The EU debate - Part III

I think that a hot poker referendum would pass easily on this thread!

The death penalty is objectively ****. It doesn't work, it costs more and it kills innocent people.
Opposing opinions are simply wrong, objectively.

Some people think that the world is flat or manmade climate change is a conspiracy by China to destabalise the US economy.
Should we have a referendum to see if they're right or not?

 

I'm less afraid to discuss them than you are to commit to an opinion on anything. You'd get more out of those you demand opinions from if you weren't so evasive on everything.

Obviously a referendum in itself means nothing but as it opens up the possibility of re-introducing the death penalty it's a crap idea for the various reasons not to have the death penalty in civilised society.

How about prioritising French workers for jobs? Is it even workable or just telling people what they want to hear. Personally I want the best person for the job to get it.

How about looking to impose French as a major world language to give France more international influence? Seems to me like another unrealistic idea and one which won't benefit the average Frenchman nor you or I.

How about increased investment in nuclear weapons? A waste of money and needlessly aggressive IMO.

She is pro-abortion though so not all bad.

 

Yeah but you mustn't criticise the source.

 

In your case, I wouldn't chance putting it to a vote on here, if I were you!..

 

To be fair, anything shoved up your arse would at least stop you talking out of it for a while.

 

Do do realise that most of that needed to be signed off by the MEPs and they said they would no do so, so in effect he got nothing

 

The MEPs said that they wouldn't do so? Source?

 

You think so?

Because nothing seems to have stopped you from doing it for months!...

 

A referendum is just democracy. You not agreeing with one possible outcome is no excuse for blocking democracy.

On the face of it, prioritising French workers is daft, but to an extent, it's simply legitimising what happens in areas of French commerce already.

The French have always been protective of their language and culture, and it's not something that affects us too often here, but I imagine it's something the French would be in favour of.

Nuclear weapons, love them or loath them, have helped keep the world peaceful.

Pro-abortion. Seems about right.

 

Wahay, that brings back memories of playground humour.

 

Should anything that 50.1% of the population want be put in place?

 

Just wow

 

Nope. They could vote for unicorns, but they won't get them.

If it's in the manifesto, and it's clear what sort of majority is acceptable, then a referendum's a reasonable way forward.

 

So you'd accept a referendum on anything possible?

 

If it was in the manifesto of the party that got elected, joining in would be the democratic thing to do.

 

So if a party promised a referendum on something like Sharia law, then you wouldn't have an issue with it?

 

If it was in their manifesto and they got voted in, then I would vote in the referendum.

 

Why would you answer a different question to the one asked?

 

To keep the discussion going.