Moos

*giggles inanely * Ooh, you are a one. I would do, but I ran out of teabags this morning and can't afford any more, as I was over-charged yesterday at Somerfield. Have you seen my kids? They're fab. *goes back to clearing up*

Not that it really matters, but isn't it called the drawing room because it's where you withdraw to? In other words, the men are left in the dining room, but the women withdraw to the drawing room, ergo the drawing room is by definition a female place for discussion. Although apparently all we're capable of is giggling and complaining about being overcharged at Somerfield or something. I'm sure there was a feminist message hidden in there somewhere, I'll keep looking.

Oops, crossed posted with your last, Quids, sorry.

I saw it too, it was puerile, homophobic and totally beyond the pale. Quids, you've seen a whole raft of points of view expressed on the forum before, do you really think a message would be removed for saying you should take the money from a cashpoint? If so, how come all the previous posts remained?

Yea for me too. The 'slippery slope' argument can be countered with well-thought-out laws and parameters. Just because in a completely unregulated situation abuse could occur doesn't mean that we shouldn't make an attempt to create a well-regulated set of laws that allows assisted suicide under certain circumstances. For instance, if someone is diagnosed with a terminal disease I see no reason why they should not choose (if they wish) to end their life earlier than the disease chooses, with dignity and without suffering. I'm not saying that those are the only circumstances under which I personally would agree with assisted suicide, but it seems to me a clear-cut example.

KalamityKel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Shall I patiently await feedback or consider my > thread yet another pointless attempt at > communicating with "God"? ;-) Did you have your obnoxious head on yesterday? Or are you not aware that "God" is a human being with a private life and an entitlement to have a, you know, weekend? Perhaps you think that you are paying "God" some stupendous sum to spend his weekends answering your not-exactly-life-threatening questions, rather than using a free service which is provided in his spare time? And no, the winky winky doesn't make it OK.

"Give me any guitar and I'll make it sound like me." - how interesting. To what degree is the musician defined or even constrained by the quality (or qualities) of his instrument?

Molly, I know what you mean about posting in haste, I've done it before many times! I do agree the changes in the role of women (and the corresponding changes for men too) have brought downsides as well as upsides, it is inevitable that change brings turbulence and disadvantage for some which one hopes is outweighed by advantages for many. I just don't believe that 'the numbers' point to working women being responsible for inflation in house prices, and unemployment. If you can prove me wrong, then I would be genuinely interested to hear it. To me, being able to work and be a mother feels more like a huge privilege than a chore, though chore it sometimes is too. I know lots of women who would love to be able to work and earn outside the home, and lots of other women who would love to be mothers. I also appreciate that this is the privilege of the professional woman, and that a woman who works several horrible jobs to bring home enough money just to feed her kids is not at all in the same position. But I truly feel that when you can find balance, usually with the help of a partner, then it really is a great position to be in. Aaanyway. Better get back to what I'm actually being paid to do, ahem.

The Nappy Lady Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As many of you know I am really not a career > woman, and I do appreciate that how I feel isn't > the case for all women.. You're darned right it isn't. Were you really suggesting that with women not working not so many men would be unemployed? That kind of comment from an intelligent woman makes me want to go back to bed and hide.

SeanMac - Brendan is doing my work for me, so I won't be bothering with that new thread. hee hee

Thanks again everyone. *applies ice pack to head*

I don't think we are both supposed to be the chair, ????. I think we just have the same odds. (still makes a change from being interchangeable with Annaj... or David Carnell.... )

Who says the chair is a chap?

Illusion never changed into something real - in other words, that's not a somersault. I may be dim, but I'm not that easily impressed.

Goodness me, I had no idea I was disagreeing with you - I just thought you had made a point that one could apply more widely. I agree that legality doesn't affect the argument at all - my point was simply that if you can easily afford to be ethical, then many people will pay more to do it but will not sacrifice the item altogether. Back more directly on topic, programmes that tackle poverty can surely be tools in helping people stay away from drugs without being politically unacceptable? After all, the 'Bunny' experiment wasn't about helping drug addicts but about helping neighbourhoods live without a drug problem..

Dear Ted is torn, he is hovering in the doorway. He longs to be invited in but fears his O'Level Latin might be too rusty.

Muley you cad, you. And on my birthday too, as if I weren't feeling elderly enough. Oh and BBW, thank you kindly - hope you don't mind that I deflected the kiss to land on my cheek (left upper, as Dud would say). Only one person is allowed to kiss the back of my neck, and you are not he.

Sean, I think you could argue that many people will do the guilty shrug for the things they aren't prepared to give up. If you have enough spare cash, it's no great sacrifice to give up battery eggs and intensively farmed meat. Likewise, if locally produced organic cocaine were available (sold in little hemp bags) then I'm sure the well-off consumer would tuck in and happily boast about it at dinner parties. The same applies to clothing. If there were a universally accepted kite-mark style grading system for high-street clothes and it were relatively easy to choose between Naughty Clothes and Good Clothes, then the pressure on large suppliers to get better grades would be tremendous. But asking the average consumer to buy all their clothes online from expensive and relatively unknown ethical brands is not going to happen. Sorry M. Chair - a little off topic there.

Thank you all for your kind wishes, everybody. xx

Denmark Hill to Battersea Park for the zoo. (lots of stairs at both ends of the short train journey)

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "The vertical expression of horizontal desire" > > Now who said that? I wanted to say Mae West, because it usually is, but looked it up and turns out it was GBS. The old dog.

There was a time when the waltz was considered fast and daring.

Anna, there was Doctor all over your post, it was most impressive.

annaj Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My personal opinion is that the organic food > industry should focus on the very valid > environmental, ethical and taste benefits rather > than make unproven health claims and argue with > scientific research ...and better treatment of animals than standard farming also, which is the reason I prefer to buy organic meat and eggs.

Bet they're missing that million quid these days.