Saintandy666

Well, Lambert should be back by then, so as long as we keep an eye on him for the entire match, we should be able to tell them apart. Could get a bit confusing when he isn't on the ball mind.

I think you are wrong to stereotype the whole of Scotland based on one isolated incident clearly carried out by absolute morons. Having Scottish family means I have been Scotland many times in my life(at least once each year, sometimes more) and I have never experienced anything, but politeness. Maybe some harmless banter here and there, but it is all light hearted.

I don't think it is having their cake and eating it. Defence and Foreign affairs would be still done in Westminster, and money for that would still be contributed nationwide, but all other services would have to be funded by money raised within Scotland and Scotland only with their own tax and spend rates. And the reason places like Wales and Scotland have stuff like cheaper unis and what not is different priorities because it is more left wing. But I agree it is absolutely out of order how an EU citizen pays nothing at a Scottish university whereas I if I wanted to go there would have to pay 9k(though I'm going to an England based uni next year anyways so doesn't affect me, but it's still wrong). And before someone says that means I want out of the EU, just because I don't agree with every single one of its effects, doesn't mean the whole thing is bad... just like anything political really.

Well, if they want devo-max or independence, what you've said is clearly wrong as they in those two options would raise there own taxes. Also, what you've said is total rubbish anyways, we are one country. Could same be said for london vs. a lot of the rest of the country?!

My family don't seem to want it, though they don't like it when English people go on how crap they would be at being independent. We both benefit from the union, though of course England/Wales/N.I and Scotland COULD do it alone... but we're stronger together. I think the Scottish actually quite like devolution these days, or at least that's what opinions polls suggest. The majority don't want independence, though so called 'devo-max' is very popular.

Alpine, you can sometimes be aggressive towards others without prior aggression. I think the main thing that needs to happen is for people to stop taking this board so seriously. Just make their point, counter and argue if they want, but don't start needlessly adding personal abuse where it isn't necessary and mainly because the person holds a different opinion to you. Write whatever you want though, but I agree with whoever(I think minty?) who said it is how you say it, not what you say.

Scotland contributes a lot, both culturally and financially. Verbal actually makes a good point re London for those making the financial point. I don't want to see us apart, but obviously that's up to the Scottish people who include one half of my family.

Our system, like it or loathe it, is not one where MPs have to listen and vote with their constituents immediate wants or interests. MPs are elected to a party who has a manifesto and they then put through that manifesto regardless of what their constituents think at the time. They are there to use their supposed intellect to judge what is best in the national interest, sometimes they might wish to listen to their constituents, but they are by no means meant to. That's the democracy we have, a trustee based one. And creating, scrutinising and passing laws that this country is governed under as well as holding sovereignty with the UK is a position of responsibility.

For the amount of work they are expected to do and the job they are in and the responsibility they hold, 65k isn't much. So how much of their salary should they give up to their political party each year?

Their salaries aren't that lucrative. MPs are reasonably cheap and we need someone to do the job and tbh I'd rather money came from an independent source distributed fairly and equally rather than labour just being unions, and the other parties individuals who may use their financial might to influence policy. What do you mean by self funded... they pay their own way? So only the rich can become MPs? Either way, there is a problem of party funding in this country now membership is down dramatically. Everyone would be the first to moan if a party like the conservatives or labour went bankrupt. It'd be disastrous for our democracy. Likewise, they also moan that individuals like Ashcroft donate so much. And also, it would correct financial discrepancies in elections. The conservatives had a disproportionate amount of money last election - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11901914

It's seriously time to do state funding of political parties.

It will probably end up being Manchester United at home.

He went to comprehensive schools.

Every newspaper which reports it as an awful thing is ridiculous. Also, I'm not a labour supporter.

Oh come off it. The Sun are clutching at straws(and frankly need to get a life) with leading on this story. Miliband won't have written the tweet and it would have been a harmless typing error. Miliband went to a comprehensive as well.

The sun are leading with this tomorrow: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4044736/Ed-Milibands-Twitter-slip-in-tribute-to-Bob-Holness.html I kind of feel sorry for the guy now. I doubt he even wrote the tweet and it could just be a slip of typing as often happens(even if o and a are opposite ends of the keyboard, it can happen). RIP to Bob Holness though, even if I don't really know who he is as he was before my time.

Download gyazo. Great for quickly printscreening stuff and giving it a link.

Poor thing

Then argue to fix the sentencing system. Don't resort to the death penalty which helps nothing.

It's a good point, and I think it needs to be looked at on a case by case basis. I think I agree with Chuka Umuna. In this case, the apology is enough just like in Boris Johnson's case that I posted a link too earlier.

People would be able to have a debate about politics without insulting the other person. Don't see the issue with that. Destroy the other persons argument with reason is the way.

Do you believe in absolute morality though? Crime in itself is a social construct(that I 100% support if it reasoned correctly and the right wrongs are punished correctly), and people that are criminals 1000 years ago are no longer criminals now, for example homosexuality.

There's still a chance of the old slippery slope though in my opinion! And once the jury makes the decision(and also the death penalty being such an emotive decisive issue, would people vote with the law or their conscience?), the action is passed on to the state and obviously in the 'slippery slope' argument, there's always the point of abuse... what if the jury were bribed and so on... in some countries, people are just sentenced to death immediately for simply having different opinions, that's why the state should never be given the power over life as the right to life is the most important right of all. I understand that many will come back with the argument of 'What about the victims right to life?', but you still have the issue of the state having control over a citizens life and two wrongs(kind of revenge argument) don't make a right. I would rather just not take the risk and let them rot in jail for the rest of their lives.

The second anyone resorts to ad hominem, it always weakens their argument! It's why I always try to stay away from personal abuse on here.

I think Alpine is more than entitled to his own opinion. In fact, I celebrate the fact that we all have different opinions and welcome it. What it does not mean though is that his opinion is sacred and shouldn't be challenged, and mine isn't sacred either.