Saintandy666

I think you are looking at this too literally and objectively. Human's are quite subjective and really this whole debate is about the symbolism of marriage, which is something that homosexuals have a right to be able to share with heterosexuals if they so wish.

You are totally correct in your inference that we can't blanket label. However, I know this to be the case for some gay Christians.

Because there are plenty of religious people who are gay, because believe it or not, it isn't a choice. Those people would like to married with the blessing of the faith they were raised in and that is absolutely fair enough.

No-one here would try and stop interracial marriages. If you believe, as I do, that any relationship between two consenting adults has exactly the same value regardless of sex, there is no argument here.

There is absolutely no reason why the church should have any say in what marriage is defined as. The Church does not own marriage, and hasn't for quite a while now. I would suggest to the Church that if they want to still be around in any meaningful form in 50-100 years that they need to move with the times and reflect modern attitudes.

Quite sad about this. Really think he appealed across the generations and seemed to have a fantastic sense of humour. And of course an important astronomer both in his work and inspiration to others. RIP

That scoreline flattered Reading. Good stuff. Out of the relegation zone.

Guly having an impact...

I expect no less. Harry Redknapp will probably make them start winning a lot. Edit: Didd I speak too soon?!

I doubt there is any difference. It'll be an automated system. The second someone scores, it'll be put in and so the cogs will start working. There's no block saying 'if southampton score, wait 5 minutes'...

Give them a chance. Why do you have to find a negative in everything?

We deserve that goal. Now let's double it.

Massive alcohol problem and drugs pretty much everywhere.

I've been to Amsterdam twice and have spoken to uni friends who live there about this law change as well. The law change has been fiercely opposed and now weakened so that individual areas can decide whether tourists can smoke or not. The facts don't lie though. Illegal drugs means billions to criminals, more dangerous drugs and higher drug usage. Prohibition has exacerbated the problem.

We all want as low problematic drug use as possible. And it has been shown in countries where cannabis is legalised that problematic drug use is down. There's no point making it illegal. You just create a massive black market, hand billions to criminals and actually make the drugs far more dangerous as criminals cut it with dodgy stuff in order to save money.

Oh for sure, but he is just excited about his work. The official NASA announcement is still extremely interesting. If we found life elsewhere, I think it would be the biggest discovery by man to date.

I believe she has this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperemesis_gravidarum - which isn't morning sickness. Just media language.

Oh please, they found organic compounds, which is very interesting. Why do you always have to be such a downer on everything? Also, love when you said that you personally weren't convinced of the ability of probes such as Curiosity not to have any cross-contamination... what makes you say this? What personal insight do you have into the methods of NASA?

I'm at one of the most liberal open-minded colleges too. We do seem to have lots of individual outreach programmes, but of course I have nothing to compare it to. I'll accept that Oxford can do more, but I think they are making increased effort. But I still think it comes down to schools as well, to give proper advice etc. It can be done, my college(as in 16-18, not oxford college!) had a great oxbridge programme. And in academic standards, you still have the fact the private school pupils receive more privileges and attention and so on, which is hard to remedy by Oxford colleges alone. I think it is 55% state school now for the uni, compared to 93% state school nationwide which is not good at all.

No, the majority don't. Though many do, and that just shows up the difference in opportunity between different classes and areas. And I quite agree that it is wrong. Though, I owe my application success much more to my College, which was superb than to my Secondary School which was awful in many areas while I was there.

I was under the impression that state school acceptance had been rising year on year(though of course it is still too low). I think Oxford can only do so much though, you need to get in early to raise standards. Treat the problem, not the symptoms. Oh, and for context, I was local comprehensive.

Not at all. Anyone can apply. 17,000 did in 2011. Yet, this is a dramatic increase in recent years. In 2007(and applications were lower then), over 27,000 people theretically had the grades to apply to oxbridge, but didn't. Now, of course, many won't choose to apply for whatever reasons, but a lot of the increase in application corresponds to the time in which the university has been doing a massive drive to encourage all types of people to apply. http://www.ox.ac.uk/about_the_university/facts_and_figures/undergraduate_admissions_statistics/2011_entry_figures/ethnic_origin.html

Well, what have I actually said that I 'would say'? - More people are applying to Oxbridge per place. Which is true. http://www.ox.ac.uk/about_the_university/facts_and_figures/index.html - Applications have increased by 55% in the last ten years alone. - There is a lot of work at Oxford.

I'm pretty sure most people I know could do a latin exam if we had had teaching in it in the lead up to the exam.

Touché!