-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
To me whilst Henderson comes off, terribly, it's also hilarious watching him being held to a higher standard than the head of state.
www.dailymail.co.uk
EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: King set to entertain Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince
EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Recollections are dimming of any connection between Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince and the 2018 dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Precisely the first thought that popped into my head.
Surprised Rodgers holds that view given his affinity for the trans community
'Morality officers' judging Henderson - Rodgers
Brendan Rodgers defends Jordan Henderson amid criticism from "morality officers" over the midfielder's move to Saudi Arabia.www.bbc.co.uk
Deleted member 15314
Guest
"morality officer" is truly a special choice of words given how Saudi literally has morality police.'Morality officers' judging Henderson - Rodgers
Brendan Rodgers defends Jordan Henderson amid criticism from "morality officers" over the midfielder's move to Saudi Arabia.
Oh my fucking god, I cannot put into words how much I despise that shark faced twat
100% This country asks higher standards in public life of its soccer players than anyone else. Higher certainly than its members of Parliament. Ridiculous.To me whilst Henderson comes off, terribly, it's also hilarious watching him being held to a higher standard than the head of state.
EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: King set to entertain Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince
EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Recollections are dimming of any connection between Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince and the 2018 dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Rodgers will have a plan b in place for sure. Celtic probably deserve to get an ass reaming for taking him back.
The nature or make up of the Creator being is a different discussion. The existence of a first cause however makes much more sense imo than claiming a universe from nothing, an infinite regress or other theory atheists put forward.
No it doesn't - get with the times. MBS is a staunch secularist and has dissolved the powers of the Mutuwa and allowed things like clubs, concerts etc to promote his own vision.
People actually wanted him here, apparently he was the only one who could handle managing in the premier league.
Or more likely, it was because he was the only manager they knew (After the Poch links died). After all, if they've never heard of someone, it must be because they're shit. That's how it works.
Maybe, I don't really know. I guess I'll just give my thoughts on this since it isn't really derailing the thread anymore. I'm not actually that interested in debating this stuff because no one really changes their mind anyway but here it goes.
I take it you're referring to the Kalam cosmological argument when you say 'first cause'. My issues with the argument is it's use of the term 'begins to exist'. To me this refers to creatio ex nihilo. However, we haven't actually seen anything that has been created out of nothing. Everything we observe has been created out of some pre existing materials, or creatio ex materia. And the point of the first premise is to appeal to our previously existing knowledge of the world and how things come into existence within it.
So there seems to be a case of equivocation here, the first premise talks about things coming into existence as we know it, out of already existing materials. But the second premise is talking about the universe, and there were no previously existing materials prior to the universe existing. So the two premises are talking about two very different notions of coming into existence.
Although I don't know where you stand on this. IIRC, the Islamic position is that the universe was created out of nothing. However, I did hear that Ibn Taymiyyah believed that the universe was created out of previously existing matter.
Which brings me to another point, I don't see how if the universe can't come from nothing, that God is able to create the universe out of nothing. It seems like the same dilemma still exists. Both sides can't explain how something could come out of nothing.
Remind me, when was the last time someone was executed in public in the US for being an atheist or a gay man?
And while we're on the subject of hypocrisy and false equivalence, if, as non-Muslim people, we were told that we had to choose between living out their lives in either Saudi Arabia or America, how many would opt for the former?
Last edited:
Let me see..
I've a choice between;
Living in a country where free speech is enshrined in the constitution, where you can criticise the government, vote to change the government, where my daughter and sister have the same rights and privileges as anyone, and they can choose any consenting adult to love without being in fear of their lives.
Or
Living in a country where free speech is not tolerated, tweeting negative stuff about the establishment results in a death penalty, where my daughter and sister would be classed as 2nd class citizens with less rights to me and where they would be executed for loving someone of the same sex.
It's a toughie alright.
I'll have to have a think and get back to you.
I'd like this post ten times if I could.
There's absolutely nothing stopping Henderson donating some of his wages to an LGBT charity. He doesn't do that because he's a cunt.
Whilst the notions may differ, the premise refers to the point that causal conditions need to be in place for anything to come into existence, whether it's something as simple as a cup of tea or something as grand as the universe. Arguing the opposite is when we fall into many absurdities.
I don't quite get the point in your last paragraph. The point is the universe DID come into existence and as such there would have been causal conditions for it do so. If we argue its an infinite entity, we're again going to fall into numerous fallacies. Whilst potential infinite things may exist, an actual infinite cannot. We can question the 'how' but its not relevant to the point that there is existence and it began to exist at a certain point. I disagree that both sides don't have an explanation- what both sides may not have is a 'how' - I.e the specific mechanics needed for the creation of the universe. But when it comes to an explanation, one side has one. One that is logical and sound and one that doesn't fall into logical absurdities of infinite regress or other fallacies. etc.
We can all play that game. Like my post said, I detest MBS and his regime so my point was the hypocrisy, not a defense of his regime. But someone can say when's the last time Saudi invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and carried out a drone warfare program that killed mainly civilians etc.
Are gay people the only victims you care about? Because I mentioned countless victims of violence from a violent country, I mentioned an organised torture regime carried out by that country - but you ignored those victims. Are some victims more important than others? How do you differentiate?
I'm against Saudi and the US actions and will be explicit on both.
As for your second paragraph, how does that question negate all humans rights abuses that the US has committed around the world? It doesn't. People can chose to live where they want, that doesn't change the reality of what we have seen the US do over the last two decades.
Are y'all for real tallying up the historical crimes of various regimes sat at your computers in the United Fucking Kingdom?
Nope just pointing out the hypocrisy of pointing out one nations crimes whilst ignoring another's.
