Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - EliB

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »
1
Culture, Media & Sport / Re: Rugby world cup
« on: October 30, 2011, 21:12:43  »
Thoroughly enjoyed the whole Rugby World Cup! The last game was a scrappy affair, but I suppose the final is never renowned for perfect strategic play!

Roll on the Six Nations now! Can't wait!! {:

2
News Review / Re: for fear of offending christians
« on: September 08, 2011, 16:37:15  »
I don't PERSONALLY find it overly offensive - but I can understand if some people do - and that is their right to feel that way!

What I AM pleased with is that an official body has finally used some common sense and realised that, shock horror!!!, Christians can be offended too!!!! For FAR too many years it's been "oh the Muslims might be offended" or whatever religion - but with things like Local Authorities calling Christmas "Winter wonderland holidays" or the like, nobody was giving a monkeys if Christians were offended - and any who spoke out were "over reacting" and "being ridiculous" (by all the people who are intelligent enough to be voluntarily celebrating a religious festival that they don't believe in!!! WHO is being ridiculous!?!?!)

I don't really care about the ad - but I DO care about the decision!!!

3
News Review / Re: key cancer drugs 3 times more available in england than scotland or wales
« on: September 06, 2011, 14:39:14  »
Quote from: AndrewF on September 03, 2011, 18:59:11
No, but nor is the fact that they pay no prescription charges while the English do... - that is devolution for you!

Couldn't agree more that we should be paying prescription charges! Think it's a ridiculous, short-term attempt at vote grabbing by Salmond, but impossible to sustain - and yes, why should the English be paying???

As for cancer drugs though - that's kind of different - that's withholding drugs - the prescription charge is unfair, yes, but drugs aren't withheld completely! People aren't dying because of it!!

4
Culture, Media & Sport / Re: sports who are the innglish or the team GB or whoever whatever?
« on: September 06, 2011, 13:32:50  »
I have NO idea what you're asking in this post!  )(:

5
Culture, Media & Sport / Re: fav cop/crime dramas
« on: September 06, 2011, 13:30:16  »
My favourite genre of drama:

I really miss The Bill - it was a brilliant programme and I'll never know why they axed it, particularly when ITV is now full of reality tv garbage!!!
I also love most, but not all, of the US ones. LOVE all the Law and Order Franchise - particularly the original L&O (especially the old ones with Jerry Orbach!!) but also SVU! My sister can't understand why I love SVU but there's something very satsifying about seeing rapists and abusers being sentenced to "20 to life" etc, even if it IS only fictional cases! The kind of sentencing that's realistic to the crime!! Don't like Law and Order UK - don't think it's worked.
Also love CSI but ONLY the NY one! Do not like the Vegas one and can't stand the red haired guy from CSI Miami - a more wooden actor I've never seen!
Am also a massive NCIS fan....got them all on DVD (as I have with SVU and CSI:NY too!!) I love that NCIS is gritty but also very funny and the real relationships that grow (suppose all the shows have that element!!)

Other British shows - used to love Silent Witness when Amanda Burton was in it, but it went downhill after she left. The early Waking the Dead's were good too, but again not so good in latter years!

Oooh - just in the mood for a wee NCIS episode now....

6
Religion / Re: fundies and liberals -understanding the Gospel or not
« on: August 31, 2011, 10:27:10  »
I  was recently told that if I believe in Creation, then I am going to be categorised as a Fundamentlalist.
Now "Fundamentalist" could be the term for someone who believes in the "fundamental" aspects of any given religion/faith, but the term has become so inflamatory that I was actually offended by the remark!

7
Faith / Re: what good are pastors on the warfront?
« on: August 27, 2011, 17:30:54  »
Padres/Chaplains/Pastors - whatever you want to call them are there to provide PASTORAL support to anyone in Operational Theatre who might want/need it! Full stop! THAT is their role - nothing else.

After that - not sure what there is to discuss.... :?:

8
Prayer Wall / Re: Dear Lord ....
« on: August 21, 2011, 21:37:37  »
I have no problem with the prayer - I think that we only need to look around us to know see that God DOES indeed have a sense of humour!

