Here's truth in your face.

Originally posted by josephw
Thank you Dasa. Now we know what false religion sounds like. Like your post, it's mean spirited and derogatory toward anyone that disagrees with it.

Apparently you have memory issues because I have told you before what religion is, false or otherwise.

If you are the product of your religion, then there isn't a soul in this forum that would ever be conv ...[text shortened]... e form of hypocrisy by calling for the death of Muslims because you are full of fear and hatred.

You have nothing to contribute so you insult instead.

Typical of another boof-head.

Originally posted by divegeester
[b]I have asked many times, what is the difference between true religion and false religion, and not 1 person could reply.

I can try.
True religion is visiting and befriending the elderly and those in prison, the lonely and least capable people in society. True religion benefits society at least at the micro level; it is a living representation of hope, aspiration and compassion. It is forgiving, trusting, loyal and merciful.[/b]

Not at all.

Even an atheist will, and can, and does all those things.

Try again little sparrow.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Sigh.

A 'true religion' would simply be one where the claims of the religion are actually true.

As there is no law of logic or reason that requires reality to be nice, or as we might wish it
to be... And indeed all of the evidence we have is that the universe is seldom if ever as we
might wish it to be... Then there can be no other confining bo ...[text shortened]... rom this site.

A fact that I feel is a great detriment to this site and the mods than run it.

You clown.

You think your waffle means something.

You put forward empty echoing nothingness's, and think it is wonderful (puk)

Originally posted by Dasa
As expected from a pig ignorant troll like yourself....................you have zero to contribute.

You did not give me 4 more principles that would determine true religion from false religion.

There are actually "more" than 4 more principles, but you can only ask boof-heads to do so much.

I wish you had zero to contribute, i really do.


Surely by now you know i'm an atheist?! Asking an atheist to differentiate between false and true religion is nonsensical. To me, they are 'all' false! (Obviously). As well as being an atheist, i am also a vegetarian. Are you going to ask 'me' next what is better to eat, chicken or cow?

Your vile hatred and grotesqueness is a stain on your chosen religion. Shame on you.

Originally posted by Dasa
You have nothing to contribute so you insult instead.

Typical of another boof-head.

boof-head? thats hilarious 😀

Originally posted by FMF
The fact that you personally don't see any value in reading what Dasa writes does not persuade me that you (or others such as the mods) should decide whether I get to read it instead of me deciding. 😉

So you do see value in Dasa's calling for the wanton destruction of all the adherents of a religion just because they follow that religion? One wonders what your neighbors might think of that.

Bigotry doesn't need to be promoted. There are already enough people around who don't see any problem with it.

"The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it." -- Albert Einstein

"Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. " -- Edmund Burke

Originally posted by FMF
So if you brand Dasa's religion "false" because of his behaviour and you contend that to do so is legitimate, can Christianity legitimately be branded "false" in the same way and for the same reason?

Don't tar us with Dasa's brush. This makes you appear disingenuous and opportunistic, at best.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
boof-head? thats hilarious 😀

Is he a student of yours?

Originally posted by Suzianne
So you do see value in Dasa's calling for the wanton destruction of all the adherents of a religion just because they follow that religion? One wonders what your neighbors might think of that.

Bigotry doesn't need to be promoted. There are already enough people around who don't see any problem with it.

I don't want you deciding what I can and cannot read. I want to decide for myself what I read and don't read. Furthermore, I don't want you deciding what ideas can and can't be promoted.

The fact that I am an advocate of free speech means I see value in defending it even when ~ or especially when ~ I disagree strongly with the ideas it is used to propagate.

My neighbours would be appalled by Dasa's proposals, just as I am. There are plenty of Islamic fundamentalists whose attitude to freedom of speech is similar in certain ways to yours.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Don't tar us with Dasa's brush.

But I wasn't doing anything of the sort. I was questioning the rationale josephw was using to declare Dasa's religion "false".

Originally posted by FMF
I don't want you deciding what I can and cannot read. I want to decide for myself what I read and don't read. Furthermore, I don't want you deciding what ideas can and can't be promoted.

The fact that I am an advocate of free speech means I see value in defending it even when ~ or especially when ~ I disagree strongly with the ideas it is used to propagate. ...[text shortened]... Islamic fundamentalists whose attitude to freedom of speech is similar in certain ways to yours.

Free speech is important, but not at the expense of all else.

There are, and should be limits on speech.

You are not allowed to incite violence for example.

As far as I am concerned Dasa crosses that line, and thus should be banned.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Free speech is important, but not at the expense of all else.

There are, and should be limits on speech.

You are not allowed to incite violence for example.

As far as I am concerned Dasa crosses that line, and thus should be banned.

I have often wondered about the legal position.

This is a UK website. Dasa's comments would, I think, amount to a crime if expressed directly by him in the UK.

Does RHP have a duty to try and prevent this and/or even report it? Even if not, there are clearly reputational risks of being seen to allow someone to advocate genocide repeatedly.

Let's put in another way. If posters were using the site to trade illegal drugs, can RHP just shrug its shoulders and cite freedom of speech? If not, how can it choose which crimes it allows to continue and which not? What if someone was using the forums to groom a 14 year old?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Is he a student of yours?

no but he has potential 😀

Originally posted by Dasa
The problem with 99% of persons in this forum is,.......... that you are all pig ignorant about religion and spirituality.

I have asked many times, what is the difference between true religion and false religion, and not 1 person could reply.

Not one person could determine what true religion is and false religion, and that's your foolhardy and pig ignoran ...[text shortened]... ine true religion from false religion.

Get to it.................and stop being PIG IGNORANT.

False religion is one where the people worship the true God of Israel.

True religion is one in which the people worship the cow, even to the point of ingesting cow urine and cow manure . now that is true religion.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
I have often wondered about the legal position.

This is a UK website. Dasa's comments would, I think, amount to a crime if expressed directly by him in the UK.

Does RHP have a duty to try and prevent this and/or even report it? Even if not, there are clearly reputational risks of being seen to allow someone to advocate genocide repeatedly.

L ...[text shortened]... allows to continue and which not? What if someone was using the forums to groom a 14 year old?

Yes.