Labour do not have the time or space with the voters to pull off this stunt any longer. You’d have thought last week would have brought that home to even the meanest intellects. It’s time to shit or get off the pot.
> @ydoethur said: > > @ydoethur said: > > > > @FrancisUrquhart said: > > > > > > > SA going to win this at a canter. > > > > > > > > > > > > I thank you....Archer strikes. > > > > > > See, @ah009, THAT is how you do it! > > > > In all honesty, I still think SA will win this easily. > > Keep them coming bud, keep them coming!!!
@AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either.
The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo.
Looking at the Peterborough Euro numbers he'd actually have half a chance winning there if he went full out remain. Quite a few soft green and Lib Dem votes out there methinks.
The more I see of what McVey is saying today, the angrier I get.
She is showing her own bigotry very clearly. She is pretending it is about parental choice - but in reality she is showing what she thinks by defending the rights of bigots to enforce their narrow world view.
> @brendan16 said: > > @kle4 said: > > > IIt is reassuring to know that our next PM believes that homophobic parents have the right to indoctrinate their children with homophobia. > > > > > > > > > > > > #Esther4Leader > > > > > > Am waiting for the usual suspects to accuse of her pandering to the Muslim bloc vote the way they do when it comes to Labour politicians. > > > > > > Presumably her view is that social and moral values should be taught by parents rather than schools - as opposed to thinking that we should make exceptions to such compulsory education because a particular group of parents object to it? > > > > > > For the nth time, nothing and no-one is stopping them doing that. The children are being taught matters which are not available in the home which is the essence of education. > > > > > > Is there any politician, other than Jess Phillips, with the courage to stand up to bullies and bigots? > > > > > > My point was that Ms McVey comes at this from a libertarian standpoint - that we don’t need to be giving explicit sex-ed to primary school children, rather than that Ms McVey is taking sides in the woke culture wars, as Mr Eagles was getting at. > > > > > > I believe the explicit sex education is actually a book that has two male penguins bringing up a baby penguin. > > > > > > Oh the horror. > > > > > > Though if memory serves penguins can be quite the deviants. > > > > People who believe in a supreme being can be a bit weird about books. In Poland they banned Winnie the Pooh due to "his" dubious sexuality and appearing half naked. > > > > Maybe if their children are better educated we can move on from this nonsense in a few hundred years time. > > Slightly fake news re Poland. It wasn’t banned in the whole country - in 2014 one primary school in one Polish village decided it wasn’t suitable to be the mascot for a new play area. Hardly the same thing!
Thanks, that does make (slightly) more sense. Googling says he is now banned in China for looking too much like President Xi, but maybe there is more to that as well.
Re Esther McVey: interesting to see someone go after the Conservative Muslim vote.
So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to...
1. absent their children from compulsory school worship? 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes? 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution? 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay?
I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
> > > > Slightly fake news re Poland. It wasn’t banned in the whole country - in 2014 one primary school in one Polish village decided it wasn’t suitable to be the mascot for a new play area. Hardly the same thing! > > Thanks, that does make (slightly) more sense. Googling says he is now banned in China for looking too much like President Xi, but maybe there is more to that as well.
No, that is a thing. Xi really doesn't like being compared to the bear with very little brain, to whom he bears a distinct resemblance.
Recently been reading Salman Rushdie's memoir Joseph Anton. A lot of politicians don't come out of it too well. It's long forgotten that the Satanic Verses was actually shortlisted for the Booker prize and the chair of the judging panel that year was very much in its favour but was out-voted by the other judges. The chair of the panel - Michael Foot.
He seems to have been one of the few people to have stuck steadfastly by Rushdie. He initiated a meeting with Kinnock who said he didn't agree with segregated Muslim schools but it was Labour party policy anyway.
Another thing. I was always told how my grandfather who grew up in the valleys of south Wales had started out as a socialist and then became disillusioned aka conservative. This was particularly true around local government and education. Clearing out the attic a few years ago I found an old letter among his treasured possessions signed by one Michael Foot - saying how nice it was to have chatted to Mr Williams. He would have long been a conservative at that point but I suppose a letter signed by Michael Foot was still worth keeping.
> @Pulpstar said: > @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either. > > The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo.
Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to.
I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour.
> @Sandpit said: > Dominic Raab a pound shop Owen Smith? > > > > https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1134005861427400704 > > > > Polling suggests the majority - in some cases 80 per cent plus of British women do not consider themselves ‘feminists’ while supporting gender equality - so share Raabs views. I expect the figure is even higher amongst Tory party members. > > It may horrify the Twitter bubble but might not be that unpopular with most women. > > https://twitter.com/KateAndrs/status/1134066662934745088
Dominic Raab may not be a feminist, but he clearly is a lightweightist; he is in favour of lightweights being treated equally and having the possibility of attaining the highest office in the land.
> > Am waiting for the usual suspects to accuse of her pandering to the Muslim bloc vote the way they do when it comes to Labour politicians.
>
> >
>
> > Presumably her view is that social and moral values should be taught by parents rather than schools - as opposed to thinking that we should make exceptions to such compulsory education because a particular group of parents object to it?
>
> >
>
> > For the nth time, nothing and no-one is stopping them doing that. The children are being taught matters which are not available in the home which is the essence of education.
>
> >
>
> > Is there any politician, other than Jess Phillips, with the courage to stand up to bullies and bigots?
>
> >
>
> > My point was that Ms McVey comes at this from a libertarian standpoint - that we don’t need to be giving explicit sex-ed to primary school children, rather than that Ms McVey is taking sides in the woke culture wars, as Mr Eagles was getting at.
>
> >
>
> > I believe the explicit sex education is actually a book that has two male penguins bringing up a baby penguin.
>
> >
>
> > Oh the horror.
>
> >
>
> > Though if memory serves penguins can be quite the deviants.
>
>
>
> People who believe in a supreme being can be a bit weird about books. In Poland they banned Winnie the Pooh due to "his" dubious sexuality and appearing half naked.
>
>
>
> Maybe if their children are better educated we can move on from this nonsense in a few hundred years time.
>
> Slightly fake news re Poland. It wasn’t banned in the whole country - in 2014 one primary school in one Polish village decided it wasn’t suitable to be the mascot for a new play area. Hardly the same thing!
Thanks, that does make (slightly) more sense. Googling says he is now banned in China for looking too much like President Xi, but maybe there is more to that as well.
> @anothernick said: > > @Pulpstar said: > > @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either. > > > > The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo. > > Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to. > > I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour.
Looking at Corbyn's 'career', it is clear that he doesn't do changing his mind. He has, since becoming leader, been forced to try to advocate for things he doesn't actually believe and it is always clear when he is doing that.
The only way Labour can really change perceptions on the topic of Brexit is to change leadership team. And that isn't looking likely.
