Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by juanmodesto)
    The elected representatives of the people. The House of Commons votes on every budget. Foreign aid is a small proportion of the budget - abolishing it will have no discernible difference to anything in the UK - but it will diminish Britain's standing in the world.
    ^^
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    Again, the British government's job is to protect British people. Yes,I value the lives of a few British soldiers more than hundreds of refugees. So should those who rule us.
    You show a profound disrespect for the Christian moral and ethical heritage and history of our nation. How dare you call yourself British when you intentionally piss on our Christian heritage. You are no more culturally British than those Muslims who call for Britain to be ruled by Sharia law; those Muslims want to overturn our heritage and so do you.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renal)
    Which are all on rotation through the 'stan at the moment and don't get broken up to provide ready replacements except in pinch point trades.


    There won't be increased training after the ban is up, there still won't be any more money in the kitty. What's more, do you suppose recruitment will rise and retention will drop while the TA are on starvation rations? Already we're struggling to keep people in the TA long enough to do two tours, do you suppose that when the drill nights, AT, socials and perhaps most importantly the beer money all dry up they'll be hanging around begging for more?
    Some will stay. Some will leave. I think it will seperate those that believe in what they are doing from those in it simply for the money.
    I suspect some leaving is the point of stopping the training - reduces the ongoing training bill in the future though the price is also reducing the size of the TA in terms of manpower.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Hanvyj)
    Do ethics not play a major role in politics? Im sorry for misinterpretation, but i feel my ethics dont change as a function of distance, yours appear to
    I think you have identified the key issue here. The party calls themselves "British" and yet seek to overturn the Christian ethics that form a fundamental part of British heritage. Surely even the BNP could not have failed to notice the contradiction in their position?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    You show a profound disrespect for the Christian moral and ethical heritage and history of our nation. How dare you call yourself British is piss on our Christian heritage. You are no more culturally British than those Muslims who call for Britain to be ruled by Sharia law; those Muslims want to overturn our heritage and so do you.
    All because I express patriotic and nationalistic feeling?

    It isn't in our heritage to throw money at the third world, and it certainly isn't in our heritage to give money to those in foreign lands whilst we have problems within our own, especially when lives are being risked in such an important issue as funding within the army.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hanvyj)
    No, but giving aid is not the same as stopping chemotherapy. I do not think it is more important. I think it is important. We might have to pay a tiny fraction more of our incomes to save thousands of lives and help other countries get out of poverty, I think that is a good thing. You do not.
    Why is it not the same thing? It's the same money from the same sources that we're spending. We give something like two billion pounds in international aid out every year, while that isn't a huge amount, it would certainly pay for things we have a limited availability of in this country - nurses and hospital beds or police officers and prison cells, whatever takes your fancy. Even if we had no shortages in this country we could be putting that sort of money into research - wouldn't a cure for cancer be a better way to spend this country's money than a new range of fairtrade jeans?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    You show a profound disrespect for the Christian moral and ethical heritage and history of our nation. How dare you call yourself British when you intentionally piss on our Christian heritage. You are no more culturally British than those Muslims who call for Britain to be ruled by Sharia law; those Muslims want to overturn our heritage and so do you.
    We are a pretty secular nation.

    The christian heritage we have includes burning people alive, raping, killing, empire building and imposing our way of life on people elsewhere.
    So which bit of our christian heritage do you want to focus on again? Part? Or all of it?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    All because I express patriotic and nationalistic feeling?

    It isn't in our heritage to throw money at the third world, and it certainly isn't in our heritage to give money to those in foreign lands whilst we have problems within our own, especially when lives are being risked in such an important issue as funding within the army.
    I think charity and compassion are present in our heritage, and indeed in the heritage of all humans, regardless of their origins.

    If the Army needs funding, it can be taken out of the banker's bonuses and other frivolities. And we can stop the private sector from ****ing things up with PFI and such ******** in the MoD.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    You show a profound disrespect for the Christian moral and ethical heritage and history of our nation. How dare you call yourself British when you intentionally piss on our Christian heritage. You are no more culturally British than those Muslims who call for Britain to be ruled by Sharia law; those Muslims want to overturn our heritage and so do you.
    I think he's a knob too, but I do enjoy pissing on Christian 'moral and ethical heritage' just as much as him. Letting religion guide us is perhaps the most backward thing I can imagine - but that's a whole different thread.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by juanmodesto)
    The elected representatives of the people. The House of Commons votes on every budget. Foreign aid is a small proportion of the budget - abolishing it will have no discernible difference to anything in the UK - but it will diminish Britain's standing in the world.
    Will it? And even if it does, is it worth it?

