egg

You refer to black people using it to black people who they are friends with. That I understand. However, I'm not sure this is context as people claim, but rather who apparently can use the word. Help me if you will. Assume these people are all friends, in which scenarios, if any, is the use of the n word offensive? 1.Black person to a white person addressing him by the n word? ? 2.White person to a black person addressing him by the n word? 3. White person addressing a white person but describing a black person (also a friend)? 4. As 3 but a white person addressing a black person. 5. As 3 but a black person addressing a white person.

Seasoned

I think that's correct...still odd that no front on pics though.

Not sure what's odd about that tbh. It's a limited report of a kick about for the u23's. I suspect Jankewitz is part of the 1st team picture so not surprising he didn't feature. What I took from that is that we have loads of youngsters that'll never get a game for us and we need to find clubs for.

Violin

Knitting

Tarantino character in pulp fiction used it talking to a black and white person re a black person. Acceptable? A black character used it talking to a white character. Would it have been acceptable for the white person to use it back to him? Blurred lines for me...have no lines.

Black to black I get...black to white?...white to black?

An offensive word is an offensive word. Who defines where the line gets drawn? Who judges if someone crosses a line? Where is the line for a white person, a black person, or a mixed race person? I'm fecked if I know. I watched pulp fiction last night. The n word was used by black people and Tarantino's character. I suspect if that film was released now the use of the word by the black characters would be OK, but probably not the white one. For me the term is offensive and if nobody uses it, we all know where we are.

Perspective is an interesting thing. I don't see that has Steve has been treated with disrespect, or that people are being "whiny children". Many of us have used this forum and it's predecessor for years, and for my part, it's a great forum which I'd like to see survive and grow. However, that ain't gonna happen if these issues persist - people are highlighting the issues to help Steve, and the forum, not "whine". With that said, if you're going to run a forum, run one that works and fix it when you know it’s not working. If finances are the issue (you assume that) Steve should say. We don't know if he runs at a loss, but if he is and there aren't past profits that could be used to make the forum work reliably, then Steve may want to be transparent and tell us what he needs. People have said that they'd put their hands in their pockets and I think many would.

Thanks, didn't realise that. I'll take a look.

Then mine and Raging Bull's interpretation was broadly correct. In not disputing the possible acceptance of a God or Gods, it follows that you must accept that there could be a God - if you felt that there was no such possibility your stance would have to be that you dispute the possible existence of God or Gods. Either you mind is open or closed, you can't have it both ways. I have no opinion about what people may or may not think. I'm not getting into a hell discussion - God has turned into farcical bible study so God only knows where hell/the devil may end up.

Amen.

Bless you Weston. I haven't raised any bible story on this thread, nor sought to debate this story. I've merely highlighted that the story you raised was a parable as you seemed hard of understanding. I don't pretend to know it history, and have no interest in it.

I'm pleased that it stoked some interest in you. It's origins hasn't / doesn't in me.

Hobby

Get a grip! I once mentioned it was a parable. You then finally accepted that, but then babbled about it stemming from a claim. I'm not the one interested in the issue.

This isn't bible study. I ain't a Bible man. I have no interest in the history behind the parable. If it interests you so much, Google is still your friend. Here's a starter for you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Good_Samaritan

Snake

..

You've swerved the question. What you're referring to is some nutters interpreting a branch of organised religion in particular way. Hanging your point on extremists is a bit desperate. Doris and Fred ain't going to do that after going to Sunday prayers at Romsey Abbey are they. And that's altogether different to someone who believes in a God but not an organised religion, which I trust on reflection, you accept isn't something that can "never" be possible.

I mean no disrespect but the use of the word "never" is an erroneous assumption. Millions of people believe in a God, but don't read holy books and/or follow an organised religion. If things like the last paragraph happen, are you saying that you believe it happens because of a belief in God per se, or some kind of religion / cult?

I grasp it completely. Unless you're being disingenuous, you're saying that you're open to persuasion with evidence. That can only mean that as things stand you are not persuaded by the existence of a God, but haven't ruled out the possibility subject to evidence. If, however, you have been disingenuous, then you've closed your mind and aren't persuadable. I couldn't give a shit which it is, but don't pretend you're open minded when it seems that you're not.

Each to their own Lighthouse. Millions of people worldwide believe in a God (deliberate use of words as this thread has shifted towards Christianity and bible study) and their "proof" is unscientific and intangible. That is enough for them and nobody should doubt what they feel, and they shouldn't have to explain it. Sure, MLG will babble on that it's dangerous for us all to have those beliefs owing to his own assumptions and lack of understanding, but the reality is the peace and comfort that believers get from a relationship with a God is proof enough. To someone that needs your level of proof I appreciate that sounds like bollocks, but as I say, each to their own.

The site is all but unusable. The "update" looks lovely when you can see it, but more often than not the site can't even open. Poor.