There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.
I am removing revoke.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time... The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That iso close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour) The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WA
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?
Trying to get a soft Brexit with CU. My preferred option
If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
This works for me, everything is on the table then. Probably makes a GE slightly more likely.
Probably, but do we really want all options still on the table? We need to start narrowing down the damn options, else they'll just return to the same position at the end of the extension period!
It is better than now, where our options are dire deal or no deal.
Revoke and referendum and GE are options now too - they could vote on them tomorrow and ask for an extension on that basis, rather than get an extension and then discuss which of them to do.
Long extension does not create more options or remove any from the table. While I have a preference to which option I'd like to happen most, I truly believe just choosing, even no deal, would be better than just hoping parliament will do better in an extension or a new GE will return less intractable MPs or a more decisive party arrangement.
There's nothing forced about making a choice now either. They agreed the date a long time ago. May has pissed them about and pissed them off, but they've also devoted mountains of parliamentary time to discussing every possible option under the sun, they are prepared to consider any option at a moment's notice.
If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargaming
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally void
The rumours seem to be that the French are successfully arguing for the extension to be shorter, possibly up to early May only.
April 11 being touted
Damn right. I said that.
If June 30 is out because if we revoke unilaterally then we wouldn't have had the elections then realistically May 22 should be out too. If we unilaterally revoke on May 21 we won't magically be able to hold the elections.
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.
I am removing revoke.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time... The first component is nobody has convincingly The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WA
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?
Trying to get a soft Brexit with CU. My preferred option
Which they could agitate for whilst we negotiate under the WA transition
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.
I am removing revoke.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time... The first component is nobody has convincingly The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WA
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?
Trying to get a soft Brexit with CU. My preferred option
Which they could agitate for whilst we negotiate under the WA transition
Precisely! We remain in a CU for the duration of the transition anyway. There's no reason that Labour can't ratify the WA then push to make the temporary CU permanent.
If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargaming
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally void
Oh yes indeed but they won't trail any offer of a longer extension until MV3 falls
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.
I guess the baseline is having a solid answer to the question - why June? And she doesn’t.
If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargaming
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally void
Oh yes indeed but they won't trail any offer of a longer extension until MV3 falls
Not sure why they are bothering. Given this talk of a longer extension when MV3 falls no MPs will treat MV3 as the final chance to avoid no deal that would be needed to give it any chance at all. So they might as well just say the only option is a longer extension - it is not as though it helps or hurts May now.
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.
They were hardly going to say she was great are they?
I think she is actually worse than Brown - but that is just noise.
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.
I guess the baseline is having a solid answer to the question - why June? And she doesn’t.
If the extension is to the end of June she has a much better chance of eking out her tenure as PM to 13 July and thus a three year reign.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
Enough of this arguing with me, I’m just cutting to the bottom line to help you. And don’t fob me off saying I said this before MV2. The signals from May, Gove, the EU crystal clear. MV3 IS different ball game now EU showed their hand to support May, in their own interest. Stop using the phrase May’s deal and appreciate where the deal EU happy with has us. To stop the EU letting as fall out next week we have to vote for the WA, anything else is a unicorn, anything else doesn’t appreciate the law or where the power lies.
other things are true, don’t like May’s deal, wanted a different outcome, don’t like May at all now, but those aren’t the key facts. these are the key facts of coming week.
what happens to Labour MPs and Labour Party when they vote with ERG to take us out in no deal by killing EUs WA? 1.The fact Labour enabled the no deal Brexit will be on leaflets and posters for elections to come. Key Fact. 2. Peoples Vote was voted on in parliament, there is photo of empty lobby, photo of labour on mass sat in their seats. When this week results in a no deal, this will be used by LD, SNP and TIG to destroy every labour candidate in every type of election for years to come. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if its Nandy who spoke eloquently against peoples vote, or a peoples vote enthusiast who unwisely think you can have another ref with remain on it without first completing the first one, they will all go to the slaughter together at next election.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
That they do not like the options before them choice, be it revoke, remove May or deal.
I am removing revoke.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time... The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour) The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !
Well, yes. That is how we must see it.
Polls are finding huge support for No Deal, who do you think these people are? The options for brexit available have to be seen in terms of Tribal British politics. This government cannot revoke, but they can go to no deal and keep their party and public vote together whilst destroying Labour.
Yes. That is what I am saying. That’s what I believe.
It depends whether Robert Smithson is right that No Deal is a pain in the arse, but no worse, or whether we do indeed see people dying from malnutrition or absence of medicines.
