I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
If Forbes goes for growth, with a low tax economy, and the UK Government continues its path of Jeremy Corbyn's tax regime, it will be a serious threat to the Union.
It won't as Nationalists can only win with the 'progressive' leftists who switched from Scottish Labour to back the SNP.
The appetite for Thatcherite Scottish Nationalism is no more than 15 to 20% of Scots, as seen with the SNP voteshare pre 2007
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
As opposed to sports where the players are millionaires, the owners are criminal billionaires and tickets can reach 5 figures?
However football is the purest meritocracy. Perhaps the purest of all. Not that I'm the world's biggest fan of meritocracy (as previously discussed).
Ha ha
I guess you’ll have to wait until the shenanigans around players careers gets outed.
Meaning? ...
Without getting Mike into trouble - the whole system of player recruitment is corrupt. Given the money kicking (!) around, it’s inevitable.
Ah ok. Agents. Kickbacks. All that. Yes it's corrupt. Money does that. But what I meant is with big ticket football you can be pretty certain that the players who make it to the top ARE the best players both actual and potential. Or rather that this is more true than in almost any other field. Why? Because it's open to all and so many have a go as kids. It's a massively wide funnel and you progress on talent plus application.
"Hey Jurgen, can you give Hugo a game against Man U? I know his dad. He's a solid chap."
Don't think so.
Think - two kids. Equal ability. Who gets the next step up? Yes, indeed.
My guess it that it will explode in the next few years.
It isn't going to happen at professional level. The stakes are too high. Probably is widespread already at lower levels. There was a strip in my Roy of the Rovers magazine about a rich guy who gave his club a million (shed loads in the late seventies) provided he played every week. He crocked their star striker who they spent some of the money on in training ISTR.
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
If Forbes goes for growth, with a low tax economy, and the UK Government continues its path of Jeremy Corbyn's tax regime, it will be a serious threat to the Union.
It won't as Nationalists can only win with the 'progressive' leftists who switched from Scottish Labour to back the SNP.
The appetite for Thatcherite Scottish Nationalism is no more than 15 to 20% of Scots, as seen with the SNP voteshare pre 2007
There was no appetite for Thatcherism at all before Thatcher.
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I am not sure Forbes' and Rees-Mogg's versions of christianity are very compatible though.
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I am not sure Forbes' and Rees-Mogg's versions of christianity are very compatible though.
They are, on abortion and homosexual marriage for example conservative Protestant evangelicals like Forbes and conservative traditional Roman Catholics like Rees Mogg are very similar
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
If Forbes goes for growth, with a low tax economy, and the UK Government continues its path of Jeremy Corbyn's tax regime, it will be a serious threat to the Union.
It won't as Nationalists can only win with the 'progressive' leftists who switched from Scottish Labour to back the SNP.
The appetite for Thatcherite Scottish Nationalism is no more than 15 to 20% of Scots, as seen with the SNP voteshare pre 2007
There was no appetite for Thatcherism at all before Thatcher.
And Thatcher never once won most seats in Scotland unlike in England.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Re matters SNP, I don't think I've ever seen such PB bloc sentiment as that Humza Yousaf is a plank. Does literally no-one have a kind word for him?
The main source of the criticism seems to be his handling of the SNHS. Afaics the numbers are pretty much comparable with the English NHS, in some cases better. Strangely the latter's performance is never seen as a barrier for English health secretaries to move on to bigger and better things.
Fwiw someone who knows him (& not particularly from his wing of the party) says he's a nice enough bloke, heart in right place but a bit lazy.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I am not sure Forbes' and Rees-Mogg's versions of christianity are very compatible though.
They are, on abortion and homosexual marriage for example conservative Protestant evangelicals like Forbes and conservative traditional Roman Catholics like Rees Mogg are very similar
You've rather glossed over the 'burn the papist' aspect I feel.
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I am not sure Forbes' and Rees-Mogg's versions of christianity are very compatible though.
They are, on abortion and homosexual marriage for example conservative Protestant evangelicals like Forbes and conservative traditional Roman Catholics like Rees Mogg are very similar
You've rather glossed over the 'burn the papist' aspect I feel.
We call it 'alternative winter fuel allocation' thesedays, more PC.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I am not sure Forbes' and Rees-Mogg's versions of christianity are very compatible though.
They are, on abortion and homosexual marriage for example conservative Protestant evangelicals like Forbes and conservative traditional Roman Catholics like Rees Mogg are very similar
You've rather glossed over the 'burn the papist' aspect I feel.
We call it 'alternative winter fuel allocation' thesedays, more PC.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Once again, Cambridge are magic, Oxford are tragic.
The boat race used to be really big. When I was at school in an area where no-one went to university, the boat race was big. Today, I only realised it was on when checking the news.
It's still quite big, I'd say. Along with the Grand National and the Masters it marks the start of Spring for the sports fan.
I'm not into it but I usually at least know it is happening from seemingly loads of promotion on the BBC site in the days leading up to it. This year I've somehow escaped any notice of it.
In the 1980s and 1990s, Saturday was Grandstand. I don't know what viewing figures it gets, but I don't think my house was atypical in that it was on in its entireity, football focus to final score, every Saturday. So you were aware of the annual events in a way you aren't now.
