Quite so, Frank!

It occurs to me that Boazy and runner didn't notice that I was actually arguing for their right to dribble in public - thus of course demonstrating tolerance in practice :)

Boazy seems a tad sensitive today. What was it I said about a pill and some quiet time with his imaginary friend?

LOL

I think that CJ Morgan's last outburst about me tells us all we need to know about him.

No, steven. You did in fact, react with your own kind of venom. You even managed to throw in an attack on Irfan Yusuf, despite not being part of the thread at all.
Now there's intolerance. Plus, your shriekings at anyone who would have the temerity to defend islamic moderates kind of seems a little over the top. It's interesting, because while I sometimes disagree with Irfan's posts, they seem to be pretty calmly stated, whereas your objectionable post is up there with the best of them.
It would seem that anyone who disagrees with you is to be shouted down.

Boaz - the point is, you see god as being relevant to everything so you're happy to go off on religious tangents, because to you, it is relevant.

How would you feel for instance, if I took every thread into a discussion about the Easter Bunny, and how it impacts on the topic at hand.
I'm not comparing the easter bunny to god or something like that, just trying to give you an idea that many don't share your belief in god's all encompassing importance.
Thus, when a discussion about something else entirely gets interrupted with biblical passages and religious rhetoric, you may as well just be interrupting each thread with lines from a car manual. It's of about as much relevance and interest to the others here, which is the point another poster made earlier - you can argue that there are others interested in god, fine - but there are plenty who aren't, and those people are having their discussions hijacked.

As for runner's post - it's yet another example of a simple attack on anything that isn't religious, without any substantiation.
Nice illustration.

Christian fundamentalists are part of our society and have a right to their say. Having said that, they seem to be over represented here. Why they've chosen to colonise this place is anyone's guess, but anyone who's been around OLO for a while must have noticed that as the fundies have moved in, others have moved out.

Boazy, you've been here forever. You're part of the furniture. You've seen people come and go over the years so I wonder whether you've noticed the same thing?

Well I dont necessarily think that numbers-wise they are over-represented, but certainly as far as the actual numbers of posts are concerned, then you have a point. TRTL makes a good point about the fact that these people dont think that they are being irrelevent because to them everything is relevant to their religion. But I dont think that this excuses them from quoting bible passages on just about every topic.

Still Gibo is great for a laugh if you are ever feeling a bit questioning about your own sanity, BD has a few reasonable things to say, though I admit to now skim reading to get past most of the religious rot, and runner whilst appearing fairly fundy, doesnt bring every topic he comments on back to God, which is good to see. BD if you have trouble understanding how annoying this can be to most posters, think back a month or more to when PALEIF turned every topic into an animals rights debate (well I am exaggerating on EVERY topic, but I think you'll get my drift).

On line opinion should and does include god botherers ( if you are not bothered now you will be on judgement day). We have the usual fundamental atheist who are happy to demonize everyone who disagrees with them. Somehow they forget and fail to give credit to the fact that most great learning centres in the Western world were started by Christians, many of the great inventions were invented by Christians and countries that adopted Christian principles have prospered much more than any others. The bile coming from these fundamentalist atheist who post on every moral topic surpasses anything ever thrown at them. They quote the likes of the dishonest Dawkins and make up the rules as they go along.