No, this is not a joke – I’ve deliberately not posted on April Fool’s – but I’ve apparently shifted more economically leftist, but also more socially authoritarian *shudders*. Odd, as this is a month when I’ve been avidly defending civil liberties. Hmm…

People are ultimately divided more by class than by nationality
Disagree -> Agree

Shifting back slightly to the firm position of Jan/Feb. I do think that, in reality, people are more divided by class than nationality, but, frankly, people usually consider their nationality more important. Fence-sit much, liberal-boy?

The prime function of schooling should be to equip the future generation to find jobs.
Agree -> Disagree

Well, define job?

It’s like the recent issue with Gove wanting universities to take over A-Levels. Some want employers also involved, and it seems to be fair.

I think that…and I need to think about this more in future… school needs to equip its students for the future. Not jobs, not academia, the future. Those are both valid options, open to all students.

I strongly believe that a core element of university education should be transferable skills. I also think that this needs extending down to high schools and even primary schools. Schooling should focus on analytical, communication and individual study skills. Not just learning by wrote of the wives of Henry VIII.

What’s good for the most successful corporations is always, ultimately, good for all of us.
Disagree -> Strongly Disagree


These days openness about sex has gone too far.
Disagree->Strongly Disagree

No way. No freaking way.

When we have the mayor of London saying “If gay marriage was OK – and I was uncertain on the issue – then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men; or indeed three men and a dog”…

When we have the ex-Mayor and candidate for Mayor claiming that his opposing party was “riddled” with gays and blaming the only gay candidate in the race for being in the closet…

When we have church leaders using lies, calling gay marriage an “aberration” and  comparing it to slavery…

…we have not gone far enough.

OK, so this is sexuality, not sex. Fair. But when the topic of “sex” is taboo, how can people openly discuss sexuality?

Perhaps we shouldn’t teach 6 year olds about sex, or whatever the latest ‘scandal’ is. But nor should we indoctrinate them to believe that heterosexuality is the only permissible sexuality, and that sex is not something that can be discussed (that there is anything that you should not discuss). It’s not that we’re not open enough, but that we’re too closed.

Oh, and by the way – when people say “But if we legalise gay marriage, why not a marriage between three people!”, I say…well, why not. Have you never been in love with two people?