McIlroy Declares for Britain?

First topic message reminder :

Rory McIlroy has declared "I’ve always felt more British than Irish", "Maybe it is the way I was brought up, I don’t know, but I have always felt more of a connection with the UK than with Ireland". This seems like a pretty strong indication to me that McIlroy will represent Team GB at the Olympics in 4 years. I think its a smart move to declare his allegiance early and in good time rather than letting the media make a storm in a tea cup about the whole issue in 4 years time close to the games.

Gareth_NI wrote:Provided the schedule is ok I imagine all top golfers will want to compete, why wouldn't they?

Gareth_NI, read back, several of my post have explained why they wouldn't.

(I can understand why you might have missed it with all this religious nonsense now dominating this thread.)

The question is why would they?

Sin é wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Gareth_NI wrote:I believe abortion is indeed banned unless the womans life is said to be at risk from a continued pregnancy.

That is frankly appalling, and another reason why religion ought to have no place in politics and government.

eh, Government didn't decide this. The people decided in a referendum.

Real democracy.

Religion influencing policy making. Glad I don't live in such a backward country.

No wonder Mcilroy would rather be British. Civilisation

McLaren wrote:"eh, Government didn't decide this. The people decided in a referendum."

Wow, what a nice bunch of people they must be. I wonder, do they still burn witches?

I guess the mystery of why the US love Ireland has just been solved, it is clear Ireland is the christian nutterdom many in the us would just love to live in.

Two sides of the same coin - its either burn witches or murder children then, is it?

I don't think the Catholics are the bible thumpers in the US.

Bible thumpers in the US are derived from Ulster Scots, not catholics.

That doesn't mean that all Ulster Scots are bible thumpers, far from it.

Now can we move on?

Skerries wrote:

Gareth_NI wrote:Provided the schedule is ok I imagine all top golfers will want to compete, why wouldn't they?

Gareth_NI, read back, several of my post have explained why they wouldn't.

(I can understand why you might have missed it with all this religious nonsense now dominating this thread.)

The question is why would they?

I didn't miss anything, it wasn't a compelling enough argument against them competing, certainly not when McDowell has quite clearly stated "I just want to be an olympian". Crystal clear to me whether you choose to believe or not.

Gareth_NI.

McDowell's club is 70/30 protestant/catholic. He went to a protestant school.

Can you really see him standing for the Soldier's Song?

Hmmm....

His diplomacy works on some obviously.

super_realist wrote:

Sin é wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Gareth_NI wrote:I believe abortion is indeed banned unless the womans life is said to be at risk from a continued pregnancy.

That is frankly appalling, and another reason why religion ought to have no place in politics and government.

eh, Government didn't decide this. The people decided in a referendum.

Real democracy.

Religion influencing policy making. Glad I don't live in such a backward country.

No wonder Mcilroy would rather be British. Civilisation

Didn't a seriously incapacitated British man die crying recently because he was refused the right to die at a time of his own choosing with dignity? But the 'automatic' right to kill (no questions or checks, no court cases) as a substitute for contraception (we woz too drunk,m'lord) is sanctioned?
Civilisation? Yes, a brand of it.

Did someone just compare taking the morning after pill to voluntary euthanasia of a fully grown adult?

WTF

super_realist wrote:

Sin é wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Gareth_NI wrote:I believe abortion is indeed banned unless the womans life is said to be at risk from a continued pregnancy.

That is frankly appalling, and another reason why religion ought to have no place in politics and government.

eh, Government didn't decide this. The people decided in a referendum.

Real democracy.

Religion influencing policy making. Glad I don't live in such a backward country.

No wonder Mcilroy would rather be British. Civilisation

There are many examples of how Catholicism has shaped Irish law same with the UK and other religions. Ireland is no backward than anywhere else including the UK. I personally oppose church law having any grounds in my country and so do many. It is a very currrent topic in the Irish media.

McIlroy is also Catholic and therefore subject to the same beliefs as any other catholics. Presumably he is an al a carte Catholic like many Irish and British Catholics.

super_realist wrote:

Sin é wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Gareth_NI wrote:I believe abortion is indeed banned unless the womans life is said to be at risk from a continued pregnancy.

