₦airaland Forum

how did this thread manage to get to 12 pages?

@ topic

these are very intelligent arguments against evolution, which evolutionists cannot answer. Perhaps evolution is more of an atheistic concept.
I have always wondered about the rationality of both evolution and atheism.

KAG:
For the first, you asked: "Has God`s commandments to man (moses) classifying good and evil, still not relevant in all societies today? yes or no." The answer is clearly no. With all due respect, it's an obviously nonsensical question, as many modern societies are implicitly and explicitly secular, and many more have little to no relation with ancient Jewish edicts. The same applies for the second.

To respond specifically to the post I've quoted, many laws in countries are generally  indifferent to lying and adultery (with lying only notable when it's a question of perjury or similar). When it comes to murder and stealing, the laws can be flexible in determining the act in question is "good" or "evil". That is, in most Western societies, there are degrees of murder and some times the act may not be seen as evil depending on the circumstances. An example that comes to mind was the case of the battered spouse that killed her abusive husband. Her act wasn't in self-defence, but she wasn't found guilty and many hailed her as a hero. Many (most?) and the law of the land were content to deem her action "good".

An example of when stealing is seen as good by members of a community? During the Katrina Hurricane, a kid stole a school bus so he could ferry people out of the flood zones. No one doubted that he stole the bus, but his act was deemed good never the less.

KAG, no insults intended, but i would appreciate it if u are objective and very rational to avoid repetition.

u agreed with my implicit definition of moral universal concept. I ended that saying that what differs is the level or degree of repercussions.
This is further illustrated by your acknowledgements above.  From which I can deduce the following:
1.   Lying in court, is punishable by law, anywhere in the world. Lying informally between two individuals brings about distrust.
God said " Thou shall not lie"

2. Adultery is an acceptable and reasonable ground for divorce. This is acknowledged by several laws, norms and cultures all over the world.
God said " Thou shall not fornicate or commit adultery"

3.   The case of stealing u mentioned, the boy stole, which the laws of man also frowns against. His not being persecuted was at the discretion of the law officers. No doubt he stole, which is a crime.
God says "Thou shall not steal"

And please notice the last part of my analysis of the moral concept, the repercussion or punishment is what differs from society to society.
Every society decides what amount of punishment to award for these crimes, but in all, they frown on it.

To sum up: Human made laws - which is what every laws humans have are - are generally flexible.

Thats only explainable by the infinite wisdom of God. How come no atheist can question the morality of any of his laws, thousands of years after he made them?  How come what HE classified as evil remains so till this day? yet every time a man makes a law, another man comes and says that the law is imperfect and subsequently amends or abolish it.

God`s laws have passed the test of time and civilisation. Man`s law hasnt, but continues to evolve around God`s law.

You realise that the Tanakh has Moses codifying more laws than those ten, right?  Pro tip: if you mention Moses getting laws from God, be aware that there were many laws, and the decalogue was just a small part of them.

lets stick to relevant points here. for the sake of objectivity.

Anyway, rather than list all ten, how about we stick to the first four which almost nobody, particularly atheists (who you included as partakers of the laws of Moses) give a damn about:

# You shall have no other Gods but me.
# You shall not make for yourself any idol, nor bow down to it or worship it.
# You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God.
# You shall remember and keep the Sabbath day holy.

I started this debate by telling u that: "Morality or moral attempts undefined by Christianity is a wasted effort. It leads no where."
If u cannot within intellectual limits declassify the good and evil (moral classification) of God`s law, thousands of years after He gave them, then u  are better off abiding by the four u mentioned above too, cos He also gave them.

On a lighter note, Jesus replaced all these commandments with Love. By loving u fulfil all the commandments.
Isnt it ironic that love is all the world needs today?
In other words ur "moral" values that are not grounded in God`s law (His concept for righteousness) are wasted.

customs and norms are limited to race, countries, cultures, places, time/season or generations. But morality is a universal doctrine . Its level of acceptability or repercussions is what differ. Norms are not Morals and vice versa.

You ask a good question - what does the word moral mean anyway? I see you gave a definition of what you mean by morals. I'll go with that definition. It will help to demonstrate things. Before I go into it, just a few points:

- I know norms are not morals. I didn't say they were. My point was slightly subler than that: custom helps to shape\fashion morality.

what exactly is the difference between them?

