Does religion have a place in modern society?

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Does religion have a place in modern society?

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

roffeyeagle Freedman Wonderland 16 Mar 05 9.41pm
Quote the despotic banana at 16 Mar 2005 9:37pm Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:27pm Quote the despotic banana at 16 Mar 2005 9:24pm Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:11pm Quote the despotic banana at 16 Mar 2005 9:07pm Freedom of religious practice is an important part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Then there would be anarchy! Religion causes conflict, look at the trouble in the Middle-East, why did 9/11 happen? It all relates to religous tension. Amazing! You've just dismissed freedom of religious practice as outlined in one of the most venerable documents on human rights - congratulations! What do you suggest then? Killing everyone in the world who harbours a religious belief? That seems to be the only way to stop this 'anarchy' you talk about... That's bollocks, you can believe in whichever religion you want, that's right. But doing this where other, completely different religions are based will cause anarchy, it will cause tension. In modern society relgious groups are inter-mixed, there is no way that religions can show such openness in today's world, and it is naive to think so. Edited by roffeyeagle (16 Mar 2005 9:30pm) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights may not be a legally-binding document, but it was drafted way back in 1948, and has since been the basis for other (legally-binding) human rights covenants. So, by your reckoning, given that people of different religions have been living side-by-side for many, many years, we must have been living in anarchy without noticing it... But we didn't have 9/11 and other Muslim extremist activities driven by their hatred of capitalism and Jews (whom they associate with capitalism). The influx of Asians into Britain didn't really begin until the 1970s so it has only been a fairly recent thing. It's been only recently when International events have occured that the tension is really beginning to mount. 'Happy being mediocre; if you've got no targets, you can't fail' - Mantra for life and Palace. Feel free to check out the Expat Eagles Facebook Group [Link] Viva la revolution!
Alert a moderator to this post

roffeyeagle

Freedman Wonderland 16 Mar 05 9.41pm

Quote the despotic banana at 16 Mar 2005 9:37pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:27pm

Quote the despotic banana at 16 Mar 2005 9:24pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:11pm

Quote the despotic banana at 16 Mar 2005 9:07pm

Freedom of religious practice is an important part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Then there would be anarchy! Religion causes conflict, look at the trouble in the Middle-East, why did 9/11 happen? It all relates to religous tension.

Amazing! You've just dismissed freedom of religious practice as outlined in one of the most venerable documents on human rights - congratulations!

What do you suggest then? Killing everyone in the world who harbours a religious belief? That seems to be the only way to stop this 'anarchy' you talk about...

That's bollocks, you can believe in whichever religion you want, that's right. But doing this where other, completely different religions are based will cause anarchy, it will cause tension. In modern society relgious groups are inter-mixed, there is no way that religions can show such openness in today's world, and it is naive to think so.

Edited by roffeyeagle (16 Mar 2005 9:30pm)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights may not be a legally-binding document, but it was drafted way back in 1948, and has since been the basis for other (legally-binding) human rights covenants. So, by your reckoning, given that people of different religions have been living side-by-side for many, many years, we must have been living in anarchy without noticing it...

But we didn't have 9/11 and other Muslim extremist activities driven by their hatred of capitalism and Jews (whom they associate with capitalism). The influx of Asians into Britain didn't really begin until the 1970s so it has only been a fairly recent thing. It's been only recently when International events have occured that the tension is really beginning to mount.

'Happy being mediocre; if you've got no targets, you can't fail' - Mantra for life and Palace.

Feel free to check out the Expat Eagles Facebook Group [Link]

Viva la revolution!