That is frankly appalling, and another reason why religion ought to have no place in politics and government.

eh, Government didn't decide this. The people decided in a referendum.

Real democracy.

Religion influencing policy making. Glad I don't live in such a backward country.

No wonder Mcilroy would rather be British. Civilisation

Interesting comment considering that the State that Rory had as its First Minister, Dr Ian Paisley (who would consider himself to be British), Founder & Head of the Free Presbyterian Church (or something like that) at the time.

Sin é

Come on now. Do you play golf at all? Any interest in it?

Have another drink.

djlovesyou wrote:Did someone just compare taking the morning after pill to voluntary euthanasia of a fully grown adult?

Voluntary euthanasia of a fully grown man making his own informed decision (his choice) was denied to said fully grown man in court - yes.

Abortion (which isn't furnished by a morning after pill BTW) is allowed with minimal controls (no court ... and even those limited controls were being broken very recently - British journalism not Irish) - yes.

Tis I

Skerries wrote:Gareth_NI.

McDowell's club is 70/30 protestant/catholic. He went to a protestant school.

Can you really see him standing for the Soldier's Song?

Hmmm....

The 70/30 split at his club is totally irrelevant, as is his school.

I really do not want to get a North/South, GB/Ireland debate over this, but plenty from similar backgrounds playing for/through Ulsters ranks do just that when representing Ireland in Rugby.

It should also be pointed out that McDowell (unless im mistaken, but im pretty certain) is from a mixed family.

GunsGerms wrote:

McIlroy is also Catholic and therefore subject to the same beliefs as any other catholics. Presumably he is an al a carte Catholic like many Irish and British Catholics.

I wonder if there's a Wozniacki clause in the bible when it comes to the whole sex before marriage thing?

GunsGerms wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Sin é wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Gareth_NI wrote:I believe abortion is indeed banned unless the womans life is said to be at risk from a continued pregnancy.

That is frankly appalling, and another reason why religion ought to have no place in politics and government.

eh, Government didn't decide this. The people decided in a referendum.

Real democracy.

Religion influencing policy making. Glad I don't live in such a backward country.

No wonder Mcilroy would rather be British. Civilisation

There are many examples of how Catholicism has shaped Irish law same with the UK and other religions. Ireland is no backward than anywhere else including the UK. I personally oppose church law having any grounds in my country and so do many. It is a very currrent topic in the Irish media.

McIlroy is also Catholic and therefore subject to the same beliefs as any other catholics. Presumably he is an al a carte Catholic like many Irish and British Catholics.

I wonder is Ms. Wozniacki an a la Carte catholic. The Poles in Ireland seem to be very religious.

Irish President - an atheist.
Queen - Head of the Church of England.

Skerries wrote:Sin é

Come on now. Do you play golf at all? Any interest in it?

Have another drink.

I don't play myself (far too slow a game for me). I've some fairly fanatical relatives who play to a decent standard and never shut up about it though!

Sin é wrote:
I wonder is Ms. Wozniacki an a la Carte catholic. The Poles in Ireland seem to be very religious.

Is she not Danish? I think there is a rule in womens tennis that you have to have an eastern european name even if you are from western europe.

Parents are Polish.

Gareth_NI

Ireland's call is played for the rugby team. Yes they play the Soldier's Song in Dublin but that's because they're in Dublin and even then you can see the Ulster boys squirming. Playing the Soldier's Song for GMac in Rio isn't going to happen my friend, I'll give you 100/1.

Anyway, I guess we'll have to wait and see. Suspect it won't become an issue for McDowell anyway as he may not be in the same form in 4 years.

Sin é wrote:

Skerries wrote:Sin é

Come on now. Do you play golf at all? Any interest in it?

Have another drink.

I don't play myself (far too slow a game for me). I've some fairly fanatical relatives who play to a decent standard and never shut up about it though!

Are you suggesting Sin é...that golf is............................... *gulp*............................... a religion to some?

Sin é's an apostate - burn him I say!

Skerries wrote:Gareth_NI

Ireland's call is played for the rugby team. Yes they play the Soldier's Song in Dublin but that's because they're in Dublin and even then you can see the Ulster boys squirming. Playing the Soldier's Song for GMac in Rio isn't going to happen my friend, I'll give you 100/1.