> @oxfordsimon said: > The more I see of what McVey is saying today, the angrier I get. > > She is showing her own bigotry very clearly. She is pretending it is about parental choice - but in reality she is showing what she thinks by defending the rights of bigots to enforce their narrow world view. > > Hateful.
> @rcs1000 said: > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1134008889660325888 > > Re Esther McVey: interesting to see someone go after the Conservative Muslim vote. > > So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to... > > 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship? > 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes? > 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution? > 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay? > > I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @Sandpit said: > > Dominic Raab a pound shop Owen Smith? > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1134005861427400704 > > > > > > > > Polling suggests the majority - in some cases 80 per cent plus of British women do not consider themselves ‘feminists’ while supporting gender equality - so share Raabs views. I expect the figure is even higher amongst Tory party members. > > > > It may horrify the Twitter bubble but might not be that unpopular with most women. > > > > https://twitter.com/KateAndrs/status/1134066662934745088 > > Dominic Raab may not be a feminist, but he clearly is a lightweightist; he is in favour of lightweights being treated equally and having the possibility of attaining the highest office in the land.
The largely female U3a Reading Group to which I belong recently read a book in which a woman' stood by her man' ..... a Vietnam vet with severe PTSD, which made him abusive to his wife and daughter. The general opinion was that, PTSD or whatever or not, 'they wouldn't have put up with that'!
> @RochdalePioneers said: > > @rcs1000 said: > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1134008889660325888 > > > > Re Esther McVey: interesting to see someone go after the Conservative Muslim vote. > > > > So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to... > > > > 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship? > > 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes? > > 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution? > > 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay? > > > > I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out? > > McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
> @RochdalePioneers said: > > @rcs1000 said: > > So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to... > > 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship? > > 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes? > > 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution? > > 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay? > > I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out? > McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
It is time to stop giving special protection to any religion that will not support full and proper equality for all.
If you aren't prepared to accept equality for all, then you have no right to demand the same protection for yourself.
We cannot stop individuals holding hateful views - but we can stop giving protection to organisations that promote the holding of those views.
In any conflict between equality and religion, equality must win out.
> Re Esther McVey: interesting to see someone go after the Conservative Muslim vote.
>
> So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to...
>
> 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship?
> 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes?
> 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution?
> 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay?
>
> I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
Amazing how politicians quick to demand that we stand up to the EU are so weak when it comes to standing up to bigots.
But let’s face it what people like McVey are displaying is a pathetic combination of bigotry and cowardice and probably trying to show that she is not Islamophobic because, hey, she’s on the side of these parents. She is an utter disgrace.
Bold move for anyone who laid England for the tournament this morning ! Cream crackering the team ranked third in the world whilst not playing their best.
> @oxfordsimon said: > > @anothernick said: > > > @Pulpstar said: > > > @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either. > > > > > > The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo. > > > > Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to. > > > > I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour. > > Looking at Corbyn's 'career', it is clear that he doesn't do changing his mind. He has, since becoming leader, been forced to try to advocate for things he doesn't actually believe and it is always clear when he is doing that. > > The only way Labour can really change perceptions on the topic of Brexit is to change leadership team. And that isn't looking likely.
No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year.
> > So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to...
> > 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship?
> > 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes?
> > 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution?
> > 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay?
> > I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
> McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
It is time to stop giving special protection to any religion that will not support full and proper equality for all.
If you aren't prepared to accept equality for all, then you have no right to demand the same protection for yourself.
We cannot stop individuals holding hateful views - but we can stop giving protection to organisations that promote the holding of those views.
In any conflict between equality and religion, equality must win out.
Jeremy Corbyn celebrated his 70th birthday with his family at his allotment this weekend. Wearing a T-shirt that said "I'd Rather Be At The Allotment".
Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
> @anothernick said: > No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year.
Do we have any real sense as to how long the EHRC report will take? Given how much evidence I have seen talk of having been admitted, I can't imagine it will be a speedy process.... sadly
Miss Cyclefree, on the other hand, consider how quickly and loudly McVey's comments have been condemned compared to the parents' (Phillips[sp] is the only MP I can think of who has openly criticised them).
> @anothernick said: > > @oxfordsimon said: > > > @anothernick said: > > > > @Pulpstar said: > > > > @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either. > > > > > > > > The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo. > > > > > > Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to. > > > > > > I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour. > > > > Looking at Corbyn's 'career', it is clear that he doesn't do changing his mind. He has, since becoming leader, been forced to try to advocate for things he doesn't actually believe and it is always clear when he is doing that. > > > > The only way Labour can really change perceptions on the topic of Brexit is to change leadership team. And that isn't looking likely. > > No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year.
Yep. The Brexit thing is key. It cuts through his natural constituency, just as it does everywhere else. In addition to prominent journalists, there are many of his allies in the Party leadership who aren't instinctively where he is. McDonnell and Abbot are ardent Remainers even while they, thus far, back the Party line.
> @AndyJS said: > Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.'
Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
Indeed. Sadly, all that happened is they projected their dreams as to what an unspun, authentic politician with radical views on welfare who was nothing like the people who win elections like Blair and Wilson, looked like onto the person who emerged from the regular 'no, it's your turn' round at the Hard Left caucus.
> @Morris_Dancer said: > Miss Cyclefree, on the other hand, consider how quickly and loudly McVey's comments have been condemned compared to the parents' (Phillips[sp] is the only MP I can think of who has openly criticised them).
The silence of politicians on this issue has been deafening. Shameful that they are continue to pander to religious extremists.
"Amazing how politicians quick to demand that we stand up to the EU are so weak when it comes to standing up to bigots. > > But let’s face it what people like McVey are displaying is a pathetic combination of bigotry and cowardice and probably trying to show that she is not Islamophobic because, hey, she’s on the side of these parents. She is an utter disgrace."
I thought you said you were a Roman Catholic - a religion which is emphatically bigoted against homosexuality in its official teachings, if not in the conduct of the priesthood. What distinguishes youi from her?
> Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.'
One wonders what they are not telling us about their plans? The bits that the EU would block.
> @rottenborough said: > > @AndyJS said: > > > Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice. > > > > Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.' > > One wonders what they are not telling us about their plans? The bits that the EU would block.
IIRC, while the EU didn't object to the continued public ownership of industries and services, there was considerable doubt as to anything not already publicly owned being 'allowed' to be so.
> @oxfordsimon said: > > @anothernick said: > > No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year. > > Do we have any real sense as to how long the EHRC report will take? Given how much evidence I have seen talk of having been admitted, I can't imagine it will be a speedy process.... sadly
No you are probably right, sadly. And no doubt m'learned friends will be called in to try and stop publication of anything critical of the leadership.
> You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual
>
> I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority
>
> Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles?
>
> I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment
>
> Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents.