If the former, it's better for the Conservatives to accept No Deal, rather than Revoke. If the latter, Revoke rather than No Deal.
Surely if a final vote in the HoC comes down to May's Deal vs No Deal (with absolutely no time left for any other options like a second referendum or a new deal), her deal will win easily because most Labour MPs will support it?
The signals from May, Gove, the EU crystal clear. MV3 IS different ball game now EU showed their hand to support May, in their own interest. Stop using the phrase May’s deal and appreciate where the deal EU happy with has us. To stop the EU letting as fall out next week we have to vote for the WA, anything else is a unicorn, anything else doesn’t appreciate the law or where the power lies.
what happens to Labour Party when they vote with ERG to take us out in no deal by killing EUs WA? 1.The fact Labour enabled the no deal Brexit will be on leaflets and posters for elections to come. Key Fact. 2. Peoples Vote was voted on in parliament, there is photo of empty lobby, photo of labour on mass sat in their seats. When this week results in a no deal, this will be used by LD, SNP and TIG to destroy every labour candidate in every type of election for years to come. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if its Nandy who spoke eloquently against peoples vote, or a peoples vote enthusiast who unwisely think you can have another ref with remain on it without first completing the first one, they will all go to the slaughter together at next election.
This is the question to answer, is this week the forced vote between WA or No deal, or not? Are there other options still in play? 3.You evoke article 50, Ultimately You leave either with a deal, revoke, or leave with no deal. There are no other options. key fact. 4.You evoke, the government (in this case a narrow form of it that’s just PM office) negotiates with EU and comes up with something jointly owned by Britain and EU. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if you think it’s a pigs ear and don’t want to be associated with it or not, that doesn’t come into choice you have, 5. 2 years are up. Article 50 now means EU own British Brexit now, not Britain. If you want extensions, its up to the EU, not British Government or British parliament, Key fact. 6. EU have made it clear its in their interest its settled sooner than later, and they are content to no deal now if their WA not approved. Key fact. You can subjectively argue if it’s the right call, but its their call if they don’t like it dragging on for the impact dragging on is having on EU financially and reputationally. 7. All we can do is leave without deal, with WA or revoke. Its not within the power on these shores to ensure anything different. Key fact. 8. There is no point getting angry with May’s Monday address to nation, listen to what government have been saying for months, not just May explicit on Monday, listen again to Gove in last weeks debate, this government is not going to revoke ever, under any circumstance. In forced choice between revoke or no deal it will prefer to manage no deal. Key fact. 9. Can anyone vote against WA this week and it end in anything other than no deal exit? No. Key fact.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
Quite right.
I was educated entirely in the Roman Catholic education system, and am now a teacher. I feel very strongly that compulsory age schooling should not be a vehicle for denominational religious education. I have chosen to teach in schools which are not religious for this reason.
The concept behind 'preparation for life in Modern Britain' is correct, unfortunately, other government reforms (e.g. academies/free schools) have meant that it is difficult to ensure uniform provision.
On another note, given the number of people in my school year who were gay or became pregnant, pretending that gay people and pre-marital sex don't exist, didn't really pan out.
Surely if a final vote in the HoC comes down to May's Deal vs No Deal (with absolutely no time left for any other options like a second referendum or a new deal), her deal will win easily because most Labour MPs will support it?
Andy
Yes. And that’s why No Deal won’t happen.
The problem is that MPs won’t think it’s the final vote. Surely there’s always more time to signal their virtue?
If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargaming
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally void
As for "... most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July ..."
48% including me would probably be strongly in favour. So would those of the 52% who've changed their mind because Cummings/Farage/Johnson duped them or for other reasons, e.g. 'I'm bored of Brexit'. Then adjust for births and deaths since 2016 which wipes out the leave majority.
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.
I am removing revoke.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time... The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That iso close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour) The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WA
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?
[Ranty post deleted. Go home viewcode, the work will be there tomorrow... ]
If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargaming
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally void
As for "... most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July ..."
48% including me would probably be strongly in favour. So would those of the 52% who've changed their mind because Cummings/Farage/Johnson duped them or for other reasons, e.g. 'I'm bored of Brexit'. Then adjust for births and deaths since 2016 which wipes out the leave majority.
A reasonable chunk of the minority who voted Remain believe that democratic votes should be respected. They won’t be happy.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.
Oh no I hope not! That's a terrible decision if they go with that, it removes all pressure off the MPs to make a decision next week and just gives 5 more weeks of faffing around.