Not half or even quarter the number that bloody start squirming when that Phil Coulter dirge pipes up.

Skerries wrote:Gareth_NI

Ireland's call is played for the rugby team. Yes they play the Soldier's Song in Dublin but that's because they're in Dublin and even then you can see the Ulster boys squirming. Playing the Soldier's Song for GMac in Rio isn't going to happen my friend, I'll give you 100/1.

Anyway, I guess we'll have to wait and see. Suspect it won't become an issue for McDowell anyway as he may not be in the same form in 4 years.

It still doesn't stop them from competing on the international stage.

I guess we will just have to wait and see re: Team Ireland competitors in 2016.

SecretFly wrote:

Skerries wrote:Gareth_NI

Ireland's call is played for the rugby team. Yes they play the Soldier's Song in Dublin but that's because they're in Dublin and even then you can see the Ulster boys squirming. Playing the Soldier's Song for GMac in Rio isn't going to happen my friend, I'll give you 100/1.

Not half or even quarter the number that bloody start squirming when that Phil Coulter dirge pipes up.

Both songs are awful especially Amhran na Bhfiann. So dated and apaulingly harsh on the ears. At least Irelands call is mildly uplifting.

Gareth_NI

Lone squirming on the Olympic podium wouldn't look great. The rugby boys get to share the burden and it's only in Dublin which is fair enough really.

McDowall will probably represent Ireland because it will probably be earier to get into the Irish team. I doubt he cares about some dreadful songs he has represented Ireland on occasion already I believe. In fairness GSTQ is probably the worst anthem out there so nothing to be gained from being in the GB team if all he is concerned about is the anthem.

On the subject of national anthems. How come England get to sing the UK National Anthem? Bit presumptuous don't you think?

When England play Ireland in Dublin it's a farce with several members of the Ireland team getting roused by their opponent's anthem.

Laughable

GunsGerms wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Skerries wrote:Gareth_NI

Ireland's call is played for the rugby team. Yes they play the Soldier's Song in Dublin but that's because they're in Dublin and even then you can see the Ulster boys squirming. Playing the Soldier's Song for GMac in Rio isn't going to happen my friend, I'll give you 100/1.

Not half or even quarter the number that bloody start squirming when that Phil Coulter dirge pipes up.

Both songs are awful especially Amhran na Bhfiann. So dated and apaulingly harsh on the ears. At least Irelands call is mildly uplifting.

You Call............... (sorry for the pun) it whatever you want Guns. I blame a lot of Ireland's lack of passion on that bloody nursery rhyme crap. The sound is bland pub sing-a-long nonsense and the words are stomach churning drivel. Sorry. If that's the best a musical island can come up with as a battle cry, then we should have silence instead for the duration. I'd prefer that..just stoic silence for a minute.

GunsGerms,

Don't you think the emotional moment when standing for your National Anthem having received your gold medal in front of billions of TV viewers is worth considering then?

Isn't that what the Olympics is all about? Doing it to make your country proud?

Certainly has to be the only reason to compete in the golf. No great achievement winning the Golf Gold when the vast majority of the top 100 won't be allowed to compete.

The only solution for the boys, is for Northern Ireland to break political ties from the rest of the UK but also not join Eire.

NI would have the best golf team in the world. Not a bad effort for a tiny bunch of catholics and protestants who get along better than the media, the extremists and several posters on this forum would have you believe.

Skerries wrote:The only solution for the boys, is for Northern Ireland to break political ties from the rest of the UK but also not join Eire.

NI would have the best golf team in the world. Not a bad effort for a tiny bunch of catholics and protestants who get along better than the media, the extremists and several posters on this forum would have you believe.

And as a Mark of Respect to Commemorate the occasion of your Independence, The Irish Free St...I mean the Irish Government will bestow on you Ireland's Call for your very own Anthem. Now wouldn't that be neighbourly of us?

I doubt your average bloke in England would care if NI ceased to be part of cental UK govt, in fact most kids are so thick these days that Id be suprised if they really have much idea about how NI is governed or in fact even where it is.
Id think the govts view on it has taken a complete volte face in the past 20 years and they wouldnt shed too many tears if there was a complete seperation from the mainland.
Im pretty ambivalent myself, Ive been to Ireland many times but never been to NI or indeed felt any desire to go, but because we are on the same island Ive visited Scotland and Wales many, many times. Be interesting to know what the popular opinion was in NI about it.

