|
Best Porn Sites | Live Sex | Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
Politics, Current Affairs, Religion Threads Post here for all Politics, Current Affairs, Religion Threads |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
March 15th, 2013, 09:33 AM | #141 |
R.I.P.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cloud cuckoo land
Posts: 4,300
Thanks: 26,852
Thanked 54,117 Times in 4,288 Posts
|
If you look at Politics in the United Kingdom, we have a blandness which is pathetic. We have three Party leaders who look like clones of each other, Milliband being the one that did not come out quite right, and still looks like a twelve year old getting over excited. The Policies of the major parties had been almost identical, prior to the election, yet now Labour want to spend spend spend, despite the fact we have crippling debts.
At least in the US you have two major Parties with very different policies, so the ability to actually vote for change! |
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to rupertramjet For This Useful Post: |
March 15th, 2013, 09:50 AM | #142 | |
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 26,237
Thanks: 162,389
Thanked 278,408 Times in 26,182 Posts
|
Taboos and social conditioning
Quote:
In Britain, women are legally allowed to breastfeed in public and anyone (such as department stores or supermarkets) who tries to forbid them to breastfeed can be prosecuted. Yet it's extremely rare to see women breastfeeding in Britain. Like it or not, no change in the law can override village law, and breastfeeding in public is frowned on here. Any women doing so would have to brazen it out against a stone wall of silent and stern disapproval. We used to repress spitting on the pavement using the same technique, and that is one taboo I want back! Spitting on the street is a vile trick and our social conditioning against it needs to be restored.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to scoundrel For This Useful Post: |
March 15th, 2013, 11:52 AM | #143 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,282
Thanks: 11,393
Thanked 48,577 Times in 2,258 Posts
|
Quote:
Do they fear they (man !) getting a hard one because of a woman is feeding her hungry baby? Wake up hillbillies, that's a very normal natural thing, much more natural than running around with assault weapons - that's pro life !! Or do you prefer a heartbreaking crying baby and a mother with a bad conscience because her baby is crying of hunger ??? Sorry for that drastic speech, but I'm loosing more and more respect of that ignorant and with a false morality equipped persons. And if it disturbs someone seeing this - just look in an other direction!
__________________
Don't forget to say To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. to your posters, don't just leech, be a member. |
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Puhbear69 For This Useful Post: |
March 15th, 2013, 02:39 PM | #144 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,044
Thanks: 24,638
Thanked 34,288 Times in 4,008 Posts
|
wildtig2013,
Quote:
I clicked on your link and saw the case is in Texas so immediately thought "there they go again, those idiot Texans". But then actually read the article. Women should be able to breastfeed anywhere they need to but, I have to say, it can make me a bit uncomfortable when I run into it. Not sure why as I normally have no problem looking at a womans bare breast; in fact I usually really like it. But suing if someone interferes? Interferes in any way? That seems a bit much. Be interesting to see what happens with this. |
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to 9876543210 For This Useful Post: |
March 15th, 2013, 11:50 PM | #145 | |
Vintage Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 3,414
Thanks: 7,709
Thanked 26,946 Times in 3,089 Posts
|
Quote:
There has been cases of Mothers who breast fed their babies in a dressing room, behind a closed door or a curtain and were told to leave the premises or be arrested. A baby is hungry. A Mother should have the right to feed that baby! Do these people who are against breast feeding in public like being told when they can eat and where? |
|
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Reclaimedwg For This Useful Post: |
March 16th, 2013, 01:36 AM | #146 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,044
Thanks: 24,638
Thanked 34,288 Times in 4,008 Posts
|
wildtig2013,
Quote:
So why would I (or most any other males) feel uncomfortable when seeing a woman breastfeed? Maybe Scounds is right with his taboo idea but it may go deeper. My girlfriend just came in the room and she has the same reaction. But she can't explain it any better either. She did have the idea that its a very personal and private practice between the mother and child. Girlfriend just came back in and said that this goes against our current and modern norms whereas many cultures around the world view that without prejudice. So, it looks like Scounds was right. Its a western civilization taboo that needs to be changed. |
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to 9876543210 For This Useful Post: |
March 16th, 2013, 02:01 AM | #147 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wherever I Lay My Toupee
Posts: 694
Thanks: 3,062
Thanked 14,875 Times in 686 Posts
|
-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses. I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag. I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket. There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism. It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service. I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested. During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents. |
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Cheekymonkey For This Useful Post: |
March 19th, 2013, 03:29 PM | #148 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,044
Thanks: 24,638
Thanked 34,288 Times in 4,008 Posts
|
qwerty007,
Quote:
Quote:
Rubio-Jindal? Too early to tell but I doubt it. Watch what the Republicans are doing to women and you'll have a better idea of where things are going. The Arkansas legislature just passed several laws which will pretty much outlaw abortion and even contraception. The Democratic Governor vetoed them because he believed they'd be thrown out in the courts but the Republican legislature overrode the veto. Now, N Dakota and several other states run by Republicans are considering even more stringent laws. Some of these even ban contraception! Banning contraception? Can you imagine that? Even now in the 21st century? Whats the matter with these people? As I said earlier, I don't think these people learned a thing from the last election. One last thing. Did you see the speech by Reince Priebus yesterday? He said something I found intersting while talking about why the Republicans lost the last election so badly. He said something to the effect (I'm paraphrasing), "My mother said its not what you say, its how you say it". What??? I don't remember anyone saying that to me. What I do remember people saying to me is, "Its not what you say, its what you DO thats important". I think this is what Jindal was saying about the Republicans being the "stupid" party. They just continue being the stupid party. Quote:
|
|||
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to 9876543210 For This Useful Post: |
March 19th, 2013, 08:23 PM | #149 | ||
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 26,237
Thanks: 162,389
Thanked 278,408 Times in 26,182 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
In the House of Commons, it isn't hard for nursing mothers to retire to a cubical, so I think Ms Boothroyd was quite right. But where there is nowhere where a nursing mother can go to feed her baby privately, one has to allow her to feed her baby without humiliating her for it. I certainly think that if a nursing mother retires to a department store changing room, the store has absolutely no business to disturb her there; that isn't over-zealous, but just plain shitty behaviour. If they provided a special room for feeding and changing babies as most stores and supermarkets do nowadays, she wouldn't be nursing her baby in a changing room anyway. In return, nursing mothers should show some consideration, as I try to do when I need to blow my nose, and do these necessary things as discreetly as possible, showing consideration for everybody else. I am in the British majority who do not like seeing nursing mothers in public, but in truth I can't remember when I last saw it. Our laws, probably in line with EU resolutions, forbid any actions to discourage mothers from nursing their babies in public, but in fact we do discourage it here, regardless of what the law says. I am afraid I am satisfied that mothers should only nurse in public when they have no alternative. By not doing so, they are being courteous and considerate and helping to maintain standards. But in return, they are entitled to be given decent and accessible facilities in all frequented public places so they can nurse their babies and change their nappies privately in a clean and comfortable and secure environment.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
||
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to scoundrel For This Useful Post: |
March 20th, 2013, 01:37 PM | #150 | |
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 26,237
Thanks: 162,389
Thanked 278,408 Times in 26,182 Posts
|
Quote:
It would be a significant reverse for the Republicans if a Democrat was elected. But by selecting damaged goods such as ex-governor Sanford to run for this district, they will be testing their support. Mr Sanford was derelict in his duty by absconding from his post. I'm sure that many voters think the problem is that he was in Argentina, getting his leg over with a lady who was not his wife. But would it have been OK if he spent 2 weeks on the Appalachian Trail without leaving contact informaton in case an emergency arose? Isn't he supposed to be available if some emergency such as an Atlantic hurricane were to crop up? Of course, there's the minor matter of him deceiving his wife and family; I trust she hired a good divorce lawyer. I imagine he posed for election as governor on his clean cut image as a family man, like they always do. But I suspect that he will win the run off and that it will be up to Ms Colbert-Busch to defeat him in the real election, if she can. There hasn't been a Democrat in that seat for over thirty years. She will have a bit more chance simply because it is likely that some Republican voters will be very unhappy that they are being asked to vindicate Mark Sanford. But even so, I think the odds would favour him over her, based on the voting record of that district.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to scoundrel For This Useful Post: |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|