FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > UK Gov blocks Scottish gender Bill.
UK Gov blocks Scottish gender Bill.
Jump to: Newest in thread
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
Do you support everything the party you voted for does?"
Maybe I voted Tory and support this? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
Do you support everything the party you voted for does?
Maybe I voted Tory and support this?"
It was a simple question |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I reckon if Scotland had another referendum tomorrow they'd vote for Independence this time."
And if the UK held an election today , the Tories would be booted out .  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
Do you support everything the party you voted for does?
Maybe I voted Tory and support this?
It was a simple question"
It was a simple question designed to excuse Conservative party voters from being concerned about the way the party they support behaves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
Do you support everything the party you voted for does?
Maybe I voted Tory and support this?
It was a simple question
It was a simple question designed to excuse Conservative party voters from being concerned about the way the party they support behaves. "
Was it?
I was a simple question to ask if you support everything the party you vote for does. You know, seeing as you made a blanket statement about people who vote Tory. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably."
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
I'm pretty sure Starmer is opposed to this too"
He is
Some better decisions emerging from this guy. Still pretty hopeless but I also agree with him that we don't need new laws to deal with the eco-nutters who are experts in bringing traffic to a standstill.
As the Labour leader told LBC Radio very recently : 'The police already have adequate powers to arrest people and move them on when they are obstructing the highway.'
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again "
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
I'm pretty sure Starmer is opposed to this too
He is
Some better decisions emerging from this guy. Still pretty hopeless but I also agree with him that we don't need new laws to deal with the eco-nutters who are experts in bringing traffic to a standstill.
As the Labour leader told LBC Radio very recently : 'The police already have adequate powers to arrest people and move them on when they are obstructing the highway.'
"
Yes, SKS is stepping up his game. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do "
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again "
This answers your question F&F? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
This answers your question F&F?"
Not really, seeing as you didn't provide that answer.
It's also one person's theory. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?"
It has cross party support to challenge it too |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again."
Well said |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
This bill has been on the cards for the past 7 years or so and was actually dropped by the SNP at one point. Its only back due to its inclusion by the Greens who formed a coalition with the SNP at the last election. I definitly do not agree with the age limit lowering but as for the rest of it, its not going to make any difference really. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again.
Well said "
I agree to a point but it's designed to stoke the independence fire within the undecideds and in that respect she is a smooth operator.... sturgeon not Safe |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again."
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmwomeq/977/report.html#heading-1
This is Westminsters own consultation into Gender Recognition Act reform. Note the timings and conclusions. Westminster was discussing this at the same time and came to broadly the same conclusions
The difference is that Holyrood followed through on reform and *legislated* while Westminster quietly dropped the whole issue and stoked the culture wars instead.
And Kier Starmer's capitulation to the "gender critical" trolling is equally shameful. Demonstrating that he has nothing like the same courage that was demonstrated by the Labour party in the late nineties when they led the way on LGBTQ rights.
And they did lead by the way - facing the same opposition in public opinion, and the same lies and misrepresentations about gay people (sexual predators, dangerous to children et al.)
Westminster is a disgrace and an affront to anyone that values democracy and decency.
But y'know Day job... mumble mumble... SNP bad...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmwomeq/977/report.html#heading-1
This is Westminsters own consultation into Gender Recognition Act reform. Note the timings and conclusions. Westminster was discussing this at the same time and came to broadly the same conclusions
The difference is that Holyrood followed through on reform and *legislated* while Westminster quietly dropped the whole issue and stoked the culture wars instead.
And Kier Starmer's capitulation to the "gender critical" trolling is equally shameful. Demonstrating that he has nothing like the same courage that was demonstrated by the Labour party in the late nineties when they led the way on LGBTQ rights.
And they did lead by the way - facing the same opposition in public opinion, and the same lies and misrepresentations about gay people (sexual predators, dangerous to children et al.)
Westminster is a disgrace and an affront to anyone that values democracy and decency.
But y'know Day job... mumble mumble... SNP bad...
