Dion

To be honest, I think the religious argument is just a cop out for a discrimination that already exists, this is the reason why you don't see the same hate against other sins. Also, justifying a discrimination with religion has happened before, even with the example of blacks. In the past people tried to justify the existence of black skin and slavery in the bible too, they used the curse of Ham that time. I find it funny how religion is often used to oppress other people or justify terrible actions. Regardless of that, even if it is purely out of religion beliefs, it still doesn't make it right. It is not right to force your beliefs on others, especially when their actions cause 0 harm to you.

I was not saying you, Fernando, just a hypothetical person who believes it is a sin. As they should. If business owners are refusing to perform gay weddings simply because they are gay weddings they should be taken to court, just like if they were refusing to perform weddings between blacks or any other sort of stupid reason people will find to discriminate. By the way, doesn't the Bible say God is the only judge or something like that? If that is so, religious people should abide to that and treat everyone equally and let the sinners burn in hell later or whatever. Anyhow I find the argument of sin very silly because I don't see any laws that prohibit eating competitions or people becoming obese despite gluttony being one of the seven deadly sins. I could spend all day listing sins that are not as frowned upon as homosexuality. It just strikes me as a strange reasoning really.

If you think homosexuality is a sin you're free to be heterosexual while allowing others to be whatever they want and leaving it to God to punish them later if it comes to that. Because homosexuals aren't harming anyone by being attracted to people of the same gender.

What I never understood about people who are against gay marriage is how does gay marriage affect them negatively? I just can't see it. How can someone be against something that doesn't directly affect them negatively in any way? And one that means a lot to the people who are denied from it. Both in regards to legal rights but also emotionally speaking. But again, I was never really good at understanding people.

Luis Fabiano was a very good player.

So long since I have last seen people using socks that high, or with sandals for that matter.

Yeah, brazilian names are sort of like that.

We usually have long surnames actually.

Suárez is so good and yet so unselfish. Holy shit, what a player. It's not by chance that he almost carried Liverpool to the title.

I can only remember two games where Courtois made mistakes not compatible with the level of goalkeeper he has and in one of those he more than redeemed himself in the same game. De Gea has the potential to play like he's the best goalkeeper in the world some games but then he's mediocre in many others. I'd take a goalkeeper that pulls 8 performances every game over one who sometimes is a 10 sometimes is 6 any day. Maybe his style and past doesn't help my judgement, but if I was a man utd fan I'd never feel safe with him there.

IMO DDG is not even top 3 EPL. I'd take any of Cech, Courtois and Lloris ahead of him. Whereas one arguably doesn't make top 3 in his domestic league the other is arguably top 3 in the world. Not even close. I don't like DDG's style nor his consistency, to me it seems he makes silly mistakes too often. Even in this season with his improved version, because in the past he was simply bad, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

De Gea is not nearly as good as some make him to be. Courtois is easily better, I'd be surprised to see Thibaut concede like that but I wasn't surprised in the least to see it from DDG.

HOLY SHIT

Nah. Just trying to go on the opposite spectrum of people who make a decent/average performance look like the worst performance of a professional player. I think it's only fair.

Come on, it was a fluke, dude. It's not like he took a look and saw Hazard's movement and free space before the backheel.

Yeah, sell him already in light of the increase in his pricetag for that assist.

wat r u talkin abut m8, any1 couldve dune dat pass

Oscar, so useless in that assist.

They might not be looking like world beaters but it doesn't change the fact that Porto's first goals were awarded to them by some really uncharacteristic individual mistakes, not because of Bayern's system or great offensive play by Porto. Fair play to Porto for pressing the defenders and everything but still those errors should have never happened.

To be honest they're losing from weird individual mistakes not their attacking philosophy or system.

So that's the Leif thief story. Always wondered.

He was arguably the best player in the team in the first half of last season. And I'm not the one saying this, if you go back to the posts made back then you'll see many people saying that. I think being maybe the best performing player in the team for half a season is probably more than playing ok but whatever.

If they were identical wouldn't that necessarily imply same gender? If they're boy / girl they can't be identical.

Where's the sexiest women thread? Had an addition to make, unfortunately she's argentinian https://instagram.com/p/1O94sVjFR_/

I know what you're getting at – he was marketed as the next Pelé but my point is: he never dominated the league in the fashion Neymar did. Heck, Robinho probably wasn't even the best player in the league when he was sold, Neymar was. Robinho's most iconic play here was being fouled and getting a penalty to make Santos win the league – that's how much of a stretch it was, his most memorable feat was getting a penalty, and a really soft one at that, if not a dive all together. Robinho's legendary play: Anyone with half a brain knows it takes a lot more than that to make the next Pelé. Pelé scored a shit ton of goals, Robinho never even was a good goal scorer. It was probably the dumbest hype I've seen in my life.