Sir David Attenborough: sending food aid to countries enduring famine is “barmy”

Attacking posters and saying they are talking nonsence.

 

Did you read the post I was referring to? Can you see any relevence it has to this thread or my posts in this thread? No... ??? That'll be because there is none!

The background is that The Real * has previously used the 'animal rights' issue to goad me. He also mocks me because I once wrote that I sometimes struggle to contend with the suffering in the world and have given thought to death as a means of avoiding it.

 

You didn't ask me to. I would have been happy to explain it.

I am for animal rights, I haven't put your beliefs down as you have mine. Okay, I haven't smuggled dogs out of Romania, but that doesn't mean I care about animals any less.

Mock you! Dear lord.

 

So are you going to explain the relevence of your original post (this'll be the second time of asking)?

 

The relevance.

You are happy to agree with the man, a lover of the Empire so why not practice what you preach dear boy.

 

Please feel free to correct me if I have misinterpreted your last post...

I am happy to agree with David Attenborough? He is a lover of the Empire? So I should kill myself for the sake of animals?

Have I got that right?

 

My post was also off the back of your previous posts.

 

So have I or have I not interpreted you correctly?

 

You're half way there.

 

Up to no good? I read the article online, thought it would spark some decent discussion, and posted it. There's nothing else to it, my friend.

I agree with Attenborough's comments, although I take no pleasure in doing so. Throwing money at Africa isn't going to work, as the problem is the people running * over there, and the people running * over here.

Those are the main obstacles to getting the place back on its feet, which is why I feel no obligation, be it moral or otherwise, to do anything about it.

Until the people with the power and the money change their ways, no amount of two pound coins a month will change anything unfortunately.

 

Less of the cryptic messages. Which half did I get right and which half did I get wrong?

 

There's no mystifying agenda here.

I explained my post and that it was also related to your previous posts.

 

Which half did I get right and which half did I get wrong?

 

Right guys, back on topic. If you wish to continue your personal discussion take it to PM.

 

I'm still paranoid in my defence of my former religion? :smiley-laughing002::smiley-laughing002::smiley-laughing002: Aye ok then

You are by far the biggest - and I hate using this word - troll on the site when it comes to anything about religion. Don't make yourself look foolish by saying you hate debating/commenting about religion, cause it's clear you get some sort of arousal when the very subject becomes apparent.

"stop trying to hint at some agenda with Catholicism.There is none....they are the biggest religion in the world and have the most influence" - so you OBVIOUSLY have an agenda against them more than any other religious institute in the world then :smiley-laughing002::smiley-laughing002::smiley-laughing002:

 

Do you know what? You are to atheism what religious fanatics are to religion. They're are millions, billions, of people for whom religion is personal - you wouldn't even know they were religious - and yet you have bitter little atheists like you who have nothing better to do than attack other people's beliefs. Atheism is not a religion, by the way, so I don't know why you'd classify yourself by disbelief in something. I don't believe in unicorns, I don't define my life around it or attack people who believe in them because it's a complete * irrelevance to my life.

 

You're entitled to attack the institutions (e.g. the Catholic Church's stance on contraception, which I, as a Catholic, disagree with) but your constant condescension towards people with religious beliefs is really * tiring.

 

Then I don't know what your arguing. That it is hard to grow things in the desert? Well duh, but people don't stay out in the middle of the desert.

 

No, nothing to do with me.......before my subsequent post, i thought he was mischief making because i know he is a practising Catholic, and the thread is clearly one where SDA is up for ridicule because of his out of context quotes.

I thought it was an excuse to have a pop at the man......and the cavalry duly arrived!(in the shape of others who didnt attempt to understand his point)

 

I do hate it, but feel obliged to make my thoughts known when i see things discussed which i have an interest in.There are many other threads which touch on religion and i take a back seat......but its pointless really, as i only need to stick my head above the parapet now and then, to get the same old accusations.

Bollocks.Im not bitter, or little.I have made it clear on multiple occasions that i have no problem with people being religious, i only have an issue with the religions themselves, and their abuse of people over the centuries, and the hypnotic power they still have over people.
If you believe, im not condemning you.......i think you are ill advised, but i wouldnt condemn you, or try and talk you out of it.Its your life mate.