Your initial comment was almost reasonable, I don't see why you decided to just jump into the crazy end of the pool. How about everybody does what they like and you don't judge other people for their life choices, you know, almost like how you advocated originally? Wouldn't that be much nicer?
DiallingWand
diallingwand
It's funny how the authors tend not to get involved in the comment threads when it's so blatantly obvious that they've made a mistake in writing the article.
How long is an appropriate amount of time to get over your husband running off with your daughter?
Fun facts: While David Cameron moralises on the insidious effects of porn on childhood and badgers internet tech companies about eliminating images of child abuse from the internet, he refuses to take action on the Sun's Page Three and recently cut 10% from the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre.
The UK doesn't have a written constitution like the US so it works a little differently. But generally yeah, our speech is more restricted than that of Americans. My comment wouldn't be considered to be an exhortation to violence against the Royal Family (I hope, and not just because the literal interpretation of my…
Actually that was Charles the second's idea. I think he was still a little miffed by that whole "beheading his dad" thing.
The king is not expected to advise the government, he's expected to sign the laws put in front of him, open hospitals and otherwise keep his mouth shut. He's an idiot. What is he going to tell politicians?
We'll still have the Tower of London and Buckingham Palace if we shift to becoming a proper republic. Not all of the tourist money will vanish.
As a British person, I find it infuriating and wish we'd beheaded them all centuries ago like the French.* People like the idea of tradition mostly, it's not an actual desire to be subservient. They don't even seem to realise that they are being. The monarchy is a persistently popular idea and a proper republican…
Depends whether or not they skip Charles. I'm hoping they don't because he'll be such a fuck up that they'll scrap the damn thing entirely.
I never said you were a bigot, I said you got the definition wrong. I don't know or care if you're a bigot.
It would actually be quite funny if this guy won. I'd love to see the transcripts in court when this law was challenged. I'm not sure it'd hold up given that you know, the Supreme court said it was unconstitutional all of 10 years ago.
Depends whether this also applies to any of the indentured labourers.
I'm trying to save the proper definition of "nauseous" by becoming nauseated every time I hear people say "I feel nauseous". Then they'll use it properly even if they didn't mean to.
Is "boy of colour" worse than "person of colour" or "woman of colour"? Because I see those all the time in the comments here and I thought it was ok.
Now playing
A much better voice for the voiceless:
Indeed. Thanks, I appreciate your thoughts.
Yeah, that was how I always imagined I'd feel if I was in your position.
Yeah, apparently it's pretty tough to recruit people now. They can't pay you either. I'd consider it (I am a guy) but having up to 10 people rock up at your house in 18 years and go "Hey biological dad!" would be a bit odd.