NJS

Somebody posted on either here or the original site about going to a Wham gig at Brixton and being fucked sensless by the girl they'd went with after she'd been worked into a sexual frenzy by the gig. Was that you or is this just a coincidence?

I stood outside Roker Park for the Bowie gig. He came out with the immortal words "Hello Newcastle" I went to see Big Country then left. Bowie never did anything for me.

Ah the old "if I opt out that leaves more for the ones who don't" bollocks which of course is applied to healthcare just as much. As I said on the legislation thread and as Bob has alluded to the thing is that the more the rich, powerful and influential opt out of state services the less they will care despite any well-meaning intentions (or bastard selfishness in the tories case). In reference to the point about a minority, elections are now decided by middle-englanders - a disproportionate amount of whom use private education. Its not just about resources its about a stake in something that you care about for the good of everybody and not just yourself. I have no kids - does that mean I should not be allowed to discuss education? - of course not - I care about society.

I did have a choice (which was pretty much my own) but it was a choice of two catholic schools. At the time it didn't bother me even though by that age I was starting to have doubts. Its only through becoming old, bitter and twisted (I blame NUFC) that I now feel so vehement on these issues.

Obviously parents have a right to make choices for their kids in the sense that by definition the kids aren't necessarily old enough to "know better" and these decisions are hopefully "co-operative" but overall I feel that if all schools were "decent" (yes, I know I'm an ideallist) then there wouldn't be a need for this choice/selection circus which leaves people disappointed. There was something today about CofE schools allowing some "heathens" in which would at least make it honest as I know people who have attended church just to "codn" their way in - thats not right imo. As I said above the answer I think is right is to determine the "good" bits of these schools and drop what I think is the bad.

The Hope and Anchor when U2 played to 9 people in 79 The very last Big Country gig at Barrowlands (saw them on the tour in London but I think that would have been better) The last Smashing Pumpkins gig in Chicago Any Belly gig.

Any teaching of young children is indoctrination by brainwashing - it should be banned completely. If your faith is so "right" then you should have the confidence that people as adults would choose it - as that is unlikely its never been allowed. On the parental choice qustion I feel parents have too much choice because its a vote winner - why should someone who may use a schools services for as little as 5 years be able to influence the founding and establishment of facilities with a lifespan of 50 years in a field of "industry" they generally know nothing about? As long as schools teach an agreed curriculum and maintain good standards (can of worms I know) then I think parents should have little or no influence.

A few thoughts: The one thing I really admire the US for is the separation clause in the constitution. Religion has no place in schools. I read recently the CofE want an exemption clause from equality legislation on homosexuality - basically they want the right to continue teaching illegal hatred and bigotry with tax payers money. There ae two things I will never forgive Blair for - within 2 weeks of coming to power he invited the Bitch around for a cosy chat and secondly for his defence of Emmannuel teaching lies as science. Anyone who is for faith schools should be made to watch the video from Ulster of adults screaming hatred at kids from a few years ago because the path to their school went too close to the "wrong" side. Having said all that it is true that they tend to get better results - I'd have a good look at why - is it just the intake comes from more "decent" folk (which I accept some theists are) or is it as they would argue some kind of moral ethos? Of course I'd ban them and to prevent the retreat to privately funded bigotry I'd do as I said in the 5 pieces of legislation thread and make private education itself illegal.

Wonderful ideals, totally impractical, if even fair. You expect people who work their arses off to provide the same opportunities to their children as someone who does the bare minimum? Don't forget to tell the last one out to turn out the lights, because those remaining won't be able to afford it. To turn yout point around why should waste of space kids get a lift in life from hard working parents? If people's only motive in life is to leave a "stash" for the kids after death then I think thats sad - you should enjoy the fruit of your own work and hope that your kids can look after themselves. Inherited wealth propogates class, power and everthing else thats unfair in this country. Or to turn yours around, why should a person who has spent the last x years of their life looking after a sick parent suddenly be left with nowt? as for: How would this help those services? they are currently stretched, what you're saying is add in another million or so people into each. Breed a blackmarket for operations etc as Joe Bloggs the multimillionaire has a dodgy hip, under your rules he cant legally jump the queue by going private so he goes for his consultation, pulls out a wad of cash and tempts the consultant to lift him above little old Mrs Muggins who only offered him a Werthers Original. In my world relatives would never have to look after the sick - I know some would want to and thats fair enough but surely that desire would come from love and not "greed". My system would be an incentive for the "powers that be" to sort it out and it would be temporary in the way you mean - I know there are people who are well meaning but I believe that in a sense the NHS has become a "token effort" which the powerful see as something they don't use. If they did I think both the resources and the determination shift would make it work.

Wonderful ideals, totally impractical, if even fair. You expect people who work their arses off to provide the same opportunities to their children as someone who does the bare minimum? Don't forget to tell the last one out to turn out the lights, because those remaining won't be able to afford it. To turn yout point around why should waste of space kids get a lift in life from hard working parents? If people's only motive in life is to leave a "stash" for the kids after death then I think thats sad - you should enjoy the fruit of your own work and hope that your kids can look after themselves. Inherited wealth propogates class, power and everthing else thats unfair in this country.

It was 89 iirc and is my number 1. 2. Ozzy Osbourne Mayfair 80 3. Manics Millenium 4. U2 MK bowl 85 5. Big Country Whitley Bay Ice Rink 86 6. Pixies Brixton 04 7 3 Colours Red Reading 99

1. Abolish and make illegal all private education and health cover (and obviously obliterate religion from all state schools at the same time) - people who try and get around it by sending kids abroad or using foreign health service to be refused re-entry and be stripped of citizenship. I believe these two services will never "work" while the rich and powerful opt out of them. 2. Renationalise without compensation all public utilities including rail etc. 3. Execute the first 1000 people in line to the throne and confiscate all "long term" inherited wealth - eg Duke of Westminster's property. 4. Inheritance tax to be 100% with no exemption bracket - so that everybody starts off in life with the same opportunities. 5. Introduce a universal contraceptive into the water supply/food chain and supply the antidote under licence.

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.