Has this goon seen the light?

[Fungus]

No they were not. Read the relevent texts.

[snip]
Some Islamic sects have stretched this to include Mohammed but note nothing in the Koran actually says that of Mohammed.
[snip]

By the way your post is blasphemy and unlike the Muslim tenents under discussion saying 'Oh Christ!' is blasphemy in all Christian sects

You make the point for me. Thanks.

And I said "yes they were blasphemous, in the opinion of many". So mperhaps you could learn to read?

And no most Christians do not consider "Oh Christ" to be blasphemy. Though most vicars would rather we did not say it. This religion lark is all about interpretation of what are no than the original dodgy dossiers.

[Mailman]

And I said "yes they were blasphemous, in the opinion of many". So mperhaps you could learn to read?

BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA...and mperhaps you could learn to spell!

Honestly, if you are going to tell someone to learn to read...at least have the good form to get your spelling right!

And no most Christians do not consider "Oh Christ" to be blasphemy.

Actually yes, taking the lords name in vane has always been considered blasphemous.

Mailman

[sasguru]

BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA...and mperhaps you could learn to spell!
Honestly, if you are going to tell someone to learn to read...at least have the good form to get your spelling right!



Actually yes, taking the lords name in vane has always been considered blasphemous.

Mailman

Probably the most ironic post ever on CUK?

PS. What has any of this religious nonsense got to do with free speech? I believe we should take the piss out of all religions as their followers are clearly a bit hard of thinking.

[zathras]

You make the point for me. Thanks.

And I said "yes they were blasphemous, in the opinion of many". So mperhaps you could learn to read?

And no most Christians do not consider "Oh Christ" to be blasphemy. Though most vicars would rather we did not say it. This religion lark is all about interpretation of what are no than the original dodgy dossiers.

"Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain" leaves little room for interpretation. There are no such explicit rules in Islam. It's also hypocritical to say images are not allowed given the history of Islamic Art doing exactly that.

A few people trying to promote change in Western democracies are using this row to to achieve those aims and we (as a society) are letting them do it. I am pretty sure you will find that most of those marching, destroying property and murdering people (yes 14 people have died over this) have not read the relevent texts and are taking the word of an Cleric. As would be the case for most Christians. Those Clerics for the most part are leading political organisations mascarading as religous ones.

[sasguru]

"Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain" leaves little room for interpretation. There are no such explicit tenents in Islam. It's also hypocritical to say images are not allowed given the history of Islamic Art doing exactly that.

A few people trying to promote change in Western democracies are using this row to to achieve those aims and we (as a society) are letting them do it. I am pretty sure you will find that most of those marching, destroying property and murdering people (yes 14 people have died over this) have not read the relevent texts and are taking the word of an Iman. As would be the case for most Christians. Those Imans for the most part are leading political organisations mascarading as religous ones.

There are no such explicit tenents in Islam.
Does Islam allow explicit owner-occupiers, then?

taking the word of an Iman
Why are they taking the word of David Bowie's wife?

You may think I'm nit-picking. Call me old-fashioned, but I've always suspected people who can't get syntax right.

[Antman]

Hey, this is all getting a bit heavy, can't somebody post a jpeg of a pair of tits and we can forget about all this?

[sasguru]

Hey, this is all getting a bit heavy, can't somebody post a jpeg of a pair of tits and we can forget about all this?

Go to Test Please Delete thread in the Light Relief section. Titties Galore.
Not work safe.

[Antman]

see ya!

[PerlOfWisdom]

Halibut!

[Clog II The Avenger]

The Holocaust

Denying the holocaust is stupid, but it should not be criminal. There is a reasonable argument over the numbers of Jews murdered because the total European Jewish population in 1938 was 6,000,000 and clearly some Jews emigrated and survived.

Whatever the number murdered does not lessen the crime. However there are even Jewish writers who accuse Israeli politicians of creating a “Holocaust Industry” out of the suffering. Some put the figures for the gas chambers as low as 200,000 whish is clearly wrong and ridiculous, but also the 6,000,000 is mathematically wrong.

To comparable fictitious cartoons of Muslims is not comparable with real history.. I do not that when Muslims kill in the name of Allah or Mohamed, there is no such protest of using the names and images in vain