its a straight refusal to answer a question

Entirely reasonable also. Some questions should not be asked and certainly not answered. I could ask you a few that you wouldn’t and shouldn’t answer. But I won’t, cos I’m also decent.

More good in her toenail than in a thousand Dawkins.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8t4VhQX5Ckk[/video]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4nCaxHN-cY[/video]

😆

Because of course the people most in need of counselling, and most prone to PTSD, are usually able to judge for themselves how traumatised they will be, and whether they might need emotional help and support afterwards.

Tell me Ninfan, how do you square your small state Toryism with this kind of state nannying?

Would you like to get forced counselling the next time you have an accident in your car, even if it’s a small bump. After all, you might be anxiety prone and thus unable to know whether you need help or not.

I suspect you don’t care for womens mental health – and only care about small state Toryism if it doesn’t interfere with your deeply held misogynistic/religious views.

Sorry then – I did try and find the original post.

You certainly wouldn’t have found the apology because there ain’t one – here is the thread

And the fact I picked up a post from a few years ago using the wonders of google which took ten minutes might have a little to do with the fact you have been banned for years.

Anyway the thread reminds me how much of a miss Ernie is, there are loads of cracking posts by him but this one is particularly good:

There’s a lot of truth in what you say Kenny Senior, but there is nothing particularly new concerning TJ’s hypocrisy and deeply insulting attitude towards people who have religious convictions. In that respect he isn’t much different to Woppit’s obsessive intolerance, other than Woppit is probably more honest and less insulting than TJ.

Last year I posted this :

“You judgemental arrogant ****.

I have worked with and known people with a whole range of religious beliefs ….. Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, more obscure Christian denominations, etc. I have found talking to them about their religion absolutely fascinating.

I wouldn’t dream of taking the piss out of them.

And you have to be some sort of idiot if you think you have the right to do so.”

In response to this comment by TJ :

“I find ALL religious views contemptible, ridiculous and offensive. If you express them you will find the piss taken from you.”

Yes he is prepared to mock ridicule and insult, people who ‘express religious views’, but he is deeply intolerant of those who mock ridicule and insult him.

at one point this was a May thread

outofbreath – Member

According to Stephen Fry most gay couples don’t do anal

I’d assume that about 50% of gay couples don’t have any penises so that seems reasonable

I certainly remember apologising – perhaps it was only off forum to someone who felt insulted by it. Esslegruntfuttock IIRC

Anyway – I have forgotten the lesson from my banning today which is – don’t get involved in long arguements on here

To be fair TJ, I find offended religious folk quite hilarious – considering their proneness to casual racism, gay bashing and misogyny. Some of the relgious posters on here have frequently displayed those very things….

“according to Stephen Fry most gay couples dont do anal*”

*yep marriage will do that

Tell me Ninfan, how do you square your small state Toryism with this kind of state nannying?

Something like 97% of women having an abortion in the UK are doing so at the cost of the state – if that isn’t the state/government meddling in things, then what is?

I’d assume that about 50% of gay couples don’t have any penises so that seems reasonable

Firstly, I’m pretty certain SF was talking about male gay people, and secondly according to a Bi ex, lack of penis makes no difference to levels of anal sex people partake in.

Anyway, I’m taking SHMBO to bed. This detailed inquiry into what kinds of sex are sins in the Liberal Party has worked me up into a frenzy. It’s roleplay night she’s being Len McCluskey and I’m John McDonnell.

I certainly remember apologising – perhaps it was only off forum to someone who felt insulted by it. Esslegruntfuttock IIRC

So do we have a new version of the Edinburgh defence to go with the new version of you – how spiffing.

Something like 97% of women having an abortion in the UK are doing so at the cost of the state – if that isn’t the state/government meddling in things, then what is?

You mean women have the choice to involve the state? Do you not see the difference between that and forced intervention by the state – or are things that black and white to you?

Old people cost the state a lot as well….

at least women pay more in NI than old people do. 😆

But great dodge of the question Ninfan – we’re seeing your true colours – you’re resentful of state resources being used on women.

BTW, how do you think the UK would cope with a massively exploding population if contraceptives and abortions weren’t provided by the state – eh? Would you like to see the UK like the Philippines because of some utterly obnoxious and backwards religious views?

Team of Trotskys?
Partnership of Poo Pants?
Coalition of Chaos?
Coalition of Chaos!

High 5s round the table at Tory HQ.

Coalition of Chaos?
Coalition of Chaos!