    The UK is still a nuclear power, sits on the security council and sits on the north atlantic council, is head of the commonwealth, relatively central in the EU and all sorts of other institutions. If we stop giving money to the third world you believe that our standing in the world will diminish?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renal)
    If we stop giving money to the third world you believe that our standing in the world will diminish?
    Nah - being the only industrialized country to have a zero foreign aid budget won't effect our standing a jot.

    :rofl:
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    All because I express patriotic and nationalistic feeling?
    You don't express any patriotic feeling. Our nation has a Christian heritage. Your agenda is strongly anti-Christian. For those of us who love this country and its heritage, your extreme anti-Christian agenda is tantamount to treachery. Why can't you have some respect for our heritage?

    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    It isn't in our heritage to throw money at the third world, and it certainly isn't in our heritage to give money to those in foreign lands whilst we have problems within our own, especially when lives are being risked in such an important issue as funding within the army.
    If you have respect for our Christian heritage then no doubt you will recall Acts 2, in which we are told that, among a crowd including "every nation under heaven", we are told: "All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need." They gave to people based on their need, regardless of their nationality. Either follow that clear lesson from Christianity or stop claiming to be patriotic.

    The problem is not being patriotic or otherwise. The problem is that you hypocritically claim to be patriotic while going against our Christian heritage. To attack Christianity is to attack the Queen. How you claim to be a patriot when you attack the Queen so viciously?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by juanmodesto)
    Nah - being the only industrialized country to have a zero foreign aid budget won't effect our standing a jot.

    :rofl:
    You obviously think it will - I'm curious; with who and why?
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by StraightDrive)
    I do enjoy pissing on Christian 'moral and ethical heritage' just as much as him.
    I'm not saying that's wrong. What is disgusting is claiming to be a patriot and then attacking Christianity and the Queen. Worse than being a patriot, or not being a patriot, is being a hypocrite. I'm not bothered if people aren't patriots; I am bothered if people are hypocrites.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renal)
    You obviously think it will - I'm curious; with who and why?
    This falls into the category of questions that are so spectacularly stupid that the questioner wouldn't understand the answer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jim-ie)
    I'm sorry, I forgot only English people exist in Britain.

    None of those pesky Irish Scots or Welsh pay hard earned money.
    :lol: funny enough to think I thought by English people I was covering all the people on the British Isles but now that I think of it I needed to use British instead isn't it? I got confused which one to use :lol:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    You don't express any patriotic feeling. Our nation has a Christian heritage. Your agenda is strongly anti-Christian. For those of us who love this country and its heritage, your extreme anti-Christian agenda is tantamount to treachery. Why can't you have some respect for our heritage?
    Extreme anti-Christian agenda for suggesting our own people are put before foreigners by our own government?

    (Original post by Kolya)
    If you have respect for our Christian heritage then no doubt you will recall Acts 2, in which we are told that, among a crowd including "every nation under heaven", we are told: "All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need." They gave to people based on their need, regardless of their nationality. Either follow that clear lesson from Christianity or stop claiming to be patriotic.
    Where in the past has Britain given to others before giving to it's own people? How is that Christian idea rooted in our own heritage? Sure, it's in the Bible, but the lunacy of our current elite, which would shy away from it's Christian roots more than anything, has not been enacted by rulers and leaders of the past.

    Also, your Bible quote and the idea of patriotism are directly contradictory.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by juanmodesto)
    This falls into the category of questions that are so spectacularly stupid that the questioner wouldn't understand the answer.
    Humour me.

    :curious:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    Extreme anti-Christian agenda for suggesting our own people are put before foreigners by our own government?



    Where in the past has Britain given to others before giving to it's own people? How is that Christian idea rooted in our own heritage? Sure, it's in the Bible, but the lunacy of our current elite, which would shy away from it's Christian roots more than anything, has not been enacted by rulers and leaders of the past.

    Also, your Bible quote and the idea of patriotism are directly contradictory.
    I don't recall Jesus telling the world to split itself along racial lines...Parable of the Good Samaritan comes to mind in fact...
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    Also, your Bible quote and the idea of patriotism are directly contradictory.
    The Queen is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England;. she is "the highest power under God in this kingdom". Therefore to wilfully act in a way contradictory to the Bible is to insult Her Majesty. Call me old-fashioned, but I think patriots shouldn't be in the business of insulting the Queen.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 12, 2009
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.