Oh no I hope not! That's a terrible decision if they go with that, it removes all pressure off the MPs to make a decision next week and just gives 5 more weeks of faffing around.
C4 news says France pushing for an extension of Article 50 until early May with no conditions attached, Macron clearly hoping for a Commons vote for EUref2 or BINO
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.
I seem to be joining a chorus (though with my voice I won't be thanked) of praise for this article. Thanks, Ms Free.
I would like to add one complicating factor, however: culture. Some things are *not* mainstays of a religion, and are in fact cultural: yet the proponents want to use religion as an excuse for a cultural practice. FGM is a good example, where it is practiced by some Christian groups (and even, in the past, some Jews), and views on it within Islam are mixed, to say the least.
Even the Burkha and Hajib can be seen as more of a cultural than a religious practice: although even there the boundaries are very blurred.
In Kerala, where my family hail from, the Muslim community number about 25% of the population. In recent years, burkas have become more and more common. When my mum was a child, they were virtually unknown.
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Cracks are showing in EU unity?
Seriously? “Cracks”? Maybe Tusk went off piste but to describe these even as “cracks” when compared to the gaping fissures in our body politic is delusional.
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.
Which makes sense, but is in a sense unfortunate since it means they will enable more can kicking.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God...... !
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.
Why? I have never paid any attention to its views on contraception or, frankly, sexual matters. I endorse nothing. I have severely criticised it over child abuse, including in a thread header a few months back. I think for myself. And speak for myself.
But I do understand what religion is, why it matters to some, what comforts it, at its best, can bring and how, again at its best, it can inspire people to do good. So I wanted to explain in response to @Roger why I thought his comment wrong.
If you disagree with what I have written, fine. But attacking me personally on the basis that somehow I am not entitled to write this is a bit odd and it does not take matters very far, does it?
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
The best thing about Catholicism nowadays is that it is weak. Anyone who knows any history should know how horrible a belief system it was when it was powerful.
I seem to be joining a chorus (though with my voice I won't be thanked) of praise for this article. Thanks, Ms Free.
I would like to add one complicating factor, however: culture. Some things are *not* mainstays of a religion, and are in fact cultural: yet the proponents want to use religion as an excuse for a cultural practice. FGM is a good example, where it is practiced by some Christian groups (and even, in the past, some Jews), and views on it within Islam are mixed, to say the least.
Even the Burkha and Hajib can be seen as more of a cultural than a religious practice: although even there the boundaries are very blurred.
In Kerala, where my family hail from, the Muslim community number about 25% of the population. In recent years, burkas have become more and more common. When my mum was a child, they were virtually unknown.
A really interesting example is Bahrain. As a child, it was relatively liberal and while religious was certainly not oppressively so. The causeway (and BAPCO running out of oil) has changed that. Cultural religion and the influence and application thereof.
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.
This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.
Heh. At one point three million and climbing I guess we know that it wasn't just MPs who were repelled by May her speech..
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
So do you think the Church is teaching in the third world that contraception is bad, or that contraception is bad (but if you want to use it, go right ahead)?
If you have told people the Christian myth, and got them to swallow it, then telling them that x is a mortal sin is actually compelling them, by threats, not to do x.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
Catholicism is a religious believe. Conservatism is an irrational creed based on fear and ignorance Discuss. A perfect essay title for my students
I don't feel we've had enough constitutional tinkering recently. A full separation of the church and the state is overdue. Perhaps something to look at once Brexit is uncontroversial?
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.
You speak as if being the first leader of a developed country threatening to willingly impose sanctions on itself would have been seen as a credible threat as opposed to the ravings of a madman. They would never have believed such a leader and we would be in exactly the same place. They still don’t IMHO.
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
No it really isn't. That you believe that says far more about you than it does about Catholics. And I repeat I am a staunch atheist who thinks all religions are a load of rubbish. But criticism has to be based on reason not on lashing out at people who hold genuine beliefs and accusing them of positions far removed from reality.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
Catholicism is a religious believe. Conservatism is an irrational creed based on fear and ignorance Discuss. A perfect essay title for my students
I hope you tidy up your spelling and grammar first!
This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.
Heh. At one point three million and climbing I guess we know that it wasn't just MPs who were repelled by May her speech..
Back up again now at 1,311,000
The map is fascinating. NI has low participation given it voted Remain - but perhaps is unwilling or unaccustomed to engage with Westminster?
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.