"
When the Scottish voters chose independence, fine. Until then, we abide by the laws of the UK |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmwomeq/977/report.html#heading-1
This is Westminsters own consultation into Gender Recognition Act reform. Note the timings and conclusions. Westminster was discussing this at the same time and came to broadly the same conclusions
The difference is that Holyrood followed through on reform and *legislated* while Westminster quietly dropped the whole issue and stoked the culture wars instead.
And Kier Starmer's capitulation to the "gender critical" trolling is equally shameful. Demonstrating that he has nothing like the same courage that was demonstrated by the Labour party in the late nineties when they led the way on LGBTQ rights.
And they did lead by the way - facing the same opposition in public opinion, and the same lies and misrepresentations about gay people (sexual predators, dangerous to children et al.)
Westminster is a disgrace and an affront to anyone that values democracy and decency.
But y'know Day job... mumble mumble... SNP bad...
When the Scottish voters chose independence, fine. Until then, we abide by the laws of the UK "
This is a devolved matter - if it wasn't then Westminster would have blocked it under section 33. Therefor this is political, not legal, and driven by anti-trans sentiment in the Tory Party. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmwomeq/977/report.html#heading-1
This is Westminsters own consultation into Gender Recognition Act reform. Note the timings and conclusions. Westminster was discussing this at the same time and came to broadly the same conclusions
The difference is that Holyrood followed through on reform and *legislated* while Westminster quietly dropped the whole issue and stoked the culture wars instead.
And Kier Starmer's capitulation to the "gender critical" trolling is equally shameful. Demonstrating that he has nothing like the same courage that was demonstrated by the Labour party in the late nineties when they led the way on LGBTQ rights.
And they did lead by the way - facing the same opposition in public opinion, and the same lies and misrepresentations about gay people (sexual predators, dangerous to children et al.)
Westminster is a disgrace and an affront to anyone that values democracy and decency.
But y'know Day job... mumble mumble... SNP bad...
When the Scottish voters chose independence, fine. Until then, we abide by the laws of the UK
This is a devolved matter - if it wasn't then Westminster would have blocked it under section 33. Therefor this is political, not legal, and driven by anti-trans sentiment in the Tory Party."
Challenging this is not anti trans at all, it is common sense rising above the fear of being labelled by people like you...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmwomeq/977/report.html#heading-1
This is Westminsters own consultation into Gender Recognition Act reform. Note the timings and conclusions. Westminster was discussing this at the same time and came to broadly the same conclusions
The difference is that Holyrood followed through on reform and *legislated* while Westminster quietly dropped the whole issue and stoked the culture wars instead."
The idea that the age limit should be dropped from 18 to 16 is not in the consultation, and that's the point that many people have a problem with.
"And Kier Starmer's capitulation to the "gender critical" trolling is equally shameful."
What do you expect? He's looking at the possibility of getting into power within the next 2 years, so he's not going to stand up for minorities if it might cost him votes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?"
When setting up UK Laws it is important that the laws of the 4 nations do not contradict each other. Consequently the lawyers for the UK Government have said, in its current form, it would appear that the Scottish Law contradicts certain Laws on the statutes and needs amendments.
In a reasonable world the two parties would get together and sort it out. In these days of Queen Nichola seeking total, unfettered, power over the Scottish people she is just using it to press the Independence buttons, again. I doubt if she really gives a shit about the difficulties of the transgender community.
Let us look at it another way. If Hollyrood decided to reduce the age of consent to 10 years of age how many people would be upset if Westminister tried to block that law? It is not personal, Westminister does not hate the Scottish nation but Sturgeon is doing her Trumpest to get the Scots to hate the English; and that is bad for both nations.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?
When setting up UK Laws it is important that the laws of the 4 nations do not contradict each other. Consequently the lawyers for the UK Government have said, in its current form, it would appear that the Scottish Law contradicts certain Laws on the statutes and needs amendments.
In a reasonable world the two parties would get together and sort it out. In these days of Queen Nichola seeking total, unfettered, power over the Scottish people she is just using it to press the Independence buttons, again. I doubt if she really gives a shit about the difficulties of the transgender community.
Let us look at it another way. If Hollyrood decided to reduce the age of consent to 10 years of age how many people would be upset if Westminister tried to block that law? It is not personal, Westminister does not hate the Scottish nation but Sturgeon is doing her Trumpest to get the Scots to hate the English; and that is bad for both nations.
"
Thats your opinion which your entitled too ,my opinion is you talk alot of crap |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?
When setting up UK Laws it is important that the laws of the 4 nations do not contradict each other. Consequently the lawyers for the UK Government have said, in its current form, it would appear that the Scottish Law contradicts certain Laws on the statutes and needs amendments.
In a reasonable world the two parties would get together and sort it out. In these days of Queen Nichola seeking total, unfettered, power over the Scottish people she is just using it to press the Independence buttons, again. I doubt if she really gives a shit about the difficulties of the transgender community.
Let us look at it another way. If Hollyrood decided to reduce the age of consent to 10 years of age how many people would be upset if Westminister tried to block that law? It is not personal, Westminister does not hate the Scottish nation but Sturgeon is doing her Trumpest to get the Scots to hate the English; and that is bad for both nations.
Thats your opinion which your entitled too ,my opinion is you talk alot of crap "
Really? Is that your only contribution? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?
When setting up UK Laws it is important that the laws of the 4 nations do not contradict each other. Consequently the lawyers for the UK Government have said, in its current form, it would appear that the Scottish Law contradicts certain Laws on the statutes and needs amendments.
In a reasonable world the two parties would get together and sort it out. In these days of Queen Nichola seeking total, unfettered, power over the Scottish people she is just using it to press the Independence buttons, again. I doubt if she really gives a shit about the difficulties of the transgender community.
Let us look at it another way. If Hollyrood decided to reduce the age of consent to 10 years of age how many people would be upset if Westminister tried to block that law? It is not personal, Westminister does not hate the Scottish nation but Sturgeon is doing her Trumpest to get the Scots to hate the English; and that is bad for both nations.
Thats your opinion which your entitled too ,my opinion is you talk alot of crap
Really? Is that your only contribution? "
To yourself ,yes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?
When setting up UK Laws it is important that the laws of the 4 nations do not contradict each other. Consequently the lawyers for the UK Government have said, in its current form, it would appear that the Scottish Law contradicts certain Laws on the statutes and needs amendments.
In a reasonable world the two parties would get together and sort it out. In these days of Queen Nichola seeking total, unfettered, power over the Scottish people she is just using it to press the Independence buttons, again. I doubt if she really gives a shit about the difficulties of the transgender community.
Let us look at it another way. If Hollyrood decided to reduce the age of consent to 10 years of age how many people would be upset if Westminister tried to block that law? It is not personal, Westminister does not hate the Scottish nation but Sturgeon is doing her Trumpest to get the Scots to hate the English; and that is bad for both nations.
Thats your opinion which your entitled too ,my opinion is you talk alot of crap
Really? Is that your only contribution?
To yourself ,yes"
Do you truly believe Westminster hates Scotland? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
This is a legal conflict as it means that the Scottish legislation will impact UK wide legislation.
It has to be resolved before it is applied. The mechanism is what it is.
Sadly, the Scottish Government were well aware that this would be the case and appear to be pursuing this course for publicity and controversy to generate outrage to translate into support for independence.
In this case it is pretty shameful exploitation by the SNP of what is a serious matter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I reckon if Scotland had another referendum tomorrow they'd vote for Independence this time."
Thats what really gets my goat.
Have a referendum
It doesn't go the way "you" want so it's "let's do another one"
Face the fact it's been done
The decision has been made
It's not
2 out of 3
Or let's keep trying till it changes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I reckon if Scotland had another referendum tomorrow they'd vote for Independence this time.
Thats what really gets my goat.
Have a referendum
It doesn't go the way "you" want so it's "let's do another one"
Face the fact it's been done
The decision has been made
It's not
2 out of 3
Or let's keep trying till it changes."
