James105

Every European country requires ID to vote. Are you suggesting that every European country is "gerrymandering" their votes or denying their citizens the right to vote? ID has also always been required to pick up a parcel from the post office amongst other things. I'd personally take it a step further and would want to see proof of paying tax before letting someone vote. No representation without taxation and all that...

Yeah good luck with that based on how much Bolt drivers make. The cost of missing the flight is cheap anyway compared to the life learning lesson that this has provided. Lessons like this will ensure she is better prepared for future journeys and help her to be more aware of her surroundings in the future.

No, it does not. GDP per capita has been going downwards for years. It will continue to go down as Labour will continue to allow the importation of both legal and illegal low skilled or no skilled immigrants to support the growth of the already rich at the expense of the poor. One day the people of the UK will realise they are participating in a migration Ponzi scheme and will vote for it to end. At that point you will scratch your head wondering how it came to be that the UK elected its equivalent of Victor Orban. If Labour come in and put a stop to low/no skilled and illegal migration only then will there will be a difference between the 2 parties. I cannot personally see that happening - can you?

It makes no difference who is in government, they are all participants of the same Ponzi growth scheme. Labour will continue this trend of bringing in low skilled migrants on the flawed basis that more people equals more growth. It's a house of cards that will come crashing down at some point and then we will end up with a genuinely far right government as people finally wake up and realise that the establishment parties do not represent them. Low skilled imported labour is only a growth scheme for the already rich. GDP per capita (the figure that matters most for household incomes) has been going downwards for years.

Yes, it's a real pity that nothing has been invented to help prevent unwanted pregnancies (other than abortion) that could mitigate the impact of this policy.

There is no difference. Somehow religious brainwashing and indoctrination of children is still considered acceptable despite there being no more evidence of an all powerful sky wizard than there is of a fat guy in a red suit delivering presents to all the well behaved children on the planet by magical flying reindeer. If this school is 'illegal' as it spreads misinformation, then so should every single faith school.

A exceptionally rare example of a common sense statement coming from the UK government.

I disagree. Look at that motorbike - he has a nice clear run all along the pavement without any pesky pedestrians getting in his way. Putting trees up could ruin his enjoyment and he might end up having to use one of the 3 lanes available on the road instead.

What she is doing is significantly less offensive to my eyes than the sight of overweight males with much bigger boobs than she has who are legally allowed to walk topless down the streets.

Where was the good kid with the gun? Need to get more kids armed to prevent this kind of tragedy from happening again. Signed, the NRA.

Actually the way that the UK has outgrown christianity has left a bit of a vacuum that Islam is now trying to (and will one day) fill with it's backwards ideology. The "right wingers" are overwhelmingly in favour of equal rights for women and gay people of any religion. The left are in favour of being allied with ideologies that would take those rights away as soon as they have the power to do so. Islamic countries protect their (backwards) values by not allowing the teaching of other religions in their schools. Maybe the west should have continued to insist on teaching Christian values rather than kowtowing to the most intolerant religion on the planet and allowing that intolerance to spread via Islamic faith schools. Maybe then the street would not be full of hateful people on their hate marches every weekend.

The police here really do put Sherlock Holmes to shame. I have no idea how they manage to track down these criminal enterprises that are buried so deep underground and make so much effort to cover their tracks that they are practically invisible.

Legal aid should be for legal defence when someone who cannot afford their own defence is accused of a serious crime, not to support vexatious actions like this where the family chose to send their child to this school knowing full well the secular nature of the school in advance and what facilities were and were not available, and having the freedom of choice to move to an alternative school if they desired such a facility. They should not have been given legal aid and if they wanted to take such a nonsense, spurious claim to the courts (as is their right) then they should fund it themselves. It's the equivalent of me taking a gym to court for not providing a swimming pool when I already knew they didn't have a pool when I signed up and took the tour of the gym before committing to joining.

Also, a big thumbs down for lack of common sense as the family were given £150,000 of taxpayers money in legal aid to take this nonsense to court.

Absolutely!!! The way that they stormed into a peaceful music festival, slaughtered hundreds of innocent civilians, raped women, took civilian hostages (including children) was definitely breaking all the norms and taboos of any kind of warfare and this literally started a war!! This caused the other side to retaliate as there is just no way that any sane civilised people should not defend themselves from that kind of barbarous action from happening again. Oh wait, silly me, that was the other side that did this, not Isreal.

That is literally my plan (except swap Tahiti for Europe and 1 year for 6 months). Unless they do announce closure of this seemingly obvious loophole I do intend to take full advantage of it. Before committing to such flagrant legal tax avoidance I am hoping this does get clarified.

Well, technically he didn't expose his wiener to anyone, as no-one can possibly see it due to the gigantic overhanging belly he is sporting.

It doesn't, but it is a pointless endeavour as we already have sex based categories that includes everyone. Your turn. How does having an open category exclude anyone. Take your time, give it your best go.

Let's not. It needs to be taken out of their hands as the flush faced vein bulging with outrage trans hate mobs have form for bullying those who who do not conform to the fantasy that men can change their sex. Have you seen the hate and threats that the likes of Sharon Davies or Martina Navratalova get for asking for fairness in women's sports? There are 2 sexes so there should be 2 categories. Nobody would object if the mens category was open to accommodate as many genders as you can think and that way nobody is excluded and leave the women's category for actual women. Simple, fair and inclusive.

Nice bit of pearl clutching there, but if the categories were just based on biological sex and there were 2 of them, who exactly is being "excluded" here? If we take another example from the list, the "Deliciagender", are you suggesting that person does not have a biological sex and would be excluded on that basis?

How many categories though? There are 72 genders according to https://www.medicinenet.com/what_are_the_72_other_genders/article.htm. Is it fair (for example) for someone who is "Esspigender" to compete against "Genderblanks"? Have any studies been carried out on this? So 72 categories is probably too many, so maybe (and just thinking aloud here) the categories should be based on the immutable biological sex of the individual - of which there are 2.

What outrage? Has somebody been on the sauce already? Open and womens categories are all that is needed. There are only 2 sexes so there only needs to be 2 categories. It obviously cannot be based on "gender" as last time I looked there is an unknown amount of genders and there could be more than 100 now. So it has to be based on sex but for inclusivity sake (which I'm sure is something you salivate about) we call one of the categories open. Problem solved.

For once I am in complete agreement with you. The mens competition is already fully open to men who dress up as women, but for the sake of "inclusivity" the mens competition can be re-branded to "open" where anyone can compete, even legacy women who are bigger, faster, stronger than actual men that you refer to. The women's competition remains open to only women. Such a simple solution that pleases everybody* *except for mediocre male athletes who have no chance of winning anything when competing against fellow males.

I really don't see what the problem is as it is nigh on impossible to tell a modern trans woman apart from a legacy female as this picture clearly demonstrates.

People will vote for Trump as he is not Biden and people will vote for Biden as he is not Trump. Neither have any redeeming characteristics that would qualify them as Presidential so people will vote for the lessor of the 2 evils, as they see it. Those who have sacrificed their ability to reason will take their cues from either their CNN or Fox overlords and what will be will be. Everyone else will just carry on as they realise that neither of these 2 incompetent old fools will really make much difference to their lives as the office doesn't really have much in the way of power anyway. The useful idiots will carry on writing long stupid lists like the OP to make them feel virtuous that their particular media overlord is the right one.