You speak as if being the first leader of a developed country threatening to willingly impose sanctions on itself would have been seen as a credible threat as opposed to the ravings of a madman. They would never have believed such a leader and we would be in exactly the same place. They still don’t IMHO.
Its not sanctions, its an exit. And they didn't believe we'd vote for it.
Given there's at least 100 MPs in Parliament who genuinely seem to want or at least be OK with it, then yes one of those being MP would have been transformative.
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
No it really isn't. That you believe that says far more about you than it does about Catholics. And I repeat I am a staunch atheist who thinks all religions are a load of rubbish. But criticism has to be based on reason not on lashing out at people who hold genuine beliefs and accusing them of positions far removed from reality.
Google catholicism and contraception, mate. Just fecking google it.
I don't feel we've had enough constitutional tinkering recently. A full separation of the church and the state is overdue. Perhaps something to look at once Brexit is uncontroversial?
No thanks.
I like the established CoE.
Nope I am with Alastair on this one. If we are to use Brexit as an opportunity for real beneficial change then disestablishment is a very good place to start.
This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.
Heh. At one point three million and climbing I guess we know that it wasn't just MPs who were repelled by May her speech..
May pivots from Deal/noBrexit to Deal/NoDeal, and in response the PV campaign pivots from "we need another vote" to "we don't need another vote, just pretend our side won".
Revoke is the mirror image of Remain having won the EURef by a seven-figure majority, but three years later the PM gets wound up at EUCO summit and accordingly repeals the 1972 European Communities Act.
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
The church teaches that everyone is made in God’s image. Everyone. That includes gay people. So the church is wrong in seeking to exclude them. The church’s understanding of human sexuality - which is not a matter of doctrine - is fundamentally flawed, one reason why it has gone so wrong when seeking to opine on such matters.
The Credo which sets out the essentials of the faith says nothing about sex. Nor does the Our Father or the Hail Mary. And it is adultery which the 10 commandments don’t like. And you’ll have to look hard for any comment at all by Jesus on homosexuality or contraception. So yes I do know what Catholicism is.
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
So do you think the Church is teaching in the third world that contraception is bad, or that contraception is bad (but if you want to use it, go right ahead)?
If you have told people the Christian myth, and got them to swallow it, then telling them that x is a mortal sin is actually compelling them, by threats, not to do x.
People can choose whether or not to follow Catholic teaching. In this day and age, no one is compelled to be part of the Catholic Church,
I seem to be joining a chorus (though with my voice I won't be thanked) of praise for this article. Thanks, Ms Free.
I would like to add one complicating factor, however: culture. Some things are *not* mainstays of a religion, and are in fact cultural: yet the proponents want to use religion as an excuse for a cultural practice. FGM is a good example, where it is practiced by some Christian groups (and even, in the past, some Jews), and views on it within Islam are mixed, to say the least.
Even the Burkha and Hajib can be seen as more of a cultural than a religious practice: although even there the boundaries are very blurred.
In Kerala, where my family hail from, the Muslim community number about 25% of the population. In recent years, burkas have become more and more common. When my mum was a child, they were virtually unknown.
A really interesting example is Bahrain. As a child, it was relatively liberal and while religious was certainly not oppressively so. The causeway (and BAPCO running out of oil) has changed that. Cultural religion and the influence and application thereof.
My mum visited Afghanistan on a student trip in 1969 and a lot of the local young women at the university were wearing miniskirts and none of them wore headscarves.
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice.
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
...seriously!
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
They are extremely unlikely to ever meet lesbians and gays. Suppressed ones perhaps but who will ever know? I'm not suggesting you don't understand religion but this is more comparable to a cult than a recognisable religion.
They literally will have no contact with anyone outside the faith. They don't go to university and will have an arranged marriage when the girl is between 18 and 20. The men go to a Yeshiva immediately after leaving school at 16. Their faith is impregnable.
Catholicism cannot be compared to it. It is beyond anything that you can explain logically. They don't have televisions because the content would be unsuitable. They believe the world is 5000 years old.
Why would you think a religion where you can't have milk after meat or tear toilet paper on the sabbath or shake hands with someone of the opposite sex or be obliged to have sex through a hole in a sheet and be forbidden from having sex at specified times in the menstrual cycle be sanguine about learning about LGBT?
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
The best thing about Catholicism nowadays is that it is weak. Anyone who knows any history should know how horrible a belief system it was when it was powerful.