In fairness, the situation has changed for Scotland and the UK since the last referendum. So it's not just having another one. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I reckon if Scotland had another referendum tomorrow they'd vote for Independence this time.
Thats what really gets my goat.
Have a referendum
It doesn't go the way "you" want so it's "let's do another one"
Face the fact it's been done
The decision has been made
It's not
2 out of 3
Or let's keep trying till it changes.
In fairness, the situation has changed for Scotland and the UK since the last referendum. So it's not just having another one."
I agree with this, rhetoric landscape has massively changed since indyref.
I would ask the Scots though, you're out of the EU. You can see what a shitshow that is, do you really want to exasperatethst by leaving the UK too? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I reckon if Scotland had another referendum tomorrow they'd vote for Independence this time.
Thats what really gets my goat.
Have a referendum
It doesn't go the way "you" want so it's "let's do another one"
Face the fact it's been done
The decision has been made
It's not
2 out of 3
Or let's keep trying till it changes.
In fairness, the situation has changed for Scotland and the UK since the last referendum. So it's not just having another one."
This will always be the case
So what do we do? Have another referendum. And it's in favour of leaving.
Then in 12 - 18-24 months everything has changed (again)
So have another and their back again??
So another 12-18-24 months further on and guess what it's changed so another referendum??
Where does it stop
It stops when It's been done and decisions made Just like brexit vote decided and crack on |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I reckon if Scotland had another referendum tomorrow they'd vote for Independence this time.
Thats what really gets my goat.
Have a referendum
It doesn't go the way "you" want so it's "let's do another one"
Face the fact it's been done
The decision has been made
It's not
2 out of 3
Or let's keep trying till it changes.
In fairness, the situation has changed for Scotland and the UK since the last referendum. So it's not just having another one.
This will always be the case
So what do we do? Have another referendum. And it's in favour of leaving.
Then in 12 - 18-24 months everything has changed (again)
So have another and their back again??
So another 12-18-24 months further on and guess what it's changed so another referendum??
Where does it stop
It stops when It's been done and decisions made Just like brexit vote decided and crack on "
Brexit was a major change. Changes of this scale don't happen very often.
I'm not sure how you quantity the scale of the change that changes the situation though.
I can see why they're arguing for another ref using the argument that things have significantly changed. I'm not against, or in favour of another referendum. Just saying I can see why they want one. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I reckon if Scotland had another referendum tomorrow they'd vote for Independence this time.
Thats what really gets my goat.
Have a referendum
It doesn't go the way "you" want so it's "let's do another one"
Face the fact it's been done
The decision has been made
It's not
2 out of 3
Or let's keep trying till it changes.
In fairness, the situation has changed for Scotland and the UK since the last referendum. So it's not just having another one.
This will always be the case
So what do we do? Have another referendum. And it's in favour of leaving.
Then in 12 - 18-24 months everything has changed (again)
So have another and their back again??
So another 12-18-24 months further on and guess what it's changed so another referendum??
Where does it stop
It stops when It's been done and decisions made Just like brexit vote decided and crack on
Brexit was a major change. Changes of this scale don't happen very often.
I'm not sure how you quantity the scale of the change that changes the situation though.
I can see why they're arguing for another ref using the argument that things have significantly changed. I'm not against, or in favour of another referendum. Just saying I can see why they want one."
They (the staunch leavers) have been wanting another since it was decided. Its nothing new and just a continuation of "it didn't go our way we demand another one"
And if that failed no doubt they would still want a 3rd etc.
Extremists are never happy until they get their own way and are not able to comprehend a majority didn't want this when the referendum was voted.
People knew the long term consequences of voting either for or against and decided against. My point still stands if "you/they/them" want a referendum because of change it would be never ending. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We vote for a government every 4-5 years. New voters are given a choice, without their decision being weighted by the votes of the dead.
It would be reasonable for that revised voting cohort to also have a referendum question attached to the GE choice. Easily done. Easy to concede, if you really do believe in democracy. But unionists do not.