What's changed? Dunno. Mixture of more demands on our time, more choice of entertainment, the BBC losing their monopoly on/giving up on sport. Sure there are other reasons. The FA Cup is the same. It used to be tge case you could go outside on FA Cup day and the streets would be empty. It would be being shown on 2 channels, I think. Nowadays, it can easily slip past unnoticed.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
An obvious marketing niche for any Celtic fringe region with peat resources. We now have Scotch, Irish, Welsh and Breton. Google tells me there’s a Cornish whisky though it’s not trying very hard - a bit too Anglo Saxon in the labelling, Anything hailing from Galicia or is the lack of godforsaken rain-drenched peat-cloaked moors an issue?
Beyond the Celtic fringe basically anywhere with a shit climate and squelchy moorland could be a candidate. I could imagine some decent single malt opportunities in Norway, the Faroes and Iceland if someone gets their act together. Alaska too, and of course the Falklands.
In fact Falklands single malt is such a good idea (and a very useful soft power strategy) that I might have a chat with the family about relocating.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
If they stay the course partners in GP practices earn 6 figure salaries, have long holidays with big pensions.
Average public sector pay is also more than average private sector pay, £605 a week in the public sector v £577 a week in the private sector https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55089900
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I don't think yoy have got the hang of this relativity business.
I can't see Mr R-M being Chancellor of a party which is to the left of Labour, and staying Chancellor for a number of years.
An obvious marketing niche for any Celtic fringe region with peat resources. We now have Scotch, Irish, Welsh and Breton. Google tells me there’s a Cornish whisky though it’s not trying very hard - a bit too Anglo Saxon in the labelling, Anything hailing from Galicia or is the lack of godforsaken rain-drenched peat-cloaked moors an issue?
Beyond the Celtic fringe basically anywhere with a shit climate and squelchy moorland could be a candidate. I could imagine some decent single malt opportunities in Norway, the Faroes and Iceland if someone gets their act together. Alaska too, and of course the Falklands.
In fact Falklands single malt is such a good idea (and a very useful soft power strategy) that I might have a chat with the family about relocating.
In a two-birds-with-one-stone approach - why not just get https://www.tarquinsgin.com to re-locate. They can develop the single malt, while making their main product....
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
The stupidest situation is when the permanent person is let go, then brought back as a consultant at higher pay, its even worse than simply bringing in someone to do the same job as the permanents.
I enjoy the Boat Race but should such a celebration of privilege and elitism be a major live broadcast on the BBC? Not sure. Think I'd rather it was on Eurosport.
I am on Chiswick Bridge and big crowds all along the riverbank, it is a great celebration of amateur sport, many future Olympians compete, is internationally renowned and one of the few sporting events the BBC alone show live still
Yes I think I saw you. Tweed jacket and navy blue bobble hat?
Do not forget union jack trousers
Tbf I sense H is not a UJ trousers type. He's big and small 'c' conservative.
You know as well as I do that he'd wear a gimp mask and a "tail" of beads in public if the party leader required it of him
Red, white and blue beads though, with a royal coat of arms on every other one.
All part of his rapprochement with Slab. Vide the photo here (similar to one which for some reason the Scotsman have deleted from their report of Mr Murray's fashion sense, or else it's not working on my browser).
Apart from on the Union I would actually vote for Kate Forbes over Sarwar if she became SNP leader.
Indeed other than on the Union and Brexit Forbes could comfortably fit in with the Jacob Rees Mogg wing of the Conservative Party on social and economic matters
I don't think yoy have got the hang of this relativity business.
I can't see Mr R-M being Chancellor of a party which is to the left of Labour, and staying Chancellor for a number of years.
If Forbes is elected Leader of the SNP tomorrow they will be a party right of Sunak's Tories, let alone Starmer Labour
An obvious marketing niche for any Celtic fringe region with peat resources. We now have Scotch, Irish, Welsh and Breton. Google tells me there’s a Cornish whisky though it’s not trying very hard - a bit too Anglo Saxon in the labelling, Anything hailing from Galicia or is the lack of godforsaken rain-drenched peat-cloaked moors an issue?
Beyond the Celtic fringe basically anywhere with a shit climate and squelchy moorland could be a candidate. I could imagine some decent single malt opportunities in Norway, the Faroes and Iceland if someone gets their act together. Alaska too, and of course the Falklands.
In fact Falklands single malt is such a good idea (and a very useful soft power strategy) that I might have a chat with the family about relocating.
Interesting post, but you don't need peat to make whisky, just water, yeast, and malted barley. Peat was once used almost universally to dry the malt, and is still used in some distilleries/maltsters to dry the malt where a smoky flavour is a desired characteristic.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
'Last week, Forbes said that she would not have voted for the 2014 legislation which legalised same-sex marriage in Scotland.
However, she later said she would “uphold the laws that have been won” and has vowed to “protect the rights of everybody in Scotland, particularly minorities, to live and to love without fear or harassment in a pluralistic and tolerant society.” '
That's from the source that *you* quote. I recommend you read them.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
If they stay the course partners in GP practices earn 6 figure salaries, have long holidays with big pensions.
