Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
Just looking at the targets set by each sport for Team GB atheletes, rowing, despite being the #1 country, despite those golds etc, the blazers set a target of 6-8 medals!
That's with a surprise silver in the women's eights as well, we didn't do well in the sculls which hurt our total.
A George Osborne style punishment beating on the Ergos when they get back home!
Having bet each way on Trott for SPOTY at 16-1, I've now had £4 each way on Dujardin at 100-1. Wiggins won with just over 30% of the vote in 2012; I reckon it could easily be sub 30 this time around.
Neither's cricket, but the rest of us put up with it
It's as much a sport as hurling hammers around the place. And it has music.
We really ought to combine it with other sports: synchronized underwater horse dressage where the riders have to vault over the "horse" with a pole before getting on the horse. That sort of thing......
If we could teach horses to ride bikes we'd win every gold going for ever.....
Oh I dont mind the dressage in the least, but cricket should be banned.
Horse dancing is impressive. And it is a real sport - Xenophon, William Cavendish and Bolsover Castle say so.
Spaghetti Western theme music, or Harrison Birtwhistle, should be mandatory.
And lets bring in those Belgian 6 day cycle races.
Dressage is a pitiful pathetic spectacle and certainly no sport.
They should end the species discrimination and have musical canine freestyle as an Olympic sport. We'd be a shoe-in for Gold with all of our Crufts champions.
I did once consider making a formal complaint to the Commission for Racial Equality about the dangerous dogs act pojnting out that if you legislate to discriminate between different races of dogs you have established the principle that such discrimination is acceptable in law and it is then a small step to extend such dyscrimination to other species including homo sapiens.
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
Such an agreement is not in conflict with English law. (It may also not be enforceable but that's another matter.)
But if a "pretend court" rules that a marriage is terminated and that a woman loses her children and gets no provision from her ex-husband when English law provides otherwise, then that woman and those children - English citizens and therefore entitled to the protection of English law - are deprived of their rights. The law is not equal for all. English law is no longer sovereign. And the state's writ no longer runs. But not on a geographical basis but on the basis of religion. We end up with the sort of millet system found in the Ottoman Empire.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Tesco is advertising its meat as all being British (or Irish) ie not foreign.
This is another example showing that although RoI has seceded from the UK it is still regarded as the same country in many ways - just as East Germany was in West Germany.
The weekly update on my average daily tracking poll:
Hillary 46.5 -0.5 Trump 40.5 -0.5
Since the beginning.
Hillary 46.5 47 44 Trump 40.5 41 41
Hillary has been hitting a ceiling of sorts at just bellow 47% since about August 1st. Trump has been scraping at a floor of sorts at just bellow 41% since about August 5th.
I can't call Trump dead yet, just because he has stabilized 6 points behind, however I still don't give much of a chance. A 10% chance for him seems OK, given the problems with his mouth, his non existent campaign, and his legal troubles, we all know that if Trump closes the gap he will shoot himself on the foot once more.
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
Such an agreement is not in conflict with English law. (It may also not be enforceable but that's another matter.)
But if a "pretend court" rules that a marriage is terminated and that a woman loses her children and gets no provision from her ex-husband when English law provides otherwise, then that woman and those children - English citizens and therefore entitled to the protection of English law - are deprived of their rights. The law is not equal for all. English law is no longer sovereign. And the state's writ no longer runs. But not on a geographical basis but on the basis of religion. We end up with the sort of millet system found in the Ottoman Empire.
Yes it is a fine line. A woman losing her children is a judgement made by a UK court of law and hence "UK law". But the couple are only there in the first place because they could not come to an agreement otherwise, or via another judgement mechanism (an aunt, or best friend, or sharia court for example), both of which would be perfectly legal, no?
Edit: not sure about who can or can't terminate a marriage if it is enacted in law in the UK. Presumably not a Sharia court, or anyone else, if that is also what you meant?
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries (It is what made everybody so suspicious of Merion Jones, everybody in her training group was popped, she changes training group, they are all then popped).
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
Because the vast majority of people still subscribe to the idea of "their country".
He gets most thing right, 'cepting his choice of political party to stand for, but in the scheme of things he gets a pass on that also.
Since the core of his beliefs is liberalism, his choice of party is both appropriate and inevitable. That liberalism is having such a hard time right now is another matter entirely.
Liberalism is having such a hard time right now because it has become the dominant philosophy in the west for long enough for all its faults to become apparent and the faults with alternatives move out of living memory.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
States take it too far. But individuals only get funding that helps them do so well because their own state supports them (bar the occasional magnificent freak of nature). Nationalism has been among the most powerful influencers for centuries now, even occasionally beating off the old stalwart, religion, and it can be very useful even if it also goes too far sometimes.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
It's only a bad thing when it undermines fundamental rights that accrue to all British citizens.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
Some Leavers need to take a good long look at themselves in the mirror.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
Ciserable Munt.
You do realise Munt = Ni**er in Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia)
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
maybe it's because only governments can bankroll the investment needed.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
I don't think he is "just" bitter, actually. I think he actually genuinely can't grasp that most people have an affinity to their country and get a sense of belonging from it and a sense of pride when it succeeds.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
States take it too far. But individuals only get funding that helps them do so well because their own state supports them (bar the occasional magnificent freak of nature). Nationalism has been among the most powerful influencers for centuries now, even occasionally beating off the old stalwart, religion, and it can be very useful even if it also goes too far sometimes.
