Radcliffe has no children; Ndereba does

Well, that was a choice Catherine made on her own. I agree that she is a class act. But life is full of choices and Paula has decided to focus on her running career right now instead of a family. That's not necessarily selfish, but the way she prefers her life to be at the time.

you're crazy....

Duhan wrote:

Radcliffe is a selfish jer. No wonder she has time to train and devote like that. She's an egotistical loser whereas Ndebereba is a mother and is deebly religious.

How come you were wasting your time posting here instead of getting out on the street and giving food to the needy or working at a soup kitchen? I guess you're egotistical and selfish, too...

Stupid posts get stupid replies... I respect Radcliffe and her hard work and determination one thousand times more than someone who gives up a promising career for a single child. Think about what she's done for the sport and for the millions of people who care about it. Britain (like the US) is built on the ideas of people working for their goals, not giving up on them.

This must be a contender for most ridiculous post ever.

Catherine would be the first one to say no one has a right to talk that way about Paula. If you want to praise Catherine say that she has too much class to say anything like the person who started this thread.

Indeed. They are both great athletes. One has children, one doesn't. End of story.

Duhan wrote:

Radcliffe is a selfish jer. No wonder she has time to train and devote like that. She's an egotistical loser whereas Ndebereba is a mother and is deebly religious.

That is idiotic. you could just as easily say ndereba is a selfish jerk because she wants to devote her time and money to her offspring whereas Radcliffe wishes to giver her time and money to the public and charity as a whole. She does not need offspring to further her legacy.

But this is all total bs. She's only 28 she can have kids in a few years.

Radcliffe's Form sucks.

Mustafa, Radcliffe is faster than you, she's tougher than you and she's smarter than you. You are a trembling pimple-faced coward. Radcliffe is not, little boy.

Mother Teresa has no children. Madonna does. Who is the better person?

another thing that Radcliffe has

A WORLD RECORD...

It's interesting that you bring the child bearing thing into play. It could easily be argued that having a child is quite selfish, as there are already plenty of young children and babies that need a solid home to live in. Anyways, something that has caught my attention from reading books by Carlos Castaneda is that having children, both for the father and mother, creates a whole in your luminous field, or the light body, or aura, or whatever you wish to call it in the abdominal region. This means there becomes a block in ones energy path and after having children one's potential has been reduced. Of course, until you have reached your mental limits this block won't necesarily slow you down. Obviously Lance Armstrong seems to be doing alright.

I doubt she's tougher than me. I've been shot seven times, twice in the chest, and I still continue to play basketball and hoola-hoop.

Being a mother certainly hasn't stopped Sonia O'Sullivan setting a load of new Irish records either.

you should check out sarah blafer hrdy's 'mother nature' for a really thorough and insightful biological/evolutionary perspective on motherhood, child-rearing, sexual selection, etc... or you should have a piece of cake. your choice.

i don't like to rule anything out, and that goes for sarah blafer hardy's opinions or the cake, but there is generally a deeper resonation within when i read accounts of seers.

You really are a loser.

What's a "jer"?

Geesuz wrote:

Mother Teresa has no children. Madonna does. Who is the better person?

Madonna. She doesn't get the poor to give all their hard earned savings to the church.