Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This is my first input on this thread. Why do people think it is so unreasonable for people to want to be in an area without kids?


I hope to be a parent in the not too distant future, and when that day comes I'm sure I will be loking for a place where I can take mini Keef and have a pint. However, I will also be hoping that there are places I can get away from the sound of kids on the odd occasion I get a break.


I do think no children areas is an idea which just wouldn't work. However, I can't stand the view that someone who wants to keep a few child free places for grown ups to have a beer in peace, is a child hating git.

This is such a ridiculously over repeated and unneccessarily fractious thread topic.


In short it's like telly. If you don't like reality tv, don't watch it when it's on. If you're strangely in the mood for repeats of Dempsey and Makepeace then slap on a bit of uk gold for half an hour.


We all know what places and what times are prone to lots of bugaboos, and which ones aren't. Something for everyone in this fair townlet and environs of ours.

mightyroar Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ah Ganapati, the quiet voice of reason. as ever. I

> agree with you entirely.

>

> But Clairese22, Dom- perhaps we need a national

> curfew? After the breeding licence has been

> approved, and the children are born, then they

> are micro chipped at birth, and if caught out in a

> public space after 8pm then their parents are

> publicly whipped?


Reasonable and moderate policies in my view and already on the Manifesto of my newly-formed King Herod Childcare Foundation (motto: Infanticide - A Cure For The World's Ills) .............JUST JOKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Depends on your definition of idiot.  I use the term to describe someone of low intellectual capacity.  But understand that this is now not used as seen to be offensive. In that respect he makes decisions that are good for him, and his close followers.  Whether they are in the interests of the US that is open to debate (in the same way that history will debate all major leaders eg was Thatcher/Reagan good for the UK/US). On line definitions: An idiot is most commonly a term for a stupid, foolish, or senseless person, often used as an insult or to express frustration with someone's silly behavior, but historically it was a clinical term for profound intellectual disability, which is now considered offensive and obsolete. The word comes from Greek roots meaning a "private person" or layman, evolving to signify ignorance and lack of skill before becoming a derogatory label for low mental capacity.  Modern Usage Self-deprecation: Used to describe one's own silly mistakes ("I felt like an idiot when I tripped").  Insult/Exclamation: A very foolish person or someone acting stupidly ("Don't be such an idiot!").  Historical/Obsolete Meaning Medical Classification: Once a technical term for someone with extreme intellectual disability (IQ below 25), a usage now rejected as offensive.  Origin Greek (idiōtēs😞 A private citizen, layman, or someone lacking professional knowledge. Latin (idiota😞 An uneducated or ignorant person.  The notable recent  'idiot' was Johnson who of course played the fool (lovable rogue) but that served him well So ultimately not a good word as it can be used in many ways. Ignorant is another good example - can be stupid, unaware, or simply rude.
    • Are you still needing this?
    • I couldn’t disagree more - Trump is an idiot and he was voted for by a combination of idiots, racists and arrogance  you can complain about weak opponents all you like - but when the alternative is a “strong” thug then the problem is those who favour the thug.  All we face was predicted  - and he doesn’t have widespread support across many parts of America. So that leaves parts of America responsible for this  oh and in the list of things you call him you forgot the bit about being a p(that’s enough! Ed)  Vance might be worse in many ways - but he doesn’t have the “glam” that Trump has. Once Trump is exposed properly or dies, nowhere near as many people will vote for his successor see also his embarrassing fanboy: Farage 
    • At least he is no doubt classified as a "useful idiot" by the Russians
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...