Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

This afternoon

Populus’s twice-weekly online poll – that had topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 36%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 14%

so you guys bitch about carney and no doubt you bitched about meryn king and ben bernanke, though perhaps you have yet to get your claws out for janet yellen
all pretty pathetic and predictable really, though no doubt you thought gordy brown did a fantastic job

religious schools
if a school is private and privately funded, then provided the ethos is not subversive, then i don't think there can or should be any objection
however, where it is taxpayer funded, i don't think ANY school should have a clear specific religion bias and that includes anglican or catholic as well

All religious schools are taxpayer funded. They are funded by virtue of having charitable status whereas they should be regarded as businesses. I don't want my taxes to be spent on the propagation of fairy stories,

not true ..... for starters, and like it or not, i think you'll find most if not all public schools are registered as charities .... that being so, and you can't just manipulate the rules to suit your own beliefs, then they have to conform to some pretty stringent rules

The difference is that most faith based schools are exclusive to pupils of that faith. That prohibition alone should merit charitable status being removed.

Again, not true, most faith based schools take other beliefs.

Only in theory. The school that I went to was a Catholic Jesuit grammar school and is now a compresenhive. A number of years ago, I tried to get one of my children in there. I was told that I needed a letter from my priest, a certificate of baptism and first communion. I said that in my day there were non Catholics at the school. I was told that now only applies if they do not have enough Catholics applying, which is never the case.

You went to a Catholic school did you H/S? no wonder you can't stand religion.

I went to a catholic school too, and whilst I don't subscribe, I see nothing wrong with it.

Indeed most catholic schools are over subscribed to hell and gone.

Not like the one I went to then Max, mine was more like indoctrination rather then education. Needless to say I rejected it when I could.

I see nothing wrong with faith schools, but I don't want any public money support. You want religious education, then pay the full cost and no subsidy, support and no charitable status.

which bit don't you read let alone understand of 42130?

I am not sure if I like public and other private schools being charities or not, but I definitely don't want it to apply to religion which I regard as harmful. It is about the intention. The intention of one is to provide excellent education. The other is to further the purposes and indoctrination of a religion. And I see no reason not to be able to put ck and choose who gets charitable status. The charity commission could have new rules that say no religious charities at all, including churches etc.

hays - in your own way, you are every bit as "fundamentalist" and intolerant as the religions you so decry and deplore ..... what you fail to grasp is that most religions set out little more than philosophies for life, propounding sensible and basic guidelines on how we should lead our lives ..... what's so wrong about that?

that most attach those guidelines to a higher being is almost irrelevant

i accept that the above is a very simplistic statement, but it's good enough

Sepp Blatter hits out at 'racist' British media and plot to destroy Fifa

Governing body's president claims press is working to an agenda as he declares plan to run for fifth term




Power broker: Sepp Blatter looks unbeatable in the next vote for the presidency Photo: AFP



By Ben Rumsby, Rio de Janeiro

7:26PM BST 09 Jun 2014



Sepp Blatter unleashed an astonishing tirade against the “racist” British media and what he branded a plot to “destroy” Fifa last night as he confirmed his intention to stand for a controversial fifth term as president.


Blatter lashed out against the critics of football’s world governing body in two defiant speeches, finally breaking his silence over the corruption crisis to engulf the organisation he leads ahead of the World Cup in Brazil.


Fifa has been under mounting pressure over the emergence of new evidence linked to its decision to award the 2022 tournament to Qatar, with sponsors lining up to express their concerns.


But Blatter dismissed the investigations spearheaded by The Telegraph and Sunday Times in an address to the African Football Confederation’s annual congress, in which he railed against the “storm against Fifa relating to the Qatar World Cup”.


He added: “Sadly, there’s a great deal of discrimination and racism, and this hurts me.”


More racist bollox here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/10887846/Sepp-Blatter-hits-out-at-racist-British-media-and-plot-to-destroy-Fifa.html

that sepp blatter is an absolute disgrace and in his own way probably an even nastier piece of work than bernie ecclestone

Which is the next con party leader?