NJS

On his "wanting me to fail" bit I'd just say that I want every player from every other club to fail. I especially want Liverpool players to fail. I especially want players who "love the club" but then always wanted to play for the scouse bastards to fail. Sorry Craig you've got me.

Saw that one - was canny like. Theres a goal Pedro scored against Everton in the game where Bracewell got fucked that I think is the best I've seen. He sort of paused about 25 yards out and sarted knocking the ball from one foot to another then started to speed up the same action as he approached their defence - 2 defenders later the classic clipped finish followed. Unfortunately no cameras caught it. The thing about the Pompey goal was I was right at the back so only just saw the first dummy before my view was obscured amongst cries of "what the fuck's he doing" etc etc. Only saw its true glory later on TV. Also have a special spot for Liam's over the wall.

Of course - soz.

"Sides" aside I didn't think anything Bob said was as bad as you're suggesting. I'd put the need for supernatural fairy stories down to simple ignorance which was pretty widespread.

F1 cars max out at about 210mph, or that seems to be the fastest they get to on the circuits. 280 is psycho airforce pilot speeds. I just meant in terms of driving ability - I'm sure Schumacher could cope better than Hammond is all I'm saying - even if it wasn't driver error the ability to deal with a crash would make the difference surely?

I don't want to go all Germaine Greer but surely good drivers that they are they are still amateurs. Speeds like that should be F1 professionals territory. Hope he makes it though.

I think there are two sides to religion - the sense of where did humans come from and who made the world and then the moral/philosophy side. I think on the former its a dead duck - the actual who or what of the big bang may still be a mystery but everything since then is pretty much explained give or take. Having said that the view which my Mother for one subscribed to that her "god" created the universe 14 billion years ago then kept a benign eye on it is one that though I disagree with it, I can sort of respect. This tends to be the side that frustrates me. Of course people who adhere to Genesis as an actual history are the ones that really get me. Taking the "big three" the idea that a God which created this vast universe and even this world would only care about and reveal himself to a small tribe in one corner of the world seems ludicrous - their subsequent spread is obviously down to politics rather that "righteousness". Looking back its obvious the world would be very different if Alexander hadn't died so young or if the Mongols hadn't turned back. This is the area where I tend to offend people by calling them "unintelligent" or "weak" as I honestly can't see why they can't recognise these obvious "truths". From the moral side once again looking at history I can see how the carrot and stick of heaven and hell would have been needed in "primitive" times. Now though given a more modern sense of society I find the idea that people are taught to be good so as to get a reward to be distasteful at best. I don't accept that "morality" needs a religion - societies have developed where the two are not completely linked - certainly the development of western Europe in the last couple of centuries includes decent morals built on at the most an agnostic point of view. Here also it becomes clear why the religions are "losing ground" in educated countries because of their refusal to evolve - for example the vast majority of decent people now realise that homosexuality isn't an abomination but the dogma of the main men can't be changed easily - similarly on contraception. Those who vehemently refuse to "modernise" also tend to be the loudest which drives people away. Given the fact that all of the things that God used to credit for like good luck and bad in terms of natural phenonema are now explained, and that the carrot and stick of heaven and hell are no longer needed imo to teach morals I don't see any necessary place for him moving into the future.

What the fuck has the kid got for eyebrows?

Ah Pascal's dilemma - If I'm right and death is death then you've lost nothing but if you're right then I've lost everything. Only problem is your "specific" truth has to be the right one so your's is just as much a "gamble" as mine. Mine is not a gamble, it is a firm belief and I have no problems dying with it. You guys dont exactly live in a haven for islamic scholars do you? So im not surprised you havent met any. Im not pulling out of this debate because you've shattered my belief misters, its because i am not disillusioned about my capabilites on the matter. I am 18 and i know my knowledge of religion and philosphy is not extensive enough for me to rage on about it in such a situatuon, yet. I suggest you go and sart this debate on an islamic board where you will expect to find serious answers. I'd echo the comments about your damned niceness but theres not much further to say - I like arguing about concrete issues like evolution/creationism which is related to a degree but arguing from a rational view against an irrational endemic belief can't last that long. All I can ultimately do is state my firm belief that if nobody was allowed to be taught any religion until adulthood the thing would be dead in a generation.

Show me "the truth" that God exists and I'll believe. I prefer reason. Ah Pascal's dilemma - If I'm right and death is death then you've lost nothing but if you're right then I've lost everything. Only problem is your "specific" truth has to be the right one so your's is just as much a "gamble" as mine.

There's a get-out clause: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5355758.stm Btw, I declare myself infallible on this board now, just to let you know. I read that today - it mentions the one thing that should absolutely scream at everybody on the planet that catholicism is ridiculous - the fact that a pope "pondered" on the assumption of Mary and decided it was true, despite no record of it anywhere, and it therefore being accepted as dogmatic fact. Some good points today - on the Malcolm X thing I think it fits what I think about things like support for the royal family as well as religion - otherwise intelligent or strong charactered people have a blind spot on something irrational which defies logic - I suppose to be sef-critical "faith" in Newcastle United could be said to fit that - whats more likely - eternal life or us winning a trophy ever again?

I'm not sure about the history of the Koran in terms of availability but if you read the OT its easy to see why the catholic church (and the rest of them) would be a lot happier if the printing press had never been invented, "peasants" had never learned to read and of course if it had been allowed to remain in Latin for ever. Whats amazing is that people can read it now and still refer to a "loving" God. I can see that in the past religion "made sense" - worshipping the sun or believing a God looked after your people and punished your enemies seemed pretty logical in the absence of much science. Now that we know what a tiny backwater of an almost infinite univese we inhabit, how people can still fall for it astonishes me. In fact it doesn't - its the brainwashing of children thats the secret - ultimately the real evil behind it all imo.

