DeeTillEhDeh

For a year?

This ^^. Members of the same family will follow both teams - my Grandad and uncle's were/are all United fans - my Dad was the Dundee fan in the family. My Grandad (RIP) used to watch both teams every other week during the 50s.

He's typical luvvy Thistle fan - doesn't actually go to games.

Oh deary Libby you need to try harder.

Nearly every on of them a fat b*****d. Is it an essential qualification if you are an Orc?

For the good of Scottish football Hibs have to win.

Apart from a short spell in the early 70s when being a hooligan was all the rage - and a minority of Dundee fans (ironically some being Catholic) decided to ape Rangers fans - most Dees fans I've come across hate the pair them. If there is any bias it is actually usually towards Celtic - many Catholics like myself would have followed them as young bairns - only to see the light and support their hometown team when they got older - usually after getting taken (like I was) to my first match at Dens. The same is true for United - yes they may have been formed from the original Dundee Hibs BUT the sectarian element never went to United (but to Harp). Anyone who wants to read about the true non-sectarian background to the Dundee clubs should check out Jm Wilkie's "ACROSS THE GREAT DIVIDE:A History of Professional Football in Dundee

Is D TOTAL for real?

I look forward to his response too. If he mentions either Dundee club then he's as about as accurate as a blind man pinning the donkey's tail.

That would require Libby Nomates to have someone to debate with in the Politics Bar. An unlikely scenario.

Mind you he looks a happy chap here. https://twitter.com/woodstockjag/status/595895705140654081/photo/1

I shuddered at the thought of Ad Lib doing a David Walliams style "bitty".

One only has to look at the inter-marrying Habsburgs to see the genetic problems of relationships between close relatives.

And the second question?

And what would the age of consent be? How could, for example, incestual grooming be avoided?

95% of child abuse cases involve someone directly known to the child, quite often a relative. Of course it's flaming relevant.

I took that to be his position too.

You really do talk some shite.

It won't happen for two reasons. Firstly the Labour Right have utter contempt for the Lib Dems, and especially for Farron. Secondly, there is no financial backer sitting in the wings to find such a venture.

And how many others who should be prosecuted are not?

Freedom of speech though does not mean freedom from consequences.People spread hate and then act surprised by the consequences, as if they didn’t know that their actions would have an outcome. You have a right to believe what you believe. You even have a right to say what you believe. But when you do, don’t be surprised by the outcome. You are free to speak your mind, but not free from the consequences. If you threaten bodily harm to someone, don’t be surprised if you end up handcuffed. If you run through the airport yelling, “bomb,†don’t be surprised when you end up on the no-fly list. Or, Ad one friend put it, you can say what you want but don't be surprised if someone smacks you in the puss afterwards.

The point is though if you are going to legislate for it then singling out one section of society only seems a ludicrous way to go about it.Sectarian and obscene behaviour happens outwith football matches - it's about time that some people realised that.

The problem is that this has turned into something of a political (excuse the pun) football. The Tories and Labour clearly have ulterior motives - the result being that any positive criticism of the Act is met by derision by the SNP fanboys. My own view is that the Act should not be repealed but amended to make it workable and enforceable. I also think that if the Act were amended then it should go beyond football - why should offensive behaviour be tolerated anywhere outside football?

1 or 2? Think there's a few more than that!!!

This. How many games have we led 1-0 only not to get the full points?