politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Rendering unto Caesar
Comments
-
Trying to get a soft Brexit with CU. My preferred optionFloater said:
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That iso close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
Clearly not enough MPs offended enough to withdraw support for her deal.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
0 -
Revoke and referendum and GE are options now too - they could vote on them tomorrow and ask for an extension on that basis, rather than get an extension and then discuss which of them to do.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
It is better than now, where our options are dire deal or no deal.kle4 said:
Probably, but do we really want all options still on the table? We need to start narrowing down the damn options, else they'll just return to the same position at the end of the extension period!AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
This works for me, everything is on the table then. Probably makes a GE slightly more likely.kle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1108802222329090048
Long extension does not create more options or remove any from the table. While I have a preference to which option I'd like to happen most, I truly believe just choosing, even no deal, would be better than just hoping parliament will do better in an extension or a new GE will return less intractable MPs or a more decisive party arrangement.
There's nothing forced about making a choice now either. They agreed the date a long time ago. May has pissed them about and pissed them off, but they've also devoted mountains of parliamentary time to discussing every possible option under the sun, they are prepared to consider any option at a moment's notice.0 -
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally voiddyedwoolie said:
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargamingBig_G_NorthWales said:
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in Julykle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
April 1st might make sense :-)dyedwoolie said:
April 11 being toutedIanB2 said:The rumours seem to be that the French are successfully arguing for the extension to be shorter, possibly up to early May only.
0 -
Damn right. I said that.dyedwoolie said:
April 11 being toutedIanB2 said:The rumours seem to be that the French are successfully arguing for the extension to be shorter, possibly up to early May only.
If June 30 is out because if we revoke unilaterally then we wouldn't have had the elections then realistically May 22 should be out too. If we unilaterally revoke on May 21 we won't magically be able to hold the elections.0 -
Is there anyone left to insult or patronise?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
0 -
SHe's been daring them to remove or overrule her for some time, but for some reason they keep doing otherwise, other than votes on the deal itself.brokenwheel said:
Clearly not enough MPs offended enough to withdraw support for her deal.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
0 -
Nothing has changed. Arkell v Pressdram Parliament. Now vote for my deal. *ends*brokenwheel said:
Clearly not enough MPs offended enough to withdraw support for her deal.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
0 -
Which they could agitate for whilst we negotiate under the WA transitionbigjohnowls said:
Trying to get a soft Brexit with CU. My preferred optionFloater said:
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
Precisely! We remain in a CU for the duration of the transition anyway. There's no reason that Labour can't ratify the WA then push to make the temporary CU permanent.dyedwoolie said:
Which they could agitate for whilst we negotiate under the WA transitionbigjohnowls said:
Trying to get a soft Brexit with CU. My preferred optionFloater said:
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
Oh yes indeed but they won't trail any offer of a longer extension until MV3 fallsBig_G_NorthWales said:
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally voiddyedwoolie said:
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargamingBig_G_NorthWales said:
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in Julykle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.Theuniondivvie said:
Will she be telling us how things went?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/11087996987296890880 -
I guess the baseline is having a solid answer to the question - why June? And she doesn’t.kle4 said:
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.Theuniondivvie said:
Will she be telling us how things went?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/11087996987296890880 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxlhyX-4qKITheuniondivvie said:
Will she be giving us an honest apprasal of how things went?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/11087996987296890880 -
Must be close to the EU taking the hit and lancing the boil0
-
Not sure why they are bothering. Given this talk of a longer extension when MV3 falls no MPs will treat MV3 as the final chance to avoid no deal that would be needed to give it any chance at all. So they might as well just say the only option is a longer extension - it is not as though it helps or hurts May now.dyedwoolie said:
Oh yes indeed but they won't trail any offer of a longer extension until MV3 fallsBig_G_NorthWales said:
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally voiddyedwoolie said:
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargamingBig_G_NorthWales said:
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in Julykle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1108802222329090048
0 -
They were hardly going to say she was great are they?kle4 said:
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.Theuniondivvie said:
Will she be telling us how things went?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1108799698729689088
