Ouch: Dumb counter to an intelligent question. The onus is on both sets of believers, both Christians and Atheists to prove both existence and non-existence if that is what they believe. Both are really dumb stands in a world where is no proof of both of these faiths.
The only logical stance is Agnostic but you have not heard of that most probably.
Ouch: Oh! I didn't realise that you had met me. Where was it? I don't remember you.
I tend not to hang around people who live in a cliched world with limited original thinking ie 'Boomer'
Can you point me to where there is definitive proof of no god?
Dumb argument used by intellectuall illiterates.
The onus of proof is on people making the claim a thing called God exists. . Rookie.
I don’t need to prove something doesn’t exist. That is on you, if you decide to believe in it especially if it is invisible. Like your climate change rhetoric, no one is asking you to prove it doesn’t exist.
Pity didn’t realise that you were trying to shift the conversation away from the (nonexistent) prejudice towards Christians in Rugby to the (irrelevant) anti Christian agenda at the ABC.
You have to slow down a bit and make it a bit clearer to normal people when you are jumping from one conspiracy theory to another.
Yeah, but other quality analysts like Rod Kafer and Nick Bishop asserted the Wallabies would be a stronger team without him. I think people got too swept up with his attacking prowess, didn’t notice how big were his weaknesses.
Well some people had him at 15 in their team of the decade, so he must have have been ok. But you’re right, he did leave a lot to be desired in kicking, defence, and being a decent human.
piru: Have you been to uni? It seems you are struggling with a simple logical line.
your quote is followed by " They are not, as a group they are sneered at by an intellectual elite who have some understanding of philosophy but not enough to understand the basis of religious faith."
If you think that rugby players are an intellectual elite then you played a different game to me.
Procreation is a choice, not a requirement. The Earth would be just fine (better perhaps) if humans died out.
Being hetro is not a requirement for procreation. Just a procreation is not a requirement for being hetro.
Oh, so subscription to a way of life that precludes the basic human requirement for procreation is somehow equal to one that enables survival of the species? An unpalatable truth?
Live and let live is fine.
What's not fine is vilifying others then acting all hurt when they don't "get the joke"
What you are mistaking for persecution is these groups finally being treated as worthwhile by society.
GH:
"The idea that Christians are excluded from rugby union is utterly absurd."
SMI:
"Gray: I never said anything of the kind"
Also SMI
I assume you assume that Christians are included? They are not as a group
Who cares what Pocock says? He’s moving overseas, he had an ordinary RWC, he took 12mths off (on full pay – but that’s RAs fault) to hug trees, & somehow he’s now qualified to comment on Folaus’ court case. Pocock should not comment on RA or WBs matters, as he’s decided to move on from this country.
There are a few ways that you're wrong, let's go through them
- Pocock was never paid not to play - he certainly wasn't 'on full pay' as you pretend to believe
- Pocock didn't comment on Folau's case
- Pocock is more than qualified to comment on what it takes to be a Wallaby captain
Thanks for playing
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Ouch: Dumb counter to an intelligent question. The onus is on both sets of believers, both Christians and Atheists to prove both existence and non-existence if that is what they believe. Both are really dumb stands in a world where is no proof of both of these faiths. The only logical stance is Agnostic but you have not heard of that most probably.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Ouch: Oh! I didn't realise that you had met me. Where was it? I don't remember you. I tend not to hang around people who live in a cliched world with limited original thinking ie 'Boomer'
Ouch
Roar Rookie
Can you point me to where there is definitive proof of no god? Dumb argument used by intellectuall illiterates. The onus of proof is on people making the claim a thing called God exists. . Rookie.
Ouch
Roar Rookie
If you think that rugby players are an intellectual elite then you played a different game to me. They are. It just you who is not.
Andy
Guest
I don’t need to prove something doesn’t exist. That is on you, if you decide to believe in it especially if it is invisible. Like your climate change rhetoric, no one is asking you to prove it doesn’t exist.
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
Pity didn’t realise that you were trying to shift the conversation away from the (nonexistent) prejudice towards Christians in Rugby to the (irrelevant) anti Christian agenda at the ABC. You have to slow down a bit and make it a bit clearer to normal people when you are jumping from one conspiracy theory to another.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Yeah, but other quality analysts like Rod Kafer and Nick Bishop asserted the Wallabies would be a stronger team without him. I think people got too swept up with his attacking prowess, didn’t notice how big were his weaknesses.
GibbonRib
Roar Rookie
Well some people had him at 15 in their team of the decade, so he must have have been ok. But you’re right, he did leave a lot to be desired in kicking, defence, and being a decent human.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Ouch Rookie, you have made a mess of your learners pants again!
stillmissit
Roar Guru
piru: Have you been to uni? It seems you are struggling with a simple logical line. your quote is followed by " They are not, as a group they are sneered at by an intellectual elite who have some understanding of philosophy but not enough to understand the basis of religious faith." If you think that rugby players are an intellectual elite then you played a different game to me.
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
He is the Wallabies Captain In Exile!
Perthstayer
Roar Rookie
Procreation is a requirement of the human race. But there are enough humans to accommodate those that don't want to or can't procreate.
Paul D
Roar Rookie
Procreation is a choice, not a requirement. The Earth would be just fine (better perhaps) if humans died out. Being hetro is not a requirement for procreation. Just a procreation is not a requirement for being hetro.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Yes. That’s equal. If you consider somebody not equal because they are not heterosexual, that’s not “less than absolute fawning”, that’s bigotry.
enoughisenough
Roar Rookie
Oh, so subscription to a way of life that precludes the basic human requirement for procreation is somehow equal to one that enables survival of the species? An unpalatable truth?
piru
Roar Rookie
Live and let live is fine. What's not fine is vilifying others then acting all hurt when they don't "get the joke" What you are mistaking for persecution is these groups finally being treated as worthwhile by society.
piru
Roar Rookie
GH: "The idea that Christians are excluded from rugby union is utterly absurd." SMI: "Gray: I never said anything of the kind" Also SMI I assume you assume that Christians are included? They are not as a group
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Is he? He was poor to terrible at passing, kicking, defending and at not turning over the ball. He was a great runner and under the high ball.
piru
Roar Rookie
Agreed - a scumbag we don't need in our game
piru
Roar Rookie
Who cares what Pocock says? He’s moving overseas, he had an ordinary RWC, he took 12mths off (on full pay – but that’s RAs fault) to hug trees, & somehow he’s now qualified to comment on Folaus’ court case. Pocock should not comment on RA or WBs matters, as he’s decided to move on from this country. There are a few ways that you're wrong, let's go through them - Pocock was never paid not to play - he certainly wasn't 'on full pay' as you pretend to believe - Pocock didn't comment on Folau's case - Pocock is more than qualified to comment on what it takes to be a Wallaby captain Thanks for playing