Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Betting opportunities in the German election – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 20 in General
imageBetting opportunities in the German election – politicalbetting.com

A quick guide to the parties may be helpful. As the system is modified PR, you get a greater choice of substantial parties than in Britain.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 11,427
    This is a profound insight


    ‘Theory: the effect of Remain campaigning over Brexit has been disastrous for the EU and for France especially - helping to confer a vastly inflated sense of their own righteousness and power, and of the UK's wrongness and impotence.’


    https://twitter.com/bencobley/status/1439506560779227137?s=21
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 8,569
    Aslan said:

    Leon said:

    This is a profound insight


    ‘Theory: the effect of Remain campaigning over Brexit has been disastrous for the EU and for France especially - helping to confer a vastly inflated sense of their own righteousness and power, and of the UK's wrongness and impotence.’


    https://twitter.com/bencobley/status/1439506560779227137?s=21

    I spoke to a German friend in the defence industry today and the topic of Le Strop came up. Despite being a confirmed pro-European and very supportive of the Franco-German alliance, his view was that the French didn't have a leg to stand on.

    Apparently the underperformance of the French in the Australian submarine contract was shocking and well known in the industry. They had originally agreed 80% of components were to be Aussie made, then they renegotiated to 60% and it was looking like they were going to have to drop it to 40%. On top of that the French attitude to work was going down very badly with the Australians. Not only did they not appreciate the 35 hour working week, which was strictly obeyed, but the French engineers were also taking all of August off and also regularly turning up to meetings 15 minutes late. According to him, the Aussies pulling out of the contract was known to be only a matter of time.
    Brilliant to have one's prejudices anecdotally confirmed but why does the aussie parts percentage fall rather than rise?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    edited September 20
    Aslan said:

    Leon said:

    This is a profound insight


    ‘Theory: the effect of Remain campaigning over Brexit has been disastrous for the EU and for France especially - helping to confer a vastly inflated sense of their own righteousness and power, and of the UK's wrongness and impotence.’


    https://twitter.com/bencobley/status/1439506560779227137?s=21

    I spoke to a German friend in the defence industry today and the topic of Le Strop came up. Despite being a confirmed pro-European and very supportive of the Franco-German alliance, his view was that the French didn't have a leg to stand on.

    Apparently the underperformance of the French in the Australian submarine contract was shocking and well known in the industry. They had originally agreed 80% of components were to be Aussie made, then they renegotiated to 60% and it was looking like they were going to have to drop it to 40%. On top of that the French attitude to work was going down very badly with the Australians. Not only did they not appreciate the 35 hour working week, which was strictly obeyed, but the French engineers were also taking all of August off and also regularly turning up to meetings 15 minutes late. According to him, the Aussies pulling out of the contract was known to be only a matter of time.
    It's wasn't a secret that the cost of the submarine contract had gone through the roof, and that the Australians were absolutely furious. (It is also worth remembering that one of the reasons that the Aussies went with the French was because the Americans weren't willing to share reactor technology with them. And AIUI only the French were willing to rework an existing nuclear sub to run diesel electric.)

    That the US is now willing to share beyond Britain (RR licenses quite a lot of US technology in its naval reactors), is a generally good thing. It is the US sensibly rewarding allies, rather than (as happened in the Trump era) pushing them away.

    That being said, I am slightly sceptical of your stories of Thales - because whenever I've had to deal with global French companies, they've been every bit as professional as global US, UK, Swiss or whoever companies. And that's especially been the case when a project was over-budget and late. Thales wants to make sales to everyone who doesn't want to be dependent on America - so they have a reputation to protect.

    Separately, there's another element of this that bears attention. The Taiwanese are currently building their own submarines (The Indigenous Submarine Project or IDS). And they did this, because Donald Trump refused authorisation for submarines or submarine technology to exported there. (A consequence of which is that the IDS is "based on technology from European countries".)

    Could we see Biden's America be willing to allow the Taiwanese to directly purchase US submarines? If it did, that would be a major demonstration that the US was willing to stand up to defend Taiwan.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,245
    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    edited September 20
    Aslan said:

    Leon said:

    This is a profound insight


    ‘Theory: the effect of Remain campaigning over Brexit has been disastrous for the EU and for France especially - helping to confer a vastly inflated sense of their own righteousness and power, and of the UK's wrongness and impotence.’


    https://twitter.com/bencobley/status/1439506560779227137?s=21

    I spoke to a German friend in the defence industry today and the topic of Le Strop came up. Despite being a confirmed pro-European and very supportive of the Franco-German alliance, his view was that the French didn't have a leg to stand on.

    Apparently the underperformance of the French in the Australian submarine contract was shocking and well known in the industry. They had originally agreed 80% of components were to be Aussie made, then they renegotiated to 60% and it was looking like they were going to have to drop it to 40%. On top of that the French attitude to work was going down very badly with the Australians. Not only did they not appreciate the 35 hour working week, which was strictly obeyed, but the French engineers were also taking all of August off and also regularly turning up to meetings 15 minutes late. According to him, the Aussies pulling out of the contract was known to be only a matter of time.
    Were they also engaging in having affairs with everybody elses husbands and wives?
  • AslanAslan Posts: 559
    France is seeking to scuttle the proposed EU-Australia free-trade agreement, asking fellow European nations to “reconsider” the deal in retaliation for the Morrison government cancelling the $90bn French submarine contract.

    Furious French government representatives are asking fellow EU countries to join a French campaign to pull out of the three-year talks on the agreement because of what is seen as an Anglosphere betrayal of an EU member.

    France recalled its ambassadors to the US and Australia on Friday and cancelled a gala at the French embassy to celebrate Franco-American relations, following the announcement of a three-way security pact between Australia, the United States and United Kingdom (AUKUS) last week to get Australia nuclear submarines from the US.

    ...European diplomats are describing the situation as a crisis in relations and other EU nations are likely to endorse French calls for action. But the Australian government is less concerned about the French calls because the EU-FTA has shown “little movement” in talks. 
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    @Aslan

    The issue - IIRC - is that the EU wants powers to block an Australian merger that would cause a monopolistic supplier to the EU. It's one of the same issues the US had with the TPP, where the bigger party demands an unreasonable (but not outrageous) condition.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 25,813
    There was a beautiful orange-red full moon this morning, hanging low in the sky well before dawn.

    Uplifting.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,631
    rcs1000 said:

    Good piece Nick.

    Yes, and sound betting tips. It’s a shame that being closer to the action, Betfair won’t let me actually put them on!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 42,181
    edited September 20

    Aslan said:

    Leon said:

    This is a profound insight


    ‘Theory: the effect of Remain campaigning over Brexit has been disastrous for the EU and for France especially - helping to confer a vastly inflated sense of their own righteousness and power, and of the UK's wrongness and impotence.’


    https://twitter.com/bencobley/status/1439506560779227137?s=21

    I spoke to a German friend in the defence industry today and the topic of Le Strop came up. Despite being a confirmed pro-European and very supportive of the Franco-German alliance, his view was that the French didn't have a leg to stand on.

    Apparently the underperformance of the French in the Australian submarine contract was shocking and well known in the industry. They had originally agreed 80% of components were to be Aussie made, then they renegotiated to 60% and it was looking like they were going to have to drop it to 40%. On top of that the French attitude to work was going down very badly with the Australians. Not only did they not appreciate the 35 hour working week, which was strictly obeyed, but the French engineers were also taking all of August off and also regularly turning up to meetings 15 minutes late. According to him, the Aussies pulling out of the contract was known to be only a matter of time.
    Were they also engaging in having affairs with everybody elses husbands and wives?
    Well, they have now been collectively, epically screwed by the Aussies. Does that count?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245
    Why on earth are we expending good bandwidth on discussing elections in a tiny backwater tinpot country which is of almost no importance globally.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423
    Charles said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)

    While, again FWIW, I agree with you about the stable parental unit with two people involved, I do wonder how the children's wider social group react to it, and consequently to the children, particularly as they get towards and into their teens.
    It'll probably not matter too much for those who get on reasonably well with their peers, but is it another stick with which to beat the fat girl or the asthmatic boy?