I think she is actually worse than Brown - but that is just noise.0 -
So, how can this government run the country when they can't even run a petition website?0
-
A splendid piece, Cyclefree.0
-
If the extension is to the end of June she has a much better chance of eking out her tenure as PM to 13 July and thus a three year reign.Jonathan said:
I guess the baseline is having a solid answer to the question - why June? And she doesn’t.kle4 said:
In fairness, I'm not sure what she is even supposed to say to them. She has virtually no authority and yet parliament has not yet taken things out of her hands. Yes, she's been very responsible for why things have gone down this route, I'm just unclear what she can do at such a summit given there's no consensus on acceptability of short or long extension.Theuniondivvie said:
Will she be telling us how things went?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/11087996987296890880 -
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.0 -
May is taking back control by sitting in a side room waiting to hear what the EU has agreed we will have.0
-
This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
OH, and thanks Cyclefree.0 -
Surely that should be Brextension?williamglenn said:0 -
[ Response too rude to post ]ThomasNashe said:
It is without precedent, and utterly disgraceful, that a Prime Minister is prepared to inflict such a calamity upon the country.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.0 -
All that remains within our control is deal or revoke (or allow no deal). Anything else requires compliance of an EU fed up with us0
-
Enough of this arguing with me, I’m just cutting to the bottom line to help you. And don’t fob me off saying I said this before MV2. The signals from May, Gove, the EU crystal clear. MV3 IS different ball game now EU showed their hand to support May, in their own interest. Stop using the phrase May’s deal and appreciate where the deal EU happy with has us. To stop the EU letting as fall out next week we have to vote for the WA, anything else is a unicorn, anything else doesn’t appreciate the law or where the power lies.
other things are true, don’t like May’s deal, wanted a different outcome, don’t like May at all now, but those aren’t the key facts. these are the key facts of coming week.
what happens to Labour MPs and Labour Party when they vote with ERG to take us out in no deal by killing EUs WA?
1.The fact Labour enabled the no deal Brexit will be on leaflets and posters for elections to come. Key Fact.
2. Peoples Vote was voted on in parliament, there is photo of empty lobby, photo of labour on mass sat in their seats. When this week results in a no deal, this will be used by LD, SNP and TIG to destroy every labour candidate in every type of election for years to come. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if its Nandy who spoke eloquently against peoples vote, or a peoples vote enthusiast who unwisely think you can have another ref with remain on it without first completing the first one, they will all go to the slaughter together at next election.
Any dispute of key facts so far?0 -
@Cyclefree - thank you.
@rcs1000 - can you please stop saying that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? It really isn’t.0 -
It depends whether Robert Smithson is right that No Deal is a pain in the arse, but no worse, or whether we do indeed see people dying from malnutrition or absence of medicines.dots said:
Well, yes. That is how we must see it.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:kle4 said:
That they do not like the options before them choice, be it revoke, remove May or deal.numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Polls are finding huge support for No Deal, who do you think these people are? The options for brexit available have to be seen in terms of Tribal British politics. This government cannot revoke, but they can go to no deal and keep their party and public vote together whilst destroying Labour.
Yes. That is what I am saying. That’s what I believe.
If the former, it's better for the Conservatives to accept No Deal, rather than Revoke. If the latter, Revoke rather than No Deal.0 -
He was being a bit over the top wasn't he :-)viewcode said:
[ Response too rude to post ]ThomasNashe said:
It is without precedent, and utterly disgraceful, that a Prime Minister is prepared to inflict such a calamity upon the country.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.0 -
AndyAndyJS said:Surely if a final vote in the HoC comes down to May's Deal vs No Deal (with absolutely no time left for any other options like a second referendum or a new deal), her deal will win easily because most Labour MPs will support it?
Yes. And that’s why No Deal won’t happen.0 -
This is the question to answer, is this week the forced vote between WA or No deal, or not? Are there other options still in play?dots said:The signals from May, Gove, the EU crystal clear. MV3 IS different ball game now EU showed their hand to support May, in their own interest. Stop using the phrase May’s deal and appreciate where the deal EU happy with has us. To stop the EU letting as fall out next week we have to vote for the WA, anything else is a unicorn, anything else doesn’t appreciate the law or where the power lies.
what happens to Labour Party when they vote with ERG to take us out in no deal by killing EUs WA?
1.The fact Labour enabled the no deal Brexit will be on leaflets and posters for elections to come. Key Fact.
2. Peoples Vote was voted on in parliament, there is photo of empty lobby, photo of labour on mass sat in their seats. When this week results in a no deal, this will be used by LD, SNP and TIG to destroy every labour candidate in every type of election for years to come. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if its Nandy who spoke eloquently against peoples vote, or a peoples vote enthusiast who unwisely think you can have another ref with remain on it without first completing the first one, they will all go to the slaughter together at next election.