- the particular practices of a given community will shape their definitions of morals.

if u cannot distinguish between norms and morals, how then do u intend to prove this statement?
This assertion of urs is false.

Now, to get to the point. You say morality is universal. Well, let's make that Morality (with a big "M". With that definition, though, we enter a contentious position because for Morality to be universal, where universal includes - let's restrict he scope for now- every human being and community, everyone must agree to the same code or definition of good and bad behaviour. That, to my knowledge isn't the case. the result is often the case that where one community preaches "thou shalt not kill", the other interprets it as "thou shalt not kill the people in my community", and yet another as "thou shalt not kill the people in my community that I like".

The law says "thou shall not kill" but also empowers the president to declare war on Cameroon or any other nation, if at any time there is a provocation to do so. How does the "events" or casualties of this war on both sides amount to killing? in other words how does this casualties contradict another law that say  "thou shall not kill"?

The point being that, even what one can possibly consider the most fundamental of insticts that should be fashioned into ethics - don't kill other human beings and you have the possibility of a better community - is not universal in itself.

I'll end this long part of my post by saying, that for me, morals are an individual's [/b]conceptions and perceptions of good and bad deeds. While ethics, on the other hand, are an attempt at universalising morals.

This is a contradiction. u initially implied that [b]communities fashion morals, so how did morality become an individual concept again?

Not a problem. Have you ever heard of the Dissoi Logoi. You should look into it. Anyway, yes. One example is, in many societies, Papua New Guinea, for instance, many, because of their way of life, had no problem with thinking cannibalism was, if not a good practice, then at least not a bad or evil one. They were convinced it wasn't a terrible practice particularly if only foreigners were cannibalised. Another example - one with which you're probably aware: during the high point of the transantlatic human slavery, many people in the West, especially in, as the stereotype goes, Southern US, were convinced they were doing the right thing. Heck, many were able to using the Bible to back up their moral uprightness in regards to their view on slavery.

Have u ever read up the definition of norms?
How come all other parts of the world condemned this act of cannibalism? All places and people of the world cannot have the same norms, but they all condemned this barbaric act of cannibalism. That is the product of the universality of morality.

What's that, have I stopped beating my wife? Some questions are not able to be answered by a simple "yes or no" response. Although I thought it was easily understandable, the point I was making was that ethics are flexible, not dogmatic. They are built on expanding rungs of individuals.
So in other words it is very rational to kill, if the scenario permits, right?
To answer your question, it's neither right nor wrong abstractly, it is always dependent on who's doing the evaluation and what is being evaluated. In that way, I am inclined to think of the actions of Joshua in Jericho as terrible and morally bankrupt, while many of the Abrahamic faith tend to see it as morally right. By the same token, I am able to see the Muslim prophet's actions as morally bankrupt while those Muslim faith don't.

Please be objective. Joshua was on a war front. What were the events that led to the war? did he (Joshua) not request a peaceful passage, whereby nothing of theirs (people of Jericho) will be taken? did the residents of jericho not opt for war by refusing his peaceful appeal?
read up the bible, intelligently before making ur assertions. They are false and untenable.

It was a strict - far too strict now that I look at it again - reading of David's story from here:

1 Samuel 17:

17And Jesse said unto David his son, Take now for thy brethren an ephah of this parched corn, and these ten loaves, and run to the camp of thy brethren;

18 And carry these ten cheeses unto the captain of their thousand, and look how thy brethren fare, and take their pledge.

Did he not deliver the food to the captain and his siblings?
how exactly did he dishonour his father?

While ur example is shrouded by ur bias against the law. I will state here that obeying or disobeying the law has nothing to do with the law. Thats up to each individual, the law is only intended to be a guide.

Again, it depends. I wouldn't consider it wrong if a person refused to honour an unrepentant serial-rapist father.

By the way, I hope you realise that other atheists might hold views that differ from mine.
honesty is ideal in a debate. what book of the bible, chapter and verse asked u to stone ur kids?

Deuteronomy 21

18If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

19Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

20And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

21And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

what does it mean to be rebellious? juxtapose ur definition to the moral concept we both agreed to.

