next »

[AL1874]

I believe criminalising Holocaust Denial is wrong, as was said before it can be defeated by argument and facts.

It is the same with creationism, people with opposing views / beliefs have the right to hold and express them.

In this country (I'm talking about the UK) the laws are already in place to protect with regard to hate crime. To take this any further would be a dangerous road to travel down and one I would not be comfortable with.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but apart from EU legislation I do not believe that British Law protects "freedom of speech" specifically like it does in the United States constitution.

It is an ideal that is often expressed but I don't think it is a right laid down in law.

[AL1874]

You're right about the rights in the UK. I actually have had big arguments with my American cousins. I always tell them I much prefer the English way with no written constitution, and all rights are accepted by everyone, and have been refined over a thousand years - that is, constantly evolving with time as our understanding of what these rights should be improves. This, rather then the American method of a written constitution, with constant squabbling over the meaning of a comma or full-stop, which in all probability the founding fathers never even thought about!

I'll let that one go shall I

But agreed,

The right to bear arms is 100% unadulterated wank, you end up with some inbred militia full of good old boys with a bloody howitzer because it is in the constitution and they like hunting.

If you are going to bestow such a privilege on anybody why does it have to be those US OF A tossers

Sometimes I despair, thank God they are not the only superpower.

[AL1874]

Sorry, I did not notice that you are on the phone.

I highlighted that you posted "the English way" in your original post, that was what I was letting go, I added the wee wink smiley to indicate that it was a joke (or meant to be).

I would say that Russia are still a superpower and now China are emerging as one (if they are not already there).

[measdale]

How to define a superpower.

I'd have said a superpower can effectively be defined by the way it interacts with other superpowers, in a fashion different from how normal states interact.
Looking at the Cold War, when there were two universally accepted superpowers and they were permanently interacting, they seemed to be set apart by
a.) being able to act anywhere on the globe (outside the other's immediate sphere of influence)
b.) with a choice of overwhelming economic, political or military leverage (each used all three methods).

So I'd define a superpower as being able to act in that fashion - ie. to be able to globally act militarily, economically and politically.
In which case I'd have had to cast my vote against Russia being a superpower, since they no longer have the capability to act globally politically (they're rebuilding their economic and military might, but political influence will take longer - look at their complete failure over Kosovo).

And, as yet, I'm not convinced the Chinese military is capable of effective action in any continent other than their own (and even there, their late 20th century is a history of spectacular defeats and they've been pretty cagey about exposing themselves since). So far economially and politically, China has shown itself at least as adept as the US. The Pacific and Africa are their obvious main spheres, but that's expanding.

So, I'd say the US and maybe China, but not Russia any more.

[bestofbarry]

I see Andrew's been causing trouble in Manchester

[Tommy]

I am alarmed by those figures...are they just allowing people to walk in?

[Sarah_]

Right to Die Cards...

A controversial new "right to die" card is being offered to the public that allows anyone to refuse treatment in a medical emergency. Who carries it, and why?

It's a morbid question, but one that many of us have pondered at least once.
ADRT card
The card that can say 'no'

If I hadn't just escaped that dreadful accident, where would I be now? Would I rather be dead than depend on others to keep me alive?

A new card seeks to address that very question. Available in pubs, banks, libraries, GP surgeries, even some churches, the Advanced Decision to Refuse Treatment (ADRT) card sits snugly in a wallet or purse and instructs a doctor to withhold treatment should the carrier lose the capacity to make decisions, because of an accident or illness.

Dubbed the "right-to-die card", it's being seen by some as a short-cut to euthanasia.

But its backers say it is a practical way of implementing the Mental Capacity Act, which came into force in 2007.

The act allows adults to draw up "advance directives" stating what sort of treatment they don't want should they lose capacity. They build on the principle of "living wills" but, crucially, mean that doctors are legally bound to abide by a patient's wish to refuse life-sustaining treatment.

What do you think, would anyone consider carrying one?

Full Article Here...

[Sarah_]

I felt the same, I really can't decide whether I would want one or not. Ultimately, the thought of been stuck in a coma terrifies me, or having a life threatening illness. But the thought of this card being able to overrule a doctor saving a life? It's just wierd, can't get my head around it.