If we competed on Religious grounds Catholics would win most of the medals.
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
It's only a bad thing when it undermines fundamental rights that accrue to all British citizens.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
Indeed, said contract would be governed by English contract law not by the court of PB with myself presiding as judge, jury and executioner (despite wanting that role from time to time!).
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
It's only a bad thing when it undermines fundamental rights that accrue to all British citizens.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
I think the position of women in certain cultures is the key issue here. Because a trite answer would be to say: they don't have to sign up to it, but of course often women have no option but to sign up and adhere to eg. sharia law (I have no idea of any of the provisions of sharia, btw).
But (and it is a huge and theoretical but), if there was free agency by everyone to sign up to it or not, then there would be much less of an issue, so hence more of a symptom than a cause.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
Some Leavers need to take a good long look at themselves in the mirror.
You say you're happy for people to enjoy it and in the very next sentence you're shitting over people who enjoy it. Bitter, as I said.
Yes it is a fine line. A woman losing her children is a judgement made by a UK court of law and hence "UK law". But the couple are only there in the first place because they could not come to an agreement otherwise, or via another judgement mechanism (an aunt, or best friend, or sharia court for example), both of which would be perfectly legal, no?
Edit: not sure about who can or can't terminate a marriage if it is enacted in law in the UK. Presumably not a Sharia court, or anyone else, if that is also what you meant?
No - sharia courts are not fine. Sharia law has been declared to be incompatible with the ECHR. It should have no place in our legal system.
For a marriage to be legal in this country it has to comply with the requirements of English law. A divorce similarly. And there are rules making provision for ex-spouses and children. Sharia law is not some form of private arbitration or an attempt to come to some amicable agreement which can then be blessed by the courts. It is an attempt to oust the jurisdiction of English law on the basis of religious law. It is an attempt to deprive English citizens (almost invariably women) of their rights under the law. It is offensive to the concept of equality under the law. If the law's writ does not run everywhere in a country, then social cohesion is harmed.
So-called sharia courts have been allowed to grow because we have not had the balls to say that in this country English law's jurisdiction does not depend on a person's religion. Any more than it should depend on a person's sex or ethnic origin or any other characteristic. We have been far too cringing before an attempt to impose the patriarchal/religious norms of very different societies on English citizens. Why should a girl's rights depend on whether her granny was born in Pakistan rather than Woking?
Groups and individuals competing for a "team" (be it a club or country) is what gives many sports its huge following.
Even in individual sports like golf, the Ryder Cup is massive...and you see how much the players genuinely absolutely pumped for that event and the fans talk about the great Ryder Cups I think more so than individual majors.
Neither's cricket, but the rest of us put up with it
It's as much a sport as hurling hammers around the place. And it has music.
We really ought to combine it with other sports: synchronized underwater horse dressage where the riders have to vault over the "horse" with a pole before getting on the horse. That sort of thing......
If we could teach horses to ride bikes we'd win every gold going for ever.....
Oh I dont mind the dressage in the least, but cricket should be banned.
Horse dancing is impressive. And it is a real sport - Xenophon, William Cavendish and Bolsover Castle say so.
Spaghetti Western theme music, or Harrison Birtwhistle, should be mandatory.
And lets bring in those Belgian 6 day cycle races.
Dressage is a pitiful pathetic spectacle and certainly no sport.
It is now that we have a gold!
You might as well propose factory farming as a sport and give the gold to whoever's troupe of chickens produces the most eggs in a day. At least there is some merit in producing a lot of eggs.
Chris Langridge and Marcus Ellis (ranked 22nd in the world) haven beat Japan's Hiroyuki Endo and Kenichi Hayakawa to become the first Britons to reach an Olympic badminton semi-final
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
You are disparaging the idea of country. Again.
Not hard to see why Alistair was pro Remain. Liberals want to see states abolished and replaced with supranational entities, this is the root of the Libdems fanatical enthusiasm for the EU - it was a vehicle to dismantle our country and its institutions.
Yes it is a fine line. A woman losing her children is a judgement made by a UK court of law and hence "UK law". But the couple are only there in the first place because they could not come to an agreement otherwise, or via another judgement mechanism (an aunt, or best friend, or sharia court for example), both of which would be perfectly legal, no?
Edit: not sure about who can or can't terminate a marriage if it is enacted in law in the UK. Presumably not a Sharia court, or anyone else, if that is also what you meant?
No - sharia courts are not fine. Sharia law has been declared to be incompatible with the ECHR. It should have no place in our legal system.
For a marriage to be legal in this country it has to comply with the requirements of English law. A divorce similarly. And there are rules making provision for ex-spouses and children. Sharia law is not some form of private arbitration or an attempt to come to some amicable agreement which can then be blessed by the courts. It is an attempt to oust the jurisdiction of English law on the basis of religious law. It is an attempt to deprive English citizens (almost invariably women) of their rights under the law. It is offensive to the concept of equality under the law. If the law's writ does not run everywhere in a country, then social cohesion is harmed.
So-called sharia courts have been allowed to grow because we have not had the balls to say that in this country English law's jurisdiction does not depend on a person's religion. Any more than it should depend on a person's sex or ethnic origin or any other characteristic. We have been far too cringing before an attempt to impose the patriarchal/religious norms of very different societies on English citizens. Why should a girl's rights depend on whether her granny was born in Pakistan rather than Woking?
By the same measure, neither should Beth Din. It can also have very egregious results.