Average public sector pay is also more than average private sector pay, £605 a week in the public sector v £577 a week in the private sector https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55089900
These are fully qualified GPs that are quitting. Why do you think that is?, and how do you propose to change their minds?.
(Hint: abusing them is not the answer that you are looking for)
I think Rishi Sunak is a decent enough PM, competent and is clearly a massive step up from Truss and Johnson.
But he's still defending 13 years of failure, in which people see their lives getting worse and not better and they see things like energy bills going up and everything getting more expensive. His wealth is an issue as people see him as out of touch.
As a man to steady the ship he's good - but I just cannot see why anyone would come out to vote for his party in big numbers at this stage.
I actually think Sunak's a game changer. While Johnson and Truss held sway, Starmer was the honest and competent alternative. You might profoundly disagree with Starmer's policies, but if you value honesty and competence, Starmer was the one. The equation changes with Sunak. Sunak shares the same basic fitness to be PM with Starmer. So now you can choose on whose policies you prefer. I think the two men have very different offers. Starmer does have to make his case.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
If they stay the course partners in GP practices earn 6 figure salaries, have long holidays with big pensions.
Average public sector pay is also more than average private sector pay, £605 a week in the public sector v £577 a week in the private sector https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55089900
These are fully qualified GPs that are quitting. Why do you think that is, and how do you propose to change their minds. (Hint: abusing them is not the answer that you are looking for)
They will soon find the grass is not greener elsewhere, especially in the current climate
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
If they stay the course partners in GP practices earn 6 figure salaries, have long holidays with big pensions.
Average public sector pay is also more than average private sector pay, £605 a week in the public sector v £577 a week in the private sector https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55089900
These are fully qualified GPs that are quitting. Why do you think that is?, and how do you propose to change their minds?.
(Hint: abusing them is not the answer that you are looking for)
On the contrary. Abusing them is *definitely* the answer HYUFD is looking for. It saves having to engage his brain and read what you wrote.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
'Last week, Forbes said that she would not have voted for the 2014 legislation which legalised same-sex marriage in Scotland.
However, she later said she would “uphold the laws that have been won” and has vowed to “protect the rights of everybody in Scotland, particularly minorities, to live and to love without fear or harassment in a pluralistic and tolerant society.” '
That's from the source that *you* quote. I recommend you read them.
Forbes opposes homosexual marriage, Sunak and Starmer personally support it, Forbes personally opposes abortion, Sunak and Starmer personally support it. Forbes is also more pro tax cuts than Sunak and Starmer at present, my point stands.
It is hardly surprising a Nationalist Party might eventually elect a conservative leader
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
The Union has certainly been given a reprieve but it is no more than that. So long as about half of Scots see their future as being one of independence when the time is right and the majority of people in England appear not to really care and those that are unionists (on both sides of the border) can't make a persuasive case for a pan-British identity, the thorn remains.
This.
Just three months ago there were substantial leads for independence in polling. What has permanently changed to prevent those leads reappearing?
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
'Last week, Forbes said that she would not have voted for the 2014 legislation which legalised same-sex marriage in Scotland.
However, she later said she would “uphold the laws that have been won” and has vowed to “protect the rights of everybody in Scotland, particularly minorities, to live and to love without fear or harassment in a pluralistic and tolerant society.” '
That's from the source that *you* quote. I recommend you read them.
Forbes opposes homosexual marriage, Sunak and Starmer personally support it, Forbes personally opposes abortion, Sunak and Starmer personally support it. Forbes is also more pro tax cuts than Sunak and Starmer at present, my point stands.
It is hardly surprising a Nationalist Party might eventually elect a conservative leader
Tax cuts? YOu didn't mention them. Changing the goalposts as usual.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
'Last week, Forbes said that she would not have voted for the 2014 legislation which legalised same-sex marriage in Scotland.
However, she later said she would “uphold the laws that have been won” and has vowed to “protect the rights of everybody in Scotland, particularly minorities, to live and to love without fear or harassment in a pluralistic and tolerant society.” '
That's from the source that *you* quote. I recommend you read them.
Forbes opposes homosexual marriage, Sunak and Starmer personally support it, Forbes personally opposes abortion, Sunak and Starmer personally support it. Forbes is also more pro tax cuts than Sunak and Starmer at present, my point stands.
It is hardly surprising a Nationalist Party might eventually elect a conservative leader
Tax cuts? YOu didn't mention them. Changing the goalposts as usual.
No, added onto Forbes opposition to abortion and homosexual marriage her support for tax cuts shows she is firmly on the right of the political spectrum ideologically other than backing Scottish independence
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
The Union has certainly been given a reprieve but it is no more than that. So long as about half of Scots see their future as being one of independence when the time is right and the majority of people in England appear not to really care and those that are unionists (on both sides of the border) can't make a persuasive case for a pan-British identity, the thorn remains.
This.
Just three months ago there were substantial leads for independence in polling. What has permanently changed to prevent those leads reappearing?
Forbes actually would be better long term for Unionists even if Yousaf will be useless.
She would destory the main raison d'etre for most pro independence backers ie Scottish independence would lead to a 'progressive' liberal, left of centre Scotland. Forbes would be a regressive, socially conservative near Thatcherite leader and would shift the SNP and thus the cause of independence in that direction too.
Just as Clegg destroyed the LDs by shifting them to an economically liberal as well as socially liberal party that was pro austerity and tax cuts when most of their voters wanted a party that was the 'progressive' conscience of New Labour
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
The Union has certainly been given a reprieve but it is no more than that. So long as about half of Scots see their future as being one of independence when the time is right and the majority of people in England appear not to really care and those that are unionists (on both sides of the border) can't make a persuasive case for a pan-British identity, the thorn remains.
This.
Just three months ago there were substantial leads for independence in polling. What has permanently changed to prevent those leads reappearing?
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
The Union has certainly been given a reprieve but it is no more than that. So long as about half of Scots see their future as being one of independence when the time is right and the majority of people in England appear not to really care and those that are unionists (on both sides of the border) can't make a persuasive case for a pan-British identity, the thorn remains.
This.
Just three months ago there were substantial leads for independence in polling. What has permanently changed to prevent those leads reappearing?
Quite. This is half time, so to speak.
I remember when those indy polls were a sea of red, month after month, year after year..
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
Your problem is that you assume Forbes would enact her beliefs, when in fact she will retain her beliefs but accept that they are not the way of the world today and would government for the many
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
You can make more money by contracting but it has its downsides as well, in terms of nominally less security (though if you are good it's easy to find contracts) and it can be a bit lonely compared to being part of a team. But you make real money by employing people if you can keep them happy and busy.
Once again, Cambridge are magic, Oxford are tragic.
The boat race used to be really big. When I was at school in an area where no-one went to university, the boat race was big. Today, I only realised it was on when checking the news.
It's still quite big, I'd say. Along with the Grand National and the Masters it marks the start of Spring for the sports fan.
I'm not into it but I usually at least know it is happening from seemingly loads of promotion on the BBC site in the days leading up to it. This year I've somehow escaped any notice of it.
In the 1980s and 1990s, Saturday was Grandstand. I don't know what viewing figures it gets, but I don't think my house was atypical in that it was on in its entireity, football focus to final score, every Saturday. So you were aware of the annual events in a way you aren't now.
What's changed? Dunno. Mixture of more demands on our time, more choice of entertainment, the BBC losing their monopoly on/giving up on sport. Sure there are other reasons. The FA Cup is the same. It used to be tge case you could go outside on FA Cup day and the streets would be empty. It would be being shown on 2 channels, I think. Nowadays, it can easily slip past unnoticed.
Maybe people just weren't as interested in football and now its not all there is to watch or do people are expressing a preference. These days watching football is a minority thing
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
The stupidest situation is when the permanent person is let go, then brought back as a consultant at higher pay, its even worse than simply bringing in someone to do the same job as the permanents.
And when they are brought back in, they get listened to more as well!
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
I'm actually quite keen to see an efficient and centrist leader.
You know, the stuff we don't get from the Conservative Party.
Yiou seem to be under the impression that I am a commie or something when I'm actually a centrist dad. But of course everything must seem terribly infrared to you given you are so far to the right you're ultraviolet.
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
The stupidest situation is when the permanent person is let go, then brought back as a consultant at higher pay, its even worse than simply bringing in someone to do the same job as the permanents.
And when they are brought back in, they get listened to more as well!
Well of course, they're external now and therefore to be trusted more.
I jest, because I've seen it go both ways - those untrusting of any external advice or suggestion and so developing real bad habits, and those who fetishise it, so that bringing in someone to 'shake things up' is seen as an automatically positive option.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
Your problem is that you assume Forbes would enact her beliefs, when in fact she will retain her beliefs but accept that they are not the way of the world today and would government for the many
Quite. She's said it several times. Yet HYUFD is ignorant of the fact that the laws have *already* been changed in Scotland.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
Your problem is that you assume Forbes would enact her beliefs, when in fact she will retain her beliefs but accept that they are not the way of the world today and would government for the many
Forbes has explicitly said she won't change Scottish abortion law, and she couldn't change it without the support of other MSPs.
If she wins, she recognises that she cannot rule alone. Scotland isn't a dictatorship.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
Your problem is that you assume Forbes would enact her beliefs, when in fact she will retain her beliefs but accept that they are not the way of the world today and would government for the many
Quite. She's said it several times. Yet HYUFD is ignorant of the fact that the laws have *already* been changed in Scotland.
Moving on from the nightly theological army-bargy:
Who do you think will emerge winner tomorrow? Has Forbes done enough to take it? Or will Yousaf hold on?
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
The Union has certainly been given a reprieve but it is no more than that. So long as about half of Scots see their future as being one of independence when the time is right and the majority of people in England appear not to really care and those that are unionists (on both sides of the border) can't make a persuasive case for a pan-British identity, the thorn remains.
This.
Just three months ago there were substantial leads for independence in polling. What has permanently changed to prevent those leads reappearing?
Forbes actually would be better long term for Unionists even if Yousaf will be useless.
She would destory the main raison d'etre for most pro independence backers ie Scottish independence would lead to a 'progressive' liberal, left of centre Scotland. Forbes would be a regressive, socially conservative near Thatcherite leader and would shift the SNP and thus the cause of independence in that direction too.