Hint: Rebellion in this concept can be likened to treason.

liverpool murdered. . . , . suspects branislav ivanovic and didier drogba. . .  

davidylan:
i basically agreed with you earlier on.
There is nothing like "morals" however in christian living . . . you are either righteous or unrighteous and our righteousness is not of works but of Christ Jesus who bought us with His blood and set us free.

well stated.

This was what i meant by "Morality or moral attempts undefined by Christianity is a wasted effort. It leads no where."

human greed, great or small always suppresses human intelligence or acumen.

Atiku is way too greedy and unprincipled. I regret ever sympathising with him during his fight against obj.

davidylan:
what an obtuse way of thinking. America's foundation is steeped in christianity . . . it is absurd to praise the roof of a house and claim you have no need for a foundation.
Why are you "celebrating" the fall of christianity? How has christianity been a problem to you in American society? Do you actually believe that christianity is the very antithesis of democracy and freedom? Do you air head know that the christian founding fathers where the ones who bequeathed you with the democracy and freedom you now stupidly claim you chose?
Why is there no "democracy and freedom" in predominantly muslim states, communists like China and North Korea? Surely there is no christianity there so they shld all be "free" right?

Is America the best place to visit because it is now kicking out christianity? Is China then a good place to visit since christianity is pretty much under the cosh?

You dont seem to be able to utilise the space between your ears very well.

u said everytin. . , , . .

KAG:
No.

No.

see,  . .  this is the evidence of ur lack of objectivity. So man made laws now regard murder, lies, adultery, stealing as good deeds, right?

what is the content of the 10 commandments?

KAG:
Um, no, it isn't false. It isn't baseless either. First, I didn't mean to say societal norms, but I'm glad you brought that up. Why? Well, because societal norms - custom - shapes the thinking of individuals within a community thereby inclining them towards particular moral stances. To quote Pascal, "Custom is our nature. What are our natural principles but principles of custom?"

Second, to stress the point, different communities have different understandings, moral stances, on what it means to be a killer. It's easy enough to spout off ideals like "thou shalt not kill", but even within the Bible, we see different moral inclinations in regard to that edict, based on how the community in question is fashioned.

uhmn. . . .while u demonstrated an understanding of what customs and norms mean by attempting to explain it, u refused to explain what morals mean.

do they mean the same thing? NO.

customs and norms are limited to race, countries, cultures, places, time/season or generations. But morality is a universal doctrine . Its level of acceptability or repercussions is what differ. Norms are not Morals and vice versa.

Human communities fashion morals.

How? please give an illustration or example to buttress ur point.

No, you meant the ancient Jews. But that's neither here nor there. Anyway, no the classifications you mention are not moral standards, especially not for most atheists. I'll go through the ones you mention individually:

Murder & stealing : Those happen very frequently. Hell, they happened in Bible, with murder being so frequently practiced by "God's chosens" that the "law" became moot. Moreover, many tend not to realise it, but we - most people - have a tendency to evaluate acts that fall under those terms (murder and stealing) individually. Individual, subjective morality at work. Definitely not the dogmatically followed moral standard for all communities.

I hardly understand the point u are making here, so I ask:
is it morally right, from atheistic point of view to commit murder? yes or no. 

Parental disobedience: Most thinking people are not so mindless as to think it's possible to obey your parents at all times, nor that many parents should be obeyed at all times. I wonder, would David's story be as entertaining if he had obeyed his father and contentedly tended the sheep. In any case, no, in most modern societies, it isn't a moral standard. More so, if your parents are redneck drunks with KKK affiliations. Just saying.

u have a porous knowledge of the bible. when or where did David disobey his father?

Again I ask, is it morally right, from an atheist point of view to dishonour ones parent?

Incidentally, we don't stone kids anymore. So much for your moral standards. So much for ours.

honesty is ideal in a debate. what book of the bible, chapter and verse asked u to stone ur kids?

Fornication: Lol. Not even close.

In other words u consider it okay to fornicate. Do u know that in your very same community(where u KAG live), some others consider it a norm to get married as a virgin?.
Dont u think that this contradicts ur initial statement that "human communities fashion morals" considering that ur own community now supports two contradicting moral doctrines. to fornicate and not to fornicate.

Homosexuality: Not amongst ethical people, no. Put it this way, in most Western communities, homosexuality is accepted, even embraced. Their unions are even celebrated.

considering that ur opinion is not from a religious but atheistic point of view, I must say that this is very biased.

Adultery: Depends.

What have we learnt? Those "laws" to help guide ethics have barely stood the test of time. Further, many communities had their own moral guides separate from Judeo-Christian traditions.

Adultery depends on what? While it is a norm in yorubaland for a married man to have concubines but forbidden for a married woman, it is also acceptable in india for a woman to practice polyandry. These are norms of two different places.

Morality is ordained by the all Righteous and Holy one, Jehovah God. And he rewards those who abide. This buttresses my opening statement that morality without Christianity is a wasted effort.

I love this thread

and i love all the bashing and counter bashing

bawomolo:
morality is determined by society.  There is no static form of morality and moral systems differ by society.


To a jew or Muslim, christians would be considered immoral for eating pork, christians would be considered for certain clothing ( morality even differs among christian denomination).  Killing isn't considered immoral during war or self-defense, does that mean killing is right?

Slavery was sanctioned by Catholic and protestant churches alike.   The KKK was built on an aryan christian tradition.

Morality is flexible and differs based on time and space (different locations).

We humans determine what's moral or immoral then attribute this morality to religion.  The God's don't make any laws, God isn't the head of the Supreme court.

Judaism and Islam are built on a relationship with the same Abrahamaic God but still considered religion.  Christianity is a canonized religion. 

hmm seems like a biased point of view.

duduspace:
@Poster

The answer to your question is so simple and is found in the christian bible Jesus said and I quote "The sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath".

Religion itself is man made in order to create an harmonious society, it is rather unfortunate that human diversity has made it a political and economic tool and in the process made it lose most of its usefulness. Morality as we know it is totally relative but it doesnt have to be if it stipulates the basic tenet of care and consideration for others and the society at large which Jesus succintly put as (Love of God and Love of Neighbor).

Understanding that religion itself is false does not mean that it should be discarded, afterall despite its many failings it has at least thrown up as many heroes as villains.

I know yu will be quick to deny your brothers (or cousins as the case may be) but the aryan culture that fuelled the KKK based a lot of their beliefs on the bible. You can always claim that they twisted the bible but have your own babblings on this forum not been a twisting of your precious bible as it suits you? You would have been classified as a seed of satan and lynched by your fellow bible punchers for not having blood in the face (can't blush) due to your melanin containing skin just because your precious bible was not specific and literal in its meanings hence the possibility of it being twisted easily by people with their selfish agendas as is still being done by your brethren even as we speak.

what's the difference between a societal norm and custom (on one hand) and morality (on the other hand)?

[quote author=m_nwankwo link=topic=252741.msg3702552#msg3702552 date=1239133784]I am simply posting scientific papers on evolution. Let each person draw their own conclusions. Of course I can paint a very comprehensive picture of how biological evolution is the manifestation of the will of God. However I will not do that on the pages of  nairaland. Besides such a picture will run into thousands of pages.  God did not use evolution as a means to create physical bodies, rather evolution is a manifestation of the will of God. If you are seriously seeking for clarification in these matters, you will have the answers even without my explanation.

What you are convinced or not convinced is your God given right. Nobody can convince another. You are correct, the human body and indeed all creations of God did not just happen. All creations came into existence and develops by the power of God. Evolution in my view is a manifestation of the omniscience of God.


As I said above, I can explain but wish not to do so. Stay blessed![/quote]what an unfortunate rubbish. This is part of the misinformation that has made nairaland legendary.
analyse those facts of urs into short coherent and articulate facts, that is debatable. And stop peddling lies in the name of God`s will.

mazaje:
the bible gods commandment concerning good and evil was only relative, it was ok for jews not to enslave each other but it was ok for them to enslave others . . . .

how relative? did the laws ask them to buy or sell slaves?

sure you dont stone to death some one for picking sticks on a sabbath will yo

thats my problem with atheists, please be objective.

what does the consequence of breaking the law have to do with good or evil?
any law without punishment is of little or no regard or consequence. Is it right to steal? commit adultery? kill? lie?
if u agree that these things are wrong and immoral, then isnt it essential that there are corrsponding consequences for violating this commandments?

