Marmalade Sandwich

Sarah, 1) My apologies for the fact that your c...

2011-11-29T19:03:12.073Z

Sarah,

1) My apologies for the fact that your comment was not published until now. I have comment moderation in operation, and rarely check my blog these days.

2) I'm not blogging anywhere at the moment. I have been almost completely absent from the blogosphere in recent months. I have been reluctant to close my blog down, because I still have things I want to say, but I never seem to get around to saying them. Sorry.

Now a day, nothing is going legally. Everything ha...

2011-11-18T08:47:14.049Z

Now a day, nothing is going legally. Everything happening illegally especially politics.

Stopped by today and read around. Was wondering if...

2011-11-14T02:33:20.274Z

Stopped by today and read around. Was wondering if you are blogging elsewhere.

I can't believe the pious drivel which flows f...

2011-08-05T20:03:30.291+01:00

I can't believe the pious drivel which flows from the bearded wonder in Lambeth.

Ben Laden was guilty. He boasted of what he had done to the west on September 11th and elsewhere. He was also boasting of what else he was going to do. He was an evil murderer.
Above all, he had declared war on the west. As such, it is not right to treat him like a common criminal. These men have on many previous occasions cried surrender, and then set off explosives. Why should the Seals take any further unnecessary risk of life, just to be nice to that squirming fool Rowan Williams, and the like.
Finally, pause and think on this.
Osama, is in custody somewhere.
Suddenly all sorts of kidnapping of western women and children start to happen. This is not being done like previous attacks with the attempt at the maximum carnage. They are not even major protected targets, like royalty or politicians.
They are just the innocent bystanders that Al Qaeda is happy to slaughter as a step towards his objective.

Their demand is simply the release of Ben Laden. There is no negotiation because the kidnappers are most happy to die along with their hostages, and there are endless supplies of willing martyrs desiring to be a hero for the cause, so any failed kidnapping just makes space for the next hero to step into his shoes. It does not even need any central control. It spontaneously happens, and once it starts, others soon jump on the bandwagon. It spreads like wild fire across the world fanned into flame by the media.
Death upon death upon death. Suddenly they have the world's attention, even more than before.

I think the Navy Seals absolutely did the one and only wise thing they could.

This is only a way to kill this type of people,

2011-06-14T10:19:30.507+01:00

This is only a way to kill this type of people,

I am totally agree with you and i really appreciat...

2011-06-13T11:08:04.471+01:00

I am totally agree with you and i really appreciate you work. And you have done a great job in this post.

While this subject can be very touchy for most peo...

2011-06-10T07:56:13.800+01:00

While this subject can be very touchy for most people, my opinion is that there has to be a middle or common ground that we all can find. I do appreciate that you’ve added relevant and intelligent commentary here though. Thank you

Thanks for that, Patently. It is good to get the ...

2011-05-06T09:54:32.855+01:00

Thanks for that, Patently.

It is good to get the perspective of someone who knows a lot more about the law than I do.

Perhaps the Navy Seals were right to shoot him. Perhaps they were not. We just will never know. We can't condemn, but we can be uncomfortable.

Yes, I'm equally uncomfortable. If they went ...

2011-05-06T09:03:15.927+01:00

Yes, I'm equally uncomfortable.

If they went in in order to apprehend him, but prepared to open fire if threatened, then I'm ok with that. If they went in with instructions to kill him, grab any available intel, and get out, then I'm very much not ok with that.

The fact he was (apparently) unarmed is one factor, but not conclusive imho. If I was faced with Bin Laden in a long flowing robe that might conceal anything, claiming that he was unarmed, I might well not believe him. I'm not keen to second-guess the guys who were there, on the spot; it's not an enviable job.

Sadly, we'll never know - the case is far too sensitive to be independently investigated, and far too high-profile for the results of an independent investigation ever to be universally believed.

I fear that the precedent will be used by others, though.

You're back! Sort of, but not very. ...

2011-05-05T10:33:23.657+01:00

You're back!

Sort of, but not very. I've got a lot of other things going on, and am struggling to find the will to blog. It's not for want of ideas going around in my head.

Albert, I've been away. (In both senses!) I...

2011-05-05T10:31:17.488+01:00

Albert,

I've been away. (In both senses!)

In general, I couldn't be bothered to watch such stuff. However a Christian friend was quite concerned, so I watched it on the BBC website to see what was going on.

I think in the interests of balance, he should commission a programme debunking the Qur'an

I think that the consequences would be quite amusing. Perhaps Salman Rushdie could present it?

Why do you bother to watch such stuff? These kind...

2011-04-05T16:57:46.694+01:00

Why do you bother to watch such stuff? These kinds of programmes trade off the fact that people are almost universally ignorant of the Bible these days. The BBC needs to realise that it is failing in its duty of educating the British public. Instead of "sexing" it all up, they just need to tell the story at the moment.

It seems to me that Noah was a monotheist, in which case, her view that the Bible says Abraham founded monotheism is false.

Regarding Walter Moberly, as I recall he's a fairly conservative Evangelical,the kind who "could have knocked big holes in her arguments". On the cutting room floor presumably.

I gather the head of religious broadcasting is a Muslim. I have no objection to that, but I think in the interests of balance, he should commission a programme debunking the Qur'an

You're back! Yes, this was a tragic and dis...

2011-04-05T16:41:30.710+01:00

You're back!

Yes, this was a tragic and disturbing case. It is important to notice the effect this will have on children. There are not enough families to foster or adopt as it is. Cutting out orthodox Christians and Jews as well as Muslims is hardly going to help matters. Moreover, it also means that it is now impossible for a child from a religious home who (for example) is suddenly orphaned to be fostered in a home which reflect his religious upbringing.

