reply to post by semperfortis
I don't actually watch a lot of rugby, but I've been led to believe that there is actually a 10 yard penalty for cutting slack, with ejection from
the game for a second offense.
Comment on ATS Debates Here, page 3
privacy
reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 12:09 PM by budski
reply to post by The Vagabond
The ten yard penalty is for questioning a refereeing decision too vigorously or for backchat to the ref, as well as not retreating immediately in certain situations where you have to be ten yards away from the opposing side.
Kind of like with mods here
(j/k)
I've opened, GUNSINWAR is up.
I suppose I have to award stars to vagabond instead of semper now so he doesn't take it out on me in my debate 
(another joke)
[edit on 25/1/2008 by budski]
The ten yard penalty is for questioning a refereeing decision too vigorously or for backchat to the ref, as well as not retreating immediately in certain situations where you have to be ten yards away from the opposing side.
Kind of like with mods here
(j/k) I've opened, GUNSINWAR is up.
I suppose I have to award stars to vagabond instead of semper now so he doesn't take it out on me in my debate
(another joke) [edit on 25/1/2008 by budski]
reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 12:19 PM by bodrul
reply to post by The Vagabond
and i shall become your new best friend, that is when your income explodes
i have a question about the debate.
Facts trump religous logic? or can people use Religous logic to back their statements.
and i shall become your new best friend, that is when your income explodes
i have a question about the debate.
Facts trump religous logic? or can people use Religous logic to back their statements.
reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 12:33 PM by bodrul
reply to post by The Vagabond
cool
i tend to use more factual evidence then anything biblical (well rarely and thats only in religous topics)
thanks for the heads ups
cool
i tend to use more factual evidence then anything biblical (well rarely and thats only in religous topics)
thanks for the heads ups
reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 04:17 PM by budski
reply to post by bodrul
A previous member no longer with us, consistently showed that logic and reason prevails over religious quotes, dogma and theory.
In a religious debate there is room for religious quotes.
IMO there is little room in any subject, except esoteric, for attempting to quote religion - except for passages which MAY have a moral message.
And yes - that statement was intentional.
According to the life of brian.
[edit on 25/1/2008 by budski]
A previous member no longer with us, consistently showed that logic and reason prevails over religious quotes, dogma and theory.
In a religious debate there is room for religious quotes.
IMO there is little room in any subject, except esoteric, for attempting to quote religion - except for passages which MAY have a moral message.
And yes - that statement was intentional.
According to the life of brian.
[edit on 25/1/2008 by budski]
reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 09:22 AM by GAOTU789
reply to post by Skyfloating
Thanks Sky. I think you did a great job considering the difficulty of your position. Hard to argue that everyone in a certian class can all be the same, regardless of what your saying they are. THere is always exceptiuons to the rule.
I actually thought you might win it seeing as this ATS and there is a lot members who believe what you where arguing for.
Looking forward to your and Bodrul's debate. Good luck mate.
[edit on 26-1-2008 by GAOTU789]
Thanks Sky. I think you did a great job considering the difficulty of your position. Hard to argue that everyone in a certian class can all be the same, regardless of what your saying they are. THere is always exceptiuons to the rule.
I actually thought you might win it seeing as this ATS and there is a lot members who believe what you where arguing for.
Looking forward to your and Bodrul's debate. Good luck mate.
[edit on 26-1-2008 by GAOTU789]
