Murdoch diversion

[Guest]

Of course, expecting a coherent, or indeed any, argument from you might be expecting pigs to fly.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_U7KCWFN4wlk/TSZwAby6STI/AAAAAAAAEEA/heVToRYfWDk/s1600/pigs%2Bmight%2Bfly.jpg

[Flosshilde]

So cute!

While we're onto animals, I read somewhere (could it have been in the Guardian?) a quote from someone who said that he imagined Rupert Murdoch without clothes would look rather like a tortoise without its shell.

But why he wanted to imagine Murdoch without clothes is beyond me.

[amateur51]

In short, it's a storm in a teacup that has been blown out of all proportion by the media and the anti-Murdoch brigade. The fact that newspapers sometimes employ underhand tactics has always been a given as far as I'm concerned.

http://www.shropshirestar.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Lord-Nelson.jpg

I See No Ships!

[Serial_Apologist]

Err, leaving the rest of your Pee-supporting post aside, I very much like handsomefortune's idiosyncratic prose style - it reminds me of James Joyce.

[french frank]

Simon (and all), phrases like 'right wing bigots' and 'screaming lefties', when appearing to include members here, are not allowed under the new House Rules.

['which explicitly or implicitly target or disparage other members, individually or as a group. Do not use offensive language.']

[Flosshilde]

Is that the rule that Simon drew our collective attention to a while back?

[Flosshilde]

That a left-winger such as "handsomefortune" believes that women should have the right to rip out their foetuses whenever they want

I think that this comment is highly offensive to many women who come to thye extremely difficult decision that an abortion is the right thing to do for them at the time. Despite the propoganda & mis-information from the anti-choice groups foetuses are not 'ripped out'.

Far from being "regressive", this government is trying very hard - as in fact I believe most other governments have tried - to find that balance. Mindless, knee-jerk insults from screaming lefties don't help.

Your facts are entirely wrong, Simon. The ammendment concerning abortion advice came from two back benchers - one Tory & one Labour. It has nothing to do with 'balancing' anything - it attempts to claim that advice from organisations that also run abortion clinics is biased, and that advice from counselling organisations run or supported by religious organisations is impartial. Tell that to tyhe marines!
The Government has given clear signals that it doesn't support the ammendment (no, I'm wrong there - it has given very muddled signals, but the latest is that it doesn't support it), & the indications are that the ammendment won't get through.

However, we don't want to divert the thread onto another discussion.

[MrGongGong]

Thank's Simon
I'd almost forgotten about this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBfCzhYbWBk

(but I know you aren't listening )

[Serial_Apologist]

Well, before we get even more unpleasant about a child, or write more unpunctuated and lazy, fantasist twaddle such as message #345, let's cut through the hysterical flapping.



It's not pleasant to think of anyone's death, especially in such sad circumstances. I can't see why anyone rational would find it particularly scary. But if "handsomefortune" knows anything about it as regards real evidence that something illegal happened (over and above of the left's ongoing and now rather boring conspiracy theories) it is his duty to contact the authorities.



Many excellent journalists, as they always have done.



Regressive in your view maybe; not in the view of others, no doubt. It's neither right nor left wing, of course. It's a subject on which governments across the world and across the spectrum take differing views, based on all kinds of judgements, beliefs and theories.

That a left-winger such as "handsomefortune" believes that women should have the right to rip out their foetuses whenever they want (no doubt based on the 60s liberal ideas of "freedom" which are the root cause of most of the current problems in society) is unsurprising; as always there is a balance to be attained between the freedoms of the mother and the right to life of the child-to-be. Far from being "regressive", this government is trying very hard - as in fact I believe most other governments have tried - to find that balance. Mindless, knee-jerk insults from screaming lefties don't help.



The correct spelling is "schizoid".

And let's balance the argument again with a quotation from the sound common-sense of Mr P:



Absolutely right on all points Mr P. Fair and balanced - impossible to argue against. Many thanks.

"Mindless, knee-jerk responses"

Like

"Rip out their foetuses"

for example?

[Simon]

"Mindless, knee-jerk responses"

Like

"Rip out their foetuses"

for example?