High 5s round the table at Tory HQ.

I would gone for “Mongolian Clusterf%ck” myself.

But great dodge of the question Ninfan – we’re seeing your true colours – you’re resentful of state resources being used on women.

Hang on, make your mind up, a minute ago I was advocating more state resources being allocated to women, now I’m against it?

BTW, how do you think the UK would cope with a massively exploding population if contraceptives and abortions weren’t provided by the state – eh?

Sounds good, less need for immigration innit 😉 however nobody is suggesting that, are they, so I’m calling straw man.

Hang on, make your mind up, a minute ago I was advocating more state resources being allocated to women, now I’m against it?

Except in this case, you’re advocating the removal of choice from women.

Again, perhaps you should be forced to enter counselling if you’re in a minor accident or entertain even the most mildy misogynistic view – I’m sure you would support that wouldn’t you ninfan?

Answer whether you would.

Sounds good, less need for immigration innit however nobody is suggesting that, are they, so I’m calling straw man.

So women are the cause of immigration woes in your universe then Ninfan? Nice. It’s all teh lefts and wimminz fault isn’t it?

What would solve that actually, is moving to an economy that doesn’t rely on unskilled labour for economic growth.

OMG – Tom and Ninfan in an arguement – this is not going to end well!

All these poor, emotional, undecided women obviously need help in the form of counselling….

The majority of women did not feel counselling was necessary because they were already certain of their decision.

most women do not seem to want or need pre-termination counselling therefore policies aimed at mandatory counselling, would be contrary to women’s wishes. Counselling should be targeted at women with risk factors for psychological complications post-termination.

http://jfprhc.bmj.com/content/41/3/181

LOL

Except in this case, you’re advocating the removal of choice from women.

I’m not advocating anything, your argument was that Tim Farron was advocating it, remember? IM just defending his right to advocate it if he wants to. Some might say you’re advocating the removal of life from healthy babies for no good reason, and question your morals, which they gave just as much a right to do as you to question theirs. Personally I’m not opposed in any way to abortion, but I think it’s right and proper that the taking of (arguably potential) life is heavily regulated

Again, perhaps you should be forced to enter counselling if you’re in a minor accident or entertain even the most mildy misogynistic view – I’m sure you would support that wouldn’t you ninfan?

AGain, you appear to be arguing that I’m advocating something, when the issue was that Tim Farron voted for it, it seems you’re unable to differentiate between someone having an opinion or belief, and someone else believing they are entitled to that belief just as much as you are entitled to yours, regardless of my own feelings on the issue – this confusion possibly explains your own inability to accept other people’s opinions as being just as valid as yours. Regardless, I’m sure there would be plentiful data on the efficacy of certain interventions in reducing the future likelihood and impact of Trauma, and cost benefit analysis of such – not an area I have any knowledge of, but certainly the type of thing that I can see an MP voting on an issue after taking advice on, and without knowing what data is available for the wide variety of traumatic episodes that people undertake, impossible for me to castigate him on… and I’m betting you don’t know either.

Edit:

would be contrary to women’s wishes

Ah, no analysis of efficacy or the incidence of trauma inside and outside counselling groups versus control, just not what they want, not much data there really is there?

Would that be a bad thing? I know a couple of ladies who have discussed having an abortion and both found the whole thing a pretty traumatic experience.

You were indirectlys advocating it.

Regardless, I’m sure there would be plentiful data on the efficacy of certain interventions in reducing the future likelihood and impact of Trauma, and cost benefit analysis of such – not an area I have any knowledge of, but certainly the type of thing that I can see an MP voting on an issue after taking advice on, and without knowing what data is available for the wide variety of traumatic episodes that people undertake, impossible for me to castigate him on… and I’m betting you don’t know either.

I just posted the data.

Personally I’m not opposed in any way to abortion, but I think it’s right and proper that the taking of (arguably potential) life is heavily regulated

Better get the government in on masturbating then.

As above, that contains no data on efficacy – just on satisfaction

indirectlys advocating it.

Ah, indirectly… right… keep digging.

As above, that contains no data on efficacy – just on satisfaction

Most psychological trials are self reporting – efficacy would only exist for an actual trial of an intervention – and efficiacy of an intervention doesn’t prove need of it’s compulsory use.

Ah, no analysis of efficacy or the incidence of trauma inside and outside counselling groups versus control, just not what they want, not much data there really is there?

Again, those same women who report not needing counselling would also be unlikely to self report trauma. There’s no hard scientific way of judging whether someone has suffered trauma – unless they’re having PTSD style flashbacks in front of your eyes.

