I probably ,misinterpreted your Quote "I've generally stayed out of the debate too... people are free to believe what they want to but feel no one should push their own beliefs onto others or criticise just because they don't hold the same beliefs!" to mean that you felt in this thread people were pushing their beliefs and criticising. It seems you didn't and were giving a general opinion (which as it happens I do agree with) Does your telly not have other channels.? Kyle is there for those who like him - same here this thread is for those who like an interesting religious debate - if you don't, you won't want to look at it. There are plenty of threads on here I ignore -not least the recent sex thread, My argument is saying that plenty of people look at the this thread and are motivated to add their opinion - to me this makes a good thread. Not sure how tongue in cheek this is - I assume it is completely so
Yes, thought I'd better explain myself a little better as it obviously didn't come across as well as it could have or how I meant it - hence why I generally stay out of these debates. I do thoroughly enjoy reading these though as people on this board have such a vast range of opinions and such knowldge on so many subjects that they really are a fascinating read, and even though there are disagreements, it never really gets offensive or personal
Quite right! Most people have long since realised that the moon is not a planetoid orbiting the Earth but a TV Broadcasting Centre controlled by Ed Harris. Moon landings indeed......
I am quite utterly flabbergasted that someone as incredibly knowledgeable as Steven Fry didn´t mention: please log in to view this image On a more serious note, maybe there is some outer force, but why do so many people need a "middle-man" to connect with their "divine creator, god," whoever, whatever! The church, however many "catholics" there are here in Mexico and however honest they may be, is a slowly dying institution here. i think in 60 years it may well be flaking away, totally. If they don´t modernise their ideas a bit their future is bleak. Religion gets a lot of stick from the non-religious, but to be honest they might well have deeper values and respect. That for me, is what it should be about really.
Ouch, Leo, I'm staggered you present the 'Doesn't your telly have an off button?' argument. I think it does, Kev, that's why I'm not a fan of it. I agree with ofh that there is a tendency for repetitive posting and pedantry. The ideal of talking religion, politics etc is fine, the reality is not so good though.
Why are you staggered? You slate Jeremy Kyle yet some people seem to love him. It is about choice. Your argument implies you want to dictate what should be on telly and perhaps here too. I am for free choice. We all choose which of these threads we read or contribute to and for somebody who does not like this one they will simply not read it. Clearly many do like it. I do not like quite a few off topic threads but do not go on there and criticise them for being there - I just let those that like them participate. There is only one thing we all actually have in common - our love of Watford. I think this board would be the worse though if every thread had to be about the club. Do you really think this thread gets offensive? Personal sometimes, as now when we are talking about our personal opinions but offensive - not in my understanding of the word - occasionally slightly heated but mostly no more than handbags at dawn. Still each to their own - one person's opinion (or belief) is as valid for them as anyone else's.
I'm not going to go beyond this, Leo. I have this -------- at work and I'm buggered if I'm going to get drawn into it here. My comment re Kyle may have implied all sorts of things to you, however it was based on your assertion that popularity is akin to quality. Not so, IMHO. Any thread can be on here, I have made no claim they shouldn't be. I have merely expressed my regret that some, not least you, can become pedants and throw around unfortunate, divisive words. Your point re what we have in common was the one I made. Each to their own indeed. This is my opinion that will inevitably be met with another 'last word freak' answer. I am not happy to have been drawn into this sort of thing by you, Leo, and given that I have expressed (on this thread) extreme difficulties and stress I have been put under, the smallest fraction of which has been written, I would ask that you don't make efforts to hound me from this board.
I couldn't disagree with you more on everything you have put here but will put it down to stress - my life is of course rosy and stress free. You have just proved the point about nastiness and personal - but not in the name of religion. If you want the last word reply and I will let you have it as to me I could not care less. For what it is worth I would hate you to leave the board and if you did because of me I would leave too.
I doubt any of us want to see posters like yourselves leaving - I certainly don't as you both make significant contributions ito what is a friendly and lively forum. I am not going to pontificate on the latest exchange other than to say Leo would never make any effort to hound anyone from the board in my opinion. I am posting this more in the spirit of someone who likes you both rather than a mod and apologise if you think I am being heavy handed or interefering. That certainly was not the intention
Not at all - and thanks Dan I confess I did not see this coming. I thought everything I ever posted said I welcome and appreciate all people's opinions and cannot see anything that suggests I would hound anyone out- as if I could if I wanted to (which I don't) All I tried to suggest was that each thread has people who like it or do not and we each tend to post on those we like - threads like the pub quiz and songs are not for me so I avoid them but do not slag off people who post to them and call them pedants or anything else. I realise that the semantics bit between Fez and I might by some not seem very interesting but it was quite interesting - to me at least. I may be wrong but yet again I suspect that it is believers who get defensive if anyone comes up with arguments they do not like. If you do not like a forthright debate that is supposed to challenge beliefs and opinions then don't join in those discussions is how I feel.Oh - and before thisI would have thought Andy and I were as good "cyber friends" as most on here.
