If you’re belief is that there is “probably no God”, then that’s probably not something to obsess over and buy ad space on buses. If you’re sure there is no God, I can see you getting worked up over it, but if you’re uncertain about it it doesn’t seem like a subject to spend much time on. That’s like reading lots of books on cryptozoology because you’re convinced there probably isn’t a Loch Ness monster.
I agree with the religious leaders in Britain who consider the ads a net positive since it will get God discussed in a country where there isn’t much discussion about religion anymore. If you’re trying to offend people (which it sounds like Dawkins wanted to do — that guy is not a model for the cheerful atheist), they probably should have picked a more religious nation. Or make sure the buses go through the Muslim parts of town. That would be fun.
I not only think they should send the buses through muslim parts of town but as they do they should have the cheerful atheists like me tossing complimentary bags of huge pork rines off of the bus. Nary would you ever see a more cheerful atheist if you let me do this!
I notice that the signs don’t say Allah. Dawkins has no guts.
…and by “guts”, I mean male genitalia.
This is one of those stories that AllahPundit at Hot Air would title “Atheists continue to make friends, influence people”.
I agree with C.S. Lewis. “Athieism is too simple. If there is no God, we should not have arrived at the question in the first place!”
Saw this on BoingBoing a week or so ago, and laughed that “so-sure-of-themselves” athiests would include a “probably” in there. Covering their bases? Very committed to their POV I guess. Very.
If there is probably no God, then the question devolves to one of Expected Value (or cost/benefit).
(Probability of God’s existence) * (cost of living His way) * (results of living His way)
weighed against
(1 – Probability of God’s existence) * (cost of not living His way) * (results of not living His way)
Since the results of not living his way are uniformly bad, both in temporal and especially eternal terms, the probability of God’s existence would have to be very nearly zero for atheism to be a viable alternative.
As Pascal said:
“I would rather be mistaken, and find out that there is no God, than to be mistaken and find out that there is.”
# 7…exactly how I feel…I’m not a “traditionally religious person” but I’m spiritual and I’d rather error on the side of caution!
Seems to me it takes a alot of effort to be an athiest.
Also, when last I checked, I am enjoying my life. If they don’t believe in G-d, why would they care if I do? I don’t get it. I mean, they don’t feel any real responsibility to anyone besides themselves, right? So, why would they give a flying flip what I believe? Could it be they just want some control over other people? That’s my big guess.
Carolynp: “Could it be they just want some control over other people? That’s my big guess.”
Now you’re getting it. The noisy atheists, liberals, the skeptic industry and parts of mainstream science are attempting to turn their beliefs into religions of their own. Remember, God warned us that this would happen. I just find it funny that these people keep going on about the inquisition and “the evils of religion” when they don’t realize that they are recreating the same things in their own image!
I think we ought to gather a couple Mohammed cartoons to run on the sides of busses running through the Muslim parts of town and attribute them to Dawkins.
Eros: I’ll pitch in for that!
“Threre’s probably no God, so stop worrying and enjoy your life.”
Sincerely, Satan
Why is it that Atheists (some, not all) angrily tell us there is no God and to try and enjoy life, yet it is happy folk (most of them) that tell me that Jesus Loves me, there is a God and that’s why I should enjoy my life?
Cognitive Dissonance just blew the top of my skull off.
Dawkins is such a putz. Based on his perpetual pissyness, I bet people “get religion” just to Not Be Like Dawkins. Heck, conversion to islam and hot-bunking with fat bastard Adam Gadahn seems more appealing than what Dawk has to offer.
# 7…exactly how I feel…I’m not a “traditionally religious person” but I’m spiritual and I’d rather error on the side of caution!
When it comes to your eternal soul and life and death…I’m sorry honey…you can’t “be on the side of caution”! LOL! Either God exists or He doesn’t! Your “let’s be careful about this” doesn’t work for me or for God! He sent his Son to us and we Crusified him! and he rose from the dead! Jesus didn’t come to Earth to be “careful” about his message! He was crusified! The most brutal form of death ever invented! Stop with “let’s be on the side of caution”! I’m thankful that Jesus wasn’t! He suffered death on MY BEHALF so that I DON’T HAVE TO! EVER! Because I BELIEVE IN HIM!