>
> The alternative isn’t non vaccination - it’s use of monovalent vaccines
And like a lot of health-care related decisions, MMR was selected on a cost-risk-benefit analysis. If you want to save your pennies for separate jabs - incidentally causing more psychological stress to your child - then go right ahead. There is no reason for it to be made available on the NHS, as far as I am aware.
Mandatory Vaccines are a tender business.
And the issue is you are saying (a) you must do it and (b) you must do it my way and no one else’s
> @OldKingCole said: > > @AndyJS said: > > Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice. > > Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.'
> > Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
>
>
>
> Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.'
>
> One wonders what they are not telling us about their plans? The bits that the EU would block.
IIRC, while the EU didn't object to the continued public ownership of industries and services, there was considerable doubt as to anything not already publicly owned being 'allowed' to be so.
There is a massive irony, that you don't see commentators noting on. Jezza's faithful 500K members seem to be mainly very in favour of Remain and 2nd vote etc. Yet Jezza's hard core manifesto and policy types want out so they can implement their massively socialist plans.
One wonders whether the faithful have thought any of this through at all.
A majority of Tory MPs have now endorsed one of the candidates, with Robin Walker's tweet in support of Sajid Javid. (Total endorsements are now 157 out of 313).
> > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual
>
> >
>
> > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority
>
> >
>
> > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles?
>
> >
>
> > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment
>
> >
>
> > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents.
>
> >
>
> > Most of the arguments come down to use of MMR vs the mono vaccines.
>
> >
>
> > The government forced the use of MMR despite some concerns about the side effect profile. It was cheaper and, they believed, would have better compliance.
>
>
>
> And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ?
>
> That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity
>
> That gives you two options:
>
> 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to
>
> 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use*
>
> (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though)
Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an option with significant additional costs purely due to ill-founded and unproven concerns about MMR?
My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers
> @Charles said: > > @Charles said: > > > Why ought they? > > > > > > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual > > > > > > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority > > > > > > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles? > > > > > > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment > > > > > > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents. > > > > > > The alternative isn’t non vaccination - it’s use of monovalent vaccines > > > > And like a lot of health-care related decisions, MMR was selected on a cost-risk-benefit analysis. If you want to save your pennies for separate jabs - incidentally causing more psychological stress to your child - then go right ahead. There is no reason for it to be made available on the NHS, as far as I am aware. > > Mandatory Vaccines are a tender business. > > And the issue is you are saying (a) you must do it and (b) you must do it my way and no one else’s
Plasma expanders are a means, admittedly not a universal means, of avoiding Jehovah's Witnesses transfusion problems.
Single vaccines, as available when I was involved with these things, do not give the same cover as MMR. No reason why that can't be overcome, but I agree with Charles about stress for the child.
> @Charles said: > > @Charles said: > > > > @Charles said: > > > > > > > Why ought they? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the arguments come down to use of MMR vs the mono vaccines. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The government forced the use of MMR despite some concerns about the side effect profile. It was cheaper and, they believed, would have better compliance. > > > > > > > > > > > > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ? > > > > > > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity > > > > > > That gives you two options: > > > > > > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to > > > > > > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use* > > > > > > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though) > > > > Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an option with significant additional costs purely due to ill-founded and unproven concerns about MMR? > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @Charles said: > > > @Charles said: > > > > > > @Charles said: > > > > > > > > > > > Why ought they? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the arguments come down to use of MMR vs the mono vaccines. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The government forced the use of MMR despite some concerns about the side effect profile. It was cheaper and, they believed, would have better compliance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ? > > > > > > > > > > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity > > > > > > > > > > That gives you two options: > > > > > > > > > > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to > > > > > > > > > > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use* > > > > > > > > > > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though) > > > > > > > > Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an option with significant additional costs purely due to ill-founded and unproven concerns about MMR? > > > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers > > Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist?
Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe.
> @TheWhiteRabbit said: > > @Nigel_Foremain said: > > > @Charles said: > > > > @Charles said: > > > > > > > > @Charles said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why ought they? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the arguments come down to use of MMR vs the mono vaccines. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The government forced the use of MMR despite some concerns about the side effect profile. It was cheaper and, they believed, would have better compliance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That gives you two options: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though) > > > > > > > > > > > > Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an option with significant additional costs purely due to ill-founded and unproven concerns about MMR? > > > > > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers > > > > Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist? > > Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe.
Doesn't necessarily mean he knows anything about the pros and cons of MMR, but if he does I am all ears (well eyes for this medium)
I'm between contracts at the moment. My wife is concerned and I feel guilty. But not too guilty as I get to have the cricket on all the time. She's getting suspicious that I might not be looking to hard for a job. She might be right.
Appears to be a perfectly pleasant man, but another lightweight, but still, I suppose preferable to The Charlatan In Chief, or Dominic Lightweight Raab
> > > > > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers > > > > Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist? > > Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe.
I asked him earlier about the actual data. Still awaiting a reply.
> @ExiledInScotland said: > I'm between contracts at the moment. My wife is concerned and I feel guilty. But not too guilty as I get to have the cricket on all the time. She's getting suspicious that I might not be looking to hard for a job. She might be right.
You are in good company. TM is between jobs and was at the Oval enjoying the cricket and looking relaxed
> @nico67 said: > Brexit a right wing coup . > > Out of the EU the nutjobs will run riot . And aided and abetted by Corbyn. > > He’s taking the piss out of Labour Remainers. If he hasn’t moved to a second vote after the Peterborough by election then he needs to be challenged . > >
Problem is 82% of people voted either Con or Lab at the last general election.
> @Nigelb said: > > @TheWhiteRabbit said: > > > @Nigel_Foremain said: > > > > @Charles said: > > > > > @Charles said: > > > > > > > > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers > > > > > > Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist? > > > > Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe. > > I asked him earlier about the actual data. > Still awaiting a reply.
I suspect he thinks MMR is actually a plot by the EU to vaccinate children against Euroscepticism and bigotry! Actually it is a shame such an inoculation is not available!
That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity
That gives you two options:
1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to
2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use*
(* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though)
That wasn't my question. I was asking what the data say about the relative safety of the three single vaccines versus MMR.
'there is enough concern' includes the spurious bollocks about autism.
Multivalent vaccines have more significant site specific reactions, but with three injections there are three occasions when SSIs can occur
More worryingly some of the work in fish suggests multivalent vaccines can trigger a cytokine storm (essentially overstimulation of the immune system). I haven’t seen data specifically in MMR but cytokine storm is very much a matter of focus right now.
Autism is spurious bollocks (I think the issue is that vaccination happens at a similar age to autism diagnosis so parents are looking for something to blame). My point was that the choice is between resolving the issue for a small cost (offering single vaccines) vs loss of herd immunity vs state compulsion. In my view the small cost is acceptable to achieve herd immunity without the unacceptable societal consequences of compulsion.
> @AndyJS said: > > @nico67 said: > > Brexit a right wing coup . > > > > Out of the EU the nutjobs will run riot . And aided and abetted by Corbyn. > > > > He’s taking the piss out of Labour Remainers. If he hasn’t moved to a second vote after the Peterborough by election then he needs to be challenged . > > > > > > Problem is 82% of people voted either Con or Lab at the last general election.
They won’t the next time . Corbyn thinks he can keep pissing off Remainers and that they’ll stick with the party .
He’s wrong . I and many others won’t be voting Labour again until he comes off the fence or preferably goes .
> @rottenborough said: > Jezza seems to have played another blinder today. > > Briefing the working class Mirror that the 2nd vote is on, and then briefing the remainer literary class Guardian, that is "some way off". > > He is a Bourbon isn't he?
> @Charles said: > href="https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/profile/Charles" > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ? > > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity > > That gives you two options: > > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to > > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use* > > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though) > > That wasn't my question. > I was asking what the data say about the relative safety of the three single vaccines versus MMR. > > 'there is enough concern' includes the spurious bollocks about autism. > > Multivalent vaccines have more significant site specific reactions, but with three injections there are three occasions when SSIs can occur > > More worryingly some of the work in fish suggests multivalent vaccines can trigger a cytokine storm (essentially overstimulation of the immune system). I haven’t seen data specifically in MMR but cytokine storm is very much a matter of focus right now.
The MMR vaccine has been in use for several decades now.
I was specifically asking about human data. Given that millions of doses have been given, work in fish models with unspecified multivalent vaccines is not really relevant. Shouldn't be that difficult to compare outcomes with the single vaccines.
> > Out of the EU the nutjobs will run riot . And aided and abetted by Corbyn.
> >
> > He’s taking the piss out of Labour Remainers. If he hasn’t moved to a second vote after the Peterborough by election then he needs to be challenged .
> >
> >
>
> Problem is 82% of people voted either Con or Lab at the last general election.
They won’t the next time . Corbyn thinks he can keep pissing off Remainers and that they’ll stick with the party .
He’s wrong . I and many others won’t be voting Labour again until he comes off the fence or preferably goes .
I now expect a challenge this summer.
I think Peterborough will be the tipping point as you say.
"Amazing how politicians quick to demand that we stand up to the EU are so weak when it comes to standing up to bigots.
>
> But let’s face it what people like McVey are displaying is a pathetic combination of bigotry and cowardice and probably trying to show that she is not Islamophobic because, hey, she’s on the side of these parents. She is an utter disgrace."
I thought you said you were a Roman Catholic - a religion which is emphatically bigoted against homosexuality in its official teachings, if not in the conduct of the priesthood. What distinguishes youi from her?
Because I have clearly said on multiple occasions, both in the thread header I have just posted and in multiple comments below the line over the years, that I think that where there is a clash between the religious and the secular in relation to this, the secular in our society should take precedence. I don’t think that parents should have the right to opt out of sex and equalities and anti-bullying education. I could not have been clearer.
I no more want to live under a Catholic theocracy than under an Islamic one.
For good measure, I think the Catholic church is wrong when it describes homosexuality as a sin or homosexuals as disordered. Jesus said nothing about the issue. And gay people like each and everyone of us are made, if you believe, in the image of God. So equality is a given. The Church is simply wrong on this point.
McVey is supporting the rights of parents to be bigots. I utterly oppose that. That is the difference between us.
> @Charles said: > href="https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/profile/Charles" > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ? > > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity > > That gives you two options: > > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to > > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use* > > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though) > > That wasn't my question. > I was asking what the data say about the relative safety of the three single vaccines versus MMR. > > 'there is enough concern' includes the spurious bollocks about autism. > > Multivalent vaccines have more significant site specific reactions, but with three injections there are three occasions when SSIs can occur > > More worryingly some of the work in fish suggests multivalent vaccines can trigger a cytokine storm (essentially overstimulation of the immune system). I haven’t seen data specifically in MMR but cytokine storm is very much a matter of focus right now. > > Autism is spurious bollocks (I think the issue is that vaccination happens at a similar age to autism diagnosis so parents are looking for something to blame). My point was that the choice is between resolving the issue for a small cost (offering single vaccines) vs loss of herd immunity vs state compulsion. In my view the small cost is acceptable to achieve herd immunity without the unacceptable societal consequences of compulsion.
Are you a scientist? If so do you work in this field, or do you base your opinion on uninformed hearsay?
I appreciate that the contest hasn't officially start - but it effectively has. Changing the rules at this point feels counterproductive. The first round of voting sorts most of this out. And if they want to change anything, they can increase the number of voting rounds per week - going for Monday/Wednesday/Friday - rather than Tuesday/Thursday - that will keep things tighter.
> @Scott_P said: > Might help explain the SCon Euro election result. > > Best Tory result in the UK you mean? > > No wonder the Zoomers are scared of her...
11%. Yes, I’m sure these “Zoomers” you speak of are absolutely terrified. Scottish patriots are however still wiping the tears of laughter from our eyes.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > "Amazing how politicians quick to demand that we stand up to the EU are so weak when it comes to standing up to bigots. > > > > > > But let’s face it what people like McVey are displaying is a pathetic combination of bigotry and cowardice and probably trying to show that she is not Islamophobic because, hey, she’s on the side of these parents. She is an utter disgrace." > > > > I thought you said you were a Roman Catholic - a religion which is emphatically bigoted against homosexuality in its official teachings, if not in the conduct of the priesthood. What distinguishes youi from her? > > Because I have clearly said on multiple occasions, both in the thread header I have just posted and in multiple comments below the line over the years, that I think that where there is a clash between the religious and the secular in relation to this, the secular in our society should take precedence. I don’t think that parents should have the right to opt out of sex and equalities and anti-bullying education. I could not have been clearer. > > I no more want to live under a Catholic theocracy than under an Islamic one. > > For good measure, I think the Catholic church is wrong when it describes homosexuality as a sin or homosexuals as disordered. Jesus said nothing about the issue. And gay people like each and everyone of us are made, if you believe, in the image of God. So equality is a given. The Church is simply wrong on this point. > > McVey is supporting the rights of parents to be bigots. I utterly oppose that. That is the difference between us.
Two amazing catches I remember are Sachin Tendulkar's at long-off to dismiss Allan Lamb at Lords in 1990, and Mark Ramprakash's at Headingley in 1991 to dismiss Phil Simmonds. That was Ramprakash's first Test Match.
> @oxfordsimon said: > > @Big_G_NorthWales said: > > > @rottenborough said: > > > https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1134073057658769410 > > > > > > WTF! A further six considering standing. > > > > The 1922 need to make a rule change and impose minimum support levels for nomination > > I appreciate that the contest hasn't officially start - but it effectively has. Changing the rules at this point feels counterproductive. The first round of voting sorts most of this out. And if they want to change anything, they can increase the number of voting rounds per week - going for Monday/Wednesday/Friday - rather than Tuesday/Thursday - that will keep things tighter.