    I'm not aware of any work on this, and would be interested to learn of any.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,805
    TOPPING said:

    Why on earth are we expending good bandwidth on discussing elections in a tiny backwater tinpot country which is of almost no importance globally.

    Because we have always been at war with East Asia?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,631
    TOPPING said:

    Why on earth are we expending good bandwidth on discussing elections in a tiny backwater tinpot country which is of almost no importance globally.

    Because our usual backwater country of interest isn’t having one right now?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,187
    edited September 20
    Charles said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)

    A friend of mine volunteered for one of the catholic charities. Her role was to be a mentor and councellor for young girls who were pregnant, many of whom were vulnerable and had no-one else to turn to at a difficult time in their lives. Many of these mostly teenagers ended up with the adoption agencies.

    Now, their choice is social services or the abortion clinic, it’s heartbreaking.
  • Meanwhile: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/19/kwarteng-to-hold-emergency-meeting-with-gas-chiefs-over-price-crisis

    "We don't need gas storage in the UK. We have the North Sea"

    [checks paperwork]

    "What do you mean we've burned through it?"
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,648
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Thank you Nick for this piece. I have to say that the lack of interest in our media in the German election has been shocking. As a leaver I recognise that this election is as important for UK interests as that of President of the US. Germany is by far the most powerful country in the EU, whatever delusions the French may be under, and its role as funder and ultimate source of creditworthiness has only increased with the departure of the UK.

    What I have been able to read is a few retrospectives of Merkel's long reign but getting an idea of where Germany is likely to go from here is very difficult. Does anyone know what Scholz's position on future UK relations is going to be? Are the French going to be reined in or given their head? I would guess that the FDP being in the government was probably good for us but it is only a guess. Where are the CDU likely to go next after this lamentable campaign?

    Following on from yesterday’s discussions, it would also be useful to gain a better understanding of the party leaders’ attitudes toward Russia and China.
    Absolutely, China especially. Relations with the US have been enormously strained by the Nord Stream pipeline which Merkel has determinedly pushed through (to make up for her catastrophic mistakes on nuclear power) but as the US focuses more and more on China and less and less on Russia the opportunities for rapprochement exist, provided that Germany step back a bit from China. The problem is that it is a vastly more important market for them than Russia was ever going to be.

    If Germany proceed on their current course the formal winding up of NATO seems a high probability.
  • On topic, isn’t saying the AfD suffer from a far-right label a touch euphemistic? I thought they were in fact authentically far-right and that’s why people didn’t vote for them?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,648
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Thank you Nick for this piece. I have to say that the lack of interest in our media in the German election has been shocking. As a leaver I recognise that this election is as important for UK interests as that of President of the US. Germany is by far the most powerful country in the EU, whatever delusions the French may be under, and its role as funder and ultimate source of creditworthiness has only increased with the departure of the UK.

    What I have been able to read is a few retrospectives of Merkel's long reign but getting an idea of where Germany is likely to go from here is very difficult. Does anyone know what Scholz's position on future UK relations is going to be? Are the French going to be reined in or given their head? I would guess that the FDP being in the government was probably good for us but it is only a guess. Where are the CDU likely to go next after this lamentable campaign?

    Following on from yesterday’s discussions, it would also be useful to gain a better understanding of the party leaders’ attitudes toward Russia and China.
    Absolutely, China especially. Relations with the US have been enormously strained by the Nord Stream pipeline which Merkel has determinedly pushed through (to make up for her catastrophic mistakes on nuclear power) but as the US focuses more and more on China and less and less on Russia the opportunities for rapprochement exist, provided that Germany step back a bit from China. The problem is that it is a vastly more important market for them than Russia was ever going to be.

    If Germany proceed on their current course the formal winding up of NATO seems a high probability.
    Nordstream is great for Germany, but sucks for independent Ukraine. If you are Germany, you want as many energy sources as possible, with as few people able to disrupt your supply as possible.

    Sucky for Ukraine - as cutting the gas off was one of the few holds they had over Russia - but would we have done any different in their place? Germany was looking after German interests - in this case avoiding a situation where they could be blackmailed by someone else.

    The SPD has been a lot keener than the CDU on LNG. They have been full throated in their support for the Brunsbüttel LNG import terminal, and this would serve to give Germany another route to import gas, and reduce Russia's leverage.

    (Germany having their own LNG import facility has been heavily opposed by Russia, even as the Germans have attempted to assuage their fears, implying they'd use it to bring in gas from Russia's Yamal LNG.)

    As far as China goes, Germany probably isn't going to be a great ally of the West. Because she has no strategic interests in the Pacific, and she has massive exports there. Against that, Taiwan is also a massive export market for Germany, and Germany is not dependent on China to cover their current account. I would expect much silence.

    I don't expect the SPD to change Merkel's low key increase in Germany's defence budget. They've gone from 1.2% of GDP in '15/'16 to 1.6% today, and I suspect they'll keep slowly ramping it until they get to 2.0%.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,187
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Thank you Nick for this piece. I have to say that the lack of interest in our media in the German election has been shocking. As a leaver I recognise that this election is as important for UK interests as that of President of the US. Germany is by far the most powerful country in the EU, whatever delusions the French may be under, and its role as funder and ultimate source of creditworthiness has only increased with the departure of the UK.

    What I have been able to read is a few retrospectives of Merkel's long reign but getting an idea of where Germany is likely to go from here is very difficult. Does anyone know what Scholz's position on future UK relations is going to be? Are the French going to be reined in or given their head? I would guess that the FDP being in the government was probably good for us but it is only a guess. Where are the CDU likely to go next after this lamentable campaign?

    Following on from yesterday’s discussions, it would also be useful to gain a better understanding of the party leaders’ attitudes toward Russia and China.
    Absolutely, China especially. Relations with the US have been enormously strained by the Nord Stream pipeline which Merkel has determinedly pushed through (to make up for her catastrophic mistakes on nuclear power) but as the US focuses more and more on China and less and less on Russia the opportunities for rapprochement exist, provided that Germany step back a bit from China. The problem is that it is a vastly more important market for them than Russia was ever going to be.

    If Germany proceed on their current course the formal winding up of NATO seems a high probability.
    Well the whole point of NATO is to keep Russia honest. If the largest country in Europe prefers to commit to buying gas from Putin than defending the continent from attack, then what are the UK and USA supposed to do about it?

    My wife and her Ukranian friends are somewhat more concerned, as to where this might all be going.

    If China becomes the focus of international foreign policy, as epitomised by Aukus, it’s going to be too easy to take the world’s eyes off Russia. They also don’t need a massive military, to continue sowing discord and political division among the first world nations.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 1,760
    Thanks for header Nick. Smarkets have had a market for constituents of next German government out for a while now. If you think SPD+Green+FPD should be odds on, and I tend to agree, there is £333 available at 2.6.

  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,110
    edited September 20
    IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Good piece Nick.

    Yes, and sound betting tips. It’s a shame that being closer to the action, Betfair won’t let me actually put them on!

    Scholz at 1.3 is interesting. I'm not sure why he'd be longer than SPD most seats. The scenario where SPD are largest party but SPD+Greens+FDP coalition negotiations fail, SPD+Greens+Left also fails and leads to CDU/CSU+Greens+FDP succeeding seems a bit far-fetched.

    There could be a scenario where SPD are biggest party but nothing works and there are new elections, but I would have thought a very long shot.

