facebook Twitter RSS Feed YouTube StumbleUpon

Home | Forum | Chat | Tours | Articles | Pictures | News | Tools | History | Tourism | Search

 
 


Go Back   BanglaCricket Forum > Miscellaneous > Forget Cricket

Forget Cricket Talk about anything [within Board Rules, of course :) ]

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old February 8, 2008, 07:10 PM
shaad's Avatar
shaad shaad is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 5, 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD, USA
Posts: 3,528

Quote:
Originally Posted by goru
First off, I'm not sure if the mods/admins have a problem with discussing this topic with minors around, so I'd suggest keeping it "clean" (although, I myself don't have a problem with bringing anything into the discussion).

So, what are your views on homosexuality? Do you believe homosexuals are "unnatural" people? Do you think they are likely to go to "hell"? Do you believe that a man cannot fall in love with a man and a woman cannot fall in love with a woman? And if you do believe that such love is possible, then why do you feel it's different from man-woman love? Are your views based on rational reasoning and/or religious beliefs? If rational reasoning (i.e. not because "God told me so", however if God has provided you with rational reasons, we can discuss them), please do state what they are.
Interesting post, goru. I'll approach it from several perspectives.

First, in my personal code of ethics, consensual acts between two or more sane adults that do not cause harm to others are prefectly fine with me. And since being "disgusting" or "obscene" to some forum members here doesn't really strike me as acts causing harm, I have no problems with homosexuality. Mind you, it's not really my cup of tea, but then eating "shutki maach" isn't my cup of tea either, and I don't go around labelling the latter as "unnatural".

Second, some posters would like to suggest that homosexual or bisexual behaviour is not innate, but learned, and therefore the issue of choice enters into it. I think it is more accurate to say that sexual orientation is a result of complex interactions between environmental, cognitive/psychological and biological factors. Evidence for biological components include:
  • Twin studies in humans, where genetically identical monozygotic twins are both more likely to be gay if one is, than fraternal (non-genetically identical) twins. There are some criticisms of these studies (ascertainment bias), but the trend seems real.
  • Correlation between fraternal birth order and sexual orientation. The fraternal birth order effect is the strongest known predictor of sexual orientation; crudely, each older brother increases a man's chances of being gay.
  • The gene fruitless in Drosophila, different versions of which can lead to male-to-female courtship, male-to-male courtship, extremely aggressive male-to-female courtship, etc.
  • The gene TRPC2 in mice, a knockout of which results in both male and female mice becoming bisexual.

Third, some posters have also tried to hint that choice is always involved, since some gay men have had children and are thus capable of coupling with women. Orpheus has already responded to this, but I think it's important to emphasize his point again. The phenotypes of many genetic traits, particularly in the arena of behaviour, are not always of the all-or-nothing category; most exhibit normal or gaussian distribution, i.e. there will be some homosexual/bisexual males capable of coupling with females, just as there will be some who cannot. In addition, I don't wish to sound unnecessarily crude here, but anyone armed with say, a probe and a firm understanding of biology/anatomy could make any male, straight or gay, ejaculate in the presence of another male human, a donkey, or a blank canvas. There would be no choice involved; but would the fact the he is "capable" of ejaculating in the presence of another male make him gay? If not, then the converse argument, as presented above, also does not fly.

Fourth, it has been suggested that homosexuality is somehow contradictory to evolution since the latter involves the passing on of genes. There are several reasons why such an argument is invalid.
  • It assumes that homosexuality is an all-or-nothing phenotype. But, as we have discussed earlier, sexual orientation appears to show a normal distribution. In addition, it's not as if every new homosexual is born with a new mutation that provided him with the relevant versions of the genes. In almost all cases these genes were carried, presumably in heterozygous form, by their parents. But, even if one assumes an ideal scenario for it to become eliminated from the population, one in which homosexuality is due to only one recessive gene (as mentioned by Orpheus, it's likely to be multifactorial, i.e. involve multiple genes), is 100% penetrant (i.e. all who are homozygous for it are homosexual; obviously untrue, as twin studies have shown), and results in no homosexual male ever coupling with a female (again, false, as has been discussed), one finds when one does the math that it would take eons for it to completely disappear (al Furqaan, you might like the math involved; PM me if interested). As an aside, it's also the same reason why ethnic cleansing of any form is unlikely to ever work.
  • It assumes that the genes associated with sexual orientation control only sexual orientation, and no other traits (the genes I mentioned affecting sexual orientation in Drosophila and mice are involved in other functions; completely eliminating the fruitless gene, for instance, results in a dead fly). An interesting analogy is the version of the gene that brings about sickle cell anaemia in humans. It's an illness-causing gene, yet it persists with fairly high distribution among the population in Africa because it confers resistance to malaria. If some of the other traits associated with the genes regulating sexual orientation provided some positive selection, then homosexuality would continue to persist in the human population.
  • It assumes there is no kin selection. Kin selection is used to describe evolutionary strategies that favour the reproductive success of an individual's relatives, even at a cost to its own survival or reproduction, e.g. one penguin leading a predator like a sea leopard away from the rest of its brood. Yes, the individual itself might not survive, but its genes, shared by its relatives, continue to be passed on. So, if some of the other traits associated with the genes involved allowed the homosexual individual to improve the reproductive success of his relatives, then these genes too would have been postively selected.

