ChatterBank7 mins ago
Is she talking sense?
16 Answers
Hopefully now that the flames of the riots have been extinguished, isn't it now time to reflect on the causes and solutions to these riots?
Like her or not, does one not think that this time Melanie Phillips is talking sense?
http://www.dailymail....lly-social-value.html
Also do you agree that the culprits benefits should be stopped and their social housing taken from them?
/// Those of us who warned over the years that they were playing with fire were sneered at and smeared as Right-wing nutters who wanted to turn the clock back to some mythical golden age.///
Now where have I heard that before?
Like her or not, does one not think that this time Melanie Phillips is talking sense?
http://www.dailymail....lly-social-value.html
Also do you agree that the culprits benefits should be stopped and their social housing taken from them?
/// Those of us who warned over the years that they were playing with fire were sneered at and smeared as Right-wing nutters who wanted to turn the clock back to some mythical golden age.///
Now where have I heard that before?
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
I got half way down and had to close it before I got angry, it's absolutely disgusting to suggest that a mother on her own cannot bring up a child properly. So what? Bring them up into a fueding, hate filled environment kept together for the sake of the the 2 parent family!? That's absolute bull and I know it first hand.. as an educated, sociable and happy adult without a criminal record and in a solid relationship.. brought up by my amazing single mum who has worked pretty much her whole life on the minimum wage to bring me up along side my brother and sister.
is she talking sense? No, she talking ignorant, blinkered, right wing b@ll@x!!
is she talking sense? No, she talking ignorant, blinkered, right wing b@ll@x!!
"She wants...
// a return to the energetic transmission of Biblical morality. /
lol
Reminds me of the Orange Order preacher who warned of the "black darkness of pre-reformation popery" threatening Britain a few years ago.
So the answer to AOG's question plainly is "no".
In fact the patient seems to be getting worse :-)
// a return to the energetic transmission of Biblical morality. /
lol
Reminds me of the Orange Order preacher who warned of the "black darkness of pre-reformation popery" threatening Britain a few years ago.
So the answer to AOG's question plainly is "no".
In fact the patient seems to be getting worse :-)
pa___ul3
Surely if you are not bothered to read it because you get angry, how can you honestly make a comment on it.
Read it and then disagree with some or all of the points she makes, but don't just dismiss it out of hand.
Regarding single mums, obviously she wasn't speaking for all of them, like your mother who obviously did a good job.
But their are many out there who are left to bring up their children, some by different fathers all on their own, and are not particularly bothered how they bring therm up.
How else would children be wandering around the streets causing mayhem if they did?
Surely if you are not bothered to read it because you get angry, how can you honestly make a comment on it.
Read it and then disagree with some or all of the points she makes, but don't just dismiss it out of hand.
Regarding single mums, obviously she wasn't speaking for all of them, like your mother who obviously did a good job.
But their are many out there who are left to bring up their children, some by different fathers all on their own, and are not particularly bothered how they bring therm up.
How else would children be wandering around the streets causing mayhem if they did?
No, she isn't.
"Instead, it introduced the sexual free-for-all of ‘lifestyle choice’; claimed that the idea of the male breadwinner was a sexist anachronism; and told girls that they could, and should, go it alone as mothers.
This was the outcome of the shattering defeat of Tony Blair, in the two years or so after he came to power, at the hands of the ultra-feminists and apostles of non-judgmentalism in his Cabinet and party who were determined, above all, to destroy the traditional nuclear family"
This is an utterly hateful, opportunistic, exploitative, misrepresentation of a whole group of people. Deliberately. Her idea that women were 'encouraged' to become single mothers is wilful distortion - all that people have ever said about it is that single mothers have the right to exist without being judged for it, and deserve all the help they can get. Anyone with the most minimal amount of brainpower could tell you that's a far cry from 'encouragement' - nobody chooses to be a single mother if they can help it.
It's the same thing with the nuclear family idea. Here's the idea on that topic that Phillips is attacking: The huge social pressure and assumption that people would simply start a family and stay in it in the past made life extremely difficult for people who simply didn't fit the model (e.g. gay people, women who wanted a career or didn't want a family, women being domestically abused and therefore wanting to divorce). These people deserved the right to pursue happiness outside of the family model, while those who wanted it could still pursue it if they wanted to.
