I must admit to finding Rory Stewart refreshing, although I would be amazed if anyone (other than Boris) canderail Boris.
Stewart's father was a high ranking officer in SIS (MI6) and highly regarded. He was the model of Q from the James Bond films. Rory Stewart was,I understand, and almost certainly still is, a serving officer in MI6. If, Boris, as seems likely, becomes PM, and if, as usually happens with Boris, things descend into chaos, SIS will have their man ideally placed to step into pole position.
This is not the first time they have acted in this way; they were ready to oust Wilson, but never did so. But it is good to know that those whose job it is to protect us are doing their duty; indeed I find it most reassuring.
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Marriage is a very conservative institution, one could argue, so it seems quite conservative to want to make it available to more people - gets more of those traditional family values ingrained across society. You're not one of those who think governments have no business defining marriage are you, as a brief look through history will show that governments absolutely do that, hence it having a legal aspect separate from religion in the first place.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
I’m beginning to think you are a black op account. I’m no fan of Tories, but you are clearly here solely to discredit them.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
I’m beginning to think you are a black op account. I’m no fan of Tories, but you are clearly here solely to discredit them.
You're just not used to hearing opinions other than your own. Shame.
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
Perfectly valid view to hold. I don't particularly see why it is more 'conservative' than wanting more people to form stable, legal unions though, even though it was more 'Conservative' at the time.
I am sure you would not agree, but it seems pretty easy to argue it as a conservative move, which does not have to align with Tory, or how things used to be.
As an aside, I wonder if after a new election Westminster will keep its crown as the gayest parliament in the world.
I must admit to finding Rory Stewart refreshing, although I would be amazed if anyone (other than Boris) canderail Boris.
Stewart's father was a high ranking officer in SIS (MI6) and highly regarded. He was the model of Q from the James Bond films. Rory Stewart was,I understand, and almost certainly still is, a serving officer in MI6. If, Boris, as seems likely, becomes PM, and if, as usually happens with Boris, things descend into chaos, SIS will have their man ideally placed to step into pole position.
This is not the first time they have acted in this way; they were ready to oust Wilson, but never did so. But it is good to know that those whose job it is to protect us are doing their duty; indeed I find it most reassuring.
A Tory told me yesterday that they were the party of Small Government. You make it clear that you are in fact the party of Big Government. You don’t deserve to survive as a political party.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
It was introduced by a Conservative - Liberal coalition government, not a Conservative majority government and slightly more Conservative MPs voted against its introduction than voted for it.
Personally I have no problem with gay marriage provided there is an exemption for religious bodies from having to perform such ceremonies if they do not wish to do so
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
"For mash get Smash!"
"Does what it says on the tin" surpasses everything else, especially if it's true that it was just intended as a placeholder while someone dreamt up a proper slogan.
I must admit to finding Rory Stewart refreshing, although I would be amazed if anyone (other than Boris) canderail Boris.
Stewart's father was a high ranking officer in SIS (MI6) and highly regarded. He was the model of Q from the James Bond films. Rory Stewart was,I understand, and almost certainly still is, a serving officer in MI6. If, Boris, as seems likely, becomes PM, and if, as usually happens with Boris, things descend into chaos, SIS will have their man ideally placed to step into pole position.
This is not the first time they have acted in this way; they were ready to oust Wilson, but never did so. But it is good to know that those whose job it is to protect us are doing their duty; indeed I find it most reassuring.
A Tory told me yesterday that they were the party of Small Government. You make it clear that you are in fact the party of Big Government. You don’t deserve to survive as a political party.
Where in my post did I say that I was a Conservative supporter? please refer to many of my recent posts.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
I’m beginning to think you are a black op account. I’m no fan of Tories, but you are clearly here solely to discredit them.
You're just not used to hearing opinions other than your own. Shame.
Au contraire. I am enveloped in opposing views. I can count the number of times I have met like-minded souls on one hand. And I’ve been around half a century.
It’s a lonely old world. And I have only best wishes for gay people who want to tie the knot and share life with the one they love.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
It was introduced by a Conservative - Liberal coalition government, not a Conservative majority government and slightly more Conservative MPs voted against its introduction than voted for it.
Personally I have no problem with gay marriage provided there is an exemption for religious bodies from having to perform such ceremonies if they do not wish to do so
It was, but it is yet another reason why many Conservative voters I know stopped voting for the party. A stain on the history of the party. He and Osborne were just awful.
