Weston Super Saint

Nah, not worth it, you've not grasped basic ice cream sales yet, that stuff will be way beyond you. Unbelievable.

Ah yes, your completely irrelevant quote about people driving for no good reason where you quoted mine that stated I drive for work every day. There was no 'misrepresentation', I put a number of question marks so you could explain but you chose not to....

My counting isn't great, but is that a classed as a gathering of more than two people - the burning question, should they be fined for disobeying the legislation?

I see irony is lost on the hard of thinking! And talking of sharpest tools in the box, why on earth would an ice cream man be out and about during the 'work day', doesn't it make more commercial sense for an ice cream man to be plying his trade when people aren't at work and more likely to buy his wares? Tune in next week folks as we'll be explaining the supremely tricky commerce concept of 'buy one get one free' to tamesaint the dullard!

Oh, I see, your hilarious joke is that I'm an ice cream man. You should be on stage.

Evidence?

Really? Surely they attract more than two people - thus breaking the legislation that restricts gatherings of two or more. Unbelievable!

????? There was a clue in there - 'work day' - I'll let you get there slowly.

I drive every work day - barely been looked at by Avon and Somerset Constabularly, let alone stopped by them...

Ooooppppssss, damn those internal police memos With the motorways empty like they currently are, that is theoretically in the region of 60 miles from home. So is that the 'acceptable' distance before the fines are dished out?

Commute is actually enjoyable - for those that still have to do it. Fuel is getting cheaper. Mrs has done all the ironing

Unless you're 50+ at which point you have statistically ever increasing chances of not surviving....

To be fair, that was the question I was asking. The argument seems to have been that 200 miles is unacceptable but 'local' is no problem at all - I'm just after a definition of 'local' which appears to be about 48 miles!

According to turkish, just one line like 'thou shalt not kill' is meaningless..... Besides, doesn't that relate to 'mankind' rather than god himself to whom the rules don't apply - as MLG has been pointing out for days now....

He was the guy that was known for his wider actions wasn't he - jew killing, war, slavery, genocide, rape, etc etc. Odd that you would think him to be not a 'great guy' when the god of the bible you are defending did very similar things

You challenged him to provide evidence and he provided it. The fact that you don't like the way it was provided doesn't make it any less valid as evidence within the book.

Forgive me, I haven't been in a church since I was forced to nearly 30 years ago. Do the old men in cloaks no longer quote from the bible? Do they no longer teach the parables? Do they no longer quote psalms? Or do they do this selectively so that they fit the 'context' that they are looking for, ignoring the less savoury elements of the book - that would be pretty weird if that's the case, what with turkish extoling the virtues of taking the 'whole context' of the book....

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the 'point' that MLG stated that the bible promoted rape, violence, bigamy, servitude etc. You then asked him to prove the 'point', to which he posted the 'scriptures' from the bible containing these. You then denied this was acceptable evidence because that was only one part of the book and not the whole 'context'. Unless I'm missing the 'point' in which case, enlighten me.

Why are my posts including all those quotes

And if Netley Park has lots of people in it - hence social distancing isn't possible - what about a quick dash to the vast expanses of the New Forest?

No, that's not what he's saying at all. He's saying that right here, right now, people still read and believe in a book written thousands of years ago which promotes all those and more. Christianity could renounce the teachings of the bible but not sure where that would leave Christianity!

Ah, I see how this argument works!! So, by your standards, if Jeremy Corbyn was recorded in a private meeting saying "I ****ing hate those ****ing Jew ****s!" then there is no way he could be classed as anti-semitic unless he repeated it more than once - you've not stated how many times something needs to be repeated so enlighten us....

A bit melodramatic! I have no figures for the rest of the world but in England and Wales : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52308783 Is the answer that the overwhelming majority of them had existing health issues?

It's been a lively debate I think everyone agrees they're idiots for travelling so far. The issue seems to be around the fine and whether they should have been told to go home, then fined if they refused, or straight up fined for being idiots. On this matter there seems to be some disagreement about how far someone can travel - again, there is no limit stated in the legislation so it is open to interpretation. So, how far should people be allowed to travel before they are fined? - it seems that the consensus is that 200 miles is definitely out of the question. 47.8 miles or 95.6 miles round trip (Lewisham to Ockham Common) has been mooted as 'tolerable', as has 26.6 miles or 53.2 miles round trip (Croydon to Ockham Common), so how what sort of distance is acceptable?

Catholic priests have got a cracking track record in this area.....