Comments
https://twitter.com/cbctom/status/1133489401969991681
'Some way off'...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/30/soft-brexit-corbyn-labour-second-referendum-some-way-off-backs
> He's ready to back a second referendum...
>
> https://twitter.com/cbctom/status/1133489401969991681
>
> 'Some way off'...
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/30/soft-brexit-corbyn-labour-second-referendum-some-way-off-backs
Labour do not have the time or space with the voters to pull off this stunt any longer. You’d have thought last week would have brought that home to even the meanest intellects. It’s time to shit or get off the pot.
> > @ydoethur said:
>
> > > @FrancisUrquhart said:
>
> >
>
> > > SA going to win this at a canter.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I thank you....Archer strikes.
>
> >
>
> > See, @ah009, THAT is how you do it!
>
>
>
> In all honesty, I still think SA will win this easily.
>
> Keep them coming bud, keep them coming!!!
I have much to learn it seems.
> He's ready to back a second referendum...
>
> https://twitter.com/cbctom/status/1133489401969991681
>
> 'Some way off'...
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/30/soft-brexit-corbyn-labour-second-referendum-some-way-off-backs
Corbyn seems determined to drive remainers into the hands of the Lib Dems.
> More seriously, I think de Kock is going to win this for SA
You're vanderestimating Dussen...
The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo.
> Get de Kock out!!!
They have
She is showing her own bigotry very clearly. She is pretending it is about parental choice - but in reality she is showing what she thinks by defending the rights of bigots to enforce their narrow world view.
Hateful.
> > @kle4 said:
>
> > IIt is reassuring to know that our next PM believes that homophobic parents have the right to indoctrinate their children with homophobia.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > #Esther4Leader
>
> >
>
> > Am waiting for the usual suspects to accuse of her pandering to the Muslim bloc vote the way they do when it comes to Labour politicians.
>
> >
>
> > Presumably her view is that social and moral values should be taught by parents rather than schools - as opposed to thinking that we should make exceptions to such compulsory education because a particular group of parents object to it?
>
> >
>
> > For the nth time, nothing and no-one is stopping them doing that. The children are being taught matters which are not available in the home which is the essence of education.
>
> >
>
> > Is there any politician, other than Jess Phillips, with the courage to stand up to bullies and bigots?
>
> >
>
> > My point was that Ms McVey comes at this from a libertarian standpoint - that we don’t need to be giving explicit sex-ed to primary school children, rather than that Ms McVey is taking sides in the woke culture wars, as Mr Eagles was getting at.
>
> >
>
> > I believe the explicit sex education is actually a book that has two male penguins bringing up a baby penguin.
>
> >
>
> > Oh the horror.
>
> >
>
> > Though if memory serves penguins can be quite the deviants.
>
>
>
> People who believe in a supreme being can be a bit weird about books. In Poland they banned Winnie the Pooh due to "his" dubious sexuality and appearing half naked.
>
>
>
> Maybe if their children are better educated we can move on from this nonsense in a few hundred years time.
>
> Slightly fake news re Poland. It wasn’t banned in the whole country - in 2014 one primary school in one Polish village decided it wasn’t suitable to be the mascot for a new play area. Hardly the same thing!
Thanks, that does make (slightly) more sense. Googling says he is now banned in China for looking too much like President Xi, but maybe there is more to that as well.
Re Esther McVey: interesting to see someone go after the Conservative Muslim vote.
So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to...
1. absent their children from compulsory school worship?
2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes?
3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution?
4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay?
I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
> > @brendan16 said:
> > > @kle4 said:
> >
> >
> > Slightly fake news re Poland. It wasn’t banned in the whole country - in 2014 one primary school in one Polish village decided it wasn’t suitable to be the mascot for a new play area. Hardly the same thing!
>
> Thanks, that does make (slightly) more sense. Googling says he is now banned in China for looking too much like President Xi, but maybe there is more to that as well.
No, that is a thing.
Xi really doesn't like being compared to the bear with very little brain, to whom he bears a distinct resemblance.
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > He's ready to back a second referendum...
> >
> > https://twitter.com/cbctom/status/1133489401969991681
> >
> > 'Some way off'...
> >
> > https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/30/soft-brexit-corbyn-labour-second-referendum-some-way-off-backs
>
> Labour do not have the time or space with the voters to pull off this stunt any longer. You’d have thought last week would have brought that home to even the meanest intellects. It’s time to shit or get off the pot.
Yes but Corbyn is the meanest of mean intellects ever to have held political office. the man is a complete dullard.
He seems to have been one of the few people to have stuck steadfastly by Rushdie. He initiated a meeting with Kinnock who said he didn't agree with segregated Muslim schools but it was Labour party policy anyway.
Another thing. I was always told how my grandfather who grew up in the valleys of south Wales had started out as a socialist and then became disillusioned aka conservative. This was particularly true around local government and education. Clearing out the attic a few years ago I found an old letter among his treasured possessions signed by one Michael Foot - saying how nice it was to have chatted to Mr Williams. He would have long been a conservative at that point but I suppose a letter signed by Michael Foot was still worth keeping.
144 for 5 at 26.3 with one batsman retired hurt
> https://twitter.com/rolandscahill/status/1134047200722477057
There's also a strong case for the mayor of New York renaming 5th Avenue...
> SA going to win this at a canter.
Just switched on the cricket, looks like things have changed a bit over the last hour or two.
> @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either.
>
> The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo.
Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to.
I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour.
> Dominic Raab a pound shop Owen Smith?
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1134005861427400704
>
>
>
> Polling suggests the majority - in some cases 80 per cent plus of British women do not consider themselves ‘feminists’ while supporting gender equality - so share Raabs views. I expect the figure is even higher amongst Tory party members.
>
> It may horrify the Twitter bubble but might not be that unpopular with most women.
>
> https://twitter.com/KateAndrs/status/1134066662934745088
Dominic Raab may not be a feminist, but he clearly is a lightweightist; he is in favour of lightweights being treated equally and having the possibility of attaining the highest office in the land.
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either.
> >
> > The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo.
>
> Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to.
>
> I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour.
Looking at Corbyn's 'career', it is clear that he doesn't do changing his mind. He has, since becoming leader, been forced to try to advocate for things he doesn't actually believe and it is always clear when he is doing that.
The only way Labour can really change perceptions on the topic of Brexit is to change leadership team. And that isn't looking likely.
> The more I see of what McVey is saying today, the angrier I get.
>
> She is showing her own bigotry very clearly. She is pretending it is about parental choice - but in reality she is showing what she thinks by defending the rights of bigots to enforce their narrow world view.
>
> Hateful.