    BTW, Bremen is a former West German state where SPD and Greens have gone into coalition with the Left, rather than the FDP. It's also an example of where the largest party (CDU) is NOT in power. I think it's the only current Bundesland where SPD and Greens had a choice of FDP or Left as coalition partner. However, at the federal level the choice is a bit different, FDP would be first choice and then it would depend on coalition negotiations.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Thank you Nick for this piece. I have to say that the lack of interest in our media in the German election has been shocking. As a leaver I recognise that this election is as important for UK interests as that of President of the US. Germany is by far the most powerful country in the EU, whatever delusions the French may be under, and its role as funder and ultimate source of creditworthiness has only increased with the departure of the UK.

    What I have been able to read is a few retrospectives of Merkel's long reign but getting an idea of where Germany is likely to go from here is very difficult. Does anyone know what Scholz's position on future UK relations is going to be? Are the French going to be reined in or given their head? I would guess that the FDP being in the government was probably good for us but it is only a guess. Where are the CDU likely to go next after this lamentable campaign?

    Following on from yesterday’s discussions, it would also be useful to gain a better understanding of the party leaders’ attitudes toward Russia and China.
    Absolutely, China especially. Relations with the US have been enormously strained by the Nord Stream pipeline which Merkel has determinedly pushed through (to make up for her catastrophic mistakes on nuclear power) but as the US focuses more and more on China and less and less on Russia the opportunities for rapprochement exist, provided that Germany step back a bit from China. The problem is that it is a vastly more important market for them than Russia was ever going to be.

    If Germany proceed on their current course the formal winding up of NATO seems a high probability.
    Well the whole point of NATO is to keep Russia honest. If the largest country in Europe prefers to commit to buying gas from Putin than defending the continent from attack, then what are the UK and USA supposed to do about it?

    My wife and her Ukranian friends are somewhat more concerned, as to where this might all be going.

    If China becomes the focus of international foreign policy, as epitomised by Aukus, it’s going to be too easy to take the world’s eyes off Russia. They also don’t need a massive military, to continue sowing discord and political division among the first world nations.
    Nordstream 2 is more about screwing Ukraine than anything else. Germany - and German power companies - will pay about $0.40 less per mmbtu of gas that comes via Nordstream.

    Can you blame them for signing up?
    Can you blame German politicians and consumers for wanting lower energy bills?

    And - from Germany's perspective - it's not that much of a risk once they have expanded the Norwegian pipeline and built the LNG import terminal.

    Indeed, I'd suggest it is Russia who is more constrained. Germany will have other suppliers of gas. Russia will have no other customers.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: Bottas at 4.5 each way for the win is worth considering. He's had some good performances in Russia in the past, and is coming off a very strong weekend in Italy. And Verstappen has a 3 place grid penalty, with overtaking being difficult, and sometimes the Dutchman can be tardy at the start (harder to handle when you have cars ahead of you as well as behind).
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 62,413
    edited September 20
    Charles said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)

    Sorry but I have absolutely zero sympathy for centres that wish to break the law being given a "religious" exemption. The law is the law and if these centres wish to put their petty bigotry over "helping the kids" then good riddance to them. Let secular organisations that don't put bigotry over helping the kids in accordance with the law take their place.

    Besides, while I may be an atheist I do have a decent understanding of the Bible and while I can't remember Christ attacking gay couples, I can recall a concept of how we are all sinners and then when it comes to the law Matthew 12:17 surely applies?

    The law is the law and that should apply to all equally and not have carved out religious exemptions whether it be for Anglicans, Catholics or Sharia.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Mr. Thompson, good riddance?

    Debatable. The capacity to find new homes for children requiring adoption has been diminished. That's not a good thing.

    If the law should apply equally in such matters, I look forward to seeing churches and mosques being compelled to marry gay and lesbian couples.
  • rcs1000 said:



    Nordstream 2 is more about screwing Ukraine than anything else. Germany - and German power companies - will pay about $0.40 less per mmbtu of gas that comes via Nordstream.

    Can you blame them for signing up?
    Can you blame German politicians and consumers for wanting lower energy bills?

    And - from Germany's perspective - it's not that much of a risk once they have expanded the Norwegian pipeline and built the LNG import terminal.

    Indeed, I'd suggest it is Russia who is more constrained. Germany will have other suppliers of gas. Russia will have no other customers.

    I wonder whose grandmother BJ would sell currently to have Germany’s energy options?
    The energy crisis seems to be comfortably overshadowing triumphant dawn of a new Anglospheric power bloc on the news this morning.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,497

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: Bottas at 4.5 each way for the win is worth considering. He's had some good performances in Russia in the past, and is coming off a very strong weekend in Italy. And Verstappen has a 3 place grid penalty, with overtaking being difficult, and sometimes the Dutchman can be tardy at the start (harder to handle when you have cars ahead of you as well as behind).

    Wont Verstappen take a new engine?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Mr. Gate, he might. The con is that means starting from the back. And while Bottas showed you can cut through the field, it's much easier if you don't have to.

    Turkey seems back on the agenda. There or the US might be preferable in terms of passing. The flipside is that taking it in Russia effectively nullifies his 3 place grid penalty rather than having that *and* going to the back elsewhere.

    If Verstappen does have a new engine then Bottas to be top 2 looks pretty likely.
  • IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Why on earth are we expending good bandwidth on discussing elections in a tiny backwater tinpot country which is of almost no importance globally.

    Because our usual backwater country of interest isn’t having one right now?
    They do have midterms next year though.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,187
    edited September 20

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: Bottas at 4.5 each way for the win is worth considering. He's had some good performances in Russia in the past, and is coming off a very strong weekend in Italy. And Verstappen has a 3 place grid penalty, with overtaking being difficult, and sometimes the Dutchman can be tardy at the start (harder to handle when you have cars ahead of you as well as behind).

    That’s a brave bet. It wouldn’t be a surprise to see the two Mercedes cars swapped over by team orders, and not in a way that’s favourable to Mr Bottas. He’s definitely worth the place bet though, or the podium.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 6,789

    Mr. Thompson, good riddance?

    Debatable. The capacity to find new homes for children requiring adoption has been diminished. That's not a good thing.

    If the law should apply equally in such matters, I look forward to seeing churches and mosques being compelled to marry gay and lesbian couples.

    Sounds a bit like PT’s “there won’t be gaps on supermarket shelves because the supermarkets will just spread their available products more thinly”...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Mr. Sandpit, perhaps. Almost worth seeing that order just to see how Bottas reacts. It could be his last ever chance of a win, in that scenario.

    It was made with him probably being second in mind. Of course, unlikely chaps can win, as we saw last time out.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    alex_ said:

    Mr. Thompson, good riddance?

    Debatable. The capacity to find new homes for children requiring adoption has been diminished. That's not a good thing.

    If the law should apply equally in such matters, I look forward to seeing churches and mosques being compelled to marry gay and lesbian couples.

    Sounds a bit like PT’s “there won’t be gaps on supermarket shelves because the supermarkets will just spread their available products more thinly”...
    I don't think that is what PT said.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423

    Charles said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)

    Sorry but I have absolutely zero sympathy for centres that wish to break the law being given a "religious" exemption. The law is the law and if these centres wish to put their petty bigotry over "helping the kids" then good riddance to them. Let secular organisations that don't put bigotry over helping the kids in accordance with the law take their place.

    Besides, while I may be an atheist I do have a decent understanding of the Bible and while I can't remember Christ attacking gay couples, I can recall a concept of how we are all sinners and then when it comes to the law Matthew 12:17 surely applies?

    The law is the law and that should apply to all equally and not have carved out religious exemptions whether it be for Anglicans, Catholics or Sharia.
    From their standpoint, of course, sending children to 'families' which don't conform to their stereotype isn't helping them.
    Not saying I agree with their stance, rather that I understand it.

