Or, only one in four republicans thinks it’s not ok to extrajudicially kill people who may or may not be involved in drug trafficking…
November 14, 2025 at 6:06 PM
Or, only one in four republicans thinks it’s not ok to extrajudicially kill people who may or may not be involved in drug trafficking…
Am sick of seeing Jonathan Gullis. He’s not a national MP and this isn’t Kidsgrove.
August 19, 2025 at 10:41 AM
Am sick of seeing Jonathan Gullis. He’s not a national MP and this isn’t Kidsgrove.
I don’t think JB would describe himself as transphobic. Is the Supreme Court ‘transphobic’ in your view? Is it reasonable to agree that biological sex is immutable?
August 13, 2025 at 10:36 AM
I don’t think JB would describe himself as transphobic. Is the Supreme Court ‘transphobic’ in your view? Is it reasonable to agree that biological sex is immutable?
Perhaps you’d be taken more seriously if you weren’t so ad hominem abusive (correct use?).
August 12, 2025 at 8:09 PM
Perhaps you’d be taken more seriously if you weren’t so ad hominem abusive (correct use?).
Actually, it does.
August 12, 2025 at 5:29 PM
Actually, it does.
It’s the court, not the government. Court obvs take science into account.
August 12, 2025 at 5:28 PM
It’s the court, not the government. Court obvs take science into account.
The problem is, who needs enemies
when generally perfectly reasonable trans men and women have you lot
supposedly defending their interests. It’s as if the Faragist right and the Russians are funding a bunch of bots. Oh wait a minute..
when generally perfectly reasonable trans men and women have you lot
supposedly defending their interests. It’s as if the Faragist right and the Russians are funding a bunch of bots. Oh wait a minute..
August 12, 2025 at 4:25 PM
The problem is, who needs enemies
when generally perfectly reasonable trans men and women have you lot
supposedly defending their interests. It’s as if the Faragist right and the Russians are funding a bunch of bots. Oh wait a minute..
when generally perfectly reasonable trans men and women have you lot
supposedly defending their interests. It’s as if the Faragist right and the Russians are funding a bunch of bots. Oh wait a minute..
So you’re on board with the Supreme Court judgement or do you know better too?
August 12, 2025 at 4:21 PM
So you’re on board with the Supreme Court judgement or do you know better too?
Just a bit of a dim witted rubbish one, that didn’t really mean anything.
August 12, 2025 at 4:19 PM
Just a bit of a dim witted rubbish one, that didn’t really mean anything.
Er, no. Just think the insults are boring and pointless. Not sure what anti semitism got to do with anything.
August 12, 2025 at 3:52 PM
Er, no. Just think the insults are boring and pointless. Not sure what anti semitism got to do with anything.
I guess, possibly given I really don’t understand what that means!
August 12, 2025 at 3:26 PM
I guess, possibly given I really don’t understand what that means!
Holocaust revisionist? Really?
Or did he write a novel with some literary license? You think his intent was to misrepresent the holocaust? I doubt that.
Or did he write a novel with some literary license? You think his intent was to misrepresent the holocaust? I doubt that.
August 12, 2025 at 3:24 PM
Holocaust revisionist? Really?
Or did he write a novel with some literary license? You think his intent was to misrepresent the holocaust? I doubt that.
Or did he write a novel with some literary license? You think his intent was to misrepresent the holocaust? I doubt that.
A legal definition of biological fact. Agree crowds can be wrong, although I don’t think the general view is in this case.
August 12, 2025 at 3:19 PM
A legal definition of biological fact. Agree crowds can be wrong, although I don’t think the general view is in this case.
So you do think you know better than the Supreme Court - and the wisdom of crowds/the bleeding obvious? I don’t go in for the ad hominem insults but was that your inner misogynist talking?
August 12, 2025 at 2:53 PM
So you do think you know better than the Supreme Court - and the wisdom of crowds/the bleeding obvious? I don’t go in for the ad hominem insults but was that your inner misogynist talking?
I’ll defer to the UK Supreme Court on that one..You?
August 12, 2025 at 2:25 PM
I’ll defer to the UK Supreme Court on that one..You?
Struggling to see why this is ironic? Do you mean a biological man identifying as a woman or the other way round? I guess if it was the latter that might be ironic, but it doesn’t jump out quite as much
as in the Boyne palaver…
as in the Boyne palaver…
August 12, 2025 at 2:16 PM
Struggling to see why this is ironic? Do you mean a biological man identifying as a woman or the other way round? I guess if it was the latter that might be ironic, but it doesn’t jump out quite as much
as in the Boyne palaver…
as in the Boyne palaver…
Ok, and your evidence?
August 12, 2025 at 1:57 PM
Ok, and your evidence?
Does that mean they believe that sex is biological?
August 12, 2025 at 1:56 PM
Does that mean they believe that sex is biological?
Yes, and would agree with its premise. Don’t think it applies here, though.
August 11, 2025 at 9:57 PM
Yes, and would agree with its premise. Don’t think it applies here, though.
Have to say you wear your erudition (very) lightly. And such eloquence.
August 11, 2025 at 9:44 PM
Have to say you wear your erudition (very) lightly. And such eloquence.
Childish, then. And I question the premise..
August 11, 2025 at 9:28 PM
Childish, then. And I question the premise..