3.You evoke article 50, Ultimately You leave either with a deal, revoke, or leave with no deal. There are no other options. key fact.
4.You evoke, the government (in this case a narrow form of it that’s just PM office) negotiates with EU and comes up with something jointly owned by Britain and EU. Key fact. It doesn’t matter if you think it’s a pigs ear and don’t want to be associated with it or not, that doesn’t come into choice you have,
5. 2 years are up. Article 50 now means EU own British Brexit now, not Britain. If you want extensions, its up to the EU, not British Government or British parliament, Key fact.
6. EU have made it clear its in their interest its settled sooner than later, and they are content to no deal now if their WA not approved. Key fact. You can subjectively argue if it’s the right call, but its their call if they don’t like it dragging on for the impact dragging on is having on EU financially and reputationally.
7. All we can do is leave without deal, with WA or revoke. Its not within the power on these shores to ensure anything different. Key fact.
8. There is no point getting angry with May’s Monday address to nation, listen to what government have been saying for months, not just May explicit on Monday, listen again to Gove in last weeks debate, this government is not going to revoke ever, under any circumstance. In forced choice between revoke or no deal it will prefer to manage no deal. Key fact.
9. Can anyone vote against WA this week and it end in anything other than no deal exit? No. Key fact.0 -
Quite right.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
I was educated entirely in the Roman Catholic education system, and am now a teacher. I feel very strongly that compulsory age schooling should not be a vehicle for denominational religious education. I have chosen to teach in schools which are not religious for this reason.
The concept behind 'preparation for life in Modern Britain' is correct, unfortunately, other government reforms (e.g. academies/free schools) have meant that it is difficult to ensure uniform provision.
On another note, given the number of people in my school year who were gay or became pregnant, pretending that gay people and pre-marital sex don't exist, didn't really pan out.
0 -
The problem is that MPs won’t think it’s the final vote. Surely there’s always more time to signal their virtue?_Anazina_ said:
AndyAndyJS said:Surely if a final vote in the HoC comes down to May's Deal vs No Deal (with absolutely no time left for any other options like a second referendum or a new deal), her deal will win easily because most Labour MPs will support it?
Yes. And that’s why No Deal won’t happen.0 -
Great article, Cyclefree, your best yet.0
-
As for "... most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July ..."Big_G_NorthWales said:
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally voiddyedwoolie said:
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargamingBig_G_NorthWales said:
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in Julykle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1108802222329090048
48% including me would probably be strongly in favour. So would those of the 52% who've changed their mind because Cummings/Farage/Johnson duped them or for other reasons, e.g. 'I'm bored of Brexit'. Then adjust for births and deaths since 2016 which wipes out the leave majority.0 -
[Ranty post deleted. Go home viewcode, the work will be there tomorrow...Floater said:
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That iso close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.]
0 -
A reasonable chunk of the minority who voted Remain believe that democratic votes should be respected. They won’t be happy.rural_voter said:
As for "... most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in July ..."Big_G_NorthWales said:
It has already been ruled that if the UK is still a member state by the 23rd May the UK have to take part in the EU elections otherwise, all laws made by the new parliament would be legally voiddyedwoolie said:
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargamingBig_G_NorthWales said:
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in Julykle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1108802222329090048
48% including me would probably be strongly in favour. So would those of the 52% who've changed their mind because Cummings/Farage/Johnson duped them or for other reasons, e.g. 'I'm bored of Brexit'. Then adjust for births and deaths since 2016 which wipes out the leave majority.0 -
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.0 -
Oh no I hope not! That's a terrible decision if they go with that, it removes all pressure off the MPs to make a decision next week and just gives 5 more weeks of faffing around.williamglenn said:0 -
Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.0
-
Cracks are showing in EU unity?FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
0 -
All pressure off our MPs then lol0
-
This time next week it'll be Brexit Eve0
-
Don't you mean 9 months...which even worse.Philip_Thompson said:
Oh no I hope not! That's a terrible decision if they go with that, it removes all pressure off the MPs to make a decision next week and just gives 5 more weeks of faffing around.williamglenn said:0 -
9 months to continue to vote against every option...Pulpstar said:All pressure off our MPs then lol
0 -
Has Juncker bent over to tie his shoelaces?Philip_Thompson said:
Cracks are showing...FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
0 -
C4 news says France pushing for an extension of Article 50 until early May with no conditions attached, Macron clearly hoping for a Commons vote for EUref2 or BINO0
-
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.Ishmael_Z said:
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.0 -
Surely by this time of night if he bends over to tie his shoelaces he will be so pissed he will just topple over.SandyRentool said:
Has Juncker bent over to tie his shoelaces?Philip_Thompson said:
Cracks are showing...FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
0 -
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
0 -
They might as well forget about Brexit for 9 months as they won't decide anything anywayFrancisUrquhart said:
9 months to continue to vote against every option...Pulpstar said:All pressure off our MPs then lol
0 -
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.0 -
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.Toms said:This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
OH, and thanks Cyclefree.0 -
In Kerala, where my family hail from, the Muslim community number about 25% of the population. In recent years, burkas have become more and more common. When my mum was a child, they were virtually unknown.JosiasJessop said:I seem to be joining a chorus (though with my voice I won't be thanked) of praise for this article. Thanks, Ms Free.
