The Politics Thread

[Harry Genshaw]

The Employment Secretary, Chris Grayling, said that what the UK was now seeing was "the impact of the international financial crisis".

I wish they'd make their mind up. Last week it was the fault of the mess they inherited from the previous administration and was all Labours fault. Now it's the international financial crisis. They (The Govt) never refer to this 'international crisis' when discussing Labours record in Govt.

[BWFC_Insane]

The Employment Secretary, Chris Grayling, said that what the UK was now seeing was "the impact of the international financial crisis".

I wish they'd make their mind up. Last week it was the fault of the mess they inherited from the previous administration and was all Labours fault. Now it's the international financial crisis. They (The Govt) never refer to this 'international crisis' when discussing Labours record in Govt.

Except this has nothing to do with the global crisis and everything to do with indiscriminate and ideological Tory cuts. Brown told them what would happen, so did everyone, but they didnt listen and neither did the British public.

For the Tories to try and pass the blame on the rising unemployment is frankly the biggest load of bunkum. They are making people unemployed. At the same time they have ground the economy to a halt, destroyed the NHS and public services, all cos as usual they want to protect their own, big business and the finance sector. Funnily enough areas that will survive the horrific mess the normal folk of this country are in.

All whilst telling us to pay off our credit card bills.

[Lord Kangana]

Theres no point in saving money at the moment, interest rates are shit. I normally have all my cards paid up at the end of the month, now I'm not bothering. Most of 'em are 0% deals anyhows.

I see it as a manageable risk, just like the banks. I.e., somebody elses.

[BWFC_Insane]

Theres no point in saving money at the moment, interest rates are shit. I normally have all my cards paid up at the end of the month, now I'm not bothering. Most of 'em are 0% deals anyhows.

I see it as a manageable risk, just like the banks. I.e., somebody elses.

And then in your small way you are sticking your middle finger up at Cameron et al. And for that I salute you! Perhaps Cameron should tell his cronies to stop chucking 0% offers round so freely! Been offered 3 cards this week with 0% for 6-15 months!

[Lord Kangana]

We're all in it together.

The trough, that is.

[thebish]

“The figures published today show two million more private sector jobs. They show 1.4 million more people in work at the end of this parliament. They show unemployment falling every year.”

David Cameron, prime minister’s questions, 30 June 2010

hmmmmmm..... pants on fire??

[Hoboh]

“The figures published today show two million more private sector jobs. They show 1.4 million more people in work at the end of this parliament. They show unemployment falling every year.”

David Cameron, prime minister’s questions, 30 June 2010

hmmmmmm..... pants on fire??

You never say something you believe in bish and it don't come up to scratch?

If so where's me lottery win? I always ask the Father & Son (Not sure what use the spirit would be) and they ain't delivered yet!

[William the White]

You never say something you believe in bish and it don't come up to scratch?

If so where's me lottery win? I always ask the Father & Son (Not sure what use the spirit would be) and they ain't delivered yet!

This is almost like a cryptic clue in a really difficult crossword... I think i almost understand it and then, all of a sudden, it slips away into some... mystery...

The meaning, the meaning?

[Hoboh]

You never say something you believe in bish and it don't come up to scratch?

If so where's me lottery win? I always ask the Father & Son (Not sure what use the spirit would be) and they ain't delivered yet!

This is almost like a cryptic clue in a really difficult crossword... I think i almost understand it and then, all of a sudden, it slips away into some... mystery...

The meaning, the meaning?

You'll get it don't worry! think beyond the third dimension (that's first left past planet hoboh)

[Worthy4England]

“The figures published today show two million more private sector jobs. They show 1.4 million more people in work at the end of this parliament. They show unemployment falling every year.”

David Cameron, prime minister’s questions, 30 June 2010

hmmmmmm..... pants on fire??

You never say something you believe in bish and it don't come up to scratch?

