UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by David13 »

Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 9:33 am
David13 wrote: December 30th, 2017, 8:45 am
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 2:48 am
David13 wrote: December 28th, 2017, 8:42 am
About social security.....

... I would vote to abolish it ...
Dc, please don't call me a liar, it makes you look bad.
Don't tell lies about what I said. If you hadn't, I wouldn't.
dc
Dc, anyone following this thread (and I don't think many are) can clearly see that I didn't lie and you falsely accused me of doing so. It's there in black and white, and you can wriggle and squirm all you like but the truth is I didn't lie and you know it.
As we are brothers in the gospel, that appears to make you "an accuser of the brethren".
Be careful of the company you keep.
Robin Hood
Let me put it another way. A simpler way.

What other jots and tittles have you got?

Are jots and tittles different than trolling?
dc

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Robin Hood »

Dc, You said you would vote to abolish social security. Then you said you never claimed you wanted social security abolished.
So I didn't lie and you jolly well know it!
Case concluded.

User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by David13 »

Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 1:00 pm Dc, You said you would vote to abolish social security. Then you said you never claimed you wanted social security abolished.
So I didn't lie and you jolly well know it!
Case concluded.
Robin Hood
Please stop telling lies like that about what I said.

It was Gclayjr who said that.

I said that would be fine with me IF they gave me back what I had contributed for the last 50 plus years.

Otherwise I'm against it.

You just can't read English, can you.
dc

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Robin Hood »

David13 wrote: December 28th, 2017, 8:42 am I do want to add a few word to what gclayjr posted.
About social security. I suppose George, like me, worked and paid into that system part of their wages or salary. I paid in more than 50 years. And they won't give me only part of my money back, a little at a time. Because they already gave my money to someone else, in most cases someone who paid nothing into the system.

So I would vote to abolish it ... IF they would give my money back. Which of course they would never do. Take my money for 50 years, actually more than 50 years, and I'm still paying into it, give my money to someone else, then cut me off with nothing? Not a good idea at all.

As to medicare, I also have that but I pay for it. I pay a lot of money every month for it, whether I use it or not. If I use it, I pay more.
And again, for more than 50 years I paid into that system for this .... care?
dc

The basis is, nothing is free. It's just someone else who pays. Or someone else who pays ... for you!
First line of the second paragraph.
That's twice you've accused me of lying when I wasn't.
I think an apology is in order dc.

I won't hold my breath though, I don't think you have it in you.
So I'll forgive you anyway.

P.S. Happy New Year dc. :)

User avatar
Silver Pie
seeker after Christ
Posts: 8989
Location: In the state that doesn't exist

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Silver Pie »

gclayjr wrote: December 28th, 2017, 7:46 am Silver Pie,
I think I would trust what Robin Hood says about seeing Russia and Germany and that they were not much different than the "free" countries. I have often wondered if we were being brainwashed into thinking we were "free" and that there really was no difference between the average USSR citizen and the average US citizen. Just because we think we are free doesn't mean we are.
Read my discussion earlier in this thread, about my working in the Czech Republic. There is a great difference, and it is obvious if you get a chance to see it.
Since you have worked there, and since you are from the same country I am (meaning only that we would share the same paradigms when it comes to what freedom is, whereas England, as you pointed out, has a somewhat different paradigm of that), I view you as a credible witness. Thank you.

User avatar
Silver Pie
seeker after Christ
Posts: 8989
Location: In the state that doesn't exist

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Silver Pie »

Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 9:33 am
David13 wrote: December 30th, 2017, 8:45 am
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 2:48 am Dc, please don't call me a liar, it makes you look bad.
Don't tell lies about what I said. If you hadn't, I wouldn't.
dc
Dc, anyone following this thread (and I don't think many are) can clearly see that I didn't lie and you falsely accused me of doing so. It's there in black and white, and you can wriggle and squirm all you like but the truth is I didn't lie and you know it.
As we are brothers in the gospel, that appears to make you "an accuser of the brethren".
Be careful of the company you keep.
I think the problem is that Robin Hood said "could not" and DC read "would not". If someone cannot save, they cannot (there is no ability). If they will not save, that presupposes that they could if they wanted to do so.

