Liverpool FC Forum

by **Afroman** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 12:03 am

I saw a programme the other day a miget was trying to find a partner.
They lined up 10 miget women and he had to pick one.
Its was........interesting

by **Woollyback** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 12:04 am

the one redeeming feature of BB is that (apart from last year when nadia the freakshow won) the most normal person always seems to win which actually re-injects me with a bit of faith in society

as for compensation for the families of slaves, i wasn't aware anything was being paid out

you also mention that britain was the country that called for an end to slavery but which country was it that was the main perpetrator of the global slave-trade for generations? so demanding an end to it all is a tad irrelevant imo

by **76-1115222408** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 12:19 am

Woollyback wrote:the one redeeming feature of BB is that (apart from last year when nadia the freakshow won) the most normal person always seems to win which actually re-injects me with a bit of faith in society

as for compensation for the families of slaves, i wasn't aware anything was being paid out you also mention that britain was the country that called for an end to slavery but which country was it that was the main perpetrator of the global slave-trade for generations? so demanding an end to it all is a tad irrelevant imo

Thankyou Wooly, I was just about to make that point. And Im sure you know what Im like, it would have been an 'essay' :laugh:

.
So thankyou for saving me making the point.

by **yckatbjywtbiastkamb** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 12:38 am

we british have a lot to answer for but i must admit where do you draw the line, do we fine the italians for the way rome treated the christians? do the italians demand money from the germans for when the huns and goths sacked rome? should britain pay money to all the decendants of the irish people who were forced to leave ireland due to the potato famine and start a new life in england, america or australia?
you could go on for years.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:09 am

And all this from BB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by **Cool Hand Luke** » Thu Aug 25, 2005 10:57 pm

woof woof ! wrote:some years ago when i visited Saudi Arabia I was forbidden by the authorities to visit the holy city of Mecca ,why ? Because I wasn't Muslim ! .
Any Muslim members of our forum care to comment on this ?

In the Name of the Most High

this is an excellent question, to say the least, and one can gather from the response that muslims have severe reversions from non muslims visiting Mecca.

one could state that this stems from the prohibition from the noble Book, the Koran, which states in Chapter 9, verse 28

9:28 O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-wise

one could very well espouse a position of exclusivity, as enjoined by a majority of muslims, which is certainly open to interpretation, particularly when the verse above

(a) speaks of Pagans, and the reference here was to the pagan Arabs, and not the people of the Book, i.e Jewish and Christians

(b) secondly, the prescription is for the 'Sacred Mosque', and not Mecca or Medina as a City

of-course, jurists and scholars will vie to maintain such exclusivism, and i find it rather odd that for a religion that maintains its Ibrahimic (i.e Abrahamic) roots, it would prevent the people of the Book, i.e the Jews and Christians from visiting

on the subject of tolerance, the "interpretation" of Islam, practiced by the muslims in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is extremely in-tolerant, not just to people of other faiths, but even those within the Islamic faith who hold different interpretations. muslims, un-fortunately have turned the other cheek when it comes to highlighting the injustices perpretated in the name of religion, particularly when it does by their own cohorts, and the price they will have to pay, is now the elimination from memory the places that hold historical and religious value. the religious divines in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, out of their sheer obsession with Idolatry, deem it an act of worship to other than God, if these historical places (like Muhammads Grave, his house) are taken to be of some religious value.

lastly, let me state, that other muslims will object on opening up vistas of visitation to Mecca and Medina, not for the reasons that i have highlighted above, but from their profound sense of sacredness that stems from these places: so as to preserve and maintain it, hence the resort to personal place and privacy.

due to religious persecution, the then Jewish and Christian settlers have left, but this does not amount to a denial of visitation, as i see it for the people of the Book to these peoples, for the bonds of the Abrahamic faith, God Willing, will perhaps one day resonate in the minds of those who are visitors, as per chance, the Lord will open their hearts to the Message of Islam, that is a continuation of the same Message, as that of Musa (i.e Moses) and 'Isa (i.e Jesus), may my parents be sacrificed for them, culminating with the end of the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon them all)

one guys reply on the subject...

by **76-1115222408** » Thu Aug 25, 2005 11:14 pm

Nice post, very thought provoking!!

by **Woollyback** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:06 am

I'm a committed atheist but I must admit I find all this stuff quite enthralling, if a few more people started to THINK about why they subscribe to their own particular religion then it could only be a good thing. I wonder how many people follow their religion purely because they were born into it and how many follow it because they actively believe in its doctrines?

I personally don't believe in any kind of higher being or intelligence whatsoever, but I totally respect the right and the choice of other people to do so. It sometimes strikes me though that most religions, if you strip them down to their bare bones, are actually very insular and exclusive which does not fit in with 21st century society (at least not with western society). Given that all religions (IMO) are merely products of the society in which they prevail, then surely those religions should adapt to the modern day environment of those societies and reflect the changes that have taken place rather than cling to obsolete teachings?

by **76-1115222408** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:10 am

WOW, exactly how I feel on this...I am an atheist and dont believe ina 'higher power'.

But also religion has been the cause of so many wars over the centuries that it is more of a hindrace on the whole really than a help....

by **neil** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:10 am

there is a quote that reads " If there was no God man would invent one". I am afraid I cannot recall to whom this should be attributed, however, they were on the button.

by **Woollyback** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:24 am

neil wrote:there is a quote that reads " If there was no God man would invent one". I am afraid I cannot recall to whom this should be attributed, however, they were on the button.

trouble is there's PLENTY of gods, every last one of them invented by man

Liverpool FC Forum

Sick as f.uck - Big brother sinks to new depths

Who is online