Though Gracchi over at Liberal Conspiracy has beaten me to it I'm going to continue writing out my response to the article on CentreRight about the supposed "moral case for lower taxation". It's not something I can at all sit comfortably on without commenting, this idea that the state is depriving us of our lifestyles and that when we talk of "us" that we are even possibly talking about anyone other than the top earners of this country.

Reading it, you feel Gingrich's outrage at the diminution of choice and freedom those families suffer at the hands of the greedy government, the frustration families must feel as their incomes are snatched from them and frittered away by inefficient and wasteful bureaucracies "for their own good".

The final part of my analysis of the issues raised by the "Big food fight" season on Channel 4. We've had a fortnight of being absolutely blitzed with potentially new knowledge about the welfare of the animals we eat, the quality of the food we eat, the effect it has on our health and the debates about who holds responsibility for changing all of these for the better. Now, with "The Truth About Food (pt 2)" that issue of corporate and governmental responsibility, along with our own need for some more common sense, is truly fleshed out.

Over at Dizzy Thinks I seem to have got myself into an impasse with the titular member of the blog over exactly what current law is on organ donations and presumed consent, and over the finer points of what such a system means. In particular here I have drawn attention to the current law on organ use and in particular to Part 1 Section 6 of the Human Tissue Act 2004.

Activities involving material from adults who lack capacity to consent
Where—

(a) an activity of a kind mentioned in section 1(1)(d) or (f) involves material from the body of a person who—
(i) is an adult, and
(ii) lacks capacity to consent to the activity, and

(b) neither a decision of his to consent to the activity, nor a decision of his not to consent to it, is in force,

there shall for the purposes of this Part be deemed to be consent of his to the activity if it is done in circumstances of a kind specified by regulations made by the Secretary of State.

Over at "Obsolete" Septicisle makes a point that I hope more would make in the future about the syndrome of the "weeping widow" in the media.

now we have the widow of the brave have-a-go hero setting out a list of everything that she thinks is wrong with society, and everyone is expected to ably nod along, wring their hands, comment that it really is appalling, or demand instant ever more draconian crackdowns, usually for their own short-term political gain.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not impugning on the right of those dealt the harshest blow that life can throw at them from pouring out their hearts at the injustice of it all; in fact, I'd encourage it. Better to let it out than to bottle it up.