If so where's me lottery win? I always ask the Father & Son (Not sure what use the spirit would be) and they ain't delivered yet!

I don't recall the Father, Son or the Holy Ghost for that matter promising you a lottery win in their manifesto...which might account for the non-delivery...

[Hoboh]

“The figures published today show two million more private sector jobs. They show 1.4 million more people in work at the end of this parliament. They show unemployment falling every year.”

David Cameron, prime minister’s questions, 30 June 2010

hmmmmmm..... pants on fire??

You never say something you believe in bish and it don't come up to scratch?

If so where's me lottery win? I always ask the Father & Son (Not sure what use the spirit would be) and they ain't delivered yet!

I don't recall the Father, Son or the Holy Ghost for that matter promising you a lottery win in their manifesto...which might account for the non-delivery...

Mmmmmm I not got past revelations yet!! facinated by those riders!

[Prufrock]

That yuk factor is socially engineered though. And if you trace that social engineering back, you'll find the Bible behind a large part of it. There is no other logical starting point than religion. Scientifically you could argue homosexuality is pointless (though adoption theory would be against you), but it is difficult to argue it is 'wrong'.

Other than the minor point that to have anything to adopt requires bits of manstuff and bits of womanstuff.

I think I'll stick with my quaint notion that it's against the general wellbeing of the human race not to procreate until everyones evolved to be hermaphrodites, at which point they can all go and fcuk themselves.

That works on a global scale, obviously, but if you take it literally, you'd be all Benedictine banning condoms, and masturbation, and sex for anything other than procreation; if you took it on the 'natural' rule, you would be ignoring the fact that scientists have found homosexual behaviour in over fifty thousand species, and on a 'taking things as a whole' level you'd be ignoring that homosexual 'couples' in animal species have often been found to 'adopt' abandoned young. Memes, not genes. If true that would make the whole gay adoption thing quite ironic as well.

[Worthy4England]

That yuk factor is socially engineered though. And if you trace that social engineering back, you'll find the Bible behind a large part of it. There is no other logical starting point than religion. Scientifically you could argue homosexuality is pointless (though adoption theory would be against you), but it is difficult to argue it is 'wrong'.

Other than the minor point that to have anything to adopt requires bits of manstuff and bits of womanstuff.

I think I'll stick with my quaint notion that it's against the general wellbeing of the human race not to procreate until everyones evolved to be hermaphrodites, at which point they can all go and fcuk themselves.

That works on a global scale, obviously, but if you take it literally, you'd be all Benedictine banning condoms, and masturbation, and sex for anything other than procreation; if you took it on the 'natural' rule, you would be ignoring the fact that scientists have found homosexual behaviour in over fifty thousand species, and on a 'taking things as a whole' level you'd be ignoring that homosexual 'couples' in animal species have often been found to 'adopt' abandoned young. Memes, not genes. If true that would make the whole gay adoption thing quite ironic as well.

Well if you want to draw the comparison between homosexuality and what happens with generally not very bright animals, I can see that there might well be parallels. Maybe we should abandon laws and go for natural selection too...

[Prufrock]

To quote Mummy, 'what does that even mean?'

I'm not suggesting we all turn gay. However, that it is a thing in humans, and is pervasive throughout the natural world suggests it is perfectly fine, and hardly likely to wipe out all the procreating members of society. Being weak, or slow, is also bad for the furthering of the species but we don't think they're disgusting.

To put it another way, you say you thing it is towards the general well-being of the human race that procreation occurs. Well, homosexuality has been around for millennia, and exists throughout the animal kingdom, and yet humans and animals are still here. That suggests it's probably fine, and so people should stop being massive nice people and trying to interfere in the private business of other folk, which has nowt to do with them. That'd be nice.

[Prufrock]

To put it another way again, and to target the general shithouse stereotypers. Well most people in this country aren't muslim and, most aren't gay, so why should 'they' be allowed. That line of thinking. Well, Mr Example, think of all the things you do in your middle class, maybe boring, but average, life. List them maybe; then consider the amount of times somebody wearing a burkha, or, in the privacy of their own lives, bumming another man has infringed even once on you doing any of the things essential to that life of yours. Then keep your 'ore owt.

