BBC Radio 4 Sunday Programme denies inviting Claire Khaw to discuss Secular Koranism

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/the-exchange-adassamad-clarke-and.html

The correct question to ask about God is not whether He exists

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9781000/9781165.stm

0742   If you report on wars, which are so often sectarian conflicts conducted in the "name of God", are you more likely to lose your own faith? Is it possible for foreign correspondents, who may often see the very worst of humanity, to still believe in God? Our guest editor Dame Ann Leslie, who lost her own Catholic faith, spoke to John Humphrys and Edward Stourton.

The argument went thus:

JH and AL saying the same thing to Ed Stourton "How can you possibly believe in God when such terrible things are allowed to happen?"  (You must be STOOPID.)

Ed said very memorably "The God that you deny is not the God I believe in."

He also said it would be illogical to start off believe in God knowing about war and horrible things happening, and then not believe in God because you are angry about war and other horrible things happening.

But liberals can say and believe any stupid crap they like because the political establishment is liberal.  The liberal establishment is of course virulently anti-God and fanatically pro-gay to the extent that we are all about to have gay marriage shoved up our collective anal passage whether we like it or not.

What Ed did not say was the phrase that kept coming to my mind, atheist though I am, and that phrase was "These things are sent to try us."

Clearly, God (if He exists) feels that He has left clear enough instructions after ensuring that there are enough people to read His instructions about what not to do and what to do to get to heaven and have paradise on earth.

If people choose to ignore it because their liberal establishment has minds that are full of liberal feminist atheist shit, well, that is just to bad for them.  They and their societies will go to hell and be hell on earth to distinguish them for those who do obey God's commandments and do not have governments intent on shoving gay marriage up the anal passage of society.  

The other thing I would say is that the question should not be about whether God exists, but whether it is useful to believe in God.

The final thing to ask oneself is whether society would be a better place if all or most people believed in God, or if most or all people did not believe in God.

When you have answered the questions truthfully and correctly, you would then have made out a very clear and compelling case for a theocracy.




HELP ME ANNOY THE FEMALE-DOMINATED PC BBC

Would you like to nominate Claire Khaw for the iPM New Year Honour for being the most entertainingly philosophical, political and theological Woman of the Year?  Go on, go on, go on!

I already know they won't let me win but your nominations will annoy them enormously.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0089nbb/features/new-year-honour

Catholic Ed Stourton allows reporter rumoured to be gay to describe a Cardinal as "extreme" without challenging him. How gay is that?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01cvg43#synopsis

At some point in this programme you will hear a reporter, Robert Piggott, rumoured to be gay at http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question343480.html, describe Cardinal O'Brien's views as "extreme".  They were discussing the Cardinal's objection to gay "marriage" at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9121354/Catholic-leader-Cardinal-Keith-OBrien-clashes-with-David-Cameron-on-same-sex-marriage-plans.html


Ed Stourton a Catholic who has written books on Catholicism listed at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Stourton_(journalist)#Publications did not challenge him, however.

Why not?

Was it a temporary lapse?

Or a deliberate policy of cowardice not to enrage his lady bosses at the BASTARD Broadcasting Corporation?

After all, he nearly lost his job http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/dec/13/bbc-radio before being reprieved http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/3980925/BBC-presenter-Ed-Stourton-will-not-be-sacked.html.

Sounds like the scum slut and  BASTARD Broadcasting Corporation was putting the frighteners on him for being white, heterosexual, married and middle class.  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1094729/PETER-MCKAY-Whats-BBCs-cruel-torture-Posh-Ed.html

That' why the fucker's so fucking scared by the gay cabal and the feminazi cunts now running the BASTARD Broadcasting Corporation.  Remember, Mark Thompson, who is Director General of the BBC has a Jewess for a wife.   (Please don't anyone fucking tell me saying "Jewess" is a anti-Semitic or I'll send you away with a flea in your ear.)

Howzat for a bit of investigative journalism on my part about the causes and origins of the cowardice of Ed Stourton?  He once even told me at a book signing of one of his books on Catholicism that he never thinks of the Trinity.  I tried to tell him he would go to hell, because that is the main ingredient of being Christian, but he dismissed my trinitarian concerns for his immortal soul as mildly eccentric and cranky, and then scuttled off home before he could buy me dinner to allow me to warm to my theme.

This means he is one of those CULTURAL Christians, which means they just like church spires rather than mosque minarets, and find the trappings and outward forms of Christian worship reassuring, but don't believe in any of that trinitarian crap.

But cultural Christians are without moral compass, bend whichever the breeze blows them, have jobs to lose and families to support.

Poor old Cultural Catholic Ed Stourton, scared of his own fucking shadow and his gay-friendly lady bosses at the BASTARD Broadcasting Corporation.  Perhaps he should read the Koran so he can get have a stiff backbone shoved up his cowardly cultural Catholic arse.    He may have a deep masculine voice but his ideas of moral courage has the taint of effeminacy.   

Islam the Religion of Politics, Philosophy and Economics

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00zjcx5#synopsis

My email today to the Sunday Programme:


Just heard your special edition from Cairo and wonder if SUNDAY would like to discuss how a modern state could inject Koranic principles into its legal system and constitution.

It makes me impatient when people talk about the separation of Church and State in their muddle-headed way.

Religion is for people who do not think they are interested in politics.

Anyone interested in politics is always interested in religion whether or not they believe in God.

God is a creation of Man to assist him in his politics, morality and spirituality.

The Muslim credo is "Forbid what is evil and enjoin what is good" - a universal duty for any moral and political being, I would have thought.

Secular Koranism invites you to agree that the Koran is a good enough guide to humanity.

Secular Koranism does not require any converts to Islam.

Secular Koranism only requires that all law graduates pass an exam in Koranic knowledge.

Secular Koranism would promote a one-party state that would protect the rights of its members. ("Do not divide yourselves into sects and rejoice in your own doctrines."

Secular Koranism would promote direct democracy AKA government by referendum. (Shura)

Secular Koranism would repeal all anti-discrimination legislation. ("There is no compulsion in belief, for truth stands clear from error.")

Secular Koranism would be economically libertarian for it supports the interpretation that a 20% flat rate income tax is the right rate of taxation for all times. (Khums)

Secular Koranism would promote charity and dismantle the welfare state which promotes and encourages female promiscuity, family breakdown and ever-lowering standards of education and behaviour.

Secular Koranism would challenge the demented matriarchy that is destroying Reason and Rational Government in this country and in the West.

I am happy to be challenged on all of the above because I have thought it all through and would welcome a forensic scrutiny of my ideas.

Iconoclasts on Immigration

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00mgwhy

Edward Stourton chairs a live discussion series in which guests set out their strong views on a subject, before being challenged by a panel of experts.

Economist and writer Philippe Legrain argues that Britain should abolish all immigration controls. The movement of people across our borders should, he says, be as free as the movement of goods and services.

Legrain's views are challenged by Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch UK, Labour MP for Keighley and Ilkeley Ann Cryer and Tony Saint, a writer and former immigration officer.

A spat when Sir Andrew said Philippe Legrain would be hearing from his lawyers if he did not withdraw his accusation of racism. Legrain reluctantly withdrew his statement, and I cheered.

Now that the Equalities and Human Rights Commission are insisting that the BNP adopt equal opportunities nationalism, I wonder if BNP activists will soon find themselves able to make similar threats.

We will have to wait and see.