One might say the same about most organised religions. The Church of England (and the other European protestant faiths) was not exactly renowned for its tolerance and understanding when it started. It was a symptom of the times not the religion.
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.
You speak as if being the first leader of a developed country threatening to willingly impose sanctions on itself would have been seen as a credible threat as opposed to the ravings of a madman. They would never have believed such a leader and we would be in exactly the same place. They still don’t IMHO.
Its not sanctions, its an exit. And they didn't believe we'd vote for it.
Given there's at least 100 MPs in Parliament who genuinely seem to want or at least be OK with it, then yes one of those being MP would have been transformative.
The effect of no deal would be the equivalent of imposing sanctions on ourselves. Put very simply an “exit” on such terms would make trade harder not easier. Like imposing sanctions.
Leavers like you complain that the EU is a political project and then act surprised when they treat it as such. It is about more than the economics. If one of the headbangers you mention were in charge the negotiations would have ended already with no deal whatsoever and we would already be begging for any kind of deal as the economy tanks. The only reason it hasn’t already is the hope that May’s deal would pass. If a headbanger were in charge we wouldn’t have got anything at all.
9 months to continue to vote against every option...
Seems the EU are not prepared to extend beyond the point where May can be challenged as Con leader. 9 months is too short if her dead hand is still there.
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
The church teaches that everyone is made in God’s image. Everyone. That includes gay people. So the church is wrong in seeking to exclude them. The church’s understanding of human sexuality - which is not a matter of doctrine - is fundamentally flawed, one reason why it has gone so wrong when seeking to opine on such matters.
The Credo which sets out the essentials of the faith says nothing about sex. Nor does the Our Father or the Hail Mary. And it is adultery which the 10 commandments don’t like. And you’ll have to look hard for any comment at all by Jesus on homosexuality or contraception. So yes I do know what Catholicism is.
I never said you didn't. You know as well as i do that it is Catholic doctrine that artificial contraception is sinful. So, as far as I can see, islam telling people in Birmingham what they can and cannot do with their genitals - bad, Catholicism telling everyone everywhere the same thing - absolutely fine.
Kazakhstan 3 Scotland 0 Looks like the all conquering independent Scotland Nats are hoping for will need a bit if work
We are a rugby nation.
because Scotland is crap with round balls prefering sports where it's played in only 2 other countries (ignoring other UK and Southern Hemisphere countries (as they always beat us))
Why FFS? A minority interest church of dwindling numbers being an established state religion is utterly bonkers. Get rid. Let religion be a private matter.
Letwin and Benn to retable amendment on Monday to give MPs the power to vote on alternative options, including 'Common Market 2.0' to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union. Letwin says he is now confident he has the votes to pass it after it lost by just 2 votes last time as at least 5 MPs have now switched in favour of the amendment following changes
Comments
Long extension does not create more options or remove any from the table. While I have a preference to which option I'd like to happen most, I truly believe just choosing, even no deal, would be better than just hoping parliament will do better in an extension or a new GE will return less intractable MPs or a more decisive party arrangement.
There's nothing forced about making a choice now either. They agreed the date a long time ago. May has pissed them about and pissed them off, but they've also devoted mountains of parliamentary time to discussing every possible option under the sun, they are prepared to consider any option at a moment's notice.
If June 30 is out because if we revoke unilaterally then we wouldn't have had the elections then realistically May 22 should be out too. If we unilaterally revoke on May 21 we won't magically be able to hold the elections.
I think she is actually worse than Brown - but that is just noise.
Unless you think May is doing it??
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
OH, and thanks Cyclefree.
other things are true, don’t like May’s deal, wanted a different outcome, don’t like May at all now, but those aren’t the key facts. these are the key facts of coming week.
what happens to Labour MPs and Labour Party when they vote with ERG to take us out in no deal by killing EUs WA?
1.The fact Labour enabled the no deal Brexit will be on leaflets and posters for elections to come. Key Fact.
2. Peoples Vote was voted on in parliament, there is photo of empty lobby, photo of labour on mass sat in their seats. When this week results in a no deal, this will be used by LD, SNP and TIG to destroy every labour candidate in every type of election for years to come. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if its Nandy who spoke eloquently against peoples vote, or a peoples vote enthusiast who unwisely think you can have another ref with remain on it without first completing the first one, they will all go to the slaughter together at next election.
Any dispute of key facts so far?
@rcs1000 - can you please stop saying that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? It really isn’t.
If the former, it's better for the Conservatives to accept No Deal, rather than Revoke. If the latter, Revoke rather than No Deal.