I must admit to finding Rory Stewart refreshing, although I would be amazed if anyone (other than Boris) canderail Boris.
Stewart's father was a high ranking officer in SIS (MI6) and highly regarded. He was the model of Q from the James Bond films. Rory Stewart was,I understand, and almost certainly still is, a serving officer in MI6. If, Boris, as seems likely, becomes PM, and if, as usually happens with Boris, things descend into chaos, SIS will have their man ideally placed to step into pole position.
This is not the first time they have acted in this way; they were ready to oust Wilson, but never did so. But it is good to know that those whose job it is to protect us are doing their duty; indeed I find it most reassuring.
A Tory told me yesterday that they were the party of Small Government. You make it clear that you are in fact the party of Big Government. You don’t deserve to survive as a political party.
The Tories are the party of small government but they are also the party of national sovereignty, secure borders, tough action on crime, the family and tradition as well and always have been and if they only look to the former and ignore the latter then they will continue to be threatened by the Brexit Party in the market towns and villages outside London and the university towns and cities
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
I’m beginning to think you are a black op account. I’m no fan of Tories, but you are clearly here solely to discredit them.
You're just not used to hearing opinions other than your own. Shame.
Au contraire. I am enveloped in opposing views. I can count the number of times I have met like-minded souls on one hand. And I’ve been around half a century.
It’s a lonely old world. And I have only best wishes for gay people who want to tie the knot and share life with the one they love.
You repulse me.
And you don't repulse me for holding a different view to my own.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Sure, you see no difference. I do given I do not see the two as equal to one another. But with a state church and marriage being a legal contract, obviously Parliament has to decide the question. And had I been an MP, I would have voted against. Just as I would today vote to repeal it.
I expect that Boris doesn't have a bad memory, it's more that he just doesn't pay attention, especially to someone who he thinks can't help his career.
Yes, I think that the case. He is rude enough to ignore people who cannot help him.
Be careful, the people that you meet on the way up you will meet again on the way down!
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Sure, you see no difference. I do given I do not see the two as equal to one another. But with a state church and marriage being a legal contract, obviously Parliament has to decide the question. And had I been an MP, I would have voted against. Just as I would today vote to repeal it.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Sure, you see no difference. I do given I do not see the two as equal to one another. But with a state church and marriage being a legal contract, obviously Parliament has to decide the question. And had I been an MP, I would have voted against. Just as I would today vote to repeal it.
Governments should stay out of the personal relationships of consenting adults. Neither do we live in theocracy - marriage is a civil as well as a religious matter. Small government means just that.
If you don't like gay marriage then the solution for you is clear - don't marry a gay man.
I expect that Boris doesn't have a bad memory, it's more that he just doesn't pay attention, especially to someone who he thinks can't help his career.
Yes, I think that the case. He is rude enough to ignore people who cannot help him.
Be careful, the people that you meet on the way up you will meet again on the way down!
I don't think that is the case at all, Boris is very good with ordinary people, in much the same way say Blair or Cameron or Major were, certainly far better than May or Brown were
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
I’m beginning to think you are a black op account. I’m no fan of Tories, but you are clearly here solely to discredit them.
You're just not used to hearing opinions other than your own. Shame.
Au contraire. I am enveloped in opposing views. I can count the number of times I have met like-minded souls on one hand. And I’ve been around half a century.
It’s a lonely old world. And I have only best wishes for gay people who want to tie the knot and share life with the one they love.
and 'was deeply unhappy he did not receive a first'.
How churlish of them not to recognise him as exceptional.
If I had to guess, I would say Boris was one of those kids who found pre-university education very easy and then peaked. A way with words that enables you to construct fancy sounding essays can only get you so far.
His articles in the Telegraph are nothing special, frankly.
He was a genuinely excellent editor of The Spectator. Which is not entirely easy.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
Have I woken up in 1955?
Justin124 and Viceroy of Orange both it seems still take a 1950s view of social matters and that is their right to do so.
Old Labour and rightwing Tory are not so far apart once you get away from economics and indeed are more likely to have voted Leave than liberal centrists too
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
Perfectly valid view to hold. I don't particularly see why it is more 'conservative' than wanting more people to form stable, legal unions though, even though it was more 'Conservative' at the time.
I am sure you would not agree, but it seems pretty easy to argue it as a conservative move, which does not have to align with Tory, or how things used to be.