In Phillips' hands, this becomes 'hatred for the nuclear family' and it is the silver bullet responsible for everything bad that has happened to society in the past 10 years.
And you believe it. You, AOG, just lap it up. You don't exercise critical thinking, you don't check what she's saying, you just nod your head because it feels right - because that's what you'd really like to be true.
Gah.
"Instead, it introduced the sexual free-for-all of ‘lifestyle choice’; claimed that the idea of the male breadwinner was a sexist anachronism; and told girls that they could, and should, go it alone as mothers.
This was the outcome of the shattering defeat of Tony Blair, in the two years or so after he came to power, at the hands of the ultra-feminists and apostles of non-judgmentalism in his Cabinet and party who were determined, above all, to destroy the traditional nuclear family"
This is an utterly hateful, opportunistic, exploitative, misrepresentation of a whole group of people. Deliberately. Her idea that women were 'encouraged' to become single mothers is wilful distortion - all that people have ever said about it is that single mothers have the right to exist without being judged for it, and deserve all the help they can get. Anyone with the most minimal amount of brainpower could tell you that's a far cry from 'encouragement' - nobody chooses to be a single mother if they can help it.
It's the same thing with the nuclear family idea. Here's the idea on that topic that Phillips is attacking: The huge social pressure and assumption that people would simply start a family and stay in it in the past made life extremely difficult for people who simply didn't fit the model (e.g. gay people, women who wanted a career or didn't want a family, women being domestically abused and therefore wanting to divorce). These people deserved the right to pursue happiness outside of the family model, while those who wanted it could still pursue it if they wanted to.
In Phillips' hands, this becomes 'hatred for the nuclear family' and it is the silver bullet responsible for everything bad that has happened to society in the past 10 years.
And you believe it. You, AOG, just lap it up. You don't exercise critical thinking, you don't check what she's saying, you just nod your head because it feels right - because that's what you'd really like to be true.
Gah.
AOG
Since the cuts to the police were announced in the budget after the election last year, I have been saying they should not happen.
// Gromit
I predict a riot!
Howe's March '81 austerity budget was followed soon after by riots in Brixton, Leeds, Leeds, Moss Side and Toxteth.
Better not cut Police jobs just yet...
18:43 Tue 22nd Jun 2010 //
I have not made a U-Turn, I have been against the police cuts all along, but you are about to see a rapid U-Turn from this shambles of a Government.
Since the cuts to the police were announced in the budget after the election last year, I have been saying they should not happen.
// Gromit
I predict a riot!
Howe's March '81 austerity budget was followed soon after by riots in Brixton, Leeds, Leeds, Moss Side and Toxteth.
Better not cut Police jobs just yet...
18:43 Tue 22nd Jun 2010 //
I have not made a U-Turn, I have been against the police cuts all along, but you are about to see a rapid U-Turn from this shambles of a Government.
No it's nonsense.
Why? Because she is describing symptoms not underlying causes.
Evidence? well we have all been subjected to changes in attitudes to marriage, authority, drugs etc Lots of respectable, successful people come from single parent families; don ike hority or the church, use recreational drugs, live 'in sin' etc
And yet only a minority are recidivists or 'dysfunctional' and an even tinier minority actually rioting.
So the causes must be at a deeper logical level. Personally I think it is an inevitable (and some might argue acceptable) consequence that when you have a capitalist, market driven economy with intense drive for universal consumerism then whilst that creates wealth for many of us it also means that a bottom layer of people who don't have the money to partake will be disenfranchised and disruptive.
Why wouldn't they - there is nothing in it for them.
Why? Because she is describing symptoms not underlying causes.
Evidence? well we have all been subjected to changes in attitudes to marriage, authority, drugs etc Lots of respectable, successful people come from single parent families; don ike hority or the church, use recreational drugs, live 'in sin' etc
And yet only a minority are recidivists or 'dysfunctional' and an even tinier minority actually rioting.
So the causes must be at a deeper logical level. Personally I think it is an inevitable (and some might argue acceptable) consequence that when you have a capitalist, market driven economy with intense drive for universal consumerism then whilst that creates wealth for many of us it also means that a bottom layer of people who don't have the money to partake will be disenfranchised and disruptive.
Why wouldn't they - there is nothing in it for them.
1 to 16 of 16