Finally, just as a corollary, there appears to be a suggestion that heterosexual sex is "natural" because it can result in procreation. However, procreation is not the reason on most of the occasions that we indulge in sexual intercourse; not to put it too crudely, recreation is. If that is the case, what is "unnatural" about homosexuals indulging in the same activity for recreation?
__________________
Shaad

Last edited by shaad; February 8, 2008 at 07:17 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old February 8, 2008, 08:26 PM
Pundit Pundit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 17, 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 3,338

Quote:
Originally Posted by al Furqaan
agreed. but the point of the thread was to discuss homosexuality with no other strings attached. the fact that homos are angels compared to the average muslim from the neo-con perspective, whilst true to the core, is also irrelevant.
If you are not talking about things with some context, then how do you think people have opinions? What then are you soliciting here - people's opinion on something that is monolithic in nature to begin with - that being your thesis?

It seems like you could be a person who likes a discussion, but soon stutters with your own confined, if not impetous, hyperbolic sense of intellect.

My guess is that you have been called just that more than once in your own lifetime. But that's me just guessing!
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old February 8, 2008, 08:39 PM
Sohel's Avatar
Sohel Sohel is offline
Cricket Savant
 
Join Date: April 18, 2007
Location: Dhaka
Favorite Player: Nazimuddin
Posts: 35,372

Once again Shaad summed up my views on the matter better than I could. Thank you Shaad. I also agree with ATMR, Razab and Miraz on the subject.

Last word, all personal preferences notwithstanding: I have had friends and colleagues who are gay, and I have failed to get along with people who happened to be gay also. It is all about the "content of one's individual character" and its greater social impact IMHO, not what they do in the bedroom or how they choose to do it and why.

Personally speaking, I find all forms of promiscuity to be ultimately unkind and therefore somewhat morally repugnant. Then again, I am aware of the fact there are exceptions to every rule even though I have yet to meet a genuinely happy swinger, gay or straight, who is at peace with him or herself. Another matter.

Living and working in San Francisco and Berkeley most of my adult life, I never thought twice about such matters to be honest. If my children are gay, then my job as a parent is to embed good values in them, so that they can be kind and caring to themselves and therefore to others.
__________________
"And do not curse those who call on other than GOD, lest they blaspheme and curse GOD, out of ignorance. We have adorned the works of every group in their eyes. Ultimately, they return to their Lord, then He informs them of everything they had done." (Qur'an 6:108)

Last edited by Sohel; February 9, 2008 at 02:08 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old February 8, 2008, 09:42 PM
al Furqaan's Avatar
al Furqaan al Furqaan is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: February 18, 2004
Location: New York City
Favorite Player: Mominul, Nasir, Taskin
Posts: 20,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orpheus
If thinking that makes you feel good.. sure! But I do not think that will make you a better thinker though. You lack basic understanding of various subject matters yet you keep spewing out garbage trying to sound intelligent. When someone points out where your logic falls apart, you keep on harping on and on about some unrelated stuff, until the other person is just annoyed and gives up. I have shown your posts more respect than it deserves.
perhaps. but that could be said of anyone one disagrees with. but i'll give you the point here.