As an aside, I wonder if after a new election Westminster will keep its crown as the gayest parliament in the world.
Civil partnerships which already existed provided the equivalent legal protections as marriage relating to survivor pensions, medical care, inheritance tax etc etc.
I don’t have any issue with equal marriage but most of the major churches and Religions in the UK haven’t reconciled themselves to it and endorsed it including our established church. And it shouldn’t be a shock some still oppose it on religious grounds even if they accepted civil partnerships.
Marriage is a word and also a cultural institution but it didn’t as far as I am aware provide any extra legal or partner benefits that weren’t available with civil partnerships. It wasn’t really about those.
Of course we then created another legal oddity as straight people could not legally form civil partnerships.
And it’s also a bit unfair that siblings who may have lived together for decades don’t have inheritance tax concessions or survivor benefits for pensions even though they paid the same contributions as those with legally recognised spouses.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
Have I woken up in 1955?
The Treaty of Rome, the precursor to the EU, dates from 1957...
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Sure, you see no difference. I do given I do not see the two as equal to one another. But with a state church and marriage being a legal contract, obviously Parliament has to decide the question. And had I been an MP, I would have voted against. Just as I would today vote to repeal it.
Governments should stay out of the personal relationships of consenting adults. Neither do we live in theocracy - marriage is a civil as well as a religious matter. Small government means just that.
If you don't like gay marriage then the solution for you is clear - don't marry a gay man.
This is a country where a Twitter post can have the Police knocking on your door - we don't live under this concept of a small government. If we lived in some Ron Paulesque libertarian state, I could see the logic in your point. But we don't. And given that we don't, I therefore wish to see the state moulded in my image.
And I have adopted that solution. I am gay myself, but have chosen to remain abstinent and not have relationships due to my moral view on the subject.
Why is it his fault he isn’t responsible for all of the budget, he raised council tax by the maximum amount to fund the police. I am told there has been a reduction of 3000 because of central government cutbacks so I fail to understand why it is his fault.
Khan is entirely immaterial to London crime numbers. He doesn't do anything and he also doesn't feel responsible for anything. He's a passive observer of events, not a leader, and confines himself to political grandstanding and that alone. A better mayor would have shown greater leadership and taken firmer action on knife crime. You are falling wholesale for his propaganda.
That wasn't why I posted the tweet. It was to highlight how Khan is still playing on Trump's mind and his desire to get one back on him.
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
"For mash get Smash!"
That was a great idea more than a great line. It was written by the most famous advertising copywriter of modern times now sadly dead.
with 14 hot summer nights to go till mid year. Looks pretty level pegging.
Thanks. The BBC charts show sharp rises over recent years with knife crime in London at twice the national average. There have been three murders in the last 24 hours.
Passions for and against Trump and Khan will drown out any rationality but it's a disgrace.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Sure, you see no difference. I do given I do not see the two as equal to one another. But with a state church and marriage being a legal contract, obviously Parliament has to decide the question. And had I been an MP, I would have voted against. Just as I would today vote to repeal it.
Governments should stay out of the personal relationships of consenting adults. Neither do we live in theocracy - marriage is a civil as well as a religious matter. Small government means just that.
If you don't like gay marriage then the solution for you is clear - don't marry a gay man.
This is a country where a Twitter post can have the Police knocking on your door - we don't live under this concept of a small government. If we lived in some Ron Paulesque libertarian state, I could see the logic in your point. But we don't. And given that we don't, I therefore wish to see the state moulded in my image.
And I have adopted that solution. I am gay myself, but have chosen to remain abstinent and not have relationships due to my moral view on the subject.
That is your right but you do not have the right to consider yourself any better than the LBGT community who are free to enter loving relationships.
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
"For mash get Smash!"
That was a great idea more than a great line. It was written by the most famous advertising copywriter of modern times now sadly dead.
A truly great piece of copywriting is a work of modest art. It is a meme. It is an ear worm. It lasts and lasts.
Cup hands here come Cadbury's. A hazelNUT in EVery BITE.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Sure, you see no difference. I do given I do not see the two as equal to one another. But with a state church and marriage being a legal contract, obviously Parliament has to decide the question. And had I been an MP, I would have voted against. Just as I would today vote to repeal it.
What does the Church have to do with it?
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
Governments should stay out of the personal relationships of consenting adults. Neither do we live in theocracy - marriage is a civil as well as a religious matter. Small government means just that.