    However, your middle paragraph, Mr T, of course applies
  • I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245
    alex_ said:

    Mr. Thompson, good riddance?

    Debatable. The capacity to find new homes for children requiring adoption has been diminished. That's not a good thing.

    If the law should apply equally in such matters, I look forward to seeing churches and mosques being compelled to marry gay and lesbian couples.

    Sounds a bit like PT’s “there won’t be gaps on supermarket shelves because the supermarkets will just spread their available products more thinly”...
    Tricky isn't it. PT is saying he's rather stick to his principles of not having bigoted institutions play a part in the upbringing of children if they won't abandon their bigotry.

    And I 100% agree with him. I suppose it is also a shame that the Fred & Rose West adoption agency never got off the ground - think of all the children who would have been rehomed with them.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    Whenever the UK-EU trade deficit was equated to 'they need us more than we need them', I tried to explain - so many times - that this depended on what Britain bought and sold. The examples I always used were FOOD and ENERGY. Time and again I was told to stop talking Britain down. https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1439844144122417152/photo/1
  • Fck, Mick Jones always had a bit of an old geezer thing going on, but now there’s nothing else.

    https://twitter.com/agencytrainer/status/1439845859177472003?s=21
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    I don't think it's only Catholics who 'discriminate' against homosexuality; AIUI many people who follow Abrahamic regions do.

    Don't know about Buddhists, Taoists or Hindus.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972
    Good article from Nick Palmer.

    It does look that after 16 years in power leading the government coaition the CDU/CSU will go into opposition as Merkal leaves the scene with the SPD moving from the junior to the senior party in government under Scholz.

    Most likely the SPD will then form an alliance in government with the Greens and FDP, which would also be the first time the FDP have been in government with the SPD and not the CDU/CSU since 1982
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,187
    edited September 20

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    The issue is that these Catholic adoption agencies had been running successfully for decades. They offered to partner with other agencies who would work with gay couples, rather than turn them away, which seemed a fair compromise.

    The consequences, are more abortions and more children growing up in what is euphemistically called ‘care’, including in places like Rotherham.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    Catholic churches indeed all Christian churches are also not required to provide gay marriage ceremonies either, nor are Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues despite gay marriage being the law of the land. Though the Church in Wales has recently voted to have gay blessings in its churches
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,497
    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,486

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    The two aren’t the same.

    In the case of the Catholic adoption agencies, not only are there other alternatives but the agencies offer to help couples find the right agency. If it was that Catholic adoption agencies had a monopoly of the market, it might be difficult but they don’t.

    Your example of Muslim women and Sharia is not comparable because those action directly impact on the welfare of another human being and this fundamentally contradict a human’s individual rights.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245
    edited September 20
    HYUFD said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    Catholic churches indeed all Christian churches are also not required to provide gay marriage ceremonies either, nor are Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues despite gay marriage being the law of the land. Though the Church in Wales has recently voted to have gay blessings in its churches
    Until Canon Law changes, or the church (edit: Church of England) is disestablished, it is illegal for a Church of England church to offer gay marriages.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Thank you Nick for this piece. I have to say that the lack of interest in our media in the German election has been shocking. As a leaver I recognise that this election is as important for UK interests as that of President of the US. Germany is by far the most powerful country in the EU, whatever delusions the French may be under, and its role as funder and ultimate source of creditworthiness has only increased with the departure of the UK.

    What I have been able to read is a few retrospectives of Merkel's long reign but getting an idea of where Germany is likely to go from here is very difficult. Does anyone know what Scholz's position on future UK relations is going to be? Are the French going to be reined in or given their head? I would guess that the FDP being in the government was probably good for us but it is only a guess. Where are the CDU likely to go next after this lamentable campaign?

    Following on from yesterday’s discussions, it would also be useful to gain a better understanding of the party leaders’ attitudes toward Russia and China.
    Absolutely, China especially. Relations with the US have been enormously strained by the Nord Stream pipeline which Merkel has determinedly pushed through (to make up for her catastrophic mistakes on nuclear power) but as the US focuses more and more on China and less and less on Russia the opportunities for rapprochement exist, provided that Germany step back a bit from China. The problem is that it is a vastly more important market for them than Russia was ever going to be.

    If Germany proceed on their current course the formal winding up of NATO seems a high probability.
    NATO is needed more than ever, Putin poses a far greater threat to the Baltic states for example than Gorbachev ever did.

    Germany still has US troops based there partly to ward off the Russians whatever deals they have done on the Nord Stream
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 8,569

    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals

    Funny he never married...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Mr. Topping, that's a black and white view of something with rather more nuance. It isn't virtue versus evil, though I can understand why you'd want to paint yourself with a halo.

    Adoption agencies that refuse to send children to gay couples do not reduce the number of children going to gay couples because that was not happening before. Their view on homosexuality, which is not one I share, doesn't increase it either. But they do (or did) send children to adoption with straight couples. By closing them down because you refuse to compromise on your scared principles (being rather less tolerant than them who did, at least, reluctantly accept partnering with agencies did engage in adoption by gay couples) all that's happened is that you've reduced the number of children being adopted, and this is not an area overflowing with provision.

    What's the practical impact? Whose life is made better?

    If your principle leads to the real world becoming objectively worse is it a principle worth holding? It might be. But it should certainly be considered.

    I agree entirely it's best of all if everyone would be content to have children adopted by gay people (after all, if a single mother or father can raise a child then having double mothers or double fathers seems obviously better). But that is not reality.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 1,760
    Strictly update.

    As predicted by yours truly on here, Rhys has come in from best price 7/1 to best price 4/1 and challenging for favourite following the opening show.

    My other comments still apply. He def looks the best dancer but almost looks like a semi-pro out of the box. A profile that's good for reaching the final but not to win with the public.
  • Thanks Nick, a very useful summary of the state of play ahead of the German election. A well informed commentator on German politics who I speak to puts a slightly higher probability on Mr Laschet becoming Chancellor than you do, even if CDU/CSU come a little behind the SPD. Personally, I wonder whether the centre right could have a better than expected night, a la UK 1992, with the fear of the Red Red Green coalition leading some late waverers to stick with the CDU. It may come down to whether the Greens (who prefer the SPD) or the FDP (who prefer the CDU) blink first in the coalition talks.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Mr. Gate, if we could ask him it might make the debate more straightforward.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972
    edited September 20
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    Catholic churches indeed all Christian churches are also not required to provide gay marriage ceremonies either, nor are Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues despite gay marriage being the law of the land. Though the Church in Wales has recently voted to have gay blessings in its churches
    Until Canon Law changes, or the church is disestablished, it is illegal for a Church of England church to offer gay marriages.
    The law of the land is gay marriage is legal, if general synod voted to allow gay marriage the law in England would be swiftly changed to accomodate that. The Methodists have already voted to have gay marriages.

    However the problem for the Anglican communion is it is a broad church and while the US Episcopal Church for example has allowed gay marriage, the African Anglican churches certainly would oppose that, indeed gay marriage is not legal in most of Africa.

    So at most gay blessings is the limit to what the Church of England will allow in its churches given the Archbishop of Canterbury is spiritual leader of the Anglican communion
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972

    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals

    I don't think he ever mentioned it, the Old Testament however certainly did
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Mr. 64, annoyingly, I forgot to back that. But good luck to you.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245
    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    Catholic churches indeed all Christian churches are also not required to provide gay marriage ceremonies either, nor are Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues despite gay marriage being the law of the land. Though the Church in Wales has recently voted to have gay blessings in its churches
    Until Canon Law changes, or the church is disestablished, it is illegal for a Church of England church to offer gay marriages.
    The law of the land is gay marriage is legal, if general synod voted to allow gay marriage the law in England would be swiftly changed to accomodate that. The Methodists have already voted to have gay marriages.