I caught a bit of Tony Rbinson's program on C4 on Saturday about "End of world-ers" who are waiting for revelation to be played out - it was comforting to note that according to some American moron "evolutionists" would be the first ones sent to hell come the glorious day. I could save the entire human race but because I recognise the world is more than 6000 years old I'm damned to burn in hell for ever. So loving these theists. Of course it confirmed what I already know - Revelation was written by someone off his tits on mushrooms.

Terrorism I'd also say that being killed by believers or the "wrath of Allah" doesn't actually matter if you're dead. On the previous point about the "good" person that section on intolerance shows that disbelievers don't get a sniff of heaven is Islam. I admit that I know more about Christianity (and its evil) than I do about Islam but I do wish followers of both creeds would be more honest about their holy books and stop trying to paint a picture of "niceness" which its all to easy to see beyond. Some of my favourite sites: Trash EvilBible

Nope - acceptance of the deity is a pre-requisite for all of them that I know of. In fact protestants believe that faith alone is a free pass - catholics require "good works" as well.

What the......where did you get that from?? Its says nothing of the sort. Only in self-defence. Thats what most people dont get. Its not Islam or Christianity that have bought the world to war, its exactly the opposite. Its people either forgetting, or completely altering the teachings of Islam and Christianity that has led to this stage. How many people on this thread have said 'I dont give a crap about religion'? Thats happening all over the world, people forgetting true religion or altering it to suit whatever they feel like at the time. Its not just happening to religion, while muslims and christians are forgetting what their religion tells them, ethics morals etc are disappearing gradually on the world level, no doubt about it. Out of context no doubt On your second point its the usual "atheists have no morals" bollocks. As part of my interest in evolution/creationism debates I found out that there were MORE murders in the US before Darwin produced his "satanic" book - this was used to counter the argument that the "downfall" of religion had led to ethical decline. Tell me who has better morals - someone like me who is "good" because I believe in the good of humanity as a whole or someone who is "good" because he desires a reward of paradise or avoidance of hell?

To be fair and equal in my contempt the Hindus and Sikhs in India don't exactly have a perfect record in this respect.

I don't give a shit what it "means" - people are defined by their actions. Muslims worldwide hold to the "identity" of Islam - they speak of a brotherhood which sounds very noble until it becomes apparent that too many of them are fuckwits - then it becomes "but they are't real muslims" or other such bollocks. When the sectarian violence in Iraq really kicked off I read posts on the BBC from Muslims claiming it had to be the CIA/Mossad as "true" muslims wouldn't bomb mosques - get real. Stop hiding behind "its just a few" and address the real issues - you have a holy book which specifically encourages believers to kill infidels (200 "though shalt not kills" do not negate a promise of paradise) - the bible has the same but they're arent anywhere near as many idiots who actually take it at its word. The sad fact is that despite their noble ideals Islam and Christianity at a big picture level have brought nothing to the human race but misery and death.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that Catholic dogma states that the Pope is infallible - he cannot make mistakes as he is "God's spokesman" on earth therefore an apology is in a way heretical. I despise orgainzed religion but I don't agree it was deliberate - as I said earlier I think it was the mistake of an arrogant intellectual. I'd also like to say that the next person who says "But Islam means peace" should be shot dead on the spot.

It was the speech of an itellectual theologian which is after all what the bloke is. its a fair point that maybe as Pope he should have realised what would happen, or at least he would have advisers who would warn him.

Its not the muslim world, its some people that have been driven to desperation. The US and the west have been kicking around the rest of the world as they please, not just the muslims. The muslims, being week and largely helpless, have now resorted to these tactics in retaliation. The muslims are themselves partly to blame for this, they have lost pace in the world and are backward and thus cannot face the US and co. face to face. But the latter are wrong when thinking they have a holy right on the earth and can do whatever they please. That bred terrorism in the first place and the only way to stop it is accepting the muslims and other races as human beings. If there had never been a single incident of Muslim terrorism I'd still consider the contribution of that and Christianity to be "evil and inhuman" - not on a personal level - individual beilefs aren't a problem - organized dogma is the problem imo.

yet, you say WE are racists for not tolerating them ....... odd. Maybe you are learning ....... I don't like intolerance from either direction - but given the level of education and culture in a lot of the Muslim world they almost have an excuse for being backwards - We don't.

First of all he quoted someone else in the context of a speech about the history of religion and violence. Secondly to describe the leader of the biggest christian church by a mile as a historical or peripheral figure is naive at best. I have no time for the catholic church or the pope in general but this furore once again proves that the Muslim world is ignorant and intolerant to a breathtaking degree. I still have yet to read anything from any Muslim to repudiate the actual statement which I wholeheatedly agree with, though I would apply it to all organized religions without exception.

It hasn't happened here yet but one thing that screwed the US was that McVeigh (Oklahoma) was a good ole boy with a grudge - it might be prevalent now for it only to be Muslims but things change - remember Guy Fawkes?

The problem you have is that you can't define "british" as easily as you think. Do you want to dictate religion or lack thereof, dress sense? sports played?, music listened to? mandate respect for the royal family? I'm what you would define as "british" but if you dictated any of those to me I'd tell you where to go and quite rightly.