Christian McArdle wrote:

I quite agree with the points you make. But there is one basic problem.
Since there are other reasonable viewpoints as well, is it really a
good idea for one camp to force others to live by its views? If you
vote yes to that, youre voting for others to force their views onto you
too. It cuts both ways. You'd effectively indirectly be voting for part
p and other such crap.

Well, to take a contrary view would require you to agree to anarchy.

not at all, just not heavy handed ott unnecessary and questionable
control. Some things our society has a good level of agreement on, and
are important. Some things are neither. Our society certainly does not
have a concensus in favour of cfls, and their importance is still open
to reasonable debate.


IMHO nannying and dumbifying is the cause of a lot of problems in
British society today.

I don't like the term nannying. It is used by right wingers to scare people
and justify all sorts of crap, like the right to torture animals, blow smoke
in my face and needlessly destroy the planet.

Maybe it is sometimes, but I think its also used fairly enough. Just
how much government control of your life do you want? Where do we draw
the line? Trying to force the populatoin into using a product is has
firmly voted against is just not imho a constructive way to govern. The
constructive path would be to look at why people arent buying many cfls
and address the issues with them. And theres nothing difficult about
doing so.

And in other areas like part p... I dont even need to comment.


NT