vortexring

The big bang has nothing to do with evolution. The ID nonsense that people are trying to get introduced into biology classes is directly to do with evolution. I thought you weren't talking about science classes. Since you are, what do you suggest? At the start of each year should the teacher declare "By the way kids, some people think that some kind of god might have created the whole universe. Now on to what we do know..." Sounds reasonable. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I'm about to go for my dinner - cheers for that. Still, in an infinite universe, anything that can happen will happen. . . 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

C'mon Marg, your regurgitation of official policy is unbecoming. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I agree most concepts of ID don't belong in the science class, but what caused or created the Big Bang? As Kallend once said/re-quoted; 'In an infinite universe, anything that can happen will happen.' Can some form of ID happen? Could it have put into place the conditions for the Big Bang? (Was there in actual fact, a 'Big Bang' as we understand it today?) As far as I'm aware, nobody fully understands the cause of the Big Bang. . . until it's cause can be fully understood the possibility of ID being responsible remain valid, as per ID being responsible for the initiation of our evolution. It isn't a subject so easily dismissed as it's so ingrained into humanity. Just as equally it can't be entirely ignored in a science class. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

What basis? The one you misunderstood? I didn't mention a science class, or any type of class for that matter. And sure, why not teach that people once thought the earth to be flat - where did you find out?

A person with such a belief would be a fool. Having jumped with Muslims in Jordan, their belief was more fatalistic. Quite interesting too; canopy deployments at 10000ft, and not bothering to steer perfectly steerable canopies, which led to long drives into the desert, and a number of avoidable collisions too. Poor training and inexperience, yes, but also a large degree of fatalism. Keeping with the posts context, surely the concepts of ID and evolution should be taught with the conclusion being up to the student regarding his or her belief? I expect most to believe in evolution. But what of those who stubbornly continue to believe in a God of some form or other? Why would they - have they some kind of flaw in their character? Sure, let them believe whatever they wish, but perhaps it might be of interest to consider why such people believe? What if they're far more intelligent and educated than all of us here on SC, yet still believe? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

What I've seen/not seen is neither here nor there regarding this topic; but do you now think the gas pipelines are no longer a/the priority? Perhaps more importantly, do you think they ever were a priority in some form or other post 9/11? One could easily believe the gas pipelines to be a non-issue. Haven't heard much about them from official channels have we? Perhaps that's what's making me feel cynical. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Gas pipeline links: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2608713.stm And especially: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1644813.stm Or am I just being cynical. . .? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

With whoever impliments and actions the policies. But culpabilty is blame.(?) Also, I disagree to a certain extent with your last paragraph. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I'm a little surprised more people haven't voted yes, it would bother them. It would certainly bother me to some extent, naturally depending on numerous other factors regarding the candidate. However, if the candidate ticked all the right boxes, and it was a choice of either him or Tony Blair. . . I doubt the UK/USA is ready for a Muslim leader yet. It'd be as unlikely as Obama becoming POTUS in the Fifties. Still, I read in a recent publication a poll for potentially worse possible Presidents than Dubya. The clear winner, by a large margin, was Satan! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

No shit Sherlock. . . You might want to reconsider 'Nothing is being compromised'. I've nothing more to say on the matter. If you've any questions regarding this, anything you're not quite sure about, speak to your CoC. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Fuck my old boots. Really!? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Guys, is this really the place to be talking about such subjects publically? Screw the nut. Talk about it by PM if necessary. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

The US not having official diplomatic relations with the Taliban doesn't necessarily mean there aren't any negotiations. I'd imagine the ultimate strategic goal of the negotiations would be to enable stabiltity to prevail in the country in order to build gas pipelines. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I'm sure most are aware negotiations have already happened and are happening now. So what would be your solution Marg? Negotiations are unavoidable. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

What goes around comes around. Whether you believe in God or not, you have to 'screw the nut', otherwise. . .

Your lowering of age isn't that logical. If the speed limits 70mph, why not 80mph, and so on. You have to draw a line eventually. Of course, I do recognize 18 being a reasonable minimum age to vote. The reasoning I have for lowering the age to 16 is to simply increase the electorate, as I feel as many people as possible should vote - and 16 year olds are quite capable of making an informed decision in this regard. It isn't a big deal really. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Having 5 year olds vote would be ridiculous. What's wrong with lowering the voting age from 18 to 16? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Depends on the reasons causing the apathy. If you consider the increasingly high wages British politicians award themselves, their increasing lack of work, the increasing length of their holidays, their efforts to increase their allowances, the increasing amount of 'scandals', and so on, an increasing amount of voters decide to no longer encourage them by voting. An increasing amount of British voters view their politicians as nothing but a bunch of scumbags and refuse to involve themselves in the voting process. This highlights an issue but doesn't do much to address it. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

doing fine up to the compulsory bit. citizens have to meet halfway and at least indicate a willingness to exercise their wish to vote. The reason I believe it should be compulsive is more pertinent to the apathy amongst the electorate in the UK in recent years. I've heard numbers of people voting recently in the US as being as high as 132 million. At the very least, there has been a remarkable turnout. Wonder why, eh? If there is apathy amongst the general electorate, you'll find only the more extreme people voting. Perhaps that's not quite the right word to use, but I'm sure you get my drift, and the unsaid implications. As to the age of 16? I feel it's essential that 'everyone' should be able to vote, no matter what your colour, race, intelligence, etc. If your 16 and not bothered with further education, you leave school. You get a job. As soon as your of school leaving age you should be able to vote. I would think anyone against such an idea to be of an arrogant & patronising character. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Yeah, you respect the dead Ivans so well you're now happy to crack jokes a couple of sentences later. . . 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Simple. All people of a nation above the age of 16 should be eligible if they wish for a fair process. And their vote would be compulsive too. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Oh really - then I say to you; STFU about your topic. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

You're so right! The honesty of Bush is remarkable, and with all the terrorists we've now killed...well, what is there left to say? Mission accomplished right? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I find it wrong we have to state to officialdom our ethnicity. I suppose as a white European it's easy for me to say that, but all the same, your ethnicity shouldn't matter unless of course you've Government figures to attain. But shouldn't we be past all that now? Isn't it obvious it doesn't matter what your ethnicity may be in regards to being qualified for whatever? Still, there is a tongue-in-cheek statement in regards to getting a job in various UK organizations: If your a gay, black, disabled and dyslexic then your in.....if your heterosexual, white, and in full mental and phsyical health, forget it. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'