If you wish to believe in fantasy you are at liberty to.

For your information I didn't really have much of a view on abortion until my partner first became pregnant. I hadn't really considered the topic before then.

If you have an issue with American interest groups lobbying for their opinions to be law I suggest that it's a far more funded and pervasive reality on the left than the right.....They have succeeded in sexual politics and in speech censorship.

Funny....I don't remember you complaining about either on those scores.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

What can I say, I'm a dot extremist.....

With respect Maple, that's a lot of questions.

I've written my take on the abortion arrest on its thread. I have no opinion on your conspiracy theory: who knows.

Twitter apologised?

Also I wasn't aware that I'm expected to provide policies on child sex abuse. Leftists continually moan on here all the time yet when I do it I'm asked to write manifestos.....I'll remind you I'm the ex teacher here. Be careful or I'll give you detention!

If I can be bothered to write something I will, but this is a bit of a busy period.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Was that as a fully qualified teacher?

Opinions? Well, I've already given a couple, I'm against same sex adoption and I'm against officially sponsored surrogacy....I suppose other views are I'm against the sexualisation of children and sex education should be reduced to only biology information....no politics and cultural agendas.

As for the reason for the arrest I've seen the Police change the reason for an arrest after the fact from what's apparent on a video. For example, I remember that happening with Tommy Robinson. So I'm not so sure as to the honesty there but then again I have no strong opinion on it.

Unfortunately the Police have been known to lie and they are interested in media far more than they should be....In my view anyway.

Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Jan 2023 6.32pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Ashburton! What years

To further argue against the use of authority of 'experts' as a tool to close down debate or suggest that credentials should automatically be regarded as the last word on something I present Martha C. Nussbaum.

[Link]

Martha Nussbaum is the Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago, with appointments in the Law School and the Philosophy Department.

Here is Martha's latest article on how humanity must find new ways to act toward animals in a world dominated everywhere by human power and activity.

To quote an analysis of the article:

[Link]

'Nussbaum suggests that we need to think seriously about curbing predation in nature. It disturbs her that animals eat other animals: this is not how things ought to be. We must be careful in what we try to do to correct this morally bad state of affairs, since through lack of knowledge, we may worsen things; but this is no excuse to let matters slide.

To be clear, she is not just proposing that we should make sure that lions can’t get into the deer cage at the zoo; she is talking about the possibility of getting animals in the wild to cease to kill and eat each other. Her idea illustrates and extends a besetting sin of contemporary moral and political philosophy, its idle utopianism. The ordinary circumstances of the human condition are rejected, and philosophers devise fantastic schemes to remake the social and political world to their own liking.'

Again, just quoting authority is a fallacy. Instead of letters after someone's name what matters are the results that come from their work.

Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Jan 2023 8.13pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

And there's me thinking it's about resources and identity.

In my view war is one condition of man. It isn't always about killing an opponent but a natural state of being to oppose a threat.

It's why de-escalation should always be the preferred course of action if possible. Given reasonable dialogue war is usually avoidable.

Everyone should have a hill to die on, having multiple hills to die on can be exhausting and a little wearing on the knees.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)