Quote:
Somewhere you heard the term "gay gene" and without much thoughts, you blabbered it out to defend that people are gay by choice since no one found the "gay gene". Then I nicely pointed out that there is no particular gene for hypertension or diabetes either but there is a genetic component to it. (FACT) We know it because of various correlation studies with monozygotic and dizygotic twins, also by gene association studies among target vs general population (I assume you know this because you took biology). I told you that you can not isolate a single gene for gayness because it is probably multifactorial.
OK, i'll admit this is interesting. however it appears as though gay people who come out of the closet have always seem to chant the mantra of "i had my first homosexual experience/thoughts/realization when i was...".

Quote:
Now had you known your subject matter, you would have immediately thought of some correlation studies instead you defended your position by saying "plausible but gayness is by choice and not inherited"(OPINION..you've no back up). EVEN AFTER I QUOTED THAT PARTICULAR SENTENCE OF YOURS.. you've asked me to give you an example where your arguments were not factual and you sounded very condescending about it.
ahh but it is factual. note the number of gays who mysteriously convert to evangelical christians. and if you disregard that. note the oft-repeated state of gays having their first realization of homosexual tendencies. it almost always happens in the teen years. now i realized my heterosexuality at the age of 4 or so. i thought girls were nice. very nice. i'm guessing the same happens to everyone.

i'll admit that the RARE instance of children "born as the wrong" gender is very intriguing. however that is not exactly similar to homosexuality. these people generally have sex changes and assume identities allowing them to engage in "hetersexual" behavior. it is interesting, and i'll admit i have no clue about it.

Quote:
If you were, I would have said - yes you are right.
very few humans have the capability that possess of admitting mistakes. i don't think you're in that class, frankly.

Quote:
see, knowing you, you will probably quote me on every sentence and reply...I am just letting you know.. I will read it.. and deep down inside curse the $hit out of you because it will make no sense.. but will try not to waste my energy and time in a written reply.
i must applaud the foresight; al Furqaan don't back down from no one. curse ahead. i for one will hope you can see things as they are, rather than as you want them to be.
__________________
Bangladesh is a stronger team with Shakib al Hasan.
Bangladesh is a stronger team without Shakib al Hasan.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old February 9, 2008, 05:51 AM
BD-Shardul BD-Shardul is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: October 16, 2006
Location: Doha, Qatar
Favorite Player: Mash,Shakib,Tamim
Posts: 7,046

The real sickness

Warning

Last edited by BD-Shardul; February 9, 2008 at 06:08 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old February 9, 2008, 06:38 AM
GuruTM's Avatar
GuruTM GuruTM is offline
ODI Cricketer
 
Join Date: May 30, 2005
Location: বলা যাবে না।
Favorite Player: আশরাফুল
Posts: 960

Goru, i have a different type of question to you. In an affectionate way. Why do you need our views? Is it really important to you? Do you have something to tell? Did someone took advantage of your vulnerability at some stage in your life? If you don't mind please share.
__________________
পথিকঃ বৃক্ষ তোমার নাম কি?
বৃক্ষঃ নামে কি'ইবা হয়? ফলেই পরিচয়।
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old February 9, 2008, 06:53 AM
goru's Avatar
goru goru is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: jinjira
Favorite Player: James Bond
Posts: 2,094

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuruTM
Why do you need our views?
Quite simply, it tells me something about some of the members here...

BTW, it's not like I just suddenly thought of discussing this topic here. It was triggered by a post made in this thread.
__________________
Dust That Sings
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old February 9, 2008, 08:10 AM
newbie's Avatar
newbie newbie is offline
ODI Cricketer
 
Join Date: June 23, 2005
Location: Hotlanta
Posts: 542

Love and let Love
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old February 9, 2008, 09:59 AM
Puck's Avatar
Puck Puck is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: June 12, 2007
Location: Yonder
Favorite Player: Me
Posts: 2,103

i have not contributed to this thread as yet because of a slight prejudice. i am rather ashamed of it and over the years had worked hard to resolve this dislike, but haven't succeeded altogether. i realise i am definitely in the wrong so normally keep my views to myself.

i hold no prejudice towards homosexuality. however, i carry a latent dislike of the 'camp' in men. the camp is a predominantly british term to define effeminate behaviour in gay men to fit into a gay community. non camp homosexual men tend to define themselves as straight-acting.

