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.
What exactly was said is unknown to us, the statement given on behalf of the couple (as I said, they've gone to the press) is that they called Mohammed a Warlord and referred to a form of islamic dress as a form of bondage. That could be as accurate as saying Hitler wasn't very fond of Jews.
I see you've resorted to the usual ignorant comment that Mohammed was a paedophile, applying todays values to another time.
You appear to be confused, firstly Islam is not a race, secondly, religions have no rights, people have rights, are you honestly saying that some people should have fewer rights than others because of their religious beliefs?


Oh and just to add, I don't remember seeing in the forum T&Cs a time limit for suggesting a topic title be modified, perhaps you could do me a favour and quote the part that does say that?

some people certainly should not have more rights than others because of their religious beliefs. We certainly are biased in the favour of the minority in this country and this is what I think is wrong

[Flyboy]

No we are not. There is more weight balanced on the protection of the rights of the minority, that is why they are called the minority. It is because the minority's rights are more likely to be infringed, therefore it is necessary to afford them more protective resources. The majority's rights are already protected, by the majority. It is why we spend more resources on the protection of children, for example, because they are least likely to be able to protect themselves. But there is no more bias given to favour the rights of the minorities, over the majorities.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

No we are not. There is more weight balanced on the protection of the rights of the minority, that is why they are called the minority. It is because the minority's rights are more likely to be infringed, therefore it is necessary to afford them more protective resources. The majority's rights are already protected, by the majority. It is why we spend more resources on the protection of children, for example, because they are least likely to be able to protect themselves. But there is no more bias given to favour the rights of the minorities, over the majorities.

Is that so Flyboy?
So tell me, do you not think that problems can arise when one group is perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be favoured over another?
I will give you two scenarios, then you tell me whether you feel action should be taken in both cases, not just one.
Muslim protestors are exercising their freedom of speech by standing on a public highway holding blood thirsty placards calling for the death of our troops.
No muslims are arrested in the above.
Is that right?
Second scenario, three people are involved in a heated debate about religion in a hotel with its doors firmly shut.
The christian couple are arrested defending their faith.
Is that right? if so tell me the difference between the two scenarios, and why the latter requires more attention by our police?

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Is that so Flyboy?
So tell me, do you not think that problems can arise when one group is perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be favoured over another?
I will give you two scenarios, then you tell me whether you feel action should be taken in both cases, not just one.
Muslim protestors are exercising their freedom of speech by standing on a public highway holding blood thirsty placards calling for the death of our troops.
No muslims are arrested in the above.
Is that right?
Second scenario, three people are involved in a heated debate about religion in a hotel with its doors firmly shut.
The christian couple are arrested defending their faith.
Is that right? if so tell me the difference between the two scenarios, and why the latter requires more attention by our police?

Their opinion? Or their faith?