Dumbass

Or, just resort to insults when your argument isn’t going too well.

Most psychological trials are self reporting.

And Cochrane reviews tend to place greater weight on studies with more than eighteen respondents, Dumbass 😆

Edit to your edit:

those same women who report not needing counselling would also be unlikely to self report trauma

Which, of course, demonstrates the ineffectiveness of relying on them opting in to counselling services then, doesn’t it?

And Cochrane reviews tend to place greater weight on studies with more than eighteen respondents, Dumbass

There were 200 respondants.

You’re displaying quite a lack of understanding in how trauma is diagnosed in the first place.

So actually, I stand by my “dumbass” statement.

And you wouldn’t know what the **** Cochrane actually is, if it smacked you upside the head Ninfan.

keep digging 😆

Ninfan, you really are showing your ignorance.

Which, of course, demonstrates the ineffectiveness of relying on them opting in to counselling services then, doesn’t it?

Not really, because if someone reports that they feel okay – they probably are – psycholigical intervention should be patient based – overthinking and prodding any possible issues is more likely to harm a patient than help them. Psychologists have a duty to do no harm as well.

women who report not needing counselling would also be unlikely to self report trauma

if someone reports that they feel okay – they probably are

😆

So, if they say they don’t need counselling, then they’re probably ok, and even if they aren’t, then we won’t know about it, because by your own admission, they are unlikely to self report trauma.

Because they aren’t traumatised in the first place you utter buffoon….if someone doesn’t think they are traumatised, it’s not helpful to tell them they are. Therapy, like drugs can be thought of carrying with it – adverse events/side effects.

you utter buffoon

Or, just resort to insults when your argument isn’t going too well.

But you just admitted that even if they are, then they are unlikely to self report it.

Talk about setting yourself up for false negatives.

Do you want to keep digging further?

No I admitted they would be unlikely to self report trauama, because they don’t believe they have it and likely aren’t actually traumatised and that psychologists rely on self reporting. Even if they were traumatised, a shrink has very few ways of being able to tell without the patient admitting it.

And, for a good introductory read on why you don’t force therapy on people who say they don’t need it – outside of very extreme circumstances – read

https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-21/edition-1/when-therapy-causes-harm

But you just admitted that even if they are, then they are unlikely to self report it.

Talk about setting yourself up for false negatives.

Ninfan, stop parroting sciencey sounding words to try to hide the fact that you’re a Turmp supporter.

can you resist?…

No I admitted they would be unlikely to self report trauama, because they don’t believe they have it and likely aren’t actually traumatised.

Of course they’re not traumatised – the survey was performed at the clinic at the time of abortion.

If you wanted to look at the effects of trauma and different interventions from a clinical basis then the sensible thing to do would be to follow them up several months, perhaps even years after that abortion, and see how they felt about it.

Your ‘study’ is about as clinically valid as my left toe – it’s little more than an opinion survey

You people bickering aren’t helping on the big issues here:

if he said it was a sin to w**k vigorously in a cupboard with an orange in mouth my while wearing my sisters bra and watching videos of Jedward, that might put me off him. Has he made an media comment on that

Personally, I reckon you’re OK as long as you don’t come out of the closet

Oh, I see you ascribe to PASS Ninfan.

The term “post-abortion syndrome” (“PAS”) has been used by anti-abortion advocates to describe a broad range of adverse emotional reactions which they attribute to abortion.[1][17][49] For example, David C. Reardon is a prominent proponent of this purported “syndrome”, and has cited it to support his anti-abortion views.[50] “Post-abortion syndrome” has not found widespread acceptance outside the anti-abortion community; the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association do not recognize PAS as an actual diagnosis or condition, and it is not included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV-TR or in the ICD-10 list of psychiatric conditions. Some physicians and pro-choice advocates have argued that the focus on “post-abortion syndrome” is a tactic used by anti-abortion advocates for political purposes, and that PAS does not really exist.[14][18][51][52][50]

I would argue that if some women do feel that they have been traumatised after an abortion, the answer is not to force pre-abortion counselling on them – but inform them of the risk of trauma and leave pre-abortion and post-abortion counselling open to them.

I’d say that it is highly likely that forcing counselling on people who cause trauma in of itself as well.

BTW: Do you think that it’s acceptable for the state to issue medical interventions against the religious wishes of adults? Eg blood transfusions?

Might be time for you 2 to get your own thread there…