Football (Soccer) is better than AFL

Well if you cant get your head around this just by the reading the title, you should just give up now and learn to flip burgers on the 'barby', grab a VB and stand there with your famous 'cork' hat and mutter useless slang like "bloody oath" or "g'day" of which you are accustomed to. However i will shed some light to you on the subject. You can make a start by calling it football, its proper name. Football, based on the fact that you use your feet 90% of the time. It is the world's team sport, a passion in virtually every respectable nation on every continent. Known as the beautiful game it is skillful, fast paced, full of action and pasison. It can be played with just a round object by 2 or more people. Dont get me wrong, Aussie rules is a enertaining game to an extent and i have seen a few games (The Eagles at Subiaco Oval) but it just doesnt posess the skill and grace compared to Football. There is a reason it has never caught on anywhere else in the world. As for the atmosphere at the game? Does it have one? That is something you can prove just by going to an AFL game and then going to a local derby Football match virtually anywhere else in the world. No competition. Lets consider the skill level of AFL, there is none. Anyone can punt a egg shape ball as hard as they can down a huge field and then hope that someone will produce a spectacular catch at the end of it. Its hardly something that you must practice time and time again to perfect. However, what the Afl players do practice everyday is scoring goals which is done by also punting the ball, a little straighter this time, into huge oversized goals consisting of 4 goalposts about 30 metres high. and about 40 meters wide in total. This brings me to how points are allocated. If by some miracle that the player does succeed in kicking the ball straight through the middle posts then he has won his team 6 points. If he misses the middle and puts it wide on either side, his team still gets a point! So from this, if you can imagine a AFl game with both teams on level points and a player has a chance to clinch victory in the dying moments, he can still miss the goal and still yet win the game. Well from my perspective this is just ridiculous. Football on the other hand, combines a variety of skills to score a goal with quick passes and movements or maybe just the 50 yard pass to a teammates feet and then at the end of the build up, the attacker has to score past a goalkeeper into a much smaller sized goal. Football is the world game, and will always be the favourite in all countries. Its even catching on in Australia now, with more and more kids in school opting to enroll in football teams of their national sport. AFl is on the slippery slope out of here, and this will be replaced with 'the beautiful game' Football.

Football versus Sectarianism

Scotland is a relatively small country, it is renowned over the world for its magnificent coastline, its dramatic landscapes and a bloody history of battles lost and battles won to differing invaders. Bagpipes and kilts, haggis and whisky, the thistle and the home of golf. Scotland is a proud nation, proud of our heritage and our culture, proud of our land, proud of our history that has made us who we are today. On the whole the population of Scotland are a friendly sociable bunch of people, always a kind word, always willing to help, always there when needed. But....there is a problem in Scotland and untill that problem is resolved, Scotland will never be the proud race that theyonce were. Religion has divided Scotland into two nations, on the one side are the Protestants and on the other are the catholics and that is where football, or as you call soccer, comes into frame. Glasgow Rangers Football Club have Protestant support and Glasgow Celtic Football Club have catholic support. When they both lay against each other it is called an 'old firm' match. When the teams play agianst one another you can almost physically see the hatred in the air, sectarian chants from both sides fill the air, religious bigotry at its worst, it is like walking into a cauldron of fire and it doesnt stop after the game is over. Each set of supporters verbally abuse each other with teasing, taunting, goading and more often than not many violent conflicts between the rival fans. There has been many deaths over the years before, during and after the old firm matches when rival supporters have attacked each other. This has been a major problem and has brought shame to Scottish football for many years. However... things are changing, football and Scotland as a whole are fighting to combat sectariansim and religious bigotry, we are getting tough on offenders and slowly minimizing the problem over years to come. It starts in schools where children are being taight to respect the religion of tothers in various ways, relgious and sectarian chants are banned from football grounds and anyone caught using or participating in the chants can be banned from visiting a football game in Scotland for life. Although the hatred is still there at any 'old firm game' there is now much less violence and most games are played without fatal incidents and the only battle that takes place is where it should have been all along... on the football park.

Prostitution has long been considered as illegal. But is it necessary to do so?

It is said that prostitution causes inconveinece and troubles to general public. However, the act that considers prostitution as illegal causes inconveinece and troubles to prostitution either. Does general public has the right t0 live without prostitution nearby which will prevent prostitutes from making money with their 'resources', or do prostitutes have the right to make money with their 'resources', which will prevent general public from living in 'and more enjoyable' environment? This is obviously a conflict of interest. The right should be grabted to the side with more social benefits. For example, if legal prostitution brings the society $100 and at the same time causes $50 harms to general public, the right should be granted to prostitutes. You may argue that it is very difficult to determine which side brings larger social benefits. But under some situations we can easily determine it. If prostitutions are located in some low-population-density areas, the harms or inconveinece caused by prostitutions will be smaller. But some may argue that although the inconveince is smaller, people will suffer. If satisfactory compensations for people who suffer are avaliable, people are willing to suffer. The right to prostitute, or the right to stop prostitution should be granted to the genral public (or people who are affected by prostitution) or prostitutes by the time the compensation system operates. However, it is very difficult to deliminate such right. What should be considered as prostitutions? If a female who provides a male with sex services for returns is said to be a prostitute, then is a wife who provides sex services for her husband for his love said to be a prostitute? Is having sex before marriage called as prostitution? We can see that is very 'costly' to deliminate such right.