As for indyref #1, massive electoral fraud was involved. The unionist cabal of Cameron, Brown, Miliband, Clegg and Davidson, with their notorious 11th hour vow, should all have been prosecuted under electoral law regarding purdah.
Then, we come to all the main promises in the unionist campaign being broken. Totally cynical electoral fraud on a par with the willingly deceitful brexit campaign. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"We vote for a government every 4-5 years. New voters are given a choice, without their decision being weighted by the votes of the dead.
It would be reasonable for that revised voting cohort to also have a referendum question attached to the GE choice. Easily done. Easy to concede, if you really do believe in democracy. But unionists do not.
As for indyref #1, massive electoral fraud was involved. The unionist cabal of Cameron, Brown, Miliband, Clegg and Davidson, with their notorious 11th hour vow, should all have been prosecuted under electoral law regarding purdah.
Then, we come to all the main promises in the unionist campaign being broken. Totally cynical electoral fraud on a par with the willingly deceitful brexit campaign."
Is there another referendum after five years if Scotland votes to leave? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We vote for a government every 4-5 years. New voters are given a choice, without their decision being weighted by the votes of the dead.
It would be reasonable for that revised voting cohort to also have a referendum question attached to the GE choice. Easily done. Easy to concede, if you really do believe in democracy. But unionists do not.
As for indyref #1, massive electoral fraud was involved. The unionist cabal of Cameron, Brown, Miliband, Clegg and Davidson, with their notorious 11th hour vow, should all have been prosecuted under electoral law regarding purdah.
Then, we come to all the main promises in the unionist campaign being broken. Totally cynical electoral fraud on a par with the willingly deceitful brexit campaign.
Is there another referendum after five years if Scotland votes to leave?"
Curious question - very empire wallah!
That would be without precedent anywhere in the world and, given that no newly independent country anywhere in the world has ever expressed a desire to return to assimilation, probably superfluous, particularly given that younger generations are progressive and pro, while the core of the reactionaries are dying off. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"We vote for a government every 4-5 years. New voters are given a choice, without their decision being weighted by the votes of the dead.
It would be reasonable for that revised voting cohort to also have a referendum question attached to the GE choice. Easily done. Easy to concede, if you really do believe in democracy. But unionists do not.
As for indyref #1, massive electoral fraud was involved. The unionist cabal of Cameron, Brown, Miliband, Clegg and Davidson, with their notorious 11th hour vow, should all have been prosecuted under electoral law regarding purdah.
Then, we come to all the main promises in the unionist campaign being broken. Totally cynical electoral fraud on a par with the willingly deceitful brexit campaign.
Is there another referendum after five years if Scotland votes to leave?
Curious question - very empire wallah!
That would be without precedent anywhere in the world and, given that no newly independent country anywhere in the world has ever expressed a desire to return to assimilation, probably superfluous, particularly given that younger generations are progressive and pro, while the core of the reactionaries are dying off."
So there is a referendum every five years until the "correct" answer is achieved, but no option to change your mind if it turns out not to be such a good deal?
Elections are reversible every five years, so not quite the same thing at all. Right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"That would be an international first, would it not? Strange that you would make such an unusual suggestion.
Although, personally, I would not be against a second referendum by way of confirmation."
You compared it to voting for a government every five years.
So, in fact, it is nothing like voting for a government every five years, is it?
It's a rare occurrence, isn't it?
There is also zero evidence of fraud. That sounds a bit "Trumpian" doesn't it?
Not to mention the curious "Empire wallah" comment which I could easily read as pretty racist if I were of a mind to as a child of immigrants from the former Empire. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?
When setting up UK Laws it is important that the laws of the 4 nations do not contradict each other. Consequently the lawyers for the UK Government have said, in its current form, it would appear that the Scottish Law contradicts certain Laws on the statutes and needs amendments.
In a reasonable world the two parties would get together and sort it out. In these days of Queen Nichola seeking total, unfettered, power over the Scottish people she is just using it to press the Independence buttons, again. I doubt if she really gives a shit about the difficulties of the transgender community.