9
Prayer Wall / Re: Please pray for our pastor
« on: August 21, 2011, 21:26:29  »
Will pray for your pastor Andrew!
I also agree that there's a very REAL need for pastors in the Armed Forces - and there is ALWAYS going to be a need for us to have Armed Forces!
The CofS my sister goes to in Aldershot has a minister who is an Army Padre.

And Ecu - I'm not sure the TA would thank you for referring to what they do as "war games"!

10
The Lounge / Re: Holidays
« on: August 21, 2011, 21:21:31  »
Oh yes, Andrew, I like a swim in the sea too - although a mile?? That's impressive...!! I'm just talking about a wee bit here and there, lol!
But I just find it mad that folk can land in a country and take off a week or fortnight later, having seen nothing of that country....


11
News Review / Re: Excessive sentences?
« on: August 20, 2011, 15:32:32  »
Quote from: JJ on August 20, 2011, 08:49:42
What I mean is what I say: It does diminish me to use terms of abuse for others.  End of.  Abuse is abuse whether it's done by a righteous person or a bad person. Isn't it? Name calling reflects on the speaker not the criminal - and keeps the bitterness and bad feeling alive in the heart of the speaker and of what use is that?  It's the message of the Gospel to look at our own hearts isn't it?  :)   It doesn't in any way condone criminal and offensive behaviour but it at least clears the decks towards a way of thinking about how to deal with the threat or aftermath of violence or crime with a level head.

It's not good to hear you say that what I really mean is something other than I say.  That doesn't make sense to me.  I say what I say in good faith.   I don't say one thing and mean another, I really don't.  In any case, as you say yourself, that you think what I really mean is that we shouldn't be so judgemental, that in a way follows directly from the first part of the above.  The reason for not being judgemental is that it prevents us from seeing the situation critically. It brings in emotional reasoning.  Judgmentalism clouds the issue.  It gets us nowhere. 
JJ, I'm really sorry if I offended you in appearing as though I was changing or trying to tell you what you "really" meant! What I was trying to do was clarify in MY head what you were saying...and I did that in a cac-handed way - I apologise!

Quote from: JJ on August 20, 2011, 08:49:42

"These people" were acting like human beings, by definition, because they are human beings.  Human beings behave in all sorts of ways for various reasons.  So it seems about time to accept this and see how it can be dealt with for the benefit of society, all of society, not just the people who have the brains and education and good fortune to be self aware and self reliant.

I get that "these people" were behaving like human beings just by dint of them BEING human....but it's not enough to say they were acting like that for "various reasons"....WHY oh WHY since all this rioting broke out having there been endless people trying to JUSTIFY why they were acting as though we lived in a totally lawless country! It MIGHT to have been to try and find a way of preventing this from ever happening again - but it APPEARED to be an endless queue of people trying to make excuses for the poor wee souls!

Personally, I'm quite ok about my calling them "scum" because IMO that's what they are! I don't feel it dimishes me to call them that. I know how I behave towards others and I'm happy with that! Brains, education and good fortune don't come into this. There were plenty of folk falling into each of these categories appearing in court on various charges connected to the riots! It's basic right from wrong and basic human respect for people who HAVE earned it, by being decent law-abiding citizens of this country! And these people were out to destroy them (and succeeded in various cases!).....for NO reason....in my book, that makes them "scum"!!

12
News Review / Re: Excessive sentences?
« on: August 20, 2011, 00:26:38  »
Quote from: JJ on August 19, 2011, 22:09:59
Because it diminishes me to use such epithets for people.  Might as well call them nigga scum a lot of them or white trash or bastards - says nothing about them but a lot about me.  Who are we to be so lofty as to call other people names? They are human beings - people like me, people unlike me, but still people.  Respec' !!