Just as Clegg destroyed the LDs by shifting them to an economically liberal as well as socially liberal party that was pro austerity and tax cuts when most of their voters wanted a party that was the 'progressive' conscience of New Labour
A possible scenario. Yousaf wins the SNP leadership and becomes FM. A number of SNP MSPs defect to Alba, giving Alba Holyrood representation for the first time. The SNP, even with Green support, no longer have an overall majority. Scots voters, scunnered with SNP infighting and Yousaf putting independence on the back burner, and wanting to kick out the Tories, vote Labour at the next GE, helping Labour win an overall majority. Scotland stagnates under Labour, as in the past. By 2026, Scots return to an SNP in which Yousaf has been replaced by Forbes, or someone else not on the left of the party. Support for independence reaches 60% plus. Then things get really interesting.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
I'm actually quite keen to see an efficient and centrist leader.
You know, the stuff we don't get from the Conservative Party.
Yiou seem to be under the impression that I am a commie or something when I'm actually a centrist dad. But of course everything must seem terribly infrared to you given you are so far to the right you're ultraviolet.
Forbes isn't a centrist, she is anti abortion, anti homosexual marriage. On that basis Ann Widdecombe is centrist!
Her economic views are also centre right, not centrist too
The Union has certainly been given a reprieve but it is no more than that. So long as about half of Scots see their future as being one of independence when the time is right and the majority of people in England appear not to really care and those that are unionists (on both sides of the border) can't make a persuasive case for a pan-British identity, the thorn remains.
This.
Just three months ago there were substantial leads for independence in polling. What has permanently changed to prevent those leads reappearing?
Forbes actually would be better long term for Unionists even if Yousaf will be useless.
She would destory the main raison d'etre for most pro independence backers ie Scottish independence would lead to a 'progressive' liberal, left of centre Scotland. Forbes would be a regressive, socially conservative near Thatcherite leader and would shift the SNP and thus the cause of independence in that direction too.
Just as Clegg destroyed the LDs by shifting them to an economically liberal as well as socially liberal party that was pro austerity and tax cuts when most of their voters wanted a party that was the 'progressive' conscience of New Labour
A possible scenario. Yousaf wins the SNP leadership and becomes FM. A number of SNP MSPs defect to Alba, giving Alba Holyrood representation for the first time. The SNP, even with Green support, no longer have an overall majority. Scots voters, scunnered with SNP infighting and Yousaf putting independence on the back burner, and wanting to kick out the Tories, vote Labour at the next GE, helping Labour win an overall majority. Scotland stagnates under Labour, as in the past. By 2026, Scots return to an SNP in which Yousaf has been replaced by Forbes, or someone else not on the left of the party. Support for independence reaches 60% plus. Then things get really interesting.
There will never be 60% for the Handmaid's Tale plus Thatcherism Scotland Forbes in her heart wants
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
Your problem is that you assume Forbes would enact her beliefs, when in fact she will retain her beliefs but accept that they are not the way of the world today and would government for the many
Quite. She's said it several times. Yet HYUFD is ignorant of the fact that the laws have *already* been changed in Scotland.
Moving on from the nightly theological army-bargy:
Who do you think will emerge winner tomorrow? Has Forbes done enough to take it? Or will Yousaf hold on?
If the former, will she get voted in as FM?
And if the latter, will this end in the courts?
My prediction - FWIW
1. Mr Y doesn't get 50%. 2. Ms F gets it on Ms R's second votes. 3. Probably gets voted in as FM, *unless* there are (a) defections *and* (b) the Greens, Tories, Slab *and* LDs all vote together for Mr Sarwar. Which latter is not impossible, vide Edinburgh Trams. It really depends what horse trading there is on both sides, notably on the GRA, and how Slab and SLD feel about getting back into bed with the Tories.
But it's a very sloppy probability tree. Not least because (3) also applies to Mr Y if he wins.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
There has been absolutely no indication she will do anything other than be collegiate on these matters, and you are provoking an argument through pure ignorance and your own bigoted views
And the GRA is nothing to do with religion but then you always try to deflect
An obvious marketing niche for any Celtic fringe region with peat resources. We now have Scotch, Irish, Welsh and Breton. Google tells me there’s a Cornish whisky though it’s not trying very hard - a bit too Anglo Saxon in the labelling, Anything hailing from Galicia or is the lack of godforsaken rain-drenched peat-cloaked moors an issue?
Beyond the Celtic fringe basically anywhere with a shit climate and squelchy moorland could be a candidate. I could imagine some decent single malt opportunities in Norway, the Faroes and Iceland if someone gets their act together. Alaska too, and of course the Falklands.
In fact Falklands single malt is such a good idea (and a very useful soft power strategy) that I might have a chat with the family about relocating.
Interesting post, but you don't need peat to make whisky, just water, yeast, and malted barley. Peat was once used almost universally to dry the malt, and is still used in some distilleries/maltsters to dry the malt where a smoky flavour is a desired characteristic.
Yes absolutely, which is why I’m not considering Bourbon and other non peat whiskies like Japanese whisky. But scotch style, iodine peat edged, misty moors plus of course the necessary crap weather outside Thats more windy than freezing: we need bogs for that.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
Your problem is that you assume Forbes would enact her beliefs, when in fact she will retain her beliefs but accept that they are not the way of the world today and would government for the many
Quite. She's said it several times. Yet HYUFD is ignorant of the fact that the laws have *already* been changed in Scotland.
