I also meant to add that another big change I'd like to see is to crack down on human trafficking - which is one of the silent crisis in Europe and the UK. It is causing huge problems in crime, slavery, the sex trade, forced sex/prostitution and in poverty and the associated problems this brings by allowing criminal gangs to promise the world to desperate people around the world, and then smuggled them into the country and into slavery, criminal gangs or the sex trade - or having them pay everything they own (including their passports) then leave them destitute as illegals on our streets. If we can crack down on these gangs, and reinforce out borders then I'm sure some of our social problems will reduce significantly.
Labour Leadership voting has closed. Apparently out of the 600k+ people who registered about 330k (around about, can't remember exact figure) voted - one of the London Mayor candidates said that only 1 in 5 of registered voters in London received a ballot, and there's a high number of left leaning and/or pro-Corbyn voters to be denied a vote. That 'lost' 250k/300k of voters could be the difference between one candidate winning or not. (though if it doesn't make a difference, then you have to say that the 'other 3' would be pretty bad at generating support).
It's not a matter of 'could' be the difference. Nobody's going to get as many votes as those that have gone missing. I dread to think of the ridiculous **** that's going to be printed if Corbyn does win, though. He'll be a cross between Stalin and a hippy, somehow.
I was trying to avoid the Godwin, but yeah! You have to remember though, just because they want to ban protests, censor the internet, sell everything off and remove human rights, it doesn't make them bad people. No, hang on, that's exactly what it means, isn't it?
Any thoughts on the right to die bill being heavily defeated? I suspect that a number of the MPs thought they'd be offered up for it if it passed.
Funny I was just about to post this now. Personally I think it's disgusting that it's been rejected. It's basically condemning people to torturous pain and suffering against their will as law. I haven't looked deeply into todays events as I've been in work, but BBC News 24 is on where I work and on the subtitles I saw it mentioned that 70% of the public support a bill such as this, while 70% of the MPs oppose it. That highlights the big disconnect there is between MPs and the public and some important issues.
Trouble is, this was a back bench bill. It is not something that can be introduced without very careful consideration. It needs the Govt to introduce the bill, with their resources behind it. I think most people would support it, but you have to ensure the criteria is very carefully set out in law. Can't risk having it misused by greedy, impatient relatives etc.
You could probably say the same about a number of things that I'd agree with the MPs on, though. Capital punishment is the most obvious example. That and the slippery slope seem to be the main non-theistic criticisms.
Honestly I'm torn. As a Muslim, I believe that everyone should die a natural death and that no-one has the right to take the life of someone else. The flip side to it is that if someone is genuinely going through such excruciating and horrific pain that it would be better to put them out of their misery, would that really be so morally bankrupt? Tricky one.
I'm in favour of people being able to choose if they want to die. But as pointed out the law has to be watertight and the instructions have to be very clear about who is making the decision. Many of my old colleagues were GPs and they are torn on the issue because of the logistical problems of when the decision is made to end a life. Often when somebody is so ill that their quality of life is deemed not worth living, they have lost capacity to make decisions for themeselves. The obvious answer seems to be to get people to sign consent when they are well, that should they become incapable, their wishes are carried out. The GP's difficulties with that is that often patients change their minds about treatment, so you can never be sure that it is still what they want. GP's sign the Hippocratic oath when they first go into practice, the oath states that they will uphold the sanctity of life and work to an ethical code that preserves life. I suppose a right to die bill could be woven into this oath, but many of the GPs I worked with were uneasy about this.
Doctors can already choose whether to turn of a patient's life support, overdose them or stop feeding them so that they starve to death. Even ignoring the pleas of family and loved ones in order to do so, so surely they can be trusted to sanctify and aid the demise of someone who actually wants to die. Can't they?
Personally, I think it's the best thing to happen to British politics in a long time. At least now there's a clear difference between the Tories and Labour
