Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#1
The boy is named Mehmet.
This is my guess.
What do the Forumites place their bets on as the name Kate and Wills will give him?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#2
You seem very excited about the birth Alexander.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#3
can never work out where hes coming from barryw lol
one minute hes a Christian, then he hates the head of the c of e
then wants to only promote his own religion(whatever that is)
hates the royals now hes into naming the baby
confused or what?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#4
Maybe Wilhelm .
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#5
nah its boring George alexander Louis.
Guest 744- Registered: 20 Mar 2012
- Posts: 412
#6
George is a splendid name and far preferable to Tarquin, Leroy etc and no more boring than Brian
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#7
Quite interesting so far.
I was thinking along the lines of the boy being brought up in London, and going by popular London names, George, James, William etc. seem antiquated, outdated, more like ghosts of names past.
So I was thinking of a popular London name .....
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#8
looks like our alexander (today at least) is a fan of the royals
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#9
Keith, please read my post 1 and the title: I wrote "child" and "boy", nowhere did I write "royal".
I don't consider this child to be "royal" nor to be my future king, nor his father, nor his grandfather.
Just for the record
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#10
then why the interest????????????????
when he will be taking up such positons in the future
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#11
Keith, I simply won't take up any more of your challenges!
If one is pulled down to that level, one will end up being beaten with it!
The best thing is to ignore them.
I won't get involved in any more discussions with you.
But it would be a good idea if you stopped ramming words in my mouth and stopped misrepresenting me!
In fact some of the phrases you have been attributing to me with regards to other Christians, or indeed to other people, are false.
Not recognising this monarchy as my head is not equivalent to "hate", and your continuous attributing to me "not having time" for other people who believe in Christ is absurd.
I'll simply keep to avoiding any response to your constant provocations, but would suggest you stopped using my name to misrepresent me in Public!.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#12
In your last post(and others alexander) it is not me that misrepresents you, all I have done is as you say challenge your viewpoint(which does keep changing)
so lets look again;
1; You did say you felt ONLY Christianity should be taught in schools, so that means to me and im sure other posters that
you are not tolerant of other faiths, in my view a wider selection should be taught.
2; you may not HATE the royal family, but you don't recognise them(sometimes)as the sovereign body, something that is in
place whether or not you recognise it
3; it is great you have a strong belief as many others on here do to, but other posters are also tolerant enough to recognise
other faiths or non believers.
not bad for starters
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS