Scott Steiner

Wow, wasn't aware of this Asim. Looks like I was wrong there. **Swallows pride**

For some reason I thought you were a young thing, DPB! Must be the 'boy' in your name.

We're constantly reminded of the evil deeds of the Nazis in film and media, however the far-left have killed far more innocents via bloodthirsty communism and the Holodomor was similar in magnitude to the Holocaust.

I'm afraid we can't, unless you're happy losing your job or becoming cancelled/ostracised. Expressing contempt is one thing, but that's not what I'm against. The pariah treatment for holding left-wing economic or social views simply doesn't happen.

Tend to agree with you, BFTD. Paedophilia, like other abnormal sexual behaviour, tends to be a result of trauma, shame and lack of structure in one's early childhood. Therefore, paedophiles will be everywhere in society and Karen Adams was actually spot on. McEleny must have realised his mistake now, but appears to be too proud to apologise.

I agree with the general theme of your post (although not some of the specifics) that things have largely shifted right in terms of economics but left in terms of social issues. The difference is that people aren't treated as pariahs for holding differing economic views in the same way they are for holding a different views on social issues. I'd just love to see us have a free society where we can talk about anything.

Great to see the few attempts at childish nonsense being largely drowned out by well thought out, sensible and reasonable replies!

Instead of S Steiner, my username should really be C Kyle.

Your decision to leave out the words that followed the first quotation is an interesting one

Not far from what I expected, and confirms my deeply held belief that the paradigm has shifted to the left over the years to the extent that people are branded far-right for having opinions which are, in reality, actually quite moderate.

The only reason abortion is settled over here is the amount of pro-choice propaganda we're force fed as well as well-meaning politicians/media figures being scared to speak up due to the fear of being labelled. Scan technology as well as scientific advances in the identification of DNA, realisation of when the child feels pain and develops organs/senses/a brain/a heartbeat as well as the harmful effects of abortion on the mother mean that attitudes could easily swing back some day. In the USA we've had promising signs of hope from recent decisions regarding Texas and Mississippi. I doubt 'Roe v Wade' will be overturned completely, but may eventually be largely rendered obsolete. Interesting to note that 'Roe' is now a pro-life activist, as are many who witness the horrors of what abortion actually is such as ex-planned parenthood boss Abby Johnson. All is not lost.

Fair play mate. In my ideal world abortion would be banned and people wouldn't have sex until they are married I'm going to do that political compass test. Got a link?

For me it's an individual, living human being at the moment of conception, which is when it has it's own DNA. I'm not judging anyone who has an abortion and know women who've had several (they weren't rape victims, but just didn't want the pregnancy), but just can't see any moral justification for it other than when the mother's life is at risk. Saving the lives of these unborn women and men does more for women's rights than anything IMO. When I look at the arguments against abortion I don't see authoritarianism or sexism, but compassion and an urge to save lives.

Make me. 'Mon then!

Interesting post mate. I don't really see abortion fundamentally as a left or right issue, but sadly over the years it's become that way, however I'm absolutely on the side of the children with that one. Completely agree about management and bureaucrats. In terms of law and order, I reckon we're stuck in a bit of a rut and when it all boils down this is due to the party political, vote reliance system we adhere to, where politicians are motivated to try and please everybody. I believe that on this issue, one of the extremes would be the way to go. Either we go down the Peter Hitchens route where we stringently enforce existing laws and go hard on prosecuting drug possession and petty crime to make everyone scared to break the law (with a huge chance they'll get caught), or indeed a softly softly approach like you suggest, which would actually work if done correctly. Neither would be a vote winner though. I agree about living in a world where people weren't so horrible. It's never going to happen though, unless we have some sort of UK-wide Western Isles style revival which produced the most high trust community that's ever existed on these islands. A latter day Duncan Campbell would be most welcome. Completely agree with what you say about alignment with parties, as well as the Labour/Lib Dem sneerers. It's a hard one, especially with the usual hysterical types giving you an 'ist'. There are some interesting case studies on P&B regarding ists and phobias being thrown about willy nilly. Agree about the working and steering groups too. You're right about the Tories doing anything for power, which is why it's hard to even truly class them as conservative IMO. Johnson is basically a liberal and Cameron did more to harm true conservatism than any other Tory PM. I vote for them because they are the party closest to my beliefs who have a chance, but they are also products of the party political, democratic, FPTP voting system which allows such individuals to flourish. Is there a better system though? Probably not. It's going to take a huge shift in the attitudes of the voters for it to ever change, but as long as they are as tribal as they are (P&B is a superb case study for this) then things will remain like this for a very long time.