Further reflections on the funeral

[Flosshilde]

'The member who claimed he was offended' aka Flossie, may well have been remembering the approbrium heaped upon gay men who contracted HIV in the 1980s and were told by the Methodist-turned-Catholic James Anderton, Chief Constable of Manchester that they were in a 'human cesspool of their own making’ in 1986, well within S_A's forty years.

& the views of the last Pope, & the Daily MAil, etc etc

[Mr Pee]

What ..? ... don't tell us you have the joy of a lesbian daughter, as well, amsey!

Come on now, Scotty, Amsy's not a bigot, just like he is NEVER disrespectful to other posters on these boards.....

[Ian Thumwood]

Amateur

I received a private message from Flosshilde accusing me of using unacceptable langauge (!!) and insisting that I apologise. This is how I am aware of who complained. I haven't broken any rules by treating anyone disrepectfully and pointed out that, "in real life", the observation would be given very short thrive - especially in my industry where complaints of that nature would generally result in ridicule. If someone thinks that an innocent remark is offensive and has read in to the comment more than could possibaly be construed, this is clearly a problem for themseves and not the messageboard.

[amateur51]

What ..? ... don't tell us you have the joy of a lesbian daughter, as well, amsey!

I have the joy of a 16 year old lesbian niece as it goes, scotty who was able to come out to her mother in the most straightforward of ways, something that makes me feel very proud of the decades of campaigning and lobbying that my generation of the tribe started and which Margaret Thatcher ultimately contributed to by her vindictive imposition of section 28. Within thirty years of its arrival (and twenty-five years of her political demise) we got to the situation where 'gay' marriage was supported by the majority of the public and politicians, and all this as part of belonging in the twenty-first century

Wake up, caveman!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/apr/18/new-zealand-parliament-song-gay-marriage-video

[amateur51]

Amateur

I received a private message from Flosshilde accusing me of using unacceptable langauge (!!) and insisting that I apologise. This is how I am aware of who complained. I haven't broken any rules by treating anyone disrepectfully and pointed out that, "in real life", the observation would be given very short thrive - especially in my industry where complaints of that nature would generally result in ridicule. If someone thinks that an innocent remark is offensive and has read in to the comment more than could possibaly be construed, this is clearly a problem for themseves and not the messageboard.

The expression 'delicate wallflowers' is term of respect down your way, IT?

[eighthobstruction]

Your original post Ian Thurmwood, was a naive spray of words out of a fountain of semi-knowledge and cliches....I didn't even notice the word deviant....what caught my eye was the 1970's terminology of a person without clarity and without a full grasp of current affairs....as i say very naive and cliche ridden (In fact cliches which were wide of the mark and archaic)....That you use a word....deviant....as a blunt instrument to make a point shows how naive you are in your use of words. You seem to pat yourself wholeheartedly on the back as if you had made clear points that other people had not already made during the last 10 days, in fact your points [such as they were] had repeatedly been made in one way and another, in much better terms. Your cliches are not appreciated....in fact they are boring....and misleading....

[Mr Pee]

House Rules

Please treat other members respectfully, even/especially if you disagree with what they are saying;

Wake up, caveman!

[amateur51]

Can you see scotty's self-selected avatar Mr Pee?

It's a caveman.

[Mr Pee]

Can you see scotty's self-selected avatar Mr Pee?

It's a caveman.

Nice try.

[amateur51]

Nice try.

Thanks.

Spooky kinda coinkydink if it's a nice try, innit?

[scottycelt]

Can you see scotty's self-selected avatar Mr Pee?

It's a caveman.

No, it's not ...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_a_caveman_and_a_neanderthal

[jean]

..."in real life", the observation would be given very short thrive...

Surely this is one for the Pedantry thread?

[Ian Thumwood]

I see my original comment was pulled. So much for free speech!

I always find it strange how quickly "liberals" are a pointing out the errors of others and only too keen to take the moral high ground only to be undone by the fact that they so frequently do not abide by their own standards. This misunderstanding of my post only emphasises my point. I'm staggered that it got deleted- especially as some of the pretentious b/s that has been posted here still remains on this thread!

