silverfox

cafe Nero?

crap? (dog variety)

Pint? Puff? Poseurs? Prostitutes? Pimps?

Trash outside the Bishop?

Tea &More?

Target Arms?

Tarts?

Tottie?

Lights at Foxtons that is

Yes, correct

I'll give you a clue - they can be seen from space at night and offend a number of people on this forum

uh uh

okay, again, I spy with my little eye something beginning with 'L'

Sorry Jah, it is your go. Bugaloo?

nope

No

I spy with my little eye something beginning with 'L'

Correct

I spy with my little eye something beginning with 'Q'

Was there a scratch on your negative Mick Mac or has Susanna got a problem with belly button fluff?

Don't care what her name is ... my blood pressure has just gone up a few degrees!

Emily Maitlis is lovely but I've noticed her ears are a bit too big. I've now switched my affections to the lovely Laura Tobin, the weather girl with the cheeky smile.

Dear Foxtons, I returned to East Dulwich tonight around midnight and as I travelled from Goose Green heading south up Lordship Lane I noticed your lights were off. I object most stongly to this and feel you are letting the area down by your penny pinching. The only lights that were on were the Payless 24-hour dodgy corner shop, Dulwich DIY ironmongers, the fast food southern chicken/ribs place near the bus stop and Londis. This is not what I moved to East Dulwich for. I didn't pay/borrow ?400,000 for a cowboy conversion of a three-bedroom flat to see a high street that has as much illumination as an impoverished midlands town full of Poundshops and charity shops occupying the premises of bankrupt ventures. When you arrived in East Dulwich with all your fanfare and bright lights I, and many others, righly thought the area was on the up. Furthermore, after a few beers on Lordship Lane, the responsible types like me who catch the bus home could always keep up with world affairs by watching Sky News or BBC News on your telly while waiting half-an-hour for the bus. Now I understand that there is another thread on this forum that is demanding you switch off your lights. I haven't bothered to read it because I suspect it is full of posts by pinko-liberals who probably imagine they're somehow saving the planet by reducing 'light pollution'. I also understand that by pretending to aquiesce to such naive demands you're actually saving a few bob on electricity. Nevertheless, we need your dynamic brashness to keep East Dulwich alive. Can you imagine Clapham, Islington, Camden or Crouch End being influenced by a few idiots? Turn the lights back on and be damned. Show East Dulwich you mean business and will not be held hostage by a few blow-ins from the sticks. Where would Las Vegas, Times Square, Piccadily Circus or even Blackpool's trams be without lights? If you need me to start a petition to keep your lights on don't hesitate to ask. Yours, Silverfox

Maybe I'm not explaining myself very well. I'm trying to say it's not just about relief from terminal illness or pain. Allow me to quote from the Matthew Parris article referred to above as he has a way with words. "People should be able to choose. Obviously. And if they choose the end but seek help with the means, they should be able to. Obviously. End of argument. ...I would expect myself to support legal reform without reservation, yet find I cannot. Not quite... It is of course outrageous that the friends, partners or even family doctors of suffering and terminally ill people seeking suicide should ever be successfully prosecuted for helping them in good faith. My reservation is this: an Assisted Suicide Act could be the beginning of a creep towards the state regulation of death. We who respect the individual?s right to die should retain a small but insistent libertarian doubt about the bringing of order to a corner of human behaviour where, at present, something closer to anarchy reigns. The road not to go down is Scotland?s. The Scottish Parliament is considering a Bill drafted by the MSP Margo MacDonald. This requires anyone considering an assisted suicide to sign a prescribed legal declaration while still mentally fit. If they later go ahead, their mental state will then have to be assessed first in a formal psychiatric examination to ensure that they are not simply depressed. There will inevitably be a requirement for official certification; and for those who might assist in the suicide to be themselves officially approved for the task. The Scottish mind seems to have a leaning towards dirigism and codification. This summer another Scot, Lord Falconer of Thoroton (the former Lord Chancellor) put down an amendment to an English measure, the Coroners and Criminal Justice Bill. It involved certification ?by two registered medical practitioners, independent of each other? that a patient was ?terminally ill and has the capacity to make a declaration? which was itself to be independently witnessed, the witnesses being neither close friends nor relations." My point is, assuming a law is enacted along these lines, it would not be long before amendments changed the requirement for terminal illness to be a necessary condition. Mental illness could be included, Alzheimer's disease for example and so on. We could sleep-walk our way into a brave new world of 'Soylent Green' euthanasia.

No, he's unusual*. However, the danger of this debate is quoting extreme examples of terminal illness to support the legalisation of assisted suicide. I can see how putting a loved one out of their misery can be an act of loving compassion. However, suicide is a selfish act and can affect those left behind. All sorts of complications can arise, families may be divided on the issue. The fact is suicide is not in itself illegal. Assisting suicide is. By legalising assisted suicide we will be crossing a boundary that may have far reaching consequences as to the value of life. (*Apologies it's Hawkin without the 'S', I should have checked)