I would like to add one complicating factor, however: culture. Some things are *not* mainstays of a religion, and are in fact cultural: yet the proponents want to use religion as an excuse for a cultural practice. FGM is a good example, where it is practiced by some Christian groups (and even, in the past, some Jews), and views on it within Islam are mixed, to say the least.
Even the Burkha and Hajib can be seen as more of a cultural than a religious practice: although even there the boundaries are very blurred.0 -
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.kle4 said:
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
0 -
I suppose this year we may actually see the end of May before the beginning of May?0
-
Seriously? “Cracks”? Maybe Tusk went off piste but to describe these even as “cracks” when compared to the gaping fissures in our body politic is delusional.Philip_Thompson said:
Cracks are showing in EU unity?FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
0 -
Which makes sense, but is in a sense unfortunate since it means they will enable more can kicking.FrancisUrquhart said:
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.kle4 said:
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
0 -
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.Ishmael_Z said:
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.0 -
F
Why? I have never paid any attention to its views on contraception or, frankly, sexual matters. I endorse nothing. I have severely criticised it over child abuse, including in a thread header a few months back. I think for myself. And speak for myself.Ishmael_Z said:
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
But I do understand what religion is, why it matters to some, what comforts it, at its best, can bring and how, again at its best, it can inspire people to do good. So I wanted to explain in response to @Roger why I thought his comment wrong.
If you disagree with what I have written, fine. But attacking me personally on the basis that somehow I am not entitled to write this is a bit odd and it does not take matters very far, does it?0 -
The best thing about Catholicism nowadays is that it is weak. Anyone who knows any history should know how horrible a belief system it was when it was powerful.Ishmael_Z said:
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.0 -
A really interesting example is Bahrain. As a child, it was relatively liberal and while religious was certainly not oppressively so. The causeway (and BAPCO running out of oil) has changed that. Cultural religion and the influence and application thereof.Sunil_Prasannan said:
In Kerala, where my family hail from, the Muslim community number about 25% of the population. In recent years, burkas have become more and more common. When my mum was a child, they were virtually unknown.JosiasJessop said:I seem to be joining a chorus (though with my voice I won't be thanked) of praise for this article. Thanks, Ms Free.
I would like to add one complicating factor, however: culture. Some things are *not* mainstays of a religion, and are in fact cultural: yet the proponents want to use religion as an excuse for a cultural practice. FGM is a good example, where it is practiced by some Christian groups (and even, in the past, some Jews), and views on it within Islam are mixed, to say the least.
Even the Burkha and Hajib can be seen as more of a cultural than a religious practice: although even there the boundaries are very blurred.0 -
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.FrancisUrquhart said:
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.kle4 said:
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.0 -
Sounds like EU throwing tezza under the bus. If do shes gone by Monday0
-
Heh. At one point three million and climbing I guess we know that it wasn't just MPs who were repelled by May her speech..IanB2 said:
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.Toms said:This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
OH, and thanks Cyclefree.0 -
So do you think the Church is teaching in the third world that contraception is bad, or that contraception is bad (but if you want to use it, go right ahead)?Sean_F said:
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
If you have told people the Christian myth, and got them to swallow it, then telling them that x is a mortal sin is actually compelling them, by threats, not to do x.0 -
Catholicism is a religious believe. Conservatism is an irrational creed based on fear and ignorance Discuss. A perfect essay title for my studentsSean_F said:
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.Ishmael_Z said:
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.0 -
No thanks.AlastairMeeks said:I don't feel we've had enough constitutional tinkering recently. A full separation of the church and the state is overdue. Perhaps something to look at once Brexit is uncontroversial?