Alert a moderator to this post

Petealiator 1066 Country! 16 Mar 05 9.41pm
Quote tetley at 16 Mar 2005 8:36pm outside the saloon at noon - this isn't the wild west. i'm putting my point across on the internet! - really no need to take it that seriously!! and by the way I don't have a problem with putting my opinion to people face to face either. if you believe in soemthing, you should say it. No this aint the wild west, it's the real world you f*ing nigel! You were doing a little more than putting your point across, you was taking me for a c. Well if you're so happy to talk to me like that face to face, I'll see you at the next HOL meet up unless you're another gutless internet gobs**e and we'll see how mouthy you are then shall we? A little advise mate, don't mug someone off unless you're prepared to follow it up. My post on the thread was not personal to you or anyone, but your reply was a direct insult to me. I'm no angel when it comes to mouthing off at people, but I don't hide and everyone knows who I am. I wouldn't talk to Steff or Reborn the way you've spoken to me, because I wouldn't fancy the consequences in the real world, you might wanna take that on board mate. My Rocksteady band... [Link] [Link] IT'S NOT SKA, IT'S ROCKSTEADY!
Alert a moderator to this post

Petealiator

1066 Country! 16 Mar 05 9.41pm

Quote tetley at 16 Mar 2005 8:36pm

outside the saloon at noon - this isn't the wild west.

i'm putting my point across on the internet! - really no need to take it that seriously!!

and by the way I don't have a problem with putting my opinion to people face to face either. if you believe in soemthing, you should say it.

No this aint the wild west, it's the real world you f***ing nigel! You were doing a little more than putting your point across, you was taking me for a c***. Well if you're so happy to talk to me like that face to face, I'll see you at the next HOL meet up unless you're another gutless internet gobs***e and we'll see how mouthy you are then shall we?

A little advise mate, don't mug someone off unless you're prepared to follow it up. My post on the thread was not personal to you or anyone, but your reply was a direct insult to me. I'm no angel when it comes to mouthing off at people, but I don't hide and everyone knows who I am. I wouldn't talk to Steff or Reborn the way you've spoken to me, because I wouldn't fancy the consequences in the real world, you might wanna take that on board mate.

My Rocksteady band...
[Link]
[Link]
IT'S NOT SKA, IT'S ROCKSTEADY!

Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 16 Mar 05 9.42pm
Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce. You need to swot up on your medieval history, old sport. He didn't 'switch to the Church of England'. This would have been difficult as it didn't exist at that point. He declared himself to be 'head of the Church in England', thereby taking upon himself authority hitherto enjoyed solely by the Pope. The Church of England was founded in the reign of Henry's successor (and son), Edward VI, under Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, where the 39 Articles established the Church of England. Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham
Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 16 Mar 05 9.42pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm

Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce.

You need to swot up on your medieval history, old sport. He didn't 'switch to the Church of England'. This would have been difficult as it didn't exist at that point. He declared himself to be 'head of the Church in England', thereby taking upon himself authority hitherto enjoyed solely by the Pope. The Church of England was founded in the reign of Henry's successor (and son), Edward VI, under Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, where the 39 Articles established the Church of England.

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Alert a moderator to this post

roffeyeagle Freedman Wonderland 16 Mar 05 9.43pm
Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:42pm Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce. You need to swot up on your medieval history, old sport. He didn't 'switch to the Church of England'. This would have been difficult as it didn't exist at that point. He declared himself to be 'head of the Church in England', thereby taking upon himself authority hitherto enjoyed solely by the Pope. The Church of England was founded in the reign of Henry's successor (and son), Edward VI, under Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, where the 39 Articles established the Church of England. OK I'm sorry... Learn a new thing every day... I didn't live back then... 'Happy being mediocre; if you've got no targets, you can't fail' - Mantra for life and Palace. Feel free to check out the Expat Eagles Facebook Group [Link] Viva la revolution!
Alert a moderator to this post

roffeyeagle

Freedman Wonderland 16 Mar 05 9.43pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:42pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm

Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce.

OK I'm sorry... Learn a new thing every day...

I didn't live back then...

'Happy being mediocre; if you've got no targets, you can't fail' - Mantra for life and Palace.

