kleinboet

Try telling Cheltenham Borough Council that cycling on the pavements is illegal! They have divided all the pavements into two "lanes" by painting a white line down the middle, and know say that the "lane" nearest the road is now OFFICIALLY the cycle lane. Funny thing is, a lot of cyclists refuse to use them. There have been a number of injuries in the centre of town which has been "pedestrianised". Young teenage scrotes have run into elderly folk, knocking them down, the getting back on their bikes and legging it! If you try and stop them YOU are done for "assaulting" the prat!!

We have brought this on ourselves - in our mad rush to be "non-racist" we bend over backwards (often at our own expense) to show that we "care". That's why we have a BLACK policemans union - I've never heard of a WHITE one, because that would be racist!! If these Muslims want shariah law, then go to a country that has it - not the UK!!

If this is such a good idea then why were the Irish the ONLY member to have a referendum? It is all very well for politicians to keep the gravy train rolling, but a lumbering, inept, corrupt organisation that size is just asking for trouble. Why won't they allow the members an opt out? I expect we could if we just stopped paying them!

Brown has just about bankrupted the country - Cameron is just telling it like it is, SOMEONE will have to sort out our finances...Brown can't!

Simple answer to that go and tell that to the Queen, The Pope and all the churches in England. As I have said in the beginning - England is anti-Christian. By the way, try using that sort of logic on every religion in the woprld...including the Sikh religion!!!

BP - I could say the same about you! What are YOU doing on here? Why I am answering questions is because I see this country being sent to hell in a hand basket by the PC's who don't look further than their noses. Why must PC's step in and say no to all OUR traditional celebrations! I am not a racist - BUT they say you HAVE to have other ethnic groups working side by side with whites. To me, THAT is racist!!! The person that can do the job best should have the job, regardless of colour or gender! Insisting that these people are installed in the workplace, regardless of ability, is the same as ignoring them completely!!

Alan, have you read the tems and conditions? No jewelry WHICH WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE EXECUTION OF YOUR DUTY, which means just that, If they put just no jewelry, then 50/80% would break that rule as they wear rings!!! What is being said in this country is that Christian festivals will not be held because it could embarrass non-Christians. Look at the Red Cross shops that refuse to decorate their shops for christmas! What they are trying to do is banish a public display of Chrismas - which is like banning the Rio carnival because it may embarrass non Brazilians!

No sportsman YOU dom't understand - Show me the dress code that says no medallions!! The "strict dress code" is rubbish in the first degree. Let me explain. I see nurses IN FULL UNIFORM shopping in Tesco's on a daily basis, or walking around town , riding a bus etc. If there WAS a dress code which was for the good of the people, then they would change into their uniform in hospital, which is supposed to be a clean environment. This used to happen in the "bad old days", but not today!! How can "medallions" be bad for patients - remember this is not back in the days of "medallion man", a crucifix is a small piece of jewelry, which wouldn't "dangle down into a patients face"!!!(In fact a lot of them are on "chokers") Now do you mean to tell me that this piece of jewelry is hazardous to patients, yet walking around town in uniform, sweating, or shedding hair will not!! The crucifix is banned because "it may cause embarrasment to a non-Christian"

BP - Likewise!!! I see you all pick up on the "poor" Sikh! The only sensible answer was from steve walker, but even he missed the point that if he is not prepared to wear the standard riot gear (which includes headgear) he should not have been employed!! However if you want to pay for that mistake, then so be it!! I see nobody will argue about the medallion ruse used by the NHS. Why don't they start by getting rid of the top heavy management and start making the NHS more efficient (not more paper bound).

Sportsman and others, I will put it in stages so that a five year old will understand it! The Sikh is suing his employer - right? The Sikh is employed by the police federation - Right? Where does the police federation get its funding - The government - right? Where does the government get the money to pay the police federation? ergo!! The Sikh is suing the BRITISH!!! The crucifix is part and parcel with religion whether you like it or not!! But for the sake of the argument we will call it a medallion. Can somebody please explain to me how the medallion can affect the patients welfare when perspiration, loose hairs etc. will not?