I think that someone should buy ads on London buses denying the existence of Richard Dawkins.
God save us from evangelical atheists.
To George (#17): Amen to that!
Buses? If you want the Muslims to notice, put the ads on cabs. Especially cab that go to airports, and forbid you to enter with liquor.
Professor John Pokinghorn:
“In the early expansion of the universe there has to be a close balance between the expansive energy (driving things apart) and the force of gravity (pulling things together). If the expansion dominated, then matter would fly apart too rapidly for condensation into galaxies and stars to take place.
Nothing interesting could happen in so thinly spread a world.
On the other hand, if gravity dominated, the world would collapse in on itself again before there was time for the processes of life to get going.
For (man) to be possible requires a balance between the effects of expansion and contraction which at a very early epoch in the universe’s history (the Planck time) has to differ from equality by not more than 1 in 1060.
The numerate will marvel at such a degree of accuracy. For the non-numerate I will borrow an illustration from Paul Davis of what that accuracy means: He points out that it is the same as aiming at a target one inch wide on the other side of the observable universe, twenty thousand million light years away, and hitting it bullseye!”
Two books, “23 Minutes in Hell,” and “To Hell and Back,’ describe a hellish place that is corroborated by another author, Richard Eby, who experienced death after falling from a second story balcony.
I accepted Jesus Christ as Savior after having been raised by an atheist socialist in a manner consistent to that worldview. My questions regarding existence were answered, “we are all just highly evolved animals, and death is the end of consciousness.” So then where did consciousness, and mans sense of justice come from?
Everything is up for grabs if there is no G-d. Self interest is primary; survival of the fittest is natural.
As is happens, Atheists bow before their own altars, lavishing their thoughts, time and money on nature, books, celebrities, booze, drugs, animals, technology, guns, the stars, name it, everyone has some “flaming turbo” idol set up in their heart.
But can it save them at the end of their lives…? If they gamble and loose, the loss is catastrophic, in that there is no recovery according to scripture.
I’m tired of this catch phrase, “I’m spiritual, but I’m not religious.” I guess that means “I believe in God but I’m still going to live my life as I want.”
I am an atheist, but I don’t get activist atheist. I would never try to take someone’s faith from them. That is just cruel. However, there is one situation where I would try to take someone’s faith. I fully support Ann Coulter’s plan to “invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity”. http://www.nationalreview.com/coulter/coulter.shtml
I think the activist atheist are just self-destructive liberals who coincidentally happen to be atheist. They want to destroy anything that illustrates the depravity and futility of their lives, so religion is their obvious target. As someone who lost his faith, I recommend guarding yours. Your faith is a valuable asset that will serve you well.
I am not an activist atheist either, but Christopher Hitchens’ book God is Not Great does a great job of outlining the terrors that religion has created in the world. It is a fascinating read. I’m more a fan of Sam Harris, however, than Hitchens or Dawkins, who both come across to me as a little too in-your-face. Still, they’re all worth checking out in my opinion.
In my defense #16 and #20:
I just don’t go to church. I believe and am deeply spiritual…it’s a very personal and individual thing. I don’t dis the way others relate to God, I hope you give me the same respect. Hey, we’re all on teh same side here!
As far as error on the side of caution: that was directed towards the idea of being an athiest, not at myself…I see harm in not believing but no harm in believing, ya know?
“I have seen a wicked man overbearing,
and towering like a cedar of Lebanon.
Again I passed by, and, lo, he was no more;
though I sought him, he could not be found.”
– Psalm 37:35-36.
“What! You don’t believe in Me?
Why, you ungrateful little …, I ought’a …, Just wait ’till I get you home!”
