Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This woman is amazing!

 

She has to be an actress impersonating a politicion for one of those reality comedy movies.

 

Some of the stuff she comes out with is completely bonkers.

 

This was her on BBC radio 4 any questions recently ;

 

"...they startled me when they told me that the 'cut' of cannabis that teenagers are smoking now... is actually 50 times more potent than it was even a year ago, because of the different drugs that are coming in and being put into it and it only takes the teenager one 'spliff' or one 'joint' or whatever they refer to it now to smoke and they will never reach their full academic potential, because it is so dangerous..."

 

Then here she is on sky news yesterday promoting her ammendment on abortions ;

 

http://youtu.be/pPmswmgX2KI

 

Most politcions embelish, or are economic with the truth but I don't think I can recall any politicion so full of self promotion and with so little grasp on fact and reality.

 

She is hilarious, read her blog page if you wan't a laugh every day.

 

http://blog.dorries.org/

 

I really hope Cameron gives her a job in the cabinet. Somehow I don't think it tho.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thing is I kind of agree with her re abortion counselling, not that long ago the only way you could get free CONFIDENTIAL pregnancy testing was through LIFE.

LIFE strangely enough was a pro-life organisation and part of the service was "counselling"

 

It should be possible to access non-biased services to discuss options. Mind you I've yet to meet anyone who took up the "optional" counselling before or after a termination - other than the different types of termination and which is more suitable for the individual, which tbh aint counselling!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately I have been involved in abortions, both here and in England. Presently you are offered unbiased counselling options and I've had access to this service.

 

The counsellors are properly trained and approved by BMA. These counsellors are accessed through the abortion service or the NHS. These are not exclusively abortion counsellors. They are trained counsellors who provide support to people from all areas of society and the national health. Abortion counselling is only a small part of their work.

 

What Dorries is proposing is that this should stop and counselling can only be provided independent of the abortion provider. As there is no nationwide counselling program sitting idle, waiting patiently for clients then this can only be through a multitude of disparate groups with no common policy. The counselling you get will not be independent it will be based on the whim of whatever “independent" local service you are passed on to.

 

And off course as with most of Dorries's madcap ideas there is no proposal how to set up, control or monitor these "independent" counselling services.

 

But regardless of that there doesn't seem to be any complaints from any user of the current system. No women currently having abortions are complaining about the counselling – none! So why try and change it unless there is an ulterior motive?

 

Another important aspect that has been overlooked is that this entire motion suggests we all need counselling. Yes it is a very tough decision but for most of us we are able to think it through properly and arrive at a decision that suits our needs and circumstances ourselves.

 

We request this procedure through responsible and legal means after having arrived at the decision with the full knowledge and facts of our situation. If we request it or are vulnerable or damaged in any way we are provided with high quality counselling and support services. What is the difficulty with this?

 

I would suggest, although I may be wrong, that Dorries has never gone through this situation. She comes across as someone who doesn't speak from personal experience on the matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
".. it only takes the teenager one 'spliff' or one 'joint' or whatever they refer to it now to smoke and they will never reach their full academic potential, because it is so dangerous..."

 

That may be an exaggeration but it is right to frighten people about taking illegal drugs of any kind. If anyone of your family was mown down by a driver, who had smoked weed, you might adopt a different viewpoint. I find it abhorrent that any taking of an illegal drug is seen as acceptable or amusing by some in society these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But regardless of that there doesn't seem to be any complaints from any user of the current system. No women currently having abortions are complaining about the counselling – none!

 

Well actually they do - I used to have reams of paper of them all provided by the NHS in official reports.

 

3 minutes with a doctor and 5minutes with a nurse is not counselling or going through options, it's just them ticking the boxes on the form and getting the signatures required for a medical termination.

 

Termination is STILL a shameful experience. No woman wants to openly admit that she had a termination, why on earth would she publicly complain?

 

Despite reassurance that things in Aberdeen would change the money allocated for the new clinic and services were redirected to more "popular" causes. Family planning and sexual health are not "sexy" enough, despite what politicians & the media may have you believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest posiedon

Nadine Dorries is a (proven) lier, an "expenses" cheat,

IE a criminal, and the UK's answer to Michele Brachman.

Yet the good folk of Mid Bedfordshire have voted her in twice :?

It doesn't say much for the opposition.

 

Blair, Bush, and Dorries the trinity :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
That may be an exaggeration but it is right to frighten people about taking illegal drugs of any kind.

The problem with this approach is that the genuinely worthwhile messages then get lost amongst this kind of hysterical bleating. How to emphasise the seriousness of heroin addiction when the volume is already cranked up to eleven over relatively harmless substances? And what scope for genuine education when misinformation is peddled at every turn?

 

No. Far better is to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That may be an exaggeration but it is right to frighten people about taking illegal drugs of any kind. If anyone of your family was mown down by a driver, who had smoked weed, you might adopt a different viewpoint. I find it abhorrent that any taking of an illegal drug is seen as acceptable or amusing by some in society these days.

 

Everyone to their own I guess but I think it's best to tell the truth to my kids and then we are speaking from the same page whenever we discuss drugs and they are never going to be able to turn around and say I told them nonsense. I want them to know that my advice and help was always true and accurate. That way I hope they will continue to turn to me and rely on me whatever issues they face. They will know my advice is consistent and honest.

 

The amount of people mown down by people high on alcohol seems to massively outweigh deaths caused by cannabis/marijuana so I want my kids to be aware of the dangers and risks of all drugs, legal or not. With the governments current policy on drugs I don't trust them to do this job for me.