Really? So if the Sikh was a BRITISH subject, then why is he allowed to SUE the BRITISH? If he is a BRITISH subject then he must obey the British rules, It does religious "tolerance" mean that we must not offend them at the expense of our own religion! Why are the exempt from wearing helmets when riding a motorbike. As for the hospitals not having a problem with crucifixes, just medallions, then they should visit Cheltenham general hospital! And why was a nurse disciplined for OFFERING to pray for somebody? Like it or not, ENGLAND is a CHRISTIAN nation, with the Queen being the head of the church... and that has AFAIK NOT been repealed. Coming back to the medallion rubbish, I have NEVER seen a newspaper article stating that any country in the Americas, Australasia or Asia, stating that they have a problem with crucifixes!! Quite the opposite, with a number of factual programmes showing nurses, paramedics and doctors wearing them! It is not the subject, but the poster that is bringing that reaction!

Put these two events of the past few weeks and tell me we are are a country that will accept other religions AS LONG AS THEY RESPECT OURS!!!!!! A Sikh has been awarded "substantial" damages for being told to remove his turban! A British nurse has been Reprimanded for wearing a Crucifix Immigrants Rule!!

Alan Stubbs - Carry on!! Your not a bad Mass-debater yourself!! I wonder what the relatives of the innocent victims of the Lockerby bombing would say to all of your replies?

Looking at that, it would appear that his "helpers" were holding him back!! By the way, I wish people would READ the threads - "he strode across the tarmac ...." not came down the stairs!!!

As for a declaration war, it would help if you read a legal definition - the link I gave you does exactly that. You are calling an armed conflict 'war', it isn't, it's armed conflict. As for comemnts by Brown about being 'at war with terrorism', look at the legal definition - or are you simply an illiterate old fool? He was using the word 'war' as an emotive - indeed, had it been a legal dclaration of war, it would require an act of parliament to do so. This is why I repeat, as your half brain cell is obviously dysfunctional, it is an armed conflict. It is not a war. "War is a reciprocated, armed conflict, between two or more non-congruous entities, aimed at reorganising a subjectively designed, geo-politically desired result" (Wikipedia - when I Googled armed conflict) I watched him being helped into the plane, wearing pyjamas - UNABLE to walk unasisted........yet at the Lybian airport, he strode across the tarmac FLANKED (not assisted!!!) by two Lybian policemen (remember he is still supposed to be in custody) clean shaven, wearing glasses and was smartly dressed in a western suit and tie!! Why let facts get in the way - bend words to suit you!

Alan Stubbs - I think {removed - inappropriate comment} !! The rubbish that you print just because it is me that is posting!!! GB himself has declared on a number of occasions (along withe the minister of defence) that we "are at war with terrorism" You could of fooled me - I thought if our army was in another country shooting at them and being shot at was being at war!!! WE are not at war with Afghanistan, but the Taleban!! Sorry, but I thought everyone with half a braincell knew that!!! Take a look at your "hero" (he has to be, the way you are standing up for him!) and please explain to me how he can get get on a 'plane to Lybia dressed in pyjamas with a towel round his head and helpesd by two people to get onto the aircraft, then appear at the other side smartly dressed in WESTERN garb and confidently walking off the 'plane to a hero's welcome!!! As for my Christianity, I am proud of it!!! and any atheist (you have to be one to mock!) is not going to stop me being a christian!! That is why I would rather not be a member.

Ah! the usual PC BS!! It does not matter whether he was guilty or not of actually blowing the plane up and killing over 200 people in cold blood or not - he is (and always will be) a TERRORIST!!! As you have very publicly pointed out our week points which MAY have been missed, the UK will now HAVE to beef up it's anti-terrorist stance! This is the country that CONDONES the jeering of anti-war (but not anti terrorist) individuals when Britain was bringing back it's war dead. This is the country that when we have black on white racial violence will sweep it under the carpet (but not if it was the other way round!) We have gone soft - so soft that the terrorist will look on us as a prime target!! I am a commited Christian But the terrorists aren't!!!

I have logged in to make you aware of one thing you have all missed. Terrorists are prepared to die for their cause, BUT, they are going to run out of terrorists unless they find a "soft" target. Scotlands government, by letting him free, has just given them one......................... the UK!!