– God (probably)
Seen on a T-shirt once:
“God is dead.” — Nietzche
“Nietzche is dead.” — God
Socrates. Well said.
It is interesting that militant atheists will gladly tell you the history of “all the evils religion has brought into the world” while ignoring that A) they are telling, in most cases, a very revisionist view of history based on either poor or cherry-picked research, and B) we don’t have to go very far back to see that atheism plus government equals genocide in all three examples (French Revolution, Fascism, and Communism), or as I like to call them, strike one, strike two, and strike three. When confronted with this, Hitchens goes off on a conscending rabbit trail of retardation about how Stalin was once in seminary (I studied about the oceans in school on occasion; does that make me a fish?) and fails to indicate why all the other communists did the same thing, and continue to do so in China, etc.
Dawkins built his career along the following lines:
1) Steal from your college mentor, extend, and popularize the concept of “the selfish gene”, which is little more than philosophy strapped onto science.
2) When this idea is disproved, talk about atheism.
3) Steal the idea of Memetics, rebrand it Memes, and popularize it.
4) When this too is found to be so much philosophy posing as science, write a book attacking religion.
Frankly, given his track record, I hope he does to atheism what he’s done to every other idea he’s stolen and promoted – destroy it. Interestingly, this is very similar to the Microsoft strategy of “embrace and extend” which basically means wizz on any idea that is not your own, embrace the technologies you can’t stop, and extend them so that only people who give you money can use them, even though you didn’t invent them. Ironically, or perhaps not, the department chair that Dawkins heads is from money donated by the guy at Microsoft who “invented” (ahem) Word and Excel.
England has faded from a world power into a dire dystopia of Orwellcams, Muslims who breed, and Atheists who don’t. A friend once threw a cigarette wrapper out a car window on the freeway in England and the driver yelled at her because he knew the cameras would pick it up and he’d get a ticket. He did. Chicago, originator of such fine politicians as… too many to mention, also has a few hundred of these cameras downtown.
At Reagan’s last speech, he was honored by Thatcher and a number of other dignitaries. One theme that they said united England and the US is that we see power as going from God to the people, then to the state. In the Continent and third world, they see power as going from God to the state, and then people get the leftovers metered out to them by the government. Where they don’t believe in God, the state has no accountablity, and apparently sees there role as the omnipresent eyes and fist to maintain order amongst those whom they taught to laugh at honor. It is sad to see England, after so many years, fall to the slavery of the Continent, to see “The 300” of sorts fall before the arrows of atrophy. I am seriously concerned that after four years of this new annointed one, we could be in worse shape than England, both financially and in terms of liberty.
jul – Thanks for sharing. Awesome post.
ussjimmy – I agree. Jesus was clear as day about who He was and the choice given to us all. There simply is no in-between.
One pastor I heard said people spend more time researching their next car than they do thinking about where they (and their children, what are we teaching them?!) will spend eternity. Nothing is more important.
Kent – You always blow me away!
I find it ironic, Frank, that there is an ad for reasonism.org right beneath this story. The ad is advertising the book “The Tyranny of God” and points the reader to an atheist website.
Just thought that was a little ironic…..
Kent said:
“A friend once threw a cigarette wrapper out a car window on the freeway in England and the driver yelled at her because he knew the cameras would pick it up and he’d get a ticket. He did.”
This is hilarious – I drive the motorways (freeways) of England every day and can assure you that this is nonsense. Whilst I agree that the UK has many cameras on the road, they are purely used for speed control and, in some urban areas, road tax evasion. However, most people that use the roads with any regularity are one step ahead of the game and have camera databases loaded into their sat navs. Consequently, they’re given prior warning of camera locations and adjust their speed on approach. It’s actually easier now to avoid tickets as cameras have replaced many speed traps set up by police patrols waiting in random concealed sidings. In respect of surveillance cameras in towns, maybe Britain has gone a little overboard. However, the purpose is to detect street crime and they are generally located in high risk areas. They have served to reduce crime in many town centres and, as yet, I have never heard of anyone being penalised for a minor misdemeanor caught on camera. I struggle with accepting the ‘Big Brother’ approach to crime but, to be honest, I cannot disagree that stringent action to reduce street crime was necessary. Had we done nothing, we would have ended up with statistics similar to yours in the US; a thought that no free thinking Brit would like to entertain.