 

There are only two main strains of marijuana - indica and sativa. The thing about skunk being some new drug is a myth. Skunk is basically a street name for grass. People now call nearly every type of grass skunk, well especially some sectors of the media. It is only growers mixing different types of strains to achieve different effects.

 

The thc in the cannabis gives it its potency. It has increased by about 3 times since the 1960's. It really can't get much stronger without being unsmokeable. However up here the normal stuff has been that soapbar hash which is cut and mixed and is about as potent as Marlboro reds. Although with the advent of the dogs this has been pretty much superseded and replaced with heroin.

 

I have many friends in Holland and the hash-smokers among them always only use stuff bought in the coffee shops called blonde. It is the mildest you can buy. They tell me it is only the tourists who come in and ask for the strong stuff.

 

It must say something that in this country where it is criminalised then the main demand is for the stronger varieties yet in Holland where it is decriminalised the main demand is for the weaker strain. That is the war on drugs for you tho!

 

However before the moderators place this on the drug thread I will make the point regarding Nadine Dorries. For her to come out with such an obviously ridiculous and factually incorrect statement then her credibility has to be in question. If she can be so wrong about such a simple thing as cannabis use how can she be taken seriously with all the statements she makes on abortion? She isn't just slightly wrong on cannabis; she is a million miles off the mark.

 

I guess this is the analogy with parenting. If you tell the kids something so utterly wrong, no matter how well intentioned, once they find out the truth will they ever believe any other advice you give them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
That may be an exaggeration but it is right to frighten people about taking illegal drugs of any kind.

The problem with this approach is that the genuinely worthwhile messages then get lost amongst this kind of hysterical bleating. How to emphasise the seriousness of heroin addiction when the volume is already cranked up to eleven over relatively harmless substances? And what scope for genuine education when misinformation is peddled at every turn?

 

No. Far better is to be honest.

 

You consider the smoking of cannabis to be acceptable, perhaps? You would be ok for someone to get behind the wheel of a car when they are high on cannabis?

Of course there are shades of drugs just as there is with alcohol where a pint of spirits is far worse than a pint of strong lager. However, I don't condone any drugs where they are deemed to be illegal; be it cannabis, heroin or cocaine. All are addictive and dangerous and there is always the danger that a cannabis smoker may want to "upgrade" to "something stronger".

If you start preaching that cannabis is ok when compared to heroin then it gives out the completely wrong message. My thoughts, anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well actually they do - I used to have reams of paper of them all provided by the NHS in official reports.

 

3 minutes with a doctor and 5minutes with a nurse is not counselling or going through options, it's just them ticking the boxes on the form and getting the signatures required for a medical termination.

 

Termination is STILL a shameful experience. No woman wants to openly admit that she had a termination, why on earth would she publicly complain

 

I don't understand if you are contradicting yourself here. It seems strange for you say you had reams of complaints and then go on to say that no women would complain about an abortion process because it is shameful.

 

But apart from that I really hope you have miss-represented yourself. It is extremely offensive to be told termination is shameful. It is a completely legal procedure open to all women in this country. Whether it is an unplanned pregnancy, rape or damaged foetus there is absolutely no shame in termination. It is a difficult and unpleasant process to go through but shame – no, that is wrong. Perhaps you could tell us the circumstances in which a woman should feel ashamed for having a termination. I find this an astonishing and frankly misogynistic statement to make; I am assuming you are a man. No woman I know could make a statement like that.

 

Some sectors of society would like to sustain the stigma and shame that they try to attach to this process but this is usually for their own subjective moral reasons. Women have been trying to remove the shame element some try to attach to this procedure for years and your comments belong to a bygone generation.

 

I was actually counselled in Shetland when I was sixteen after becoming pregnant with my older boyfriend. I wanted a baby marginally less than I wanted to have sex in the first place and admit fully my mistake. However I was neither emotionally, physically or financially capable of bringing up a child at that time so termination was completely the correct and unashamed procedure for me. Despite this I was "counselled" by my doctor, a senior member of a local church, that the foetus would have fingers and toes and was I really sure I wanted to proceed. I was then referred to a counsellor who turned out to be an avid member of the local Catholic Church. Needless to say what impartial advice I was given there. But I am thankful that I was strong enough to proceed regardless and am now a happy mother of a family I can attend to properly - with no shame at all.

 

Now that would have been worthy of a complaint. Nevertheless my point on lack of complaints on the present counselling offered was made on the back of statements by senior members of the English medical profession. And again just to be clear, this is on complaints that the counselling received may have been in some way biased towards termination – this is the important point of reference to Nadine Dorries amendment. Noone is complaining they are being counselled to have terminations.

 

Let's debate all you want but please try to think how your language comes across to women! Surprising as it may seem, some of us are quite strong enough to take serious and important decisions about our bodies without advice from men or being made to feel ashamed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i sat with a friend for most of a day and night while she agonised over whether to have an abortion or not it wasn't an easy decision

that was over 30 years ago and even now she sometimes has regrets but knows it was the best solution for her

what i am against is "abortion on demand" again this was over 30years ago a woman around 20 was in the hospital i worked in she didn't believe in contraception and had an abortion her 6th in 2 years this i feel is wrong and would like to think wouldn't happen to-day but you never know

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh can see how this could go off track. But as long as posts are related to Nadine Dorries then fair enough to be on this thread I would say. She makes many false and mendacious statements on these subjects and the point of the thread was to debate how dishonest she is. In order to show her position is demonstratably false then it can be necessary to elaborate on why she is so weak on many of her arguments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...