the term 'acting' is indeed of much importance here. my research interest had crossed gender theory a few times without really having spent any degree of specialisation. i have worked on feminism as an academic discipline as well as the field of 'cultural context' and 'queer-theory'. a close friend and ex tutor from my undergraduate days is an italian feminist who is a well known scholar within the field of queer theory. queer theory basically espouses the idea that we are all born into this world and pick up our behaviour from the society we live in. so boys wear blue and girls wear pink. boys play football and girls play with barbie dolls. these are of course the visible stimuli. the unconscious thought process is only begining to be understood and there are many other factors that helps us reach a gender biased state where we have definitely taken on the historical attributes that define the behaviour of a typical male or a female. so gender is a construct (based on this argument).

so why am i biased? i have no idea. homosexuality was illegal in this country until the 60s. up until the last ten years the age of consent for homosexual sex was 21. now it has been lowered to 18. is homosexuality wrong? i suppose that depends on your cultural perspective. i would assume that most people being brought up in bangladesh, educated in bangladesh would think of it as a disease. most people in strictly religious countries or where religion plays a very prominent part in everyday lives of the citizen finds homosexuality intollerable. in the anglo-saxon west there is still some prejudice but secularisation has gradually erroded some of this prejudice. i personally find the campness to be a little ridiculas, especially when it is artifcial. i could understand the campness in the eighties and perhaps the nineties, but since gays are accepted in society in our age, i see little need for the campness.

my ex-girlfiend's older brother was gay. he had known about his sexuality apparently, from a very early age. he never had a girlfriend and after university joined the church of england as a priest. so he was essentially celibate and never had sex upto the age of 27. he met someone at the age of 27, fell in love, left the church (his job not the religious belief) and after same sex marriages were legalised, he married his partner. over the years i have known, been friends with and worked with gay men and women. some i liked, some i disliked but never because of their sexuality. i presently work with a chap called julian who is as camp as anyone could get. here, my prejudice kicks in but i don't vocalise it. i certainly would never reveal to him my dislike for his effeminacy.

in a way, i see this dislike as something totally natural. for instance, i love eating chocolates and all things sweet. diabetes is in my family and there is a chance that i might well develop the disease in the next ten years if i continue my present lifestyle. yet i indulge in sweets. i know it is wrong and bad for me but i still do it. my prejudice against the campness of julian is similarly wrong. i know that any vocalisation of it would hurt his feelings so i never utter a word, yet i carry it with me. i certainly don't have a problem with his preference for men but i do have a problem with his campness.
__________________
'immerse your soul in love' - thom yorke
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old February 9, 2008, 12:21 PM
Rabz's Avatar
Rabz Rabz is offline
BanglaCricket Staff
BC - Bangladesh Representative
 
Join Date: February 28, 2005
Location: Here
Favorite Player: Father of BD Cricket
Posts: 20,471

WoW! couple of days MIA in BC, and we have some hot new topics!!

Personally, I dont appreciate the "act of homosexuality", but i have no problem with homosexuals. As voiced by some other in this forum, i have no problem with two consenting adult doing whatever behind thier closed doors.

Specially after working in fashion-retail industry where 70% of men are gay, it was part of my daily life to be around gay guys for the better part of the day. And seriously, i had no problem with it. Infact, i found them more fun to be around.

Even more on a personal note, one of my very very good friend came out of closet few years back. She confirmed what she always suspected and i was the first person to be told!! What could i do! i had to be her mental support throughout her whole process as her whole family was against the notion (she was of Arab heritage).

She used to drag me out to lesbian clubs and i had a chance to met with a lot of gay/lesbian people thru that. Talking with a lot of them, i got to understand gay/lesbians a whole lot better and my notion changed from "oh thats sick" to "well, i dont complain as it doesnt really bother me".

From a religious point of view, homosexuality is forbidden. But so is all other form of sexuality beside an act of sex between a married man and his wife.

If homosexuality is just a kind of sexual orientation, what difference is that from heterosexuals' orientation towards bdsm/fetish/swinging/polygamy? ( sorry, not sure if im crossing the level of civility here).

