Originally posted by french frank
View Post
-
Yes, that is my understanding. MPs are not delegates. -
I was responding in my own sledgehammer sort of way to silly personal insults directed against the MP concerned . She was derided because, as a Catholic, her decision was based on the moral principles of the Church of which she is a member. According to our well-informed Flossie the Pope and 'her priest' happen to think the same on the issue. Surprise Surprise & Shock Horror.Originally posted by Stephen Whitaker View Post
If Lib Dem MP Sarah Teather is to be mocked by voting in accordance with her moral principles, and therefore deemed by others to be 'guilty by association' with the horrid Pope and 'her priest', I see no reason why this should not also apply to the 'pro-gay marriage' sympathisers and the likes of the screeching Mr Tatchell.
Sorry if I caused any offence to you by pointing this out but we must be always fair and equitable, isn't that right, Stephen ... ?Comment
-
Agreed. So what shall we do?Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostI blame the EU
it's all their fault !!!
All I meant really was that there is a pretence of representation
politicians represent
1: Themselves and their place in history (Blair wants a chapter not a footnote)
2: Their mates
3: Their party
4: maybe the people who vote for them
5: Their constituents who didn't vote for them ....... (seldom have any representation)
which is fine as long as one is aware of this ......Comment
-
I was chiding (not mocking, scotty) her because she said one thing on her website, and then changed her mind when she remembered what Protect the Pope wanted and what she imagined some of her constituents from other religious fathis would think. To be so inconsistent in public is foolish and bizarre and quite unnecessary - unless you're crazy for publicity.Originally posted by scottycelt View PostComment
-
Funnily enough, I wasn't referring to you on this occasion, amsey ...Originally posted by amateur51 View Post
That point is perfectly valid. However she ended up having to decide between her religious ethics and her liberal instincts and she chose the former. I think it would have been much easier for her to chose the latter despite the Moslem vote in her constituency. Hence my stated admiration.
Ian Duncan Smith, who also happens to be a Catholic, chose the easier route. That is entirely up to him but I can't see how he can possibly square that decision with his professed beliefs. Not entirely unusual for a politician, I readily agree.
Right or wrong in her decision, at least Ms Teather has sound logic on her side?Comment
-
Ah the spectre of pragmatic Catholicism, in the same week that the body of King Richard III is discovered ...spoo-ooookyOriginally posted by scottycelt View PostFunnily enough, I wasn't referring to you on this occasion, amsey ...
That point is perfectly valid. However she ended up having to decide between her religious ethics and her liberal instincts and she chose the former. I think it would have been much easier for her to chose the latter despite the Moslem vote in her constituency. Hence my stated admiration.
Ian Duncan Smith, who also happens to be a Catholic, chose the easier route. That is entirely up to him but I can't see how he can possibly square that decision with his professed beliefs. Not entirely unusual for a politician, I readily agree.
Right or wrong in her decision, at least Ms Teather has sound logic on her side?
Comment
-
Very interesting discussion here. I am a mix. I am in favor of Gay Marriage and against the Death Penalty. I am an Anglo/American, but have to say I find discussions on MP's having strong beliefs, etc that guide their voting a bit comical. However, I will have to say maybe this is my exposure to the US political system. My feeling toward all politicians and particularly in the states was best stated by Mark Twain in a speech.
'Let's say I am a member of congress and let's say I'm an idiot. Excuse me I repeat myself'.Comment
-
What shocking sexism and ageism, MrGG. Whether your claims are true or not I've always understood that we must never, ever say such nasty things especially as it might be most upsetting to others (and very likely the majority of valued members here) and, in any case, we are all equal, remember? At least that's what I thought. ...Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostSo I guess one concludes that intelligence decreases with age (over the age of 55)
and men are more likely to be unpleasant (68%)
I'm not sure how this has any bearing on the wonderful news that we are going to have equal marriage ?
but raise a glass to the end of bigotry
I'm actually at the moment re-reading George Orwell's Animal Farm and I think I'm beginning now to get your idea of 'equality' which hitherto I've always found extremely difficult to grasp. Maybe I should have followed your example and had the occasional sip of the rather superior Talisker instead of the more commonplace Bells?
Anyway, I'm sure we're all thrilled and delighted to read that that you are now going to have an equal marriage, Mr GG. All members, I'm sure, will join in the congratulations and celebrations ..
Not being nosey, but who was guilty of the 'bigotry' in your marriage .. surely it couldn't have been your good lady as to even suggest such a thing would be most unfair and inequitable.?Comment
-
NOt my claimsOriginally posted by scottycelt View Post
just some made up tosh from under the bridge
are you the one to get the "string em up" brigade back on task ?Comment
-
Oh what a lovely man ....
The Welsh secretary has said gay couples "clearly" cannot provide a "warm and safe environment" in which to raise children.
On ITV Wales' Face to Face programme, David Jones said this was why he had voted against the government's legislation for same-sex marriage.
The Conservative MP said he was not homophobic and had "people in my life who are important to me who are gay"
He probably baulks when people call him a bigot too
Comment
-
It's time we elected MPs who can be bothered to look at objective evidence. Over the last few years there have been several studies which indicate that the children of gay couples are just as likely to grow up happily as those of heterosexual couples. This is not surprising, since by definition such children are likely to be very much wanted --no accidental pregnancies.Originally posted by amateur51 View PostOh what a lovely man ....
The Welsh secretary has said gay couples "clearly" cannot provide a "warm and safe environment" in which to raise children.
On ITV Wales' Face to Face programme, David Jones said this was why he had voted against the government's legislation for same-sex marriage.
The Conservative MP said he was not homophobic and had "people in my life who are important to me who are gay"
He probably baulks when people call him a bigot too
I despair sometimes !Comment
-
Why just Gay Marriage?
Comment
-
-
Well, obviously he isn't a 'bigot' as your second-last sentence indicates, amsey ...Originally posted by amateur51 View PostOh what a lovely man ....
The Welsh secretary has said gay couples "clearly" cannot provide a "warm and safe environment" in which to raise children.
On ITV Wales' Face to Face programme, David Jones said this was why he had voted against the government's legislation for same-sex marriage.
The Conservative MP said he was not homophobic and had "people in my life who are important to me who are gay"
He probably baulks when people call him a bigot too
However, even if he were, I would hope that most of us here are in favour of free expression (even for 'bigots') and would condemn those who seek to bully and intimidate others into coming around to their way of thinking.
Mr Jones is perfectly entitled to his opinion even if it offends the politically-correct sensitivities of others. Those who cry 'bigot' invariably never seem to bother over-much who they, themselves, offend and are often the most intolerant of all. as some of the hysterical reactions to Mr Jones's comments clearly demonstrate.Comment
Comment