tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post6977131691967768658..comments2012-07-06T08:25:55.800+01:00AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comBlogger72125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-70794497246316557412012-07-06T08:25:55.800+01:002012-07-06T08:25:55.800+01:00John,<br /><br />‘I don&#39;t believe in vampires. Imagine if I called myself an &#39;avamparist&#39; and devoted a blog to calling vampires murderers.’<br /><br />I don’t know what blog that is so i can’t comment. But you do believe in zombies. Even my child at 7 knows they are make believe.<br /><br />‘it is not possible for Him to commit murder.’<br /><br />Was the Passover not murder? I thought you told us it was possible for him to do everything.<br /><br />‘He allows all his mortal creatures to die, so if we followed your line of &#39;thought&#39; then He would be a murderer of every single creature He ever created and let die.’<br /><br />I am fine with that.<br /><br />‘Buffy here I come!’<br /><br />Wear a condom when you do. <br /><br />‘God does exist. That can be demonstrated with absolute certainty, which makes it scientific.’<br /><br />So said the religion called Intelligent Design. Only the Bunkum Brigade believed it.<br /><br /> ‘Certainly more scientific than the hypothetical experimental sciences that you subscribe’<br /><br />Would you recommend the bible as a work of science? <br /><br />The whole discussion with you has become so unreal. Possession would be the wrong word but I am sure there is one that describes your condition.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-64140476957024262262012-07-01T12:38:58.688+01:002012-07-01T12:38:58.688+01:00AM,<br />‘God is not a murdered because he does not exist. The fictional god of the bible is a murderer beyond dispute. Just as a character in a novel can be a murderer so too can a character in a bible. It hardly follows that because we believe a fictional character to be a murderer that the character assumes real life attributes.’<br /><br />I don’t believe in vampires. Imagine if I called myself an ‘avamparist’ and devoted a blog to calling vampires murderers.<br /><br />BTW if God is the Lord and Creator of all things, it is not possible for Him to commit murder. He allows all his mortal creatures to die, so if we followed your line of ‘thought’ then He would be a murderer of every single creature He ever created and let die. This would include men, (which I regard as the summit of material creation), and aardvarks and flies which seem just as important to you.<br /><br />Anyway, I must get back to slaying those darned vampires, Buffy here I come!<br /><br />PS, God does exist. That can be demonstrated with absolute certainty, which makes it scientific. Certainly more scientific than the hypothetical experimental sciences that you subscribe to which, given their inability to demonstrate their findings are only ‘scientific’ in a broad sense of that word.John McGirrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04406483272037255062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-7823193901141269372012-07-01T10:43:54.424+01:002012-07-01T10:43:54.424+01:00John,<br /><br />‘Note especially the last paragraph of this twisted author.’<br /><br />Seems such a common sense thing to say. I myself wonder how ‘a tiny piece of insensible, embryonic tissue, and its life suddenly leaps to infinite, uncomputable value’ despite feeling that the human person is the highest form of life we have and human beings should seek to protect the life of human beings. In areas where we cannot get consensus, such as abortion, we rely on individual conscience. Given that even chicken choking would be banned by clerics, they will hardly be listened to in the discussion. <br /><br />God is not a murdered because he does not exist. The fictional god of the bible is a murderer beyond dispute. Just as a character in a novel can be a murderer so too can a character in a bible. It hardly follows that because we believe a fictional character to be a murderer that the character assumes real life attributes.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-61304972947573905322012-06-24T08:10:34.655+01:002012-06-24T08:10:34.655+01:00‘I am a firm realist.’<br /><br />Who believes it is idolatry to worship statues but bits of wafer? <br /><br />‘I much prefer to argue with the use of reason rather than faith.’<br />But rarely do.<br /><br />‘My Church confirms my conclusions.’<br /><br />All the more reason to doubt them. <br /><br />‘The same could be said of any book in the Bible or of any writing of any Saint for 2,000 years, whether it be St <br />Augustine or St Theresa of Avila etc.’<br /><br />Yet you think it is right to burn books.<br /><br />‘I grant that if I had a Blog I would not allow the same latitude.’<br /><br />I wonder why that doesn’t surprise me.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-27225896674099471562012-06-23T07:54:45.544+01:002012-06-23T07:54:45.544+01:00John,<br /><br />‘There is absolutely no justification for abortion that cannot be given for infanticide.’