Groups and individuals competing for a "team" (be it a club or country) is what gives many sports its huge following. Even in individual sports like golf, the Ryder Cup is massive...and you see how much the players genuinely absolutely pumped for that event.
I don't know why we can't have an Olympic jockeys tournament on the model of the Shergar Cup or simply get 15 equally rated horses and a jockey from each country - Silvestre de Souza for Brazil, Frankie Dettori for Italy, Jim Crowley for the UK and run a single race.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Liberal Trolling Alert.
Just another person who lacks any great love for their country.
Groups and individuals competing for a "team" (be it a club or country) is what gives many sports its huge following. Even in individual sports like golf, the Ryder Cup is massive...and you see how much the players genuinely absolutely pumped for that event.
I don't know why we can't have an Olympic jockeys tournament on the model of the Shergar Cup or simply get 15 equally rated horses and a jockey from each country - Silvestre de Souza for Brazil, Frankie Dettori for Italy, Jim Crowley for the UK and run a single race.
There are lots of "strange" omission from the Olympics. Squash for instance. We have wiff waff, tennis, badminton, but no squash.
Yes it is a fine line. A woman losing her children is a judgement made by a UK court of law and hence "UK law". But the couple are only there in the first place because they could not come to an agreement otherwise, or via another judgement mechanism (an aunt, or best friend, or sharia court for example), both of which would be perfectly legal, no?
Edit: not sure about who can or can't terminate a marriage if it is enacted in law in the UK. Presumably not a Sharia court, or anyone else, if that is also what you meant?
No - sharia courts are not fine. Sharia law has been declared to be incompatible with the ECHR. It should have no place in our legal system.
For a marriage to be legal in this country it has to comply with the requirements of English law. A divorce similarly. And there are rules making provision for ex-spouses and children. Sharia law is not some form of private arbitration or an attempt to come to some amicable agreement which can then be blessed by the courts. It is an attempt to oust the jurisdiction of English law on the basis of religious law. It is an attempt to deprive English citizens (almost invariably women) of their rights under the law. It is offensive to the concept of equality under the law. If the law's writ does not run everywhere in a country, then social cohesion is harmed.
So-called sharia courts have been allowed to grow because we have not had the balls to say that in this country English law's jurisdiction does not depend on a person's religion. Any more than it should depend on a person's sex or ethnic origin or any other characteristic. We have been far too cringing before an attempt to impose the patriarchal/religious norms of very different societies on English citizens. Why should a girl's rights depend on whether her granny was born in Pakistan rather than Woking?
Yes the women thing is critical. It is a failing (IMO) of those cultures. I am no cultural relativist but at the same time, if it is a cultural attribute then assuming the woman didn't come to the UK for emancipation, the fact that it continues here is not something we can do anything about. We can legislate, indeed do legislate against discrimination but if we have immigrants who import this aspect of their culture to the UK then I'm not sure what we can do.
Must dash, v irritating so my reply more garbled than usual; not taking the time to say what I want more succinctly.
Will try to pick it all up later this evening apologies.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries (It is what made everybody so suspicious of Merion Jones, everybody in her training group was popped, she changes training group, they are all then popped).
Think you mean Marion Jones (?)
Merion Jones is the 'journalist'.
The idea of an EU Team is quite amusing. Could this be another one like Universities, where accordnig to the league tables we outdo most of the rest together :-).
Euro Informationen which works for the European Commission and European Parliament has put together a medal table for the Olympics with the EU ranked first. They really are cheeky bastards pinching all our medals.
Neither's cricket, but the rest of us put up with it
It's as much a sport as hurling hammers around the place. And it has music.
We really ought to combine it with other sports: synchronized underwater horse dressage where the riders have to vault over the "horse" with a pole before getting on the horse. That sort of thing......
If we could teach horses to ride bikes we'd win every gold going for ever.....
Oh I dont mind the dressage in the least, but cricket should be banned.
Horse dancing is impressive. And it is a real sport - Xenophon, William Cavendish and Bolsover Castle say so.
Spaghetti Western theme music, or Harrison Birtwhistle, should be mandatory.
And lets bring in those Belgian 6 day cycle races.
Dressage is a pitiful pathetic spectacle and certainly no sport.
It is now that we have a gold!
You might as well propose factory farming as a sport and give the gold to whoever's troupe of chickens produces the most eggs in a day. At least there is some merit in producing a lot of eggs.
Monty Python came up with some interesting Olympic Sports in the Silly Olympics (I think this would cause Outrage if a TV show did it today):
He gets most thing right, 'cepting his choice of political party to stand for, but in the scheme of things he gets a pass on that also.
Since the core of his beliefs is liberalism, his choice of party is both appropriate and inevitable. That liberalism is having such a hard time right now is another matter entirely.
Liberalism is having such a hard time right now because it has become the dominant philosophy in the west for long enough for all its faults to become apparent and the faults with alternatives move out of living memory.
Liberalism is having a hard time because too many people who claim to be liberal are no such thing, do not appear to understand the principles they espouse and, at the first whiff of grapeshot, abandon them.
Who was it who said that a liberal is a man who won't even take his own side in an argument?
There are too many of those sort of liberals around and not enough of those who really understand the rights and freedoms which Western civilization has brought and how hard they had to be fought for and how hard they will continue to have to be fought for if they are to be maintained.
