SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Scouse]

Being offended should not be protected by itself, but if the offense comes with intimidation, or threats of violence, then thats straying into harassment territory.

It's a fucking poster of a foetus. A live unborn child. That's it.

It's not a threat of violence, or intimidating, or chasing around the streets after children, or all of the other fucking nightmare whataboutery you and @Gwadien have decided to embark upon.

It's simply a picture of a kid, in a womb - you know, what women carry to term (so hardly shocking) - and a website. Nothing else. What's so threatening about it that it constitutes harrasment?

I don't agree with the anti abortion lot - I largely agree with the pro-choice lot. But considering I actually tried to enter into the argument with census data showing what most of the UK feels about this thing lets look at just one aspect of it eh?:

If I started an advertisement campaign for negative eugenics, IE we kill off everyone with some kind of disease/illness who is a burden to their family/state, would you support that too?

Stella Creasy supports sex-selective abortions. So aborting kids when parents don't like the sex of it. That's top-end of that argument.

How about going further? Terminating kids with non-life threatening minor disabilities - like cleft palate - which a disabled MP brought to parliament but had the motion talked out? My cousin had a cleft palate - it was a two second op after she was born to fix. She's lived a full and productive life and other than a slight scar on her upper lip nobody would know.

Are we OK to perform eugenics at this level @Gwadien? @Ormorof? The aborting of a baby near-term because of a minor, fixable, disfigurement?

What Stella Creasy doesn't support is debate about the nailed-on eugenics above. And neither do you two - based on the fact that you ignored the evidence I brought to the party before becoming all emotional because I used the term "snowflake" - which seems to be a red rag to a tiny whiny bull nowadays

 

[DaGaffer]

How is this "harrasment"?

Looks like absolutely the shutting down of free speech to me. As much as I disagree with it, it's absolutely fair game.

This is what you get when you decide what's free speech depending on who gets pissed off by having to hear differing views.

Fucking country full of snowflakes is what we've made.

You play the ball not the man. There's nowt wrong with anti-abortion posters if that's what floats your boat, but whats the necessity for the personal attack?

 

[Gwadien]

@Scouse has literally morphed in @Job.

It's not about who puts down the logical argument, it's about who shouts loudest and insults the most.

 

[Scouse]

You play the ball not the man. There's nowt wrong with anti-abortion posters if that's what floats your boat, but whats the necessity for the personal attack?

Raising awareness of what an MP supports and providing a link to a website which offers further information seems fair game for me. It'll increase voting pressure one way or another. If she has policies she's trying to implement that sections of society disagree with then it's fair to point them out in a way that clearly asks voters to decide on.

It doesn't incite or condone violence and I don't buy that we all somehow have to be responsible for everyone else's actions - people are personally responsible for what they do (like @Ormorof got wrong - you have to deal with the consequences of your actions yes - but you're not responsible for the actions of idiots).

 

[Scouse]

@Scouse has literally morphed in @Job.

It's not about who puts down the logical argument, it's about who shouts loudest and insults the most.

I've made arguments and used the term snowflake. Where's these terrible insults @gwad?

I've even answered your direct question on eugenics. Where's your rebuffal?

Eugenics. Justify please.

 

[Job]

So Tony Hall has taken it upon himself to 'reverse' the verdict on impartiallity at the BBC.

Thats where we are, the power of liberal woke has empowered him to stick a finger to the BBC charter.

I really dont know where we are heading...the media is ignoring the rules..the supreme court is ignoring the rules and now the brexiters have decided they might as well join in.

 

[Gwadien]

So Tony Hall has taken it upon himself to 'reverse' the verdict on impartiallity at the BBC.

Thats where we are, the power of liberal woke has empowered him to stick a finger to the BBC charter.

I really dont know where we are heading...the media is ignoring the rules..the supreme court is ignoring the rules and now the brexiters have decided they might as well join in.

It's interesting actually.

In the original complaint, they complained about the bloke who was presenting too, but that was dismissed, even though it was clearly him egging her on to give the response she did.

 

[Job]

Yes..change the subject as usual.

Its now irrelevent that she got annoyed and voiced an opinion.