Yes. And that’s why No Deal won’t happen.
3.You evoke article 50, Ultimately You leave either with a deal, revoke, or leave with no deal. There are no other options. key fact.
4.You evoke, the government (in this case a narrow form of it that’s just PM office) negotiates with EU and comes up with something jointly owned by Britain and EU. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if you think it’s a pigs ear and don’t want to be associated with it or not, that doesn’t come into choice you have,
5. 2 years are up. Article 50 now means EU own British Brexit now, not Britain. If you want extensions, its up to the EU, not British Government or British parliament, Key fact.
6. EU have made it clear its in their interest its settled sooner than later, and they are content to no deal now if their WA not approved. Key fact. You can subjectively argue if it’s the right call, but its their call if they don’t like it dragging on for the impact dragging on is having on EU financially and reputationally.
7. All we can do is leave without deal, with WA or revoke. Its not within the power on these shores to ensure anything different. Key fact.
8. There is no point getting angry with May’s Monday address to nation, listen to what government have been saying for months, not just May explicit on Monday, listen again to Gove in last weeks debate, this government is not going to revoke ever, under any circumstance. In forced choice between revoke or no deal it will prefer to manage no deal. Key fact.
9. Can anyone vote against WA this week and it end in anything other than no deal exit? No. Key fact.
I was educated entirely in the Roman Catholic education system, and am now a teacher. I feel very strongly that compulsory age schooling should not be a vehicle for denominational religious education. I have chosen to teach in schools which are not religious for this reason.
The concept behind 'preparation for life in Modern Britain' is correct, unfortunately, other government reforms (e.g. academies/free schools) have meant that it is difficult to ensure uniform provision.
On another note, given the number of people in my school year who were gay or became pregnant, pretending that gay people and pre-marital sex don't exist, didn't really pan out.
48% including me would probably be strongly in favour. So would those of the 52% who've changed their mind because Cummings/Farage/Johnson duped them or for other reasons, e.g. 'I'm bored of Brexit'. Then adjust for births and deaths since 2016 which wipes out the leave majority.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
But I do understand what religion is, why it matters to some, what comforts it, at its best, can bring and how, again at its best, it can inspire people to do good. So I wanted to explain in response to @Roger why I thought his comment wrong.
If you disagree with what I have written, fine. But attacking me personally on the basis that somehow I am not entitled to write this is a bit odd and it does not take matters very far, does it?
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.
If you have told people the Christian myth, and got them to swallow it, then telling them that x is a mortal sin is actually compelling them, by threats, not to do x.
I like the established CoE.
The map is fascinating. NI has low participation given it voted Remain - but perhaps is unwilling or unaccustomed to engage with Westminster?
Given there's at least 100 MPs in Parliament who genuinely seem to want or at least be OK with it, then yes one of those being MP would have been transformative.
Revoke is the mirror image of Remain having won the EURef by a seven-figure majority, but three years later the PM gets wound up at EUCO summit and accordingly repeals the 1972 European Communities Act.
The Credo which sets out the essentials of the faith says nothing about sex. Nor does the Our Father or the Hail Mary. And it is adultery which the 10 commandments don’t like. And you’ll have to look hard for any comment at all by Jesus on homosexuality or contraception. So yes I do know what Catholicism is.
They literally will have no contact with anyone outside the faith. They don't go to university and will have an arranged marriage when the girl is between 18 and 20. The men go to a Yeshiva immediately after leaving school at 16. Their faith is impregnable.
Catholicism cannot be compared to it. It is beyond anything that you can explain logically. They don't have televisions because the content would be unsuitable. They believe the world is 5000 years old.
Why would you think a religion where you can't have milk after meat or tear toilet paper on the sabbath or shake hands with someone of the opposite sex or be obliged to have sex through a hole in a sheet and be forbidden from having sex at specified times in the menstrual cycle be sanguine about learning about LGBT?
Leavers like you complain that the EU is a political project and then act surprised when they treat it as such. It is about more than the economics. If one of the headbangers you mention were in charge the negotiations would have ended already with no deal whatsoever and we would already be begging for any kind of deal as the economy tanks. The only reason it hasn’t already is the hope that May’s deal would pass. If a headbanger were in charge we wouldn’t have got anything at all.
Why FFS? A minority interest church of dwindling numbers being an established state religion is utterly bonkers. Get rid. Let religion be a private matter.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/mps-move-to-take-control-of-brexit-as-theresa-may-heads-back-to-brussels-a4097446.html