I like the established CoE.0 -
You speak as if being the first leader of a developed country threatening to willingly impose sanctions on itself would have been seen as a credible threat as opposed to the ravings of a madman. They would never have believed such a leader and we would be in exactly the same place. They still don’t IMHO.Philip_Thompson said:
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.FrancisUrquhart said:
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.kle4 said:
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.0 -
No it really isn't. That you believe that says far more about you than it does about Catholics. And I repeat I am a staunch atheist who thinks all religions are a load of rubbish. But criticism has to be based on reason not on lashing out at people who hold genuine beliefs and accusing them of positions far removed from reality.Ishmael_Z said:
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.0 -
I hope you tidy up your spelling and grammar first!Fenman said:
Catholicism is a religious believe. Conservatism is an irrational creed based on fear and ignorance Discuss. A perfect essay title for my studentsSean_F said:
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.Ishmael_Z said:
If you "are a Catholic" you endorse an organization which has damaged the world more, and more avoidably, than Islam or Judaism ever did, by refusing to tell the third world that contraception is ok. I am therefore puzzled that you felt able to write this piece.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.0 -
Back up again now at 1,311,000Toms said:
Heh. At one point three million and climbing I guess we know that it wasn't just MPs who were repelled by May her speech..IanB2 said:
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.Toms said:This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
OH, and thanks Cyclefree.
The map is fascinating. NI has low participation given it voted Remain - but perhaps is unwilling or unaccustomed to engage with Westminster?0 -
Easier said than done.dyedwoolie said:Sounds like EU throwing tezza under the bus. If do shes gone by Monday
0 -
Its not sanctions, its an exit. And they didn't believe we'd vote for it.DougSeal said:
You speak as if being the first leader of a developed country threatening to willingly impose sanctions on itself would have been seen as a credible threat as opposed to the ravings of a madman. They would never have believed such a leader and we would be in exactly the same place. They still don’t IMHO.Philip_Thompson said:
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.FrancisUrquhart said:
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.kle4 said:
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.
Given there's at least 100 MPs in Parliament who genuinely seem to want or at least be OK with it, then yes one of those being MP would have been transformative.0 -
Google catholicism and contraception, mate. Just fecking google it.Richard_Tyndall said:
No it really isn't. That you believe that says far more about you than it does about Catholics. And I repeat I am a staunch atheist who thinks all religions are a load of rubbish. But criticism has to be based on reason not on lashing out at people who hold genuine beliefs and accusing them of positions far removed from reality.Ishmael_Z said:
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.0 -
Nope I am with Alastair on this one. If we are to use Brexit as an opportunity for real beneficial change then disestablishment is a very good place to start.Casino_Royale said:
No thanks.AlastairMeeks said:I don't feel we've had enough constitutional tinkering recently. A full separation of the church and the state is overdue. Perhaps something to look at once Brexit is uncontroversial?
I like the established CoE.0 -
May pivots from Deal/noBrexit to Deal/NoDeal, and in response the PV campaign pivots from "we need another vote" to "we don't need another vote, just pretend our side won".Toms said:
Heh. At one point three million and climbing I guess we know that it wasn't just MPs who were repelled by May her speech..IanB2 said:
It went viral after May's speech, before which it has about 60,000 signatures. The whole site has fallen over now but the last time I looked it had over 1,300,000. The problems the site has had mostly this afternoon and evening suggests interest is still on the upswing.Toms said:This "revoke Article 50" petition has grown like a Californian wildfire. It keeps collapsing under massive traffic. Last I looked it had about one and a quarter million signings.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
OH, and thanks Cyclefree.
Revoke is the mirror image of Remain having won the EURef by a seven-figure majority, but three years later the PM gets wound up at EUCO summit and accordingly repeals the 1972 European Communities Act.0 -
Didn't stop Schindler and von Stauffenberg!Ishmael_Z said:Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.