In respect of the initial posting – Britain, in general, is now viewed as secular. However, Christianity is still alive and well and we have 67% of the population still believing in God (albeit fewer than the 78% in the US). Personally, I do not believe in God as per the teachings of The Bible; there are far too many inconsistencies for me to be convinced. However, I certainly do not rule out the possibility of creation at some point in history (somewhere around four and a half billion years before The Bible would have us believe). Consequently, I would be considered an Agnostic and it is my experience that many, non Christian, Brits hold similar viewpoints. I can, however, assure you that the debate continues vigorously.
The difference I have found when speaking to British people about religion, as opposed to discussing it with Americans during the several years I spent in your country, is that, for some reason, Brit’s are far more willing to consider alternative theories and, generally, have a better understanding of the content of the Bible from which to base their arguments. Please do not feel that I am trying to paint Brit’s superior in any way, I can assure you we’re all equal, but it does seem to be that Americans are often happy to accept a belief that they have been brought up with, without checking out the evidence for themselves.
“A great deal of human suffering has been caused by religious fanaticism. If the Inquisition no longer has the power to compel our indignation, the Moslem world often seems quite prepared to carry the burden of exuberant depravity in its place.
Nontheless, there is this awkward fact: The twentieth century was not an age of faith, and it was awful. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Pol Pot will never be counted among the religious leaders of mankind.”
– David Berlinski, The Devil’s Delusion, 2008
“To me consensus seems to be: The process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause could have been fought and won under the banner “I stand for consensus”?”
-Margaret Thatcher, The Downing Street Years, 1994
“Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never – in nothing, great or small, large or petty – never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense.”
– Winston Churchill, Address at Harrow School, 1941
“As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”
– Joshua 24:15
What’s the rate of home-invasion-robbery per 100,000 population in Great Britian these days?
5 of 7 asked – “What’s the rate of home-invasion-robbery per 100,000 population in Great Britian these days?”
Latest published figures for 2006/2007 are 2.5% of households, or 2500 per 100,000 households – (households, not population). This has fallen steadily year-on-year from a high of 6.4% in 1995. It should probably be noted that the vast majority of British homes do not have any form of intruder alarm system installed.
Source: Home Office Statistical Bulletin (PDF Document)
Sorry, looks like I buggered up the link – the PDF cited is at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/17_07_07_crime.pdf
If he were smart, he would’ve put that on a T-shirt and MADE money instead of putting it on a bus and PAYING for it.
Anyway, as IMAO’s token staff atheist, I have to say that I’m against this because it’s rude to open a conversation with a complete stranger by making a controversial statement, and that’s essentially what this ad does.
If atheists want to persuade people that being an atheist is a good thing, then atheists should start by not being assholes.
I have been pondering (yes I know a dangerous endeavor), still, the major difference between Europeans and Americans is that Europeans are willing to settle. They are willing to give up freedom for “peace”, liberty for “comfort” and leadership for “totalitarianism”. They have been like this for the last 500 or more years.
That is why our ancestors originally left. They were not willing to settle or to allow someone else to choose for them. They weren’t willing to have less than someone else just because they were born into a certain family, socio-economic group or town. They believed that everyone was responsible for themselves and what they achieved. That is why they came here, that is why they didn’t stay there………..they refused to allow someone else to limit their destiny.
That is also why Americans achieved while Europe floundered, why the new technologies, ideas and discoveries in science, medicine et al. have come from the US. Others may take those ideas and improve on them but the generation of new ideas takes freedom of action and thought and they simply don’t know how to do that there. Just ask the Russians. They haven’t had a new thought in two millennia.