Rather typical. A moderate length post from me, logically argued and clear in meaning, raising some pertinent points, was quoted - in full - by S-A.

So far so good.

So I read on, hoping for a rational point or two that would contribute to the discussion. After all, there's always room to adjust one's views if someone comes along with some valid alternative.

What did I find?

You guessed it.

He fastened on one short, descriptive phrase and made some throwaway remark that doesn't even address any part of the argument.

It's always good to read opposing posts if they are sensibly-argued and rational. I've learned much and also adjusted my views several times in the past as a result of the high level of debate from some co-posters on these boards.

But there are a few who seem unable to formulate logical ideas and realistic philosophies. They seem to skim-read other peoples' posts and then, if they find a bit that they may not agree with, drop in some throwaway, simplistic remark, with neither evidence nor even logic to back it up.

Short responses and the occasional sarcasm or witticism are fine. But not at the expense of never providing anything remotely constructively debated.

Hence the use of the "ignore" feature. I think S-A will join GongGong, Amateur and Flossie. That's a lot of my time saved that would otherwise be wasted in reading, er, .......... *

* please complete with appropriate noun.

[Simon]

Simon (and all), phrases like 'right wing bigots' and 'screaming lefties', when appearing to include members here, are not allowed under the new House Rules.

Sorry. I'll edit the post to remove the phrase.

I'll also be very quick to point out any offensive posts that I see aimed at anyone who doesn't conform to the accepted PC left/liberal position from now on. One should always try to be helpful. :)

[MrGongGong]

Rather typical. A moderate length post from me, logically argued and clear in meaning, raising some pertinent points, was quoted - in full - by S-A.

So far so good.

So I read on, hoping for a rational point or two that would contribute to the discussion. After all, there's always room to adjust one's views if someone comes along with some valid alternative.

What did I find?

You guessed it.

He fastened on one short, descriptive phrase and made some throwaway remark that doesn't even address any part of the argument.

It's always good to read opposing posts if they are sensibly-argued and rational. I've learned much and also adjusted my views several times in the past as a result of the high level of debate from some co-posters on these boards.

But there are a few who seem unable to formulate logical ideas and realistic philosophies. They seem to skim-read other peoples' posts and then, if they find a bit that they may not agree with, drop in some throwaway, simplistic remark, with neither evidence nor even logic to back it up.

Short responses and the occasional sarcasm or witticism are fine. But not at the expense of never providing anything remotely constructively debated.

Hence the use of the "ignore" feature. I think S-A will join GongGong, Amateur and Flossie. That's a lot of my time saved that would otherwise be wasted in reading, er, .......... *

* please complete with appropriate noun.

1: Fingers in ears ............. check
2:Disengage brain..............check
3: Set bigotometer to max.......check
4: Disengage logic circuits........check
5: Set assumtionometer to max.......check
6: Type away


I thought this kind of offensive nonsense was now banned ?

[Serial_Apologist]

Sorry. I'll edit the post to remove the phrase.

I'll also be very quick to point out any offensive posts that I see aimed at anyone who doesn't conform to the accepted PC left/liberal position from now on. One should always try to be helpful. :)

Thank you, Simon. Please feel welcome to stop reading my posts... and I'll stop screaming now

[MrGongGong]

Thank you, Simon. Please feel welcome to stop reading my posts... and I'll stop screaming now

He's not listening you know
thats the way of the keepers of logic

[Anna]

Simon, it's not really your use of phrases such as right-wing bigots or loony lefties that worries me but statements such as the following:

That a left-winger such as "handsomefortune" believes that women should have the right to rip out their foetuses whenever they want (no doubt based on the 60s liberal ideas of "freedom" which are the root cause of most of the current problems in society) is unsurprising

There are women on the MB (unfortunately far too few of them) who may have had an abortion or have sisters, cousins or friends who have had abortions and can you therefor imagine the distress your phrasing may have caused? I'm sure the majority of women who have had to take that decision have not done so lightly or are you of the opinion that kinder-kirke-kuchen should apply to women and they should not have "freedom"

I don't want to start a debate on this I simply wanted to say to Simon that it would be best to think about possible effects his extremely emotive words could have before posting them