I know you should just ignore the troll but one can only assume the poster currently known as Steph votes for the Green party or CND representatives, or the Lib Dems.

He's so anti-capitalist and anti-weapons sales that he couldn't possibly vote Tory.

Absolutely stand by that comment - any religion that consider females less valuable than males is an issue for me, any religion that accepts honour killings as acceptable again is an issue for me. Any religion that thinks intimate physical relations between the same sex is punishable by death is also an issue for me - I am leaving that there.

No private companies will have supplied weapons to potentially lethal despots whilst Labour were in government but I doubt very much that the Labour party increased their funds by selling a few rifles and grenades.

You've not read the bible have you.

Have you taken a peek into the history of the Catholic religion or Church of England.
Granted they havent gone for honour killings but, they certainly dont treat women equally and let's not even go towards their exploits with young boys or young unmarried pregnant girls.



How about "castratos" in the Catholic church too and for what ??

All religion is man made and about power and control. Most of them, however, have at least tried to move on from the middle ages. Haven't seen many beheadings, stonings or homosexuals thrown off tall buildings in this country recently.

I don't anywhere in the bible where same sex relationships are punishable by death - I don't see any Christian country that practises that - maybe I'm wrong?

I don't think in the bible it suggests honour killing your daughter is not only allowed but positively encouraged - again perhaps I'm wrong.

Good job Monty Python didn't do a life of Brian on Mohammed - do you think Salman Rushdie was have got the same response if his book was about Christianity?

Leviticus 20:13
“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.'

This is the old testament though, and although homosexuality is never acceptable in Christianity, it is not punishable by death in the new testament.

As for honour killings... Again from the old testament:
Deuteronomy 22

20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

Again, this wasn't really condoned in the new testament.

The fact is, all religions are usually violent and oppressive if followed orthodoxicly. Ask the Muslims in Myanmar if they think Buddhism is a peaceful religion for example. So it's not just as simple as saying one is any worse then any other, especially when there's so many other factors that motivates someone to do something.

It's also important to realise Islam is approximately 600 years 'younger' than Christianity, and at approximately the same point in Christian history the Spanish inquisition was taking place in Europe, so it doesn't necessarily mean Islam won't go through the same reforms as Christianity has. Having said that, it could be argued that those reforms were a result of social and economic changes, as opposed to religious modernisation.

I think you're confusing where a country is in the march towards secularism and inherent problems with one religion more than another.

They're all terrible, all have deeply unpleasant and bloody pasts and I view with deep suspicion anyone who genuinely believes in them.

Countries, religions or both?

I completely agree re religion - Islam is particularly troublesome - you only have to look at recent events in Batley.

Tribal disagreements are far more aggressive - look in Rwanda, Middle East, Ethiopia - this is real and nothing to do with religion.

Both are Abrahamic religions but Christianity changed 1000 years ago - Islam it would appear is still stuck in the middle ages

Sadly, I believe that conflict is just part of what we are as humans. Religion, colour and geographic boundaries are just the excuses.

We are just animals after all - albeit with a higher intelligence

I’ve read the bible. Can you point out where it says “thou shall blow up innocent people” or “if thou sees a cartoon of Jesus thou should get a machine gun and murder people”?

I don't think they had AK47s and TNT in the middle east 2000 years ago.

I think they had explosive in China well before that

Quote ="Zoo Zoo Boom"I think they had explosive in China well before that'" They didn’t. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_gunpowder An chap called John Green has a series of 42 short videos on YouTube called Crash Course World History that I found entertaining and informative, when I watched them a few years ago.

Quote ="Zoo Zoo Boom"I think they had explosive in China well before that'" They didn’t. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_gunpowder An chap called John Green has a series of 42 short videos on YouTube called Crash Course World History that I found entertaining and informative, when I watched them a few years ago.

Quote ="Mild Rover"They didn’t. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_gunpowder An chap called John Green has a series of 42 short videos on YouTube called Crash Course World History that I found entertaining and informative, when I watched them a few years ago.'" China had fireworks c200BC - started using explosives about 600AD - possibly just before the start of Islam.

Quote ="Mild Rover"They didn’t. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_gunpowder An chap called John Green has a series of 42 short videos on YouTube called Crash Course World History that I found entertaining and informative, when I watched them a few years ago.'" China had fireworks c200BC - started using explosives about 600AD - possibly just before the start of Islam.

Primitive firecrackers (e.g. bamboo stems thrown into fires), you mean?

What’s your source for explosives being developed/used that early (before the 9th century)?

Try looking at the vintage news on google

Have gone into some sort of meta, self referential liar, liar parody skit here? With Johnsonian alt-facts?

It’s okay to be wrong. If a bit lazy nowadays. Like me, when I didn’t know what ‘commercial banking’ meant the other day. Learning is winning. Desperately reframing and chatting chaff isn’t for intellectual titans like me and thee. It is for second rate bluffers like ABdPJ.

I can’t believe that Labour supporters are actually sticking up for terrorists in This thread.

I mean. Really?

Who was it who backed apartheid in South Africa.