Categories
Options
Sunak is coming out of this with his reputation enhanced – politicalbetting.com
Sunak is coming out of this with his reputation enhanced – politicalbetting.com
Tuesday’s papers are just coming in and inevitably the public row between Sunak and Johnson is dominating the front pages.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Hunt: “I have asked John Glen, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, to lead a major public sector productivity programme across all government departments which we will report on in the Autumn….
… He will assess how we can increase public sector productivity growth, both in the short and long term, and look at what it would take to deliver the additional 0.5% every year that would stop the state growing ever bigger.”
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1668335783332417539?s=20
If someone turns up telling people that they should live in this or that way because some book says so, that person gets to be told they're wrong if the target of their proselytising disagrees.
It doesn't matter if that book is Mein Kampf, the Bible, the Communist Manifesto, the Qur'an, On Liberty, The Torah, or Harry fucking Potter and the Prisoner of fucking Azkaban,
If your book says you should forgo sex before marriage, seize the means of production, observe Saturday as the Sabbath, wipe out those tho observe Saturday as the Sabbath, or use time travel to save Buckbeak the fucking Hippogriff, it may well be deep and profound to you, and you're welcome to try your hand at persuading others. But if someone tells you no, you're wrong and frankly you're an idiot for thinking that, then there's no "boo hoo but religion" card to be played. It's just a belief system, and someone testing it through either reasoned argument or dismissive contempt is your problem, not the problem of the person who refuses to listen to your enthused babble.
First class response.
It is deeply depressing that that is not the case on some other things people should feel free to criticise. And we shouldn't feel grateful we can get away with it with Christianity, we should be worried we cannot with others.
It's like being grateful the government doesn't arbitrarily lock us up and torture us for criticising it, like happens in many places - that's great, but it's kind of the bare minimum we expect.
Our society has evolved from ancient times to today. Our society has evolved within my own lifetime. In my own lifetime we've evolved from gays being ostracised and unable to get married to completely accepted. We've evolved from ethnic minorities being no more than a "Token Black" on TV (as South Park literally named that character) if there was even a Token on the show, to interracial entertainment being completely normal.
In my parents or grandparents lifetime we've evolved further still.
So why should it be remotely shocking that we have evolved even further from Ancient times? Or Medieval times?
That's kind of the whole point. There's no single text, no one book, no one belief system that sums up who we are and how we got here. We are more than the sum of our parts. We are thousands of years of societal evolution which has been built upon concepts that existed from ancient times and have evolved since and adapted since.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12187013/NADINE-DORRIES-sinister-forces-stopped-girl-reaching-House-Lords.html
Indeed it has to succeed, just as Starmer has with Corbyn, and in so doing he will gain respect and support
As for Sunak, well, he might come out of it with his reputation enhanced, but that's not exactly changing the general direction of travel much.
I mean, her instant resignation out of pique and this sort of thing makes it super clear that any issues she has with Sunak (or the 'sinister forces') extend no further than when it inconvenienced her being given a nice prize she was promised.
It's not exactly stirring up my proletarian rage at the establishment that her hero was unable to secure her the peerage he obviously told her was a sure thing.
No way should you ever have been promised a peerage, and Sunak making it clear you are not getting one is spot on
The stat that always get me is just how few ethnic minority MPs there were at the turn of the millenium. The contrast with now is stunning.
Cummings
Corbyn
Milne
We're one general election away from the full set. Cmon Rishi, do the right thing.
I rang Boris who was in Egypt and about to give a speech. 'B******s,' he bellowed down the line. 'It's someone in No 10 who is just making mischief. Sunak told me himself that you were on it just days ago and he wouldn't lie to me. It's a wind up.'
We have allowed a grotesque medieval creed to destroy our precious Free Speech, thanks to misguided policies of migration and multiculturalism. Policies which, I suspect, you approve of
It still just seems like a big old 'wah, I didn't get that thing I don't really deserve*'
*such as anyone deserves such a thing - Dorries was a Cabinet Minister for just under 1 year and a MP for less than 20. There have been far less distinguished peers, definitely, but she's not exactly a major figure either.
I and others on here debated with him and were quite happy to reject his beliefs as much as anyone who espouses their views on this site can be rejected.
He tried calling those who disagreed with him Islamophobic and it was bullshit then, and its bullshit now from you, and didn't silence anyone. And last I checked, we all still have our heads.
Islam is a religion with some ridiculous beliefs just like Christianity is. Not remotely Islamophobic or fatal to say that.
(I don't in any way deny the huge influence of Christianity on development of our culture, and thus even my own concepts and beliefs despite being an athiest, but the impression I got from the book was he rather overplays the idea)
Luckily, i don’t believe in a benevolent deity, I believe the Creator is necessarily outwith our comprehension, as is the purpose of the universe, all we can do is intuit this purpose, and this Creation, if we are fortunate. Put it differently: we see through a glass darkly, and sometimes, with that impaired vision, God definitely comes across as a bit of a c*nt. Sad but true
She was too obsessed with cat videos.
RIP, apologies if that's inappropriate.