Rumpelstilskin,
You “free-thinking” Brits crack me up.
Your last paragraph is arrogant.
I still agree with Kent.
PS
The world would be a VERY different place without Christians.
“If there is probably no God, then the question devolves to one of Expected Value (or cost/benefit).
(Probability of God’s existence) * (cost of living His way) * (results of living His way)
weighed against
(1 – Probability of God’s existence) * (cost of not living His way) * (results of not living His way)
Since the results of not living his way are uniformly bad, both in temporal and especially eternal terms, the probability of God’s existence would have to be very nearly zero for atheism to be a viable alternative.”
Both of those things result in the same outcome. You go to hell no matter how you live if you’re talking about probabilities and God’s existence. At least if we’re talking about the Xian God. You have to believe in God to stay out of hell. Unless you’re assigning a 100% or maybe 99% probability to God existing, I don’t think that counts as belief.
Rumpelstiltskin;
I’m glad to hear that the crime-rate has gone down. It’d be terrible to think that you gave up your freedom and didn’t even get a reasonable degree of safety in your own homes in exchange.
PS. Lots of people ‘believe’ in God, but ‘faith’ in God is about trust.
You can’t ‘trust’ someone you don’t know.
If I want to study rocks, all I have to do is go find some rocks. They won’t come to me but they won’t run away, either. If I want to study plants, they can’t run away but some of them can stick me with a thorn or give me a rash; there’s a little bit of initiative on their part. If I want to study animals they can swim, crawl, run, borrow or fly away; it’s hard to study animals if they don’t want to be studied. If I want to get to know another human being, the initiative is 50/50. As I study them they will be studying me too.
If I want to get to know the truth about the Creator of the Universe – the initiative is ALL on His side. I can’t know anything unless He reveals it to me; by revelation, authority, example, or testimony.
Faith begins after I assent to the truth that He reveals. Faith gives me the constancy, the guiding light, to keep on believing what I’ve already accepted as true, not in the presence of evidence to the contrary, but in the presence of temptation, fear, sorrow, or my own re-imergent self-will.
When you get tired of searching for God, just turn around. He’s been right behind you all along, tapping on your shoulder. Fortuneately for us all, God Wants us to know him.
“Here I am! I stand at the door and knock!”
– Rev 3:20
Sulamie – I apologise if my last paragraph came across as arrogant, that wasn’t the intention. However, given the title of the site, the style of its content and the general nature of the commenting threads, I would have thought that arrogance was a prerequisite for contributing 🙂 In all seriousness though, my comment was based on observations I have made whilst discussing theology with both Brits and Americans; it wasn’t meant to offend in any way. With regard to Kent’s post, you are, of course, free to agree with who you wish. I was merely clarifying the situation with regard to cameras in the UK by pointing out that the story relayed to him regarding the cigarette paper was, almost certainly, erroneous. It’s just not like that here. At all.
5 of 7 – In what way do you believe our freedom in the UK has been eroded? Having lived on both sides of the pond, I see very little difference here from the US. Can you elaborate with some specifics, please?
Let’s see video camera’s in every corner. Home ownership at record lows. Gangs of armed youths (sticks and rocks) wandering the cities so no one feels safe any more. Generations of children lost to the scourge of abortion for the convenience of people who can’t take responsibility for keeping their legs closed and their pants zipped. The elderly and infirm unable to get competent medical care when they need it. Members of the military spit on and refused service. Christian institutions attacked and closed for being intolerant by members of other minority sects.
I guess you’re pretty free to wallow in the muck and mire of hedonistic and sensual secularism. That I guess is what Europe has settled for.
No offense meant…I only know about what I read in the rags.
Seanmahair:
Thank you for the feedback. Firstly, I understand freedom to be defined in terms of; freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of political viewpoint, freedom of movement, freedom to elect a government etc. In other words, true democracy. In that respect, I believe the UK to be much on a par with the USA.
The statements you have made, I believe, have more to do with quality of life and, whereas freedom and quality of life do have a bearing on each other, they are not inextricably linked.