If you don't like gay marriage then the solution for you is clear - don't marry a gay man.
This is a country where a Twitter post can have the Police knocking on your door - we don't live under this concept of a small government. If we lived in some Ron Paulesque libertarian state, I could see the logic in your point. But we don't. And given that we don't, I therefore wish to see the state moulded in my image.
And I have adopted that solution. I am gay myself, but have chosen to remain abstinent and not have relationships due to my moral view on the subject.
That is your right but you do not have the right to consider yourself any better than the LBGT community who are free to enter loving relationships.
G, This country is f****ed, excuse my French. This is just another symptom, what is this obsession with LBGT nowadays and everybody having to prove how great they are, why can people not just get on with their own lives instead of trying to get one up on some other group, make out who is the best , etc. WTF is it all about.
Bozo also said it was a waste of tax payers money to investigate historical child abuse . He called it spaffing money up the wall ! I’m sure the survivors of abuse are touched by his empathy !
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
I don't view gay 'marriage' as a civil right.
Why not? Since this is a civil law not a religious one, the Churches make religious decisions, give me one civil reason why gay people should be denied marriage.
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Sure, you see no difference. I do given I do not see the two as equal to one another. But with a state church and marriage being a legal contract, obviously Parliament has to decide the question. And had I been an MP, I would have voted against. Just as I would today vote to repeal it.
What does the Church have to do with it?
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
A feeble hearsay story about Boris swearing is not going to stop his campaign.
I was having this chat with a Labour-voting friend an hour ago.
His womanising and bastard-breeding and general caddishness is priced in. Everyone knows it, and shrugs, or they don't know it and they don't care anyway. A scandal that might stop him, now, will need to be monumental.
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
I don't view gay 'marriage' as a civil right.
Why not? Since this is a civil law not a religious one, the Churches make religious decisions, give me one civil reason why gay people should be denied marriage.
Because I don't view gay 'marriage' as being equal to actual, real marriage. I don't view it as legitimate which is why I wouldn't attend one/would repeal it. It's as simple as that.
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
Something as shocking as not really believing in Brexit.
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
I don't view gay 'marriage' as a civil right.
Why not? Since this is a civil law not a religious one, the Churches make religious decisions, give me one civil reason why gay people should be denied marriage.
Because I don't view gay 'marriage' as being equal to actual, real marriage. I don't view it as legitimate which is why I wouldn't attend one. It's as simple as that.
Sorry "I don't view" is not a civil reason to deny equality before the law.
If I write "I don't view interracial 'marriage' as being ..." would that be a valid reason to deny people equality before the law? No.
The Churches can deny it if they want but give a civil reason to deny it in law.
A feeble hearsay story about Boris swearing is not going to stop his campaign.
I was having this chat with a Labour-voting friend an hour ago.
His womanising and bastard-breeding and general caddishness is priced in. Everyone knows it, and shrugs, or they don't know it and they don't care anyway. A scandal that might stop him, now, will need to be monumental.
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
I would guess it would have to be something way out of the arena of shagging and gaffes. Real dodgy financial corruption, but would be really rather surprising given we found he doesnt even bother to be tax efficient.
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
Something as shocking as not really believing in Brexit.
There's implication for that already, but the Borisites are calculating he is boxed in on that as his best route to holding the party together and remaining as PM, whatever his wishy washy opinions.
In order to deny people civil rights there needs to be a prima facie reason why to do so. Because to grant those rights brings harm to others for instance.
Does gay marriage harm others? No. So what reason does anyone have?
Does it violate religious beliefs? Perhaps but that doesn't matter for the law, and the Churches can deny it but we're talking civil marriage not religious marriage.
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
Something as shocking as not really believing in Brexit.
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
I don't view gay 'marriage' as a civil right.
Why not? Since this is a civil law not a religious one, the Churches make religious decisions, give me one civil reason why gay people should be denied marriage.
Because I don't view gay 'marriage' as being equal to actual, real marriage. I don't view it as legitimate which is why I wouldn't attend one. It's as simple as that.
Sorry "I don't view" is not a civil reason to deny equality before the law.
If I write "I don't view interracial 'marriage' as being ..." would that be a valid reason to deny people equality before the law? No.
The Churches can deny it if they want but give a civil reason to deny it in law.
Homosexual behaviour is very different to the pigmentation of someone's skin, and it is a controversial behaviour in terms of morality and religion.