    However the problem for the Anglican communion is it is a broad church and while the US Episcopal Church for example has allowed gay marriage, the African Anglican churches certainly would oppose that, indeed gay marriage is not legal in most of Africa.

    So at most gay blessings is the limit to what the Church of England will allow in its churches given the Archbishop of Canterbury is spiritual leader of the Anglican communion
    As I said, until Canon Law is changed, it is illegal to offer gay marriages in a Church of England church.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,447
    IshmaelZ said:

    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals

    Funny he never married...
    Cheap shot. It was never intended by God that he should marry.
  • Scott_xP said:

    Whenever the UK-EU trade deficit was equated to 'they need us more than we need them', I tried to explain - so many times - that this depended on what Britain bought and sold. The examples I always used were FOOD and ENERGY. Time and again I was told to stop talking Britain down. https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1439844144122417152/photo/1

    The massive spike in UK leccy prices compares grimly to the rather gentle increases in Europe. And it was predicted https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020/03/10/hard-elecxit-will-brexit-increase-the-cost-of-electricity/
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245
    edited September 20
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    Catholic churches indeed all Christian churches are also not required to provide gay marriage ceremonies either, nor are Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues despite gay marriage being the law of the land. Though the Church in Wales has recently voted to have gay blessings in its churches
    Until Canon Law changes, or the church is disestablished, it is illegal for a Church of England church to offer gay marriages.
    The law of the land is gay marriage is legal, if general synod voted to allow gay marriage the law in England would be swiftly changed to accomodate that. The Methodists have already voted to have gay marriages.

    However the problem for the Anglican communion is it is a broad church and while the US Episcopal Church for example has allowed gay marriage, the African Anglican churches certainly would oppose that, indeed gay marriage is not legal in most of Africa.

    So at most gay blessings is the limit to what the Church of England will allow in its churches given the Archbishop of Canterbury is spiritual leader of the Anglican communion
    As I said, until Canon Law is changed, it is illegal to offer gay marriages in a Church of England church.
    More precisely, according to the "second lock", such a marriage, if undertaken, would not be recognised in law as well as it being illegal ("fourth lock").
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 8,569
    edited September 20

    IshmaelZ said:

    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals

    Funny he never married...
    Cheap shot. It was never intended by God that he should marry.
    How do you know?

    Bit more complicated than you think. From Wikipedia Sexuality of Jesus

    James I of England may have been relying on a pre-existing tradition when he defended his relationship with the young Duke of Buckingham: "I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his son John, and I have my George."[9] Frederick the Great wrote to similar effect in his 1748/9 poem Palladium, which includes the lines: "This good Jesus, how do you think/He got John to sleep in his bed?/Can't you see he was his Ganymede?"[10]

    Others who have given voice to this interpretation of the relationship between Jesus and John have been the philosophers Denis Diderot and Jeremy Bentham.
  • Mr. Topping, that's a black and white view of something with rather more nuance. It isn't virtue versus evil, though I can understand why you'd want to paint yourself with a halo.

    Adoption agencies that refuse to send children to gay couples do not reduce the number of children going to gay couples because that was not happening before. Their view on homosexuality, which is not one I share, doesn't increase it either. But they do (or did) send children to adoption with straight couples. By closing them down because you refuse to compromise on your scared principles (being rather less tolerant than them who did, at least, reluctantly accept partnering with agencies did engage in adoption by gay couples) all that's happened is that you've reduced the number of children being adopted, and this is not an area overflowing with provision.

    What's the practical impact? Whose life is made better?

    If your principle leads to the real world becoming objectively worse is it a principle worth holding? It might be. But it should certainly be considered.

    I agree entirely it's best of all if everyone would be content to have children adopted by gay people (after all, if a single mother or father can raise a child then having double mothers or double fathers seems obviously better). But that is not reality.

    This is a difficult issue. My gut instinct would be to accept the compromise in the interests of the children. But this issue doesn't exist in isolation, and I can understand why gay people wouldn't want to accept the principle, and establish a precedent, of them being second class citizens. After all, how many decades, indeed centuries, have they had to fight for the rights that heterosexual take for granted? If they had given way every time some religious bigot told them that God doesn't like gays then they would still be living lives of dishonesty and fear in the closet and society would be far the worse for it.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,486

    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals

    He didn’t. The Catholic Church’s stance is very much a Pauline concept. If you want to get into the weeds, there is an interesting question about how much of the Christian faith is actually Christian and how much is influenced by St Paul.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Mr. Pioneers, decades of stupid energy policy more focused on green headlines than keeping the lights on hasn't helped.

    Mr. Boy, aye, for a lot of people there's a tension there. It isn't clear cut. But in such a case I'd prefer to do a practical good, even if it's a long way short of perfect.

    And there are other religious exemptions in various ways on equality laws (ordination of priests, marriage etc).
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245

    Mr. Topping, that's a black and white view of something with rather more nuance. It isn't virtue versus evil, though I can understand why you'd want to paint yourself with a halo.

    Adoption agencies that refuse to send children to gay couples do not reduce the number of children going to gay couples because that was not happening before. Their view on homosexuality, which is not one I share, doesn't increase it either. But they do (or did) send children to adoption with straight couples. By closing them down because you refuse to compromise on your scared principles (being rather less tolerant than them who did, at least, reluctantly accept partnering with agencies did engage in adoption by gay couples) all that's happened is that you've reduced the number of children being adopted, and this is not an area overflowing with provision.

    What's the practical impact? Whose life is made better?

    If your principle leads to the real world becoming objectively worse is it a principle worth holding? It might be. But it should certainly be considered.

    I agree entirely it's best of all if everyone would be content to have children adopted by gay people (after all, if a single mother or father can raise a child then having double mothers or double fathers seems obviously better). But that is not reality.

    This is a difficult issue. My gut instinct would be to accept the compromise in the interests of the children. But this issue doesn't exist in isolation, and I can understand why gay people wouldn't want to accept the principle, and establish a precedent, of them being second class citizens. After all, how many decades, indeed centuries, have they had to fight for the rights that heterosexual take for granted? If they had given way every time some religious bigot told them that God doesn't like gays then they would still be living lives of dishonesty and fear in the closet and society would be far the worse for it.
    Plus allowing the Catholic Church to be involved in the affairs of children. What could possibly go wrong?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245
    MrEd said:

    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals

    He didn’t. The Catholic Church’s stance is very much a Pauline concept. If you want to get into the weeds, there is an interesting question about how much of the Christian faith is actually Christian and how much is influenced by St Paul.
    Is this one of those you're not a proper Tory things?
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,760
    Excellent summary Mr Palmer, many thanks.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702
    IshmaelZ said:

    Aslan said:

    Leon said:

    This is a profound insight


    ‘Theory: the effect of Remain campaigning over Brexit has been disastrous for the EU and for France especially - helping to confer a vastly inflated sense of their own righteousness and power, and of the UK's wrongness and impotence.’


    https://twitter.com/bencobley/status/1439506560779227137?s=21

    I spoke to a German friend in the defence industry today and the topic of Le Strop came up. Despite being a confirmed pro-European and very supportive of the Franco-German alliance, his view was that the French didn't have a leg to stand on.

    Apparently the underperformance of the French in the Australian submarine contract was shocking and well known in the industry. They had originally agreed 80% of components were to be Aussie made, then they renegotiated to 60% and it was looking like they were going to have to drop it to 40%. On top of that the French attitude to work was going down very badly with the Australians. Not only did they not appreciate the 35 hour working week, which was strictly obeyed, but the French engineers were also taking all of August off and also regularly turning up to meetings 15 minutes late. According to him, the Aussies pulling out of the contract was known to be only a matter of time.
    Brilliant to have one's prejudices anecdotally confirmed but why does the aussie parts percentage fall rather than rise?
    Hard to tell without being a fly on the wall. But previous Australia arms deals have had significant problems with their requirement for work to be done in Australia.