[William the White]

Human sexuality expresses itself in many ways. None threaten the future of the human race.

[BWFC_Insane]

“The figures published today show two million more private sector jobs. They show 1.4 million more people in work at the end of this parliament. They show unemployment falling every year.”

David Cameron, prime minister’s questions, 30 June 2010

hmmmmmm..... pants on fire??

You never say something you believe in bish and it don't come up to scratch?
If so where's me lottery win? I always ask the Father & Son (Not sure what use the spirit would be) and they ain't delivered yet!

Funny how that you adopt that attitude very selectively!

[Worthy4England]

To quote Mummy, 'what does that even mean?'

I'm not suggesting we all turn gay. However, that it is a thing in humans, and is pervasive throughout the natural world suggests it is perfectly fine, and hardly likely to wipe out all the procreating members of society. Being weak, or slow, is also bad for the furthering of the species but we don't think they're disgusting.

To put it another way, you say you thing it is towards the general well-being of the human race that procreation occurs. Well, homosexuality has been around for millennia, and exists throughout the animal kingdom, and yet humans and animals are still here. That suggests it's probably fine, and so people should stop being massive tw*ts and trying to interfere in the private business of other folk, which has nowt to do with them. That'd be nice.

Are they not educating you kids to understand English these days?

I was saying there's lots of things occur in the animal kingdon that we don't adopt as a model for the human race, except where it's convenient for us to do so, such as death by natural selection. I will try and spell things out a bit clearer for you next time.

If that horse you're on gets any higher, you might hurt yourself if you fall off.

As for my "boring, middle class, life." You know the square root of feck all about me, and yet you seem to be able to stereotype me, by your own opinions, I guess that's make you a general shithouse stereotyper too? Or does it only count, if you happen to be a minority that Pru has chosen to defend?

I'm not sure of the applicability of the parallel you draw between muslims (who I guess could pro-create) or people wearing burkha's (who I guess could procreate too) and gay people (who can't procreate without outside intervention)

The point I'm making is that without procreation, the ability to be gay would not present itself as an option. I therefore question how natural it is. Do I go on anti-gay marches? No. Do I go gaybashing? No. Do I object to people being gay? No. Have I had some good nights out on Canal Street? Yes. Do I have friends that are benter than a nine-bob note? Yes.

Do I think it's natural? No. Am I allowed to express that view in a society that promotes free speech? Yes.

Will I keep my oar out on a messageboard, when others quite blatantly don't?

Do yourself a favour.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

The point I'm making is that without procreation, the ability to be gay would not present itself as an option. I therefore question how natural it is.

'Therefore' here suggests a logical link that I don't quite follow.

For me it's a simpler question - does homosexuality occur as a matter of nature rather than nuture in human beings.? If the answer is yes, then it has to be 'natural', notwithstanding what you have said about the prerequisite of procreation for this naturally occurring phenomenon to take place.

[Hoboh]

The point I'm making is that without procreation, the ability to be gay would not present itself as an option. I therefore question how natural it is.

'Therefore' here suggests a logical link that I don't quite follow.

For me it's a simpler question - does homosexuality occur as a matter of nature rather than nuture in human beings.? If the answer is yes, then it has to be 'natural', notwithstanding what you have said about the prerequisite of procreation for this naturally occuring phenomenon to take place.

At the risk of a headache for mummy I agree with his spin on the matter and feel the "nature" angle to be correct given most gay people "felt" that way as long as they could remember back in childhood.
Mr W makes some very good and valid points and is fully entitled to his opinion and to try to modify that is almost she who shall not be nameds (Harriet Haperpersons) territory!
So to cut it short Pru and to the chase, do you want to be a H*****t or what?