Well...bottom line, i learned not to worry about things that doesnt really involved me.
__________________
Verily, in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find rest [Al-Qur'an,13:28]
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old February 9, 2008, 12:34 PM
Bengaliprince176's Avatar
Bengaliprince176 Bengaliprince176 is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: March 18, 2007
Location: UK- Notts
Favorite Player: PRINCE OF KOLKATA!!!
Posts: 1,013

i have nothing against gays, when i was younger a few years back, in high school, it was a common thing to bash gays and being called gay was an insult, but we did it anyway as jokes, and even now, at college, their usual insult, gay this, gay that blah blah, there will always be prejucide against them, and their a re a few gay teachers at my school, one of them came upto us, once when we were laughing at something he was doing when showing another boy how to do the triple jump.....after that incident i grew up, he seemed hurt and angry but kept his cool when talking to us., since then i couldnt care less, what people are, it was wrong of me to laugh and even take the mick behind their back, i thought it was plain wrong, and when i hear things on the news, gay rapists, etc etc it sickens me still, but it would be wrong of me to do anything, who am i? ill let God decide what is right and wrong, on this issue. it doesnt concern me anymore.
__________________
Ek Tanatey Jemon Tamon, Do Tanatey Ruugi,
Tin Tanatey Raja Ujir, Char Tanetey Sukhi!!!
----KISHORE "THE LEGEND" KUMAR!!!!- Troyee-----
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old February 9, 2008, 04:21 PM
Pundit Pundit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 17, 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 3,338

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck
i would assume that most people being brought up in bangladesh, educated in bangladesh would think of it as a disease. most people in strictly religious countries or where religion plays a very prominent part in everyday lives of the citizen finds homosexuality intollerable. in the anglo-saxon west there is still some prejudice but secularisation has gradually erroded some of this prejudice.
You are again mistaking secularism with materialism. Since you have commented on Bangladeshis, let me add to it. Unfortunately, you yourself is nothing but a product of our bangladeshi leap frog culture exhibited among a sub-set of its population who perceive themselves to have been enlightened by the West.

This has really been so convenient to the powers that be ,coming from the West - so often before, either as the garbage russian communism or the french brand of secularism. The earlier has played with the minds, degenerating them to a point of utter dispair, and packed it with the misplaced notion that it's good to vent anger towards people who are more capable and achieved more in their lifetime. The latter is nothing but yet a more degenerate version of Woodstock, only that it continues to last in your mind, and robs you with all the notion of social responsibility desired of modern men and women. Go ahead, continue to be condescending and judgemental, and you will remain no more than the man servant you are at a british lord's kitchen.

And on the main topic - people in the West have not accepted homesexuality - its just that they could care less about it when put in the context of the 15 hour work days, retirement money concerns from the age of 25, 401ks e.t.c. Better yet, apparently its also providing a venue for making more money. Yeah, so why should I complain.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old February 9, 2008, 06:02 PM
One World's Avatar
One World One World is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: May 18, 2005
Location: New England
Favorite Player: Charlie Chaplin
Posts: 16,585

This thread reminds me Sunil Gangopaddhaya and Alan Ginsberg.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old February 9, 2008, 08:40 PM
shaad's Avatar
shaad shaad is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 5, 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD, USA
Posts: 3,528

Er guys, I understand this thread is a little controversial, and I am not averse to a good argument either. But can you leave the ad hominems out of it? Both of you are good debaters and can make your points without taking potshots at one another.
__________________
Shaad
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old February 9, 2008, 10:09 PM
goru's Avatar
goru goru is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: jinjira
Favorite Player: James Bond
Posts: 2,094

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaad
Er guys, I understand this thread is a little controversial, and I am not averse to a good argument either. But can you leave the ad hominems out of it? Both of you are good debaters and can make your points without taking potshots at one another.
*cough* Not to mention how certain mods will use those kinds of posts as an excuse to close/delete such threads. *cough*
__________________
Dust That Sings
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old February 10, 2008, 12:01 AM
billah billah is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: September 5, 2003
Posts: 5,364

Quote:
Originally Posted by goru
*cough* Not to mention how certain mods will use those kinds of posts as an excuse to close/delete such threads. *cough*
I think the bc mods are sensible enough to allow a civil discussion on one of the most interest generating topic of our generation.