Bit of a silly comparison to make. But I can see why you would think that if you personally don't have moral/religious objections to homosexual behaviour.
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
Something as shocking as not really believing in Brexit.
What like writing two different columns, one pro remain, one pro leave?
Indeed while Macmillan, Wilson and Cameron can be said to be above average, Eden and Brown were arguably the worst PMs since the War.
Cameron was the worst prime minister since Lord North, let alone the war. He almost lost Scotland; he did lose Europe. His government also gave us the debacle of Lansley's NHS changes and the fiasco of IDS's universal credit. He did at least look prime ministerial, so there is that.
And the absurd introduction of gay 'marriage' by a Conservative government.
Are you a parody? How is gay marriage an affront to your working class values?
I didn't say it had anything to do with working class values. I'm against gay 'marriage', and would have voted against as most Tory MPs did, because I believe marriage is one man + woman.
And I believe your "beliefs" have no bearing on equality before the law.
Governments should stay out of the personal relationships of consenting adults. Neither do we live in theocracy - marriage is a civil as well as a religious matter. Small government means just that.
If you don't like gay marriage then the solution for you is clear - don't marry a gay man.
This is a country where a Twitter post can have the Police knocking on your door - we don't live under this concept of a small government. If we lived in some Ron Paulesque libertarian state, I could see the logic in your point. But we don't. And given that we don't, I therefore wish to see the state moulded in my image.
And I have adopted that solution. I am gay myself, but have chosen to remain abstinent and not have relationships due to my moral view on the subject.
That is your right but you do not have the right to consider yourself any better than the LBGT community who are free to enter loving relationships.
G, This country is f****ed, excuse my French. This is just another symptom, what is this obsession with LBGT nowadays and everybody having to prove how great they are, why can people not just get on with their own lives instead of trying to get one up on some other group, make out who is the best , etc. WTF is it all about.
I cannot answer your question because I cannot tell what you are actually aggrieved about from your comments.
This is a country where a Twitter post can have the Police knocking on your door - we don't live under this concept of a small government. If we lived in some Ron Paulesque libertarian state, I could see the logic in your point. But we don't. And given that we don't, I therefore wish to see the state moulded in my image.
And I have adopted that solution. I am gay myself, but have chosen to remain abstinent and not have relationships due to my moral view on the subject.
Whilst many will disagree with your view you are entitled to it and as such nothing you have said could remotely been seen as being worthy of police again. The Twateratti are a different matter and are easily ignored.
However to see the state "moulded" in your image is a bizarre conservative viewpoint. The richness of individualism is one of the joys of a liberal democracy. Whereas a state of moulded people is a tyrants charter, whether it be of the authoritarian left or right.
Some have said you are living in the 1950's - you may choose to do so and your morals are a matter for you and you alone. But it would appear you also want 1984.
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
"For mash get Smash!"
That was a great idea more than a great line. It was written by the most famous advertising copywriter of modern times now sadly dead.
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
Something as shocking as not really believing in Brexit.
What like writing two different columns, one pro remain, one pro leave?
I find it rather surprising how many buy the argument that was just him working through his own thoughts and opiniosn on the subject, rather than the far more plausible explanation that he perhaps had thought about it before writing those articles and had at least general views on the subject, and yet still wrote two versions just in case he wanted to go the other way. So on the fence he decided that was the bes tway to figure things out. Sure.
Boris using fruity language isn’t quite the black swan required to derail his campaign in my humble opinion.
Yes. The Mirror story shows a rather touching, naive faith in the continued prudishness of the British people, even though the word "fuck" is now common parlance on our TV screens, and we all watch pornhub on our phones. When we are not sexting.
Esther McVey has also endorsed Boris according to the article.
Hancock said to be considering Gove or Boris but at least half his backers have already shifted to Gove and former Hancock backer David Mundell declared for Gove tonight with Karen Bradley also considering backing the Environment Secretary
Lovelock's is a good illustration of how difficult it is when you start with a blank piece of paper which is always the way it is. Most writers never write anything as memorable. (Though CDP was famous for it's original campaigns)
"For mash get Smash!"
That was a great idea more than a great line. It was written by the most famous advertising copywriter of modern times now sadly dead.
That poll must be quite worrying for the Conservatives - given Boris seems pretty certain at this point, you'd expect a bigger jump. Maybe it'll happen but it does show the danger of people becoming entrenched (for the two main parties).