One of the current threats to Western liberalism - Islamism - is far more alike to previous challenges in the 20th century to liberalism (Communism, Nazism and Fascism) than its proponents or its opponents often allow. We should have enough of a memory of the consequences of those baleful movements not to be giving such a free pass to those groups who have a similar hatred of Western liberalism and a similar millennarial obsession with creating a perfect society, through blood, death and violence and hatred of scapegoated groups, usually involving Jews, amongst others.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries (It is what made everybody so suspicious of Merion Jones, everybody in her training group was popped, she changes training group, they are all then popped).
Think you mean Marion Jones (?)
Merion Jones is the 'journalist'.
The idea of an EU Team is quite amusing. Could this be another one like Universities, where accordnig to the league tables we outdo most of the rest together :-).
''Just another person who lacks any great love for their country.''
Even so, we have to be careful with patriotism. I have zero love for the one world order Davos elite, but equally I don't want to see old national tensions and rivalries return, especially with nations such as Germany and France.
Mr Meeks....a man more grumpy than Steve Redgarve finding he has not only been downgraded to coach but will also be sitting next to Jon Inverdale on a 22hr non-stop flight.
Mr Meeks....a man more grumpy than Steve Redgarve finding he has not only been downgraded to coach but will also be sitting next to Jon Inverdale on a 22hr non-stop flight.
Euro Informationen which works for the European Commission and European Parliament has put together a medal table for the Olympics with the EU ranked first. They really are cheeky bastards pinching all our medals.
www.medaltracker.eu/index.php?article_id=1
There is no way the combined EU would get that many medals as there is a limit on the number of entrants per country per event.
Euro Informationen which works for the European Commission and European Parliament has put together a medal table for the Olympics with the EU ranked first. They really are cheeky bastards pinching all our medals.
www.medaltracker.eu/index.php?article_id=1
I might do one for the Queen showing that all her Realms when combined are leading.
Mr Meeks....a man more grumpy than Steve Redgarve finding he has not only been downgraded to coach but will also be sitting next to Jon Inverdale on a 22hr non-stop flight.
Erm, I have ventured two opinions on this thread:
1) Live and let live - different people like different things. 2) Individual athletic performance should be judged on its own merits and that the focus on nationality for judging sporting prowess is unhealthy.
Anyone would have thought that I had spat on the Queen, given the reaction this has provoked.
Not hard to see why Alistair was pro Remain. Liberals want to see states abolished and replaced with supranational entities, this is the root of the Libdems fanatical enthusiasm for the EU - it was a vehicle to dismantle our country and its institutions.
You do realise repeating this absurd piffle ad nauseam doesn't make it true or accurate. This Lib Dem voted LEAVE and the only "fanatical enthusiasm" for the EU I saw was from Cameron and Osborne as they tried to save their own skins,
I've never met a Liberal who wants to dismantle our country - perhaps you have. Perhaps you'd prefer us too withdraw from the UN or NATO as supranational entities,
''Just another person who lacks any great love for their country.''
Even so, we have to be careful with patriotism. I have zero love for the one world order Davos elite, but equally I don't want to see old national tensions and rivalries return, especially with nations such as Germany and France.
Personally I think it is modern communications technology (electronic ommunication and vehicular) that has diffused this issue not the politicians.
Euro Informationen which works for the European Commission and European Parliament has put together a medal table for the Olympics with the EU ranked first. They really are cheeky bastards pinching all our medals.
www.medaltracker.eu/index.php?article_id=1
There is no way the combined EU would get that many medals as there is a limit on the number of entrants per country per event.
The EU wouldn't even enter; they would still be busy arguing with each other about the internal selection rules.
Mr Meeks....a man more grumpy than Steve Redgarve finding he has not only been downgraded to coach but will also be sitting next to Jon Inverdale on a 22hr non-stop flight.
Erm, I have ventured two opinions on this thread:
1) Live and let live - different people like different things. 2) Individual athletic performance should be judged on its own merits and that the focus on nationality for judging sporting prowess is unhealthy.
Anyone would have thought that I had spat on the Queen, given the reaction this has provoked.
Euro Informationen which works for the European Commission and European Parliament has put together a medal table for the Olympics with the EU ranked first. They really are cheeky bastards pinching all our medals.
www.medaltracker.eu/index.php?article_id=1
There is no way the combined EU would get that many medals as there is a limit on the number of entrants per country per event.
The EU wouldn't even enter; they would still be busy arguing with each other about the internal selection rules.
Going to be interesting to see this ideological test!
"Have you read the Art of the Deal ?" "Have you seen the Apprentice ?" "Have you bought Trump merchandise ?" "All those wearing a Make America Great Again hat, pass automatically"
He gets most thing right, 'cepting his choice of political party to stand for, but in the scheme of things he gets a pass on that also.
Since the core of his beliefs is liberalism, his choice of party is both appropriate and inevitable. That liberalism is having such a hard time right now is another matter entirely.
Liberalism is having such a hard time right now because it has become the dominant philosophy in the west for long enough for all its faults to become apparent and the faults with alternatives move out of living memory.
Liberalism is having a hard time because too many people who claim to be liberal are no such thing, do not appear to understand the principles they espouse and, at the first whiff of grapeshot, abandon them.
Who was it who said that a liberal is a man who won't even take his own side in an argument?
There are too many of those sort of liberals around and not enough of those who really understand the rights and freedoms which Western civilization has brought and how hard they had to be fought for and how hard they will continue to have to be fought for if they are to be maintained.
