If you could make one currently legal thing illegal...

[Angst]

Alcohol, i love the stuff but it would just be funny.

 

[Woden]

Alcohol, i love the stuff but it would just be funny.

Yea, prohibition in the states was hilarious.

 

[olivier renault]

What about rolling tobacco, pipes, cigars etc?

No, of course not. First, force them to turn to pipe smoking as a public humiliation.

 

[estebanrey]

Yea, prohibition in the states was hilarious.

Mainly because it was it wasn't properly enforced.

People often cite the Volstead Act as proof that alcohol prohibition doesn't work but the fact is, it was implemented in a world of utter corruption, unenforced by local authorities and the Feds that did could only arrest you if they found you red handed producing it.

Had the smoking ban been implemented in 1920s USA that would have failed too.

 

[mufc802]

Littering.

 

[estebanrey]

Littering.

Which already is...

The law - Is it illegal to drop litter?

Anyone that drops litter in a public place is committing a crime and they can be fined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act. The fine is between £50 - £80, and if not paid a magistrates’ court can impose a fine of up to £2,500.

 

[mufc802]

You would think its legal with the amount if litter you see..

 

[estebanrey]

You would think its legal with the amount if litter you see..

Then blame your local council, it's their job to enforce that law.

 

[panthro]

EDIT, changed my mind. I'd ban foreigners from owning more than 49% ownership in property.

 

[Theophany]

*sigh*

There is no proof that the tooth fairy exist. There is no proof she doesn't.

Does that mean they are equally likely? No.
Does it mean the choice of believing each requires the same amount of 'faith'? No.
Does it mean each is as rational as the other? No.

This is the problem with religious discourse. Atheists seem to think comparing organised religion to something as trivial as the tooth fairy or santa claus is appropriate when clearly it isn't. Please don't insult my intelligence with such lowest common denominator reasoning.

lol, ok.

Balanced perspective you say? Yeah, lets all believe in, adjust our lives to suit and worship something which we have absolutely no proof is there.

Sounds like the actions of an intelligent, rational and balanced individual to me....

I don't find athiest know it all arrogant, I respect their position that due to the complete lack of evidence put before them they refuse to entertain the idea of a higher being as depicted in currently circulating religious beliefs.

I have little to no respect for those who don't questing something just because they find thinking difficult.

Sarcasm and insults, hardly a coherent argument to back up your point, is it? You can make anything sound idiotic by skirting around the point and taking potshots.

EDIT: This wasn't my original argument anyway. My argument was that it should be illegal to assist in forming a child's belief in this nonsense prior to adulthood when they will then be grown up enough to make an informed decision as to whether or not they wish to take up and dedicate themselves to Rudolph the red nosed six armed elephant, or whatever.

If parents were not allowed to indoctrinate their children into the ridiculous beliefs they hold themselves, watch religion in the UK drop off the map within a generation - only very very few people turn to 'god' after their childhood, and there is a bloody good reason for this.

And to a certain degree I would agree with you. Institutions such as schools don't have a place doing this imo. That being said, I think parents have every right to bring up their child as they see fit provided it does not deprive them of education (e.g. disallowing them to learn evolutionary science, as remotely rare as it is in this country).

My parents brought me up teaching me a load of things I now think are nonsensical to me or that I don't believe in, but the important thing is that they gave me the tools to make those decisions for myself.

 

[estebanrey]

This is the problem with religious discourse. Atheists seem to think comparing organised religion to something as trivial as the tooth fairy or santa claus is appropriate when clearly it isn't. Please don't insult my intelligence with such lowest common denominator reasoning.

Why isn't it appropriate? It's the same thing.

And there is a difference between 'organised religion' a a belief in god. I was not commenting on religion but simply the belief in a god and your statement that you can't prove he doesn't exist.

 

[Theophany]

Why isn't it appropriate? It's the same thing.

And there is a difference between 'organised religion' a a belief in god. I was not commenting on religion but simply the belief in a god and your statement that you can't prove he doesn't exist.

God and the tooth fairy are the same thing? I'm afraid you've lost me. And any credibility for that matter.

 

[shoes]

This is the problem with religious discourse. Atheists seem to think comparing organised religion to something as trivial as the tooth fairy or santa claus is appropriate when clearly it isn't. Please don't insult my intelligence with such lowest common denominator reasoning.

I fail to see the difference. They're both made up (albeit with good intentions), both have no supporting evidence, both involve money changing hands and both are completely irrelevant in twenty first century life.

Sarcasm and insults, hardly a coherent argument to back up your point, is it? You can make anything sound idiotic by skirting around the point and taking potshots.

I'm not skirting around the point at all, so I'll reword it without the sarcasm:

I do not believe that the manipulation of one's actions based on beliefs stemming from religious scripture and tradition shows the character of that person to be strong, independant or free thinking.

Furthermore, I do not think that you understand, regardless of you comment about religious scientists, that it simply is not logical to follow something simply because it cannot be proven that it does not exist.

And to a certain degree I would agree with you. Institutions such as schools don't have a place doing this imo. That being said, I think parents have every right to bring up their child as they see fit provided it does not deprive them of education (e.g. disallowing them to learn evolutionary science, as remotely rare as it is in this country).

