1_man_army

Well, back in those days you were either born into wealth or born into poverty. You didn't work hard to become rich like how it mostly is today - you just got it handed to you. The poor were the hard workers and the rich were the ones who sat on their butts eating grapes all day. I can see why they would say the more spoiled a man is, the harder it is to follow the path of God. You wouldn't really need God if you were treated like one yourself, but as for the poor who have to work to death just to survive, believing God and having hope would be very useful to them. My point was that taking the bible literally can backfire, the rights and wrongs of capitalism & the American Dream was just my way to highlight it (using that passage). Well at that point, you need to use your own discretion. Some passages SHOULD be taken literally ,while some shouldn't. And as that is very hard to do, leave it to the Bible Scholars to figure it out. And yea, Zierro is right, there was this one instance when Jesus was talking to a rich guy who wanted to go to heaven. Jesus said "drop all your riches, and follow me" the guy said no. And he's in hell now probably lol. Jesus wasn't saying you can't be rich, but the guy was hoarding it. Not giving to the needy, nor to God. That's what Jesus meant. Then who decides what should be taken as a parable and what shouldn't - scholars? What happens when scholars disagree? Also there is zero ambiguity in the passage I mentioned, it says "a rich man" - not some, there are no preconditions, no exceptions are mentioned - it suggests that all rich men would find it virtually impossible to get into heaven. I love how you say "that's what Jesus meant" like you were there to hear it in context.

I seen him accept an award from FIFA at the charity game for him last week, you could tell he didn't have long left, to his credit he made sure he shook the hand of every player and thanked them.

Do you own any English counties, have a father in the House of Lords or are you Royalty? If not you better be Stephen Hawking to get into Oxford :P Seriously though, they claim to be all equal opportunities but its crap, at my old high school we've had people with perfect grades apply to Oxford and Cambridge and not even get an interview. Personally, I've just graduated uni this month after finishing a 4 year Honours degree at Napier University.

Well, back in those days you were either born into wealth or born into poverty. You didn't work hard to become rich like how it mostly is today - you just got it handed to you. The poor were the hard workers and the rich were the ones who sat on their butts eating grapes all day. I can see why they would say the more spoiled a man is, the harder it is to follow the path of God. You wouldn't really need God if you were treated like one yourself, but as for the poor who have to work to death just to survive, believing God and having hope would be very useful to them. My point was that taking the bible literally can backfire, the rights and wrongs of capitalism & the American Dream was just my way to highlight it (using that passage).

Exactly, taking the bible (or any religious text) literally is dangerous. My favourite passage to quote to people who take the text literally is; ...which basically declares the American Dream of working hard and getting rich to be immoral. Do I believe that being rich is wrong - no - but that quote is always a good argument ended in these discussions. [/hide] The Eye Of The Needle was literally a passage way, archway, I think in rome. I can see how people today can look at it in a different way/ it can have a different meaning. http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea ... f-a-needle

Ordered:

AMEN! Not that I necessarily agree with the flaming on the list topics but helps to read the whole thread. I saw people getting flamed for seemingly no reason, so i figured id go trollin to get to the bottom of this. :P I see now so I will see if I can get the pm topic stickified and officlized.

Teenagers. Kids are ten and below. Adult is 18 and up. Got it? -.- What are 11 & 12 year olds then?

Half this thread smells of Bloodsport or Fight Club or some weird hybrid of the two... ...with a touch of Enter the Dragon.

Is it just me or have people in this thread been posting way too many films?

What more can you do (I assume now cockpit wise) before they can't even see the track? If you can provide perhaps a graphic design then okay, but I really think the F1s are designed well. That's my point, there is little more that can be done to protect somebody in an F1 car. They're designed perfectly for what the do -go fast (they're basically upside planes). My point was that because they're designed so perfectly for speed (with an open cockpit) there is always a small opportunity that a driver's head or neck can be hit in a freak incident like this. I didn't mean that they were designed badly, just that there is always a possibility of a fluke accident like Massa's.

You might consider it an old school style but it isn't, it's lazy modern street rhyming over modern Southern beats. Those points in itself doesn't make it a bad album (Birdman's lack of ability does that ;) ) but there is no way that any mixture of those rhymes and Mannie Fresh's beats can ever be considered old school. If you think that is an old school style, then I'd say listen to some Grandmaster Flash, some Kurtis Blow and some Shugerhill Gang and then compare and contrast. That all being said, I quite like some of Mannie Fresh's beat but not with Birdman or Mannie Fresh rapping on them. I don't mean all this as a flame but there just comes a point in a discussion where you go from 'difference of opinion' to just being wrong - you my friend are in the latter - I know because I've been there myself before.