<br />Whether people agree with abortion or not, they can see that different arguments can be made in respect of both. They may not agree with the arguments but they are not blind to them. <br />I suppose people ask themselves what they would do if faced with a hypothetical situation. Imagine a scenario where a priest rapes a woman. The Church traffics him on to another dioceses, the bishop then gets up and demands that the raped woman give birth to the rapist’s child. I don’t imagine any but the deranged backing that. This is an extreme scenario but it is the type of hypotheses that allows us to reflect on what we might do. <br /><br />‘I do not dread to see the cruel society that you would prescribe, because I am living in it, and it is getting daily worse.’<br /><br />There is no agreement on abortion being a cruelty in the manner you describe it. Society simply cannot agree. Most probably suspect that if men could get pregnant abortion would be a sacrament. But there is agreement that child rape is wrong. The very people who would long to lecture society on abortion have failed morally in respect of child rape. As for all the Presidents and Nobel prize winners you refer to – the Church does not snub them. <br /><br />Aine said: &#39;Firstly let me start here by stating clearly that I am not an advocate for <br />sexual relations between human beings and other animal species.&#39;<br /><br />And you said: ‘Why not? That will be next on the agenda.’<br /><br />That seems nonsense. The whole thrust of Aine’s point is about liberating human sexuality from the constraints of religion and bias and basing it on the consensual principle. Much of the discussion on this site has focussed on the clergy wanting to extend sex outside the consensual. If anything it is from the clergy that we are likely to find the case for bestiality. Denied access to boys they might seek out some other being unable to give consent. I just don’t believe it enters the discussion at all but rather is thrown out to distract. <br /><br />‘Not another Spaghetti devotee!’<br /><br />Spaghetti versus wafer: any real difference? <br /><br />‘In the end it is a blessing that this society is dying’.<br /><br />Very much the way the religious mind thinks, unfortunatelyAMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-18732448829152309572012-06-22T07:43:17.609+01:002012-06-22T07:43:17.609+01:00John,<br /><br />‘Sometimes they should be burnt precisely because we do understand their content or author.’<br /><br />That is to prefer more ignorance and less knowledge. I think it better that we understand things than don’t.<br /><br />How should society decide on what books to burn? Who should be able to read them in order to decide that others should not read them?<br />‘Bad books can kill; eg; the Koran.’<br /><br />You could have mentioned the bible.<br /><br />‘Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize humankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel’ - Thomas Paine <br /><br /> ‘Catholics have nothing to be ashamed of in regard to the Inquisitions.’<br /><br />Torture, murder, burnings – if those are not matters to be ashamed of the term conscience has no meaning. <br /><br />Morality: ‘So where does it come from? The FSM? No God, in the end, must mean no morality. Certainly not one that can be shared by all.’<br /><br />It comes from our own reason. And that is the same for those who believe in god. They still have to think up the morality they wish others to share. And there is no morality that can be shared by all. That much must be evident today even to you who believes in god but can see no shared moral interpretative framework. And what are we to base this morality of god on? Hardly the bible which justifies rape, plunder and child killing. At the end of it all we come back to humans devising moral frameworks. Some claim they are god given and others claim otherwise. <br /><br />‘I oppose abortion, infanticide and euthanasia.’<br /><br />I think that has been shown to be incorrect in respect of the murder of children as a punishment against homosexuality.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-18895724801783314332012-06-21T07:56:12.330+01:002012-06-21T07:56:12.330+01:00John,<br /><br />Lourdes, ‘has passed all the scientific tests they could think of.’<br /><br />Was the &#39;Zambelli Affair&#39; of a few years back not about money?<br />The only thing cured by Lourdes water is thirst. Paris alone has more hotels in the whole of France. Tells you it is good for business. What is it – 60 odd miracles since the 1860s? That is supposed to amount to a cure rate of 1 out of every 3 million. And in some cases the illness returned in later years. That will be found in any society with or without religion and so called miracles. It is estimated that more people died on the journey to and from Lourdes in traffic accidents. I would reconsider my view on it when they produce just one person, only one, that went out with one leg and came back with two. That would be a miracle.