Now it would seem the BBC has reversed its own decision and decided its OK to voice opinions and by default be biased...against the right obviously.
Because thats all they will do.
As usual.
Festering woke shitshow.

 

[Gwadien]

Yes..change the subject as usual.

Its now irrelevent that she got annoyed and voiced an opinion.

Now it would seem the BBC has reversed its own decision and decided its OK to voice opinions and by default be biased...against the right obviously.
Because thats all they will do.
As usual.
Festering woke shitshow.

I don't really understand how I can take anything you say seriously after suggesting people with Asthma get benefits, lol.

 

[DaGaffer]

Raising awareness of what an MP supports and providing a link to a website which offers further information seems fair game for me. It'll increase voting pressure one way or another. If she has policies she's trying to implement that sections of society disagree with then it's fair to point them out in a way that clearly asks voters to decide on.

It doesn't incite or condone violence and I don't buy that we all somehow have to be responsible for everyone else's actions - people are personally responsible for what they do (like @Ormorof got wrong - you have to deal with the consequences of your actions yes - but you're not responsible for the actions of idiots).

Go and look at the "stop stella" website and tell me that isn't just ad hom attacks on Stella Creasy. The "Pregnant Stella's Hypocrisy" section in particular (because you can't be pro-choice and have children or go through the trauma of a miscarriage without being a hypocrite apparently). This isn't "further information", its personal attacks.

 

[Scouse]

Don't disagree with you that those sections of the websites definitely are personal attacks @DaGaffer - they perceieve hypocricy and want to point it out - and yes, it's a bit rich. But I don't think that it constitutes actual harrasment.

And, importantly, I don't think Stella does either - as fair as I can see her complaint to the police and to the home secretary is that the poster harrasses "women of walthamstowe" - as if showing actual reality can constitute that.

Agree that it definitely has the potential to provoke feelings of guilt and shame in some women who've had abortions - whilst others may feel angry, ambivalent, or make them laugh out loud at 'religious nuts' (as if only religious people are the only people who could disagree with abortion).

But that's not harrassment - that's the gamut of natural reactions you'd expect when people are presented with a picture that reminds you of what you did.

Banning discourse because some people might react that way isn't proportionate IMO - people shouldn't get to move through public spaces without being exposed to the ideas that the public have.

Your home is your 'safe space'. Outside in the 'big bad' world (or 'melting pot of ideas' or whatever people want to think about it) you get to find out how other people think - and the whole world shouldn't be forced to tread on eggshells just because a tiny proportion of people may potentially be insufficiently inured to <insert ideas in opposition to how you feel>.

Stella is using her faux 'outrage' to bring about social change she believes in IMO - as a public figure she IS sufficiently hardened to this sort of attack and, as she is a public figure who is attempting to actively bring about her idea of what is good social change then expecting a level of public disapprobation is par for the course and entirely to be expected.

 

[Scouse]

As an aside - even if I'm wrong on that point (which I don't believe I am) - the solution would be to remove that bit of the website, not take down the whole, legitimate, message.

 

[Job]

I don't really understand how I can take anything you say seriously after suggesting people with Asthma get benefits, lol.

Its called PIP disability allowance, you can start the process for claiming at 15, the child gets it at 16, its a personal allowance up to £145 a week and once you are in it, it opens up a world of convenience for the child and the parent ..its open to everyone of course.
You are no doubt far too lower middle class to have heard of it.

 

[DaGaffer]

Don't disagree with you that those sections of the websites definitely are personal attacks @DaGaffer - they perceieve hypocricy and want to point it out - and yes, it's a bit rich. But I don't think that it constitutes actual harrasment.

And, importantly, I don't think Stella does either - as fair as I can see her complaint to the police and to the home secretary is that the poster harrasses "women of walthamstowe" - as if showing actual reality can constitute that.

Agree that it definitely has the potential to provoke feelings of guilt and shame in some women who've had abortions - whilst others may feel angry, ambivalent, or make them laugh out loud at 'religious nuts' (as if only religious people are the only people who could disagree with abortion).