Moving on from the nightly theological army-bargy:
Who do you think will emerge winner tomorrow? Has Forbes done enough to take it? Or will Yousaf hold on?
If the former, will she get voted in as FM?
And if the latter, will this end in the courts?
My prediction - FWIW
1. Mr Y doesn't get 50%. 2. Ms F gets it on Ms R's second votes. 3. Probably gets voted in as FM, *unless* there are (a) defections *and* (b) the Greens, Tories, Slab *and* LDs all vote together for Mr Sarwar. Which latter is not impossible, vide Edinburgh Trams. It really depends what horse trading there is on both sides, notably on the GRA, and how Slab and SLD feel about getting back into bed with the Tories.
But it's a very sloppy probability tree. Not least because (3) also applies to Mr Y if he wins.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
Harking back to the earlier question posed by @Stuartinromford I think. If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
This graph is interesting. It isn't the older GPs quitting, take a look at the under 30's.
Bunch of snowflakes
Public sector pay is shit though with utterly retarded salary caps - "no-one can earn more than the PM" - and lots of politics and petty bureaucracy that make it pretty bleak at times. Not sure the pension makes up for that.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
The stupidest situation is when the permanent person is let go, then brought back as a consultant at higher pay, its even worse than simply bringing in someone to do the same job as the permanents.
And when they are brought back in, they get listened to more as well!
Well of course, they're external now and therefore to be trusted more.
I jest, because I've seen it go both ways - those untrusting of any external advice or suggestion and so developing real bad habits, and those who fetishise it, so that bringing in someone to 'shake things up' is seen as an automatically positive option.
In the public sector they use consultants a lot because they often only have people to run business as usual, so when change is needed they need to get people to help with specialist skills. I'm not sure when the deskilling of the public sector happened, probably in the 70s and 80s. Every now and again they come up with schemes to have a public sector in-house consultancy function but it never works because they don't pay enough.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
There has been absolutely no indication she will do anything other than be collegiate on these matters, and you are provoking an argument through pure ignorance and your own bigoted views
And the GRA is nothing to do with religion but then you always try to deflect
It is in the sense most religious bodies reject it and Forbes if she wins will rip it up and throw it in Patrick Harvie's face and tell him if he wants to stop supporting her government, there is the door!
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
I'm actually quite keen to see an efficient and centrist leader.
You know, the stuff we don't get from the Conservative Party.
Yiou seem to be under the impression that I am a commie or something when I'm actually a centrist dad. But of course everything must seem terribly infrared to you given you are so far to the right you're ultraviolet.
Forbes isn't a centrist, she is anti abortion, anti homosexual marriage. On that basis Ann Widdecombe is centrist!
Her economic views are also centre right, not centrist too
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
We shall see (or rather probably won't, as my money - theoretically - is on Humza), though it's worth nothing that 33 non SNP MSPs voted for the GRR Bill, and only 39 against. Forbes did not vote it appears.
If those MSPs, which included 3 Conservatives, were willing to vote for the bill proposed by their political opponents, then it seems a reasonable bet they are in favour of other measures of a similar kind, and so if even half the SNP still back that sort of thing, could not Forbes be bounced into it?
In any case I think you may mistake the devout for the zealot. Someone could be extremely devout, even bigoted in their views, yet still not agree with forcing their views on others but believing they needed to persuade.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
If you are 'not as much,' are you not still accepting you are one?
Oh, he just believes in divine right, preserving the religious settlement imposed by a sex-mad 16th century monarch, and ignoring everyone who isn't a Tory. No, sir, not a =zealot at all.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
We shall see (or rather probably won't, as my money - theoretically - is on Humza), though it's worth nothing that 33 non SNP MSPs voted for the GRR Bill, and only 39 against. Forbes did not vote it appears.
If those MSPs, which included 3 Conservatives, were willing to vote for the bill proposed by their political opponents, then it seems a reasonable bet they are in favour of other measures of a similar kind, and so if even half the SNP still back that sort of thing, could not Forbes be bounced into it?
No, she would be elected on a platform to rip the GRA Sturgeon proposed to shreds and she would, most Scots opposing it anyway
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
There has been absolutely no indication she will do anything other than be collegiate on these matters, and you are provoking an argument through pure ignorance and your own bigoted views
And the GRA is nothing to do with religion but then you always try to deflect
It is in the sense most religious bodies reject it and Forbes if she wins will rip it up and throw it in Patrick Harvie's face and tell him if he wants to stop supporting her government, there is the door!
Having seen the disaster that Green influence has been on Scottish government, I hope the Greens never get any influence over Westminster government.
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
Your problem is that you assume Forbes would enact her beliefs, when in fact she will retain her beliefs but accept that they are not the way of the world today and would government for the many
Quite. She's said it several times. Yet HYUFD is ignorant of the fact that the laws have *already* been changed in Scotland.
Moving on from the nightly theological army-bargy:
Who do you think will emerge winner tomorrow? Has Forbes done enough to take it? Or will Yousaf hold on?
If the former, will she get voted in as FM?
And if the latter, will this end in the courts?