how can you get my point when you are living inside a bubble. . . some of the 10 commandments are not relevant in todays world at all. . . try stoning to death somebody for him doing work on the sabbath and see what will happen to you. . . . some of the 10 commandments are natural, even people that have never read any of the 10 commandment know that it is wrong to steal, kill or tell lies. . . people know to respect their parent even those that were never exposed to the 10 commandments at all, example our ancestors in africa that never came across the writings and commandments of mostly unknown jewish writers called the old testament knew that is is good to respect your parents they were never told to do that by yahweh the god of the ancient hebrews. . . . .

which of the 10 commandments is irrelevant in this age? do u really know what the 10 commandments are?

how can a law be natural? It is the norm of the yorubas for the male to prostrate and the female kneel when greeting the elders. It is however not the norm amongst the igbos. This does not mean that younger yorubas are respectful or do honour their parents, neither does it mean that the igbos are rude or disrespectful. Its just a norm.
Jehovah God`s law says honour ur parents that ur days might be long. This has nothing to do with the cultural norms prevalent in africa or anywhere. This is a law.

[quote author=Mad_Max link=topic=258421.msg3701587#msg3701587 date=1239122962]The guy thinks he needs signs and portents to herald his birth. Apparently you can't be born like everyone else and be a prophet.[/quote]How come that was the only thing u deduced from the story? This is called hypocrisy.

posakosa:
No religion is not neccesasary for morality.

The notion of what is moral or immoral is absolutely relative.

you are right.

But since Christianity is more than a religion, (its a relationship with the Father), I can safely say that Its doctrines are the standard bearer for all forms of morality.

mazaje:
yes it has why are people not stoning each other for doing work on the sabbath? what has the commandedment of not boiling baby goat in their mothers milk got to do with you and i? that ridicilous law is also part of the ten commandments. What morality is there to learn in christianity when the same god that says he is a good god admits that he is also capable of doing evil? he even confessed his evil deeds. . . . . (i wonder why chrsitians say that they worship a good that is incapable of doing evil. . . . . )

ur argument is way out of line. Has God`s commandments to man (moses) classifying good and evil, still not relevant in all societies today? yes or no.

You are talking about the repercussion of evil. Its as simple as sentencing someone to the gas chamber for committing murder.
Is the sentence evil, considering the initial crime commited?

here is the ancient hebrew god confessing of his evil deeds. . . . what morality is there to learn from a god that gives out ridicilous laws and is a strong advocate of rape, murder, sagregation and slavery?

are you sure? what makes you say that? you mean all the billions of people that have survived in china, mongolia, india, japan, sri-lanka who have never hard of jesus or yahweh over the years were just savages that lived off one another?

what kind of morality is this? killing peoples children because their parents refuse to worship you? is there anything good to be learnt from this verse? do people deserve to be killed for disobedience and lack of worship?  Morality has nothing to do with religion. . . . . .

just dont get ur point.

what is morality?
Is God`s 10 commandments given to moses, before this modern civilisation, still relevant in law making for all societies existing today?

KAG:
That communities - human communities - fashion morals.

I dont even know wat to say.
This is not only false, it is also baseless with regards to individual securities.
I m implying that societal norms (which is what i believe u mean) are not in any way a standard bearer for morality.

You mean the ancient Jews classification of good and evil? Well, yes, several have, actually. You'd be surprised at the number of laws attributed to Moses that we consider nonsensical or outdated these days.
That's a bold claim. So, am I to understand that the Jews pre-Christ (and during, in fact), the ancient Greeks, most of Africa for much of its life, etc, weren't moral before Christianity? Hmm, that's an interesting thought: Humans have been amoral or immoral for much of its existence, then. Super.

I meant Jehovah God.

Has His classification of murder, stealing, parental disobedience, fornication, Homosexuality and adultery as evil, still not moral standards even to atheists?
These classification by God of good and evil many thousand years ago still stand the test of time and human intellect today.

vescucci:
You don't actually believe in that 15 months gestation thingie do u. I know he doesn't 'stage manage miracles' or 'sow' unwanted 'seeds' but u can't possibly think a freak of nature incident like 6 months overtime in a womb translates to some sort of prophethood. Even imagination has elastic limit. I hate having to sweat it. There's someone called MadMax here. Nevermind her name but she's a good christian with genuine gray matter. Seek her out.

vescucci:
You know I just noticed MadMax posted earlier. Her head go dey swell now. Anyway, if u like, read some of her posts when she goes religious. (Daniel Craig is not GOD! She's just playing) You could pick up some points about thinking for yourself.