Feel free to check out the Expat Eagles Facebook Group [Link]

Viva la revolution!

Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 16 Mar 05 9.45pm
Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:43pm Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:42pm Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce. You need to swot up on your medieval history, old sport. He didn't 'switch to the Church of England'. This would have been difficult as it didn't exist at that point. He declared himself to be 'head of the Church in England', thereby taking upon himself authority hitherto enjoyed solely by the Pope. The Church of England was founded in the reign of Henry's successor (and son), Edward VI, under Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, where the 39 Articles established the Church of England. OK I'm sorry... Learn a new thing every day... I didn't live back then... No, but I think Old Chap did.... Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham
Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 16 Mar 05 9.45pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:43pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:42pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm

Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce.

OK I'm sorry... Learn a new thing every day...

I didn't live back then...

No, but I think Old Chap did....

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Alert a moderator to this post

roffeyeagle Freedman Wonderland 16 Mar 05 9.47pm
Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:45pm Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:43pm Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:42pm Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce. You need to swot up on your medieval history, old sport. He didn't 'switch to the Church of England'. This would have been difficult as it didn't exist at that point. He declared himself to be 'head of the Church in England', thereby taking upon himself authority hitherto enjoyed solely by the Pope. The Church of England was founded in the reign of Henry's successor (and son), Edward VI, under Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, where the 39 Articles established the Church of England. OK I'm sorry... Learn a new thing every day... I didn't live back then... No, but I think Old Chap did.... lol 'Happy being mediocre; if you've got no targets, you can't fail' - Mantra for life and Palace. Feel free to check out the Expat Eagles Facebook Group [Link] Viva la revolution!
Alert a moderator to this post

roffeyeagle

Freedman Wonderland 16 Mar 05 9.47pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:45pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:43pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 16 Mar 2005 9:42pm

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:34pm

Cucking, Henry VIII wanted to divorce to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, but the Pope wouldn't allow him to. Hence he switched to the Church of England so he could get a divorce.

OK I'm sorry... Learn a new thing every day...

I didn't live back then...

No, but I think Old Chap did....

lol

'Happy being mediocre; if you've got no targets, you can't fail' - Mantra for life and Palace.

Feel free to check out the Expat Eagles Facebook Group [Link]

Viva la revolution!

Alert a moderator to this post

tetley Wimbledon 16 Mar 05 9.58pm
Quote Petealiator at 16 Mar 2005 9:41pm My post on the thread was not personal to you or anyone, but your reply was a direct insult to me. quote from your first post: "f*ing pseudo-intellectuals, you think you know it all! You think you have the answers to everything, politics, death, the meaning of life, because you have a fing degree!" if calling you a self-indulgent whiner is worse than that, then this country really is going to the dogs. Edited by tetley (16 Mar 2005 9:58pm) It's not the fall that's important.....it's the landing* All Nature is but Art, unknown to thee; All Chance, Direction, which thou canst not see; All Discord, Harmony, not understood; All partial Evil, universal Good [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

tetley

Wimbledon 16 Mar 05 9.58pm

Quote Petealiator at 16 Mar 2005 9:41pm

My post on the thread was not personal to you or anyone, but your reply was a direct insult to me.

quote from your first post:

"f***ing pseudo-intellectuals, you think you know it all! You think you have the answers to everything, politics, death, the meaning of life, because you have a f***ing degree!"

if calling you a self-indulgent whiner is worse than that, then this country really is going to the dogs.