But that's not harrassment - that's the gamut of natural reactions you'd expect when people are presented with a picture that reminds you of what you did.

Banning discourse because some people might react that way isn't proportionate IMO - people shouldn't get to move through public spaces without being exposed to the ideas that the public have.

Your home is your 'safe space'. Outside in the 'big bad' world (or 'melting pot of ideas' or whatever people want to think about it) you get to find out how other people think - and the whole world shouldn't be forced to tread on eggshells just because a tiny proportion of people may potentially be insufficiently inured to <insert ideas in opposition to how you feel>.

Stella is using her faux 'outrage' to bring about social change she believes in IMO - as a public figure she IS sufficiently hardened to this sort of attack and, as she is a public figure who is attempting to actively bring about her idea of what is good social change then expecting a level of public disapprobation is par for the course and entirely to be expected.

A website and the ads to support it are not separate things; the intent of the ad is to get people to the website and it uses the personal angle to do it. I don't care about the picture or people's anti-abortion beliefs, any more than I care about religious ads or other things I detest; what I dislike is using an individual as the focus of a campaign. Of course Stella Creasy will use the "women of Walthamstow" argument, because if she pointed out it's simply a personal attack on her the response (by a judge or the public) could easily be "you're in the public eye so you're fair game" and on matters of conscience and personal grief, I profoundly disagree with that attitude.

I know there's a line here (we attack Trump and Johnson on a personal level all the time, when in truth we should be attacking their provable dishonesty), but in this particular case that whole "hypocrisy" section is the line that shouldn't be crossed.

 

[Gwadien]

Its called PIP disability allowance, you can start the process for claiming at 15, the child gets it at 16, its a personal allowance up to £145 a week and once you are in it, it opens up a world of convenience for the child and the parent ..its open to everyone of course.
You are no doubt far too lower middle class to have heard of it.

Its not even means tested.

Can you find evidence that you get it for Asthma, Autism and Adhd please.

Or admit you were chatting shit because you want to create resentment of the poor and the welfare state.

 

[Scouse]

Devil is in the detail @Job:

If you have severe asthma, you may need extra support financially if your diagnosis means:

• You’re too unwell to work
• You need lots of time off work because you’re having lots of asthma symptoms and/or asthma attacks
• You have to go to lots of healthcare appointments
• You spend lots of time in hospital
• You’re struggling to get around
• You’re managing other health conditions as well as asthma
• You need a part-time or full-time carer.

You're not suggesting that if people are so severely disabled that they need a carer that they shouldn't receive financial assistance are you?

 

[Gwadien]

Devil is in the detail @Job:
You're not suggesting that if you have such a debilitating condition that you need a full time carer that financial assistanceshouldn't be available, are you?

You wouldn't be going to school if your asthma was that bad though.

So I call bullshit again.

 

[Gwadien]

It's also disgusting how Job sees having autism or adhd as a badge of honour purely for financial benefit.

Ask @Moriath what his experience of school was, although you'll just dismiss it because he's not you.

Id love to see you spend a hour with a kid who has Adhd, I know you belong to that dinosaur generation that says 'muhhh, they're just shit heads, nothing wrong with them!!!!'

People said the same shit for cancer until not very long ago, would you like to revert to medical cures for them too? Actually, your answer would be yes considering your views on the NHS.

Until it comes to you ofc.

 

[Scouse]

Of course Stella Creasy will use the "women of Walthamstow" argument, because if she pointed out it's simply a personal attack on her the response (by a judge or the public) could easily be "you're in the public eye so you're fair game" and on matters of conscience and personal grief, I profoundly disagree with that attitude

I profoundly disagree with political opportunism - and if a judge said "public eye/fair game" then that seems fair enough to me.

(Edit: Not to say I don't sympathise)

I know there's a line here (we attack Trump and Johnson on a personal level all the time, when in truth we should be attacking their provable dishonesty), but in this particular case that whole "hypocrisy" section is the line that shouldn't be crossed.

Debateable. But even if I concede it - the answer is above - remove that bit of the website.

Blimey. This is getting weird - we're having a disagreement on Freddyshouse and we're slowly moving towards a consensus position by identifying common ground.