<br /><br /> <br />DAWKINS: It may seem tough to question these poor, desperate people’s faith. But isn’t bracing truth better than false hope? What is the evidence for any miracles?<br /><br />FR. GRIFFIN: There are actually sixty-six declared miracles. There are about two thousand unexplained cures here. But then we would say there are millions of people who have been healed in different ways.<br /><br />DAWKINS: Healed in some sort of mental way?<br /><br />FR. GRIFFIN: Healed in spiritual ways, or people who have come to terms with their own particular situation, people who have rediscovered God in their lives again, people who have received a new grace here in Lourdes.<br /><br />DAWKINS: So you tend to get about 80,000 per year?<br /><br />FR. GRIFFIN: There’s about 80,000 sick pilgrims who come here every year.<br /><br />DAWKINS: That’s been going on for more than a century now—for a century and a half?<br /><br />FR. GRIFFIN: Yes<br /><br />DAWKINS: So, 80,000 per year, and, of those, sixty-six have been cured. I’m just. . . you see the way I’m thinking?<br /><br />FR. GRIFFIN: Yup<br /><br />Sort of sums it up.<br /><br />As always there will be things that science cannot currently explain or cure. But the alternative is hardly to look at the supernatural. The notion of miracles and an interventionist god makes no intellectual sense. The people who believe in a creative intelligent energy but not in divine intervention would seem to have a stronger case.<br />‘Hence it could be shown NOT to be a &#39;money-making racket&#39;, hence the charges.’<br /><br />Not so. The charges are made under a blasphemy law which would not have been applied had the allegations been levelled against a politician. When I hear blasphemy I think of witchcraft and that age. <br /><br />You are right on this point. There is too much protection afforded to opinions. All the isms that we are not allowed to offend in a bid to make us politically correct. John Waters in the Irish Times done a great piece a while on the politically correct climate that is suffocating discourse and strangling ideas. An atheist should merit no respect solely for his atheistic ideas. Nor should a Christian for theirs. There are situations where protection is needed – a person cannot do much about their skin colour or sexuality or disability. They are not opinions. Religion and atheism are opinions, what people think. They should be open to ridicule and caricature if need be. <br />You reinforce this suffocating culture by your desire to have so much banned. I take the opposite view. If you ran a blog I am in no doubt that I would be censored. You are never censored here.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-12433720560939942572012-06-20T08:36:04.309+01:002012-06-20T08:36:04.309+01:00John,<br /><br />‘I always liked Brendan Behan&#39;s tale about smoking the bible. And why not, if it is an old protestant one?’<br /><br />Indeed. Apparently smoking the Catholic one led to an erection!<br /><br />I think there was a bog standard bible that they put in each cell. It was a red cover. Don’t know if it was Protestant or Catholic. Is the ‘word of god’ not the same in them all? I don’t know the difference. It made good cigarette paper or writing paper. At the end of chapters there was a blank white bit. Very thin paper - great for writing and easily concealed during searches. It also kept the feet off the floor during the winter days and nights when we were talking at the window.<br /><br />&#39;no sane person can believe ALL came from NOTHING.’<br /><br />Does that make you insane from believing god came from nothing?<br /><br />Our whole experience of life John is that things evolve from small to big, from simple to complex. We are expected by religion to believe that it all started out as complex/big or always was complex/big. Just does not correspond to what our experience is. Outside of religion I like many others have thought about the possibility of a designer. I just put the mumbo jumbo and higgledy-piggledy to the side and thought about it. It just does not add up. It explains nothing whereas science explains an awful lot. <br /><br />‘Call it what you will, but what was there before what is now is what we call God.’<br /><br />But this is a case of god being pushed back further and further back into the depths of time and the universe. Hans Kung is very good on this aspect. But you would imagine that if there was a word of god it would have told people about how the human species evolved and wasn’t suddenly stuck in the garden of Eden 6000 years ago (1000 years after the Sumerians invented glue) as a brand new creation with no previous organic or biological history. How did it take Darwin and others to discover that?AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-3949581239284353602012-06-18T10:24:06.813+01:002012-06-18T10:24:06.813+01:00Saint?MaryHedgehog <br /><br />‘Jesus speaking on religiosity – “you brood of vipers – you white <br />washed tombs with the appearance of Godliness but underneath full of filth” <br />“you who break the backs of the people with demands and religious rules but do not follow them yourselves”... Vatican antics spring to mind clearly along with rules, regulations and so on!!!’