0 -
The church teaches that everyone is made in God’s image. Everyone. That includes gay people. So the church is wrong in seeking to exclude them. The church’s understanding of human sexuality - which is not a matter of doctrine - is fundamentally flawed, one reason why it has gone so wrong when seeking to opine on such matters.Ishmael_Z said:
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
The Credo which sets out the essentials of the faith says nothing about sex. Nor does the Our Father or the Hail Mary. And it is adultery which the 10 commandments don’t like. And you’ll have to look hard for any comment at all by Jesus on homosexuality or contraception. So yes I do know what Catholicism is.0 -
People can choose whether or not to follow Catholic teaching. In this day and age, no one is compelled to be part of the Catholic Church,Ishmael_Z said:
So do you think the Church is teaching in the third world that contraception is bad, or that contraception is bad (but if you want to use it, go right ahead)?Sean_F said:
I'm a Conservative. It doesn't follow that I endorse the party line on everything.
On contraception, no one is compelled to adhere to Catholic doctrine.
If you have told people the Christian myth, and got them to swallow it, then telling them that x is a mortal sin is actually compelling them, by threats, not to do x.0 -
bigjohnowls - thanks for posting this, it made me laugh out load, and that's the first time anything Brexit-related has made me do that!bigjohnowls said:
Deal - badJonathan said:Deal - bad
No Deal - mad
Extension - sad
Referendum - glad
No Deal - badderer
Extension - mad as f***
Referendum - mad as f*** but even more so0 -
No I think if mv3 cannot pass she won't accept a longer extension then she will quit. Depends o the text......GIN1138 said:
Easier said than done.dyedwoolie said:Sounds like EU throwing tezza under the bus. If do shes gone by Monday
0 -
My mum visited Afghanistan on a student trip in 1969 and a lot of the local young women at the university were wearing miniskirts and none of them wore headscarves.matt said:
A really interesting example is Bahrain. As a child, it was relatively liberal and while religious was certainly not oppressively so. The causeway (and BAPCO running out of oil) has changed that. Cultural religion and the influence and application thereof.Sunil_Prasannan said:
In Kerala, where my family hail from, the Muslim community number about 25% of the population. In recent years, burkas have become more and more common. When my mum was a child, they were virtually unknown.JosiasJessop said:I seem to be joining a chorus (though with my voice I won't be thanked) of praise for this article. Thanks, Ms Free.
I would like to add one complicating factor, however: culture. Some things are *not* mainstays of a religion, and are in fact cultural: yet the proponents want to use religion as an excuse for a cultural practice. FGM is a good example, where it is practiced by some Christian groups (and even, in the past, some Jews), and views on it within Islam are mixed, to say the least.
Even the Burkha and Hajib can be seen as more of a cultural than a religious practice: although even there the boundaries are very blurred.0 -
They are extremely unlikely to ever meet lesbians and gays. Suppressed ones perhaps but who will ever know? I'm not suggesting you don't understand religion but this is more comparable to a cult than a recognisable religion.Cyclefree said:
I do understand religion. I was brought up a Catholic and still am. I am also a mother of a gay son. So this is important to - and personal for - me.Roger said:That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice.
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
...seriously!
I am going to shout now. Being gay or trans is NOT A CHOICE. It is part of who you are. And it is something that you can be aware of from a very young age. It was certainly the case with my son. So, yes, it should be taught - in an age appropriate way - from primary school onwards.
And those Orthodox Jews will meet lesbians and gay people among those they meet every day but they will be people who are too scared to be who they are be.
They literally will have no contact with anyone outside the faith. They don't go to university and will have an arranged marriage when the girl is between 18 and 20. The men go to a Yeshiva immediately after leaving school at 16. Their faith is impregnable.
Catholicism cannot be compared to it. It is beyond anything that you can explain logically. They don't have televisions because the content would be unsuitable. They believe the world is 5000 years old.
