norwaysaint

This shows a bit of ignorance over what is taught in schools. In British schools, children are educated about the major religions of the world, which gives an insight into culture and improves understanding and tolerance. RE does not teach people that biblical events are facts. RE teaches that certain people across the world have these or those beliefs and traditions. It is a fact that people who are Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Sikhs or Christians have those beliefs, study from those books, follow those customs and have those festivals. do you think these facts should not be taught to children? I think promoting ignorance is a very poor solution. Education is always the way forward, the more people understand others, the less they will react in a misguided way. I spent twelve years teaching RE at primary level incidentally and at one point was mainly responsible for writing the school plans for the subject, meaning I read the curriculum very carefully and, as an atheist, I considered it a very important part of education. With your suggestion, the only people with any understanding of a religion would be those whose parents followed it, they would be ignorant of all other religions and more open to prejudice because of it.

Do you really think that comparison bears out? Kelvin Davis who is struggling to make the position his own and has been patchy when he has played is in the same situation as puncheon who has been an ever present, easily the first choice for his position and a major part of our more successful performances this season? Okay.

What about "Reading player tries to header the ball but the ball is on the ground so he can't header it!"

I have no idea how the different stands sing, but it has been fantastic watching saints on TV, or listening on the radio and hearing how loudly our fans sing home and away. They are drowning out other teams fans in away matches and singing the roof off at St Mary's too. I've never heard our support sound so good. There can't be many better for noise in the PL at the moment, certainly for our size and the distance of the journeys our travelling fans make.

Yes, but I and many others have been, making it a gateway to other drugs. It's not the only gateway, but being involved with dealers is unarguably a gateway to a variety of drugs.

I don't think you read my comment properly. I said that it was a gateway drug in that by visiting an illegal drug dealer, you are often likely to be offered other drugs he has. I know this is true because in my youth, when I smoked cannabis, I was often offered tabs, speed, ecstasy etc. I don't think smoking cannabis increases your likelihood of taking other drugs in any other way except becoming part of that culture.

I've known somebody in the same situation, who ended up in a hospital, where he said nearly every other resident was also a regular cannabis user. The harmful effects are undoubted and included at the top. The thing is that anyone who wants cannabis can get it pretty easily and they are never going to be able to change that. The other point is that you could easily substitute the word cannabis for alcohol in your post, yet we would never spend millions battling the availability of alcohol. If the war is lost, what next?

OK, that's a bit misleading, but it has been in the state of Washington with Colorado likely to follow. I'm not sure how it's going to work when it's still against federal law. For those that don't get that, the US is governed at state level in some areas and by central (federal) government in others. Most Americans strongly object to too much federal interference in their state. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20621210 It's always a grey area with decriminalisation of drugs. Of course there are serious health risks there that shouldn't be trivialised or ignored, just like there are with drugs that have already been made legal, like alcohol and tobacco. The war on drugs has been a lost cause for a very long time, they barely scratch the surface with what they find and make no lasting difference with whom they arrest. if the very expensive war on drugs is a lost cause, why is so much time and money used in pursuing it? It may go against many principles to give it up and take a different stance, but once it's legal, they can control it a lot more and tax it accordingly, like the other drugs that are now legal. It would go from being a drain on public resources to being a new source of income. This would reduce its effect as a gateway drug to some extent as people buying cannabis would do so without being offered whatever other drug the illegal supplier was carrying. It would also take the trade away from criminal gangs and put it into the hands of legal businesses, just like alcohol. Downsides are the health risks, the public acceptability of another drug, and cannabis isn't harmless, and the idea that this is a step on a ladder that will eventually see most illegal drugs legalised for similar reasons, which many people would feel less comfortable with. There may also be increased cost in healthcare for users, although it's arguable this could also be reduced as a result. What's your opinion, is this the way forward, or will it be looked back on as a silly mistake, soon to be corrected or destroy society as we know it?

Not fair, Turkish admitted that he got it wrong about Guly and doesn't need his nose rubbed in it. He should be respected for being able to admit he was wrong.

I the first half, you could only hear the saints fans (very loud and clear) on TV, lots of OWTS, One Nigel Adkins, Gaston Ramirez etc, I think I remember one L'pool song being sung, but I forget what it was. I was amazed our fans could outsing theirs so comprehensively at Anfield.