<br /><br />So true.<br /><br />‘He wants/demands life/the world to submit to his views and when it obviously never will he lashes out.<br /><br />I think this is a feature common to the authoritarian personality in general, not just the religious types. <br /><br />‘I just had to walk away from it all the end because every religion has its tools to control and process you the way they want you to be. I just stick to a personal conviction and leave it at that.’<br /><br />Which seems the best approach to take. It would be hard to quarrel with the ethics of it.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-67006186928783179382012-06-17T23:04:33.673+01:002012-06-17T23:04:33.673+01:00michaelhenry,<br />&#39;i could never understand those who say that we have to fear God- why shoud people have to live in fear of a God that loves them-&#39;<br /><br />Here are a few quotes. Excuse the Proddy Bible, but we Catholics don&#39;t read it enough to make such lists.<br /><br />http://www.feargod.net/verses.phpJohn McGirrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04406483272037255062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-79990246618024954282012-06-17T21:15:59.314+01:002012-06-17T21:15:59.314+01:00SMH,<br /><br />‘An excellent book i read recently is called Honor Killings in the 21st Century by Nicole Pope’<br /><br /> I am sure it would be fascinating and insightful. I just don’t have the time to read all that I would like to. I suppose I am no different from most others in that respect. On occasion I have bought the same book twice forgetting that I bought it before because it was a ‘must read.’!<br /><br />‘It really helped me u/stand how patriarchy combined with twisting religious scriptures spells death <br />literally for women and girls.’<br /><br />The men of god like to lord it over women for sure. <br /><br />Aine <br /><br />‘You homophobic neanderthal.’<br /><br />Laughed at that but not coz it was thrown John’s way. Just that you said it. I could actually hear you scream!<br /><br />‘sexuality is not destructive.’<br /><br />Of course not. Religion is destructive of sexuality. Crusty old mullahs and prisest hate the notion that people enjoy themselves and pay little heed to the preaching mob. <br /><br />‘Who or what one consensually does with ones vagina/penis is really a personal choice/decision.’<br /><br />Totally. The bishop can stir his tea with it if he wants as long as he keeps it away from my cup.<br /><br />‘I hope for the benefit of further generations you never reproduced and spread your vitriolic ignorance further than yourself.’<br /><br />I don’t think there is much chance of that being spread too far. I imagine anybody reading what John says on these matters will be disinclined towards that perspective. Who really wants to support murder of children as revenge against gays?AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-52729860947235487342012-06-17T18:41:22.266+01:002012-06-17T18:41:22.266+01:00Michael,<br /><br />it happens only with a religion of hateAMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-57782694517216589842012-06-17T16:31:06.172+01:002012-06-17T16:31:06.172+01:00AM<br /><br />&quot; McGirr missing feared Alive &quot;<br /><br />LOL- <br /><br />On another note i could never understand those who say that we have to fear God- why shoud people have to live in fear of a God that loves them-michaelhenryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02922594308606665908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-49648300813442677772012-06-17T07:52:16.249+01:002012-06-17T07:52:16.249+01:00John,<br /><br />We never wanted rid of you. We just got to a point where the same old same old no longer had the pulling power. You were free to stay or go. When you went you were sort of missed. We actually put an alert out: McGirr missing feared alive!<br /><br />‘The trouble with you liberals is that you will not allow anyone to dissent from your liberalism, all while pretending to be oh so tolerant.’<br /><br />You dissent as much as you like here. And by your own admission if you ran the blog you wouldn’t allow the same latitude.<br /> <br />‘You claim to allow my voice, but you have to tell me what I mean.’<br />We should just allow you to go unchallenged? Your belief in magic left to its own devices. Because it is a blog shaped by a free speech outlook does not mean we get a free run.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-80485462749912864462012-06-15T11:07:47.246+01:002012-06-15T11:07:47.246+01:00I am beginning to see why those who deny God are considered insane in the Good Book.