One of the current threats to Western liberalism - Islamism - is far more alike to previous challenges in the 20th century to liberalism (Communism, Nazism and Fascism) than its proponents or its opponents often allow. We should have enough of a memory of the consequences of those baleful movements not to be giving such a free pass to those groups who have a similar hatred of Western liberalism and a similar millennarial obsession with creating a perfect society, through blood, death and violence and hatred of scapegoated groups, usually involving Jews, amongst others.
One of the problems of being the dominant philosophy is that the majority claim to support it despite only paying lip service to it and twisting it to their own agenda at every opportunity.
Christianity had this problem when it was virtually compulsory in the west and is still working through the aftermath
Euro Informationen which works for the European Commission and European Parliament has put together a medal table for the Olympics with the EU ranked first. They really are cheeky bastards pinching all our medals.
www.medaltracker.eu/index.php?article_id=1
There is no way the combined EU would get that many medals as there is a limit on the number of entrants per country per event.
The EU wouldn't even enter; they would still be busy arguing with each other about the internal selection rules.
And a 20k page document on the team dress.
That would just be the abridged summary of the guidelines rather than the full rule book you talking about there.
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
It's only a bad thing when it undermines fundamental rights that accrue to all British citizens.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
Indeed, said contract would be governed by English contract law not by the court of PB with myself presiding as judge, jury and executioner (despite wanting that role from time to time!).
I did include rcs as well, so you don't get to grab all 3 hats!
But the issue with Sharia courts is that participants agree that the courts ruling is final, with no right of appeal to the UK courts. Who knows whether women agree to that without any moral suasion. I have my doubts. Even if they did, I think this is quite wrong: a right is a right is a right. If a court doesn't not abide by certain minimum standards then its rulings should have no validity in English law
Not hard to see why Alistair was pro Remain. Liberals want to see states abolished and replaced with supranational entities, this is the root of the Libdems fanatical enthusiasm for the EU - it was a vehicle to dismantle our country and its institutions.
You do realise repeating this absurd piffle ad nauseam doesn't make it true or accurate. This Lib Dem voted LEAVE and the only "fanatical enthusiasm" for the EU I saw was from Cameron and Osborne as they tried to save their own skins,
I've never met a Liberal who wants to dismantle our country - perhaps you have. Perhaps you'd prefer us too withdraw from the UN or NATO as supranational entities,
Roy Jenkins et al to name but a few.
I regard Cameron and Osborne as uber liberals. (note the small l).
The Conservative and (Liberal) Unionist Party is as much the successor of the old Liberal Party as the Lib Dems (Liberal Unionists and Nat Liberals
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
It's only a bad thing when it undermines fundamental rights that accrue to all British citizens.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
I think the position of women in certain cultures is the key issue here. Because a trite answer would be to say: they don't have to sign up to it, but of course often women have no option but to sign up and adhere to eg. sharia law (I have no idea of any of the provisions of sharia, btw).
But (and it is a huge and theoretical but), if there was free agency by everyone to sign up to it or not, then there would be much less of an issue, so hence more of a symptom than a cause.
The value of women's evidence was chosen deliberately as that's a key provision of Sharia law.
My view is that if a court doesn't not abide by certain minimum standards (e.g. equal treatment of witnesses) then its rulings should have no validity in English law
Mr Meeks....a man more grumpy than Steve Redgarve finding he has not only been downgraded to coach but will also be sitting next to Jon Inverdale on a 22hr non-stop flight.
Erm, I have ventured two opinions on this thread:
1) Live and let live - different people like different things. 2) Individual athletic performance should be judged on its own merits and that the focus on nationality for judging sporting prowess is unhealthy.
Anyone would have thought that I had spat on the Queen, given the reaction this has provoked.
But many people see the view that you expressed as being much in the same vein of wanting do do away with the Queen and all we consider dear in this country.
Mr Meeks....a man more grumpy than Steve Redgarve finding he has not only been downgraded to coach but will also be sitting next to Jon Inverdale on a 22hr non-stop flight.
Erm, I have ventured two opinions on this thread:
1) Live and let live - different people like different things. 2) Individual athletic performance should be judged on its own merits and that the focus on nationality for judging sporting prowess is unhealthy.
Anyone would have thought that I had spat on the Queen, given the reaction this has provoked.
But many people see the view that you expressed as being much in the same vein of wanting do do away with the Queen and all we consider dear in this country.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
You are disparaging the idea of country. Again.
You need serious remedial reading lessons.
"The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags"
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
It's only a bad thing when it undermines fundamental rights that accrue to all British citizens.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
I think the position of women in certain cultures is the key issue here. Because a trite answer would be to say: they don't have to sign up to it, but of course often women have no option but to sign up and adhere to eg. sharia law (I have no idea of any of the provisions of sharia, btw).
But (and it is a huge and theoretical but), if there was free agency by everyone to sign up to it or not, then there would be much less of an issue, so hence more of a symptom than a cause.
The value of women's evidence was chosen deliberately as that's a key provision of Sharia law.
My view is that if a court doesn't not abide by certain minimum standards (e.g. equal treatment of witnesses) then its rulings should have no validity in English law
Good points. Should we recognise the "annulment" of a marriage in Catholic law ? After all, a divorce should suffice whether the Church likes it or not.
''But many people see the view that you expressed as being much in the same vein of wanting do do away with the Queen and all we consider dear in this country. ''
That is partly because the queen has queened her socks off. We have been witness to a queening masterclass and think its normal because its all we've ever known.
