zippo

SHADE Eh, I'm awfully sorry. I didn't get the rules. I should have changed two letters. So here we go : SHARK

BAND

move

Seems rather obvious, but here we go anyway GIVE

Sadly Sungazer couldn't get more out of my "hole" than a "roll". Ofcourse it's against the rules of this game, but I don't blame him. His "roll" is kind of original. But don't let it happen again!!! Ok, let's proceed with a new word : file Oh, there it was Meriadoc who got me, by clicking quicker. My "file" was a reply to jjpriest25's "fill". Well, I guess you guys have the choise now to reply either to Meriadoc's "dill" or to my "file". But that would make the game a bit chaotic. Is there any rule to this case?

hole

Look how this bulldog has fun !!! http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=CQzUsTFqtW0 Having seen this video, I'm now trying to familiarize my dog with the skateboard. She doesn't seem to see the fun of it for the moment, but maybe later. You never know.

As an "elderly" man, I like the oldies from the late sixties, begin seventies. Led Zeppelin, Yes, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, Frank Zappa & the Mothers, Genesis (I saw Peter Gabriel perform in 1975 on Genesis' last "The Lamb lies down on Broadway tour". Pretty awsome!!). But that doesn't mean I'm a fossil. I'm also open to nowadays performers, and I can appreciate the music of a band like the Babyshambles. By the way, these guys seem to be inspired quite a lot by some groups from the sixties, like the Kinks. This is remarkable, because as a rockband in the seventies, you couldn't think of being inspired by music from 40 years ago!! Music in those days seemed to evolve rather quickly, from the rockabilly of Bo Diddley of 1960 into the premisses of Hard Rock of Jimi Hendrix in 1967. Those were the days!!

It's not surprising to see the Catholic church issueing this statement. Well, the part about birthcontrol is nothing new. Catholics seem to believe that only God has the right to decide how much children you can have, despite all social, economic and ecological problems that overpopulation produces. As to the Pope's statement that "polluting the environment is a sin", well it's better than nothing. But I somehow don't have the impression Catholics are that concerned with ecological problems. Just look at the people who support Berlusconi in Italy. They are all good Catholics, but they don't give a [bleeped!] for environmental issues!! These statements of the Pope are outdated, because they don't have any impact. Nobody will stop committing sins, just because the Pope says you might be sent to hell after you die!! It's ridiculous!! We're not living in the Middle Ages anymore!!

As a European I don't vote for the American presidential elections, but that doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on the candidates. In the poll I voted for Obama. I think he has the capacity to lead this great Nation that is the USA. And I also think he is able to get the USA out of the dead end street in which it got stuck lately. I hope Obama (if he get's elected president) will give back the USA its leading role in the world, but on another basis as sofar, being more solidary and respectfull with other countries.

Frankie, the link does work!! It is a downloadable file, in *.avi format. Either you open it, and play it with, for example, a program like Realplayer, or you download it to your local hard disk and play it. Hope you got it. Enjoy...

I totally agree with you meriadoc, specially when you say that there are more urgent problems to solve. But that doesn't need to prevent us from having ideas about the origin of this planet. I think that's one of the main things of being a human. Human beings are able to think about their origin, as well as their destiny. And they are also able to have some influence on their future. Let's hope that humans and their societies make the best of it in the near future.

I approve the opinion of Suiren. The theory of the "Big Bang" as well as evolution are not contrary to the idea of the existance of a "God". There are even theologists who "believe" in both, like the French Catholic philosopher Teillard du Chardin (he was a clergyman, but did also scientific work as a palaeolontogist and an archaeologist in China). As a professional archaeologist I'm convinced of the "Big Bang" theory and the evolution. But I'm not against the idea of the existence of a God. Allthough I must say I don't really "believe". One of my University professors, the American prehistorian Ray Newell, told me once that to believe, it's something you do in church, but in science "belief" is less helpfull. Science is about facts. Things and events you can prove, and reproduce repeatedly. But a lot of religious people would say that they have very strong proof for the presence and the acts of God. But as a non believer I just don't feel nor see it. So that makes the discussion with religious people difficult.

The central question of this item is "Who got the beginning of the world right". Is there anyone who wants to discuss that? As an professional archaeologist I'm convinced of the scientific view, that is a beginning with a "Big Bang" followed by a very slow evolution, leading to the forming of planet Earth and life (animals and plants).