My prediction - FWIW
1. Mr Y doesn't get 50%. 2. Ms F gets it on Ms R's second votes. 3. Probably gets voted in as FM, *unless* there are (a) defections *and* (b) the Greens, Tories, Slab *and* LDs all vote together for Mr Sarwar. Which latter is not impossible, vide Edinburgh Trams. It really depends what horse trading there is on both sides, notably on the GRA, and how Slab and SLD feel about getting back into bed with the Tories.
But it's a very sloppy probability tree. Not least because (3) also applies to Mr Y if he wins.
Whoever wins tomorrow becomes leader of the SNP but not automatically First Minister
I assume there is the possibility the winner fails to be endorsed by Holyrood so what happens next in those circumstances?
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
If you are 'not as much,' are you not still accepting you are one?
Oh, he just believes in divine right, preserving the religious settlement imposed by a sex-mad 16th century monarch, and ignoring everyone who isn't a Tory. No, sir, not a =zealot at all.
Having the Church of England as the established church means the hell, fire and brimstone churches like Forbes' are kept in check south of the border
Jim Murphy says if Kate Forbes wins the SNP leadership tomorrow and becomes First Minister it will be out with secular liberalism and in with Christian democracy for Scotland
I remember well the religious terror covering the UK in its dark clouds as David Cameron, as PM, performed the frightful and divisive Christian act of having a child baptised into the dark faith of the Church of England; and when T May was PM, turning up weekly to early communion at Sonning parish church, who can forget the forced conversions of Jews, Turks and Infidels unleashed under her theocratic regime. It will take centuries for secular liberalism to recover.
Cameron voted for homosexual marriage as did May however, Forbes opposes it as she opposes abortion.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
The point being what? Mercifully we have a parliamentary not a presidential constitution. And why on earth should there not be diversity of views of matters which have always been ones of conscience.
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
Forbes personally opposes abortion completely without exemptions and was sponsored at Holyrood in her first job by a US anti abortion pressure group which played a key part in pushing to get Roe v Wade overturned by the SC.
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
You try asking HYUFD what *his* position is on abortion. I've never known him reply to that question, except to give an answer to a completely different question.
Ditto on gay marriage.
I want to reduce abortions not ban it completely, I support gay marriage in civil law but would keep the exemption from it for religious bodies. Forbes is actually harder line than me on both
You demand to allow the state church to ban gay marriage. In fact, you demand that the C of E is the State Church and has a role in the State, in the legislature and the constitution. Scotland doesn't *even* have a state church - indeed, such a notion is completely contrary to the beliefs of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland. That is a seriously left wing position compared to yours.
No, the Church of England now blesses homosexual couples, the Free Church of Scotland Forbes belongs to does not.
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
Forbes will not govern as a religious zealot like you are, but will accept the settled will of the majority
You are just trying to inflame the position
Forbes is a religious zealot, once she gets power who knows what she will try and do. She will certainly start with a rejection of all the Trans stuff Sturgeon has pushed as a start to push Scotland back towards her social conservatism
There has been absolutely no indication she will do anything other than be collegiate on these matters, and you are provoking an argument through pure ignorance and your own bigoted views
And the GRA is nothing to do with religion but then you always try to deflect
It is in the sense most religious bodies reject it and Forbes if she wins will rip it up and throw it in Patrick Harvie's face and tell him if he wants to stop supporting her government, there is the door!
Having seen the disaster that Green influence has been on Scottish government, I hope the Greens never get any influence over Westminster government.
Only likely in the UKIP sense of pushing the main party into adopting various stances to fend them off. Doesn't look to be critical this time around.
Comments
Saint Yves: Patron Saint of Brittany, lawyers and abandoned children; known as Advocate of the Poor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivo_of_Kermartin
switched from Scottish Labour to back the SNP.
The appetite for Thatcherite Scottish Nationalism is no more than 15 to 20% of Scots, as seen with the SNP voteshare pre 2007
Probably is widespread already at lower levels.
There was a strip in my Roy of the Rovers magazine about a rich guy who gave his club a million (shed loads in the late seventies) provided he played every week.
He crocked their star striker who they spent some of the money on in training ISTR.
And will hate me for it and make me pay all week.
If the government succeeds in enforcing a large public sector real terms pay cut, then what happens next?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/26/nhs-england-staff-shortages-could-exceed-570000-by-2036-study-finds
Reason - inducement of exploding heads.
Fwiw someone who knows him (& not particularly from his wing of the party) says he's a nice enough bloke, heart in right place but a bit lazy.
Forbes would be the first explicitly anti homosexual marriage leader of a mainstream Holyrood Westminster party since it came in. Even Tim Farron voted for homosexual marriage
Quite a few seem to assume that, if Forbes is elected, the SNP will be transformed. A bit like this....
BTW 'opposing abortion' tells me nothing. Few indeed support banning it in all cases. I have no idea where KF stands on this. I 'oppose' abortion in this sense - I think it should be, in Clinton's phrase 'safe, legal and rare'.
I might have to try some..
https://www.houseofmalt.co.uk/product/armorik-yeun-elez-jobic-breton-single-malt-whisky/
What's changed? Dunno. Mixture of more demands on our time, more choice of entertainment, the BBC losing their monopoly on/giving up on sport. Sure there are other reasons.
