Sorry, but the ground you stand on when you do your ritual is your church. You may not own it, perhaps it is a public square, but you still need some space to perform the ritual, silent or otherwise.

Well sure, but that doesn't make speech a ritual.

Speaking about free speech:
http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/590061/WhatsApp-UK-Ban-Weeks-Snoopers-Charter
No more private conversations, you must include the government listening post. Is this England or North Korea?

Geez

“In our country, do we want to allow a means of communication between people which we cannot read?” said Prime Minister Cameron earlier this year.

"My answer to that question is: 'No, we must not’.”

And people here are complaining about the EU being a bunch of Totalitarian, authoritarian fascists.

Speaking about free speech:
http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/590061/WhatsApp-UK-Ban-Weeks-Snoopers-Charter
No more private conversations, you must include the government listening post. Is this England or North Korea?

Free speech in the UK exists for the monarch and for MPs while in the Palace of Westminster (in the UK freedom of speech is considered a parliamentary privilege, at least it is by MPs).

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Speaking about free speech:
http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/590061/WhatsApp-UK-Ban-Weeks-Snoopers-Charter
No more private conversations, you must include the government listening post. Is this England or North Korea?

Free speech in the UK exists for the monarch and for MPs while in the Palace of Westminster (in the UK freedom of speech is considered a parliamentary privilege, at least it is by MPs).

Unparliamentary language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unparliamentary_language

How many tens of millions have the Christians murdered and enslaved, in the past 100 years, in the name of their Religion?

Best not ask that question. Abrahamists have a very bad reputation for killing each other. Just ask Jesus. Or the Protestant Reich Church.

---

Someone who is intentionally uninformed is ... [or why would I post a proper name?!]

You should look up the activities of the Protestant Reich Church a/k/a Deutsche Evangelische Kirche a/k/a Reichskirche. Start with the US Holocaust Memorial Museum http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005206

So that is within your past 100 years criteria ... May fall a little short of tens of millions, but still within the multiple millions! I'm sure you are completely and thoroughly proud of your heritage and association with such wonderful Christian persons.

(As to Godwin, you asked a historical context question and are getting a historical context answer.)

---

Meanwhile, in South Africa, the grand apartheid experiment and all of its institutionalised crime and oppression was underpinned, to a very large extent, by Christians and their beliefs. I know; I spent 30 years living through the apartheid years. The religious propaganda that the ruling Afrikaner nationalists spouted to support their evil system was nauseating.

"Christianity has evolved beyond what they did in the past?" Yeah, right.

---

Destroy, destruction ... those are strong, angry words.

Attempting the destruction of ideologues, whether they are secular, religious, left wing, right wing, or any combination thereof, strikes me as being an exercise in futility - much like a game of whack-a-mole. Which particular ideology is the "greater enemy" (and therefore, in your world, up for early obliteration) is a matter of subjective opinion - and your opinion is that it is a numbers game. Well, good luck with that. More moles to whack, I guess.

I think that Tim Lott's opinion piece published in The Guardian earlier this year, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, presents an interesting take on ideologues. Could it be said that proposing the destruction of "left wing/right wing secular ideology" is itself an ideology that has the potential to snuff out a few hundred million, perhaps even a couple of billion, people?

---

I think that Tim Lott's opinion piece published in The Guardian earlier this year, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, presents an interesting take on ideologues. Could it be said that proposing the destruction of "left wing/right wing secular ideology" is itself an ideology that has the potential to snuff out a few hundred million, perhaps even a couple of billion, people?

Every ideology or system of beliefs that one feels strongly enough about has the potential to become an excuse to murder people. The more strongly you believe in something, the more violent you will protect it.

But, I would caution against pinpointing ideologies or systems of beliefs as the source of murder. They may on surface be used to excuse or promote violence, but I think in most cases the causes have nothing to do with that. I think impotence is far more often the root for violence than anything else.

Also, keep in mind that the internet tends to amplify what we are saying. If you disagree with someone, that person is automatically worse than Hitler, a minor conflict is instantly 'like World War 2', government policies you don't like automatically make the government 'fascists' or a 'Nazi/Communist regime'. And if you were to talk to those persons in real life, you would find that in most cases, the differences in opinion that seemed so huge online are actually pretty minor. So to call Clyde's fuming posts about how he feels about 'ideologues' part of an ideology is probably giving it to much credit.

Could it be said that proposing the destruction of "left wing/right wing secular ideology" is itself an ideology that has the potential to snuff out a few hundred million, perhaps even a couple of billion, people?

I told CLYDE the same exact thing once upon a time. Every person's opinion is their belief system or ideology. Yet CLYDE proffers that he's an Atheist to ideology, and has named all "ideology" the enemy. He claims ideology is like a religion and asserts those stating a strong belief in something that happens to be in line with left-wing or right-wing are akin to religious beliefs.

I attempted to point out the irony of his claims but he hasn't yet realized how impossible his position is.

...