Esther McVey has also endorsed Boris according to the article
Could only really have gone to him or Raab I suppose. Which endosrsement is better for a future job is pretty obvious, although feels like she would be a resignation risk if anything on Brexit did not go as planned.
Boris using fruity language isn’t quite the black swan required to derail his campaign in my humble opinion.
Yes. The Mirror story shows a rather touching, naive faith in the continued prudishness of the British people, even though the word "fuck" is now common parlance on our TV screens, and we all watch pornhub on our phones. When we are not sexting.
Boris using fruity language isn’t quite the black swan required to derail his campaign in my humble opinion.
Yes. The Mirror story shows a rather touching, naive faith in the continued prudishness of the British people, even though the word "fuck" is now common parlance on our TV screens, and we all watch pornhub on our phones. When we are not sexting.
Arent we all supposed blocked from doing so thanks to may genius purity law?
Boris using fruity language isn’t quite the black swan required to derail his campaign in my humble opinion.
Yes. The Mirror story shows a rather touching, naive faith in the continued prudishness of the British people, even though the word "fuck" is now common parlance on our TV screens, and we all watch pornhub on our phones. When we are not sexting.
You’re missing the point . The F word isn’t the issue , it’s who it’s directed at .However the story looks impossible to corroborate so won’t have any effect anyway. I see little chance of anything derailing Bozo .
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
I don't view gay 'marriage' as a civil right.
Why not? Since this is a civil law not a religious one, the Churches make religious decisions, give me one civil reason why gay people should be denied marriage.
Because I don't view gay 'marriage' as being equal to actual, real marriage. I don't view it as legitimate which is why I wouldn't attend one. It's as simple as that.
Sorry "I don't view" is not a civil reason to deny equality before the law.
If I write "I don't view interracial 'marriage' as being ..." would that be a valid reason to deny people equality before the law? No.
The Churches can deny it if they want but give a civil reason to deny it in law.
Homosexual behaviour is very different to the pigmentation of someone's skin, and it is a controversial behaviour in terms of morality and religion.
Bit of a silly comparison to make. But I can see why you would think that if you personally don't have moral/religious objections to homosexual behaviour.
What exactly are your "moral/religious objections to homosexual behaviour"?
Boris using fruity language isn’t quite the black swan required to derail his campaign in my humble opinion.
Yes. The Mirror story shows a rather touching, naive faith in the continued prudishness of the British people, even though the word "fuck" is now common parlance on our TV screens, and we all watch pornhub on our phones. When we are not sexting.
Arent we all supposed blocked from doing so thanks to may genius purity law?
Boris using fruity language isn’t quite the black swan required to derail his campaign in my humble opinion.
Yes. The Mirror story shows a rather touching, naive faith in the continued prudishness of the British people, even though the word "fuck" is now common parlance on our TV screens, and we all watch pornhub on our phones. When we are not sexting.
Arent we all supposed blocked from doing so thanks to may genius purity law?
I heard it kicks in, sometime in July? Given that it is a pet T May project, and also ludicrous, contentious and counter productive, let's hope that one upside to her departure is the modification or repeal of this rubbish legislation.
Comments
Stewart's father was a high ranking officer in SIS (MI6) and highly regarded. He was the model of Q from the James Bond films. Rory Stewart was,I understand, and almost certainly still is, a serving officer in MI6. If, Boris, as seems likely, becomes PM, and if, as usually happens with Boris, things descend into chaos, SIS will have their man ideally placed to step into pole position.
This is not the first time they have acted in this way; they were ready to oust Wilson, but never did so. But it is good to know that those whose job it is to protect us are doing their duty; indeed I find it most reassuring.
Snake oil.
9000 murders by gun and the rest accidental shootings and suicides.
She must be hoping Boris wins
Has a chance of taking the title from her.
I am sure you would not agree, but it seems pretty easy to argue it as a conservative move, which does not have to align with Tory, or how things used to be.
As an aside, I wonder if after a new election Westminster will keep its crown as the gayest parliament in the world.
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/06/09/the-uk-just-elected-a-record-number-of-lgbtq-people-to-parliament/
Personally I have no problem with gay marriage provided there is an exemption for religious bodies from having to perform such ceremonies if they do not wish to do so
That's what it looks like to me...
It’s a lonely old world. And I have only best wishes for gay people who want to tie the knot and share life with the one they love.
