Today I'm angry about.....

[thebish]

Can't you look in a dictionary?

yes I could... but Tango is a religious man - Catholic by his own description - and in catholicism "evil" has a supernatural dimension and is connected to the power of "the devil". Theologically understood - "evil" is not really susceptible to the naughty step - it is much darker and more powerful than that...

on the other hand - Tango might merely be using "evil" to mean "very naughty" - but I suspect not - hence my question.

hobo - I think - used the phrase "pure evil" - which - again - hints at something other than just "very naughty"

[Hoboh]

Can't you look in a dictionary?

yes I could... but Tango is a religious man - Catholic by his own description - and in catholicism "evil" has a supernatural dimension and is connected to the power of "the devil". Theologically understood - "evil" is not really susceptible to the naughty step - it is much darker and more powerful than that...

on the other hand - Tango might merely be using "evil" to mean "very naughty" - but I suspect not - hence my question.

hobo - I think - used the phrase "pure evil" - which - again - hints at something other than just "very naughty"

There are men far cleverer than I throughout the ages bish who think far from the boundries that humans are constained within there are other forces at work. It would be foolish not to consider that certain acts commited by people may possibly be driven by an outside force we don't understand nor can we comprehend. These acts go far beyond the limits of our ability to understand and defy any known logic we can apply to them, in simple terms evil allows us a label with which to tag them. Who really knows?
Does the devil or God really exist? I don't know never met either of them, some people build their entire life based around these two, maybe they are the easy human way to label two different forces, I would not like to say. Who makes our minds tick when we swat flies etc and take delight and satisfaction in doing so? Who presses the other button of guilt and remorse at what you've just done?
Oh sod it!

[thebish]

Can't you look in a dictionary?

yes I could... but Tango is a religious man - Catholic by his own description - and in catholicism "evil" has a supernatural dimension and is connected to the power of "the devil". Theologically understood - "evil" is not really susceptible to the naughty step - it is much darker and more powerful than that...

on the other hand - Tango might merely be using "evil" to mean "very naughty" - but I suspect not - hence my question.

hobo - I think - used the phrase "pure evil" - which - again - hints at something other than just "very naughty"

There are men far cleverer than I throughout the ages bish who think far from the boundries that humans are constained within there are other forces at work. It would be foolish not to consider that certain acts commited by people may possibly be driven by an outside force we don't understand nor can we comprehend. These acts go far beyond the limits of our ability to understand and defy any known logic we can apply to them, in simple terms evil allows us a label with which to tag them. Who really knows?

ok - so you are saying that venables and thompson were infected/driven/possessed? by a dark supernatural force at work in the world? This is your view?

[Hoboh]

Can't you look in a dictionary?

yes I could... but Tango is a religious man - Catholic by his own description - and in catholicism "evil" has a supernatural dimension and is connected to the power of "the devil". Theologically understood - "evil" is not really susceptible to the naughty step - it is much darker and more powerful than that...

on the other hand - Tango might merely be using "evil" to mean "very naughty" - but I suspect not - hence my question.

hobo - I think - used the phrase "pure evil" - which - again - hints at something other than just "very naughty"

There are men far cleverer than I throughout the ages bish who think far from the boundries that humans are constained within there are other forces at work. It would be foolish not to consider that certain acts commited by people may possibly be driven by an outside force we don't understand nor can we comprehend. These acts go far beyond the limits of our ability to understand and defy any known logic we can apply to them, in simple terms evil allows us a label with which to tag them. Who really knows?

ok - so you are saying that venables and thompson were infected/driven/possessed? by a dark supernatural force at work in the world? This is your view?

It is a possibility and I know next is the "good" forgiveness bit but Hey I'm human and not perfect

[thebish]

It is a possibility and I know next is the "good" forgiveness bit but Hey I'm human and not perfect

I have no "next" planned - but wouldn't you say it makes a difference how you would treat the the problem depending on what you think caused it?

if it is - as you suggest - the result of a non-human dark force at work in the world - then I'm not sure how you'd treat it...

I happen NOT to think that. I reckon it is simple basic human nature - children ARE cruel - and as all warfare proves we are all capable of extreme violence whether we think we are or not without resort to some kind of supernatural explanation.

in fact - resorting to the supernatural is a bit of a cop-out (in my opinion) - because, in a way, it gives us a reason not to think too hard about resolving it given that we define the problem as beyond our human influence....