<br /><br />You should see the number of Sites calling God, (who they say doesn’t exist), a murderer. I am just after reading one where they take the Good Lord to court over it! <br /><br />www.thegodmurders.com<br /><br />Atheism is truly a twisted religion.John McGirrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04406483272037255062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-34904320593117944782012-06-15T10:55:53.468+01:002012-06-15T10:55:53.468+01:00“‘Richard Dawkins thinks aardvarks, monkeys and people are all of the same value.’”<br />‘He might but I have never heard him argue that.’<br />Note especially the last paragraph of this twisted author. <br /><br />&quot;Sir,<br />You appeal for money to save the gorillas. Very laudable, no doubt. But it doesn&#39;t seem to have occurred to you that there are thousands of human children suffering on the very same continent of Africa. There&#39;ll be time enough to worry about gorillas when we&#39;ve taken care of every last one of the kiddies. Let&#39;s get our priorities right, please!<br />This hypothetical letter could have been written by almost any well-meaning person today. In lampooning it, I don&#39;t mean to imply that a good case could not be made for giving human children priority. I expect it could, and also that a good case could be made the other way. I&#39;m only trying to point the finger at the automatic, unthinking nature of the speciesist double standard. To many people it is simply self-evident,without any discussion, that humans are entitled to special treatment. To see this, consider the following variant on the same letter:<br />Sir,<br />You appeal for money to save the gorillas. Very laudable, no doubt. But it doesn&#39;t seem to have occurred to you that there are thousands of aardvarks suffering on the very same continent of Africa. There&#39;ll be time enough to worry about gorillas when we&#39;ve saved every last one of the aardvarks. Let&#39;s get our priorities right,please!<br />This second letter could not fail to provoke the question: What&#39;s so special about aardvarks? A good question, and one to which we should require a satisfactory answer before we took the letter seriously. Yet the first letter, I suggest, would not for most people provoke the equivalent question: What&#39;s so special about humans? As I said, I don&#39;t deny that this question, unlike the aardvark question, very probably has a powerful answer. All that I am criticising is an unthinking failure to realise in the case of humans that the question even arises.<br />The speciesist assumption that lurks here is very simple. Humans are humans and gorillas are animals. There is an unquestioned yawning gulf between them such that the life of a single human child is worth more than the lives of all the gorillas in the world. The &#39;worth&#39; of an animal&#39;s life is just its replacement cost to its owner — or, in the case of a rare species, to humanity. But tie the label Homo sapiens even to a tiny piece of insensible, embryonic tissue, and its life suddenly leaps to infinite, uncomputable value.&quot; (&quot;Gaps in the Mind,&quot; in The Great Ape Project)John McGirrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04406483272037255062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-25755109998774740812012-06-15T09:43:49.615+01:002012-06-15T09:43:49.615+01:00John <br /><br />‘in this case, eternal happiness for the innocent trumps a brief period of misery on earth.’<br /><br />And ‘this case’ was the murder of children nothing else.<br /><br />‘every thing has a purpose and is always permitted in order for a greater good to occur.’<br /><br />Ever were this true – it is bunkum to me – we are not talking about what is permitted but what is inflicted. <br /><br />‘My reply could be extended to say IF children were burned, THEN God would have permitted it for their eternal happiness.’<br /><br />You stated unambiguously your support for their deaths.<br /><br />‘Maybe God took all the innocent children before he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, who knows?’<br />Sounds so weak and implausible. Arguably he could have allowed the priests to rape them all first. <br /><br />‘The &#39;brief period of misery&#39; refers to human life on earth, not to children being burned.’<br /><br />This is irrelevant. You were asked a question in which the context was clear and the response to ‘this case’ was to justify the murder of children as a means of dealing with gays.<br /><br />‘If children are whisked away, and bypass 70 years of misery, why is that bad?’ <br /><br />Try losing your own. I wonder if I am really reading this. And you claim to be opposed to abortion. Every abortion could be justified on those vicious grounds.<br /><br />‘In any case I did not say, &#39;Hey, God why don&#39;t you burn some kids?&#39; That would be ADVOCATING it, ie calling for it. To attempt an explanation of a possible interpretation of an event is not to ADVOCATE it. At least it is not in my dictionary.’<br /><br />You keep digging into that hole John. You are doing just fine.<br /><br />‘sodomy leads to death.’<br /><br />Even between men and women?