It would be very easy to envisage a Western world where, 50 years from now, much of what we take for granted, in terms of freedom of expression, has been completely snuffed out. Cancel culture (whether of the Woke variety, or the De Santis variety) may become totalitarian. And those who would snuff out free expression would claim to ridding the world of hate, or degeneracy,
I think that a lot of what came out of Judaism and
Christianity is so trite and seemingly obvious today, that it’s easy to forget how radical and absurd it seemed at a time when kings and generals bragged about genocide, mass impalements, and feeding defeated rivals to wild
beasts.
I know I am.
We shouldn't have blasphemy rules, de jure or de facto. It's wrong to silence people. Is that clear enough?
PB is an anonymous forum, it is entirely different
I don't debate politics or religion in my own name. I don't debate politics or religion on my social media accounts. And I don't burn books - anywhere.
You avoid the thorny truth by then simply saying you never debate politics or religion in your own name, so the issue does not arise
This is like debating with a 13 year old
https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1667603447640719364/photo/2
She's not angry at him, yet, but ultimately it seems like she relied on his assurances and he was either lying or wrong.
Free speech still exists in this country. If you're a dickhead though going around being obnoxiously rude to unsolicited strangers or setting fires in buildings then blasphemy isn't the issue.
The rest of us born in a ditch peasants had no desire to be first Conservative MPs and later Peers, so I doubt Nads will get the vote of outrage she is expecting after another Conservative MP has blocked her elevation to the Lords.
I am all for diversity of opinions but some opinions reflect very badly on their adherents.
Nor even similar.
Where you and I differ is my view that such divinity is best served in solitude. Organized religion on the other hand is the root of much of the World's woes. It is not your Gods or your prophets who are to blame, it is avarice of men who build their churches, idols and finery with money they demand with menaces from the poor. From the Church of Rome to the Church of Scientology, Charlatans become wealthy and then politically connected to enhance that wealth.
So when you pray in solitude, ask your God if he is angered that the CoE owns so much real estate here in the UK, and why don't the C of E liquidate these assets to clothe, feed and educate the needy?
Substitute C of E for just about any faith based organised church throughout the World if you like.
Interestingly, she believed that she became an MP because it was God's will. Perhaps even God though the Lords would be taking the piss a bit. She wants to be careful she doesn't get a smiting by railing against His divine will. God's, that it. Not Sunak's.
- voluntary censorship out of fear is a bad thing
- any idea or belief that thinks it is beyond mockery is not shows itself to be fragile, and will not gain wider acceptance
Now the trouble is that this is a global problem. Muslims I know in the UK can take a joke. Hopefully this becomes the norm globally in time, as it has with Christianity.
Because, ultimately, all religions - not limited to Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Scientology - are batshit insane in their beliefs. And so deserve their fair share of mockery.
I wouldn't concern yourself with what anyone else thinks of you or anyone else for that matter. HY is forthright and thick skinned. I suspect he gives not two hoots what anyone thinks of him or his opinions. You should do likewise. For what it's worth from what I have read on here (and we all have our axes to grind and crosses to bear) I would share a couple of beers or three with both you and HY. There are others on here I doubt I would want to, and the thought would be mutual.
But like I said, we are all just strangers on the internet.
The sentencing remarks in the abortion case. Not quite how it was presented earlier. Deception and lying are not viewed favourably by the courts. The sentence does seem a tad harsh.
Perhaps she should have been more temperate towards him rather than rely on the great Boris to see her through. What goes around comes around.
But I think that God's got a sick sense of humour
And when I die
I expect to find him laughing
She's also a politics graduate from Keele University.
If the letter was not appropriate for the Judge to take into account, then the Judge should be more than qualified and capable of determining that my himself or herself. That is their role, it is not the role of the Royal College of Obstetricians etc to determine whether what they have to say is relevant or not.
I fail to see any circumstances where it would be "better" for those with a relevant interest or expertise to not express that interest or expertise.
To respond to those who've said something with "it would have been better if you'd just stayed quiet" seems to me to be entirely inappropriate.
It seems to me that the timeline is that she was initially charged with a different offence to which she pled not guilty, her lawyers asked if the prosecutors had considered a different charge and then an agreement was reached to plead guilty to that other charge.
But then the Judge says he can't suspend the sentence because she didn't plead guilty initially.
That doesn't make any sense to me. She wasn't found guilty of the offence she was charged with initially, she pled guilty to a different charge which wasn't listed initially, so how or why should she have pled guilty to that when it wasn't even the charge originally before the courts?
The fact she pled not guilty to a charge she was never convicted of surely should not be held against her?
Sort of like the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The tragedy of Christianity is that "Christians" are far more interested in the teachings of Paul than of Christ.
Utah is very rich, with relatively little homelessness and few substance issues. All the empirical evidence is that LDS adherents are happier than average too.
If it wasn't for the ban on coffee and tea, and my lack of belief in God, I think I'd have probably given it a spin.
They had a massive Slave pen here, whence they would despatch coffled slaves down the Natchez Trace to Nawlins
I did the Natchez Trace last year. Barely any mention in the history of the 1-2m slaves marched down the road, in chains, in the huge domestic slave trade (which burgeoned after Atlantic trading was abolished and Britain enforced the rule)
Speaking of Seattle, we have a fairly sizable Mormon population, they have a temple in Shoreline, northern burb. PLUS we also have a large contingent of Jack Mormons, ranging from merely lapsed to actively anti-LDS. Similar to "recovering Catholics".
A goodly segment of these, are refugees from Utah and southern Idaho which is largely an extension, demographically, of the Beehive State.