I've totally lost the cool that makes me. I'm now a beast of sorts who doesn't require much prodding. A grouch with no fuse. Max, try not to implode with too much muffled glee

I still cant figure out the basis of this very biased opinion of urs.

Who is talking about his calling here? where u there when adeboye, oyakilome or oyedepo were called?

The bible says that by their fruits we shall know them, the fruits he bears have a semblance of what i read in my bible, and what the Fathers spirit encourages me to do.
15 month or no 15 month, may he continue to grow from strength to strength. amen.

KAG:
No.

The same in religious societies: Human made laws and societal based ethics formulated and codified to best protect many\most members of a group or society at large.

what r u saying?

Has God`s classification of good and evil from the very beginning and as given to moses, been repudiated?

Morality or moral attempts undefined by Christianity is a wasted effort. It leads no where.

davidylan:
mazaje nko?

he is coming

vescucci:
Forget about whose church has a closer semblance to d real deal and which one is more charitable. The thread reads as it reads. I'm not a christian and I naturally steer clear of acting like I know more than its adherents but this is RICH. Even Jesus spent d good ol nine months. People need to watch National Geographic more. Whilst retaining d good sense not to turn atheist or agnostic of course

and ur point is?

Kobojunkie:
How about this? Let me keep my hope that the more people stand up to these men, they will be forced to give us what we want, while you and those on your end keep your tales to yourselves? OK?

what tales?

u sound unrealistic and unobjective. I m not asking u to endorse my opinion, I only asked why more obvious crimes are not being investigated?

davidylan:
are you surprised? they need "quotes" from men like this to validate their own insecurity.

no mind them.

manmustwac:
The day when the african millions will stop praying for an imaginary God to come down from Heaven to solve thier problems and decide to hold their leaders to accountability is the day Africa will start to move forward

manmustwack

is africa the only continent with problems? u can humour urself.

how come everyone keeps ignoring u?

mantraa:
Where is davidylan? has he given up and admitted defeat? or is he still searching for his peer reviewed scientific papers in support of creationism?
He seems to have gone very quiet all of a sudden.

I hope that maybe he has started to realise that the power of denial is not as powerful as the blatant truth.

there was no contest or debate here.

evolutionists have refused to answer pertinent questions, so y debate with one who has limited knowledge of the issues at stake?

manmustwac:
I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious ideas of heaven and hell, or of a god

-Thomas Edison

how come there is no quote in ur name?

are u just an uninformed brat, brandishing atheism in our face?

Dede1:
The posted interview that has been accredited to one David Ejoor is an embodiment of delusion. In fact, it is a ranting of a deluded ant.

an unfortunately "tribalistically" oriented Nigerian, who cannot see beyond his ethnic sentiments and objectively look at issues.

Kobojunkie:
I don't think I am in the USA or UK. This group is made up of Nigerians like you and I, looking to get the man you claim to be LAW in your Nigeria, arrested for spraying money, something that has been declared illegal. Are you going to come back with THEY HAVE FOUR HEADS as reason next? Come on!!

No i m not.

I m only trying to see this through. I don't think their intentions to bring obasanjo to book is genuine. Considering that obj and daniel are presently fighting, I tink its just a little way of embarrassing the obj guy. It could also be a way of getting at soludo for his attempted second term at the CBN.
This is 9ja, this tales are very common.

On a lighter note, are there not enough evidences and allegations that can be proven beyond reasonable doubt in court (including the power probe and halliburton scams) that can put obj in jail forever? so why not pursue this cases?.

Sisi Jinx:
Errr. . . coz no other country wants 'em?

Okay, seriously. . . is this a trick question?

got me laughin hard. . . lol

@ olaadegbu

nice and intelligent quotes. God bless u.

Kobojunkie:
10 years? I mean Soludo came up with the new plan. I want to see how this one goes down. Obasanjo breaking Soludo's own law,and the EFCC being urged to arrest him. I hope the group has videos to go with those pictures, hi def pictures to boot!! lol

u must think this is USA or UK. this is 9ja where obasanjo is law.

blacksta:
no be you vote them in  because of N500 recharge card ( you don sell your birthright and now you are complaining)

na who tell u say den count my vote?    no be iwu just announce result?

whats tabborah?