However, I’ll still address each of the claims you have made as, because they are unsubstantiated, are open to interpretation and, therefore, in need of clarification.
“Video camera’s [sic] in every corner”
CCTV is prominent in some areas of the UK, I’ll concede to that. They’re mainly located in high risk crime areas. They are certainly not on every street corner and vast areas of the UK do not have any cameras at all. The latest statistics show that there is one camera for each 14 inhabitants. The linked article below suggests that there are now 30m cameras in the USA…
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4236865.html
With a population of approx 300m, that equates to one for every 10 inhabitants.
“Home ownership at record lows”
Home ownership is actually at a decade low, not an all time low. This has been brought about by the international economic downturn that, incidentally, started in the US as a direct result of sub-prime lending and the subsequent offsetting of loans. Home ownership in the UK runs parallel with the US and is currently equal at 69%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeownership_in_the_United_States#International_Comparison
“Gangs of armed youths (sticks and rocks) wandering the cities so no one feels safe any more”
I have never witnessed gangs of youths brandishing sticks and rocks and I spend a lot of time in different cities, both by day and night. There are some areas in some cities that have a problem with gang culture, as there is in the US. However, it is perfectly safe to walk the streets in the overwhelming majority of the UK. You might like to check out the violent crime statistics for the US versus those of the UK. As a start, you will see from the link below that your murder / homicide rate is, per capita, four times that of the UK.
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
“Generations of children lost to the scourge of abortion for the convenience of people who can’t take responsibility for keeping their legs closed and their pants zipped.”
I am not proud of the abortion statistics in the UK and am extremely concerned that abortion is being seen as a form of contraception by a frighteningly high number of young women. My work keeps me close to the UK abortion debate and I am in agreement that radical change is required to drastically reduce our figures. However, the following statistics show how much of a problem this is in the US where 24% of pregnancies end in abortion. I must admit that this figure staggered me as I thought it would be the one area where the UK would definitely return significantly damning figures. Apparently not.
US statistics:
http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/tp/Ten-Abortion-Facts.htm
UK statistics:
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/publicationsandstatistics/publications/publicationsstatistics/dh_4116461
I would write more on the ‘Silver Ring Thing’ abstention initiative in the US and its disappointing statistics, as this is something I have had to consider in the course of my work. However, the subject is huge and a separate debate in itself.
“The elderly and infirm unable to get competent medical care when they need it”
The UK, as you are probably aware, has a National Health Service that provides free medical care for all its citizens. Nowadays, many UK citizens choose to take out private health care insurance as the level of care is, understandably, higher than the free service. Health care plans provided by employers are becoming increasingly common. Nonetheless, we do still provide a comprehensive free medical service for anyone that wishes to access it. I believe we can be proud of that. It has found itself under a great deal of strain over the years as it requires huge cash injections from the government. You only have to do a brief Google search to find articles that are critical of US health policy for the poor. One, for example, can be read at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-06-18-texas-health-care_N.htm#uslPageReturn
“Members of the military spit on and refused service”
These, I can assure you are isolated instances, carried out by people I am ashamed to share my nationality with. The few occurrences are then sensationalised by the gutter press. The vast majority of UK citizens are extremely proud of our armed services and support them all the way, even if they are not so supportive of the political decisions that take them into ‘some’ controversial wars. With regard to the US, you also have your fundamentalists that take repulsive action against your war heroes.
http://current.com/items/89006804/westboro_church_thanks_god_for_deaths.htm
These American, ‘supposed’ Christians picket your soldiers funerals with placards such as ‘Thank God for Dead Soldiers’ – Nothing on this grotesque scale has ever been staged against our soldiers in Britain. However, I would not dream of taking this as representative of the general US viewpoint, in the same way that I would not expect Americans to view our isolated ‘minor’ incidents as representative of the British viewpoint.
“Christian institutions attacked and closed for being intolerant by members of other minority sects.”