Therefore... Since Left Wing/Right Wing Secular Ideology has killed and/or enslaved over One Billion people, during the last 100 years. And Christian Religion much, much, much, much less:

...

Not true. As has been pointed out, Aparthied in South Africa was propped up by Christian faith, as was segregation in the US. The Yugoslavian conflict was split along religious lines, thousands died in the Northern Ireland conflict.

The residential homes where Native American children were abused were run by the Catholic Church. So were the workhouses for women were many women were abused and used like slave labour. In fact, if you take into account the harm done to women by the Christian faith then I'd say its definitely up there, even if you just take into account the last 100 years. (forced pregnancies, forced adoptions, literally locking women up who've had sex before marriage). Then of course there is the horrors inflicted on homosexuals by Christians all over the globe.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Could it be said that proposing the destruction of "left wing/right wing secular ideology" is itself an ideology that has the potential to snuff out a few hundred million, perhaps even a couple of billion, people?

I told CLYDE the same exact thing once upon a time. Every person's opinion is their belief system or ideology. Yet CLYDE proffers that he's an Atheist to ideology, and has named all "ideology" the enemy. He claims ideology is like a religion and asserts those stating a strong belief in something that happens to be in line with left-wing or right-wing are akin to religious beliefs.

I attempted to point out the irony of his claims but he hasn't yet realized how impossible his position is.

OzzFan...

You, and others, sharing your Belief System, do not, nor will never understand this:

Non-practical, I Have The Truth, Ideology/Religion Believers. Are, what they are. Which, as History Instructs. Will eventually, if they gain power, murder and enslave Innocents.

Is a Believer in a Religion and/or Ideology, capable of Thinking outside their very small box?

Haven't seen any evidence of that, yet.

Sorry in disturbing your 'Of us, By us, For us' thinking. This Blasphemer and Apostate, to your 'Beliefs', cannot help himself.

CLYDE...

Why do you claim I don't understand your position? Is it because I disagree with your assertions that you conclude I mustn't understand lest I would agree with you? What box have you put me in that you think I can't think outside of?

Those are serious questions. You seem to think that disagreement with another is equivalent to an inability to understand or consider other positions to a given scenario.

By all means... 'disturb' my thinking and enlighten me. That is the entire reason I enjoy reading posts of opposing views. But please, at least engage in answering questions posed of you so that I may better understand rather than your typical hand waiving non-responses.

Could it be said that proposing the destruction of "left wing/right wing secular ideology" is itself an ideology that has the potential to snuff out a few hundred million, perhaps even a couple of billion, people?

I told CLYDE the same exact thing once upon a time. Every person's opinion is their belief system or ideology. Yet CLYDE proffers that he's an Atheist to ideology, and has named all "ideology" the enemy. He claims ideology is like a religion and asserts those stating a strong belief in something that happens to be in line with left-wing or right-wing are akin to religious beliefs.

I attempted to point out the irony of his claims but he hasn't yet realized how impossible his position is.

OzzFan...

You, and others, sharing your Belief System, do not, nor will never understand this:

Non-practical, I Have The Truth, Ideology/Religion Believers. Are, what they are. Which, as History Instructs. Will eventually, if they gain power, murder and enslave Innocents.

Is a Believer in a Religion and/or Ideology, capable of Thinking outside their very small box?

Haven't seen any evidence of that, yet.

Sorry in disturbing your 'Of us, By us, For us' thinking. This Blasphemer and Apostate, to your 'Beliefs', cannot help himself.

CLYDE...

Why do you claim I don't understand your position? Is it because I disagree with your assertions that you conclude I mustn't understand lest I would agree with you? What box have you put me in that you think I can't think outside of?

Those are serious questions. You seem to think that disagreement with another is equivalent to an inability to understand or consider other positions to a given scenario.

By all means... 'disturb' my thinking and enlighten me. That is the entire reason I enjoy reading posts of opposing views. But please, at least engage in answering questions posed of you so that I may better understand rather than your typical hand waiving non-responses.

Which questions?

My Thinking is diametrically different from yours.

I am a Practical Thinker, and believe any 'solutions' to our problems, must be grounded in understanding human nature, and learning from our mistakes.

IE: I am Anti-Capitalist. But as a Practical Matter: Neither Marxism, nor Extreme Socialism has, or will work. They will only, as History and Human Nature Instructs, make matters worse.

Believe it or not, we probably agree with the Problems. Not the solutions.

Consider:

Das Kapital is a basically true indictment of 19th century Capitalism. And present day International Capitalism.

The 'Solution' - The Communist Manifesto, is totally deranged in its misunderstanding of Power and Human Nature.

We can have long discussions regarding 'Solutions'. But the Foundation of my thinking, is:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely

Any 'Solution', which Centralizes Power in the hands of Non-Perfect Humans has, and will go bad.

Great. Now what part of all of that do you think I disagree with? You've put me in a box and tell me that I don't understand it. So tell me what 'solutions' you think I believe in. Why do you think your thinking is diametrically opposed to my own? Have you engaged me in my thinking to know what my position is on each and every topic?