Why would you think a religion where you can't have milk after meat or tear toilet paper on the sabbath or shake hands with someone of the opposite sex or be obliged to have sex through a hole in a sheet and be forbidden from having sex at specified times in the menstrual cycle be sanguine about learning about LGBT?0 -
One might say the same about most organised religions. The Church of England (and the other European protestant faiths) was not exactly renowned for its tolerance and understanding when it started. It was a symptom of the times not the religion.IanB2 said:
The best thing about Catholicism nowadays is that it is weak. Anyone who knows any history should know how horrible a belief system it was when it was powerful.Ishmael_Z said:
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.0 -
T
The effect of no deal would be the equivalent of imposing sanctions on ourselves. Put very simply an “exit” on such terms would make trade harder not easier. Like imposing sanctions.Philip_Thompson said:
Its not sanctions, its an exit. And they didn't believe we'd vote for it.DougSeal said:
You speak as if being the first leader of a developed country threatening to willingly impose sanctions on itself would have been seen as a credible threat as opposed to the ravings of a madman. They would never have believed such a leader and we would be in exactly the same place. They still don’t IMHO.Philip_Thompson said:
Which just goes to show what some of us have said all along, the EU will act differently if they think you're actually prepared to go for no deal. By May coming off like she is prepared to go for no deal she's now getting what she asked for.FrancisUrquhart said:
From sky / German journalist it sounds like the EU are for once not sure if May might actually go nuclear and no deal and that tusks approach is more likely to end up with it, so they are trying to engineer a fudge to push things back.kle4 said:
Given their best outcome is for us to remain a short extension (even one with an implied longer extension ready when the deal is defeated again) is not the best route to that, and really does risk no deal.FrancisUrquhart said:Sky talking heads just saying that EU leaders think tusk has made a boo boo and now they are thinking to find a fudge to dig themselves out of it.
Just imagine how much better these negotiations could have gone if someone who wasn't a compulsive liar and was prepared to go for no deal all along had been in charge.
Given there's at least 100 MPs in Parliament who genuinely seem to want or at least be OK with it, then yes one of those being MP would have been transformative.
Leavers like you complain that the EU is a political project and then act surprised when they treat it as such. It is about more than the economics. If one of the headbangers you mention were in charge the negotiations would have ended already with no deal whatsoever and we would already be begging for any kind of deal as the economy tanks. The only reason it hasn’t already is the hope that May’s deal would pass. If a headbanger were in charge we wouldn’t have got anything at all.0 -
Seems the EU are not prepared to extend beyond the point where May can be challenged as Con leader. 9 months is too short if her dead hand is still there.FrancisUrquhart said:
9 months to continue to vote against every option...Pulpstar said:All pressure off our MPs then lol
0 -
I never said you didn't. You know as well as i do that it is Catholic doctrine that artificial contraception is sinful. So, as far as I can see, islam telling people in Birmingham what they can and cannot do with their genitals - bad, Catholicism telling everyone everywhere the same thing - absolutely fine.Cyclefree said:
The church teaches that everyone is made in God’s image. Everyone. That includes gay people. So the church is wrong in seeking to exclude them. The church’s understanding of human sexuality - which is not a matter of doctrine - is fundamentally flawed, one reason why it has gone so wrong when seeking to opine on such matters.Ishmael_Z said:
They should put themselves to the trouble of informing themselves as to what their church actually teaches. Their position as described by you is approximately equivalent to being Nazis who love Jews and think fascism is a no-no.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am an atheist but even I know there is far more to Catholicism than endorsing an organisation. There are significant doctrinal differences which are independent of the church hierarchy. I have many friends and family who are Catholic but who support both gay rights, abortion and contraception. So it is entirely reasonable for Cyclefree to write the excellent article and still profess belief in Catholicism.
The Credo which sets out the essentials of the faith says nothing about sex. Nor does the Our Father or the Hail Mary. And it is adultery which the 10 commandments don’t like. And you’ll have to look hard for any comment at all by Jesus on homosexuality or contraception. So yes I do know what Catholicism is.0 -
because Scotland is crap with round balls prefering sports where it's played in only 2 other countries (ignoring other UK and Southern Hemisphere countries (as they always beat us))Alistair said:
We are a rugby nation.HYUFD said:Kazakhstan 3 Scotland 0 Looks like the all conquering independent Scotland Nats are hoping for will need a bit if work
0 -
Casino
Why FFS? A minority interest church of dwindling numbers being an established state religion is utterly bonkers. Get rid. Let religion be a private matter.0 -
6 weeks unconditional extension according to chap on BBC0
-
Letwin and Benn to retable amendment on Monday to give MPs the power to vote on alternative options, including 'Common Market 2.0' to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union. Letwin says he is now confident he has the votes to pass it after it lost by just 2 votes last time as at least 5 MPs have now switched in favour of the amendment following changes
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/mps-move-to-take-control-of-brexit-as-theresa-may-heads-back-to-brussels-a4097446.html0