Will you forbid alcohol, tobacco or any dangerous activity because of the potential costs on the NHS ? Will you stop people from giving birth to children who will be handicaped?

You assume a definite link between smoking and lung cancer, or alcohol with cirrhosis. Who’s onus will it be to prove that one has neither smoked nor drunk?

What is a healthy life?

If you do not let people the choice of health cover, you are not much better than a good old fashioned socialist.

Which you confirm by wanting to punish banks if they lend money! How can you ever say that it is reckless? Will you force every borrower to be vetted by some government agency to make sure they know what they are doing? Has any bank ever forced someone at gunpoint? What about the personal responsibility you are talking about?

Isn’t it a contradiction that you talk about education, and yet you think that you should decide for people what they can borrow?!

It also sounds a bit too fashionable a statement, since banks as we know are eeeevil at the moment (they weren’t so much when the going was easy, funnily enough). Why only banks? How about fast food joints? After all, following your logic, they are selling junk foods, which is bad. Where do you stop?

What have you got against faith schools? Or is it a choice that parents will not be able to make for their children? Have you even been to one?

These are just a few thoughts.

It seems to me that having the tories would just switch a bunch of authoritarian showers for another bunch. It does not please me very much.

I must admit that I am very negative about the whole EU project, which is the main reason I have disassociated myself with the Liberal Democrats. Though I do agree with their domestic agenda, and certainly am not a Conservative or a ‘kipper, so I’m of no political abode.

I was always that way, I tried being pro-EU but you lot reminded me that my heart wasn’t, and shouldn’t have been, in it. But I’ll not be joining y’on the Tory benches.

Because this country has so many things that Europe needs, it shouldn’t be too hard to negotiate a trading relationship. They are statesmen, not toddlers, and will make a policy that suits their electorates, as we should be doing. Accordingly the good things about Europe such as exchange of students etc. can be kept without the bad things of the EU.

I know the excellent Global Vision think-tank have been looking into this area, and anyone who shares my stance should read their publications:

http://www.global-vision.net/

And we’d notice the difference how, exactly…?

“If we have a law that prevents the press from investigating wrongdoing among public figures then it is carte blanche for the entire House of Lords to spend the rest of the year gorging on swan while taking it in turns to do man love on the Woolsack”

Any thoughts?!

Lola, I freely admit that my principles make it almost impossible for me to agree with full EU membership. I’d prefer a purely trading relationship because the social, political and financial baggage from the EU has become intolerable.

Mo, thanks for the feedback as you made some good points. I might change some of the wording, but I don’t believe in giving people ’second chances’ when it comes to something like obesity because it will mean a lot more taxpayers’ cash being lost unless the obese individual takes full responsibility for their situation.

First of all, with regard to terrorism – There is no point in opening communication channels to terrorists if they do have a goal that hinders an aspect of the lives of people living in an established order. Al Qaeda for example is not demanding anything and their sole objective is to cause destroy Western values, institutions and people.

While I agree the Welfare State should only help those that need it – but that doesn’t mean those only with long term illness/injuries. It should be an available base of support for those that need it in the short term e.g. when looking for a new job.

Lastly in regard to your 10th point – While I agree that those taking care of their bodies/health should be given priority – this doesn’t mean ruling out everyone who drinks excessively or eats too much. I am a believer in second even third chances if the chance can be afforded to be given.

Except for these disagreements – Spot on!