Page 10 of 11

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:09 pm
by Tsukiyumi
...

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:13 pm
by Sonic Glitch
Tsukiyumi wrote:...
Sorry, forgot the " ;-) "

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:15 pm
by Tsukiyumi
Ah; there we go. :lol:

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:08 am
by Mikey
Wait, Mel Gibson is American? I thought he was an Aussie and just grew up in the U.S.

Anyway, it depends where you go. Remember, America is big enough to have wildly varying attitudes. In the cosmopolitan areas, Judaism is generally accepted without much prejudice (a are most other non-Christian religions.) In the sticks, though, there are still people who believe the blood libel - and Catholicism is considered a weird cult-ish fringe sect of Christianity. There are places in the South in which I'd honestly and easily envision myself swinging for the "crime" of being Jewish.

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:14 am
by Mikey
Captain Seafort wrote:
Mikey wrote:Now, wait a damned minute. You're the one who keeps telling me that England isn't a country
It isn't - it's still got its own football team though. The Irish rugby team is even more complicated - it's drawn from the whole island.
:bangwall: Now wait a tick...

I gather that you're talking about "national" teams, as you didn't say "Coventry City" or "Liverpool FC" or anything similar. (Bonus question: In what year did Coventry City win the British Football Cup?) So, these "national" teams are playing against other "national" teams from the same nation? That's like saying Alabama is playing Michigan in the Olympics.

And the Irish have a "national" team comprising players from different nations? :picard:

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:00 am
by Graham Kennedy
It's a history thing. England, Wales and Scotland are not like different states in the US, they were individual countries in their own right to begin with and still retain that identity. The English conquered the rest, they didn't come in by consent or agreement, and although there's a combined government, at least a fair bit of the national identity still remains - kind of like Canada and Quebec.

It can lead to some weird oddities, because England has a huge population compared to the others - over eight times that of Scotland and Wales combined. Because England is so dominant, of course the response in Scotland and Wales is to try and assert themselves all the more. It leads to weird oddities like the government in Wales has to offer all forms and documents in Welsh, and offer Welsh interpreters for phone messages and meetings and such, and even funds a public TV station which is entirely in Welsh... in a country where less than 1% of the Welsh people speak the language. In fact one of the major sources of employment for the few Welsh speakers is working for the governments in it's efforts to support people who speak Welsh!

You could have a British National sports team, but if you did it would be 90% English. That's just not politically acceptable to the Scots or Welsh, so we all do our own thing. Stupid really, but there you go.

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:26 am
by Mikey
Yes, I obviously know about the cultural identities of Wales and Scotland. I just thought it odd that the country of the UKoGBaNI would have three different "national" teams for one nation.

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:30 am
by Graham Kennedy
It is odd, but that's why. :)

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:26 am
by Mikey
GrahamKennedy wrote:It is odd, but that's why. :)
Probably even odder if one pauses to consider the face that the English (predominantly of Anglic, Saxon, Danish, Norman, and Breton ancestry) exceed the Welsh, Scottish, and Irish at a game that has its roots in a Pictish custom. :lol:

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:46 am
by Captain Seafort
Mikey wrote:So, these "national" teams are playing against other "national" teams from the same nation? That's like saying Alabama is playing Michigan in the Olympics.
Yep.
And the Irish have a "national" team comprising players from different nations? :picard:
Also yes. They had to write a new song specifically for the team, because the Republic took exception to God Save the Queen and NI took exception to an old IRA song.
I just thought it odd that the country of the UKoGBaNI would have three different "national" teams for one nation.
Four, in fact - NI's got it's own football team as well.

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
by Mikey
Captain Seafort wrote:Four, in fact - NI's got it's own football team as well.
I'm sorry, I must be going batshit insane. It looked like you said that NI has its own team, presumably in addition to the "pan-Irish" team drawn from both Eire and NI. Of course, that can't be what you said because that would be absolutely over-the-top grade-A crazy.

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:42 pm
by Captain Seafort
*Cough*
The Irish rugby team is even more complicated - it's drawn from the whole island.
...

NI's got it's own football team

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:24 pm
by Mikey
Sorry. I know the difference, of course (though I confess I don't understand the difference between union and league) - I guess I just glossed over the word "rugby" because we'd been discussing soccer in particular.

*EDIT* The whole thing still sounds like it had a heaping bowl of Crazy-O's for breakfast, though.

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:43 pm
by Captain Seafort
Mikey wrote:I confess I don't understand the difference between union and league
Union's 15-a-side, League's 12-a-side, and they really don't get on. Beyond that... *shrugs*

Pity Thorin isn't around any more, or I suspect we'd get a very long dissertation on how League is superior in every way.

Re: The "creator hypothesis"

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 3:47 pm
by Mikey
Yes, I recall some of those rants. Somehow, they never seemed to include any actual reasons. How is it that they don't get on? I can't imagine many matches between a 15-man team and a 12-man team... unless you mean the adherents of each style don't get on well with each other.