I'd say it might bring us down to their level to use such terms, but that's not what you mean! You mean ( I think!) that we shouldn't be so judgemental as to use such terms for other human beings. My argument to that would be that these people weren't ACTING like 'human beings' and thankfully they're definitely UNlike me! I wouldn't bring race into it because 1) I don't care WHAT race folk are and 2) these riots were nothing to do with race! All ethnicities were rioting! Respect is something that's earned - not a given just by being part of the human race!!

13
News Review / Re: Excessive sentences?
« on: August 19, 2011, 19:48:13  »
Quote from: JJ on August 19, 2011, 17:03:25
Well I wouldn't like to be smacked myself.  And I wouldn't do it to a child whose understanding is even less than mine.  Anyway..........that's another subject, smacking. 
Already tried posting this but it didn't work....
JJ, I know that 'smacking' is another issue, but my point was that we DID understand why we were being smacked - and so did my friend's boy!


Quote from: JJ on August 19, 2011, 17:03:25

My surprise is that floopowder is so sensitive.  Really sorry that she is so upset, shame that she feels like she has to leave.  I invite her to respect her-self and dialogue without using the word scum regarding people she hardly knows.  I'm very happy to do that.

And who cares about the bloody admin.

I'm curious JJ as to why you think it's wrong to refer to the rioters as "scum", because that's exactly what they were - wanton violence and destruction of property....what else would you call them?  Decent, law-abiding people don't behave in that way!

14
News Review / Re: Excessive sentences?
« on: August 19, 2011, 16:34:57  »
With regards the sentencing...I DID think it was (almost) laughable to hear Hazel Blears rant about the rioters when she got away with THEFT and FRAUD! But whilst the sentences for these youths who were inciting violence (which came to nothing!) deserve some punishment, I see no benefit to locking them up - and those actually rioting deserve the 4 years imprisonment - but I DO agree that the sentencing as a whole HAS been far too soft for years - but it's also been totally inconsistent, which is why you see this 4 year tarrif for these youths whilst rapists (if convicted at all!!!!) can get 18 months! There has to be some consistency regarding REALISTIC sentences, NO MATTER WHO the perpetrator is: what public office they hold; how famous or rich they are; or how poor they are!! There should be a sentence affixed to each crime (or level of ie. in the US Murder 1, **** 2 etc!!) and that is IT!!! NO leniency depending on how influencial you might be or how many 0s are on your bank balance!
As for smacking children (and I mean a short, sharp smack on the backside, NOT a doing!!!!One equals discipline, the other, abuse!) I have no problem with that! My sister and I were both smacked - but it was always after several ignored warnings and mostly (in my case) a lot of cheek (I WAS a joy of a child!!) and any time we WERE smacked, we knew full well that we deserved it! Whilst visiting a friend last week she smacked one of her 8 year old sons after several warnings..one smack on his backside....don't see the problem....!!!

15
News Review / Re: Excessive sentences?
« on: August 17, 2011, 12:35:57  »
I'm have mixed views on this....

These youths TRIED to incite violence - and although that in itself is a criminal offence and SHOULD be dealt with severely (haha! think i'm forgetting what country I'm in - we haven't dealt with anything "severely" for decades!!!!!) I think 4 years imprisonment isn inappropriate! Rapists don't even get that for goodness sake and they didn't ACTUALLY perpetrate any violence! I wonder if any of those caught actually rioting will get anything approaching that kind of sentence.

The other problem is how the offending youth culture view Community Service. When I was at court when my dad got assaulted, waiting outside was a real eye-opener - youths coming out of court shouting "Community Service" and other assembled youths cheering like they'd got one over on the system...they don't see it as any kind of sentence, punishment, deterrant, ANYTHING! They see it as a RESULT!
Whilst I think prison should be for violent offenders ONLY (with appropriate sentences!!!) I also agree that the COmmunity Service theory needs over hauling...I think the US have the right idea - different coloured hi viz jackets with the crime labelled on the back. Humiliation? Yes - but that in itself might be a deterrent! Although the Human Rights wallas would have something to say.......although human rights of the "IP" are always conveniently forgotten!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »