Views on assisted dying – politicalbetting.com

System · November 24

Views on assisted dying – politicalbetting.com

When asked to describe their views on assisted dying both in principle and in practice, here’s what the public said:Support in principle + practice: 59%Support in principle, in practice don’t think possible to create adequate laws: 19%Oppose in principle, but willing to… pic.twitter.com/SNNBLS1ocW

Read the full story here

DecrepiterJohnL · November 24

What worries me is this issue might begin to see religion-based campaigning, like in the United States. Otherwise I'm broadly supportive although the practicalities in dementia (or similar) cases are beyond my ken.

Peter_the_Punter · November 24

It's a tricky one.

It's no problem for me, because I trust Mrs PtP totally and would be sure she would make the right decision at the right time. Not everyone is so fortunate however, and they are the ones who need to be protected.

There's a lot of devil in the detail of this one, I believe,

ydoethur · November 24

Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?

ydoethur · November 24

Currently between 76 and 80% of all power is from wind and we are exporting on all fronts.

It will of course drop again tomorrow.

Peter_the_Punter · November 24

ydoethur said:
Currently between 76 and 80% of all power is from wind and we are exporting on all fronts.

It will of course drop again tomorrow.

Nationally, or just on PB?

DecrepiterJohnL · November 24

ydoethur said:
Currently between 76 and 80% of all power is from wind and we are exporting on all fronts.

It will of course drop again tomorrow.

Every silver lining has a cloud:-

Storm Bert: thousands without power as UK is lashed with 70mph gusts
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/nov/23/storm-bert-thousands-without-power-as-uk-is-lashed-with-70mph-gusts

Fishing · November 24

I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.

Peter_the_Punter · November 24

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce, is usually an excellent idea.

Probably right, but an even better bellweather would be the BMA which has consistently opposed every progressive health reform since its inception.

Watch what it says, and support the opposite.

BlancheLivermore · November 24

Peter_the_Punter said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce, is usually an excellent idea.
Probably right, but an even better bellweather would be the BMA which has consistently opposed every progressive health reform since its inception.

Watch what it says, and support the opposite.

Bellwether - a castrated ram (wether), carrying a bell, so the other sheep can follow even in fog or dark

Fishing · November 24

BlancheLivermore said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce, is usually an excellent idea.
Probably right, but an even better bellweather would be the BMA which has consistently opposed every progressive health reform since its inception.

Watch what it says, and support the opposite.
Bellwether - a castrated ram (wether), carrying a bell, so the other sheep can follow even in fog or dark

I can understand the sheep needing to carry a bell so others can follow it, but why do they need to castrate it?

Is it because otherwise it would follow the sexiest ewe rather than leading the pack?

maxh · November 24

On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Andy_JS said:

rcs1000 said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

maxh said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Casino_Royale said:
Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t
If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.
Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.
Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"
Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)
I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?
I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.
What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest
He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.
I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.
Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.
Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum
Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway
"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.
Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.
I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.
I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.

In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.

MattW · November 24

Thank-you for the header.

I don't see any easy ways on assisted suicide. It depends on an ethical stance and goodwill by all concerned, and that has to be regulated by individual conscience as well as law.

MattW · November 24

FPT, picking up the defence post.

viewcode said:

Casino_Royale said:
Defence.

We probably need a plan to rebuild the army, navy and to some extent the air force (this is a trickier one that I'll come back to) over a 5-10 year period, with an industrial strategy to boot, otherwise any extra money will simply be absorbed by inflation. On top, we'd need software integration of the defence platforms. Strategic objective should be to protect international and global trade, global stability and British interests worldwide as well as deter a serious "hot" war on the continent or near east, with a large sized force, and the option of a long-term medium sized deployment overseas.

RAF: hypersonic and drone defences, which might be more where the modern RAF needs to go on top of Tempest, if it's still valid, and additional strike capability. I doubt seven front-line squadrons are enough. Of course, we need maritime aircraft.

Royal Navy: is in a pitiful state. The 1998 SDR projected reducing the fleet of frigates and destroyers from 35 to 32. And we were supposed to get 12 x Type 45 destroyers. But we now actually only have 6 and, I think now, only 12 x frigates, most of which can't put to sea, and 6 x functional HK subs. We need to get back up to 12 x destroyers, 20 x frigates, 12 x attack submarines, four x strategic subs, two amphibious platforms, and a RFA that can sustain them all. We can deploy a serious carrier battlegroup with reserves at any time. Big expansion.

British Army: in an even more pitiful state. At almost every level. Where do you start? Ammo, artillery, fighting vehicles, APCs, tanks and infantry all well below even the most basic establishment levels. The BAOR was about 50k men right though the 1980s and British Forces Germany still 25k men in the 1990s. Whatever way I look at it I think we need the capability for the deployment of two fully equipped heavy war-fighting divisions, with another in reserve and another in training. It probably needs to go back up to about 125,000 regulars which is an expansion of 50,000 men. Massive.

But my fag packet calculations are that we'd need to probably spend 3.5% of GDP ultimately to do all that. So the defence budget need to rise from £57bn per year to about £88-89bn per year or about a 30-32bn increase each year.

I can get there with 2p on the basic rate and the higher rate, so 22p becomes the new basic rate and 42p become the higher rate and 47p the new top rate (raises about £20bn of that) and ending the triple lock (saves about £10bn).

The more I think about it the more I think we have to do it, and start arguing for it..

I could live with that. You?
Yes, pretty much. Some minor caveats: Tempest is probably non-doable and the Americans are thinking about abandoning their next-gen program in favour of continually upgrading F35. So cease all future development and concentrate on adding to, and continually improving what we have. So bring all SA80 rifles up to L85A3 standard, all Challys up to Challenger 3 standard, put cats and traps on the carriers and add drones for refuelling and recon. I haven't a clue what to do with F35 (you can't maintain it on land let alone sea) or Ajax (its shit). But that's just noodling: your plan is sound, and there's nothing more expensive than a second-best army.

As ever, Nicholas Drummond is good: https://nitter.poast.org/nicholadrummond

I don't see the point of the cats and traps on the carriers.

I think I can foresee anti-drone systems at air bases quite rapidly, and I'd punt for light beam based, or mobile ones deployed tactically (what worked well in Ukraine?). I think I can also see harsher restrictions on drones - Auditors are going to need to watch it, and could be treated as assaults on national security.

I can see Type 32 frigates coming firmly into the programme from the current Hokey-Cokey, as being cost effective.

I can see a further batch of Typhoon being ordered, to latest spec (as Germany?), to bridge a gap. The production lines are still rolling. In addition to a further wave of F35, to Block 4.

Personally, I don't see Tempest being stopped - we are too deep in with Japan / Italy.

Recruitment is a biggie, as is pilot training. As also is air defence, and general fragility caused by concentration of bases to a few airfields and a couple of naval bases.

I think I can see an increased push on CCF in schools, which has been reasonably successfully expanded (aiui) over the last decade. I think I also see something on expansion of reservists.

We have much to learn from Finland and Sweden.

And maybe Ireland will even get a motorised pedalo.

I think one thing to watch for is to the extent the NATO response this week to Putin's latest eye-poke is a unified response.

BlancheLivermore · November 24

Fishing said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce, is usually an excellent idea.
Probably right, but an even better bellweather would be the BMA which has consistently opposed every progressive health reform since its inception.

Watch what it says, and support the opposite.
Bellwether - a castrated ram (wether), carrying a bell, so the other sheep can follow even in fog or dark
I can understand the sheep needing to carry a bell so others can follow it, but why do they need to castrate it?

Is it because otherwise it would follow the sexiest ewe rather than leading the pack?

Where do you think they hang the bell?

Foxy · November 24

Peter_the_Punter said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce, is usually an excellent idea.
Probably right, but an even better bellweather would be the BMA which has consistently opposed every progressive health reform since its inception.

Watch what it says, and support the opposite.

I am not in the BMA, but that's nonsense.

The BMA is however neutral on Euthanasia,

https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/ethics/end-of-life/physician-assisted-dying/physician-assisted-dying-survey

IanB2 · November 24

Peter_the_Punter said:
It's a tricky one.

It's no problem for me, because I trust Mrs PtP totally and would be sure she would make the right decision at the right time. Not everyone is so fortunate however, and they are the ones who need to be protected.

There's a lot of devil in the detail of this one, I believe,

Almost any policy would fail if it were judged alone on the edge cases. Trouble is, this one will be.

TheScreamingEagles · November 24

Congratulations to Max Verstappen for winning his third legitimate world championship.

I have decided to go to the 2025 Las Vegas Grand Prix.

Dopermean · November 24

59% would consider it for themselves but 68% want it available to a loved one...
Is that compassion or something else?

I doubt it will pass this time, probably something best handled by a citizens assembly given the public opinion.

Theuniondivvie · November 24

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?

*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?

IanB2 · November 24

TheScreamingEagles said:
Congratulations to Max Verstappen for winning his third legitimate world championship.

I have decided to go to the 2025 Las Vegas Grand Prix.

That’s a gamble.

TheScreamingEagles · November 24

IanB2 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Congratulations to Max Verstappen for winning his third legitimate world championship.

I have decided to go to the 2025 Las Vegas Grand Prix.
That’s a gamble.

Nah, when else will I get a better opportunity to lob a bottle of piss at Max Verstappen?

Morris_Dancer · November 24

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Eagles, the Circuit of the Americas in Austin is a better circuit.

Theuniondivvie · November 24

maxh said:
On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Andy_JS said:

rcs1000 said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

maxh said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Casino_Royale said:
Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t
If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.
Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.
Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"
Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)
I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?
I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.
What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest
He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.
I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.
Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.
Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum
Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway
"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.
Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.
I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.
I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.
In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.

As I pointed out on the last thread Germany largely has a trust system for public transport, but afaics trust in politics is breaking down there in the same way as in most western countries. If trust is as deeply embedded in Norway as suggested it must be truly exceptional, and worth examining.

MattW · November 24

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?

I'm surmising, but I think it would be framed around the twin concepts of respect for life, and respect for the sovereignty of God. In general aiui Islam has a stronger concept of 'fate' ("Inshallah") over human agency compared to some other belief systems eg Protestant Christianity. It has a version of what I could characterise as "Calvinist" values.

So a decision to be killed could be seen as an imposition on matters that are not strictly our decision.

TheScreamingEagles · November 24

Morris_Dancer said:
Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Eagles, the Circuit of the Americas in Austin is a better circuit.

But that's in Texas, Nevada for the win.

Edit - I've never been to a night race, night races look fab.

Morris_Dancer · November 24

Mr. Eagles, more expensive and kitschy glitz over substance. So, it'd be in keeping with your wardrobe, at least.

Gallowgate · November 24

Good morning from a sub-tropical 10 degrees Celsius Newcastle upon Tyne

TheScreamingEagles · November 24

Morris_Dancer said:
Mr. Eagles, more expensive and kitschy glitz over substance. So, it'd be in keeping with your wardrobe, at least.

Nah, last time I was in Vegas I won so much at the casinos the Nevada Gaming Commission were about to give me a ban.

Theuniondivvie · November 24

MattW said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
I'm surmising, but I think it would be framed around the twin concepts of respect for life, and respect for the sovereignty of God. In general aiui Islam has a stronger concept of 'fate' ("Inshallah") over human agency compared to some other belief systems eg Protestant Christianity. It has a version of what I could characterise as "Calvinist" values.

So a decision to be killed could be seen as an imposition on matters that are not strictly our decision.

I sense that many religious views on the subject emanate from a feeling that life is a gift from whichever god goes with you, and that there is something blasphemous about having agency over the ending of it.

Speaking of Calvinist values, Gordon Brown just on the radio making yet another intervention, this time on assisted dying. Great that he’s found a second career in making moral pronouncements. Perhaps he should go the whole hog, put on a dog collar and let his moral compass guide him back to the manse.

JohnLilburne · November 24

Theuniondivvie said:

maxh said:
On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Andy_JS said:

rcs1000 said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

maxh said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Casino_Royale said:
Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t
If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.
Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.
Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"
Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)
I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?
I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.
What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest
He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.
I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.
Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.
Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum
Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway
"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.
Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.
I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.
I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.
In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.
As I pointed out on the last thread Germany largely has a trust system for public transport, but afaics trust in politics is breaking down there in the same way as in most western countries. If trust is as deeply embedded in Norway as suggested it must be truly exceptional, and worth examining.

Slightly off topic, you are right about German public transport. I was travelling around last month with a Deutschlandticket for I think 8 days, using public transport every day, and regional trains most days, and I recall only having to show my ticket once.On Intercity trains they asked though.

This is in contrast to NL which has an entry/exit system and Austria where I was asked to show my ticket on every journey.

TheScreamingEagles · November 24

Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no

MattW · November 24

JohnLilburne said:

Theuniondivvie said:

maxh said:
On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Andy_JS said:

rcs1000 said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

maxh said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Casino_Royale said:
Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t
If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.
Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.
Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"
Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)
I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?
I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.
What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest
He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.
I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.
Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.
Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum
Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway
"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.
Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.
I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.
I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.
In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.
As I pointed out on the last thread Germany largely has a trust system for public transport, but afaics trust in politics is breaking down there in the same way as in most western countries. If trust is as deeply embedded in Norway as suggested it must be truly exceptional, and worth examining.
Slightly off topic, you are right about German public transport. I was travelling around last month with a Deutschlandticket for I think 8 days, using public transport every day, and regional trains most days, and I recall only having to show my ticket once.On Intercity trains they asked though.

This is in contrast to NL which has an entry/exit system and Austria where I was asked to show my ticket on every journey.

Is the strong German sense of social conformity engaged?

I'm thinking of the reactions that are sometimes received to crossing the road in the wrong place.

The UK perception often seems to be "if nobody enforces the rules on me I am entitled to break them".

Or, as James May put it

: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3EBs7sCOzo

bondegezou · November 24

Theuniondivvie said:

maxh said:
On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Andy_JS said:

rcs1000 said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

maxh said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Casino_Royale said:
Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t
If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.
Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.
Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"
Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)
I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?
I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.
What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest
He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.
I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.
Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.
Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum
Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway
"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.
Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.
I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.
I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.
In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.
As I pointed out on the last thread Germany largely has a trust system for public transport, but afaics trust in politics is breaking down there in the same way as in most western countries. If trust is as deeply embedded in Norway as suggested it must be truly exceptional, and worth examining.

The Docklands Light Railway also relies on trust for most of its length. Jago Hazzard did a video about it recently, that perhaps has some broader implications: https://youtu.be/j4WLZzgpYYY “Why don’t DLR stations get completely trashed?” (I hope I haven’t re-opened a contentious trains debate.)

Peter_the_Punter · November 24

BlancheLivermore said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce, is usually an excellent idea.
Probably right, but an even better bellweather would be the BMA which has consistently opposed every progressive health reform since its inception.

Watch what it says, and support the opposite.
Bellwether - a castrated ram (wether), carrying a bell, so the other sheep can follow even in fog or dark

It is for little gems of information like this that so many of us check in daily to this Site.

Are you an official member of the Pedantry Committee, or just an occasional volunteer.?

noneoftheabove · November 24

In favour but would like a Royal Commission to review how it is working and legislated for elsewhere and come up with recommendations rather than fasttracked through parliament.

Why have we stopped using Royal Commissions anyway? Last one was in 1999, seems like an appropriate tool for a largely non political issue with public support but where getting the legislation right is hard and critical.

Peter_the_Punter · November 24

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Congratulations to Max Verstappen for winning his third legitimate world championship.

I have decided to go to the 2025 Las Vegas Grand Prix.
That’s a gamble.
Nah, when else will I get a better opportunity to lob a bottle of piss at Max Verstappen?

You won't even need to use your own, given the widespread availability of Budweiser.

Pulpstar · November 24

TheScreamingEagles said:
Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no

You never know, Pope's keeping might prove to be even better than his recent batting

Morris_Dancer · November 24

F1: when the market gets going again on the Constructors may be worth hedging by laying Ferrari if the numbers turn out nicely enough. Last bet on the market was laying McLaren at 1.21.

Sandpit · November 24

TheScreamingEagles said:
Congratulations to Max Verstappen for winning his third legitimate world championship.

I have decided to go to the 2025 Las Vegas Grand Prix.

Who cares about the guy who was fifth in the race, when there were two British drivers that finished first and second!

noneoftheabove · November 24

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no
You never know, Pope's keeping might prove to be even better than his recent batting

Might need some prayers for that one.

Morris_Dancer · November 24

Mr. Sandpit, Mercedes exceeded my expectations by a mile. Would've been some good betting there, had I seen it.

Peter_the_Punter · November 24

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no
You never know, Pope's keeping might prove to be even better than his recent batting
Might need some prayers for that one.

Essex have a decent wicktkeeper-batsmen in Michael Pepper. He would make an excellent opening partner for Phil Salt.

Sadly, the English selectors don't venture East of NW3 these days, but I live in hope.

Foxy · November 24

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no
You never know, Pope's keeping might prove to be even better than his recent batting
Might need some prayers for that one.

Are you expecting Mass attacks?

Fishing · November 24

noneoftheabove said:
In favour but would like a Royal Commission to review how it is working and legislated for elsewhere and come up with recommendations rather than fasttracked through parliament.

Why have we stopped using Royal Commissions anyway? Last one was in 1999, seems like an appropriate tool for a largely non political issue with public support but where getting the legislation right is hard and critical.

Because they're hugely expensive, make a tortoise look like Concorde, don't ensure public support and don't tell you much if anything you can't get from a literature survey online at a millionth of the cost?

They're also extremely easy to manipulate depending on who you choose as the chair and members, and people cottoned on to that. They may have had a point when the public deferred more to bodies with words like "Royal" and "Commission" in the title, but now that anybody with a keyboard can reach millions with their view, their utility is gone. And I say that as somebody who worked on the staff of a public sector commission for a couple of years.

All in all, there's no substitute for an open public debate.

HYUFD · November 24

What that polling shows is that while voters may support assisted dying for terminal illnesses they certainly don't support it for any reason at all and for mental illness etc.

There is a risk though that once passed euthanasia conditions widen and those with mental health conditions, the very disabled etc also feel pressured to end their lives. That is partly an issue in Canada under Trudeau's Liberal led government hence Poilievre's Conservatives have said they will tighten euthanasia laws if as is likely they win the next Canadian general election

Taz · November 24

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?

Shabana Mahmood is against it and has cited her faith.

I don’t see why religious conviction causing an objection should be an issue.

mwadams · November 24

59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.

HYUFD · November 24

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.

Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

Tres · November 24

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

Evidence please

noneoftheabove · November 24

Foxy said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no
You never know, Pope's keeping might prove to be even better than his recent batting
Might need some prayers for that one.
Are you expecting Mass attacks?

He might be okay with the orthodox bowlers but if the quicks start firing it in like canons will he up to it? He can certainly catch though which is why he is best as a romeing slip.

bondegezou · November 24

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

The guy worried about sharia law being introduced wants to roll back women’s rights with religious laws of his own.

TheScreamingEagles · November 24

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

Yes, the Supreme Governor of the Church of England should make that point.

The reality is as plenty of people cannot afford to own property then they aren't starting families.

HYUFD · November 24

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?

Assisted dying is not legal in any Muslim majority nation just as same sex marriage is not legal in any Muslim majority nation

MattW · November 24

Hmm. Bluesky has arrived - now blocked by Pakistan !

https://www.techradar.com/pro/vpn/pakistan-blocks-bluesky-amid-popularity-surge

noneoftheabove · November 24

Fishing said:

noneoftheabove said:
In favour but would like a Royal Commission to review how it is working and legislated for elsewhere and come up with recommendations rather than fasttracked through parliament.

Why have we stopped using Royal Commissions anyway? Last one was in 1999, seems like an appropriate tool for a largely non political issue with public support but where getting the legislation right is hard and critical.
Because they're hugely expensive, make a tortoise look like Concorde, don't ensure public support and don't tell you much if anything you can't get from a literature survey online at a millionth of the cost?

They're also extremely easy to manipulate depending on who you choose as the chair and members, and people cottoned on to that. They may have had a point when the public deferred more to bodies with words like "Royal" and "Commission" in the title, but now that anybody with a keyboard can reach millions with their view, their utility is gone. And I say that as somebody who worked on the staff of a public sector commission for a couple of years.

All in all, there's no substitute for an open public debate.

The last one on Lords reform took 11 months. Its hardly a massive delay.

Foxy · November 24

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.

The penultimate tweet also worrys me. People clearly expect a slippery slope and a degree of pressure on people to kill themselves. I think that a likely outcome too.

MattW · November 24

noneoftheabove said:

Foxy said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no
You never know, Pope's keeping might prove to be even better than his recent batting
Might need some prayers for that one.
Are you expecting Mass attacks?
He might be okay with the orthodox bowlers but if the quicks start firing it in like canons will he up to it? He can certainly catch though which is why he is best as a romeing slip.

Orthodox Bowlers - are are the Orange Order involved?

twistedfirestopper3 · November 24

.

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

Mate, you're stuck in the 1800s, so I think we can discount your views on the modern world.

Casino_Royale · November 24

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.

Well, quite.

noneoftheabove · November 24

Foxy said:

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.
The penultimate tweet also worrys me. People clearly expect a slippery slope and a degree of pressure on people to kill themselves. I think that a likely outcome too.

It happens already and it is inevitable that it would increase a bit if it were legal. Supporters should recognise that and we should do a lot to mitigate it, however the harm to far more people who are denied the right to dignity is imo in total greater.

Casino_Royale · November 24

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

I wonder if some countries will get to the point where they tax childless women unless they can show medical cause, together with banning abortion and contraception?

A bit like the reverse of the China one-child policy. Ceaușescu did this and it did raise the birth rate, although it also led to the horror of the Romanian Orphanages.

JosiasJessop · November 24

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

The liberalised divorce laws also prevent a great deal of heartache and pain for people who make the wrong decision about life partner. Including a good friend of mine.

Peter_the_Punter · November 24

MattW said:

noneoftheabove said:

Foxy said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Send for Johnny Bairstow.

Wicketkeeper Jordan Cox has been ruled out of England's series in New Zealand with a broken thumb.

Cox, uncapped in Tests, injured his right thumb in the nets before the second and final day of England's only warm-up against a New Zealand Prime Minister's XI in Queenstown.

The 24-year-old had been due to make his Test debut in Christchurch on Thursday, covering for regular keeper Jamie Smith, who is missing the three-match series on paternity leave.

In Cox's absence, Ollie Pope is set to deputise behind the stumps, leaving 21-year-old Jacob Bethell in line for his first Test cap.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c79zg42dw9no
You never know, Pope's keeping might prove to be even better than his recent batting
Might need some prayers for that one.
Are you expecting Mass attacks?
He might be okay with the orthodox bowlers but if the quicks start firing it in like canons will he up to it? He can certainly catch though which is why he is best as a romeing slip.
Orthodox Bowlers - are are the Orange Order involved?

No, the selectors take a catholic view of the matter.

Foxy · November 24

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates
Yes, the Supreme Governor of the Church of England should make that point.

The reality is as plenty of people cannot afford to own property then they aren't starting families.

Divorce rates have been declining for a quarter century. Mostly because many couples never marry in the first place.

The fall in fertility rates is a worldwide phenomenon, and affecting nearly every country, though some are still over 2. It has very little to do with divorce law in any particular country, or for that matter housing. Mostly it is to do with women choosing not to have children.

MarqueeMark · November 24

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.

Good job they didn't poll for the mother-in-law...

Big_G_NorthWales · November 24

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

Good morning

I utterly reject your comments

What does have a negative effect on family and fertility are those locked in loveless marriages

The change to no fault divorces is to be welcomed

JosiasJessop · November 24

Theuniondivvie said:

MattW said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
I'm surmising, but I think it would be framed around the twin concepts of respect for life, and respect for the sovereignty of God. In general aiui Islam has a stronger concept of 'fate' ("Inshallah") over human agency compared to some other belief systems eg Protestant Christianity. It has a version of what I could characterise as "Calvinist" values.

So a decision to be killed could be seen as an imposition on matters that are not strictly our decision.
I sense that many religious views on the subject emanate from a feeling that life is a gift from whichever god goes with you, and that there is something blasphemous about having agency over the ending of it.

(Snip)

Given how both Christianity and Islam have taken great glee historically in ending life of the 'wrong' people, and of hurting many others, I think that's utterly wrong.

The churches pretend to care about people. In reality, the churches and their hierarchies are about control of the population.

(I see churches as very different from faith.)

Stereodog · November 24

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates

What conceivable benefit would you expect to acru from restricting divorce? Couples stuck in loveless marriages are not likely to bring children into them and if they did it would be for entirely the wrong reasons to the detriment of everyone.

JohnLilburne · November 24

Foxy said:

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.
The penultimate tweet also worrys me. People clearly expect a slippery slope and a degree of pressure on people to kill themselves. I think that a likely outcome too.

One of my issues is that legislation often turns out to be badly worded, ineffective or have bad faults. In any sensible world you would review legislation a year or two after passing it, and amend it where it isn't working. But we don't do that - for the obvious reason that the Opposition would have a field day telling the Government they had fucked up. (Also we erroneously regard the Government's job as passing lots of new legislation, so there probably isn't parliamentary tune for it)

Jonathan · November 24

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.

Not really, easily explained by who fills in the survey.

geoffw · November 24

Foxy said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates
Yes, the Supreme Governor of the Church of England should make that point.

The reality is as plenty of people cannot afford to own property then they aren't starting families.
Divorce rates have been declining for a quarter century. Mostly because many couples never marry in the first place.

The fall in fertility rates is a worldwide phenomenon, and affecting nearly every country, though some are still over 2. It has very little to do with divorce law in any particular country, or for that matter housing. Mostly it is to do with women choosing not to have children.

The logic of your first para escapes me. Unless your denominator in the "divorce rate" includes unmarried people ...

Big_G_NorthWales · November 24

Anyway EDF have given us free energy from 8.00am to 12 noon this morning, so the washing machine, dryer, dishwasher and everything else we can think of are switched on !!!!!!!

malcolmg · November 24

Peter_the_Punter said:
It's a tricky one.

It's no problem for me, because I trust Mrs PtP totally and would be sure she would make the right decision at the right time. Not everyone is so fortunate however, and they are the ones who need to be protected.

There's a lot of devil in the detail of this one, I believe,

However some dumbcluck MP should not be deciding that I have to die in excruating pain over a long period just because they are thick fcukwits. If it is good enough for dogs it should be good enough for humans.

Taz · November 24

Good morning from Sunny Cape Verde

Todays sweeney episode ifs Poppy.

Not a classic and written as a filler. No,characters had any redeeming features.

Still had the great line “what you doing standing round like a motorway breakfast’

JosiasJessop · November 24

It's sad how many shits on here are starting to peddle the Musk/MAGA "We need higher fertility rates!" line. Which actually means reducing womens' rights in quite startling ways.

Foxy · November 24

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates
I wonder if some countries will get to the point where they tax childless women unless they can show medical cause, together with banning abortion and contraception?

A bit like the reverse of the China one-child policy. Ceaușescu did this and it did raise the birth rate, although it also led to the horror of the Romanian Orphanages.

Isn't that exactly what we are seeing in Trumpistan?

malcolmg · November 24

JosiasJessop said:

Theuniondivvie said:

MattW said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
I'm surmising, but I think it would be framed around the twin concepts of respect for life, and respect for the sovereignty of God. In general aiui Islam has a stronger concept of 'fate' ("Inshallah") over human agency compared to some other belief systems eg Protestant Christianity. It has a version of what I could characterise as "Calvinist" values.

So a decision to be killed could be seen as an imposition on matters that are not strictly our decision.
I sense that many religious views on the subject emanate from a feeling that life is a gift from whichever god goes with you, and that there is something blasphemous about having agency over the ending of it.

(Snip)
Given how both Christianity and Islam have taken great glee historically in ending life of the 'wrong' people, and of hurting many others, I think that's utterly wrong.

The churches pretend to care about people. In reality, the churches and their hierarchies are about control of the population.

(I see churches as very different from faith.)

Another bunch of greedy , self seeking hypocritical two faced fcukwits who should have no say in anything to do with people's lives. We see their results regularly.

Taz · November 24

Unsurprisingly the shakedown merchants got more cash and a deal in the end at the COP summit. Although lots of squealing from poor nations like Nigeria and India demanding more and charities/NGOs too.

What happens when the Trumpdozer takes over ? Not a penny from the US.

Andrew Neil on COP29

https://x.com/afneil/status/1860611941984788592?s=61

Sean_F · November 24

JosiasJessop said:

Theuniondivvie said:

MattW said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
I'm surmising, but I think it would be framed around the twin concepts of respect for life, and respect for the sovereignty of God. In general aiui Islam has a stronger concept of 'fate' ("Inshallah") over human agency compared to some other belief systems eg Protestant Christianity. It has a version of what I could characterise as "Calvinist" values.

So a decision to be killed could be seen as an imposition on matters that are not strictly our decision.
I sense that many religious views on the subject emanate from a feeling that life is a gift from whichever god goes with you, and that there is something blasphemous about having agency over the ending of it.

(Snip)
Given how both Christianity and Islam have taken great glee historically in ending life of the 'wrong' people, and of hurting many others, I think that's utterly wrong.

The churches pretend to care about people. In reality, the churches and their hierarchies are about control of the population.

(I see churches as very different from faith.)

I think the picture is more mixed.

OTOH, you have brutal wars of religion. On the other, you have truces of God, distinctions between combatants and non-combatants, Just War theory, and religious buildings treated as places of sanctuary. These all had an impact in mitigating the brutality of medieval warfare.

One reason why warfare became more atrocious in the 16th century is that as the Church split, so it lost its authority over men who waged war.

malcolmg · November 24

Foxy said:

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.
The penultimate tweet also worrys me. People clearly expect a slippery slope and a degree of pressure on people to kill themselves. I think that a likely outcome too.

why do you think it is a likely outcome. Fecking doctor's have been doing it for ages, the shitty Liverpool pathway they invented as a perfect example.

mwadams · November 24

Jonathan said:

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.
Not really, easily explained by who fills in the survey.

"People"

stodge · November 24

Morning all

On topic.

This is one of those complex moral and philosophical questions for which everyone will have their opinion enforced (usually) by personal experience, education, culture and the rest.

Death (especially our own) is a subject with which none of us feel comfortable though as Mr Bulsara once asked "who wants to live forever?" and as a famous Doctor also opined "I want to see what's next". To be blunt, the past happened without us and the future will as well.

The other side to this is what we would want for ourselves and our loved ones and what we would want for everyone else and there's often a conflict.

It's a lot to do with freedom - some might argue the overpowerful State restricts oue right to live how we choose and shouldn't restrict our right to die how we choose. That's a little blunt but free will and individual choice do have a big role to play. If there comes a point when an individual's life is intolerable shouldn't that individual (if of sound mind) have the right to end it on their own terms?

Those suffering with dementia (and that's often not the individual but their loved ones) pose a particular moral dilemma and I've no easy answers for that.

It's one of those issues which requires sober and honest argument.

Nigelb · November 24

Morris_Dancer said:
Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Eagles, the Circuit of the Americas in Austin is a better circuit.

And Austin is a far nicer place the the hellhole that is Vegas.

Also, it's 50/50 that the championship will be over by then.

Sean_F · November 24

Foxy said:

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.
The penultimate tweet also worrys me. People clearly expect a slippery slope and a degree of pressure on people to kill themselves. I think that a likely outcome too.

Wherever you draw the line, there will always be hard cases on the other side. So, the pressure will always be for the line to move.

malcolmg · November 24

Taz said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
Shabana Mahmood is against it and has cited her faith.

I don’t see why religious conviction causing an objection should be an issue.

She and others should stick their religion up their arses. If she does not want it fine, the clown should not be forcing her religious beliefs on the rest of the nation

malcolmg · November 24

Peter_the_Punter said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Congratulations to Max Verstappen for winning his third legitimate world championship.

I have decided to go to the 2025 Las Vegas Grand Prix.
That’s a gamble.
Nah, when else will I get a better opportunity to lob a bottle of piss at Max Verstappen?
You won't even need to use your own, given the widespread availability of Budweiser.

LOL, a cracker Peter

Stocky · November 24

Peter_the_Punter said:
It's a tricky one.

It's no problem for me, because I trust Mrs PtP totally and would be sure she would make the right decision at the right time. Not everyone is so fortunate however, and they are the ones who need to be protected.

There's a lot of devil in the detail of this one, I believe,

What do you think would be the wrong decision?

It's your decision - mentally capable with terminal illness and less that six months to live anyway.

Taz · November 24

malcolmg said:

Taz said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
Shabana Mahmood is against it and has cited her faith.

I don’t see why religious conviction causing an objection should be an issue.
She and others should stick their religion up their arses. If she does not want it fine, the clown should not be forcing her religious beliefs on the rest of the nation

Hi there Malc. Good morning. Hope all is good with you and yours

JohnLilburne · November 24

MattW said:

JohnLilburne said:

Theuniondivvie said:

maxh said:
On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Andy_JS said:

rcs1000 said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

maxh said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Casino_Royale said:
Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t
If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.
Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.
Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"
Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)
I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?
I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.
What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest
He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.
I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.
Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.
Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum
Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway
"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.
Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.
I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.
I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.
In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.
As I pointed out on the last thread Germany largely has a trust system for public transport, but afaics trust in politics is breaking down there in the same way as in most western countries. If trust is as deeply embedded in Norway as suggested it must be truly exceptional, and worth examining.
Slightly off topic, you are right about German public transport. I was travelling around last month with a Deutschlandticket for I think 8 days, using public transport every day, and regional trains most days, and I recall only having to show my ticket once.On Intercity trains they asked though.

This is in contrast to NL which has an entry/exit system and Austria where I was asked to show my ticket on every journey.

Is the strong German sense of social conformity engaged?

I'm thinking of the reactions that are sometimes received to crossing the road in the wrong place.

The UK perception often seems to be "if nobody enforces the rules on me I am entitled to break them".

Or, as James May put it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3EBs7sCOzo

I'm not sure. They do still wait for green men at crossings even if there is no traffic. My trip told me that DB is indeed very poor, if you looked up at the departure boards at any time you would see more than half the trains in Spätung or cancelled, I had a couple of poor experiences travelling in the evening rush hour, trains made more crowded through cancellations and delays. (I know travelling in rush hour is never a good idea, but I wanted to get back to Düsseldorf for Altbier and food)

Sean_F · November 24

malcolmg said:

Taz said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
Shabana Mahmood is against it and has cited her faith.

I don’t see why religious conviction causing an objection should be an issue.
She and others should stick their religion up their arses. If she does not want it fine, the clown should not be forcing her religious beliefs on the rest of the nation

Forcing one’s beliefs on the rest of the nation is exactly what politicians of all stripes do.

StillWaters · November 24

JosiasJessop said:
It's sad how many shits on here are starting to peddle the Musk/MAGA "We need higher fertility rates!" line. Which actually means reducing womens' rights in quite startling ways.

Not necessarily

I worry about fertility rates. But that should be addressed via cost of living, tax incentives etc. not some kind of breeding farm.

Foxy · November 24

geoffw said:

Foxy said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

Fishing said:
I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce to more or less anything Mrs Thatcher did, is usually an excellent idea.
Divorce laws in the UK are too liberal now with no fault divorce. Having a negative effect on the family and fertility rates
Yes, the Supreme Governor of the Church of England should make that point.

The reality is as plenty of people cannot afford to own property then they aren't starting families.
Divorce rates have been declining for a quarter century. Mostly because many couples never marry in the first place.

The fall in fertility rates is a worldwide phenomenon, and affecting nearly every country, though some are still over 2. It has very little to do with divorce law in any particular country, or for that matter housing. Mostly it is to do with women choosing not to have children.

The logic of your first para escapes me. Unless your denominator in the "divorce rate" includes unmarried people ...

The absolute numbers are down, but so are the rates. Basically people who marry now tend to marry later and stay married.

Taz · November 24

malcolmg said:

Foxy said:

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.
The penultimate tweet also worrys me. People clearly expect a slippery slope and a degree of pressure on people to kill themselves. I think that a likely outcome too.
why do you think it is a likely outcome. Fecking doctor's have been doing it for ages, the shitty Liverpool pathway they invented as a perfect example.

Shipman was not an aberration. He was a design issue in our state health service.

malcolmg · November 24

MattW said:
Thank-you for the header.

I don't see any easy ways on assisted suicide. It depends on an ethical stance and goodwill by all concerned, and that has to be regulated by individual conscience as well as law.

FFS you have to have a terminal illness and half the country sign it off. F all to do with anyone else.

Nigelb · November 24

Foxy said:

mwadams said:
59% want assisted dying for themselves.
68% want it for their loved ones.

That 9% is precisely why I think there are problems with this bill.
The penultimate tweet also worrys me. People clearly expect a slippery slope and a degree of pressure on people to kill themselves. I think that a likely outcome too.

Is that the case - or is it that those who are opposed to the policy just like that as an argument against it ?

Hard to tell - though it's quite clear the latter is true of some of the more vocal MPs.

Taz · November 24

Sean_F said:

malcolmg said:

Taz said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
Shabana Mahmood is against it and has cited her faith.

I don’t see why religious conviction causing an objection should be an issue.
She and others should stick their religion up their arses. If she does not want it fine, the clown should not be forcing her religious beliefs on the rest of the nation
Forcing one’s beliefs on the rest of the nation is exactly what politicians of all stripes do.

We vote for them based on their policy platforms. God botherers we don’t.

malcolmg · November 24

noneoftheabove said:
In favour but would like a Royal Commission to review how it is working and legislated for elsewhere and come up with recommendations rather than fasttracked through parliament.

Why have we stopped using Royal Commissions anyway? Last one was in 1999, seems like an appropriate tool for a largely non political issue with public support but where getting the legislation right is hard and critical.

Because they were F-ing useless and just money for the old school tie boys.

JohnLilburne · November 24

JohnLilburne said:

MattW said:

JohnLilburne said:

Theuniondivvie said:

maxh said:
On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Andy_JS said:

rcs1000 said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

maxh said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Casino_Royale said:
Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t
If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.
Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.
Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"
Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)
I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?
I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.
What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest
He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.
I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.
Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.
Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum
Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway
"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.
Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.
I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.
I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.
In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.
As I pointed out on the last thread Germany largely has a trust system for public transport, but afaics trust in politics is breaking down there in the same way as in most western countries. If trust is as deeply embedded in Norway as suggested it must be truly exceptional, and worth examining.
Slightly off topic, you are right about German public transport. I was travelling around last month with a Deutschlandticket for I think 8 days, using public transport every day, and regional trains most days, and I recall only having to show my ticket once.On Intercity trains they asked though.

This is in contrast to NL which has an entry/exit system and Austria where I was asked to show my ticket on every journey.

Is the strong German sense of social conformity engaged?

I'm thinking of the reactions that are sometimes received to crossing the road in the wrong place.

The UK perception often seems to be "if nobody enforces the rules on me I am entitled to break them".

Or, as James May put it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3EBs7sCOzo
I'm not sure. They do still wait for green men at crossings even if there is no traffic. My trip told me that DB is indeed very poor, if you looked up at the departure boards at any time you would see more than half the trains in Spätung or cancelled, I had a couple of poor experiences travelling in the evening rush hour, trains made more crowded through cancellations and delays. (I know travelling in rush hour is never a good idea, but I wanted to get back to Düsseldorf for Altbier and food)

... so given the poor state of the railways I do wonder if social conformity is breaking down to the extent that Germans feel they aren't getting what they paid for. Also there are now a lot of immigrants - I stayed near Hamburg Hbf and it is clearly Little Syria - who won't have that same sense of conformity

Theuniondivvie · November 24

Polling terribly, ratings down the toilet, all those broken promises before they were elected.
Time to bash benefit scroungers in the Mail!

https://x.com/toryfibs/status/1860439896105558401?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q

JosiasJessop · November 24

Sean_F said:

JosiasJessop said:

Theuniondivvie said:

MattW said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:
Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?
*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?
I'm surmising, but I think it would be framed around the twin concepts of respect for life, and respect for the sovereignty of God. In general aiui Islam has a stronger concept of 'fate' ("Inshallah") over human agency compared to some other belief systems eg Protestant Christianity. It has a version of what I could characterise as "Calvinist" values.

So a decision to be killed could be seen as an imposition on matters that are not strictly our decision.
I sense that many religious views on the subject emanate from a feeling that life is a gift from whichever god goes with you, and that there is something blasphemous about having agency over the ending of it.

(Snip)
Given how both Christianity and Islam have taken great glee historically in ending life of the 'wrong' people, and of hurting many others, I think that's utterly wrong.

The churches pretend to care about people. In reality, the churches and their hierarchies are about control of the population.

(I see churches as very different from faith.)
I think the picture is more mixed.

OTOH, you have brutal wars of religion. On the other, you have truces of God, distinctions between combatants and non-combatants, Just War theory, and religious buildings treated as places of sanctuary. These all had an impact in mitigating the brutality of medieval warfare.

One reason why warfare became more atrocious in the 16th century is that as the Church split, so it lost its authority over men who waged war.

I think the worsening of war is down to improvements in weaponry and associated technology more than a church split. I fear the crusades (and the equivalent Islamic wars of conquest) belie the idea that the religious authorities were not bloodthirsty charlatans. The rules, such that there were, were often broken when it suited the combatants.

As a minor example from history, remember how much Pope Alexander II promoted and encouraged the Norman Invasion.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

Views on assisted dying – politicalbetting.com

Comments