Stubby

1. You nay have found it irrelevant. I don't think it was. 2. I'm glad you agree with my first point. 3. You're re-iterating your point for the second time. Again, I largely agree with it. You're ignoring or mis-interpreting my second point. I don't see much value in our continuing to repeat the obvious to each other.

A little reading would quickly verify that what I wrote is not imaginary. Yes, that is your point. And there's a lot of truth in it. It's probably difficult to be motivated to either good or evil by a belief in the absense of something. But this is a discussion forum, which means other people are also invited to make points. And I attempted to make two. The first was that if an athiest does something evil without saying atheism is his motivation for doing it, that hardly makes it any less evil. The second was that some atheists seem to have had no trouble blaming their evil actions on factors other than their atheism. I like to think you don't really mind me making these points, and I hope you will see as much truth in them as I did in yours.

On the contrary, some evil people do believe they are Christians. I never said otherwise. Also, some evil people believe they are atheists. Some are agnostic. Some are all kinds of things. It is possible to believe in anything and be evil. This does not prove that any particular world view is right or wrong. You can't judge any world view by the way some people have abused it. That's where we came in about a page ago. And, to be honest, I would have thought it was obvious.

So you ignore the substantive part of my post. Can I take silence as assent regarding the point I was making? I was unaware that "Hitler believed that he was carrying out god's work in exterminating the Jews". If true, that's incredibly sad and evil. But then almost everything about Hitler is incredibly sad and evil. Do you have a reference for that piece of information? And how is it possible to know what Hitler "believed"? I hope you're not just going to quote what he said, because he wasn't exactly known for his honesty.

I really hope you're not suggesting that genocide is OK so long as it's not done in the name of something? And the examples I mentioned (chosen at random) were done in the name of the proletariat, or in the name of communism, or in the name of equality. The Nazis killed millions in the name of the German people, or in the name of Hitler. Does that make them more acceptable?

There seems to be a double standard being applied here. You seem happy to say that because some religious people have done bad things, all religion is bad, but seem to refuse the idea that because some athiests have done bad things, all atheism is bad. Of course, both theists and athiests have done bad things. And, of course, this does not prove that either underlying world view is faulty, just that people do bad things.

I'm not sure you can legitimately describe everybody who believes in God as less rational than you. Many philosophers, scientists, engineers and mathematicians believe in God. Maybe they've got reasons you don't understand? You seem to be anti-religion to a degree that is itself beyond rationality. And I would have thought a case could be put together to suggest that Atheism has had a rather negative impact on human history. Communist - and Atheist - China, Cambodia and USSR spring to mind.

For me Christmas is mostly about celebrating the birth of the greatest man who ever lived, the saviour of the world, Jesus Christ. Oh, and for many years I was an engineer.

I loved it. Lighten up.

Sorry, I'll try again. Yep. If we take sentiment out of the equation. Gazza is still learning his trade, Kelvin has recently shown he's not up to it. Boruc is a class act. Maybe Kelvin has been carrying an injury and is now fit. Maybe Gazza has learned enough. But it's too risky right now to hope for either when you have a genuine, quality goaklkeeper "in the building".

Yep. If we take sentiment out of the e

Can we tone the rhetoric down a touch, please?

Although Nigel tends to pick a lot of reserves for games like this, and I expect he'll do so again, I would prefer it if he'd pick his strongest team, win a game, get some confidence back into the players, and help them to gel, and give the fans something to get happy about.

Unbelievable! St mary's is a HUGE improvement on the Dell. I dread to think what a state we'd be in now if we hadn't moved. And I remember how many years we'd talked about moving before we finally managed it. Rupert Lowe made a lot of major mistakes but this wasn't one of them.

Was anyone suggesting that being a Catholic would have anything to do with footballing ability?

I do enjoy a well-turned phrase. "A hard-working but totally lamentable group of innumerate fruitcakes" is a good one.

De Ridder is really frozen out, then.

Appy claimed in the Football's Football Show that since the one-month deals finish after the transfer window closes, he'll be able to keep all these players until January.

Where are all the complaints about racism?

I and, I suspect, many others are morally outraged.

Maybe the coaches have been working with Fox during the summer to improve his defensive qualities?

He's a right misery on the pitch. Always moaning. Hard to like.

Sir! There are some insults that are beyond the pale! I just wondered how anyone can "literally push the club forward" (unless it's a golf club or something).

"NC ambition is literally pushing this club forward" How???

But how recently did they come to that view?