Area for all other political discussion
:sunglasses: 53.3 % :thumbsup: 13.3 % :grinning: 6.7 % 😟 20 % :cry: 6.7 %
By KevS
Membership Days Posts
Here's a thought. If these fundamentalist nutters who have hijacked this case are of the belief that God is infallible, then surely it was His intention that this poor kid would fall ill and possibly pass away.

So, if the doctors at Alder Hey wanted to let nature take its course, by objecting to this, surely they're going against the Will of God?
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
Libertarian philosopher Gerard Batten wants executive powers to veto medical decisions

UKIP’s new leader Gerard Batten has spoken out against the British state and has said the sick tot should have ‘a right to life.’

Batten said: “Alfie Evans should have a right to life, not a duty to die at the behest of the state.

Batten said that the state had no right to tell parents, ‘You will not get your kid back even for alternative health care until we are sure he is dead.’

He called on Politicians to speak out on the case adding that the court judgement was ‘a gateway to totalitarianism.’

“We are talking about the right to life of a young child, and the right of his parent to protect him from a healthcare and legal system gone astray.” said Batten

“Quite outrageously, our healthcare and legal systems are now preventing freely giving care to a living child. ... ms-courts/
By bluebellnutter
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
So when do the hospital stop trying to save him? Artificially you can probably keep anyone alive for a fairly long time as long as they aren't brain dead, how long does Gerard want to keep the child alive artificially? 5 years? 10? 50? 100? And why is the cost of this justified, what about the "right to life" of others who may be denied treatment to fund keeping Alfie Evans alive? Do they count less? Or is he advocating for a massive tax hike?
By cycloon
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
We are in the middle of that 'American Crime Story' series about the trial of O J Simpson. The story it tells is how some of OJ's lawyers decide, with maximum cynicism, to use Simpson's blackness as the core of the case, embedding his case in the broader story of institutional racism and injustice. Some of his layers believe that is what happened, but others do not. The cynicism is absolutely enthrallingly terrible, and the mendacity on the part of the political voices in this case remind me of it.

Take a terrible situation, in which deeply-founded, genuine human emotion is running freely because of a terrible injustice (natural, in Alfie Evans's case), and use it for utterly cynical, calculated, offensively self-interested purposes.
  • 1
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 70
On the Radio

Listening to The Reunion (partly) on Radio 4 w[…]

Boris Johnson

Now then.[…]

Labour, Generally.

On a similar note I've seen many comments to the e[…]

The Northern Irish thread

Well, one bus company in Ballymena would appear to[…]