Edited by tetley (16 Mar 2005 9:58pm)

It's not the fall that's important.....it's the landing
All Nature is but Art, unknown to thee;
All Chance, Direction, which thou canst not see;
All Discord, Harmony, not understood;
All partial Evil, universal Good

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

the despotic banana Dept. of Baboon Maintenance 16 Mar 05 11.16pm
Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:41pm But we didn't have 9/11 and other Muslim extremist activities driven by their hatred of capitalism and Jews (whom they associate with capitalism). The influx of Asians into Britain didn't really begin until the 1970s so it has only been a fairly recent thing. It's been only recently when International events have occured that the tension is really beginning to mount. Surely the international events of which you speak are a direct result of not just Muslim extremism, but also Christian extremism (Neo-Cons in the White House, for instance)? Muslims do seem to get all the blame... Ask me about Ronald de Boer.
Alert a moderator to this post

the despotic banana

Dept. of Baboon Maintenance 16 Mar 05 11.16pm

Send a Private Message to the despotic banana

Quote roffeyeagle at 16 Mar 2005 9:41pm

Surely the international events of which you speak are a direct result of not just Muslim extremism, but also Christian extremism (Neo-Cons in the White House, for instance)? Muslims do seem to get all the blame...

Ask me about Ronald de Boer.

Alert a moderator to this post

HorshamEagle under the union jack 16 Mar 05 11.26pm
Religion isn't the problem, it's the fanatics who preach it that are. Religion is manipulated by people who interpret it to suit them. Do you know where hell is?
Alert a moderator to this post

HorshamEagle

under the union jack 16 Mar 05 11.26pm

Religion isn't the problem, it's the fanatics who preach it that are. Religion is manipulated by people who interpret it to suit them.

Do you know where hell is?

Alert a moderator to this post

HorshamEagle under the union jack 16 Mar 05 11.30pm
Just out of interest, where do people stand on this? [Link] I think it makes a mockery of everything. when you consider some schools don't allow kids to wear certain hairstyles, yet apparently religion is the be all and end all and is exempt from any ruling? Edited by HorshamEagle (16 Mar 2005 11:33pm) Do you know where hell is?
Alert a moderator to this post

HorshamEagle

under the union jack 16 Mar 05 11.30pm

Just out of interest, where do people stand on this?

[Link]

I think it makes a mockery of everything. when you consider some schools don't allow kids to wear certain hairstyles, yet apparently religion is the be all and end all and is exempt from any ruling?

Edited by HorshamEagle (16 Mar 2005 11:33pm)

Do you know where hell is?

Alert a moderator to this post

the despotic banana Dept. of Baboon Maintenance 16 Mar 05 11.44pm
Quote HorshamEagle at 16 Mar 2005 11:30pm Just out of interest, where do people stand on this? [Link] I think it makes a mockery of everything. when you consider some schools don't allow kids to wear certain hairstyles, yet apparently religion is the be all and end all and is exempt from any ruling? Edited by HorshamEagle (16 Mar 2005 11:33pm) I don't know how much long-held dogma there is regarding mohicans...probably not much. Ask me about Ronald de Boer.
Alert a moderator to this post

the despotic banana

Dept. of Baboon Maintenance 16 Mar 05 11.44pm

Quote HorshamEagle at 16 Mar 2005 11:30pm

Just out of interest, where do people stand on this?

[Link]

I think it makes a mockery of everything. when you consider some schools don't allow kids to wear certain hairstyles, yet apparently religion is the be all and end all and is exempt from any ruling?

Edited by HorshamEagle (16 Mar 2005 11:33pm)

I don't know how much long-held dogma there is regarding mohicans...probably not much.

Ask me about Ronald de Boer.

Alert a moderator to this post

HorshamEagle under the union jack 16 Mar 05 11.58pm
It is ridiculous that this girl is able to flout the School rules on the back of Human Rights legislation. At some point religious rights come to an end. Otherwise people can do abolsutely anything in the name of religion. Do you know where hell is?
Alert a moderator to this post

HorshamEagle

under the union jack 16 Mar 05 11.58pm

It is ridiculous that this girl is able to flout the School rules on the back of Human Rights legislation.

At some point religious rights come to an end. Otherwise people can do abolsutely anything in the name of religion.

Do you know where hell is?

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Does religion have a place in modern society?

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors