Modern Life Is Rubbish

[Mister M]

24 minutes ago, RJRB said:

You have repeated this ridiculous claim so often that you must believe it to be true.

You also obviously have no confidence in medical experts.

So if faced with a personal medical condition where treatment may or may not be successful would you reduce the options to a simple 50/50 bet,when in fact the true odds may be anything from odds on to a remote possibility.

That makes no sense at all to me.

Lol... I wonder if Checkov argues with his G.P

[hackey lad]

1 hour ago, Mister M said:

Lol... I wonder if Checkov argues with his G.P

Think he  argues with himself .

[Beechwood_S6]

6 hours ago, hackey lad said:

Think he  argues with himself .

Not with all those imaginary collaborators  hanging around in his head to backup his misconceptions.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, Chekhov said:

Yeah, good idea, let's play pass the soddin' parcel, I'm sure that's just as good as a family unit living together. 

No, it's very much a "sub optimal" alternative.

Yet again, that wasn't my argument; yet again, you're suggesting I've said something that I haven't in order to fit your own beliefs. 

 

Of course living as a family is better, if the environment that the family lives in has not become poisonous for the child due to the irretrievable breakdown of the parental relationship. 

 

10 hours ago, Chekhov said:

To some extent you have an excuse for your outlandish ideas because, er, you do not have kids.

Which, again, as I've said above, has precisely nothing to do with my understanding of how an irretrievably toxic parental relationship can affect a child.

 

10 hours ago, Chekhov said:

Let me tell you something, short of unfaithfulness (nobody should have to live with a lying unfaithful sod*) nothing would make me move out of the house my beautiful boy lives in. Nothing. I cannot understand any parent having an affair, I can only assume they do not love their kid(s) as much as I love mine.

Good for you. I don't care.  I'm not arguing from the perspective of the adult's feelings (which seems to be all-important for you, unsurprisingly); I'm concerned with the effect on the child.  The reason why the parental relationship has irretrievably broken is utterly irrelevant; the starting point for this discussion was that it has broken down irretrievably.

 

10 hours ago, Chekhov said:

* though I notice you have pointedly not even agreed that parents (in particular) should not be "playing away".

As I said above and restated here, that's a bizarre tangent that has no relevance to a discussion that's about a relationship that's already broken and its effect on the child.  Do stop trying to swerve away from the point.  No one cares what you think about affairs.

 

10 hours ago, Chekhov said:

You do not know what you are talking about because you don't agree with me, and you are more bothered about  some arcane theoretical political / societal point than children

Fixed that for you.

 

I've mentioned nothing that's political let alone arcane; you're the one that brought political positions into it.  The subject is inherently 'societal' because it's about family relationships.

 

My point, as I've said repeatedly, is the effect on the child of a toxic family environment due to the irretrievable breakdown of the parental relationship.  You,  however, have mentioned how leaving the family home would affect you.

 

10 hours ago, Chekhov said:

but at least you are consistent because you have stated before that you have zero empathy for them before they are born.

I haven't said that, and once again you're attempting to set up yet another strawman.  Do try to focus.

 

So, what shall we take from this?  Mainly confirmation that Chekhov consistently fails to read or fails to understand (wilfully or otherwise) the posts he's replying to; that he consequently misrepresents (wilfully or otherwise) what others have written; that he additionally claims that others have posted statements that they haven't made from positions that he imagines they take according to his own beliefs and the positions he'd like to argue against; and that when he's unable to respond to a post he swerves away from the subject to introduce an irrelevant tangent that has little or no bearing on the subject under discussion.  Nice job.

Edited August 7, 2023 by Guest

[Chekhov]

1 hour ago, Hecate said:

Of course living as a family is better, if the environment that the family lives in has not become poisonous for the child due to the irretrievable breakdown of the parental relationship. 

At last.

[Chekhov]

 

1 hour ago, Hecate said:

>>Chekhov said:
but at least you are consistent because you have stated before that you have zero empathy for them [kids] before they are born.<<

 

I haven't said that, and once again you're attempting to set up yet another strawman.  Do try to focus.

Not quite.

This post is one of yours from "Freedom of speech to be banned near abortion clinics" :

 

>>The_Daddy said : 

The right to free speech vs peoples feelings?

Banning free speech anywhere seems like a slippery slope to me.<<

 

You replied :

Yup.  On the one hand: freedom to make a dick of yourself screaming at women on their way into a clinic.  On the other: minding your own damn business and letting women go unharassed when they're getting access to their healthcare.  It's a toughy.

 

It's just the woman's "healthcare" is it ?

So, you are more bothered about the "feelings" of the woman terminating her child than you are about the life of that child.

Edited August 7, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

1 hour ago, Hecate said:

>>Chekhov said:
Let me tell you something, short of unfaithfulness (nobody should have to live with a lying unfaithful sod*) nothing would make me move out of the house my beautiful boy lives in. Nothing. I cannot understand any parent having an affair, I can only assume they do not love their kid(s) as much as I love mine.<<

 

Good for you. I don't care.  I'm not arguing from the perspective of the adult's feelings (which seems to be all-important for you, unsurprisingly); I'm concerned with the effect on the child.  The reason why the parental relationship has irretrievably broken is utterly irrelevant; the starting point for this discussion was that it has broken down irretrievably.

At least you're being consistent.

 

 >>I'm concerned with the effect on the child<<

 

Really ? Are you sure ?

If you were "concerned with the effect on the child" you would clearly state that parents should not be "messing around"  as that greatly increases the chances of said parents arguing and splitting up, both of which seriously affect the children.

More than once I have asked you if such "messing around" is wrong for parents of kids in particular, but you have studiously avoided answering the question.

 

10 hours ago, Tyke02 said:

I thought your point was that people who don't have experience of a subject (parenthood) shouldn't express an opinion. 

I suspect if Hecate ever had kids her opinions may alter, both on this subject, and she may even mellow a bit on abortion.

That's what I meant.

Edited August 7, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

10 hours ago, Tyke02 said:

Your shopping list of grievances with "experts" has been answered many times, and a change of subject seems to be your "go to" response  when faced with rebuttal.

"grievances" that's an odd way of putting it. I would say my list of their more infamous errors, but no it hasn't.

Those "experts" were wrong more than they were right, that's just a fact.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

At last.

I have not argued that a healthy single parent family is inherently better than a healthy two parent family.

[Chekhov]

10 hours ago, RJRB said:

You have repeated this ridiculous claim so often that you must believe it to be true.

You also obviously have no confidence in medical experts.

So if faced with a personal medical condition where treatment may or may not be successful would you reduce the options to a simple 50/50 bet, when in fact the true odds may be anything from odds on to a remote possibility.

That makes no sense at all to me.

>>You also obviously have no confidence in medical experts.<<

 

I have never said that at all.

I have no confidence in over cautious "virologists" * engaged in their giant experiment. In particular I have never had any confidence in their "computer models", and I was right :

 

(2 March 22) Covid modelling cannot accurately predict numbers, admits government expert
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...accurately-predict-numbers-admits-government/

 

(18 Dec 21) SAGE told to only model the most pessimistic scenarios
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/my-twitter-conversation-with-the-chairman-of-the-sage-covid-modelling-committee/
 

 

* That's most not all, because not all of them were making these scary predictions and recommending draconian suppression of society.