+1
> https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1134008889660325888
>
> Re Esther McVey: interesting to see someone go after the Conservative Muslim vote.
>
> So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to...
>
> 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship?
> 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes?
> 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution?
> 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay?
>
> I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > Dominic Raab a pound shop Owen Smith?
> >
> >
> >
> > https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1134005861427400704
> >
> >
> >
> > Polling suggests the majority - in some cases 80 per cent plus of British women do not consider themselves ‘feminists’ while supporting gender equality - so share Raabs views. I expect the figure is even higher amongst Tory party members.
> >
> > It may horrify the Twitter bubble but might not be that unpopular with most women.
> >
> > https://twitter.com/KateAndrs/status/1134066662934745088
>
> Dominic Raab may not be a feminist, but he clearly is a lightweightist; he is in favour of lightweights being treated equally and having the possibility of attaining the highest office in the land.
The largely female U3a Reading Group to which I belong recently read a book in which a woman' stood by her man' ..... a Vietnam vet with severe PTSD, which made him abusive to his wife and daughter. The general opinion was that, PTSD or whatever or not, 'they wouldn't have put up with that'!
> More seriously, I think de Kock is going to win this for SA
Tros difficile, mon vieux?
> > @rcs1000 said:
> > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1134008889660325888
> >
> > Re Esther McVey: interesting to see someone go after the Conservative Muslim vote.
> >
> > So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to...
> >
> > 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship?
> > 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes?
> > 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution?
> > 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay?
> >
> > I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
>
> McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
She is a poundshop Katie Hopkins.
> > @rcs1000 said:
> > So, here's the question(s). Is it OK for parents to...
> > 1. absent their children from compulsory school worship?
> > 2. demand their children skip RE (comparative religion) classes?
> > 3. require schools to "teach the controversy" - i.e. put intelligent design on an equal or higher footing than evolution?
> > 4. stop their children hearing that it's OK to be gay?
> > I'm sure there are others, but how much do we demand there is a common core of tolerance and teaching that the state enforces in schools, and how much do parents get to opt out?
> McVey is right. Best not to talk to children about reality. That way we can ensure that LGBT people like me will continue to grow up confused and afraid as I did once we realise that we aren't conforming to the norm being imposed on us by wazzocks like McVey.
It is time to stop giving special protection to any religion that will not support full and proper equality for all.
If you aren't prepared to accept equality for all, then you have no right to demand the same protection for yourself.
We cannot stop individuals holding hateful views - but we can stop giving protection to organisations that promote the holding of those views.
In any conflict between equality and religion, equality must win out.
How long before Leadsom is interviewed and says, "How would she know about parenting"?
But let’s face it what people like McVey are displaying is a pathetic combination of bigotry and cowardice and probably trying to show that she is not Islamophobic because, hey, she’s on the side of these parents. She is an utter disgrace.
167 for 6 with one retired hurt
> > @anothernick said:
> > > @Pulpstar said:
> > > @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either.
> > >
> > > The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo.
> >
> > Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to.
> >
> > I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour.
>
> Looking at Corbyn's 'career', it is clear that he doesn't do changing his mind. He has, since becoming leader, been forced to try to advocate for things he doesn't actually believe and it is always clear when he is doing that.
>
> The only way Labour can really change perceptions on the topic of Brexit is to change leadership team. And that isn't looking likely.
No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/rendering-unto-caesar/
As Jonathan Swift put it 'It is useless to try and reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into'
Jeremy Corbyn celebrated his 70th birthday with his family at his allotment this weekend. Wearing a T-shirt that said "I'd Rather Be At The Allotment".
> No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year.
Do we have any real sense as to how long the EHRC report will take? Given how much evidence I have seen talk of having been admitted, I can't imagine it will be a speedy process.... sadly
> > @oxfordsimon said:
> > > @anothernick said:
> > > > @Pulpstar said:
> > > > @AlastairMeeks I think he simply can't bring himself to do it. Corbyn must know that politically he is better off going full remain, but he simply isn't in his heart a remainer. He knows he could never get his party to fully support Brexit either.
> > > >
> > > > The nation is watching his internal machinations, he is stuck in limbo.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately I think that's true. He doesn't have the intellectual self-confidence required to ignore the siren voices of his advisers, though he must know that the vast majority of his colleagues and an even vaster majority of party members want him to.
> > >
> > > I think we have now reached the tipping point - even though Labour will, I think, adopt a remain and reform position at the party conference if not before, remainers will not see Corbyn as a credible advocate of such a policy and many will be permanently lost to Labour.
> >
> > Looking at Corbyn's 'career', it is clear that he doesn't do changing his mind. He has, since becoming leader, been forced to try to advocate for things he doesn't actually believe and it is always clear when he is doing that.
> >
> > The only way Labour can really change perceptions on the topic of Brexit is to change leadership team. And that isn't looking likely.
>
> No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year.
Yep. The Brexit thing is key. It cuts through his natural constituency, just as it does everywhere else. In addition to prominent journalists, there are many of his allies in the Party leadership who aren't instinctively where he is. McDonnell and Abbot are ardent Remainers even while they, thus far, back the Party line.
> Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.'
> Miss Cyclefree, on the other hand, consider how quickly and loudly McVey's comments have been condemned compared to the parents' (Phillips[sp] is the only MP I can think of who has openly criticised them).
The silence of politicians on this issue has been deafening. Shameful that they are continue to pander to religious extremists.
"Amazing how politicians quick to demand that we stand up to the EU are so weak when it comes to standing up to bigots.
>
> But let’s face it what people like McVey are displaying is a pathetic combination of bigotry and cowardice and probably trying to show that she is not Islamophobic because, hey, she’s on the side of these parents. She is an utter disgrace."
I thought you said you were a Roman Catholic - a religion which is emphatically bigoted against homosexuality in its official teachings, if not in the conduct of the priesthood. What distinguishes youi from her?
Now 180 for 7
> > @AndyJS said:
>
> > Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
>
>
>
> Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.'
>
> One wonders what they are not telling us about their plans? The bits that the EU would block.
IIRC, while the EU didn't object to the continued public ownership of industries and services, there was considerable doubt as to anything not already publicly owned being 'allowed' to be so.
> > @anothernick said:
> > No. Though if the EHRC report is damning and Corbyn continues to disappoint his supporters on Brexit (see recent Guardian columns by Paul Mason and Owen Jones) his position may come under threat later in the year.
>
> Do we have any real sense as to how long the EHRC report will take? Given how much evidence I have seen talk of having been admitted, I can't imagine it will be a speedy process.... sadly
No you are probably right, sadly. And no doubt m'learned friends will be called in to try and stop publication of anything critical of the leadership.
And the issue is you are saying (a) you must do it and (b) you must do it my way and no one else’s
> WHAT A CATCH.....