It was not ever thus. Look at Charles I. In the 19th century there was a strong anti-monarchy under current, even at the height of British power and wealth.
There are so many animals the world would rather have dancing than horses.
Gorilla Dancing Vole Dancing Shark Dancing
It isn't dancing, in origin. It is a boring but necessary military discipline: if you want to parade your cavalry in neat lines the riders need to be able to nudge their horses sideways, backwards etc to get exactly into position. ("Dressage" = as in the command "by the right, dress!) Admittedly things have got a bit out of hand since then.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
You are disparaging the idea of country. Again.
You need serious remedial reading lessons.
"The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags"
Why is that disparaging the idea of country? I am disparaging the idea of celebrating sporting prowess along nationalist lines. Surely absolute sporting achievement is of more interest than the accident of their birth? Usain Bolt's achievements will be remembered for generations. Tom Daley's, I suspect, will not.
The things I love about the United Kingdom are nothing to do with athletes. I have cherished its openness, its tolerance of other views, its good humour, its phlegmatic undogmatic character. All of those things are in retreat now. Perhaps the United Kingdom is in retreat as well with them.
FPT Cyclefree ....."All good stuff. It does not deal with the problems caused by having people who think that sharia law should trump English law, for instance"
The very fact this is is even a topic of conversation shows how dramatically this country has been changed by a certain section of society. That section of course refuses to integrate as can be seen from the need or requirement for their own legal system at odds with the host.
Suppose you and I came together to formulate Mospping Law.
Its sole statute was that if I borrowed a pack of cards from you and didn't return it within 20 days I would owe you £5.
We both agreed to be bound by Mospping Law. How is this a bad thing or subverting the UK's social fabric?
It's only a bad thing when it undermines fundamental rights that accrue to all British citizens.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
I think the position of women in certain cultures is the key issue here. Because a trite answer would be to say: they don't have to sign up to it, but of course often women have no option but to sign up and adhere to eg. sharia law (I have no idea of any of the provisions of sharia, btw).
But (and it is a huge and theoretical but), if there was free agency by everyone to sign up to it or not, then there would be much less of an issue, so hence more of a symptom than a cause.
The value of women's evidence was chosen deliberately as that's a key provision of Sharia law.
My view is that if a court doesn't not abide by certain minimum standards (e.g. equal treatment of witnesses) then its rulings should have no validity in English law
Good points. Should we recognise the "annulment" of a marriage in Catholic law ? After all, a divorce should suffice whether the Church likes it or not.
Provided that the annulment is in addition to/incorporates a divorce then there is no problem with it. What matters is that individuals don't suffer a disadvantage. If they want something extra that makes them feel good about their situation then who cares?
Neither's cricket, but the rest of us put up with it
It's as much a sport as hurling hammers around the place. And it has music.
We really ought to combine it with other sports: synchronized underwater horse dressage where the riders have to vault over the "horse" with a pole before getting on the horse. That sort of thing......
If we could teach horses to ride bikes we'd win every gold going for ever.....
Oh I dont mind the dressage in the least, but cricket should be banned.
Horse dancing is impressive. And it is a real sport - Xenophon, William Cavendish and Bolsover Castle say so.
Spaghetti Western theme music, or Harrison Birtwhistle, should be mandatory.
And lets bring in those Belgian 6 day cycle races.
Dressage is a pitiful pathetic spectacle and certainly no sport.
It is now that we have a gold!
You might as well propose factory farming as a sport and give the gold to whoever's troupe of chickens produces the most eggs in a day. At least there is some merit in producing a lot of eggs.
Monty Python came up with some interesting Olympic Sports in the Silly Olympics (I think this would cause Outrage if a TV show did it today):
ttps://youtube.com/watch?v=UI8CWptOEm8
That's absolutely brilliant, not sure it would get past the TV PC police nowadays though!
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
You are disparaging the idea of country. Again.
You need serious remedial reading lessons.
"The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags"
Why is that disparaging the idea of country?
The fact you have to ask shows that you just don't get it, won't get it, can't get it, and explains why you lost in June.
2) Individual athletic performance should be judged on its own merits and that the focus on nationality for judging sporting prowess is unhealthy.
Once an athlete reaches the very highest levels they can transcend their nationality in a way - Usain Bolt and Roger Federer two of the best examples I guess.
Without British punters buying poor value lottery tickets/paying for Sky subs - Jason Kenny, Chris Hoy, Laura Trott and Sir Wiggo wouldn't have won nearly as much as they did in the cycling though. So nationality undoubtedly plays a part - although its smaller part than say which car you're in in an F1 race.
Could we have an olympics sans nationality ? It's an interesting question.
Personally I like to see the greatest potential performance always win a medal. Upsets are well and good but when the best in a sport performs the best they can, well that is more satisfying to me than watching someone win as a result of errors by others (Whitlock's pommel (Total superiority vs His floor (Great but ultimately winning due to other's mistakes)) a topical case in point.
Those who don't like particular sports are not obliged to watch them. I haven't yet watched a minute of the Olympics. I don't begrudge those who enjoy them their pleasure.
You won't have seen, therefore, that to mark the last Olympics where we are members of the EU they have created an "EU" team, of which we are part, instead of competing as GB. We're doing very well, btw.
The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags (of any kind). Why can't we celebrate the success of athletes wherever they come from?
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Nonsense. Cycling had team sponsored doping. There is suggest that it in a number of sports it is based around training groups, rather than countries.
