The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The newsnight debate on the legislation on smacking childern..
The Tory representative's 2 arguments against the legislation:
i) It's a 'nanny' government intruding on peoples' lives by regulating what goes on in the family home.
- So the Tories are opposed to protecting children from abuse by their parents, because 'what goes on behind closed doors' is nobody else's business.
Small children obviously have no way of protecting themselves from abuse by adults, and according to Tory policy, nobody else should protect them either.
It's pre-war acceptance of wife abuse all over again.
ii) Legislating against child abuse is tantamount to the government accusing average Joe of abusing his kids.
- So the Tories feel that any legislation brought into force is an accusation that everyone in the country commits the offence.
So we're a nation full of would-be murderers, rapists, paedophiles.. and all this is the average man in the street. Because otherwise we wouldn't have legislation against said acts?
And we can't legislate to make something illegal unless it's common practice amongst everyone?
Again, this Tory 'policy' goes beyond retarded.
I know politics is rife with idiots coming up with false arguments just to find a way to disagree with 'the other side', and hopefully pursuade anyone who wasn't actually listening to the words,
but to me the Tories are terrible for it lately - everything coming out of Howard's mouth seems to be a knee-jerk reaction disagreeing with Blair or assimilating a popular headline into policy.
I can't remember him ever justifying one of his political positions. He just goes for cheap soundbites without any sort of basis in reason or sense.
Half the time he doesn't even offer an opinion on the actual issue, just says something derogatory about Blair or his government.
The Tories simply don't have genuine legitimate policies.
So yes, Lib Dems still aren't a realistic prospect for power, and Labour constantly screw everyone over, but at least they have policies. At least they stand for some kind of principles.
The Tory representative's 2 arguments against the legislation:
i) It's a 'nanny' government intruding on peoples' lives by regulating what goes on in the family home.
- So the Tories are opposed to protecting children from abuse by their parents, because 'what goes on behind closed doors' is nobody else's business.
Small children obviously have no way of protecting themselves from abuse by adults, and according to Tory policy, nobody else should protect them either.
It's pre-war acceptance of wife abuse all over again.
ii) Legislating against child abuse is tantamount to the government accusing average Joe of abusing his kids.
- So the Tories feel that any legislation brought into force is an accusation that everyone in the country commits the offence.
So we're a nation full of would-be murderers, rapists, paedophiles.. and all this is the average man in the street. Because otherwise we wouldn't have legislation against said acts?
And we can't legislate to make something illegal unless it's common practice amongst everyone?
Again, this Tory 'policy' goes beyond retarded.
I know politics is rife with idiots coming up with false arguments just to find a way to disagree with 'the other side', and hopefully pursuade anyone who wasn't actually listening to the words,
but to me the Tories are terrible for it lately - everything coming out of Howard's mouth seems to be a knee-jerk reaction disagreeing with Blair or assimilating a popular headline into policy.
I can't remember him ever justifying one of his political positions. He just goes for cheap soundbites without any sort of basis in reason or sense.
Half the time he doesn't even offer an opinion on the actual issue, just says something derogatory about Blair or his government.
The Tories simply don't have genuine legitimate policies.
So yes, Lib Dems still aren't a realistic prospect for power, and Labour constantly screw everyone over, but at least they have policies. At least they stand for some kind of principles.
Page:
This smacking thing is so dumb. Even if it was put into practise and it became illegal to smack your kids and cause 'bruising or redness', you really think the people that smack the s##t out of their kids day in day out are gonna stop doing it because it's against the law?
There should be a 'dumb ass minority' clause in ever new law that passes; it's okay to smack your children for reasonable means, unless you're a crap parent who got knocked up when you were 14, named your baby Britney and enjoy flogging her publicly in the cereal isle at Tescos.
There should be a 'dumb ass minority' clause in ever new law that passes; it's okay to smack your children for reasonable means, unless you're a crap parent who got knocked up when you were 14, named your baby Britney and enjoy flogging her publicly in the cereal isle at Tescos.
The newsnight debate on the legislation on smacking childern..
The Tory representative's 2 arguments against the legislation:
i) It's a 'nanny' government intruding on peoples' lives by regulating what goes on in the family home.
- So the Tories are opposed to protecting children from abuse by their parents, because 'what goes on behind closed doors' is nobody else's business.
Small children obviously have no way of protecting themselves from abuse by adults, and according to Tory policy, nobody else should protect them either.
It's pre-war acceptance of wife abuse all over again.
ii) Legislating against child abuse is tantamount to the government accusing average Joe of abusing his kids.
- So the Tories feel that any legislation brought into force is an accusation that everyone in the country commits the offence.
So we're a nation full of would-be murderers, rapists, paedophiles.. and all this is the average man in the street. Because otherwise we wouldn't have legislation against said acts?
And we can't legislate to make something illegal unless it's common practice amongst everyone?
Again, this Tory 'policy' goes beyond retarded.
I know politics is rife with idiots coming up with false arguments just to find a way to disagree with 'the other side', and hopefully pursuade anyone who wasn't actually listening to the words,
but to me the Tories are terrible for it lately - everything coming out of Howard's mouth seems to be a knee-jerk reaction disagreeing with Blair or assimilating a popular headline into policy.
I can't remember him ever justifying one of his political positions. He just goes for cheap soundbites without any sort of basis in reason or sense.
Half the time he doesn't even offer an opinion on the actual issue, just says something derogatory about Blair or his government.
The Tories simply don't have genuine legitimate policies.
So yes, Lib Dems still aren't a realistic prospect for power, and Labour constantly screw everyone over, but at least they have policies. At least they stand for some kind of principles.
The Tory representative's 2 arguments against the legislation:
i) It's a 'nanny' government intruding on peoples' lives by regulating what goes on in the family home.
- So the Tories are opposed to protecting children from abuse by their parents, because 'what goes on behind closed doors' is nobody else's business.
Small children obviously have no way of protecting themselves from abuse by adults, and according to Tory policy, nobody else should protect them either.
It's pre-war acceptance of wife abuse all over again.
ii) Legislating against child abuse is tantamount to the government accusing average Joe of abusing his kids.
- So the Tories feel that any legislation brought into force is an accusation that everyone in the country commits the offence.
So we're a nation full of would-be murderers, rapists, paedophiles.. and all this is the average man in the street. Because otherwise we wouldn't have legislation against said acts?
And we can't legislate to make something illegal unless it's common practice amongst everyone?
Again, this Tory 'policy' goes beyond retarded.
I know politics is rife with idiots coming up with false arguments just to find a way to disagree with 'the other side', and hopefully pursuade anyone who wasn't actually listening to the words,
but to me the Tories are terrible for it lately - everything coming out of Howard's mouth seems to be a knee-jerk reaction disagreeing with Blair or assimilating a popular headline into policy.
I can't remember him ever justifying one of his political positions. He just goes for cheap soundbites without any sort of basis in reason or sense.
Half the time he doesn't even offer an opinion on the actual issue, just says something derogatory about Blair or his government.
The Tories simply don't have genuine legitimate policies.
So yes, Lib Dems still aren't a realistic prospect for power, and Labour constantly screw everyone over, but at least they have policies. At least they stand for some kind of principles.
Page: