Posted by Ben @ July 14th, 2010 8:58 pm. Filed under: Abolish This!,Anything I Want Is A Human Right,Batshit Mental Rants,Clearly You've Thought This Through,Don't Worry About What THEY Want,Duplicate Petitions,Hanging's Too Good For 'Em!,Is Research The Same Thing As Making Shit Up? Good.,Please State The Nature of the Medical Emergency,Sexism,Stand Back! I'm Going To Try SCIENCE!,Stop Spending My Money On Things I Don't Understand.,Unreasonable Demands,What A Dick,Won't Somebody Please Think Of The Children?,You Know - We Haven't Banned Anything Lately. — Tags: AndyCC, ngreer —
Abortion. Touchy subject. Touchy enough for at least two petitions on YourFreedom.
Someone decides to have sex, they should live with the concequences. Abortion should be banned for all social economic reasons.Life is a sacred thing, whether you believe it is from God or not, people these days think that you just pop-out of the womb on the day you are born, but it starts before that within the womb.
If people disagree with banning Abortion for social economic reasons, could they please explain why it is differnt to killing a 5 year old because they are not an Adult yet?
Abortion is just legalised mass murder, wrapped up to make everyone feel good about it.
Why the contribution is important
Why should an innocent unborn child be murdered simply because of a “bad” choice to have sex?Why should the taxpayer pay for this? And for the clumsy decisions of others not to use protection?
Why the contribution is important
The right to life is a fundamental human right. The unborn are human. At the moment of conception they become, by any reasonable definition, human. They are genetically members of the species homo sapiens, and between that moment and birth, there is no clear dividing line when a change occurs. If there is no clear dividing line, then no change occurs (if it is illegal to kill at some precise moment and not before, that must be because a significant change occurs at that moment).It follows that to kill the unborn is murder, and the clear denial of that unborn child’s right to life. We will not execute murderers and rapists because of this principle, but we will inflict a particularly brutal killing on defenceless, innocent children. This is unnacceptable in any society that aspires to be civilised.
let’s ignore all of the bollocks pseudo-science and half-arsed presumptions in these petitions and jump to the crux of the matter: making abortion illegal.
What about where protection is used? What about rape? What about incest rape? What about instances where the baby won’t survive childbirth? What about instances where the mother won’t survive childbirth? What about where the baby will be born without a brain? Or, rather simply, what if the woman simply isn’t ready to be a mother? It’s her body, her choice, and she shouldn’t be forced into motherhood against her will, be it because she was attacked in the park or because she just doesn’t want to have kids.
Even taking all of these variables out of the picture, making abortion illegal isn’t going to help. The women that want abortions are still going to find ways of getting them, being it going abroad to somewhere else in Europe where it’s still legal. Or, if that’s not an option, they’ll seek out a “back alley abortion” where statistics show they will, in fact, wind up dead.
So, long story short, it seems AndyCC and ngreer hate women, they don’t think a woman is entitled to ownership of her own uterus.
Posted by Ben @ July 8th, 2010 8:10 pm. Filed under: Abolish This!,Everyone Stop What You're Doing Because You're Mildly Inconveniencing Me,I Could've Looked This Up But Instead I Watched Countdown,Thank You For Coming -- It's Been Very Useful — Tags: deepinfen —
I run a very small business with two employees. I am required by law to have employees liability insurance which is just as it should be. To prove this I am required by law to display (for my employees to see) a valid copy of the pertaining insurance certificate which again is acceptable.However, by law I am required to keep each year’s insurance certificate for 40 years. I am nearing retirement and my business will end with my retirement. As the law stands and for my particular circumstance, I will be required to keep the last issued certificate until I am 105 years old which is barmy. The chances of my living to this age are remote and what happens if I die before the 40 years is up I am not sure. Perhaps I shall have it stipulated in my will that the certificates be interned with me in my coffin so that those responsible will have to dig me up to get their putrifying paperwork.
Why the contribution is important
There are much simplier ways of resolving this issue such as making it a legal requirement for those companies that provide employees liability insurance to keep an accessible unified data base (of those employers they have insured) on the web for 40 years. Of course that would be too simple and something the insurance companies will fight tooth and nail against, for they know full well that many employers will ignore the 40 year requirement and thereby make it difficult for an employee to make a far back claim.
Rather than sit there bitching to the government about your problem and making unsubstantiable claims about what insurance providers may or may not do under any particular set of circumstances, why don’t you do some actual research like, oh, I don’t know, asking a solicitor what you’re supposed to do under the circumstances?
Posted by Ben @ January 26th, 2010 8:33 pm. Filed under: Abolish This!,Everything MPs Have Is Part Of The Expenses Scandal,Nothing Should Ever Change!,So I Just Type What I Want Here And The PM Has To Do It?,Stop Spending My Money On Things I Don't Understand.,This was Yesterday's News Ages Ago,spelin an grammer — Tags: Mr Robert Philp —
This is quite possibly the greatest misunderstanding of how MPs are paid I’ve ever seen in my life:
by Mr Robert PhilpMP’s to have a wage just like everyone else. No second home and all expenses to be audited by independent auditors and a committee made up of members of the public
Posted by Ben @ December 23rd, 2009 7:08 pm. Filed under: Abolish This!,Can't someone else pay the tax?,Clearly You've Thought This Through,I Could've Looked This Up But Instead I Watched Countdown,Is Research The Same Thing As Making Shit Up? Good.,It Says So In The Daily Mail,Stop Spending My Money On Things I Don't Understand.,Thank You For Coming -- It's Been Very Useful,That's SO UNFAIR! I HATE YOU!,The Nasty Television Upset Me!,There's Already A Solution But Don't Let That Stop You From Bothering The PM,This Is The Worst Kind Of Discrimination! The Kind Against Me!,Unreasonable Demands,spelin an grammer — Tags: Mr Richard Moore —
Oh dear, we have another “scrap the TV license” moron in our midsts. And this one is armed with misinformation! Let’s get this over with…
by Mr Richard MooreWhy should the BBC be given free money, whilst other TV channels gain no funding from the BBC TV License?
Why also is it satisfactory for the BBC to outsourse it’s published programs to e.g. BBC Americas for viewing abroad.
Why also is it satisfactory for the BBC to use UK License holders money to spurn products for their own profit from the UK public, i.e. childrens toy product etc…?
With the current economic state the country has been placed into, would it not enable families with a lower income to utilise the monies used for a TV License on more benificial items, i.e. feeding their family?
Is it not fair to the other broadcast network’s such as ITV, Channel 4 etc… to not recieve monies from the TV License.
Support the scrappage of the BBC TV License, sign the petition!
Okay, let’s dissect this one, shall we?
Why should the BBC be given free money, whilst other TV channels gain no funding from the BBC TV License?
Because the BBC is a public broadcasting service, and ITV, Channel 4, Channel Five, Sky etc. are businesses supported by advertising.
Why also is it satisfactory for the BBC to outsourse it’s published programs to e.g. BBC Americas for viewing abroad.
Actually, haha, they don’t. What happens is this: BBC Worldwide, the business arm of the BBC, is given the rights to distribute the shows to other territories. What happens then is that BBC America has to bid for those rights, and if they succeed then they get the show. You probably don’t know this but until recently BBC America didn’t have the first-to-air rights to Doctor Who – the American SciFi Channel (now called SyFy) outbid them for the rights to series one through four, and they let those rights lapse this year for the one-off specials.
Additionally, BBC America (which, I need to reiterate, is a business much like ITV and British Sky Broadcasting) actually co-funds some BBC productions such as Robin Hood.
So, y’know. Research.
Why also is it satisfactory for the BBC to use UK License holders money to spurn products for their own profit from the UK public, i.e. childrens toy product etc…?
Again, this is stuff that is all handled by the BBC’s business arms and is not funded by the money they get from the TV license, you frog’s gusset.
With the current economic state the country has been placed into, would it not enable families with a lower income to utilise the monies used for a TV License on more benificial items, i.e. feeding their family?
Considering that television is a luxury item and not a utility, they could always put the TV in the loft if they can’t afford their license.
Is it not fair to the other broadcast network’s such as ITV, Channel 4 etc… to not recieve monies from the TV License.
There is some debate about this, but once again it’s worth noting that ITV, Channel 4 etc. are supported by advertising. The BBC is not.
Thanks for playing.
Posted by Ben @ December 18th, 2009 8:06 am. Filed under: Abolish This!,Clearly You've Thought This Through,Featuring A Special Celebrity Guest!,Nanny Knows Best,This Is The Worst Kind Of Discrimination! The Kind Against Me!,Unintentional Irony,Won't Somebody Please Think Of The Children?,You Know - We Haven't Banned Anything Lately. — Tags: Alan Davies, Ben B, Keith Harris, robert woods, Ted Charlton —
by robert woodsOnlline petitions are a sign of the lapse of interest and general lethargy inherent in the british public. If you want to complain about something, get off your arse and do it properly.
Define “properly”. Also: Irony!
by Ted Charlton
…and to help you keep track of how much you’re spending, you can use a Smart Meter.
by Alan DaviesJust because some people don’t look over 25 they cannot buy alcohol or cigarettes. The legal age for purchase of both these products is 18. Please legislate to stop this discrimination and nannying.
Age verification is not discrimination. But then, what do you know? You keep getting the Obvious Alarm on QI.
by Ben BBy abolishing daylight savings time in the following way. Next summer time (2010)clocks go forward by one hour, repeat for another two years and never move the clock back. This will eventually lead to long summer days rdeucing the cost of lighting which will be positive for the environment. This will also reduce traffic collisions
I like the part where you suggest we abolish Daylight Savings, but everything else is just bollocks.
by Keith HarrisIn a time of breakdown of family life, the government needs to look at stopping Bank Holiday trading. This year, more and more retailers are open longer hours over Christmas, using the excuse that December 26th is on a Saturday and trading normal hours. They are also treating December 28th and New Years day as normal trading days rather than open reduced hours. All these days, and other Bank Holidays should become trading free to allow more family time,which has all but been eroded by greedy high street retailers.
Yes, because being able to pop down to Wilkinsons and buy yourself a Snuggie is causing the very fabric of society to tear at the seems.
Posted by Ben @ November 23rd, 2009 11:44 pm. Filed under: Abolish This!,Anything I Want Should Be Free,Sorry, What Was I Talking About?,spelin an grammer — Tags: Paul booth —
by Paul boothwhen analogue is turned off make it free for everyone to watch tv either through Sky,Virgin,Freeview Box,Tv with freeview included and a computer.Because people already pay enough subscriptions any how.
So it’s not just the TV license you want gone, you basically want to be able to watch everything, forever, for free.
Fuck off, Paul.
Posted by Ben @ November 9th, 2009 8:52 pm. Filed under: Abolish This!,I'm Keeping The Whole Class Back — Tags: Michelle Amos —
by Michelle AmosThis petition is from parents/carers/friends of children who would like to see an end to SATS testing on primary school children.
Are you sure it’s from parents, carers and friends of children? Because I think it’s a petition from children who don’t like exams.