Indeed, it was Team Armstrong that pushed the doping envelope in recent times and that wasn't based on nationality. Meeks is just bitter. As I wrote earlier today, Team GB have been part of Brexit.
Dear God, I write specifically that I am entirely happy for people to enjoy something I have no interest in and I get abused. I offer a completely innocuous view on a tangential subject and get told that I'm bitter about Brexit.
You are disparaging the idea of country. Again.
You need serious remedial reading lessons.
"The one thing I think is very silly about the Olympics is the concept of competing under flags"
Why is that disparaging the idea of country?
The fact you have to ask shows that you just don't get it, won't get it, can't get it, and explains why you lost in June.
Surely it is to be expected that a Europhile is confused about the importance of nation states.
''But many people see the view that you expressed as being much in the same vein of wanting do do away with the Queen and all we consider dear in this country. ''
That is partly because the queen has queened her socks off. We have been witness to a queening masterclass and think its normal because its all we've ever known.
It was not ever thus. Look at Charles I. In the 19th century there was a strong anti-monarchy under current, even at the height of British power and wealth.
I think her final gift to us might be to go on to the age of 110 and outlive Prince Charles handing over direct to Prince William.
I always find it slightly odd when people (rightly) complain about the evils of sharia law, and fail to mention the Beth Din.
The problem is this: the moment you have 'religious' laws some people will prefer them to the state's laws, and use them as an alternative, whist trying to make them the same. This puts a great deal of power in the hands of a few people (almost always men) who, whilst versed in religious law, may know little about the laws of the land.
In the case of state laws there is always the right of appeal; judges who make terrible decisions can have judgements overturned or even removed from their role. If I want a divorce, I can get eventually get one. If I want to get married, not special considerations are placed on me that would not be placed on my neighbour.
It is terrible that in this day and age a woman is placed in a position where she cannot get 'divorced' from her husband just because her husband does not want to divorce. It's ludicrous that the Jewish community see the only solution to this is to place adverts shaming the husbands.
So simply: get rid of both sharia courts and the Beth Din.
(There are problems with this when couples are married in other countries, and the obvious problems when people are insane enough to self-impose restrictions through religion)
Comments
Also defeated people suspended for drug cheating.
http://www.dressage-news.com/?p=1847
Gorilla Dancing
Vole Dancing
Shark Dancing
But if a "pretend court" rules that a marriage is terminated and that a woman loses her children and gets no provision from her ex-husband when English law provides otherwise, then that woman and those children - English citizens and therefore entitled to the protection of English law - are deprived of their rights. The law is not equal for all. English law is no longer sovereign. And the state's writ no longer runs. But not on a geographical basis but on the basis of religion. We end up with the sort of millet system found in the Ottoman Empire.
That form of nationalism has led directly to state-sponsored drugs cheats. I'm sure we would still have drugs cheats but I very much doubt that the problem would be anything like as bad.
Tesco is advertising its meat as all being British (or Irish) ie not foreign.
This is another example showing that although RoI has seceded from the UK it is still regarded as the same country in many ways - just as East Germany was in West Germany.
Hillary 46.5 -0.5
Trump 40.5 -0.5
Since the beginning.
Hillary 46.5 47 44
Trump 40.5 41 41
Hillary has been hitting a ceiling of sorts at just bellow 47% since about August 1st.
Trump has been scraping at a floor of sorts at just bellow 41% since about August 5th.
I can't call Trump dead yet, just because he has stabilized 6 points behind, however I still don't give much of a chance.
A 10% chance for him seems OK, given the problems with his mouth, his non existent campaign, and his legal troubles, we all know that if Trump closes the gap he will shoot himself on the foot once more.
Edit: not sure about who can or can't terminate a marriage if it is enacted in law in the UK. Presumably not a Sharia court, or anyone else, if that is also what you meant?
Always find the negative and relate it to "savage cuts"
'Brutal but effective': why Team GB has won so many Olympic medals
Sports that have propelled Britain up the medal table have received extra investment while others have had their funding cut altogether
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/happy-news-at-last-for-the-remain-camp/
Lots of bad landings ahead!
No Brits AFAIC see.
So Mospping's Law - although it is a contract, not a law so not a good example - was to state that imposition of said penalty would be decided by the MaxPBrcs council, but that any evidence submitted by a woman was of instrisically less value than that submitted by a man then that would be a problem
Some Leavers need to take a good long look at themselves in the mirror.
Helmer with the mandatory Kipper cap:
https://twitter.com/howarthm/status/473477154442051584
sames true of football world cup.
Ignite blue touchpaper.....
But (and it is a huge and theoretical but), if there was free agency by everyone to sign up to it or not, then there would be much less of an issue, so hence more of a symptom than a cause.
For a marriage to be legal in this country it has to comply with the requirements of English law. A divorce similarly. And there are rules making provision for ex-spouses and children. Sharia law is not some form of private arbitration or an attempt to come to some amicable agreement which can then be blessed by the courts. It is an attempt to oust the jurisdiction of English law on the basis of religious law. It is an attempt to deprive English citizens (almost invariably women) of their rights under the law. It is offensive to the concept of equality under the law. If the law's writ does not run everywhere in a country, then social cohesion is harmed.
So-called sharia courts have been allowed to grow because we have not had the balls to say that in this country English law's jurisdiction does not depend on a person's religion. Any more than it should depend on a person's sex or ethnic origin or any other characteristic. We have been far too cringing before an attempt to impose the patriarchal/religious norms of very different societies on English citizens. Why should a girl's rights depend on whether her granny was born in Pakistan rather than Woking?