I don't know if this item makes a lot of sence. Male or female. We don't have the choice. We're born as a male or a female, and have to do with it for the rest of our lives. That's to say, I'm a male, and I'm satisfied with that. But I think life would be rather boring without women. They are essential!! By the way, some of my best friends are women (and I'm not talking about girlfriends for dating, because my wife would be very angry!!). But I would like to say that my female friends have qualities that are so rare, like humour, kindness, attention and warmth.

Bats (are marvelous animals, and are not frightening to me!)

I'm very pleased by the positive opinions on the works of my father, Evert Musch. He would have been pleased as well. It's wonderfull to know his paintings still have a positive impact, even if he's not there anymore. His work is just about the splendour of nature and human beings. My sister and me are about to organize an exhibition in our home village Anloo, in the North of the Netherlands. I'm also preparing a website on my father's life and his paintings, set in the context of his beloved countryside. Hope to see you there. And thanks a lot for visiting these pages.

The posts to the item on religious pressure are interesting and show all kinds of views and opinions towards religion. Most of the posts are made by people who themselves are not really religious. It's interesting to see that, despite their "atheist" opinions, these people all agree about a need for spiritality. It seems the belief in a "God" is not necessary to proceed in everyday life. Most people also express a need for tolerance towards all kinds of beliefs or philosophical opinions. I think this is very encouraging.

Well basically I agree with JCX, that it's possible to live without religion, especially if you're mentally strong enough. But I'm a bit frightened by his statement that science would be his religion. In my view science alone cannot be a religion. And science without moral values cannot be used as a guiding line for a human society. In the past, unfortunately there have been some painfull experiences of science taking over power. One example ; the destruction of socalled "inferior" human races and handicapped people during WWII by the nazis, because of a wrong interpretation of the evolutionary theories. One must bear in mind that science can do a lot of good to the human society, but it can also be very dangerous, if manipulated by unscrupulous politicians and industrials in their quest of power and money. Regards, zippo

form

I just want to tell I'm satisfied about this forum that gives an opportunity to express freely all kinds of opinions. Now about religious pressure. I live in a country (France) where the citizens are free to practise any religion. That's written in the constitution. And the State and the Church are independent. So, theoretically there should be no reason for tension between religions. But lately there have emerged some problems concerning sectarian movements. Some of them seem to exploit their members, forcing them to pay huge amounts of money, to the benefit of the "church". In most cases the victims are mentally and socially weak persons. The French authorities are warning against these sectarian movements. It seems the Scientology movement is also being accused of this kind of practise. I don't really know what the Scientology church stands for, but I'm not really interested. I just don't care about religion. I'm not an atheist however. I think atheists are people who are against religion and reject the existence of a god. I just don't care. For me it doesn't matter. If people find some comfort in religion, and in the belief of god, well that's OK to me. But for me it just doesn't work, and I don't appreciate if religious people want to convince me that their religion will save me, or make me better. Come on!! I don't need a god or a religion to guide me. I'm not a christian or a muslim or a hindu or whatever, but that doesn't mean I'm without moral principles. Some religious people with whom I discussed seem to think that if you're non confessional, you don't have any guiding lines and in that case you will be tempted to do all kinds of bad things (including rape, murder, etc.). I just tell them that it doesn't work that way. I'm not tempted to do evil things, and I don't need a god to tell me what I'm allowed to do. In fact, when you're a member of a church, often it's not even god who tells you what to do, but it's the preacher, or your social environment (teachers, parents, etc.). You can call that religious pressure, or whatever you like. Most people need a social environment to function. Therefore they're organised in communities (churches, clubs, quarters). I think there's nothing wrong with that, as long as it doesn't lead to exclusion and misunderstanding towards people who think different. Because that can lead to hatred, culminating into violent conflicts. Unfortunately, in the past religion has often been practised in a narrow, communitarian way. In many cases this attitude led to conflicts, some of which are counting amongst the most tragic pages in the history of mankind (the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Holocaust, etc.). If religion wasn't perhaps directly responsible for these tragedies, it didn't prevent it neither. So that's one of the reasons I'm not really attracted by religion. Regards, zippo

word