It's almost like the olden days!

 

[DaGaffer]

Its not even means tested.

Can you find evidence that you get it for Asthma, Autism and Adhd please.

Or admit you were chatting shit because you want to create resentment of the poor and the welfare state.

Reading the website, the criteria seems to be "needing help with daily tasks and getting around"; so definitely claimable for types of autism at the low functioning end of the spectrum, and probably claimable for extreme types of chronic asthma. I'm struggling to imagine an adhd scenario that would be covered but the wording is vague enough to make it possible.

Not that it's very much money anyway...

 

[Gwadien]

Reading the website, the criteria seems to be "needing help with daily tasks and getting around"; so definitely claimable for types of autism at the low functioning end of the spectrum, and probably claimable for extreme types of chronic asthma. I'm struggling to imagine an adhd scenario that would be covered but the wording is vague enough to make it possible.

Not that it's very much money anyway...

Well ya, that's why I asked if his wife worked in a SEN school, because there's no way that a person on the end of the spectrum that is deemed acceptable to be in mainstream education gets money like that.

Job is just chatting shit, because he thinks that all public sectors are over funded.

 

[Scouse]

Meanwhile, stay classy Britain...

'Best and brightest' will always be welcome my arse.

 

[Bodhi]

Just back from a long weekend in Riga, and if you haven't sampled it, I'd highly recommend it. Decent value (but not as cheap as I was expecting), clean, not too big so nowhere was far to walk, bars were open until 7am and there was a lovely beach resort just up the road (Jurmala).

We also sampled one of the AK47 Experiences - which was nice. Still no idea how you're supposed to actually hit anything with one, but was fun finding out. The Desert Eagle was a bit of a beast as well.

 

[Scouse]

Stag do?

 

[Bodhi]

No, went with the wife as she's always wanted to go. She was a bit bemused about me wanting to go to the Shooting Range, but she soon go into it - just didn't like the shotgun much.

 

[Gwadien]

Looks like they've been getting some tips from the Trump.

Cover-up allegations over dam wall collapse

 

[Job]

Reading the website, the criteria seems to be "needing help with daily tasks and getting around"; so definitely claimable for types of autism at the low functioning end of the spectrum, and probably claimable for extreme types of chronic asthma. I'm struggling to imagine an adhd scenario that would be covered but the wording is vague enough to make it possible.

Not that it's very much money anyway...

Yes..thats why as I explained before you go off on your rants.
They hassle my wife to provide evidence that the kid is struggling in school.
She says its bordering on munchausen by proxy, then they hassle the fuck out of the doctors.

So stop with your clueless , disconnected ranting and realise there are professional scroungers at work here.
You can get PIP for abything if you can coerce the health officials into it.
Thats why the evil Tories are clamping down on it...so your 'liberal' world view can be satisfied
Hows the ivory tower?

 

[Scouse]

They hassle my wife to provide evidence that the kid is struggling in school.

Does she provide it if it's not true?

If no, then no problem there.

then they hassle the fuck out of the doctors.

And it's up to the doctors to make an assessment. If these highly qualified people agree, then fine. If not, then no problem.


My sister is wag officer for toxteth and speke - she works with the worst your wife has ever come up against. Benefit fraud isn't a subject that she thinks is a massive problem. Generally she reckons the system gets it right. And that the kids, by and large, are victims of idiot parents - not to be lumped in with how you feel about the adults (who are the ones hassling your wife).

Yes, sometimes the kids are absolute no-hope shits - but only because their parents are. And many aren't - who, given the right support, lead better lives.

You'd fuck them over though. Because of your hatred (and jealousy) of the adults.

 

[Gwadien]

He's chatting shit, I don't know why you believe him.

If he is telling the truth, it's amazing how his political beliefs perfectly line up with his wife's experience at school, lol.

 

[Scouse]

I don't. I just showed him that if his wife isn't lying to the authorities for chav parents then they're not getting benefits.

They might (and absolutely will) try it on. But he and his missus should feel safe in the knowledge that benefit fraud, even by the government's own admission, is a tiny problem. (although it makes great headlines in the gutter press)