Again, isolated instances jumped on by the tabloids and sensationalised out of all proportion. All UK towns, cities and villages still have Christian churches in high numbers that carry on their business unchallenged at all times.
It saddens me that many Americans hold viewpoints that are so scathing of Britain and British culture, and choose to believe only the negatives they hear about it. Britain has always been a staunch ally of America and, at this point in time, stands shoulder to shoulder with you in two wars. Yes there are some social problems in Britain but, as the above hopefully illustrates, they are no more than those in the USA.
Incidentally, thank you for giving me something to occupy my time on a particularly cold and typically wet British Sunday afternoon!
#44 – Rumpelstiltskin,
“Can you elaborate with some specifics, please?
2 – .22 cal revolvers
1 – .32 acp pistol
1 – .32 S&W long revolver
1 – .357 Magnum revolver
1 – .45 cal pistol
1 – .22 cal bolt-action rifle
1 – .22 cal pump-action rifle
1 – .357 Magnum lever-action carbine
1 – 20 ga breach-loaded shotgun
1 – 12 ga breach-loaded shotgun
1 – 12 ga pump shotgun
right to carry
right to self-defense
right to defend my home or business without being treated as a bigger criminal than the hood who attacks me.
(check back in 2 years. Current status liable to change).
I give you Kudos for doing your homework. All I did was look in my gun cabinet.
lol – That’s a mighty fine selection of
penis extensionsguns you have there. How do you decide which one to use when you have an intruder? By the time you’ve selected your weapon of choice, they’ll have emptied your house and be miles away! Wouldn’t just one or two be enough? Also, wouldn’t it be true that most burglaries are committed when there’s nobody home? Do the guns jump out of the cabinet and fire by themselves?Only joking, of course. However, I must admit, having looked at the US crime stats, I’m beginning to understand why you have the gun laws you do. It must be a pretty frightening place to live nowadays. Thank God we don’t have to worry about that here!
Just re-read your last line, 5 of 7. It shows me you really are a true American. Whilst other nations do their homework, America goes straight to the gun cabinet – 😉
Rumpelstiltskin,
Thanks for the apology. It gets old hearing from Europeans how enlightenened they think they are and how backwards they think we are.
Thank you/your country for standing shoulder to shoulder with us.
We cringe at the thought of your nation being lost to extremists and those who do not cherish God, freedom. I personally hope America doesn’t follow suit. There’s a reason people risk life and limb to come here at all cost. We have always been the shining city on the hill.
I hope and pray the “inconsistencies” you find in the Bible don’t keep you from finding the truth about God.
PS – Oh and yeah, we like guns here. A lot.
If having guns implies ‘penis extentions’ (gosh, I’ve never heard that before!) does having no guns imply ‘no penis at all’? Or is a cigar sometimes just a cigar?
I guess I was on hold too long before posting (I am trying to write with 3 kids interrupting!)
I didn’t see your last post Rumpel……the one where you slammed both 5 of 7 and the nation I hold near and dear.
Were you just joking around then, too? You do that a lot – say obnoxious things and then follow up with, “Aw just foolin!”
Or maybe you’re just showing yourself to be a smug (fill in blank)?
Make up your mind, would ya.
oh shoot I spelled enlightened wrong (darn kids!)
Unfortunately, I believe that one thing we will never hold in common is our sense of humour. Brits often say things tongue in cheek, whether we’re talking to other Brits or those from overseas; there’s no offence meant, it’s just friendly banter. Having lived in America, I understand this more than some – that is why I tend to clarify that I am joking. Sometimes, I forget.
I can assure you I have many American friends and colleagues and certainly do not see them as backward in any way, shape or form. Quite the contrary in many cases. Neither do I believe that we are more enlightened. Our historical differences have shaped our beliefs and cultures and, as a result, we see certain things from different perspectives. That is only natural and inevitable. We only have to look at the way Islamic history has skewed perspectives in Arab states to see how that works! Fortunately, Britain and America both believe in the democratic process, so our cultures do meet at that point and, consequently, we tend to find some common ground. That and our language, of course.