Worms: Some say it may be derived from the phrase "by Our Lady", a sacrilegious invocation of the Virgin Mary. The abbreviated form "By'r Lady" is common in Shakespeare's plays around the turn of the 17th century, and interestingly Jonathan Swift about 100 years later writes both "it grows by'r Lady cold" and "it was bloody hot walking to-day" [1] suggesting that a transition from one to the other could have been under way If you did believe in God, you wouldn't be a murderer, and some people really do, and go on to live good lives - it's up to the individual as to whether it was the truth or a pack of lies! Blasphemy is when a believing person KNOWINGLY insults God. Davy R : "In his encyclical Redemptoris Mater, Pope John Paul II said: Thus there is a mediation: Mary places herself between her Son and mankind in the reality of their wants, needs and sufferings. She puts herself "in the middle", that is to say she acts as a mediatrix not as an outsider, but in her position as mother. She knows that as such she can point out to her Son the needs of mankind, and in fact, she "has the right" to do so. Her mediation is thus in the nature of intercession: Mary "intercedes" for mankind". WHO said it? Not God!! Funny you will take a human's word for it - but not God's

Emma 2 - so you by your very words APPROVE of those actions, and don't deny it otherwise why bring it up. Most mothers will tell you that they threatened their children if they did something wrong - If you do that, I'll do this - or words to that effect, but we know they wouldn't harm a hair on their heads!!But even then you didn't put the whole thing in - just what you wanted! I suggest you read the WHOLE piece before trying to twist information to suit you! Jesus was NOT God, he was sent in human form (or so the Bible says) and had human foibles (turning over the money-changers tables in the temple, cursing the fig tree because it had no fruit etc.) to tell the world to treat one another properly! Christians lead by example - how many times in your life have you heard "that is unchristian!!" when somebody does something wrong? As to your last comments - you really should get out more!!! Oh - I forgot it's the last one of those cherry picked statements that you object to!!

Chesters - I hate to tell you, but those "sayings" are prayers. Atheists deny Christ, the Bible (it's a 'fairy tale) or anything remotely religious. "Oh sh1t" is a saying, people that don't believe in GOD, use prayers by telling you they are "sayings" If you don't believe in god use some of the many other sayings - otherwise you ARE praying. If you are in a car and something happens to put you in danger why do most people say "God help me/us" if they don't believe. Even bl00dy has religious connotations, thanks to the Catholics (by our lady has been shortened to bl00dy) I know that the original ten commandments are common sense, but then a lot of people have no common sense, thats why they were brought to everyone's notice. If you believe in Christ THE SAVIOUR , you are a Christian - Christ is in the Q'ran and most other religious books (not the Torah) as a prophet like all the others. If you ask them why prophets suddenly dried up after Christ, they answer "we are waiting for the Messiah". I know that there are many people in our midst that plan murder, theft, etc. but these people are NOT Christians. How can the call themselves Christians if they break both the law of today and the commandments!

Oh dear - this is going back to Sunday School. Let me just say God's Churches were TOTALLY different from the Christian church today - It was a forum for debate, rather like this one, only with people facing one another. Remember were told Church and not churches, A lot of "churches today are creations of man. Men who used only one or two paragraphs of the Bible to form a new church. IMHO if you believe in god and Jesus, you are a member of his church. Look at the C of E. Started by royalty who was told by Rome (another wayward "church" ) that he could not marry again! Why I call what is possibly the most powerful "church" in the world "wayward" is that they don't pray directly to God, but through the Virgin Mary - breaking a commandment! Now something startling - you don't HAVE to go to church to be a Christian!! You can pray anywhere! As for non-Christians, how many of them have never said a prayer - even if it only "thank God" , "God help us" or "Oh God" They are all prayers, whether you like it or not! Let's try and use some common sense here, Christians do use the all eleven commandments, but not in the way that is was done in the OT. What the do is observe the commandments!! Voluntarily!! We don't commit adultery, kill people, we don' covet our neighbours wives etc. Why???? We have a very important duty as Christians, we show we are Christians by example (well we try!)

I am going round and round in circles here - the OT is history!!!! (Bilical history if you want!) - the NT is the start of life as we know it!! By the way, those of you that keep in saying Christians and the old testament in the same breath, Christianity did not exist!! The name Christianity comes from Christ!!! Cory: Matthew 5 (Verse 17)'Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfil. (Verse 18)For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. (Verse 19)Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Verse 17 - He did, he fulfilled it with the eleventh commandment! Verse 18 - emphasis on the ALL Verse 19 - I don't argue with that!

DavyR :The deal was that you could worship whoever you wanted, so long as you also recognised the supremacy of the emperor Do you honesty believe that the Christians, even today would do that? Can you Imagine - Bowing down to Gordon Brown and calling him a GOD!!!!!!!

I see we are back to the OT again (some 80% of Israelis are NOT Christians, but Jewish!)