Even in individual sports like golf, the Ryder Cup is massive...and you see how much the players genuinely absolutely pumped for that event and the fans talk about the great Ryder Cups I think more so than individual majors.
Must dash, v irritating so my reply more garbled than usual; not taking the time to say what I want more succinctly.
Will try to pick it all up later this evening apologies.
Merion Jones is the 'journalist'.
The idea of an EU Team is quite amusing. Could this be another one like Universities, where accordnig to the league tables we outdo most of the rest together :-).
Euro Informationen which works for the European Commission and European Parliament has put together a medal table for the Olympics with the EU ranked first. They really are cheeky bastards pinching all our medals.
www.medaltracker.eu/index.php?article_id=1
https://youtube.com/watch?v=UI8CWptOEm8
Who was it who said that a liberal is a man who won't even take his own side in an argument?
There are too many of those sort of liberals around and not enough of those who really understand the rights and freedoms which Western civilization has brought and how hard they had to be fought for and how hard they will continue to have to be fought for if they are to be maintained.
One of the current threats to Western liberalism - Islamism - is far more alike to previous challenges in the 20th century to liberalism (Communism, Nazism and Fascism) than its proponents or its opponents often allow. We should have enough of a memory of the consequences of those baleful movements not to be giving such a free pass to those groups who have a similar hatred of Western liberalism and a similar millennarial obsession with creating a perfect society, through blood, death and violence and hatred of scapegoated groups, usually involving Jews, amongst others.
The plan includes suspending visas from countries with ties to terrorism and an ideological test for those applying to enter the US.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37086578
Going to be interesting to see this ideological test!
Even so, we have to be careful with patriotism. I have zero love for the one world order Davos elite, but equally I don't want to see old national tensions and rivalries return, especially with nations such as Germany and France.
And the attacks on the Trump campaign and its links continue.
1) Live and let live - different people like different things.
2) Individual athletic performance should be judged on its own merits and that the focus on nationality for judging sporting prowess is unhealthy.
Anyone would have thought that I had spat on the Queen, given the reaction this has provoked.
I've never met a Liberal who wants to dismantle our country - perhaps you have. Perhaps you'd prefer us too withdraw from the UN or NATO as supranational entities,
"Have you seen the Apprentice ?"
"Have you bought Trump merchandise ?"
"All those wearing a Make America Great Again hat, pass automatically"
Christianity had this problem when it was virtually compulsory in the west and is still working through the aftermath
But the issue with Sharia courts is that participants agree that the courts ruling is final, with no right of appeal to the UK courts. Who knows whether women agree to that without any moral suasion. I have my doubts. Even if they did, I think this is quite wrong: a right is a right is a right. If a court doesn't not abide by certain minimum standards then its rulings should have no validity in English law
I regard Cameron and Osborne as uber liberals. (note the small l).
The Conservative and (Liberal) Unionist Party is as much the successor of the old Liberal Party as the Lib Dems (Liberal Unionists and Nat Liberals
My view is that if a court doesn't not abide by certain minimum standards (e.g. equal treatment of witnesses) then its rulings should have no validity in English law
And if you want to get back in, that is the way you should vote in 2020.
Are there rules on the nationality of the horse, or is it just the rider?
edit: sorry, you're not talking about value meals, are you
That is partly because the queen has queened her socks off. We have been witness to a queening masterclass and think its normal because its all we've ever known.
It was not ever thus. Look at Charles I. In the 19th century there was a strong anti-monarchy under current, even at the height of British power and wealth.
The things I love about the United Kingdom are nothing to do with athletes. I have cherished its openness, its tolerance of other views, its good humour, its phlegmatic undogmatic character. All of those things are in retreat now. Perhaps the United Kingdom is in retreat as well with them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/rio-2016/schedule/2016-08-15
Without British punters buying poor value lottery tickets/paying for Sky subs - Jason Kenny, Chris Hoy, Laura Trott and Sir Wiggo wouldn't have won nearly as much as they did in the cycling though. So nationality undoubtedly plays a part - although its smaller part than say which car you're in in an F1 race.
Could we have an olympics sans nationality ? It's an interesting question.
Personally I like to see the greatest potential performance always win a medal. Upsets are well and good but when the best in a sport performs the best they can, well that is more satisfying to me than watching someone win as a result of errors by others (Whitlock's pommel (Total superiority vs His floor (Great but ultimately winning due to other's mistakes)) a topical case in point.
The problem is this: the moment you have 'religious' laws some people will prefer them to the state's laws, and use them as an alternative, whist trying to make them the same. This puts a great deal of power in the hands of a few people (almost always men) who, whilst versed in religious law, may know little about the laws of the land.
In the case of state laws there is always the right of appeal; judges who make terrible decisions can have judgements overturned or even removed from their role. If I want a divorce, I can get eventually get one. If I want to get married, not special considerations are placed on me that would not be placed on my neighbour.
It is terrible that in this day and age a woman is placed in a position where she cannot get 'divorced' from her husband just because her husband does not want to divorce. It's ludicrous that the Jewish community see the only solution to this is to place adverts shaming the husbands.
http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/analysis/148865/well-continue-name-and-shame-men-who-refuse-free-ex-wives
So simply: get rid of both sharia courts and the Beth Din.
(There are problems with this when couples are married in other countries, and the obvious problems when people are insane enough to self-impose restrictions through religion)