    On the other hand, the French attitude to keeping work in France has been noted in aerospace. The Germans are (or used to be) the worst offenders in grabbing work share using interesting methods, in Europe, but the French are not far behind.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 43,600
    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245

    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Very good explanation of the sitch on R4 today at 8.10am.

    Presumably (that part wasn't mentioned) the gas companies that are going bust sold long but bought short in the gas market and hence can't fulfil their obligations.
  • Sandpit said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    The issue is that these Catholic adoption agencies had been running successfully for decades. They offered to partner with other agencies who would work with gay couples, rather than turn them away, which seemed a fair compromise.

    The consequences, are more abortions and more children growing up in what is euphemistically called ‘care’, including in places like Rotherham.
    If there are readily made alternatives available then why should people end up in care?

    Why don't they end up at the alternatives that were good enough for gays? Why can't they be good enough for everyone? If Catholic agencies aren't crowding out unbigoted ones then the unbigoted ones should be able to expand to meet the demand.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 17,113

    Charles said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)

    While, again FWIW, I agree with you about the stable parental unit with two people involved, I do wonder how the children's wider social group react to it, and consequently to the children, particularly as they get towards and into their teens.
    It'll probably not matter too much for those who get on reasonably well with their peers, but is it another stick with which to beat the fat girl or the asthmatic boy?

    I'm not aware of any work on this, and would be interested to learn of any.

    I think peer pressure about gay (or mixed race or single) parents has pretty much gone away among kids. Teasing and bullying hasn't, but not much on those topics.

    Incidentally, the Netflix series Sex Education (series 3 just released), while superficially comedy froth with doubtful cultural background (it's around a school in Britain with distinctly American characteristics) is praised by all my young friends as being spot on abput current social attitudes - it subtly introduces all kinds of teenage and adult angst issues, and manages to be funny, touching, unsentimental and verbally explicit without being pornographic.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 43,600
    TOPPING said:

    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Very good explanation of the sitch on R4 today at 8.10am.

    Presumably (that part wasn't mentioned) the gas companies that are going bust sold long but bought short in the gas market and hence can't fulfil their obligations.
    AEP's article is much gloomer than just a few smaller energy suppier's going under. Industrialists are screaming that disaster awaits this winter on a whole range of fronts. Three day week here we come.

    Sounds like Business Dept over the years has made multiple mistakes and assumptions and the chickens are coming home...

    Brexit wont help of course as there will be no solidarity with EU over interconnectors and contracts.

    AEP of course, so gloom warning trigger.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226
    rcs1000 said:

    Aslan said:

    Leon said:

    This is a profound insight


    ‘Theory: the effect of Remain campaigning over Brexit has been disastrous for the EU and for France especially - helping to confer a vastly inflated sense of their own righteousness and power, and of the UK's wrongness and impotence.’


    https://twitter.com/bencobley/status/1439506560779227137?s=21

    I spoke to a German friend in the defence industry today and the topic of Le Strop came up. Despite being a confirmed pro-European and very supportive of the Franco-German alliance, his view was that the French didn't have a leg to stand on.

    Apparently the underperformance of the French in the Australian submarine contract was shocking and well known in the industry. They had originally agreed 80% of components were to be Aussie made, then they renegotiated to 60% and it was looking like they were going to have to drop it to 40%. On top of that the French attitude to work was going down very badly with the Australians. Not only did they not appreciate the 35 hour working week, which was strictly obeyed, but the French engineers were also taking all of August off and also regularly turning up to meetings 15 minutes late. According to him, the Aussies pulling out of the contract was known to be only a matter of time.
    ....Separately, there's another element of this that bears attention. The Taiwanese are currently building their own submarines (The Indigenous Submarine Project or IDS). And they did this, because Donald Trump refused authorisation for submarines or submarine technology to exported there. (A consequence of which is that the IDS is "based on technology from European countries".)

    Could we see Biden's America be willing to allow the Taiwanese to directly purchase US submarines? If it did, that would be a major demonstration that the US was willing to stand up to defend Taiwan.
    The new Taiwanese submarine* will contain a lot of US systems - sonar, combat systems, torpedoes etc (which were approved by Trump) - and is being built with Japanese help.
    The first boat is now expected to be launched in just two years' time, unusually ahead of schedule. Assuming that's correct, it's hard to see what alternative they could get from the US, who don't even build diesel/electric boats.

    *inauspiciously labelled the 'IDS'...
  • Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Massive shit. As @Morris_Dancer pointed out this has been brewing for a long time. We've been making strategically stupid decisions in energy since the "dash for gas" days. You can only rely on North Sea Gas as your energy reserve if you haven't let the privatised utilities burn through it already.

    For all of the bluster the UK has been increasingly and heavily reliant on exports for decades. Too much focus on prices and competition and profiteering, not enough on where the energy is coming from and what drives the prices.

    So here we are. Reliant on imported gas with fuck all storage, reliant on imported electricity with no membership of the regulated European energy market (and nothing to replace it). A unique to Britain massive price spike in electricity threatening business ruin food shortages and blackouts.

    We may avoid it. But why the fuck has Johnson let us slide out here to the edge? Global Britain who can't keep the lights on? Watch him spin our power crisis as some kind of environmental statement for COP26.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,187

    Sandpit said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    The issue is that these Catholic adoption agencies had been running successfully for decades. They offered to partner with other agencies who would work with gay couples, rather than turn them away, which seemed a fair compromise.

    The consequences, are more abortions and more children growing up in what is euphemistically called ‘care’, including in places like Rotherham.
    If there are readily made alternatives available then why should people end up in care?

    Why don't they end up at the alternatives that were good enough for gays? Why can't they be good enough for everyone? If Catholic agencies aren't crowding out unbigoted ones then the unbigoted ones should be able to expand to meet the demand.
    The main difference between Catholic adoption agencies, and many domestic adoption placements - mostly run by local social services - is that the Catholic agencies actually cared about, and provided pastoral support to, young pregnant women.

    The vast majority of other private adoption agencies operating in the UK, are sourcing children from abroad.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 537

    Charles said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)

    While, again FWIW, I agree with you about the stable parental unit with two people involved, I do wonder how the children's wider social group react to it, and consequently to the children, particularly as they get towards and into their teens.
    It'll probably not matter too much for those who get on reasonably well with their peers, but is it another stick with which to beat the fat girl or the asthmatic boy?

    I'm not aware of any work on this, and would be interested to learn of any.

    I also wonder about the role model question - e.g. if you've two gay blokes who adopt a girl, where is her female role model?
    Often the worst damage when family breakup occurs is to the kid who loses a role model of their own gender from regular family life.
  • Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Massive shit. As @Morris_Dancer pointed out this has been brewing for a long time. We've been making strategically stupid decisions in energy since the "dash for gas" days. You can only rely on North Sea Gas as your energy reserve if you haven't let the privatised utilities burn through it already.

    For all of the bluster the UK has been increasingly and heavily reliant on exports for decades. Too much focus on prices and competition and profiteering, not enough on where the energy is coming from and what drives the prices.

    So here we are. Reliant on imported gas with fuck all storage, reliant on imported electricity with no membership of the regulated European energy market (and nothing to replace it). A unique to Britain massive price spike in electricity threatening business ruin food shortages and blackouts.

    We may avoid it. But why the fuck has Johnson let us slide out here to the edge? Global Britain who can't keep the lights on? Watch him spin our power crisis as some kind of environmental statement for COP26.
    Its an obsession with being global that is the fundamental problem.