Leo, I think that I am the only one on here that has openly declared himself a believer and so I presume that the 'defensive' tag refers to myself. I admit that this thread, coming so soon after the 'Charlie Hebdo' thread (in which the God bashers also had the field very much to themselves), initially nerved a little - my first thought was 'do we have to go down this road again`, however, I have enjoyed the debate and I do not think that any feelings have been bruised. Having said that, my 'defence`was never anything more than demanding my right to believe in my God without ridicule (and there has been some) - I do not think that a debate is possible on this theme because I believe in something which is, for you and others on here, unbelievable - and so the debate does not meet the necessary criteria of mutual respect which should accompany debate. We all know that this debate would not have arisen were it not for the fact that some people have chosen to kill in the name of God - that was the spark which started all of this - together with the automatic assumption that religion is the source of all evil and wars in the World - a claim which does not have one iota of proof because we can never know how many people through history have refrained from killing because of their religion. Also, those who have killed were probably already potential murderers even before religion got hold of them - and so it was not religion which was the problem but rather the ghettoes they grew up in which turned them into angry young men without perspectives of any kind.
Nope Cologne - did not even think of you for that comment and I did not check back but thought a few people on here believed in God with a capital G whereas thought your beliefs were closer to spirituality - almost native American style. I don't find that - or any other belief ingod "unbelievable" I just do not share that belief. I do not think I have ridiculed anybody for a belief on here (since I don't find it ridiculous) and have not noticed it from others. I do think believers are being overly sensitive though. I come on this site for chats about Watford and also for wider off topic chats - if nobody held different views it would be sterile. Until Andy had a personal go at me I thought we all conducted ourselves well but frankly do not think it worth continuing to discuss when some cannot accept others disagree without seeing it as an attack on their beliefs as opposed to an opportunity to exchange views.. This really is the last word I have to say on this thread as I have upset some and failed to get others to realise that anything that cannot be debated is devalued in my humble opinion. GIven we have some sensitive souls perhaps we should all stick to threads on which we agree how great Watford are. I will.
I guess, in its simplistic form, this debate can never reach a satisfactory conclusion because nobody can provide conclusive proof that they are correct in their belief!
That's the way it is Dave. Furthermore the believer, believes in God (or Gods) precisely because it is unprovable. If God could be proved using finite logic then he would belong to our World. Quite simply the methodology is different - the believer looks for signs and not proofs. Debate is impossible here - but what is possible is to debate the influence and effects which faith or belief have had upon society.
That opinion requires a serious answer and I think this guy puts it better than I can.https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=DDi7_4BcvTg
This is my last word on here... because I've joined a different forum. Leo, you have been so itching for an argument, so confrontational, you failed to notice that we agree on pretty much everything in terms of religion. In terms of getting personal you have referred to another as 'arrogant'. In terms of offensive, I refer you to the third paragraph of post 173 on the Charlie Hebdo thread. That was very offensive, but you lacked, IMHO, the humility to apologise. Once again it was someone else's fault. You make assumptions I presume that I am religious, and that I just can't handle criticism. FWIW, I'm not religious, never have been. I work for a Christian organisation that has recently dictated that all staff must engage in worship. I don't blame religion for that, it's people, but a little difficult to swallow when they take a presumed moral high ground with me, which they do, on the basis that I am not religious. Regarding my comments, you "put them down to stress". How very high-handed and patronising. Perhaps I should presume to analyse the root of your aggression? I won't. Am I one of your "sensitive souls"? Again, patronising. Not sensitive, just don't like unnecessary confrontation on a board of fellow fans. In regards to your life being "rosy and stress-free" I think I've been as supportive as everyone else to you. But does it never cross your mind that others are going through stress. Heaven help me, maybe worse? I don't seek to compare stresses but sometimes I think you are oblivious to others'. As you, in your own words describe your approach as "confrontational" I urge you to re-read your posts, but more importantly others', and ask yourself if this style of approach, on matters that are sensitive, is best when you have no idea what is going on in the lives of the people you confront. I just wanted you to pause for thought. I wish everyone all the very best, particularly brian for his recent posts and Dave for the early mornings. ATR