Let us look at it another way. If Hollyrood decided to reduce the age of consent to 10 years of age how many people would be upset if Westminister tried to block that law? It is not personal, Westminister does not hate the Scottish nation but Sturgeon is doing her Trumpest to get the Scots to hate the English; and that is bad for both nations.
Thats your opinion which your entitled too ,my opinion is you talk alot of crap
Really? Is that your only contribution?
To yourself ,yes
Do you truly believe Westminster hates Scotland?"
I think he does. Sad but true, some believe the Sturgeon propaganda with a religious ferver, never doubting a word of it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We vote for a government every 4-5 years. New voters are given a choice, without their decision being weighted by the votes of the dead.
It would be reasonable for that revised voting cohort to also have a referendum question attached to the GE choice. Easily done. Easy to concede, if you really do believe in democracy. But unionists do not.
As for indyref #1, massive electoral fraud was involved. The unionist cabal of Cameron, Brown, Miliband, Clegg and Davidson, with their notorious 11th hour vow, should all have been prosecuted under electoral law regarding purdah.
Then, we come to all the main promises in the unionist campaign being broken. Totally cynical electoral fraud on a par with the willingly deceitful brexit campaign."
".. Massive electoral fraud .." - Please send all your evidence into the police immediately. This cannot go unpunished. It will certainly make " ... Cameron, Brown, Miliband, Clegg and Davidson ..." look stupid when they sue you for slander.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757
Apologies if already posted.
This is what people who vote Tory support. Presumably.
You don't have to be a Tory supporter to oppose this bill.
The bill was possibly put forward by the SNP because it knew it would be rejected and would create a constitutional crisis.
I genuinely think if the Scottish electorate were asked if it supported this bill, it would be resoundedly defeated.
Sunak getting it correct again
Definitely an interesting take on it.
Would be a master stroke if so to get the remain in UK voters over to their side as now it looks like London are meddling in Scottish affairs and telling them what to do
This bill has been 6 years in the making, over 100 amendments considered, and has broad cross party support in the Scottish Government(including conservatives)
I would say every effort has been made to ensure this went through.
But hey... Rah! Rah! down with the oiks eh?
When setting up UK Laws it is important that the laws of the 4 nations do not contradict each other. Consequently the lawyers for the UK Government have said, in its current form, it would appear that the Scottish Law contradicts certain Laws on the statutes and needs amendments.
In a reasonable world the two parties would get together and sort it out. In these days of Queen Nichola seeking total, unfettered, power over the Scottish people she is just using it to press the Independence buttons, again. I doubt if she really gives a shit about the difficulties of the transgender community.
Let us look at it another way. If Hollyrood decided to reduce the age of consent to 10 years of age how many people would be upset if Westminister tried to block that law? It is not personal, Westminister does not hate the Scottish nation but Sturgeon is doing her Trumpest to get the Scots to hate the English; and that is bad for both nations.
Thats your opinion which your entitled too ,my opinion is you talk alot of crap
Really? Is that your only contribution?
To yourself ,yes
Do you truly believe Westminster hates Scotland?
I think he does. Sad but true, some believe the Sturgeon propaganda with a religious ferver, never doubting a word of it."
What religious ferver? Ive never heard her speak about religion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Unfortunately this is a complex issue that many people feel afraid to talk about openly and honestly in fear of offending people or being labelled a bigot.
You can fully support gay, lesbian and trans people but also have some concerns in having unlimited amount of genders, identity legislation that is based on people's feelings and not biological realities and gender care when it comes to children and teenagers. But if the narrative is ever questioned, it is so easy to shutdown conversation by labelling someone a transphobe or bigot. It is incredibly tiring and counter productive to persuading people to your view. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It seems obvious to me that the SNP have chosen this issue on purpose.
The whole GRC age limit thing is an issue which has almost no effect, to almost no one. But it's an issue which politicians are going to find it hard to argue against. Therefore it'll be easy to get it voted for in the Scottish parliament.
They knew full well that it would get denied by the UK parliament, and they only brought the issue forward to stoke up anger in Scotland about the UK having supremacy.