    When you think in global terms you then start thinking that you don't need to produce anything yourself and that everything can be imported.

    And its a mentality that set in decades ago - its why the UK has run a trade deficit since 1998.

    Plus in the energy sector the added obsession of reducing carbon emissions.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245

    TOPPING said:

    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Very good explanation of the sitch on R4 today at 8.10am.

    Presumably (that part wasn't mentioned) the gas companies that are going bust sold long but bought short in the gas market and hence can't fulfil their obligations.
    AEP's article is much gloomer than just a few smaller energy suppier's going under. Industrialists are screaming that disaster awaits this winter on a whole range of fronts. Three day week here we come.

    Sounds like Business Dept over the years has made multiple mistakes and assumptions and the chickens are coming home...

    Brexit wont help of course as there will be no solidarity with EU over interconnectors and contracts.

    AEP of course, so gloom warning trigger.
    Do you have a link to that article? Or any one giving a broader context?

    This morning it was put as though "the world turned the lights back on" after the virus.

    But would like to see further info.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832

    The massive spike in UK leccy prices compares grimly to the rather gentle increases in Europe. And it was predicted https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020/03/10/hard-elecxit-will-brexit-increase-the-cost-of-electricity/

    This should be retweeted over the next few weeks whenever another energy company goes bust. https://twitter.com/MrYesWeCan/status/1439667182745669632/photo/1
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972
    edited September 20
    I would be wary about that, given Morrison still leads Albanese as preferred PM.

    At the 2019 Australian general election every final poll had Shorten's Labor ahead of Morrison's Coalition on 2PP and they were expected to win, however Morrison led Shorten as preferred PM and it was indeed Morrison who was re elected. On the primary vote the latest Morgan poll also has the LNP coalition on 39.5% to just 35% for Labor even if Labour lead on 2PP
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,187
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Very good explanation of the sitch on R4 today at 8.10am.

    Presumably (that part wasn't mentioned) the gas companies that are going bust sold long but bought short in the gas market and hence can't fulfil their obligations.
    AEP's article is much gloomer than just a few smaller energy suppier's going under. Industrialists are screaming that disaster awaits this winter on a whole range of fronts. Three day week here we come.

    Sounds like Business Dept over the years has made multiple mistakes and assumptions and the chickens are coming home...

    Brexit wont help of course as there will be no solidarity with EU over interconnectors and contracts.

    AEP of course, so gloom warning trigger.
    Do you have a link to that article? Or any one giving a broader context?

    This morning it was put as though "the world turned the lights back on" after the virus.

    But would like to see further info.
    AE-P article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/09/19/mounting-fears-1970s-style-three-day-week-britains-energy-crunch/
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,245
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Very good explanation of the sitch on R4 today at 8.10am.

    Presumably (that part wasn't mentioned) the gas companies that are going bust sold long but bought short in the gas market and hence can't fulfil their obligations.
    AEP's article is much gloomer than just a few smaller energy suppier's going under. Industrialists are screaming that disaster awaits this winter on a whole range of fronts. Three day week here we come.

    Sounds like Business Dept over the years has made multiple mistakes and assumptions and the chickens are coming home...

    Brexit wont help of course as there will be no solidarity with EU over interconnectors and contracts.

    AEP of course, so gloom warning trigger.
    Do you have a link to that article? Or any one giving a broader context?

    This morning it was put as though "the world turned the lights back on" after the virus.

    But would like to see further info.
    AE-P article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/09/19/mounting-fears-1970s-style-three-day-week-britains-energy-crunch/
    tx
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    The issue is that these Catholic adoption agencies had been running successfully for decades. They offered to partner with other agencies who would work with gay couples, rather than turn them away, which seemed a fair compromise.

    The consequences, are more abortions and more children growing up in what is euphemistically called ‘care’, including in places like Rotherham.
    If there are readily made alternatives available then why should people end up in care?

    Why don't they end up at the alternatives that were good enough for gays? Why can't they be good enough for everyone? If Catholic agencies aren't crowding out unbigoted ones then the unbigoted ones should be able to expand to meet the demand.
    The main difference between Catholic adoption agencies, and many domestic adoption placements - mostly run by local social services - is that the Catholic agencies actually cared about, and provided pastoral support to, young pregnant women.

    The vast majority of other private adoption agencies operating in the UK, are sourcing children from abroad.
    They just didn't care enough about them to do the role with equality before the law?

    Hopefully the people who care and have passion will take up jobs in agencies that do want to look after young women while paying full respect to everyone equally before the law.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,163

    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Massive shit. As @Morris_Dancer pointed out this has been brewing for a long time. We've been making strategically stupid decisions in energy since the "dash for gas" days. You can only rely on North Sea Gas as your energy reserve if you haven't let the privatised utilities burn through it already.

    For all of the bluster the UK has been increasingly and heavily reliant on exports for decades. Too much focus on prices and competition and profiteering, not enough on where the energy is coming from and what drives the prices.

    So here we are. Reliant on imported gas with fuck all storage, reliant on imported electricity with no membership of the regulated European energy market (and nothing to replace it). A unique to Britain massive price spike in electricity threatening business ruin food shortages and blackouts.

    We may avoid it. But why the fuck has Johnson let us slide out here to the edge? Global Britain who can't keep the lights on? Watch him spin our power crisis as some kind of environmental statement for COP26.
    I don't believe Johnny Voting-Public would buy the COP26 ruse at all, particularly us oldies (Boris-voting over 55s) who are prone to the cold.

    If I was Johnson I would be blaming the 22 years of Labour/Coalition/Remainer governments (none of whom, let's face it had an energy policy). This fiasco has been brewing for years. He'll get away with that, lights or no lights.
  • Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Massive shit. As @Morris_Dancer pointed out this has been brewing for a long time. We've been making strategically stupid decisions in energy since the "dash for gas" days. You can only rely on North Sea Gas as your energy reserve if you haven't let the privatised utilities burn through it already.

    For all of the bluster the UK has been increasingly and heavily reliant on exports for decades. Too much focus on prices and competition and profiteering, not enough on where the energy is coming from and what drives the prices.

    So here we are. Reliant on imported gas with fuck all storage, reliant on imported electricity with no membership of the regulated European energy market (and nothing to replace it). A unique to Britain massive price spike in electricity threatening business ruin food shortages and blackouts.

    We may avoid it. But why the fuck has Johnson let us slide out here to the edge? Global Britain who can't keep the lights on? Watch him spin our power crisis as some kind of environmental statement for COP26.
    Headlines that have aged well, part 471

    "Sturgeon told ‘find new customer’ for independent Scotland's energy as UK would cut ties"

    https://tinyurl.com/4k4byk8h
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423

    Charles said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    The Catholic adoption centres believed that adoption by gay couples was against their religious beliefs. When they were given no choice they closed and kids who were previously adopted were less well supported with a huge cost to them.

    The compromise I pushed at the time was the requirement that if a Catholic service wasn’t willing to provide adoption services to gay couples themselves they had to have a partnership with someone who would. The Catholics were grumpy but ok with it. The activists on the gay rights side weren’t.

    The kids lost out.

    (FWIW my personal belief is that a stable two person parental unit is key to children’s success in life. The sex of each member of the parental unit is irrelevant)

    While, again FWIW, I agree with you about the stable parental unit with two people involved, I do wonder how the children's wider social group react to it, and consequently to the children, particularly as they get towards and into their teens.
    It'll probably not matter too much for those who get on reasonably well with their peers, but is it another stick with which to beat the fat girl or the asthmatic boy?

    I'm not aware of any work on this, and would be interested to learn of any.

    I think peer pressure about gay (or mixed race or single) parents has pretty much gone away among kids. Teasing and bullying hasn't, but not much on those topics.