Question...

What is YOUR Solution to the Evils of Capitalism.

Good starting point, for this discussion.

Let's start a new thread if we're going to change subjects, shall we?

Question...

What is YOUR Solution to the Evils of Capitalism.

Good starting point, for this discussion.

What discussion? Thread topic is "Damned hard to be a Christian these days.........." And you claim that is somehow "Evils of Capitalism"? Sounds like an ideologue with a broken record one neuron mind.

---

Question...

What is YOUR Solution to the Evils of Capitalism.

Good starting point, for this discussion.

Let's start a new thread if we're going to change subjects, shall we?

Not the question?

How did I know you could not answer, without proving my point.

Thank you.

I don't know CLYDE. How did you know I couldn't answer without proving your point? You're just too smart for me! You've out-witted me with your superior discussion skills. I am defeated!

Responding to your question, is 'changing subjects'.

Yes, answering my question was changing subjects. That doesn't give us license to continue to move the thread even further off topic. I didn't realize that trying to avoid hijacking threads was my attempt to avoid answering your questions though. Thanks for setting me straight.

Question...

What is YOUR Solution to the Evils of Capitalism.

Good starting point, for this discussion.

Let's start a new thread if we're going to change subjects, shall we?

Not the question?

How did I know you could not answer, without proving my point.

Thank you.

I don't know CLYDE. How did you know I couldn't answer without proving your point? You're just too smart for me! You've out-witted me with your superior discussion skills. I am defeated!

Responding to your question, is 'changing subjects'.

Yes, answering my question was changing subjects. That doesn't give us license to continue to move the thread even further off topic. I didn't realize that trying to avoid hijacking threads was my attempt to avoid answering your questions though. Thanks for setting me straight.

Why don't we both admit defeat, and move on.

:) :) :)

Because, despite what you obviously think, I am not here as some sort of sport to "defeat" the other person. Your responses betray that you actually do think that is the purpose of discussion here.

It's no wonder that no one can engage in discussion with you. Your automatic defenses to your ideology prevent you from seeing outside your position. To this Atheist of your ideology, you seem afraid to open up.

Question...

What is YOUR Solution to the Evils of Capitalism.

Good starting point, for this discussion.

Let's start a new thread if we're going to change subjects, shall we?

Not the question?

How did I know you could not answer, without proving my point.

Thank you.

I don't know CLYDE. How did you know I couldn't answer without proving your point? You're just too smart for me! You've out-witted me with your superior discussion skills. I am defeated!

Responding to your question, is 'changing subjects'.

Yes, answering my question was changing subjects. That doesn't give us license to continue to move the thread even further off topic. I didn't realize that trying to avoid hijacking threads was my attempt to avoid answering your questions though. Thanks for setting me straight.

Why don't we both admit defeat, and move on.

:) :) :)

Because, despite what you obviously think, I am not here as some sort of sport to "defeat" the other person. Your responses betray that you actually do think that is the purpose of discussion here.

It's no wonder that no one can engage in discussion with you. Your automatic defenses to your ideology prevent you from seeing outside your position. To this Atheist of your ideology, you seem afraid to open up.

Responded to your I am defeated part of your post. In BOLD above.

I did understand what you were really saying, and got a laugh.

You didn't understand my 'laughing', but let's return to the subject response.

You do understand what is said about those, who have no sense of humor, and cannot laugh at themselves.

OzzFan...

You have disappointed me. Thought there might be some hope for you. Regarding an Intelligent Back-and-Forth Discussion.

Guess you are not interested.

Next.

Sorry, but not knowing you very well, I don't know what your sense of humor is. Further, it can be hard to read humor and tone in text. Because of your typical style of retorts, I took your smiles to be more like taunts than attempts at levity.

I do know what is said about those with no sense of humor. But I also know that a good comic plays to his audience. You can't make people laugh if you don't know what they find funny.

OzzFan...

You have disappointed me. Thought there might be some hope for you. Regarding an Intelligent Back-and-Forth Discussion.

Clyde there is so seldom forth from you that discussion is impossible.

---

Destroy, destruction ... those are strong, angry words.

Attempting the destruction of ideologues, whether they are secular, religious, left wing, right wing, or any combination thereof, strikes me as being an exercise in futility - much like a game of whack-a-mole. Which particular ideology is the "greater enemy" (and therefore, in your world, up for early obliteration) is a matter of subjective opinion - and your opinion is that it is a numbers game. Well, good luck with that. More moles to whack, I guess.

I think that Tim Lott's opinion piece published in The Guardian earlier this year, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, presents an interesting take on ideologues. Could it be said that proposing the destruction of "left wing/right wing secular ideology" is itself an ideology that has the potential to snuff out a few hundred million, perhaps even a couple of billion, people?

I claim that very few people are ideologues except under whatever bizarre definition Clyde holds. Waving to Clyde from within 60 miles of the banished kitty man, lol!