That said, in the same way as you get angry about the way Europeans attempt to belittle your beliefs and cultures, I get frustrated when I see so many anti-brit postings on American sites, and read about what an awful, hedonistic and morally bankrupt place Britain has become. That is simply untrue. I often wonder, if that is the genuine belief in the US, why is Britain still your most visited overseas location?
When all is said and done, there is good and bad on both sides of the Atlantic, as there is in all societies. If we accept that, we can stop bitching about who’s better than who and move forward together as allies of democracy and common sense.
You’re welcome. I really meant what I said. I only know what I read in the rags. If you believed half of what the US media prints you would have a really janduced view of the people here.
I also didn’t mean to offend in my ponderings about the differences between Europe and the US. Whether someone is willing to accept what is and live with it or to move on to something new is a personal, individual preference. One is not better than the other, simply different.
It does though explain the differences in our thought processes about problem solving, social mores, liberty, et al. We in the US find the “nanny state” mentality of much of Europe to be restrictive and intrusive. In turn the Europeans seem to find some of our peoples “less government” ideas uncaring and negligent.
I was pondering from an intellectual standpoint more than a judgmental standpoint.
Sorry if I offended, I really didn’t mean to.
Things are much worse in the U.K. than here, because the U.K. literally does have a “Living” constitution – it is subject to the whims of parliament – and a population that voluntarily imposed socialism and the socialist mindset on itself many years ago.
If you want a daily log of the erosion of freedoms in the U.K., read pcwatch.blogspot.com. The article selection is somewhat myopic, but the trend is born out by reports I receive from relatives.
The English are, however, still the best at everything – including condescension.
“A true American”
Thank you!
“While other nations do their homework, America goes straight to the gun cabinet.”
It’s worked for us for over 200 years – ain’t it cool?
Rumpelstiltskin is OK with me!
Rumpelstiltskin, wake up. You’re country is just figuring out it’s been sleeping too long.
Check this one out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTq2NEUlhDE
That’s a 10 year old news story – The Tony Martin case was in 1999, he was released in 2003 after having his sentence commuted to manslaughter. The facts that weren’t mentioned in the video were that Tony Martin killed the 16 year old with a pump action shotgun, that he wasn’t licensed to hold, while the teenager was trying to escape through a window. He had already been wounded by Martin’s guard dog and was begging for mercy as Martin shot him. I’m not sure whether that would be legal in the US (to kill a burglar whilst they were trying to escape) but it would seem a little excessive to me. Our self-defence laws allow us to use reasonable force in order to protect ourselves. Had the kid have had a gun that was pointing at Tony Martin, he would have had the right to shoot him. I don’t condone burglary in the slightest, but I believe that the sentence should have been a little less than the death penalty.
What is interesting, is the level of attention that the story attracted. Why? Because it’s an isolated incident that hadn’t happened before and hasn’t reoccurred since! Please believe me, or go back and check out the links I posted further up the thread, we just don’t have anywhere near the amount of violent crime that exists in the US.
At the outset of the video, the protest being filmed was to do with the proposed fox hunting ban that was finally introduced in 2004. Fox hunting was a traditional sport for the upper classes, where a fox would be hunted by a group of horsemen and a pack of hounds. They would seek out a fox and chase it across the countryside, trashing hedgerows and private land in their wake, until they caught the fox. The huntsman then threw it to the hounds, whilst still alive, who would rip it limb from limb. Young huntsman would then have the blood smeared across their faces as part of an initiation process. The pro-hunt protesters were in a significant minority and the general view of the nation was that it should have been banned years ago. Other forms of hunting are still perfectly legal in the UK.
Our gun laws were debated as a result of the Hungerford massacre in 1986 and finally changed following the Dunblane school massacre in Scotland in 1996. Since the change in the laws, we have not witnessed any further such instances.
This may be of interest:
No further comment is required. The figures speak for themselves.