User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by David13 »

Silver Pie wrote: January 16th, 2018, 5:28 pm
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 9:33 am
David13 wrote: December 30th, 2017, 8:45 am
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 2:48 am Dc, please don't call me a liar, it makes you look bad.
Don't tell lies about what I said. If you hadn't, I wouldn't.
dc
Dc, anyone following this thread (and I don't think many are) can clearly see that I didn't lie and you falsely accused me of doing so. It's there in black and white, and you can wriggle and squirm all you like but the truth is I didn't lie and you know it.
As we are brothers in the gospel, that appears to make you "an accuser of the brethren".
Be careful of the company you keep.
I think the problem is that Robin Hood said "could not" and DC read "would not". If someone cannot save, they cannot (there is no ability). If they will not save, that presupposes that they could if they wanted to do so.
Sigh.
Isn't that a distinction without a difference?
If I have nothing to save because I spend all my money on booze, doesn't that mean I cannot save? It certainly means I don't save, doesn't it?
If I have a very very very limited income, couldn't I save $2, somehow?

Isn't it just splitting hairs?
dc

User avatar
harakim
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2819
Location: Salt Lake Megalopolis

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by harakim »

Robin Hood wrote: As for your freedoms, what other nation on earth requires soon to be married couples to have a blood test?
A blood test is not required. I think maybe the ignorance pendulum swings both ways.
gclayjr wrote: December 19th, 2017, 11:41 am Robin Hood,
For instance I can choose the medical care for my little boy, and our Government (or the Crown if you want be nit picky), cannot deny me the opportunity seek out my own doctor and medicine to try and heal him , not use the full force of the government (excuse me the crown) to demand rthat I starve and kill him.
Actually, that is not true. You can choose or refuse any treatment you want as an adult. However, the doctors have the right to do whatever they want to your kids if they claim it's a medical necessity. Look it up. I have talked to a lawyer and researched this very topic in the last two months.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Robin Hood »

Silver Pie wrote: January 16th, 2018, 5:28 pm
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 9:33 am
David13 wrote: December 30th, 2017, 8:45 am
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 2:48 am Dc, please don't call me a liar, it makes you look bad.
Don't tell lies about what I said. If you hadn't, I wouldn't.
dc
Dc, anyone following this thread (and I don't think many are) can clearly see that I didn't lie and you falsely accused me of doing so. It's there in black and white, and you can wriggle and squirm all you like but the truth is I didn't lie and you know it.
As we are brothers in the gospel, that appears to make you "an accuser of the brethren".
Be careful of the company you keep.
I think the problem is that Robin Hood said "could not" and DC read "would not". If someone cannot save, they cannot (there is no ability). If they will not save, that presupposes that they could if they wanted to do so.
Thank you Silver Pie.
I have an autistic daughter.
She is 26 years old and cannot work. She is incapable of earning a living.
Therefore, she "could not" save anything. She depends completely upon us for all of her needs.
It is this kind of situation to which I was referring, and I think dc knew that (because it is what I said), but chose to ignore it in order to try to point score.

User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by David13 »

Robin Hood wrote: January 17th, 2018, 6:32 am
Silver Pie wrote: January 16th, 2018, 5:28 pm
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 9:33 am
David13 wrote: December 30th, 2017, 8:45 am

Don't tell lies about what I said. If you hadn't, I wouldn't.
dc
Dc, anyone following this thread (and I don't think many are) can clearly see that I didn't lie and you falsely accused me of doing so. It's there in black and white, and you can wriggle and squirm all you like but the truth is I didn't lie and you know it.
As we are brothers in the gospel, that appears to make you "an accuser of the brethren".
Be careful of the company you keep.
I think the problem is that Robin Hood said "could not" and DC read "would not". If someone cannot save, they cannot (there is no ability). If they will not save, that presupposes that they could if they wanted to do so.
Thank you Silver Pie.
I have an autistic daughter.
She is 26 years old and cannot work. She is incapable of earning a living.
Therefore, she "could not" save anything. She depends completely upon us for all of her needs.
It is this kind of situation to which I was referring, and I think dc knew that (because it is what I said), but chose to ignore it in order to try to point score.

No, it was not obvious you had a personal slant to this issue. You had previously revealed no such thing that I recall.

But I'm glad you did now reveal this. I had no way to know this.

And I certainly would not want to debate with you whether it is morally appropriate for the government, or the family to support a 26 year old daughter who cannot earn a living.
dc

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Robin Hood »

David13 wrote: January 17th, 2018, 9:05 am
Robin Hood wrote: January 17th, 2018, 6:32 am
Silver Pie wrote: January 16th, 2018, 5:28 pm
Robin Hood wrote: December 30th, 2017, 9:33 am

Dc, anyone following this thread (and I don't think many are) can clearly see that I didn't lie and you falsely accused me of doing so. It's there in black and white, and you can wriggle and squirm all you like but the truth is I didn't lie and you know it.
As we are brothers in the gospel, that appears to make you "an accuser of the brethren".
Be careful of the company you keep.
I think the problem is that Robin Hood said "could not" and DC read "would not". If someone cannot save, they cannot (there is no ability). If they will not save, that presupposes that they could if they wanted to do so.
Thank you Silver Pie.
I have an autistic daughter.
She is 26 years old and cannot work. She is incapable of earning a living.
Therefore, she "could not" save anything. She depends completely upon us for all of her needs.
It is this kind of situation to which I was referring, and I think dc knew that (because it is what I said), but chose to ignore it in order to try to point score.

No, it was not obvious you had a personal slant to this issue. You had previously revealed no such thing that I recall.

But I'm glad you did now reveal this. I had no way to know this.

And I certainly would not want to debate with you whether it is morally appropriate for the government, or the family to support a 26 year old daughter who cannot earn a living.
dc
Well, as I said previously, and as Silver Pie so rightly pointed out, that is what I said.
With regard to my daughter, my wife and I support her. But there will come a day when we will be gone and that is when I expect the state to support her by providing her basic needs. I believe that is what civilized societies do. The strength of a nation can be measured by the way it treats it's weakest citizens.

Anyway, never mind. We're probably never going to agree on this.

Benjamin_LK
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2502
Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Benjamin_LK »

Fiannan wrote: December 16th, 2017, 12:50 pm
Nanette Newman, an actress who appeared in 1980s Fairy Liquid commercials, told the Daily Mail the ban is “ridiculously over the top”.

“What a bizarre world we live in where the adverts I starred in might today be considered harmful, yet it’s considered perfectly acceptable for women to be shown on mainstream TV having sex,” she told the Mail.

While campaigns to change the view of society presented in advertisements is intended to increase equality, it may be having the effect of skewing representations in a different way. Breitbart London reported in August a major survey of major advertising companies in Britain which found that businesses are over-representing ethnic minorities and homosexual in their marketing in order to ward off accusations of bigotry.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/12 ... ar-gender/

Maybe the wrong side won the Cold War after all. At least the Soviets depicted women as mothers.

Image
Interestingly enough they also ended up with a large proportion of their workforce being women as well as the first woman in space being Soviet.

User avatar
Silver Pie
seeker after Christ
Posts: 8989
Location: In the state that doesn't exist

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Silver Pie »

David13 wrote: January 16th, 2018, 6:04 pm Sigh.
Isn't that a distinction without a difference?
If I have nothing to save because I spend all my money on booze, doesn't that mean I cannot save? It certainly means I don't save, doesn't it?
If I have a very very very limited income, couldn't I save $2, somehow?

Isn't it just splitting hairs?
dc
It seems it depends on the perspective of the person who read Robin Hood's post. You, with your life's experience, thought of those who could not because they wasted the money (which means they could have if they had chosen differently).

Me, with my life's experience supposed that those who could not would be those who honestly could not, no matter how much they scrimped and saved and starved to do so. Because "could not" implies an inability (there is no choice) and "would not" implies there is a choice. I know because I have been in financial situations many times where I could not buy enough food to keep myself healthy. There was no unwillingness involved. Rent and utilities had to come first. Now, you could argue that I could have chosen to have my electricity turned off or chosen to be homeless so that I could eat, and I concede that point. If we are going in that direction, perhaps Robin Hood's people could have done so, as long as they starved to death or went homeless.

User avatar
Silver Pie
seeker after Christ
Posts: 8989
Location: In the state that doesn't exist

Re: UK to ban depictions of traditional mothers in ads.

Post by Silver Pie »

Robin Hood wrote: January 17th, 2018, 6:32 am Thank you Silver Pie.
I have an autistic daughter.
She is 26 years old and cannot work. She is incapable of earning a living.
Therefore, she "could not" save anything. She depends completely upon us for all of her needs.
It is this kind of situation to which I was referring, and I think dc knew that (because it is what I said), but chose to ignore it in order to try to point score.
In that case, my comment above (to DC) is moot as your daughter couldn't earn even enough for rent or utilities. It is absolutely true that there are those who cannot, not even by any stretch of the imagination. And I think you did point out earlier those who absolutely could not work for money.

Post Reply