Diggers, I agree, in fact I doubt your average bloke in England would care if various parts of England started declaring independence.

I blame the English Comprehensive "Schooling" system myself. Designed by the toffs to keep the masses in their place. The majority of English citizens have little say in what will be in their own country let alone other parts of the UK.

Skerries wrote:Diggers, I agree, in fact I doubt your average bloke in England would care if various parts of England started declaring independence.

I blame the English Comprehensive "Schooling" system myself. Designed by the toffs to keep the masses in their place. The majority of English citizens have little say in what will be in their own country let alone other parts of the UK.

I'm laughing..not out of disrespect. What the two of you said is just true. Indeed I'd go further, the average bloke wouldn't care if the housing estate two miles down the road declared Independence. But it's not only England. Nobody seems to care about anything that isn't happening in their area, on their computer screens, and on their smartphones. Crowded cities - all loners.

SecretFly wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I would have thought 'groundless' is pretty pertinent. Maybe a bit more education and learning to think for oneself would be time better spent than listening to preachers, of all ilks, talking cr@p and stirring up prejudices.

'Groundless' is a scientific term..meaning lack of evidence/lack of a basis in fact, navy. Religious belief doesn't require evidence...it's belief. A child believes in ghosts - ghosts are groundless in scientific terms...the child still believes in ghosts.

Thanks for the lecture in 'science' but as it's what I do I'm not sure I gained a lot from it. I fail to see your point - groundless applies to belief in a religious sense by your definitions just fine.

SecretFly

I think it's inevitable that the current climate will mean that people will have to start caring about things, other than themselves, soon. We're already in trouble but many are too blinkered to realise what's happening, others are in denial.

It's interesting to watch what the establishment (Cons & Labs) is doing now the wheels have finally come off. Suddenly the 'professional' politicians are listening to the people they have dumbed down creating havoc.

England should start looking to learn from the parts of the UK that are still functioning as a 'normal' society.

Sin é wrote:...If there was no such thing as religion/faith (no Adam and Eve in the garden/bible) how would you decide what is right and wrong?

Whether you have no time for religion/faith, you have derived your morality from the bible.

Sorry. Can't pass this up. Rubbish. Utter nonsense. They were discussing ethics and morals in Greece long before the supposed Jesus appeared on the scene - or any of his teachings for that matter. In most recent conflicts, statistically it was far more likely that those 'Samaritans' rescuing/saving people were not religious. Talking of the 'Good Samaritan', am I mistaken (I think not) but wasn't he dong good around the time (before?) Jesus' teachings took hold? If so, what was his moral guiding light as it certainly wasn't Christianity was it?

The Bible is chock full of utterly immoral baloney, which isn't surprising as it's a work of man and of it's time i.e. the childhood of mankind.

navyblueshorts wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I would have thought 'groundless' is pretty pertinent. Maybe a bit more education and learning to think for oneself would be time better spent than listening to preachers, of all ilks, talking cr@p and stirring up prejudices.

'Groundless' is a scientific term..meaning lack of evidence/lack of a basis in fact, navy. Religious belief doesn't require evidence...it's belief. A child believes in ghosts - ghosts are groundless in scientific terms...the child still believes in ghosts.

Thanks for the lecture in 'science' but as it's what I do I'm not sure I gained a lot from it. I fail to see your point - groundless applies to belief in a religious sense by your definitions just fine.

No it don't.
It wasn't a lecture, it was the truth.
If 'Science' was what "you do" you'd be able to understand the concept. Ciao.

Skerries wrote:SecretFly

England should start looking to learn from the parts of the UK that are still functioning as a 'normal' society.

Prey tell where that might be ? The bestiality loving Welsh, the cross dressing Scots or the gun slinging Irish ?

SecretFly wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:Did someone just compare taking the morning after pill to voluntary euthanasia of a fully grown adult?

Voluntary euthanasia of a fully grown man making his own informed decision (his choice) was denied to said fully grown man in court - yes.

