I recently submitted an application for a training contract at a law firm although the deadline has not passed yet.
Yesterday I noticed that I’ve made a error on the dates of one of the more minor positions on my CV from 5 years ago.
Do I contact the firm and ask to correct the error, drawing attention to it, or do I leave it?
I should guess that in a large firm, until the deadline, applications sit in HR and will be passed as a set to whoever actually makes the decision, which gives you a window to correct the mistake and submit a new one.
So now the clock ticks down towards real Brexit, we have no clue what it will be, and we’re in the hands of Boris and his circus. What could go wrong?
The EU behaving like pillocks?
The Eu have always behave in an manner that ignores the interests of their members. Only Germany and France matter. I noted the refusal to allow Farage's flashmob of loons to wave UK flags, this is typical of the EU denying the nation state in favour of being European. It will be its downfall. You cannot supress the nation states forever.
There is not much evidence for that latter assertion. Nation states as we understand them only really emerged in the later 19th and early 20th century. It is observable that people who see themselves as part of a nationality quest for degrees of self determination, but that can be as much threat to a nation state (Spain, Canada, Scotland). Nevertheless for most of human history people didn’t live within such entities and today in much of the world the artificial nation states imposed upon them are the cause of significant discontent.
Yes, the concept of the nation-state is a fairly recent one, and while predominant at present are often not congruent with their peoples. This is the case even in Islands like our own, let alone more fluid land borders in other parts of the world.
There is a view that national consciousness arose out of the combination of printed newspapers and mass education, particularly literacy. This allowed the development of kinship groups well beyond pre existing ones.
With globalisation, internet and social media, those building blocks are breaking down. Increasingly the more savvy are forming transnational kinship groupings directly, bypassing those traditional media. We see this on the Left and Centre but also with the Right wingers praising Trump in Parliament Square last night. Or indeed Brits able to follow the Iowa Caucuses as easily as an American.
There is increasingly a global demos, and with translation apps, I can as easily read Haaretz or the Rand Daily Mail as the Guardian. The same goes with streamed video and news. No wonder older activists are so afraid and reactionary.
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Malc you really should go to bed earlier, or leave the Scotch alone, either that or you are eating far too many turnips. You always wake up grumpy, or is that just the way the Nits are?
No whisky for me these days or turnips. I am also exceedingly happy at present , except for the puerile jingoistic bollox that has infected England. Hard to believe how embarrassing it was to watch the state of the idiots celebrating last night. Sooner Scotland is back in the EU the better.
Allow them their moment Malky, lets not forget the Sainted Nicola's pretty nasty celebration when Jo Swinson lost her seat.
Yes I suppose so but I think they will live to regret it. Celebrating Swinson getting gubbed was well justified, she had been particularly nasty re SNP and Scotland in general , smug git got her just desserts.
From what I have seen, the new MP, Amy Callaghan is a vast improvement on deluded Jo Swinson.
Would not be difficult , she actually spends time in Scotland and her constituency.
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Malc you really should go to bed earlier, or leave the Scotch alone, either that or you are eating far too many turnips. You always wake up grumpy, or is that just the way the Nits are?
No whisky for me these days or turnips. I am also exceedingly happy at present , except for the puerile jingoistic bollox that has infected England. Hard to believe how embarrassing it was to watch the state of the idiots celebrating last night. Sooner Scotland is back in the EU the better.
Allow them their moment Malky, lets not forget the Sainted Nicola's pretty nasty celebration when Jo Swinson lost her seat.
Yes I suppose so but I think they will live to regret it. Celebrating Swinson getting gubbed was well justified, she had been particularly nasty re SNP and Scotland in general , smug git got her just desserts.
Unusually I agree - politics is partisan and swinson was a great scalp. I'm a Tory and was almost as pleased.
I disagree. Its all very well to celebrate an opponents downfall as long as you accept it with equally good grace when it happens to you. The "sainted Nicola" has proved to be completely toothless with regards to EU membership and I hope she suffers for it politically speaking. Sturgeon is a one trick pony, period.
A brief moment of exuberant celebration at a victory when not liking defeat oneself does not strike me as being particular poor in the grace department. I hope for Sturgeon and the SNP to suffer politically, but that moment was utterly inconsequential.
Another Scot referendum is entirely justified, disastrous though Scotland leaving would be. Current government policy towards Scotland reminds me of how we treated Ireland many moons ago. Not good at all.
That's an exaggeration, but I'm very worried about Scotland.
Those numbers for Boris Johnson north of the border are shocking. His ratings are so low he must be widely disliked even amongst Conservatives and Unionists.
I should imagine his wife is not too enamoured of him as well.
F1: Ladbrokes has the Australian Grand Prix up (just the winner). It's pretty disappointing to see the each way, with two months almost to the race, is just a third the odds top 2.
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Morning Malc. Health at your place improving, I hope.
Morning OKC, yes thanks, they finally discharged my wife last night. Scary first day as she is still very ill but she is delighted to be home and on way to recovery. I am head cook , bottlewasher, cleaner and pharmacist.
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Malc you really should go to bed earlier, or leave the Scotch alone, either that or you are eating far too many turnips. You always wake up grumpy, or is that just the way the Nits are?
No whisky for me these days or turnips. I am also exceedingly happy at present , except for the puerile jingoistic bollox that has infected England. Hard to believe how embarrassing it was to watch the state of the idiots celebrating last night. Sooner Scotland is back in the EU the better.
Allow them their moment Malky, lets not forget the Sainted Nicola's pretty nasty celebration when Jo Swinson lost her seat.
Yes I suppose so but I think they will live to regret it. Celebrating Swinson getting gubbed was well justified, she had been particularly nasty re SNP and Scotland in general , smug git got her just desserts.
Unusually I agree - politics is partisan and swinson was a great scalp. I'm a Tory and was almost as pleased.
It did the LibDems a favour.
Yes - her wokeness could have destroyed them completely - although they're not out of the woods yet, lord knows who they will elect this time.
The Trump trial is a funny sort of witchhunt, I must say, with all key prosecution witnesses banned from appearing. Will I be able to do that when I'm up at the Bailey on a serious charge?
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Malc you really should go to bed earlier, or leave the Scotch alone, either that or you are eating far too many turnips. You always wake up grumpy, or is that just the way the Nits are?
No whisky for me these days or turnips. I am also exceedingly happy at present , except for the puerile jingoistic bollox that has infected England. Hard to believe how embarrassing it was to watch the state of the idiots celebrating last night. Sooner Scotland is back in the EU the better.
Allow them their moment Malky, lets not forget the Sainted Nicola's pretty nasty celebration when Jo Swinson lost her seat.
Yes I suppose so but I think they will live to regret it. Celebrating Swinson getting gubbed was well justified, she had been particularly nasty re SNP and Scotland in general , smug git got her just desserts.
Unusually I agree - politics is partisan and swinson was a great scalp. I'm a Tory and was almost as pleased.
I disagree. Its all very well to celebrate an opponents downfall as long as you accept it with equally good grace when it happens to you. The "sainted Nicola" has proved to be completely toothless with regards to EU membership and I hope she suffers for it politically speaking. Sturgeon is a one trick pony, period.
I* will celebrate the demise of Sturgeon with great gusto.
F1: Albon's 67. I had a £1 free bet and put it on him each way, but if you're betting with actual money I'd not touch the market right now. Only the top 2 placed pre-testing is unexpected.
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Malc you really should go to bed earlier, or leave the Scotch alone, either that or you are eating far too many turnips. You always wake up grumpy, or is that just the way the Nits are?
No whisky for me these days or turnips. I am also exceedingly happy at present , except for the puerile jingoistic bollox that has infected England. Hard to believe how embarrassing it was to watch the state of the idiots celebrating last night. Sooner Scotland is back in the EU the better.
Allow them their moment Malky, lets not forget the Sainted Nicola's pretty nasty celebration when Jo Swinson lost her seat.
Yes I suppose so but I think they will live to regret it. Celebrating Swinson getting gubbed was well justified, she had been particularly nasty re SNP and Scotland in general , smug git got her just desserts.
Unusually I agree - politics is partisan and swinson was a great scalp. I'm a Tory and was almost as pleased.
It did the LibDems a favour.
Yes - her wokeness could have destroyed them completely - although they're not out of the woods yet, lord knows who they will elect this time.
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Malc you really should go to bed earlier, or leave the Scotch alone, either that or you are eating far too many turnips. You always wake up grumpy, or is that just the way the Nits are?
No whisky for me these days or turnips. I am also exceedingly happy at present , except for the puerile jingoistic bollox that has infected England. Hard to believe how embarrassing it was to watch the state of the idiots celebrating last night. Sooner Scotland is back in the EU the better.
Allow them their moment Malky, lets not forget the Sainted Nicola's pretty nasty celebration when Jo Swinson lost her seat.
Yes I suppose so but I think they will live to regret it. Celebrating Swinson getting gubbed was well justified, she had been particularly nasty re SNP and Scotland in general , smug git got her just desserts.
Unusually I agree - politics is partisan and swinson was a great scalp. I'm a Tory and was almost as pleased.
I disagree. Its all very well to celebrate an opponents downfall as long as you accept it with equally good grace when it happens to you. The "sainted Nicola" has proved to be completely toothless with regards to EU membership and I hope she suffers for it politically speaking. Sturgeon is a one trick pony, period.
A brief moment of exuberant celebration at a victory when not liking defeat oneself does not strike me as being particular poor in the grace department. I hope for Sturgeon and the SNP to suffer politically, but that moment was utterly inconsequential.
As an LD member I was sorry to see Jo lose, but I have no problem with another party leader celebrating an electoral gain. It is part of political life.
I recently submitted an application for a training contract at a law firm although the deadline has not passed yet.
Yesterday I noticed that I’ve made a error on the dates of one of the more minor positions on my CV from 5 years ago.
Do I contact the firm and ask to correct the error, drawing attention to it, or do I leave it?
I should guess that in a large firm, until the deadline, applications sit in HR and will be passed as a set to whoever actually makes the decision, which gives you a window to correct the mistake and submit a new one.
I think there's a decent prospect they review/first-sift applications as they come in but I doubt it will matter much either way, if you get the job and the error comes up when checking references they are highly unlikely to withdraw the offer. The question is essentially would you rather they think about your application more (thanks to the email, and given how many applications there are anything which makes them think about you can be an asset) or would you rather they didn't have a reason to dismiss you (thanks to the error, and given how many applications there are anything which lets them reject one is a risk). I think it's pretty marginal either way.
Good luck in any case, I went through the process repeatedly for a few years and am still rather mentally scarred by all the stress/rejections before I got one. Your time is certainly better spent polishing your next application than thinking about changing such a minor thing on your last one.
A brief moment of exuberant celebration at a victory when not liking defeat oneself does not strike me as being particular poor in the grace department. I hope for Sturgeon and the SNP to suffer politically, but that moment was utterly inconsequential.
As an LD member I was sorry to see Jo lose, but I have no problem with another party leader celebrating an electoral gain. It is part of political life.
Indeed it is silly for anyone to complain about celebrating a gain, especially such a coup as decapitating a rival parties leader.
The Lib Dems have unsuccessfully attempted "decapitation strategies" time and again - does anyone in a million years seriously think that hypothetically if the shoe was on the other foot and Johnson was the one who'd lost his seat to the Lib Dems that Swinson wouldn't have exuberantly celebrated?
I recently submitted an application for a training contract at a law firm although the deadline has not passed yet.
Yesterday I noticed that I’ve made a error on the dates of one of the more minor positions on my CV from 5 years ago.
Do I contact the firm and ask to correct the error, drawing attention to it, or do I leave it?
I should guess that in a large firm, until the deadline, applications sit in HR and will be passed as a set to whoever actually makes the decision, which gives you a window to correct the mistake and submit a new one.
I think there's a decent prospect they review/first-sift applications as they come in but I doubt it will matter much either way, if you get the job and the error comes up when checking references they are highly unlikely to withdraw the offer. The question is essentially would you rather they think about your application more (thanks to the email, and given how many applications there are anything which makes them think about you can be an asset) or would you rather they didn't have a reason to dismiss you (thanks to the error, and given how many applications there are anything which lets them reject one is a risk). I think it's pretty marginal either way.
Good luck in any case, I went through the process repeatedly for a few years and am still rather mentally scarred by all the stress/rejections before I got one. Your time is certainly better spent polishing your next application than thinking about changing such a minor thing on your last one.
Thanks very much for your thoughts. I have quite a good relationship with the recruitment team having met them many times already and I’m quite memorable, but I’d rather not put any unnecessary negative thoughts in their heads.
This has only come up as subsequent application asked for specific dates for each job on the CV rather than just a month and a year so I had to triple check everything. I think LinkedIn’s date rounding led me astray!
I’m going to take @AlastairMeeks ’s advice and leave it. At least I’m 100% certain on their accuracy for future applications, of which there will be many!
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Malc you really should go to bed earlier, or leave the Scotch alone, either that or you are eating far too many turnips. You always wake up grumpy, or is that just the way the Nits are?
No whisky for me these days or turnips. I am also exceedingly happy at present , except for the puerile jingoistic bollox that has infected England. Hard to believe how embarrassing it was to watch the state of the idiots celebrating last night. Sooner Scotland is back in the EU the better.
Allow them their moment Malky, lets not forget the Sainted Nicola's pretty nasty celebration when Jo Swinson lost her seat.
Yes I suppose so but I think they will live to regret it. Celebrating Swinson getting gubbed was well justified, she had been particularly nasty re SNP and Scotland in general , smug git got her just desserts.
Unusually I agree - politics is partisan and swinson was a great scalp. I'm a Tory and was almost as pleased.
I disagree. Its all very well to celebrate an opponents downfall as long as you accept it with equally good grace when it happens to you. The "sainted Nicola" has proved to be completely toothless with regards to EU membership and I hope she suffers for it politically speaking. Sturgeon is a one trick pony, period.
A brief moment of exuberant celebration at a victory when not liking defeat oneself does not strike me as being particular poor in the grace department. I hope for Sturgeon and the SNP to suffer politically, but that moment was utterly inconsequential.
As an LD member I was sorry to see Jo lose, but I have no problem with another party leader celebrating an electoral gain. It is part of political life.
The Estuary Airport 'idea' was actually a rehash of something from the 60's which was turned down then as impracticable.
It's not impracticable. Certainly not with current engineering. Lots of places in the world have built dramatic new airports. Hong Kong is one of my favourites.
It wasn’t the physical building of it that made it impracticable. It was the distance from its customer base, the lack of a workforce, tons and tons of birds, and the political inability to either decommission or find a new role for Heathrow that made it a nonsense scheme.
Not to mention the winter fog in the estuary, the interference with flight paths at Amsterdam airport, the unexploded WWII bombs all over the site...
Yes indeed.
I was at the press conference when Boris launched the idea (and during which I though he seemed to be lining up a larger Stansted as his fallback), and when he was asked what would happen to Heathrow and its employing much of west London, and he genuinely didn’t appear to have an answer. He blustered for a bit and then said something about making it a “regional airport”; within a few days in the media he was talking about decommissioning and the opportunity to build tons of new homes.
Oh, and all of the international companies with regional headquarters on the M4 and M3 corridors, for whom proximity to the airport is a key consideration. And the M25 being a car park at the best of times already, with a bottleneck around the Dartford crossings, and that the maths didn’t work without closing LHR completely and selling off the land afterwards.
Yes, it was a nice idea in someone’s mind, but totally implausible in practice. Boris stuck with the idea long after it was pointed out to him that it was never plausibly going to happen.
LHR is where it is, and the only plausible way forward from here is expanding it. If we’d spend the last decade building the third runway instead of arguing about it, millions of tonnes of carbon emissions would have saved, generated as they are by having hundreds of planes flying around in circles every day waiting to get their landing slot.
Thanks for the view from Dubai.
Where two new runways would have been built, in the time the U.K. has been arguing about this one.
I've done the little inter-terminal train, back in 2018
The Trump trial is a funny sort of witchhunt, I must say, with all key prosecution witnesses banned from appearing. Will I be able to do that when I'm up at the Bailey on a serious charge?
The comments are interesting, and sort of bear out the findings of the poll. If you are certain you are right, why should you respect the views of those who disagree with you?
I think the big difference lies in the distribution of the Leave/Remain vote. The Remain vote is more heavily concentrated than the Leave vote, which is more evenly distributed. Leavers are more likely to encounter people who disagree with them.
The comments are interesting, and sort of bear out the findings of the poll. If you are certain you are right, why should you respect the views of those who disagree with you?
I think the big difference lies in the distribution of the Leave/Remain vote. The Remain vote is more heavily concentrated than the Leave vote, which is more evenly distributed. Leavers are more likely to encounter people who disagree with them.
I'd be worried about any individual who was certain they were right about anything.
This is my first post on here for a while, as in truth I felt an increasing sense of fear and trepidation as 11pm yesterday approached.
This morning I awoke with a sense of despair, and along with thousands of my countrymen a feeling of sadness about what we have lost. Now, things can surely only worsen.
After yesterday's terrible events, the sales of Jarrod Bowen to West Ham and Kamil Grosicki to West Brom, who will create chances and score goals for my beloved Hull City.
This is my first post on here for a while, as in truth I felt an increasing sense of fear and trepidation as 11pm yesterday approached.
This morning I awoke with a sense of despair, and along with thousands of my countrymen a feeling of sadness about what we have lost. Now, things can surely only worsen.
After yesterday's terrible events, the sales of Jarrod Bowen to West Ham and Kamil Grosicki to West Brom, who will create chances and score goals for my beloved Hull City.
Things will never be the same again.
Genuinely sorry you feel like that even though I still resent Hull City getting Andy Robertson for a steal and then selling him to those chancers in Liverpool.
I recently submitted an application for a training contract at a law firm although the deadline has not passed yet.
Yesterday I noticed that I’ve made a error on the dates of one of the more minor positions on my CV from 5 years ago.
Do I contact the firm and ask to correct the error, drawing attention to it, or do I leave it?
Just send a polite short note saying that there was an error and the correct date is x.
It may only be very minor but if you do get to the stage of being offered the job and if the firm does due diligence on your CV and notices the discrepancy you don’t want to to be in the position then of having to explain why there is a mistake or of having someone think that you have lied on your CV. Some employers can be very hot on this sort of thing. Others less so. You don’t want to take the risk.
Polling found that a couple of years ago. I would have thought it a lot of it was to do with Remain voters having been to Uni so considering people who disagree ignorant, as well as genuinely thinking anyone who doesn't want open borders is racist, so shouldn't be entertained
Who said this, "I'm not very keen on the Common Market. After all, we beat Germany and we beat Italy and we saved France and Belgium and Holland. I never see why we should go crawling to them" ?
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Dare one say it, this probably correlates with the ideological core of the contemporary Labour Party as well. The product of a feeling of total moral superiority which, therefore, means that everyone else must be wrong and is therefore stupid, evil or both.
The overwrought, candlelit vigil Europhilia isn't so much the alpha and omega around which all of this revolves as just one of the core doctrines of the faith.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
'Don't do that, it puts us in a bad light' isn't the greatest moral bar to clear but it's a start I guess.
I saw the handful of sad sacks that constituted the unionists celebrations in Scotland, what a small bunch of neanderthals. They could not get out of double figures and looked a real bunch of knuckle draggers.
Morning Malc. Health at your place improving, I hope.
A beautiful day today. Lovely sunshine. Spring is coming
But hard to enjoy because when you go for a walk you have to pick your way through bits of sky strewn around the roads and pavements. Perhaps you haven't gone out yet.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
Many opinions are total nonsense I completely agree.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
Many opinions are total nonsense I completely agree.
It is totally ok to have no time for falsehood, bullshit and those that actively undermine those engaged in serious research.
A beautiful day today. Lovely sunshine. Spring is coming
But hard to enjoy because when you go for a walk you have to pick your way through bits of sky strewn around the roads and pavements. Perhaps you haven't gone out yet.
No, definitely nice outside. Sunny, dry, not even that cold. Probably will head out once the tennis is done. Great match.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
Unlike those thinking that listening to Beethoven’s Ode to Joy is treason, perhaps?
Yes, it was outrageous to listen the national anthem of the EU on the night of Britain's departure from it, and a disloyal act.
I stand by that.
I respectfully disagree.
If socialists want to listen to the Red Flag on the night of a Tory election victory then so be it. Remainers playing a foreign organisations anthem is not disloyal its just a touch sad.
Polling found that a couple of years ago. I would have thought it a lot of it was to do with Remain voters having been to Uni so considering people who disagree ignorant, as well as genuinely thinking anyone who doesn't want open borders is racist, so shouldn't be entertained
You can certainly argue that climate-change is an evidence based issue. You could maybe do it to an extent about the death penalty too.
However, same-sex marriage, immigration and tradition are really values judgements, and there are no right or wrong answers.
I'm surprised at the low levels of objection to religion. It wouldn't surprise me if fear of falling on the wrong side of intersectionality is a factor there, but those numbers are still lower than I thought.
Who said this, "I'm not very keen on the Common Market. After all, we beat Germany and we beat Italy and we saved France and Belgium and Holland. I never see why we should go crawling to them" ?
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
I have no time for witch doctors, conspiracy nuts, flat earthers and climate sceptics. They do a lot of harm and should be challenged. They are entitled to their private views, but if they enter public debate they need to be called out as wrong.
Unlike those thinking that listening to Beethoven’s Ode to Joy is treason, perhaps?
Yes, it was outrageous to listen the national anthem of the EU on the night of Britain's departure from it, and a disloyal act.
I stand by that.
I respectfully disagree.
If socialists want to listen to the Red Flag on the night of a Tory election victory then so be it. Remainers playing a foreign organisations anthem is not disloyal its just a touch sad.
I actually find the Red Flag offensive; it actively celebrates violence and intolerance. And, yes, I find it disloyal too.
Would I ban it?
Of course not. But, I'm free to air my views as to what I think of it on here, and I will.
Yes, terrible, that. Although in his case it was the DEFENCE witnesses who did the no-show. I enjoyed the BBC programme. Interesting to see it portrayed through the eyes of the girls. Usually they are deemed subsidiary fluff to the vastly more important motives and actions of the 'hommes serieux'.
Who said this, "I'm not very keen on the Common Market. After all, we beat Germany and we beat Italy and we saved France and Belgium and Holland. I never see why we should go crawling to them" ?
Clement Attlee.
Yes, but you spoilt my game.
I was hoping for some solid left-wing Remainer to jump on it and say 'Farage', or something, whereupon after I could have had my fun :-(
I'm a Sanders sympathiser but I agree with David's analysis. Biden looks too long IMO, can't see Klobouchar even coming close, but maybe Buttigieg is value too.
There's a powerful KLOBUCHAR surge underway, but sadly only the shitty pollsters like Emerson and ARG can see it.
Unlike those thinking that listening to Beethoven’s Ode to Joy is treason, perhaps?
Yes, it was outrageous to listen the national anthem of the EU on the night of Britain's departure from it, and a disloyal act.
I stand by that.
It is not on any normal reading of the word treason.
While I understand and honour your love for your country I am afraid I cannot agree with your view that those British citizens who feel that a part of their identity has been torn away and they are made to feel somehow less welcome or less a part of their country are in any sense treasonous or disloyal.
You personally may not intend that. But there are real people - including me and mine - who do feel that. So I don’t take kindly to suggestions that intolerance is somehow something that is only shown by one side or other in this matter.
Anyway, I am off to do some some shopping for curtains and then a walk.
Before I go, best wishes to @malcolmg and his wife.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
I have no time for witch doctors, conspiracy nuts, flat earthers and climate sceptics. They do a lot of harm and should be challenged. They are entitled to their private views, but if they enter public debate they need to be called out as wrong.
You don't win anyone over to your side by sneering at them and calling them wrong.
And, I'd also draw a distinction between public figures who advocate, where you can challenge more robustly, and private individuals who may be followed or influence by them, where you absolutely need to be respectful.
My wife half-believes in tarot cards and palm readings. I think it's absolute bollocks, but I don't tell her so because it'd upset her and gives her a level of working through her thoughts & emotions, and she takes comfort in it.
Wonder if he could win the Red Wall back? Probably not. These days it appears you need to be a bit of a "character". You have to make those plebs chuckle.
Polling found that a couple of years ago. I would have thought it a lot of it was to do with Remain voters having been to Uni so considering people who disagree ignorant, as well as genuinely thinking anyone who doesn't want open borders is racist, so shouldn't be entertained
You can certainly argue that climate-change is an evidence based issue. You could maybe do it to an extent about the death penalty too.
However, same-sex marriage, immigration and tradition are really values judgements, and there are no right or wrong answers.
I'm surprised at the low levels of objection to religion. It wouldn't surprise me if fear of falling on the wrong side of intersectionality is a factor there, but those numbers are still lower than I thought.
On same sex marriage I very much believe there is a right and wrong answer and I would definitely say I don't respect those with the other opinion.
Either you believe in treating people equally or you don't. If you don't, I don't respect that.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
I have no time for witch doctors, conspiracy nuts, flat earthers and climate sceptics. They do a lot of harm and should be challenged. They are entitled to their private views, but if they enter public debate they need to be called out as wrong.
You don't win anyone over to your side by sneering at them and calling them wrong.
And, I'd also draw a distinction between public figures who advocate, where you can challenge more robustly, and private individuals who may be followed or influence by them, where you absolutely need to be respectful.
My wife half-believes in tarot cards and palm readings. I think it's absolute bollocks, but I don't tell her so because it'd upset her and gives her a level of working through her thoughts & emotions, and she takes comfort in it.
Unlike those thinking that listening to Beethoven’s Ode to Joy is treason, perhaps?
Yes, it was outrageous to listen the national anthem of the EU on the night of Britain's departure from it, and a disloyal act.
I stand by that.
It is not on any normal reading of the word treason.
While I understand and honour your love for your country I am afraid I cannot agree with your view that those British citizens who feel that a part of their identity has been torn away and they are made to feel somehow less welcome or less a part of their country are in any sense treasonous or disloyal.
You personally may not intend that. But there are real people - including me and mine - who do feel that. So I don’t take kindly to suggestions that intolerance is somehow something that is only shown by one side or other in this matter.
Anyway, I am off to do some some shopping for curtains and then a walk.
Before I go, best wishes to @malcolmg and his wife.
Have a good day all.
Intolerance is very skewed to the Remainer side, as this poll by a reputable pollster shows.
British citizens choosing the EU flag and anthem over ours, and showing nothing of their love for this country, really winds me up. This shouldn't be news to you, and you chose to open the subject all over again this morning, and do a bit of grandstanding at my expense.
I know full well you don't feel that strongly about the EU, and you know me too, so I'm afraid I find some of the sentiments in your post synthetic.
Objectively, the old people won and the young people lost. If we're trying to work out what's going on in politics, it won't help to pretend this didn't happen.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
I have no time for witch doctors, conspiracy nuts, flat earthers and climate sceptics. They do a lot of harm and should be challenged. They are entitled to their private views, but if they enter public debate they need to be called out as wrong.
You don't win anyone over to your side by sneering at them and calling them wrong.
And, I'd also draw a distinction between public figures who advocate, where you can challenge more robustly, and private individuals who may be followed or influence by them, where you absolutely need to be respectful.
My wife half-believes in tarot cards and palm readings. I think it's absolute bollocks, but I don't tell her so because it'd upset her and gives her a level of working through her thoughts & emotions, and she takes comfort in it.
There is such a thing as objective truth. Right?
I fear we may be getting into the realms of philosophy here..
Polling found that a couple of years ago. I would have thought it a lot of it was to do with Remain voters having been to Uni so considering people who disagree ignorant, as well as genuinely thinking anyone who doesn't want open borders is racist, so shouldn't be entertained
You can certainly argue that climate-change is an evidence based issue. You could maybe do it to an extent about the death penalty too.
However, same-sex marriage, immigration and tradition are really values judgements, and there are no right or wrong answers.
I'm surprised at the low levels of objection to religion. It wouldn't surprise me if fear of falling on the wrong side of intersectionality is a factor there, but those numbers are still lower than I thought.
On same sex marriage I very much believe there is a right and wrong answer and I would definitely say I don't respect those with the other opinion.
Either you believe in treating people equally or you don't. If you don't, I don't respect that.
I disagree. I have no objection to same-sex marriage, but views on this (even in this country) were very different only 15 years ago, and you can certainly construct arguments on different types of marriage and the purpose of marriage, as well as religious ones, that you can't just dismiss as 'wrong', even though I would respectfully disagree with them.
And, of course, we can't be certain of how views on social issues like this will evolve in future. It relates to human dynamics around sex, gender, relationships and communities, which tend to move from one strong consensus to another.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
I have no time for witch doctors, conspiracy nuts, flat earthers and climate sceptics. They do a lot of harm and should be challenged. They are entitled to their private views, but if they enter public debate they need to be called out as wrong.
You don't win anyone over to your side by sneering at them and calling them wrong.
And, I'd also draw a distinction between public figures who advocate, where you can challenge more robustly, and private individuals who may be followed or influence by them, where you absolutely need to be respectful.
My wife half-believes in tarot cards and palm readings. I think it's absolute bollocks, but I don't tell her so because it'd upset her and gives her a level of working through her thoughts & emotions, and she takes comfort in it.
There is such a thing as objective truth. Right?
I fear we may be getting into the realms of philosophy here..
If you can’t accept the concept that some things are true and some things are not, and every idea is equally valid we are completely lost.
Objectively, the old people won and the young people lost. If we're trying to work out what's going on in politics, it won't help to pretend this didn't happen.
You want to start moving forward by telling young people they are losers?
Objectively, the old people won and the young people lost. If we're trying to work out what's going on in politics, it won't help to pretend this didn't happen.
A few years ago I was rather taken with the idea that Richard Branson and Peter Gabriel had of "The Elders" - wise old heads from around the world that should be listened to. Made sense to me that opinions of people who have lived through turbulent times should be listened to. Now it seems they should be discarded.
Here's the site, haven't read it in years, it probably says Brexit is a disaster!
Objectively, the old people won and the young people lost. If we're trying to work out what's going on in politics, it won't help to pretend this didn't happen.
You want to start moving forward by telling young people they are losers?
They lost, and they know they did. If you want to pretend things that happened didn't happen in the hope of greater social harmony or something then feel free, but don't do it on a political betting site.
Well of course, it is easier to forgive if you have won, harder to forgive if you have lost. Isn't that just the bleeding obvious?
That's not right on all those. Those like me who support gay marriage and don't respect those who wish to deny equal rights to others have won that debate, but it doesn't make us view those who would deny basic liberties to others with any more respect.
Who said this, "I'm not very keen on the Common Market. After all, we beat Germany and we beat Italy and we saved France and Belgium and Holland. I never see why we should go crawling to them" ?
Though Attlee was very much in favour of a much stronger United Nations, acting with it's own military against sovereign states, and also the Bretton Woods institutions that underpinned post war prosperity until the 1970s. He was not a small minded nationalist about these issues.
I think publicly burning a flag should be a criminal offence. Punishable by getting a good shoeing.
Make them walk round the streets picking up litter, wearing a sandwich board of the flag they have burnt, front and back. Four weeks for a first offence.
Objectively, the old people won and the young people lost. If we're trying to work out what's going on in politics, it won't help to pretend this didn't happen.
You want to start moving forward by telling young people they are losers?
They lost, and they know they did. If you want to pretend things that happened didn't happen in the hope of greater social harmony or something then feel free, but don't do it on a political betting site.
Nobody is pretending any such thing. It's just that stoking up a perceived grievance when you have nothing to offer them doesn't help. Maybe they would feel better if we all pretended we were still a little bit in?
Polling found that a couple of years ago. I would have thought it a lot of it was to do with Remain voters having been to Uni so considering people who disagree ignorant, as well as genuinely thinking anyone who doesn't want open borders is racist, so shouldn't be entertained
You can certainly argue that climate-change is an evidence based issue. You could maybe do it to an extent about the death penalty too.
However, same-sex marriage, immigration and tradition are really values judgements, and there are no right or wrong answers.
I'm surprised at the low levels of objection to religion. It wouldn't surprise me if fear of falling on the wrong side of intersectionality is a factor there, but those numbers are still lower than I thought.
On same sex marriage I very much believe there is a right and wrong answer and I would definitely say I don't respect those with the other opinion.
Either you believe in treating people equally or you don't. If you don't, I don't respect that.
I disagree. I have no objection to same-sex marriage, but views on this (even in this country) were very different only 15 years ago, and you can certainly construct arguments on different types of marriage and the purpose of marriage, as well as religious ones, that you can't just dismiss as 'wrong', even though I would respectfully disagree with them.
And, of course, we can't be certain of how views on social issues like this will evolve in future. It relates to human dynamics around sex, gender, relationships and communities, which tend to move from one strong consensus to another.
Of course I can dismiss those who believe in inequality with marriage as wrong. Just as I can dismiss anyone who thinks interracial marriage should be illegal is wrong. The fact people held bad views in the past doesn't make them better now - though I'm not going to judge people from the past by today's standards I will more than happily judge anyone still clinging to such views TODAY.
As a married atheist I'm also prepared to dismiss anyone who brings religion into a debate on marriage as wrong too. Marriage is a civil institution that is not religious. Keep your religion in your Church and not the law.
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
Absolutely, but means discussing fact not opinion. Not all opinions are true. There is no debate on whether man made climate change Is real or dangerous. It’s a question of how bad and what we do about it.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
I have no time for witch doctors, conspiracy nuts, flat earthers and climate sceptics. They do a lot of harm and should be challenged. They are entitled to their private views, but if they enter public debate they need to be called out as wrong.
You don't win anyone over to your side by sneering at them and calling them wrong.
And, I'd also draw a distinction between public figures who advocate, where you can challenge more robustly, and private individuals who may be followed or influence by them, where you absolutely need to be respectful.
My wife half-believes in tarot cards and palm readings. I think it's absolute bollocks, but I don't tell her so because it'd upset her and gives her a level of working through her thoughts & emotions, and she takes comfort in it.
Who said this, "I'm not very keen on the Common Market. After all, we beat Germany and we beat Italy and we saved France and Belgium and Holland. I never see why we should go crawling to them" ?
Though Attlee was very much in favour of a much stronger United Nations, acting with it's own military against sovereign states, and also the Bretton Woods institutions that underpinned post war prosperity until the 1970s. He was not a small minded nationalist about these issues.
Who said he was? And, I basically agree with him. If there was a broader base of military contributions from a wider group of democratic nations at the UN, then that would be a good thing - although I don't think you could or should force anyone to take part in a war.
Support for Brexit doesn't mean you're anti-international or global action, or have sympathies with other nations; it means you're against the pan-european federalist ideology aimed at creating a new country called Europe.
The comments are interesting, and sort of bear out the findings of the poll. If you are certain you are right, why should you respect the views of those who disagree with you?
I think the big difference lies in the distribution of the Leave/Remain vote. The Remain vote is more heavily concentrated than the Leave vote, which is more evenly distributed. Leavers are more likely to encounter people who disagree with them.
I'd be worried about any individual who was certain they were right about anything.
I am certain I am right in saying I do not understanding anything with "quantum" in it.
Especially Quantum of Solace. How did that get made?
Objectively, the old people won and the young people lost. If we're trying to work out what's going on in politics, it won't help to pretend this didn't happen.
You want to start moving forward by telling young people they are losers?
They lost, and they know they did. If you want to pretend things that happened didn't happen in the hope of greater social harmony or something then feel free, but don't do it on a political betting site.
Nobody is pretending any such thing. It's just that stoking up a perceived grievance when you have nothing to offer them doesn't help. Maybe they would feel better if we all pretended we were still a little bit in?
There is plenty of evidence that points to the accuracy of this poll
Quite right to challenge people who actively undermine sound science. What meaningful debate can their be?
The scientific method doesn't involve shutting down debate.
There's an awful lot of evidence that man-made climate change is real, although we can debate the scale and the effect. Nevertheless, I can not only respect but I can also understand why others take a different view.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
I have no time for witch doctors, conspiracy nuts, flat earthers and climate sceptics. They do a lot of harm and should be challenged. They are entitled to their private views, but if they enter public debate they need to be called out as wrong.
You don't win anyone over to your side by sneering at them and calling them wrong.
And, I'd also draw a distinction between public figures who advocate, where you can challenge more robustly, and private individuals who may be followed or influence by them, where you absolutely need to be respectful.
My wife half-believes in tarot cards and palm readings. I think it's absolute bollocks, but I don't tell her so because it'd upset her and gives her a level of working through her thoughts & emotions, and she takes comfort in it.
There is such a thing as objective truth. Right?
I fear we may be getting into the realms of philosophy here..
If you can’t accept the concept that some things are true and some things are not, and every idea is equally valid we are completely lost.
You're dealing in abstract theory, without giving any concrete examples, presumably to try and win some sort of debating point.
I'm not interested in that.
If you read downthread, again, you'll see I drew a distinction between evidence-based phenomena, and those that are values judgements on that survey.
For both, given they ultimately result in political action, I think respect is essential.
The comments are interesting, and sort of bear out the findings of the poll. If you are certain you are right, why should you respect the views of those who disagree with you?
I think the big difference lies in the distribution of the Leave/Remain vote. The Remain vote is more heavily concentrated than the Leave vote, which is more evenly distributed. Leavers are more likely to encounter people who disagree with them.
Likewise the Labour vote.
I've speculated before that if you're renting a room in Walthamstow and many thousands in debt a resentment might arise plus a desperate desire to believe you are morally and/or intellectually superior to 'people like them'.
Polling found that a couple of years ago. I would have thought it a lot of it was to do with Remain voters having been to Uni so considering people who disagree ignorant, as well as genuinely thinking anyone who doesn't want open borders is racist, so shouldn't be entertained
You can certainly argue that climate-change is an evidence based issue. You could maybe do it to an extent about the death penalty too.
However, same-sex marriage, immigration and tradition are really values judgements, and there are no right or wrong answers.
I'm surprised at the low levels of objection to religion. It wouldn't surprise me if fear of falling on the wrong side of intersectionality is a factor there, but those numbers are still lower than I thought.
On same sex marriage I very much believe there is a right and wrong answer and I would definitely say I don't respect those with the other opinion.
Either you believe in treating people equally or you don't. If you don't, I don't respect that.
And, of course, we can't be certain of how views on social issues like this will evolve in future. It relates to human dynamics around sex, gender, relationships and communities, which tend to move from one strong consensus to another.
Of course I can dismiss those who believe in inequality with marriage as wrong. Just as I can dismiss anyone who thinks interracial marriage should be illegal is wrong. The fact people held bad views in the past doesn't make them better now - though I'm not going to judge people from the past by today's standards I will more than happily judge anyone still clinging to such views TODAY.
As a married atheist I'm also prepared to dismiss anyone who brings religion into a debate on marriage as wrong too. Marriage is a civil institution that is not religious. Keep your religion in your Church and not the law.
Sorry Philip, I disagree. Nothing good can come of being dismissive or disrespectful of those who hold different values to you; you can certainly point out you very strongly disagree, but respectively.
For what it's worth, my wife and I got married in a CoE church; that was very special and important to us. We both feel (and felt) that getting married in a registry office is more a spectated legal transaction than a real marriage, but we'd never be so disrespectful as to tell our friends who chose that path that.
Of course I can dismiss those who believe in inequality with marriage as wrong. Just as I can dismiss anyone who thinks interracial marriage should be illegal is wrong. The fact people held bad views in the past doesn't make them better now - though I'm not going to judge people from the past by today's standards I will more than happily judge anyone still clinging to such views TODAY.
As a married atheist I'm also prepared to dismiss anyone who brings religion into a debate on marriage as wrong too. Marriage is a civil institution that is not religious. Keep your religion in your Church and not the law.
Sorry Philip, I disagree. Nothing good can come of being dismissive or disrespectful of those who hold different values to you; you can certainly point out you very strongly disagree, but respectively.
For what it's worth, my wife and I got married in a CoE church; that was very special and important to us. We both feel (and felt) that getting married in a registry office is more a spectated legal transaction than a real marriage, but we'd never be so disrespectful as to tell our friends who chose that path that.
Some values deserve respect. Some don't.
If your values are extreme and despicable in my eyes - if you believe women should be men's chattel, if you don't believe people should be treated equally before the law etc, etc, etc then I'm not going to pretend to respect that. I don't.
Comments
There is a view that national consciousness arose out of the combination of printed newspapers and mass education, particularly literacy. This allowed the development of kinship groups well beyond pre existing ones.
With globalisation, internet and social media, those building blocks are breaking down. Increasingly the more savvy are forming transnational kinship groupings directly, bypassing those traditional media. We see this on the Left and Centre but also with the Right wingers praising Trump in Parliament Square last night. Or indeed Brits able to follow the Iowa Caucuses as easily as an American.
There is increasingly a global demos, and with translation apps, I can as easily read Haaretz or the Rand Daily Mail as the Guardian. The same goes with streamed video and news. No wonder older activists are so afraid and reactionary.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/shamed-aberdeen-tory-councillor-who-21403970
Good luck in any case, I went through the process repeatedly for a few years and am still rather mentally scarred by all the stress/rejections before I got one. Your time is certainly better spent polishing your next application than thinking about changing such a minor thing on your last one.
The Lib Dems have unsuccessfully attempted "decapitation strategies" time and again - does anyone in a million years seriously think that hypothetically if the shoe was on the other foot and Johnson was the one who'd lost his seat to the Lib Dems that Swinson wouldn't have exuberantly celebrated?
This has only come up as subsequent application asked for specific dates for each job on the CV rather than just a month and a year so I had to triple check everything. I think LinkedIn’s date rounding led me astray!
I’m going to take @AlastairMeeks ’s advice and leave it. At least I’m 100% certain on their accuracy for future applications, of which there will be many!
https://twitter.com/robwattsf1/status/1223165939836968962
https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1223510668340617218?s=19
Be surprised if they stuck with the pink.
I think the big difference lies in the distribution of the Leave/Remain vote. The Remain vote is more heavily concentrated than the Leave vote, which is more evenly distributed. Leavers are more likely to encounter people who disagree with them.
This is my first post on here for a while, as in truth I felt an increasing sense of fear and trepidation as 11pm yesterday approached.
This morning I awoke with a sense of despair, and along with thousands of my countrymen a feeling of sadness about what we have lost. Now, things can surely only worsen.
After yesterday's terrible events, the sales of Jarrod Bowen to West Ham and Kamil Grosicki to West Brom, who will create chances and score goals for my beloved Hull City.
Things will never be the same again.
It may only be very minor but if you do get to the stage of being offered the job and if the firm does due diligence on your CV and notices the discrepancy you don’t want to to be in the position then of having to explain why there is a mistake or of having someone think that you have lied on your CV. Some employers can be very hot on this sort of thing. Others less so. You don’t want to take the risk.
The overwrought, candlelit vigil Europhilia isn't so much the alpha and omega around which all of this revolves as just one of the core doctrines of the faith.
I stand by that.
No progress will be made in winning them round if they are disrespected, so it's in the best interests of everyone concerned by climate change to respect them.
This is a own worst enemy thing.
If socialists want to listen to the Red Flag on the night of a Tory election victory then so be it. Remainers playing a foreign organisations anthem is not disloyal its just a touch sad.
The clear light of day finds me in no better mood.
However, same-sex marriage, immigration and tradition are really values judgements, and there are no right or wrong answers.
I'm surprised at the low levels of objection to religion. It wouldn't surprise me if fear of falling on the wrong side of intersectionality is a factor there, but those numbers are still lower than I thought.
Would I ban it?
Of course not. But, I'm free to air my views as to what I think of it on here, and I will.
I was hoping for some solid left-wing Remainer to jump on it and say 'Farage', or something, whereupon after I could have had my fun :-(
While I understand and honour your love for your country I am afraid I cannot agree with your view that those British citizens who feel that a part of their identity has been torn away and they are made to feel somehow less welcome or less a part of their country are in any sense treasonous or disloyal.
You personally may not intend that. But there are real people - including me and mine - who do feel that. So I don’t take kindly to suggestions that intolerance is somehow something that is only shown by one side or other in this matter.
Anyway, I am off to do some some shopping for curtains and then a walk.
Before I go, best wishes to @malcolmg and his wife.
Have a good day all.
And, I'd also draw a distinction between public figures who advocate, where you can challenge more robustly, and private individuals who may be followed or influence by them, where you absolutely need to be respectful.
My wife half-believes in tarot cards and palm readings. I think it's absolute bollocks, but I don't tell her so because it'd upset her and gives her a level of working through her thoughts & emotions, and she takes comfort in it.
Either you believe in treating people equally or you don't. If you don't, I don't respect that.
British citizens choosing the EU flag and anthem over ours, and showing nothing of their love for this country, really winds me up. This shouldn't be news to you, and you chose to open the subject all over again this morning, and do a bit of grandstanding at my expense.
I know full well you don't feel that strongly about the EU, and you know me too, so I'm afraid I find some of the sentiments in your post synthetic.
Have a nice day.
And, of course, we can't be certain of how views on social issues like this will evolve in future. It relates to human dynamics around sex, gender, relationships and communities, which tend to move from one strong consensus to another.
How do you explain the others?
Here's the site, haven't read it in years, it probably says Brexit is a disaster!
https://theelders.org/
https://youtu.be/M-A3rlQ7ecM
Not all the issues on the poll are about Brexit, so Remainers haven't lost on some of them, yet are less tolerant of people who disagree with them.
As a married atheist I'm also prepared to dismiss anyone who brings religion into a debate on marriage as wrong too. Marriage is a civil institution that is not religious. Keep your religion in your Church and not the law.
Support for Brexit doesn't mean you're anti-international or global action, or have sympathies with other nations; it means you're against the pan-european federalist ideology aimed at creating a new country called Europe.
This really shouldn't be hard to figure out.
Especially Quantum of Solace. How did that get made?
I'm not interested in that.
If you read downthread, again, you'll see I drew a distinction between evidence-based phenomena, and those that are values judgements on that survey.
For both, given they ultimately result in political action, I think respect is essential.
It always has its place.
I've speculated before that if you're renting a room in Walthamstow and many thousands in debt a resentment might arise plus a desperate desire to believe you are morally and/or intellectually superior to 'people like them'.
For what it's worth, my wife and I got married in a CoE church; that was very special and important to us. We both feel (and felt) that getting married in a registry office is more a spectated legal transaction than a real marriage, but we'd never be so disrespectful as to tell our friends who chose that path that.
If your values are extreme and despicable in my eyes - if you believe women should be men's chattel, if you don't believe people should be treated equally before the law etc, etc, etc then I'm not going to pretend to respect that. I don't.