I'm waiting for it to appear on the BBC cricket page.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/47476750
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Labour supporters, most of whom live in Remain areas like London, should have done their reserach on Corbyn's deeply Eurosceptic views before electing him as leader twice.
>
> Corbyn was always against European Union. Possibly not if it had been the Socialist Republic of Europe, but in 1975 he was part of the Anti- brigade which followed Benn; they stated categorivcally that 'we won't be able to build Socialism while we're 'in' Europe.'
Also the 1983 Labour Party manifesto
One wonders whether the faithful have thought any of this through at all.
twitter.com/WalkerWorcester/status/1134078259543662592
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1feCjt98HJcY9tlc5Zx78ZoSOC2fN-j0vRVFD5eUTbUE/edit#gid=0
Wikipedia numbers:
Hunt 30
Johnson 29
Gove 27
Raab 22
Javid 16
Hancock 12
Malthouse 6
McVey 6
Leadsom 4
Stewart 3
Cleverly 2
> > @Charles said:
>
> > Why ought they?
>
> >
>
> > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual
>
> >
>
> > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority
>
> >
>
> > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles?
>
> >
>
> > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment
>
> >
>
> > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents.
>
> >
>
> > The alternative isn’t non vaccination - it’s use of monovalent vaccines
>
>
>
> And like a lot of health-care related decisions, MMR was selected on a cost-risk-benefit analysis. If you want to save your pennies for separate jabs - incidentally causing more psychological stress to your child - then go right ahead. There is no reason for it to be made available on the NHS, as far as I am aware.
>
> Mandatory Vaccines are a tender business.
>
> And the issue is you are saying (a) you must do it and (b) you must do it my way and no one else’s
Plasma expanders are a means, admittedly not a universal means, of avoiding Jehovah's Witnesses transfusion problems.
Single vaccines, as available when I was involved with these things, do not give the same cover as MMR. No reason why that can't be overcome, but I agree with Charles about stress for the child.
> How long before Leadsom is interviewed and says, "How would she know about parenting"?
haha. Imagine having Mrs Loathsome as your parent though! Poor little mites!
> > @Charles said:
>
> > > @Charles said:
>
> >
>
> > > Why ought they?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Most of the arguments come down to use of MMR vs the mono vaccines.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > The government forced the use of MMR despite some concerns about the side effect profile. It was cheaper and, they believed, would have better compliance.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ?
>
> >
>
> > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity
>
> >
>
> > That gives you two options:
>
> >
>
> > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to
>
> >
>
> > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use*
>
> >
>
> > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though)
>
>
>
> Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an option with significant additional costs purely due to ill-founded and unproven concerns about MMR?
>
> My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers
Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist?
> > @Charles said:
> > > @Charles said:
> >
> > > > @Charles said:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > Why ought they?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > Most of the arguments come down to use of MMR vs the mono vaccines.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > The government forced the use of MMR despite some concerns about the side effect profile. It was cheaper and, they believed, would have better compliance.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity
> >
> > >
> >
> > > That gives you two options:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to
> >
> > >
> >
> > > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use*
> >
> > >
> >
> > > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though)
> >
> >
> >
> > Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an option with significant additional costs purely due to ill-founded and unproven concerns about MMR?
> >
> > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers
>
> Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist?
Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe.
https://twitter.com/SkyCricket/status/1134130850839351298
https://twitter.com/matthancock/status/1134107797065469953?s=21
> > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > > @Charles said:
> > > > @Charles said:
> > >
> > > > > @Charles said:
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > Why ought they?
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > You are effectively saying that the interests of the group (herd immunity) trumps the rights of the individual
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > I am very uncomfortable with the state having that authority
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion. Where do you stand on this one Charles?
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > I think they are idiots. But I don’t see why the government should have the right to compel treatment
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > Because the government would be failing in its duty to protect others from the harm caused by the spread of diseases as a result of non-vaccination, including to the children of these parents.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > Most of the arguments come down to use of MMR vs the mono vaccines.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > The government forced the use of MMR despite some concerns about the side effect profile. It was cheaper and, they believed, would have better compliance.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ?
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > That gives you two options:
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use*
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an option with significant additional costs purely due to ill-founded and unproven concerns about MMR?
> > >
> > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers
> >
> > Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist?
>
> Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe.
Doesn't necessarily mean he knows anything about the pros and cons of MMR, but if he does I am all ears (well eyes for this medium)
Out of the EU the nutjobs will run riot . And aided and abetted by Corbyn.
He’s taking the piss out of Labour Remainers. If he hasn’t moved to a second vote after the Peterborough by election then he needs to be challenged .
> Hancock certainly has the cringe factor.
>
> https://twitter.com/matthancock/status/1134107797065469953?s=21
Appears to be a perfectly pleasant man, but another lightweight, but still, I suppose preferable to The Charlatan In Chief, or Dominic Lightweight Raab
> > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > > @Charles said:
> > > > @Charles said:
> > >
> > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers
> >
> > Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist?
>
> Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe.
I asked him earlier about the actual data.
Still awaiting a reply.
England can still lose this!!
IT'S COMING HOME, IT'S ONLY BLOODY WELL COMING HOME.
> I'm between contracts at the moment. My wife is concerned and I feel guilty. But not too guilty as I get to have the cricket on all the time. She's getting suspicious that I might not be looking to hard for a job. She might be right.
You are in good company. TM is between jobs and was at the Oval enjoying the cricket and looking relaxed
England win by 104 runs
> All you nervous nellies thinking England had blown this.
>
> IT'S COMING HOME, IT'S ONLY BLOODY WELL COMING HOME.
No, please.
Were still a long way from being favourites...
> Brexit a right wing coup .
>
> Out of the EU the nutjobs will run riot . And aided and abetted by Corbyn.
>
> He’s taking the piss out of Labour Remainers. If he hasn’t moved to a second vote after the Peterborough by election then he needs to be challenged .
>
>
Problem is 82% of people voted either Con or Lab at the last general election.
> > @TheWhiteRabbit said:
> > > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > > > @Charles said:
> > > > > @Charles said:
>
> > > >
> > > > My concerns about MMR are different to the anti-vaxxers
> > >
> > > Concerns about MMR? Are you a scientist?
> >
> > Charles works for a pharmaceutical company I believe.
>
> I asked him earlier about the actual data.
> Still awaiting a reply.
I suspect he thinks MMR is actually a plot by the EU to vaccinate children against Euroscepticism and bigotry! Actually it is a shame such an inoculation is not available!
More worryingly some of the work in fish suggests multivalent vaccines can trigger a cytokine storm (essentially overstimulation of the immune system). I haven’t seen data specifically in MMR but cytokine storm is very much a matter of focus right now.
Autism is spurious bollocks (I think the issue is that vaccination happens at a similar age to autism diagnosis so parents are looking for something to blame). My point was that the choice is between resolving the issue for a small cost (offering single vaccines) vs loss of herd immunity vs state compulsion. In my view the small cost is acceptable to achieve herd immunity without the unacceptable societal consequences of compulsion.
