Search results

But that's like the Queen making her speech (actually it's written for her by the government) at the State Opening of Parliament: she's there effectively by invitation (or even sufferance*) of Parliament, but woe betide any Opposition MP who heckes his/her Head of State; of course after she's...

Only with the help of those cheese-eating surrender-monkeys the French:p

Another attempted assault on Christian freedom of speech and religion, which will hopefully fail.

No, he should be suspended or censured in some other way. A British MP who called his/her head of state a liar would be suspended from Parliament. All three of the poll answers are correct: yes, it was inappropriate and disgraceful conduct; yes, he reflected the frustrations and fears of many...

I was very offended by Revmitchell's unfounded allegation against me. However, I have decided to forgive him and would appreciate your prayers in making that a reality as far as my feelings go; I also hope you understand if I don't post further on this thread.

It is indeed a very serious question. I am a lawyer and I know what defamation of character is and the legal remedies available. I am however also mindful of I Cor 6. I haven't yet decided what to do and I would hope Revmitchell does the decent thing here.

I will give you until 5pm British Summer Time to withdraw your libel and apologise, failing which I will take further action.

Sir, I demand that you withdraw that libellous remark.

I would be grateful if you would retract your accusation of lying. If I am mistaken in my view, then please show me where and how I am, but don't EVER accuse me of dishonesty.

Because, for those who cannot afford it, it is a necessary corollary to the right to life. I find it odd that some here - quite rightly - claim that right for the unborn and yet would seek to restrict it for some once they are born. Yes, for those who cannot afford it, for the same reason. To...

That's pretty low; whatever happened to 'play the ball not the man'?

I thought sockpuppets weren't allowed?

Wow, a flounce! What's he said to Tim, BTW?

If Jim's talking about the UK, then they were permitted, not forced - along with any other children whose parents for whatever reason objected to them taking part in Christian worship.

The latter.

But why is that the 'likely' scenario? That's the main (flawed) assumption you're making.

Sure you do. Many parents do not have a choice for the reasons I've already outlined.

And too many parents don't have a choice. Your post is likewise shot through with assumptions: 1. That the mother cound have chosen another time to do the weekly shop. Most parents don't, realistically. My wife, for example, doesn't. 2. That the child was kicking off before she set out to...

Aaron, you just don't engage, do you? Two-year olds more often than not don't have the awareness of right and wrong that older children have, so I would say that there's a 90% chance that you're talking garbage. And, yes, I use corporal punishment. Oh, and you asked why your posts were odious...

Not so much a myth as a lie.