Abortion (which isn't furnished by a morning after pill BTW) is allowed with minimal controls (no court ... and even those limited controls were being broken very recently - British journalism not Irish) - yes.

Tis I

It was 'denied' him as the courts decided they shouldn't be making that kind of decision - I tend to agree. It should be discussed and legislated for in Parliament. The courts basically passed it back to Parliament. Unfortunate for Nicklinson given his condition but his case isn't a good example of the sort of 'denial' being discussed here is it?

navyblueshorts wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:Did someone just compare taking the morning after pill to voluntary euthanasia of a fully grown adult?

Voluntary euthanasia of a fully grown man making his own informed decision (his choice) was denied to said fully grown man in court - yes.

Abortion (which isn't furnished by a morning after pill BTW) is allowed with minimal controls (no court ... and even those limited controls were being broken very recently - British journalism not Irish) - yes.

Tis I

It was 'denied' him as the courts decided they shouldn't be making that kind of decision - I tend to agree. It should be discussed and legislated for in Parliament. The courts basically passed it back to Parliament. Unfortunate for Nicklinson given his condition but his case isn't a good example of the sort of 'denial' being discussed here is it?

I dont agree it should be a decision for Parliament personally, its too broad a subject. I believe that their should be some form of high court ruling on a case per case basis that would allow judges to make sensible and indeed humane decisions. But its an incredibly tricky and emotive subject with no easy solutions that will satisfy everyone.

SecretFly wrote:No it don't.
It wasn't a lecture, it was the truth.
If 'Science' was what "you do" you'd be able to understand the concept. Ciao.

Groundless: not based on any good reason. (That's a definition by the way). I'd say that sums up religion fine wouldn't you? "Ciao"? I hope so. Don't let the door hit you on the way out eh?

Diggers wrote:...I dont agree it should be a decision for Parliament personally, its too broad a subject. I believe that their should be some form of high court ruling on a case per case basis that would allow judges to make sensible and indeed humane decisions. But its an incredibly tricky and emotive subject with no easy solutions that will satisfy everyone.

Maybe but Parliament has to have input and to-date it hasn't. Until such time as it does, it's not going to be the Supreme Court etc doing it. Actually, it's pretty pathetic that Parliament refuses to discuss it properly and passes it off to the legal system. Still, I'm not surprised given our political class these days.

Its difficuly to say its groundless when millions upon millions pf people would claim to have faith in a particular god or other. Surely the fact that this phenomena exists...and to suggest every religous person is stupid is just ridiculous.......makes for some kind of good reason to take religion seriously.

Diggers, although it may have come across that way, I wasn't trying to pick out a country. Instead, I would suggest that the parts of the UK that are very broken tend to also be densely populated, i.e. the cities. Most of them are in England but i accept that there are similar problems in the other parts of the UK.

Dense population means less caring individuals - I think this is a human trait because in less dense populations people have to rely on each-other more and therefore can't afford to be a pain in the ass.

One solution might be to give people who live in more traditional, caring, less densely populated societies more of a say in the countries' politics. This could be achieved by making the constituencies the same size geographically rather than by population.

I was only joshing Skerries. Anyway Camerons big society is going to sort us all out so its all going to be OK anyway........hmmm.....
Obviously constituency boundaries are a hot topic under this govt but they have to be so careful when they tinker with them for obvious reasons.

It's groundless. There's no evidence that stands up to any scrutiny. Every single thing about any religion has been systematically taken apart as science etc makes further discoveries.
Religion is the only thing today (except maybe quack food supplements!) that requires no evidence for its claims.
People like to believe in something 'spiritual'. Until we get away from that and a fear of death I'd say religions are here to stay...unfortunately.
It's only worth taking seriously for the damage it can cause - just look at the idiots attacking 'Western' embassies and consulates just now. I take that seriously but I don't think its in the sense you mean!

Anyway. Enough already I think. A bit off-topic....

Well Cameron has recognised a symptom but not the problem. It's only possible to see the problem when you are not part of it.

Changes in boundaries should be done by an apolitical group. We need a brave politician to come forward as a leader who is also prepared to sack himself. Career politicians, as the majority to get to the top are, are our nemesis.

This thread has the lot,

Golf
Ireland
Religion
Politics