Evening, Davij. Good response from you - a better reception than I received from SHallowvale, albeit with a little quotewar to kick us off
Euthanasia should be legal, but it should always be optional. It should never be down to the State to decide who is killed. However, this is a difficult position to argue when the NHS exists. Without the NHS, the existence of heavy smoking, binge drinking and eating disorders become a societal and personal issue rather than a political one. I find this a far healthier way to live as a nation as it encourages self improvement, or at the very least, discouraging self-destruction, for the sake of those who care about you having to pick up the pieces personally. I've tied up two points in one here.
On single mothers: this is why I suggest not legislating against any form of religious morality and practice. Marriage, divorce, etc. all fall in to the purview of the Church. Divorce laws have been incredibly lax since the 60s. Peter Hitchens once gave this analogy, which I warmed to: if you are in a ship that is heading towards a small iceberg and there are lifeboats surrounding your ship all the time, you jump at the first sign of difficulty. If those lifeboats are not there, you steer the ship around and keep it on track." The majority of the divorces you see are from women being "unhappy", usually with their sex life. I believe the statistics are along the lines of 65-70% of divorces are initiated by women for such a reason. The woman also gets 80% of the childcare. Now, when there is proven domestic abuse, the abuser should be prosecuted under the law, much less divorced by the victim.
There isn't really much anti-NHS propaganda that I can find. There is this article from
the Guardian in 2001, and that's about all. People need to be made aware of the effects is has on society and how people function because of it's existence, whilst also pointing out the economic factors and it's current crumbling state.
I would hang Tony Blair in Trafalgar Square, and it should be televised. Politicians need to face the full force of justice when they attempt to lie and manipulate a government and abuse their position as elected leader. It was released the other day in the
Daily Mail that Blair signed up to a war in Iraq before there was any conflict. This war crime, coupled with his multicultural and multiracial agenda, intentionally flooding the country with non-Whites should be considered treason to the fabric of our nation.
OK, OK, let me explain a little clearer, since both you and SHallowvale got a little muddled up. If either parent commits a crime against their child, it is still illegal and an offence by the law. What I am stating is that parents who do not do the recommended child raising techniques as recommended by the NHS or other official bodies, should not be penalised at all. These are personal choices. Otherwise, you could end up with a situation where it could become an offence to take your child to Church before they become an adult- because they must "choose" their religion rather than being "indoctrinated". This is liberalism at its conclusion, in my opinion. Likewise, if a parent decides not to give their children certain injections or maybe decides to punish them for misbehaving, they should not be penalised for acting as the child's guardian and in their future best interest. I understand it's a touchy subject, and I'm sure I may simply come from an exceptionally strong family than a lot, but it's a principle I think the weaker families would only adopt when forced. Hence, my following paragraph.
How do we make families care about each other? It's simple: they must rely on each other. The state should no longer coerce people in to giving morality-free cash monies to strangers they have no connection to or desire to give money to. Taxes will always exist, of course, but I'm talking about welfare (including NHS and education). Biologically, parents are predisposed to love and care for their children as we are a K-type reproductive species, which means low birth rate, high investment. However, we are living in an age of SHallowvales. An age of hedonists who care far more about their personal wellbeing and happiness before the people around them. In the past, and I'm talking Pagan times, it was recognised that we were simply advanced animals. We breed and reproduce to continue our genes and legacy, like all animals. It would bring great shame to a man or woman who allows their blood line to dry up at them after their bloodline has supposedly lasted thousands of years to this point. It's this kind of kinship society that yields the greatest social capital.
I agree, liberal capitalist sounds about right.