[TANGODANCER]

Bish, bish. You seem to be making a carreer out of demanding people explain every post to your satisfaction. Your view is just yours and no better than mine or anyone else's, and just as allowable on a forum. The moral high ground is a fine stand to take, but unfortunately, the world isn't comprised of perfect people.

The dictionary description of evil is depraved, morally wrong, wicked (all of which might describe what was done to the Bulger child) It nowhere mentions dark forces occult or otherwise. . That's the context most people would accept I was speaking in. I in no way suggested anything religious or satanic amongst any of it, unless you want to bring in the most serious of the ten commandments of course: Thou shalt not kill" ?
Neither did I advocate a "good tanning", merely spoke of my own upbringing. Don't put words in mouths to suit your own argument. People are allowed to air views without being put in the witnessbox, surely? I also didn't make decisons on what should happen here, merely asked where parental control came into the equation. That's hardly a reason for much explanation because it obviously was missing in a big way.

[thebish]

Bish, bish. You seem to be making a carreer out of demanding people explain every post to your satisfaction. Your view is just yours and no better than mine or anyone else's, and just as allowable on a forum. The moral high ground is a fine stand to take, but unfortunately, the world isn't comprised of perfect people.

The dictionary description of evil is depraved, morally wrong, wicked (all of which might describe what was done to the Bulger child) It nowhere mentions dark forces occult or otherwise. . That's the context most people would accept I was speaking in. I in no way suggested anything religious or satanic amongst any of it, unless you want to bring in the most serious of the ten commandments of course: Thou shalt not kill" ?
Neither did I advocate a "good tanning", merely spoke of my own upbringing. Don't put words in mouths to suit your own argument. People are allowed to air views without being put in the witnessbox, surely? I also didn't make decisons on what should happen here, merely asked where parental control came into the equation. That's hardly a reason for much explanation because it obviously was missing in a big way.

fair enough - nobody is denying you your view - I was just asking what you meant!! I still fail to see why you always see that as a big problem! Hobo explained and now i see where he is coming from.

you know as well as I do that "evil" has all sorts of connotations. you simply mean "very very very naughty" whereas Hobo means "dark supernatural forces"

see - on the surface you were both saying the same thing - but actually you are not! I would not have known that if I hadn't asked since you both used the same word - the meaning of which is not as obvious or universal as you suggest.


also - where did I even come close to comparing your view with mine or suggesting mine is better - that is a bizarre accusation. where did I even come close to suggesting any views were "allowed" or "not allowed"??? you have me utterly stumped.

I asked for clarification - I presumed you wanted to be clearly understood - now I have it - and it is instructive - far from saying the same thing, as seemed likely by your use of common language - you and Hobo are saying ENTIRELY DIFFERENT things (which may or may not be a relief to you!)


can you point out also where on earth I came anywhere near close to "taking the moral high ground"????

[Montreal Wanderer]

[

fair enough - nobody is denying you your view - I was just asking what you meant!! I still fail to see why you always see that as a big problem! Hobo explained and now i see where he is coming from.

We all knew where hobo came from. Planet Hobo located somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun...

[Hoboh]

[

fair enough - nobody is denying you your view - I was just asking what you meant!! I still fail to see why you always see that as a big problem! Hobo explained and now i see where he is coming from.

We all knew where hobo came from. Planet Hobo located somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun...

Actually I prefer Genghis Khan a much more interesting person.

I do not have a belief in the supernatural just a hunch that we ignore it's possible existence at our peril, not everything has a convenient label.

[Verbal]

You running on sunday, squire?

I am indeed. Come and say hello. I'll be in my Trent Park running club vest. Yellow with green stripes down the side.

I was up late so only caught the tailenders, doubt you were among them. Did however find my flatmate, so cheered her on along the end of the second lap Anywho, hope it all went well!

Indeed not. 1hr 36mins 45secs. Smashed my P.B.

blimey - congrats - I'd need the bike to get anywhere near that!!

Indeed, congrats mate about 14 minutes ahead of my p.b., really need to get in to the running.

My mate ran dressed as pacman, the crazy bastard

[Gary the Enfield]

I am indeed. Come and say hello. I'll be in my Trent Park running club vest. Yellow with green stripes down the side.

I was up late so only caught the tailenders, doubt you were among them. Did however find my flatmate, so cheered her on along the end of the second lap Anywho, hope it all went well!