The only way they could be considered old school rappers is if you were born sometime last week. Plus, anyone who even considers Birdman a rapper is marked down in my book - the man just can't rap. Edit: Best album of 09? It wasn't even the best album of June (wasn't as good as AZ's album or Mos Def's to start with).

There's little more you can do to protect F1 drivers, the very nature of the F1 car leaves the head and neck prone and that will always leave a possibility that a driver can be seriously injured. According to the news channels, the bit of Barrichello's suspension broke through the visor, hit Massa just above his eye (which I presume would be the brow area) and fractured the skull. He supposedly has had an operation and is stable. If it did hit him on the brow rather than the eye socket then he should have a better chance as that area is one of the skull's thicker areas. He also has to be thankful that the helmet technology has improved so much, he would certainly have died from a similar debris impact in years gone by. It's odd that these things happen in two's. Those old enough to have even a vague memory of 1994 will remember how Roland Ratzenberger and Ayrton Senna both died at Imola in horror crashes. In fact, Ratzenberger died in qualifying and after they got Senna out of his car after Senna's crash, they found a folded up Austrian flag that he was going to unfold as a tribute to Ratzenberger.

A museum of Welsh history that's surrounded by sheep, it won't be breaking down anyone's preconceptions of Wales then :P .

Instead of saying that The Beatles changed music as a whole it's more accurate to say that they changed popular music. We don't talk about the bands that started Skiffle for that very reason, it hasn't become a facet of popular music. Whether or not they created the innovations to which they're credited is irrelevant in the discussion about their legacy, what is important is that The Beatles are the band that brought these things to the mainstream. If people hear something new from a band that they haven't heard before, that band will get the credit even if there were others who did those things before.

Plus if that attitude is as prevailent in real life as it appears to be on these forums, it is more than likely that they'll struggle to get jobs that they are capable of doing and willing to do anyway.

The problem in the UK is that everyone can and will use the George Best argument when it comes to liver transplants. Best got a transplant despite being a long term alcoholic who continued to drink after his transplant until he died. If I was the guy in the case mentioned, I'd be asking why Best was able to get a transplant and I wasn't - the only difference is that Best was older and was famous.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

The main problem is that doctors will only go to Private companies for employment. The government pays for their education (around 100,000$ CAD for a general doc) and they go off either to private Canadian companies or to the US. It creates a huge money deficit and a shortage of general doctors, because specialists in Canada are still relatively well payed. I agree, that would be a problem which is why any government funded scheme wouldf have to ensure that doctors were paid a competative wage to discourage them jumping ship. Additionally, you could add a minimum service system similar to what the military does when they pay your way through college/university.

I don't see why both public and private medical care can't work side by side. People still have the choice to go private for an improved service while those who can't afford it can stay on the minimum public healthcare scheme. That way it is still a two tier system - those who can pay for the extras and those who can't which is better than having a system whereby; those who can pay will pay and those who can't pay will have to hope they're near a free clinic or hope for the best. Access to healthcare should be a fundamental human right in my opinion, some things are more important than the almighty dollar and the ideals of capitalism. I hate many things about the UK but we can be proud that we have the NHS, it is probably the country's crowning achievement of the last 100 years. It is comforting to know that if I pass out in the street I can and will be taken to the nearest hospital and treated for my condition without the need for a 'wallet biopsy' (a disgusting euphemism in my opinion) in the ambulance. Is the NHS perfect? Far from it but it is still a remarkable achievement.

Regardless of whether he did enough time or not, I think people should be allowed to earn a living and be brought back into society after they serve their time. Don't get me wrong, I find what he did detestable and I think his sentence was a bit lenient but he had no real control over how long he went in for and I think that once your time is done you should be allowed to re-enter society in a meaningful way. I think he should be allowed to earn a living doing what he did best. Of course, if he re-offends that is a different matter.

I think that was the season that started on ITV 2 last night (I've lost track of the season number). It's irritating that they gave the new season little publicity on ITV 2, I just stumbled across it last night.

Yeah but coherence is something that should be expected in a film regardless of who it is aimed at and regardless of the intention of the film. Of course some will deliberately alter the structure to give some sort of effect. Sorry, I know I'm off topic now because I'm not even referring to this film specifically, more of a general point.

Oh god. Not another lil wayne album. :wall: Tha Carter 3 was definitely best rap album of the year last year. Had so many good songs lol, but the two singles he released for his new album weren't the greatest, so idk. It sold well but it was mediocre at best, full of forgettable songs.