The FA Cup is the same. It used to be tge case you could go outside on FA Cup day and the streets would be empty. It would be being shown on 2 channels, I think. Nowadays, it can easily slip past unnoticed.
Everyone knows that to earn real money you go contract and can then earn double or even triple. And you get resentment between the consultants/contractors doing the same job as the permanents but being paid masses more.
Beyond the Celtic fringe basically anywhere with a shit climate and squelchy moorland could be a candidate. I could imagine some decent single malt opportunities in Norway, the Faroes and Iceland if someone gets their act together. Alaska too, and of course the Falklands.
In fact Falklands single malt is such a good idea (and a very useful soft power strategy) that I might have a chat with the family about relocating.
Average public sector pay is also more than average private sector pay, £605 a week in the public sector v £577 a week in the private sector
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55089900
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/christian-action-research-education-anti-abortion-lobby/
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1630595430127108097?s=20
I can't see Mr R-M being Chancellor of a party which is to the left of Labour, and staying Chancellor for a number of years.
8,000 miles from me is about right, I feel.
However, she later said she would “uphold the laws that have been won” and has vowed to “protect the rights of everybody in Scotland, particularly minorities, to live and to love without fear or harassment in a pluralistic and tolerant society.” '
That's from the source that *you* quote. I recommend you read them.
(Hint: abusing them is not the answer that you are looking for)
She said: “I couldn’t conceive of having an abortion myself. I’ve seen my baby at 12 weeks and 20 weeks but yes, I defend the right of women to make use of that legal provision to access abortion.”
Forbes was then asked if this meant she would defend the current law which allows women to have an abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
“My position is that I wouldn’t change the law as it stands”, she added.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23338379.kate-forbes-says-defend-abortion-rights-despite-personal-beliefs/
It is hardly surprising a Nationalist Party might eventually elect a conservative leader
Ditto on gay marriage.
Just three months ago there were substantial leads for independence in polling. What has permanently changed to prevent those leads reappearing?
She would destory the main raison d'etre for most pro independence backers ie Scottish independence would lead to a 'progressive' liberal, left of centre Scotland. Forbes would be a regressive, socially conservative near Thatcherite leader and would shift the SNP and thus the cause of independence in that direction too.
Just as Clegg destroyed the LDs by shifting them to an economically liberal as well as socially liberal party that was pro austerity and tax cuts when most of their voters wanted a party that was the 'progressive' conscience of New Labour
Forbes refuses to see homosexual couples as legitimate, Forbes regards homosexuality as a sin, Forbes is anti homosexual marriage in ALL circumstances.
That is the leader your party may elect tomorrow and it will be delicious to see the ghastly hypocrisy you will use to justify staying in a party led by a leader who opposes everything you stand for other than Scottish independence if Forbes wins tomorrow
You know, the stuff we don't get from the Conservative Party.
Yiou seem to be under the impression that I am a commie or something when I'm actually a centrist dad. But of course everything must seem terribly infrared to you given you are so far to the right you're ultraviolet.
I jest, because I've seen it go both ways - those untrusting of any external advice or suggestion and so developing real bad habits, and those who fetishise it, so that bringing in someone to 'shake things up' is seen as an automatically positive option.
You are just trying to inflame the position
If she wins, she recognises that she cannot rule alone. Scotland isn't a dictatorship.
Who do you think will emerge winner tomorrow? Has Forbes done enough to take it? Or will Yousaf hold on?
If the former, will she get voted in as FM?
And if the latter, will this end in the courts?
Yousaf wins the SNP leadership and becomes FM.
A number of SNP MSPs defect to Alba, giving Alba Holyrood representation for the first time.
The SNP, even with Green support, no longer have an overall majority.
Scots voters, scunnered with SNP infighting and Yousaf putting independence on the back burner, and wanting to kick out the Tories, vote Labour at the next GE, helping Labour win an overall majority.
Scotland stagnates under Labour, as in the past.
By 2026, Scots return to an SNP in which Yousaf has been replaced by Forbes, or someone else not on the left of the party.
Support for independence reaches 60% plus.
Then things get really interesting.
Her economic views are also centre right, not centrist too
1. Mr Y doesn't get 50%.
2. Ms F gets it on Ms R's second votes.
3. Probably gets voted in as FM, *unless* there are (a) defections *and* (b) the Greens, Tories, Slab *and* LDs all vote together for Mr Sarwar. Which latter is not impossible, vide Edinburgh Trams. It really depends what horse trading there is on both sides, notably on the GRA, and how Slab and SLD feel about getting back into bed with the Tories.
But it's a very sloppy probability tree. Not least because (3) also applies to Mr Y if he wins.
And the GRA is nothing to do with religion but then you always try to deflect
If those MSPs, which included 3 Conservatives, were willing to vote for the bill proposed by their political opponents, then it seems a reasonable bet they are in favour of other measures of a similar kind, and so if even half the SNP still back that sort of thing, could not Forbes be bounced into it?
In any case I think you may mistake the devout for the zealot. Someone could be extremely devout, even bigoted in their views, yet still not agree with forcing their views on others but believing they needed to persuade.
I assume there is the possibility the winner fails to be endorsed by Holyrood so what happens next in those circumstances?