Indeed not. 1hr 36mins 45secs. Smashed my P.B.

blimey - congrats - I'd need the bike to get anywhere near that!!

Indeed, congrats mate about 14 minutes ahead of my p.b., really need to get in to the running.

My mate ran dressed as pacman, the crazy bastard

There were some sights. I saw Scooby Doo too. No sign of the meddling kids, though.

[thebish]

[

fair enough - nobody is denying you your view - I was just asking what you meant!! I still fail to see why you always see that as a big problem! Hobo explained and now i see where he is coming from.

We all knew where hobo came from. Planet Hobo located somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun...

Actually I prefer Genghis Khan a much more interesting person.

I do not have a belief in the supernatural just a hunch that we ignore it's possible existence at our peril, not everything has a convenient label.

I'm not sure how that makes sense Hobo - you did say that they were evil and that evil was some kind of non-human (supernatural) force in the world - but you don't believe in the supernatural....

[Prufrock]

Not commented on this before, but it's all about personal opinions, so I'll venture one:

I got quite a few tannings as a ten year old for things like breaking a window, having a bow and arrow when forbidden to do so, no being home in time to the extent of causing worry etc. In other words, disobeying my parents rules. Very unfair at the time, I thought, but certainly not ignorable. Bullying in one form or another has existed has since time imemorial, but this wasn't just bullying, it was evil and caused the deliberate death of a child. I don't seem to hear much mention of parental responsibility amongst any of it..... I feel, somehow, that I should.

you and hobo have both described venables and thompson as "evil".

now - unless you're just using sloppy language (in which case - fair enough) - what precisely do you mean in describing someone (or someone's actions) as "evil"?

I actually think this is quite a serious issue...

if it was "evil" - then that suggests something inherent - from the "devil" - at least in its common usage - so how, in that case, do parents have any role in the matter?

you describe it as "evil" - and then prescribe a good tanning (or parental discipline) - can "evil" be beaten out of someone? is "evil" conquered by the imposition of childhood boundaries? if so - then you have a fairly weak definition of "evil" - hence my question - what precisely do you mean in describing it thus?

Can't you look in a dictionary?

I'm amazed people are arguing that them being 10 years old meant they didn't know what they were doing?

They brutally tortured and murdered an infant, I'll leave out some of the grim details of what they did, as we've all heard them before.

But, both kids knew what they were doing.

And so I will ask again how you, or anyone else claiming so knows this, despite the fact the authorities deemed them not to be 'evil' and deserving of a new start. It cannot be put any clearer than : They were ten years old. I know it's a while since some on here were ten, but the idea a ten year old kid has a notion of death, of consequence in anything like an adult sense is beyond me. Go and talk to a ten year old, and maybe you will realise you cannot apply adult logic to children.

[Hoboh]

Not commented on this before, but it's all about personal opinions, so I'll venture one:

I got quite a few tannings as a ten year old for things like breaking a window, having a bow and arrow when forbidden to do so, no being home in time to the extent of causing worry etc. In other words, disobeying my parents rules. Very unfair at the time, I thought, but certainly not ignorable. Bullying in one form or another has existed has since time imemorial, but this wasn't just bullying, it was evil and caused the deliberate death of a child. I don't seem to hear much mention of parental responsibility amongst any of it..... I feel, somehow, that I should.

you and hobo have both described venables and thompson as "evil".

now - unless you're just using sloppy language (in which case - fair enough) - what precisely do you mean in describing someone (or someone's actions) as "evil"?

I actually think this is quite a serious issue...

if it was "evil" - then that suggests something inherent - from the "devil" - at least in its common usage - so how, in that case, do parents have any role in the matter?

you describe it as "evil" - and then prescribe a good tanning (or parental discipline) - can "evil" be beaten out of someone? is "evil" conquered by the imposition of childhood boundaries? if so - then you have a fairly weak definition of "evil" - hence my question - what precisely do you mean in describing it thus?

Can't you look in a dictionary?

I'm amazed people are arguing that them being 10 years old meant they didn't know what they were doing?

They brutally tortured and murdered an infant, I'll leave out some of the grim details of what they did, as we've all heard them before.

But, both kids knew what they were doing.