Another thought - this is a dream thread for the pedantic (i.e. shaad, pundit, Sohelnr, even our Herr Doctor Z). I say, keep this going guys, keep it interesting. Keep it light, however. Discuss it without the mudslinging (Orphy excluded)
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old February 10, 2008, 04:36 AM
Arnab Arnab is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: June 20, 2002
Location: BanglaCricket.com
Posts: 6,069

It seems to me that BC is approaching the status of a moderated usenet group on any conceivable topic. I personally didn't quite foresee such an explicit, pre-determined and open discussion here on the nature of human sexual orientation. But carry on.
__________________
ক্লান্তি আমার ক্ষমা করো,প্রভু,
পথে যদি পিছিয়ে পড়ি কভু।
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old February 10, 2008, 04:45 AM
Rabz's Avatar
Rabz Rabz is offline
BanglaCricket Staff
BC - Bangladesh Representative
 
Join Date: February 28, 2005
Location: Here
Favorite Player: Father of BD Cricket
Posts: 20,471

Good to see our youngins not indulging them into this topic.
Im impressed with thier well behaved manner.
Goes to show thier maturity and good netiquette.
__________________
Verily, in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find rest [Al-Qur'an,13:28]
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old February 10, 2008, 11:46 AM
Pundit Pundit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 17, 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 3,338

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabz
Good to see our youngins not indulging them into this topic.
Im impressed with thier well behaved manner.
Goes to show thier maturity and good netiquette.
Yes, I agree. Not only do they know better and thus refrain from indulging in the practice of this "form of art," but also have enough brain power to not waste time in this needless discussion.

Perhaps Goru will graciously provide us with an exit point by summarizing all that has been captured on this topic, including how we have gotten about to discuss it. What do you say dude - care to spend some time on a summary thread, and then we can move on to the SA series.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old February 10, 2008, 12:43 PM
al Furqaan's Avatar
al Furqaan al Furqaan is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: February 18, 2004
Location: New York City
Favorite Player: Mominul, Nasir, Taskin
Posts: 20,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arnab
It seems to me that BC is approaching the status of a moderated usenet group on any conceivable topic. I personally didn't quite foresee such an explicit, pre-determined and open discussion here on the nature of human sexual orientation. But carry on.
well thats because the hot-headed simple posters have stayed out or were uninterested by the topic. its a shame that any thread has to be closed down because a few lose their cool and ruin it for the many.
__________________
Bangladesh is a stronger team with Shakib al Hasan.
Bangladesh is a stronger team without Shakib al Hasan.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old February 10, 2008, 01:00 PM
layperson's Avatar
layperson layperson is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Favorite Player: Tamim & Sakib
Posts: 2,574

Quote:
Originally Posted by al Furqaan
well thats because the hot-headed simple posters have stayed out or were uninterested by the topic. its a shame that any thread has to be closed down because a few lose their cool and ruin it for the many.

Are you looking for me?
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old February 10, 2008, 01:05 PM
al Furqaan's Avatar
al Furqaan al Furqaan is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: February 18, 2004
Location: New York City
Favorite Player: Mominul, Nasir, Taskin
Posts: 20,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by layperson
Are you looking for me?
not unless you are responsible for closing down previous controversial threads.

__________________
Bangladesh is a stronger team with Shakib al Hasan.
Bangladesh is a stronger team without Shakib al Hasan.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old February 10, 2008, 01:10 PM
goru's Avatar
goru goru is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: jinjira
Favorite Player: James Bond
Posts: 2,094

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pundit
Perhaps Goru will graciously provide us with an exit point by summarizing all that has been captured on this topic, including how we have gotten about to discuss it. What do you say dude - care to spend some time on a summary thread, and then we can move on to the SA series.
Not really, I don't believe in summarizing "debate" threads for the lazy or the people who aren't interested enough to read the whole thing.

Besides, I don't see why this thread would need an "exit point" ... that might be important if people are going around in circles on the same topic. If someone has something new to add, then go ahead... otherwise, let the thread drop away.
__________________
Dust That Sings
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old February 10, 2008, 01:20 PM
Arnab Arnab is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: June 20, 2002
Location: BanglaCricket.com
Posts: 6,069

Now I see a Google ad banner of loveandpride.com, a "premier" gay site, on Valentine's day gifts featuring two gay guys. That's just great. Dumb Google.
__________________
ক্লান্তি আমার ক্ষমা করো,প্রভু,
পথে যদি পিছিয়ে পড়ি কভু।
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old February 10, 2008, 01:25 PM
goru's Avatar
goru goru is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: jinjira
Favorite Player: James Bond
Posts: 2,094

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arnab
Now I see a Google ad banner of loveandpride.com, a "premier" gay site, on Valentine's day gifts featuring two gay guys. That's just great. Dumb Google.
I swear I just spit out my drink...
__________________
Dust That Sings
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
BanglaCricket.com
 

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Partner Sites | Useful Links | Banners |

© BanglaCricket