    Incidentally, the Netflix series Sex Education (series 3 just released), while superficially comedy froth with doubtful cultural background (it's around a school in Britain with distinctly American characteristics) is praised by all my young friends as being spot on abput current social attitudes - it subtly introduces all kinds of teenage and adult angst issues, and manages to be funny, touching, unsentimental and verbally explicit without being pornographic.
    That's good to read; I can imagine racial mixtures not being much of a problem issue any more, given the amount of 'mixtures' about, and the generally positive public attitudes on the subject.. One of my grandchildren was a PHSE teacher and is now training to be an Educational Psychologist; I shall have to have a chat with her when we next visit.
    Another granddaughter (15) talks about a 'trans' boy in her class. Not sure what the situation vis a vis toilets and sport is concerned, but he is apparently happily accepted as 'one of the girls'. It's a majority girls school, though; how he'd manage in a more equal (numbers-wise) school I'm not sure. Maybe, of course, his parents sent him there because it was mostly girls.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 62,413
    edited September 20
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh...

    "The UK has slashed its strategic gas storage to barely 1.7pc of annual demand by closing the Rough facility off the Yorkshire coast, subcontracting the costly task of storage to Germany and the Netherlands."

    Telegraph

    Sounds like Business Sec could be in real shit here this winter.

    Very good explanation of the sitch on R4 today at 8.10am.

    Presumably (that part wasn't mentioned) the gas companies that are going bust sold long but bought short in the gas market and hence can't fulfil their obligations.
    AEP's article is much gloomer than just a few smaller energy suppier's going under. Industrialists are screaming that disaster awaits this winter on a whole range of fronts. Three day week here we come.

    Sounds like Business Dept over the years has made multiple mistakes and assumptions and the chickens are coming home...

    Brexit wont help of course as there will be no solidarity with EU over interconnectors and contracts.

    AEP of course, so gloom warning trigger.
    Do you have a link to that article? Or any one giving a broader context?

    This morning it was put as though "the world turned the lights back on" after the virus.

    But would like to see further info.
    AE-P article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/09/19/mounting-fears-1970s-style-three-day-week-britains-energy-crunch/
    An AEP article predicting doom and gloom is the next-best-thing to a Peston article doing so as a contraindicator showing everything will ultimately be OK.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,124
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    Catholic churches indeed all Christian churches are also not required to provide gay marriage ceremonies either, nor are Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues despite gay marriage being the law of the land. Though the Church in Wales has recently voted to have gay blessings in its churches
    Until Canon Law changes, or the church is disestablished, it is illegal for a Church of England church to offer gay marriages.
    The law of the land is gay marriage is legal, if general synod voted to allow gay marriage the law in England would be swiftly changed to accomodate that. The Methodists have already voted to have gay marriages.

    However the problem for the Anglican communion is it is a broad church and while the US Episcopal Church for example has allowed gay marriage, the African Anglican churches certainly would oppose that, indeed gay marriage is not legal in most of Africa.

    So at most gay blessings is the limit to what the Church of England will allow in its churches given the Archbishop of Canterbury is spiritual leader of the Anglican communion
    As I said, until Canon Law is changed, it is illegal to offer gay marriages in a Church of England church.
    It would require primary legislation from parliament, not only a change in Canon Law.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972
    MrEd said:

    I don’t think Jesus would take too kindly to discrimination against homosexuals

    He didn’t. The Catholic Church’s stance is very much a Pauline concept. If you want to get into the weeds, there is an interesting question about how much of the Christian faith is actually Christian and how much is influenced by St Paul.
    The Christian faith is a mixture of the New Testament messages of Christ and Paul and the Old Testament which they share with the Jews but not Christ, interestingly Christ is seen as a prophet by Muslims too though Muhammad is their main prophet obviously
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,187

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    The issue is that these Catholic adoption agencies had been running successfully for decades. They offered to partner with other agencies who would work with gay couples, rather than turn them away, which seemed a fair compromise.

    The consequences, are more abortions and more children growing up in what is euphemistically called ‘care’, including in places like Rotherham.
    If there are readily made alternatives available then why should people end up in care?

    Why don't they end up at the alternatives that were good enough for gays? Why can't they be good enough for everyone? If Catholic agencies aren't crowding out unbigoted ones then the unbigoted ones should be able to expand to meet the demand.
    The main difference between Catholic adoption agencies, and many domestic adoption placements - mostly run by local social services - is that the Catholic agencies actually cared about, and provided pastoral support to, young pregnant women.

    The vast majority of other private adoption agencies operating in the UK, are sourcing children from abroad.
    They just didn't care enough about them to do the role with equality before the law?

    Hopefully the people who care and have passion will take up jobs in agencies that do want to look after young women while paying full respect to everyone equally before the law.
    In the case of my friend, she was an unpaid volunteer, working with a charity in her spare time at her local church. Local authority social services worked very differently.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,972
    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    Catholic churches indeed all Christian churches are also not required to provide gay marriage ceremonies either, nor are Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues despite gay marriage being the law of the land. Though the Church in Wales has recently voted to have gay blessings in its churches
    Until Canon Law changes, or the church is disestablished, it is illegal for a Church of England church to offer gay marriages.
    The law of the land is gay marriage is legal, if general synod voted to allow gay marriage the law in England would be swiftly changed to accomodate that. The Methodists have already voted to have gay marriages.

    However the problem for the Anglican communion is it is a broad church and while the US Episcopal Church for example has allowed gay marriage, the African Anglican churches certainly would oppose that, indeed gay marriage is not legal in most of Africa.

    So at most gay blessings is the limit to what the Church of England will allow in its churches given the Archbishop of Canterbury is spiritual leader of the Anglican communion
    As I said, until Canon Law is changed, it is illegal to offer gay marriages in a Church of England church.
    It would require primary legislation from parliament, not only a change in Canon Law.

    Which could come in very swiftly if general synod voted for gay marriage, which it won't because of opposition from African churches within the Anglican communion as I said.

    The most the C of E will ever offer is gay blessings but not full marriage
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423
    edited September 20

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    I'm curious how many of those who regret there is no Catholic exemption to equalities legislation so that Catholics can't discriminate against homosexuals ... Would also call for an Islamic exemption to equalities legislation so that Muslims could discriminate against women in accordance to Shariah law?

    The law is the law and we should have equality before the law.

    The issue is that these Catholic adoption agencies had been running successfully for decades. They offered to partner with other agencies who would work with gay couples, rather than turn them away, which seemed a fair compromise.

    The consequences, are more abortions and more children growing up in what is euphemistically called ‘care’, including in places like Rotherham.
    If there are readily made alternatives available then why should people end up in care?

    Why don't they end up at the alternatives that were good enough for gays? Why can't they be good enough for everyone? If Catholic agencies aren't crowding out unbigoted ones then the unbigoted ones should be able to expand to meet the demand.
    The main difference between Catholic adoption agencies, and many domestic adoption placements - mostly run by local social services - is that the Catholic agencies actually cared about, and provided pastoral support to, young pregnant women.

    The vast majority of other private adoption agencies operating in the UK, are sourcing children from abroad.
    They just didn't care enough about them to do the role with equality before the law?

    Hopefully the people who care and have passion will take up jobs in agencies that do want to look after young women while paying full respect to everyone equally before the law.
    Catholic agencies, particularly in the RoI were not, traditionally, very 'careful' about young pregnant women or their subsequent babies.

    Anecdote alert: in a small town locally there were, some 60 years ago a couple of CofE Home for Unmarried Mothers.
    An acquaintance of mine tells of how, as a horrible little 10 or so year old, he and his friends would sit on a wall near the Church and jeer at the poor girls as they were marched into Morning Service each Sunday.
Sign In or Register to comment.