And so I will ask again how you, or anyone else claiming so knows this, despite the fact the authorities deemed them not to be 'evil' and deserving of a new start. It cannot be put any clearer than : They were ten years old. I know it's a while since some on here were ten, but the idea a ten year old kid has a notion of death, of consequence in anything like an adult sense is beyond me. Go and talk to a ten year old, and maybe you will realise you cannot apply adult logic to children.

Asked if killing someone was wrong I'd bet to a person they would say yes!

[William the White]

[

fair enough - nobody is denying you your view - I was just asking what you meant!! I still fail to see why you always see that as a big problem! Hobo explained and now i see where he is coming from.

We all knew where hobo came from. Planet Hobo located somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun...

Actually I prefer Genghis Khan a much more interesting person.

I do not have a belief in the supernatural just a hunch that we ignore it's possible existence at our peril, not everything has a convenient label.

I'm not sure how that makes sense Hobo - you did say that they were evil and that evil was some kind of non-human (supernatural) force in the world - but you don't believe in the supernatural....

[Prufrock]

Not commented on this before, but it's all about personal opinions, so I'll venture one:

I got quite a few tannings as a ten year old for things like breaking a window, having a bow and arrow when forbidden to do so, no being home in time to the extent of causing worry etc. In other words, disobeying my parents rules. Very unfair at the time, I thought, but certainly not ignorable. Bullying in one form or another has existed has since time imemorial, but this wasn't just bullying, it was evil and caused the deliberate death of a child. I don't seem to hear much mention of parental responsibility amongst any of it..... I feel, somehow, that I should.

you and hobo have both described venables and thompson as "evil".

now - unless you're just using sloppy language (in which case - fair enough) - what precisely do you mean in describing someone (or someone's actions) as "evil"?

I actually think this is quite a serious issue...

if it was "evil" - then that suggests something inherent - from the "devil" - at least in its common usage - so how, in that case, do parents have any role in the matter?

you describe it as "evil" - and then prescribe a good tanning (or parental discipline) - can "evil" be beaten out of someone? is "evil" conquered by the imposition of childhood boundaries? if so - then you have a fairly weak definition of "evil" - hence my question - what precisely do you mean in describing it thus?

Can't you look in a dictionary?

I'm amazed people are arguing that them being 10 years old meant they didn't know what they were doing?

They brutally tortured and murdered an infant, I'll leave out some of the grim details of what they did, as we've all heard them before.

But, both kids knew what they were doing.

And so I will ask again how you, or anyone else claiming so knows this, despite the fact the authorities deemed them not to be 'evil' and deserving of a new start. It cannot be put any clearer than : They were ten years old. I know it's a while since some on here were ten, but the idea a ten year old kid has a notion of death, of consequence in anything like an adult sense is beyond me. Go and talk to a ten year old, and maybe you will realise you cannot apply adult logic to children.

Asked if killing someone was wrong I'd bet to a person they would say yes!

But they couldn't tell you why.

[thebish]

But they couldn't tell you why.

is there a "right" answer to that question that defines you as "adult"?

[Prufrock]

But they couldn't tell you why.

is there a "right" answer to that question that defines you as "adult"?

There isn't one right answer, but part of the difference between a child and an adult, and the bit that gives adults responsibility, is the ability to reason why or why not we should or should not do something, an understanding of the consequences of actions.

[thebish]

But they couldn't tell you why.

is there a "right" answer to that question that defines you as "adult"?

There isn't one right answer, but part of the difference between a child and an adult, and the bit that gives adults responsibility, is the ability to reason why or why not we should or should not do something, an understanding of the consequences of actions.

ok - I agree - I just thought for one moment there might be a "right" answer - and i don't know it!!

[ohjimmyjimmy]

Don't know if this has been brought up before, BUT...hospital parking, today i am angry about hospital parking.

Got a phone call at work yesterday afternoon, 'try not to panic but your dad's been rushed into hospital'. So off i goes to the infirmary, where i spent half an hour trawling a circuit of the bastard place, not knowing if my dad was fecking alive or dead, trying to find a parking space, getting blocked in by indecisive old biddies stopping their Skoda in the middle then deciding to reverse back, well i cant reverse back you daft old cow i've got 8 cars behind me cos of the queue you've created.

In the end drove back half a mile to the main road, parked in a side street and ran to the fcking hospital...only to see my dad walking out of A&E, apparently he'd fainted at work and was just taken in as a precaution.

Angry? You bet i am !

(And then we go and get tatered 4-0)