No one can claim this is about putting children first. The interests of very vulnerable children are being sacrificed to bolster a very grown up agenda. It comes as no surprise that a PM who is content with abortion thinks such things.

I rather liked the rabbi who was barely polite in ...

2011-03-28T20:24:41.087+01:00

I rather liked the rabbi who was barely polite in his responses to her interpretations.

I can't remember now why Dr S concluded that God had a wife except that there were some images depicting a Very Important Female Figure which was also worshipped by Canaanites. Why couldn't she have been the Canaanite El's mother - after all didn't she argue (or rather assert) that this goddess morphed into the Virgin Mary?

...and I do wish she'd ditch the glottal stops

Jay

The word 'Allah' simply means 'The Lor...

2011-03-28T03:40:12.353+01:00

The word 'Allah' simply means 'The Lord'. As with Canaan and 'El', it's just another generic word for 'God'.

So Arab Christians aren't bowing to Muslim pressure when they call God Allah. They are, however, avoiding being killed just yet...

I've read the Bible. I know something about...

2011-03-26T20:32:50.293Z
I've read the Bible. I know something about it. When the BBC produces a programme about the Bible, I can see that a lot of it is tendentious rubbish. I am naturally tempted to conclude that when the BBC produces a programme on a subject that I know little about, it may be entertaining, but it will be unlikely to give me accurate information.

Perhaps the most useful lesson from this otherwise uninformative documentary.

46339.....98675

2011-01-29T23:05:24.811Z
46339.....98675

I wanna to decide some of questions in this area. ...

2010-12-30T13:04:30.777Z
I wanna to decide some of questions in this area. Could u help me to do it?

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, may all your w...

2010-12-15T04:45:49.539Z
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, may all your wishes come true!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, may all your w...

2010-12-11T18:21:18.212Z
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, may all your wishes come true!

Hello, you site is very funny he told me to cheer ...

2010-11-26T01:19:49.061Z
Hello, you site is very funny he told me to cheer up .. Merry Christmas.

//An unborn child is in relationship with his moth...

2010-11-25T18:49:51.779Z
//An unborn child is in relationship with his mother, but there is no contract.//

Of course, then we could drill down into what it means to be "in a relationship", however I think we have taken enough of YMB's blog space as it is!

//I think the issue in relation to the child stealing the pea, is that if the child is starving and the parent is not, the child has a right to the pea.//

I disagree, but we have already been over this in another thread, with no conclusion, and I cannot see it being resolved here either, therefore I think it is best to put the issue to bed.

I shall end by thanking you for a pleasant and impassioned conversation, one which has caused me to question my assumptions about materialism and the nature of reality (and people say blogs are just mindless empty wastes of time). I shall leave the final word to your good self.

I do not see how a relationship can be not cont...

2010-11-24T14:33:54.965Z
I do not see how a relationship can be not contractual. Can you give me an example?

An unborn child is in relationship with his mother, but there is no contract.

We are individual by nature

Yes but we are mutually dependent. We do not beget ourselves for example.

I think the issue in relation to the child stealing the pea, is that if the child is starving and the parent is not, the child has a right to the pea.

Or, another example comes to mind - instead of a p...

2010-11-17T21:15:40.200Z
Or, another example comes to mind - instead of a pea, make it a drop of my blood. Am I expected to agree with the idea that the person (man, woman, child) who would take a drop of my blood, does not deserve death? If they were to ambush me, and try to take it by force, would I not be justified in fighting until they were dead in order to protect that which is indisputably mine?

In that regard, it is far easier for me to agree that it would be absolute evil to violently prevent a woman from having an abortion, for to agree otherwise is to say that another person has a right to my blood.

//Certainly, but just because we enter into some c...

2010-11-17T20:52:03.644Z
//Certainly, but just because we enter into some contracts, it does not follow that therefore all relationships are contractual. //

I do not see how a relationship can be not contractual. Can you give me an example?

//No, if we are social by nature, then it is prior to us and therefore prior to our decisions.//

We are individual by nature - we have one mind and we have it alone and unshared. We have a yearning for interaction with other humans by nature, that is what I mean by "social". Therefore, to support any particular society must be an act of my decision.

//indeed, you regard someone attempting to protect the child as guilty of immoral violence.//

True enough. Since for the mother to be forced to bear the child is an act of enslavement of the woman, and since the only mechanism that the law has is violence, then you are advocating violence against the mother for wishing to withdraw from a relationship. I do see that as a species of slavery.

//If we are social by nature, then violence is done in some circumstances when we withdraw ourselves from certain relationships//

I do not agree. Violence is aggressive and physical. To say that voluntarily withdrawing is violence is to say that it is violence to throw off the shackles of oppression.

So forcing me to live for the benefit of others, is not violent?

//someone who protects a starving child from a parent who seeks to kill the child for stealing a solitary pea, is, on your account, guilty of violence//

I think the analogy to abortion is somewhat faulty. In the analogy, the child is not a current and real trespasser on the land of the parent, nor is it in the act of continuous theft from the parent. It would rather be a case of the child taking a large proportion of the food from the parent, making them experience great discomfort, and then making them risk their lives to expel them from their body.

The response of the parent in the analogy is not required to halt the theft of the pea- that is achieved by merely not allowing the child access to their food.

However, I broadly agree with what you say.

Let us say there are a million children, and each of them steals one pea from my field. Each is only guilty of the "small" crime of stealing one pea - yet, cumulatively, they have caused a massive amount of damage to me. I would argue that killing at least one child in such a circumstance is a reasonable act. The guilt of the individual child is no greater in my example or you analogy.

Or, if the child in your example steals one pea a day, then after many days, I have lost an entire meal. Am I to kill them then?

It is rather like saying that it is okay to steal a penny, but not okay to steal 1,000,000,000 pennies.