Whilst I have made my point clear about my feelings regarding Margaret Thatcher, it seems unacceptable on this thread to post negative comments about a political party for whom double standards ought to be printed in bold within their manifesto and whose Faustian pact with Cameron has seen this country languish in recession longer than it would have done under a Labour administration. It could equally be argue that siding up to the Tories was "post-Modern" or even "ironic" but I don't suspect that the 2.6 million on the dole would probably agree. Despite claiming to be "progressive" and without doubt kerbing the excesses of the likes of Cameron and Osborne, the Liberals have simply acted as a crutch for an administration no one wanted. As soon as they saw the possibility of power-sharing, their principles were ditched over-night. Had Clegg no been so quick to form an alliance with Cameron it is unlikely that the Conservatives would have remained in office.

You see this time and time again in the arean of local politics too. The failings of Margaret Thatcher and her reliance on the free-market with all the social ills that this generated should have been confined to the bin forever in 1997. Clegg has simply aided the resurrection of a political party whose raison d'etre had simply passed it's sell by date and was increasingly antiquated. This has been well argued in this thread already. By forming a coalition with the Conservative party, the Liberals have jettisoned their "proegessive" values for a taste of power. How typical of a political party favoured by fruitcakes whose likes in academia , etc are often divorced from the real world / front line of where societies ill's rest !!

I hope in 2015 that the electorate realise the part the Liberals have played in sustaining in power the Conservatives. Margaret Thatcher's funeral should have marked the point at which Conservative policies and values were buried alongside her. Unfortuantely, Clegg's crazed grab for power has merely helped to breath fresh life in to the Conservatives. The party and their supporters deserve to be severely punished in the next elections and I would treat Clegg and all his chums with the same contempt as the Conservatives.

[NB The comment was not pulled: it was and remains here. ff]

[Serial_Apologist]

I see my original comment was pulled. So much for free speech!

I always find it strange how quickly "liberals" are a pointing out the errors of others and only too keen to take the moral high ground only to be undone by the fact that they so frequently do not abide by their own standards. This misunderstanding of my post only emphasises my point. I'm staggered that it got deleted- especially as some of the pretentious b/s that has been posted here still remains on this thread!

Whilst I have made my point clear about my feelings regarding Margaret Thatcher, it seems unacceptable on this thread to post negative comments about a political party for whom double standards ought to be printed in bold within their manifesto and whose Faustian pact with Cameron has seen this country languish in recession longer than it would have done under a Labour administration. It could equally be argue that siding up to the Tories was "post-Modern" or even "ironic" but I don't suspect that the 2.6 million on the dole would probably agree. Despite claiming to be "progressive" and without doubt kerbing the excesses of the likes of Cameron and Osborne, the Liberals have simply acted as a crutch for an administration no one wanted. As soon as they saw the possibility of power-sharing, their principles were ditched over-night. Had Clegg no been so quick to form an alliance with Cameron it is unlikely that the Conservatives would have remained in office.

You see this time and time again in the arean of local politics too. The failings of Margaret Thatcher and her reliance on the free-market with all the social ills that this generated should have been confined to the bin forever in 1997. Clegg has simply aided the resurrection of a political party whose raison d'etre had simply passed it's sell by date and was increasingly antiquated. This has been well argued in this thread already. By forming a coalition with the Conservative party, the Liberals have jettisoned their "proegessive" values for a taste of power. How typical of a political party favoured by fruitcakes whose likes in academia , etc are often divorced from the real world / front line of where societies ill's rest !!

I hope in 2015 that the electorate realise the part the Liberals have played in sustaining in power the Conservatives. Margaret Thatcher's funeral should have marked the point at which Conservative policies and values were buried alongside her. Unfortuantely, Clegg's crazed grab for power has merely helped to breath fresh life in to the Conservatives. The party and their supporters deserve to be severely punished in the next elections and I would treat Clegg and all his chums with the same contempt as the Conservatives.

I think some of us could agree with the above, while at the same time doubting whether the Liberal Party (sic) harbours a monopoly of, er, "deviants".

[french frank]

I see my original comment was pulled. So much for free speech!

Correction. Your comment was not pulled and remains intact. I received a complaint: I rejected it.