Reply With QuoteBan religion in all forms. Re-brand it as morality and principle based around the 10 commandments (or really the 6 commandments as the first four are bullsh!t) and basically just treat people as you would wish to be treated.
Problem solved.
Hall Of Fame
Originally Posted by Elite_Pie
Mainly. It amazes me that people still believe there is a God, whether a he, she, or it. I can understand it in the dark ages when science was in it's infancy and it might have seemed the most likely explanation, but surely not in this day and age.
As for the Queen, probably a nice lady who's given good service, but I can't agree with the principle of a Royal Family.[/quote]
wow ! for the first time i agree with some of your post, i also cant get my head around how people still believe in a god. But, unfortunately christian religion is on the decline and the muslim religion is on the increase, which can only end in tears for us. so what do we do ?
Hall Of Fame
Ban religion in all forms. Re-brand it as morality and principle based around the 10 commandments (or really the 6 commandments as the first four are bullsh!t) and basically just treat people as you would wish to be treated.
Problem solved.
Hall Of Fame
Very silly and contradictive comment EP
Hall Of Fame
Why is it silly, and why is it contradictive?
All I'm saying is behave in the right manner but remove the ridiculous 'God' bit.
Hall Of Fame
2005 Cambridge figures, said 88% of the worlds population believed in a God(s).
Britain was 38%.
That's an awful lot of people to label, with a ridiculous comment.
Everyone is entitled to believe in what they want, if it brings them contentment. No one can say to believe is mad and those that are fanatical about it, have no right to push it.
Hall Of Fame
Because stop thinking you are always correct !!! You saying ban religion is just as extreme as people saying we must believe in god, ala, budha ect, are you so arrogant you can't see that?
Hall Of Fame
Worst thread I've ever seen
Hall Of Fame
You said to me "what do we do?", so I told you what I would do. It's my opinion and mine alone, you either agree or disagree. It's not right or wrong, it's just what I think.
Hall Of Fame
Mainly. It amazes me that people still believe there is a God, whether a he, she, or it. I can understand it in the dark ages when science was in it's infancy and it might have seemed the most likely explanation, but surely not in this day and age.
As for the Queen, probably a nice lady who's given good service, but I can't agree with the principle of a Royal Family.[/quote]
The issue is with a Queen not God.
The reason why the Royal Family or just plainly a Sovereign stays is a) the service they provide and more importantly b) someone above politics.
In the 3 or 4 instances in recent memory where someone was needed to determine the political fate of the nation, the Queen acted correctly:
1) 1956 (or thereabouts) with Eden's resignation. She had choice between Butler or MacMillan, and chose HM by consulting Churchill and asking th
Hall Of Fame
I shudder to think what an elected or appointed President would have done in such a position.
It's very likely that 1 or more of them would have chosen instead to immerse themselves in the political process and sided with a PM or Party Leader, and thus alienate the other side and their voters.
The Sovereign with no political affiliation and obligated to no one, is able to rise above the situation and either a) ignore the quarreling politicians until they decide or b - use behind the scenes influence to prod 1 or more of them to do the sensible thing, and c) as she has done - give them some time and space to gauge the public mood and act responsibly.
Only when all this fails, then she must act to use her reserve powers.
I believe a President, beholden to some party or keen to make his mark and legacy as Sir John Kerr did in 1975, would have acted rashly.
Here the ruling party acts as her representative and Govt is in her, thus the Sovereign has an enormous advantage to resolve
Posting Permissions