<br />Religion leads to death it could be argued more convincingly. <br /><br />‘Richard Dawkins thinks aardvarks, monkeys and people are all of the same value.’<br /><br />He might but I have never heard him argue that. <br /><br />Itsjustmacker,<br /><br /> ‘he is quoting Saint Thomas, but then again, how can someone be made a Saint who advocates Evil doing , to get Good some out of it???.<br /><br />It is a very malign religious perspective whereby people with a bent for evil (not referring to John here) derive pleasure from sadism and power over others and try to mask it on wholesome grounds. <br /><br />‘But with his Post, He is also Advocating it, that is if he Believes Saint Thomas to be correct!’<br /><br />Which he has since been tying himself in knots trying to undo.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-24463475315576169122012-06-14T09:31:36.660+01:002012-06-14T09:31:36.660+01:00michaelhenry,<br />&#39;well did Ken Major buy what you were selling or did the git close the door on your face-&#39;<br /><br />He asked his mrs and she said no, lol! So he came back sheepishly and said he had to defer to her, lol, wimp!<br /><br />I got a better response from &#39;archbishop&#39; Eames. He seemed a nice fella.John McGirrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04406483272037255062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-22113850219227032382012-06-14T08:01:27.564+01:002012-06-14T08:01:27.564+01:00Michaelhenry,<br /><br />funny enough I thought the film of Pet Sametary was good. Never saw The Stand but did watch Salem&#39;s Lot. It was very well put together. Most of his work on screen doesn&#39;t match up to the booksAMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-55261826452086465372012-06-14T00:14:04.825+01:002012-06-14T00:14:04.825+01:00John McGirr-<br /><br />&quot; When he opened the door i knew him at once,by his horns&quot;<br /><br />Your bound to know there was no way that i was going to let that gem go- well did Ken Major buy what you were selling or did the git close the door on your face-<br />tell the truth-God hates fibbers you know, lol-<br /><br />AM-<br /><br />I liked Pet Sematary but its film did not do the book much justice<br />The stand was a massive book and its t.v series was ok-But i thought that the Salems Lot t.v series was just as great as the book-we dont see that to often-michaelhenryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02922594308606665908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-17222721367309473902012-06-13T22:40:05.766+01:002012-06-13T22:40:05.766+01:00Michaelhenry,<br /><br />The Stand was brilliant. It was the second one I read. Ploughed through it at the start of 1982. Salem&#39;s Lot was great as well. Think I would opt for Pet Sematery. A black book.AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-52892311920517247492012-06-13T22:06:04.307+01:002012-06-13T22:06:04.307+01:00michaelhenry,<br />&#39;now you are calling that U.D.R junkie major ken maginnis a good man- and you think that i am blind about politics-&#39;<br /><br />My father stopped believing in hell because he said Paisley does. I prefer to give credit where it is due, but it is just an expression.<br /><br />I used to do a &#39;door to door&#39; job and some years ago I knocked on his door, not knowing where he lived until then. When he opened the door I knew him at once, by his horns. The thoughts that went through my mind, lol!<br /><br />Almost enough to make me support euthanasia.John McGirrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04406483272037255062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-40324069224756008092012-06-13T21:49:12.481+01:002012-06-13T21:49:12.481+01:00AM- <br /><br />Stephen King- &quot; what is my favourite &quot;<br /><br />I cant answer with just one book-<br />Salems lot<br />The stand<br />Cell<br />Under the Dome<br />The Dark tower series-all six<br /> of them despite that fcuk of a end<br />i am about to read the shining again because part 2-Doctor Sleep is comming out soon-its like waiting for christmas when i was a wee one-<br />John McGirr-<br />now you are calling that U.D.R junkie major ken maginnis a good man- and you think that i am blind about politics-michaelhenryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02922594308606665908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-68477387589698592072012-06-13T19:32:55.518+01:002012-06-13T19:32:55.518+01:00Michaelhenry,<br /><br />I used to love King but haven&#39;t read him in years. Was still on the blanket when I read him for the first time. What is your favourite?AMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00559413440743290550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807238897188927967.post-46185497291707968262012-06-13T18:42:25.705+01:002012-06-13T18:42:25.705+01:00Good man, Ken.<br /><br />http://www.u.tv/News/Gay-marriage-bestiality-remark-slammed/02a42048-03d5-4a26-94e8-a967d0cd8495John McGirrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04406483272037255062noreply@blogger.com