Gransnet guidelines

there are Scotch Whisky, Scotch eggs
But very little Scotch humour so I found when I was deleted from a thread last year for telling a couple of jokes with a Scotch Scottish flavour.
So being mindful of the title of this thread, I'm jumping overboard before I'm forced to walk the plank again!

Scotch is another name for Scottish whisky
Well I never did! Nice to meet you again Maw What I meant was that there was no evidence of drink as they each have a company car (and a laptop) to carry out home visits!
I've learned something else today. Installed Shazam on my new phone; now happy as Larry! OoRoo

Dr Spooner was real, Rufus but not all the things he is reported to have said are real.
Also I second Maw's post - there are Scotch Whisky, Scotch eggs and Scotch mist, and you can scotch a rumour or a lie, but the people who live in Scotland are Scots. After all, it isn't Scotchland, is it?

Scotch is another name for Scottish whisky Rufus2 - not a nationality ?

Are the (supposed) sayings of Dr Spooner well-known in Oz
Elegran; This is my 3rd attempt to reply; the first two disappeared "poof" without trace, but briefly in case it happens again, the answer is "can't say," yet. My present contact with the outside world is, apart from the good Dr. is through young Asian nurses who visit 3 times a week (to attend to my rotten feet; fortunately not the other end, yet!) and speak very good English, not like what we hear on UKTV. Not a trace of Geordie or Scotch amongst them!
Also members of our OBE class: some have difficulty in hearing the question let alone understanding it, but we are a patient group; never in a hurry.
You say "supposed"; I always thought he was for real!?

It is bad enough with my existing spellchecker deleting what I type and using what it thinks I meant, or ought to mean. When I typed "single-sex schools" why on earth did it think what I wanted to say was "anti-war"? Heaven knows what a keen young new one would produce.

The affluence of incohol is a very common debilitating condition. Sufferers try to cure it by taking the hair of the dog, but that only produces a temporary improvement.

Are the (supposed) sayings of Dr Spooner well-known in Oz? If they are not, try Googling spoonerisms, I think you will like them.

Very clever Elegran! You nearly got me and I was about to suggest (seriously) that you needed to ask Father Christmas for a new spell-checker when the penny dropped!
Just as well I'm a smart feller!
Cheers

It is strong stuff, Rufus.

affluence of incohol
Stone the crows! Is that something caused by Brexit, for a celebratory 31st.? The recipe please!

I agree Alexa and IMO Gnostic was being deliberately insulting and abusive which did nothing for his/her argument.

Just because we can do a thing, doesn't mean that we should. No one posted on the deleted thread that they had the right not to be offended. Freedom of speech may give some the green light to offend and insult, but that doesn't make it right or acceptable.

The "intoxication of hatred" seemed to be the case to me Elegran.

Your non-religious position doesn't offend me, Rufus, it is where I stand too. I was wondering how you would have reacted to the tone and attitude of the OP if you HAD read the thread. I think the poster would have been told a few Aussie home truths. He (it sounded like a man) went far beyond non-religious and into personal and religious abuse. He also sounded (to me, anyway) to be under the affluence of incohol, or other substances, though perhaps that was just the intoxication of hatred.

I asked because it seemed to me as though you hadn't
Elegran; You "seemed" correctly! ..I declared my position early on in this pseudo-debate, i.e. non religious; sorry if that upsets you, but I've not the slightest interest in the religious content of this argument and I think my contributions confirm that.
The only reason I'm here is sympathy for OPs dismay at the treatment handed out by GN. I've been there too!

You are probably right Elegran. I don't know how such a scheme might be arranged. . I sort of presumed the gransnet editor people might be good at that sort of thing.

I have noticed what a lot of good comes of the AIBU and chat posts and these are often supportive and helpful. Do you think such a forum plus religious content would work?

Smileless:

"Regardless of whether a thread is for discussion and debate or for the expression of religious or spiritual feelings, it should be possible to participate without deliberately insulting and or causing offence to other posters."

There is a difference between deliberately insulting a private person on one hand, and causing offence on the other hand. I have no right to go through life not being offended. I would not even want such a right.

I don't like to feel offended but I support freedom of speech even when that means I sometimes feel offended.
Laws of slander and libel are right and proper. Arguments that disrupt complacency are beneficial except for people who are ill or dying

Alexa I don't know how you would keep out those who just wish to post negatively and aggressively and would drown out real discussion and replace it with mudslinging. Having some threads for genuine sober debate and others for flippancy or worse doesn't work for other topics, so I can't see it being successful for an emotionally controversial area like religion. I daresay existing websites for that kind of posts have already discovered this, and have fulltime moderators reading all posts before they are published, to weed out the worst offenders.

Beckett:

"You would not insult true followers of Islam by assuming they all follow ISIS so why would anyone consider it OK to insult those who follow Christ."

ISIS is political and Christianity is not political. Apples and pears. Ordinary Muslims are not religious fundamentalists or politically motivated just like ordinary Christians.

Anyway, to intend a personal insult is not the same as expressing doubt or disapproval about about the individual's beliefs . Some beliefs are unreasonable and other beliefs are downright dangerous.

Some religionists identify themselves with their religion harmlessly and beneficially, and I was suggesting gransnet should provide a devotional space for them. Having thought it over, I gather there are already such websites also many churches run their own websites.

For instance I disapprove of Islam as a faith stance as it's markedly prescriptive where most Xian sects are comparatively liberal. I could provide an argument to support my claim.

I asked because it seemed to me as though you hadn't, Rufus.

In an appropriate manner means without being offensive, using crude language and respecting the right of others to have a different point of view or belief Rufus.

Disagreement doesn't require rudeness and or a lack of respect for others.

Did you read the actual thread while it was there,
Elegran; No! Why do you ask?

then if in disagreement, do so in an appropriate manner Rufus
Smileless; Excuse me, but what do those words mean?

There is no debate more boring than the one where everybody agrees!

I agree Gonegirl

I think we need to separate religions and political beliefs.

There is a big difference between Nazism and ISIS, and Christianity. Christianity is a religion central to this country, as is the Muslim faith. And other recognised and respected beliefs.

How can Nazism and IS be anything like that?

Sorry. Odd argument.

Alexa I told Gnostic that I found his/her posts offensive and s/he continued with the same rhetoric.

I would not seek to deliberately offend, and if I did so inadvertently and that was pointed out to me I would apologise and re evaluate the content of my posts. IMO it was Gnostic's intention to offend and presumably that's why the thread was deleted.

Regardless of whether a thread is for discussion and debate or for the expression of religious or spiritual feelings, it should be possible to participate without deliberately insulting and or causing offence to other posters.

I agree Beckett. True followers of Islam would be offended if it was assumed they were followers of ISIS and like you, I don't understand why anyone thinks it acceptable "to insult those who follow Christ".

Alexa Yes I would argue against those beliefs but I also think that insulting someone's religion does nothing to deter their thinking. In some cases it merely reinforces their thoughts. In the case of evil, such as Nazism I prefer to use logical arguments. In the case of ISIS - they are fanatics who twisted their religion.

You would not insult true followers of Islam by assuming they all follow ISIS so why would anyone consider it OK to insult those who follow Christ.