You repulse me.
There are no reason why gay couples should be barred from marrying their loved ones. Marriage is a civil institution not a religious one and it is civil marriage that is legal. Religions are still permitted to decide what they want to do and if they want to stick to archaic definitions they are allowed to do so.
Be careful, the people that you meet on the way up you will meet again on the way down!
If you don't like gay marriage then the solution for you is clear - don't marry a gay man.
Old Labour and rightwing Tory are not so far apart once you get away from economics and indeed are more likely to have voted Leave than liberal centrists too
I don’t have any issue with equal marriage but most of the major churches and Religions in the UK haven’t reconciled themselves to it and endorsed it including our established church. And it shouldn’t be a shock some still oppose it on religious grounds even if they accepted civil partnerships.
Marriage is a word and also a cultural institution but it didn’t as far as I am aware provide any extra legal or partner benefits that weren’t available with civil partnerships. It wasn’t really about those.
Of course we then created another legal oddity as straight people could not legally form civil partnerships.
And it’s also a bit unfair that siblings who may have lived together for decades don’t have inheritance tax concessions or survivor benefits for pensions even though they paid the same contributions as those with legally recognised spouses.
I digress....
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8104412/london-stabbings-2019-knife-crime-statistics/
58 2019
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8273147/london-murder-rate-2019/
with 14 hot summer nights to go till mid year. Looks pretty level pegging.
And I have adopted that solution. I am gay myself, but have chosen to remain abstinent and not have relationships due to my moral view on the subject.
That wasn't why I posted the tweet. It was to highlight how Khan is still playing on Trump's mind and his desire to get one back on him.
https://twitter.com/wahlen_de/status/1139992870205689858
https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/john-webster-adman-made-history/1154224
Passions for and against Trump and Khan will drown out any rationality but it's a disgrace.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48646922
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1139996442079191040
Cup hands here come Cadbury's. A hazelNUT in EVery BITE.
Lipsmackingthirstquenchingacetastingetcetc.... Pepsi.
I can remember them all, word for word, from my childhood. Kudos to great copywriters.
The Tory veteran talks of his dismay at the ‘fantasies’ of the leadership race and his fears if Boris Johnson becomes PM"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/15/kenneth-clarke-bring-down-no-deal-government
It was legalised civilly. It wasn't legalised for Churches, unless the Church chooses by its own choice to do it - which is surely the Churches own right?
Why repeal it? What does taking civil rights away from anyone achieve?
I was having this chat with a Labour-voting friend an hour ago.
His womanising and bastard-breeding and general caddishness is priced in. Everyone knows it, and shrugs, or they don't know it and they don't care anyway. A scandal that might stop him, now, will need to be monumental.
My friend and I were speculating what such a Boris-scuttling scandal might be. A rape, perhaps. Or a secret heroin addiction. A tape recording of the most outrageous racism. That's what the anti-Borisites need now, at this late stage. Something truly shocking.
If I write "I don't view interracial 'marriage' as being ..." would that be a valid reason to deny people equality before the law? No.
The Churches can deny it if they want but give a civil reason to deny it in law.
Does gay marriage harm others? No. So what reason does anyone have?
Does it violate religious beliefs? Perhaps but that doesn't matter for the law, and the Churches can deny it but we're talking civil marriage not religious marriage.
Bit of a silly comparison to make. But I can see why you would think that if you personally don't have moral/religious objections to homosexual behaviour.
And the Westminster poll has an alleged surge to 21 still 3 points behind the BP.
The right wing press desperation to help Bozo is vomit inducing .
However to see the state "moulded" in your image is a bizarre conservative viewpoint. The richness of individualism is one of the joys of a liberal democracy. Whereas a state of moulded people is a tyrants charter, whether it be of the authoritarian left or right.
Some have said you are living in the 1950's - you may choose to do so and your morals are a matter for you and you alone. But it would appear you also want 1984.
Thank you but no !!
22% say they would be more likely to vote Tory under Boris, his nearest rival got just 8% saying the same
Hancock said to be considering Gove or Boris but at least half his backers have already shifted to Gove and former Hancock backer David Mundell declared for Gove tonight with Karen Bradley also considering backing the Environment Secretary
Boris will be the first to betray Brexit.
Greens 27%
Union 24%
AfD 13%
SPD 11%
FDP 9%
Left 8%
Others 8%
https://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/