Best Bond I like Craig, but it has to be Connery, he was just so cool. Tough, funny, self-assured. Favourite quote: "This is a woman's gun" "Do you know a lot about guns Mr Bond?" "I know a bit about women." I have never managed to get all of the way through a Dalton film. He's just such a charisma vacuum. Best film Goldfinger. Like with most films, it's got a lot to do with when and how I saw it. It was the first one I saw, at Christmas of course, and my brother had been raving about it. i was finally old enough to watch bond and that was the film to see. Best baddie Blofeld, any of them, but of course Donald Pleasance had the hollowed out volcano that has become THE standard for an evil megalomaniac. Best car The Goldfinger Aston Martin, because when I was a kid everybody except me had the toy, plus the weapons of course. I liked the toy Lotus, but when I saw it in the film I was disappointed. Sexiest Bond girl (goody or villain) Diana Rigg or Shirley Eaton Best theme tune I love You Only Live Twice, I think it's magnificent, but I also love We Have All the Time in the World. I seem to be alone in this but I think Live and Let Die is one of the worst songs. It has a fantastic dramatic start, but when the song actually gets going, it's a horrible messy, plinky plonky jazz number. All that "What does it matter to ya?" rubbish. I think people just hear the start and forget the rest is quite lame.

You see, written down I understand every word easily, almost identical to Norwegian, but what on Earth goes wrong with the Danish when they speak? Utterly incomprehensible.

http://www.sporcle.com/games/kippah/the-92--football-league-clubs-20112012-season There are quite a few Saints quizzes on there as well if you search Southampton. I think somebody on here linked to one a while ago.

I've only had one of those calls once. I acted very interested and asked him to wait a minute while I fetched the laptop and booted it up. Then I went for a dump. He was gone when I came back which I thought was rather rude.

I think I'd agree with most of that.

I know that's an attempt at sarcasm, but I would honestly say that I don't think there is anyone who posts on here who is more concerned about their credibility. Concerned enough to always need the last word. If you had an ounce of self-security, you wouldn't need to keep justifying yourself and insisting it was all just a joke.

I think the main person who said this happened was Turkish and he's already admitted he got it wrong. No need to go on about it really.

This is absolutely the case and I posted about it on the match thread. When he got the ball near the goal, he was commonly in situations where 99% of players would make a reaction shot, that would generally miss ie ball to his feet, while moving at speed and being challenged. yet he's one of those players for whom time seems to work differently than for everyone else. Somehow, he's able to see the better pass, control the ball and deliver it it beautifully in exactly the same time as others can only manage that reaction shot. Having a brain that works and solves problems so quickly is undoubtedly a form of genius. The reason we missed a few goals was as a result of it. Puncheon would receive a pass in front of goal from ramirez that he would never have expected to land at his feet and he produced the expected and fluffed reaction shot. That sounds like a criticism of Puncheon, but it's not meant to be, Puncheon did everything we could expect of him, but we can't expect him to think as quickly as Ramirez.

Actually, I have to admit to enjoying it a bit, can you tell? Well done to you for backing down though, that deserves respect.

I'd agree with this, pace is better than no pace, but ability is better than pace. I'd disagree that Antonio and De Ridder were ever that popular. There were a few people who wanted to see more of de ridder when we needed a decent player on the right, but no significant number. Waigo was more popular than Antonio and there wasn't too much complaining when we didn't sign either. because somebody starts a thread and those who agree post on it, doesn't mean it's a popular view. Just like stadium expansion, only a handful of people called for it to happen any time soon, but because of the squabbling and thread starting, you could be fooled into thinking it was a common view.

Or to put it another way, just Turkish getting it wrong.

Well, if it weren't important to you, why would you spend so much of your day talking about it? You must post at least 20 times a day, probably more, and mostly concerning other people's opinions. I would agree that I also spend too much time taking notice of other people's opinions, but considerably less.

Is it ok for you to sneer when optimistic things don't happen? I think there were at most 3 or 4 posters you were squabbling with about stadium expansion, not really a number worth taking issue with, but you're right, that probably is about the sum of intelligent posters.

Yet you get very upset when people don't take you seriously, talking about not sharing your inside information. You also sneered at anyone who doubted the contract clause, now you sound like you're starting to doubt it yourself.

It's ok to be wrong, it's a pretty normal thing and when we post opinions or rumours, it'll often turn out that way. I think what's needed is a bit more humility when posting those opinions and rumours. You'd have to admit yourself Alpine, that you post some very strong opinions, but don't leave much room for doubt and never come back to the subject with any humility if you weren't right. That kind of aggressive posting can come across as arrogant and can make people enjoy pointing out how wrong you were a little more. Take the wind out of their sails a bit by leaving room for your own fallibility.