My parents brought me up teaching me a load of things I now think are nonsensical to me or that I don't believe in, but the important thing is that they gave me the tools to make those decisions for myself.

I disagree, with something as serious as religion I think that the child should be educated on the various beliefs of the majority of religious organisations without being coerced into conforming to any one of them. This would still give them the tools to make the decision they want to without being forced into performing any ritual or worship to something which cannot be proven, and as I stated earlier, is quite ridiculous when compared to modern day knowledge.

 

[estebanrey]

God and the tooth fairy are the same thing? I'm afraid you've lost me. And any credibility for that matter.

They are both mythical beings are they not?

Why is a belief in a big sky fairy anymore rational than believing in one that lives on Earth and collects teeth?

 

[Sinny]

Not really, you have at least 2 lanes. You can overtake them.

Still annoys me. I don't generally mind if road surfaces are treacherous but on a hot day, the overtaking lane is full and you're stuck behind a little old lady in a Ka doing 35

it's even worse when someone's doing 20 in a 40 zone.

 

[Illusion]

Alcohol. Just for the laugh really. I drink socially every weekend but just think the uproar would be pretty hilarious.

 

[Theophany]

I fail to see the difference. They're both made up (albeit with good intentions), both have no supporting evidence, both involve money changing hands and both are completely irrelevant in twenty first century life.

I'm not skirting around the point at all, so I'll reword it without the sarcasm:

I do not believe that the manipulation of one's actions based on beliefs stemming from religious scripture and tradition shows the character of that person to be strong, independant or free thinking.

Furthermore, I do not think that you understand, regardless of you comment about religious scientists, that it simply is not logical to follow something simply because it cannot be proven that it does not exist.

Religion is irrelevant to you. It is not an irrelevance full-stop. And this is really the crux of the issue of which we clearly will not progress. The reason being that you have an innate prejudice against anybody religious. If you cannot see the irony of that then all I can say is "wow." As I stated way back; religion is not the problem - people are.

I disagree, with something as serious as religion I think that the child should be educated on the various beliefs of the majority of religious organisations without being coerced into conforming to any one of them. This would still give them the tools to make the decision they want to without being forced into performing any ritual or worship to something which cannot be proven, and as I stated earlier, is quite ridiculous when compared to modern day knowledge.

I grew up with all this 'modern day knowledge.' I was raised Catholic. I went to a religious school. I went to church. I am now an agnostic. I don't seem to have any of your prejudices.

Funny that, innit? How something clearly so anachronistic can actually do somebody some good.

They are both mythical beings are they not?

Why is a belief in a big sky fairy anymore rational than believing in one that lives on Earth and collects teeth?

Because one was openly made up to stop their children being sad about their teeth falling out and the other gives billions of people around the world hope, strength and a reason not to give up, not to mention a clear moral code that makes them good people.

You can make anything sound stupid by trivialising it. What's next? Unicorns? Leprechauns?

 

[Nitefly]

Ban people from discussing religion on OCUK. How people have such a raging hard-on for this discussion is beyond me.

Actually, you are free to discuss if you are actually doing something about it.

 

[bitslice]

Babble.

Really? Perhaps I should be grateful you didn't embarrass yourself by posting a LOL gif like that other kid

People have, or should have, the right to hold and express opinions. If they choose to express them, they should accept that those opinions are now open to criticism and ridicule.

I don't hold with the later myself, it's really a bit childish, but that is how a lot of atheists act in debates. Try and find one thread without them ridiculing the christian god as a fairy, they are nothing if not predictable.

Out of curiousity would you like to link where somebody has posted a thread about their belief in god, because I've been here years and never seen one. I do however stumble across the tedious rantings of an Atheist at least every other Wednesday. I mean, just shut up about it, nobody cares :/

They should also be prepared to defend their opinions in a reasoned, thought-out manner. If they cannot, then their opinion is of no value.

This doesn't seem to hold for atheists though does it, "babble", their normal posting style always seem to drag the topic down to their level all the time (with a few exceptions on this forum to be fair, but most of them are just overly excited at the thought of cut n pasting another Dawkins quote and happily beaming at their own stupendous intellect

If you don't like their arguments you can either dispute them, or ignore them.

If only I could, unfortunately atheists crave peer attention so much that they post the same boring crap in the picture thread as well, and given that no Christian makes a habit of posting, then 99% of their other comments are unsolicited lookatme wh0ring too.

I'm also not sure what "random group nobody even flipping cared about before 1995" you're referring to.

Christians? Nobody gave a crap about them before, but as soon as Dawkins told kids what to think they haven't shut up since.
It's been twenty years since a Christian said anything about god to my face, yet on the Internet there are more atheists screaming at me about how awesome they are, than girls in a state of undress.

I wish they would all just **** off tbh

 

[estebanrey]

Because one was openly made up to stop their children being sad about their teeth falling out

And God (and heaven) was made up to stop adults being sad about the fact we die and cease to exist.

Also, the notion of God gives no one a sense of morality. If the only reason you don't go around murdering people is because you fear 'hell', I wouldn't say that was a very moral stance.