> All you nervous nellies thinking England had blown this.
>
> IT'S COMING HOME, IT'S ONLY BLOODY WELL COMING HOME.
With Stokes playing like that and the fielding superb you could just be right
WTF! A further six considering standing.
Briefing the working class Mirror that the 2nd vote is on, and then briefing the remainer literary class Guardian, that one is "some way off".
He is a Bourbon isn't he?
> https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1134073057658769410
>
> WTF! A further six considering standing.
The 1922 need to make a rule change and impose minimum support levels for nomination
> > @nico67 said:
> > Brexit a right wing coup .
> >
> > Out of the EU the nutjobs will run riot . And aided and abetted by Corbyn.
> >
> > He’s taking the piss out of Labour Remainers. If he hasn’t moved to a second vote after the Peterborough by election then he needs to be challenged .
> >
> >
>
> Problem is 82% of people voted either Con or Lab at the last general election.
They won’t the next time . Corbyn thinks he can keep pissing off Remainers and that they’ll stick with the party .
He’s wrong . I and many others won’t be voting Labour again until he comes off the fence or preferably goes .
> Jezza seems to have played another blinder today.
>
> Briefing the working class Mirror that the 2nd vote is on, and then briefing the remainer literary class Guardian, that is "some way off".
>
> He is a Bourbon isn't he?
More of a Custard Cream, surely
> href="https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/profile/Charles"
> And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ?
>
> That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity
>
> That gives you two options:
>
> 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to
>
> 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use*
>
> (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though)
>
> That wasn't my question.
> I was asking what the data say about the relative safety of the three single vaccines versus MMR.
>
> 'there is enough concern' includes the spurious bollocks about autism.
>
> Multivalent vaccines have more significant site specific reactions, but with three injections there are three occasions when SSIs can occur
>
> More worryingly some of the work in fish suggests multivalent vaccines can trigger a cytokine storm (essentially overstimulation of the immune system). I haven’t seen data specifically in MMR but cytokine storm is very much a matter of focus right now.
The MMR vaccine has been in use for several decades now.
I was specifically asking about human data. Given that millions of doses have been given, work in fish models with unspecified multivalent vaccines is not really relevant.
Shouldn't be that difficult to compare outcomes with the single vaccines.
I think Peterborough will be the tipping point as you say.
I no more want to live under a Catholic theocracy than under an Islamic one.
For good measure, I think the Catholic church is wrong when it describes homosexuality as a sin or homosexuals as disordered. Jesus said nothing about the issue. And gay people like each and everyone of us are made, if you believe, in the image of God. So equality is a given. The Church is simply wrong on this point.
McVey is supporting the rights of parents to be bigots. I utterly oppose that. That is the difference between us.
> href="https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/profile/Charles"
> And after many years of use, what does the data now say about your concerns ?
>
> That there is enough concern about MMR we are seeing a worrying in vaccination rates to a level that is threatening herd immunity
>
> That gives you two options:
>
> 1. Force (either directly or indirectly via withholding benefits) people to do what the state wants them to
>
> 2. Provide the option of vaccines that people actually want to use*
>
> (* these vaccines exist and are approved, although - I believe - that the master seed for the mumps vaccine needs renewal. It’s been a few years since I checked though)
>
> That wasn't my question.
> I was asking what the data say about the relative safety of the three single vaccines versus MMR.
>
> 'there is enough concern' includes the spurious bollocks about autism.
>
> Multivalent vaccines have more significant site specific reactions, but with three injections there are three occasions when SSIs can occur
>
> More worryingly some of the work in fish suggests multivalent vaccines can trigger a cytokine storm (essentially overstimulation of the immune system). I haven’t seen data specifically in MMR but cytokine storm is very much a matter of focus right now.
>
> Autism is spurious bollocks (I think the issue is that vaccination happens at a similar age to autism diagnosis so parents are looking for something to blame). My point was that the choice is between resolving the issue for a small cost (offering single vaccines) vs loss of herd immunity vs state compulsion. In my view the small cost is acceptable to achieve herd immunity without the unacceptable societal consequences of compulsion.
Are you a scientist? If so do you work in this field, or do you base your opinion on uninformed hearsay?
> > @rottenborough said:
> > https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1134073057658769410
> >
> > WTF! A further six considering standing.
>
> The 1922 need to make a rule change and impose minimum support levels for nomination
I appreciate that the contest hasn't officially start - but it effectively has. Changing the rules at this point feels counterproductive. The first round of voting sorts most of this out. And if they want to change anything, they can increase the number of voting rounds per week - going for Monday/Wednesday/Friday - rather than Tuesday/Thursday - that will keep things tighter.
> Might help explain the SCon Euro election result.
>
> Best Tory result in the UK you mean?
>
> No wonder the Zoomers are scared of her...
11%. Yes, I’m sure these “Zoomers” you speak of are absolutely terrified. Scottish patriots are however still wiping the tears of laughter from our eyes.
> > @Cyclefree said:
>
>
>
> "Amazing how politicians quick to demand that we stand up to the EU are so weak when it comes to standing up to bigots.
>
> >
>
> > But let’s face it what people like McVey are displaying is a pathetic combination of bigotry and cowardice and probably trying to show that she is not Islamophobic because, hey, she’s on the side of these parents. She is an utter disgrace."
>
>
>
> I thought you said you were a Roman Catholic - a religion which is emphatically bigoted against homosexuality in its official teachings, if not in the conduct of the priesthood. What distinguishes youi from her?
>
> Because I have clearly said on multiple occasions, both in the thread header I have just posted and in multiple comments below the line over the years, that I think that where there is a clash between the religious and the secular in relation to this, the secular in our society should take precedence. I don’t think that parents should have the right to opt out of sex and equalities and anti-bullying education. I could not have been clearer.
>
> I no more want to live under a Catholic theocracy than under an Islamic one.
>
> For good measure, I think the Catholic church is wrong when it describes homosexuality as a sin or homosexuals as disordered. Jesus said nothing about the issue. And gay people like each and everyone of us are made, if you believe, in the image of God. So equality is a given. The Church is simply wrong on this point.
>
> McVey is supporting the rights of parents to be bigots. I utterly oppose that. That is the difference between us.
Well said Cyclefree
> > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > @rottenborough said:
> > > https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1134073057658769410
> > >
> > > WTF! A further six considering standing.
> >
> > The 1922 need to make a rule change and impose minimum support levels for nomination
>
> I appreciate that the contest hasn't officially start - but it effectively has. Changing the rules at this point feels counterproductive. The first round of voting sorts most of this out. And if they want to change anything, they can increase the number of voting rounds per week - going for Monday/Wednesday/Friday - rather than Tuesday/Thursday - that will keep things tighter.
I agree