Messages

Some people are just selfish pricks - whether on a bike or in a car.

In london as a pedestrian Id say bikes are a more concerning issue to me - cars at least dont run red lights generally but some cyclists do.

When I do drive in london, which i do as little as I can, its touch and go which i see more off - bad cyclists or bad drivers.

For the good cyclists some of the insane cycle lane sections dont help them - sharing with buses or changing lanes randomly coming up to major junctions.

And the poor who don't have the money to pay for food? Would everyone in a society have access to the same number of calories if less than 2300 is the average for the whole territory ? Mothers who are so weak they can't breastfeed their kids and have no money to pay for formula, for example.

10% of kids are stunted because of Israeli policy.

Israel is a disgrace.

First, I find Israels actions in gaza abhorrent. However this argument with the average calories helps nothing, as it is misreported at best.
the average as i said would be right for adults, but much of the poupulation would be a lot younger and therefore have less needs, easily countering the number of breastfeeding mothers who require what - 600 calories a day extra?
Are you also implying that wealthy palestinians are taking much more than they require and the poor are starving accordingly?

As I say, I dont know all the details here, and im not defending israel, but reporting the average calories above and saying this is just enough to keep them alive is false - 1800 a day average minimum given by  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Have a read at the article, which is a from a very well respected newspaper in Israel, Harratz. What are your thoughts on their plan to put 1.5 million people on a diet that contained just enough calories to stop them from dying.

Surely the figure of 2279 is the correct average intake across men and women in order to maintain weight.
It is far from starving.

@NI FAN I never said once it was ok to hang or torture a dog - I just pointed out that we are all guilty in one way or another of being part of some animal cruelty if we choose to look at it that way....

you said we cant choose which to cry over- but of course we can "cry" over mistreated while not over others

what difference does it make to you what "passage I live by"? do you think I have the catechism papered in my bedroom?

No difference to me at all, it is just your varying view on a lot of threads with regards to religious observation.

On topics you agree with the catholic church you say you follow all teachings of the catholic church (naturalism, gay marriage etc), but this one you dont seem to be so sure on (wasnt there a cats thread also)

What have I said that goes against what you posted...
I simply pointed out the level of cruelty that we are all end benefactors of in one way or another......

Is cruelty ok then if its for food or income?

When you said "An animal is an animal -you can't pick and choose which you cry about....." in the context of the discussion, and considering previous posts of yours concerning animal treatment, doesnt seem sit well with the whole preventing suffering etc.
People can choose to "cry" over one that has been cruelly treated, but not over an animal killed for a purpose in a way that prevents it suffering more than necessary.

Do you agree with, and live by the passage ive quoted above?

Men who rear turkeys in mushroom houses or sheds for The Chirstmas season wouldn't follow the Moy Park or factory way. I've seen houses full of turkeys hung upside down til they die. Some places may slice the vein that feeds the brain and therefore they are brain dead before they are body dead and the blood runs out.
My point is we all are at the end of the assembly line with the knives and forks at the ready. An animal is an animal -you can't pick and choose which you cry about.....

Not like you to be so at odds with catholic teaching - i had thought you aimed to follow it pretty closely

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a7.htm

Respect for the integrity of creation  is the interesting section

"2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.195 Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man's dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.196

2416 Animals are God's creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory.197 Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image.198 Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons."

English supporting Irish soccer fans turning their back on their national team (a country with the same population as Birmingham).

Ireland has the same population as birmingham? Think you are a bit out with that one.

greater Birmingham has a population of near 4 mil

How are you defining greater birmingham?
The west midlands conurbation has 2.2 m, and this is generally what is meant by that

Considering that he's worked with real world class players(not Robbie Keane 'world class') in his days as coach of Juventus, so its hardly surprising he doesn't trust Irish players to have the ability to hold onto the ball for any length of time.

He may not rate the players, but he seems to differ with many in the relative rating of individual players compared to each other.

English supporting Irish soccer fans turning their back on their national team (a country with the same population as Birmingham).

Ireland has the same population as birmingham? Think you are a bit out with that one.

Tony finally has the world wide audience he has been craving!

http://www.destinationnewry.com/sports/gaa/news-The_GAA_and_Soccer_United

Is this a different Fearon?
"I'm a follower of Aston Villa"

Tony off here is a Spurs fan.

Finally there is a lot of reverse racism over here, it's not so long ago a black racist went on tv and went on a hate filled rant that stated that he wanted black people to rise up and kill eery white baby, baby momma and every white man in the US of A...............what got done, absolutely nothing, the rules got thrown out the window thanks to the fact that no one stood up and held the fcuker accountable for what came out of his mouth. If that is not reverse racism and incitement to hatred I don't know what is.

This isnt "reverse racism" - its just racism.
Who was this guy? was he in some position of authority where he could be disciplined?

I wonder might McIllroy just not bother.
Is it worth it for him, the analysis and bitterness he will get no matter what he chooses.

He'll not worry what a bunch of bigots really think, as if he's reading this lol. Probably counting his money and watching tennis

Obviously individual comments on here arent going to affect him, but the overall arc of things migh annoy him sufficiently.
His statement after the last comments was:
"Having just won three of my last four tournaments, including a second Major championship, I was hoping that my success on the golf course would be the more popular topic of golfing conversation today. "

ie hes got better things to be at than listening to gurning

Usually it's the other way around. The most recognisable face carries the flag because they are the most recognisable face. It doesn't make them such.

Actually I dont think they even tend to do that.
Outside of Jamaica I dont know how many teams had their most recognisable face out front.
USA - the largest team - had Mariel Zagunis. Could have had a basketball player - lebron for example-  or serena williams or even phelps

UK had Chris Hoy

I wonder might McIllroy just not bother.
Is it worth it for him, the analysis and bitterness he will get no matter what he chooses.