I think it might backfire for them though. I don't think there are that many people in Scotland that fully agree with changing the age limit, and those people might be secretly happy that the UK parliament has stopped it. Those people might not vote SNP next time if they think that an independent Scotland would rush to change this law again.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmwomeq/977/report.html#heading-1
This is Westminsters own consultation into Gender Recognition Act reform. Note the timings and conclusions. Westminster was discussing this at the same time and came to broadly the same conclusions
The difference is that Holyrood followed through on reform and *legislated* while Westminster quietly dropped the whole issue and stoked the culture wars instead.
And Kier Starmer's capitulation to the "gender critical" trolling is equally shameful. Demonstrating that he has nothing like the same courage that was demonstrated by the Labour party in the late nineties when they led the way on LGBTQ rights.
And they did lead by the way - facing the same opposition in public opinion, and the same lies and misrepresentations about gay people (sexual predators, dangerous to children et al.)
Westminster is a disgrace and an affront to anyone that values democracy and decency.
But y'know Day job... mumble mumble... SNP bad...
When the Scottish voters chose independence, fine. Until then, we abide by the laws of the UK "
Exactly |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unfortunately this is a complex issue that many people feel afraid to talk about openly and honestly in fear of offending people or being labelled a bigot.
You can fully support gay, lesbian and trans people but also have some concerns in having unlimited amount of genders, identity legislation that is based on people's feelings and not biological realities and gender care when it comes to children and teenagers. But if the narrative is ever questioned, it is so easy to shutdown conversation by labelling someone a transphobe or bigot. It is incredibly tiring and counter productive to persuading people to your view. "
Exactly!!! This is the problem discussing this on public forums As soon as you question the “politically correct” or status quo narrative you get labelled ..phobic. Everyone has a right to voice their opinion as long as it’s done respectfully! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Unfortunately this is a complex issue that many people feel afraid to talk about openly and honestly in fear of offending people or being labelled a bigot.
You can fully support gay, lesbian and trans people but also have some concerns in having unlimited amount of genders, identity legislation that is based on people's feelings and not biological realities and gender care when it comes to children and teenagers. But if the narrative is ever questioned, it is so easy to shutdown conversation by labelling someone a transphobe or bigot. It is incredibly tiring and counter productive to persuading people to your view. "
It is an inherently good thing to try not to offend people and to try not to be offended.
It is complicated.
Sexuality is a continuum, both physically (body) and mentally (feelings). Where any individual sits on it varies. Claiming that body and mind are separate is to misunderstand humanity, surely?
However, there are legal consequences to a definition of sexuality, so self-identification is troublesome as is coming to a conclusion as to who you are before you have experienced life.
I would maintain that the Scottish Government position was as much to provoke a confrontation with Westminster as Amy consideration of the actual matter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sadly, the Scottish Government were well aware that this would be the case and appear to be pursuing this course for publicity and controversy to generate outrage to translate into support for independence."
Bingo, that's what it was all about.
Perhaps an element of trying to win what they may have considered an influential demographic on their side. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *AFKA HovisMan
over a year ago
Sindon Swingdon Swindon |
"Unfortunately this is a complex issue that many people feel afraid to talk about openly and honestly in fear of offending people or being labelled a bigot.
You can fully support gay, lesbian and trans people but also have some concerns in having unlimited amount of genders, identity legislation that is based on people's feelings and not biological realities and gender care when it comes to children and teenagers. But if the narrative is ever questioned, it is so easy to shutdown conversation by labelling someone a transphobe or bigot. It is incredibly tiring and counter productive to persuading people to your view.
Exactly!!! This is the problem discussing this on public forums As soon as you question the “politically correct” or status quo narrative you get labelled ..phobic. Everyone has a right to voice their opinion as long as it’s done respectfully! "
I've not looked in detail, but from searching for "pho", we are 60 comments in and noone has done this. Ive noted this in other threads and it starts to smell like feelings not facts. I also think that it's only a shut down if you let it. Challenge someone who seeks to shut you down. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
