Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Here's a plus for forthcoming DUP influence. They may force a debate on abortion dates. Absent any good medical reasons, the current 6 months is too long imo, and the tales of foetuses living for some time in a stainless steel kidney bowl shames our society.
 
GoldhawkRd said:
If anyone out there believed the election was truly about Brexit and nothing else, they need to be certified. It was about austerity, May promising only pain to come, Corbin spreading the glad tidings that he had invented a magic money tree
Click to expand...

You won't get an argument from me. I believe it was called by the Conservatives because they thought the timing would make it easier to smash their political opponents, and specifically by Mrs May to smash her opponents within the Conservatives who were hampering her. There did appear to be plenty of people prepared to pretend beforehand that they believed it was about Brexit - here and elsewhere, saying we needed to give the Conservatives their increased majority to guarantee it was done properly. Now the result is known, they seem to be harder to find. Instead they're saying stupid people believed in the promises of Labour, that they were fooled and didn't know what they were voting for.

The topic was different, some of the people are different, but the noise is familiar.

I'm still hopeful and I'd like to see a cross-party negotiating team working together in the national interest.
 
TheBigDipper said:
You won't get an argument from me. I believe it was called by the Conservatives because they thought the timing would make it easier to smash their political opponents, and specifically by Mrs May to smash her opponents within the Conservatives who were hampering her. There did appear to be plenty of people prepared to pretend beforehand that they believed it was about Brexit - here and elsewhere, saying we needed to give the Conservatives their increased majority to guarantee it was done properly. Now the result is known, they seem to be harder to find. Instead they're saying stupid people believed in the promises of Labour, that they were fooled and didn't know what they were voting for.

The topic was different, some of the people are different, but the noise is familiar.

I'm still hopeful and I'd like to see a cross-party negotiating team working together in the national interest.
Click to expand...

Will a Tory-DUP cross-party team do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoldhawkRoad
GoldhawkRd said:
If anyone out there believed the election was truly about Brexit and nothing else, they need to be certified. It was about austerity, May promising only pain to come, Corbin spreading the glad tidings that he had invented a magic money tree
Click to expand...

Some interesting analysis here....

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2017/06/result-happen-post-vote-survey/

Only 8% of Labour voters named Brexit as the most important issue in their decision, compared to 48% of those who voted Conservative.
 
GoldhawkRd said:
I agree national interest comes into this, and David Davis would be mistaken if he doesn't keep Keir Starmer in the information loop, where confidentiality between UK/EU negotiating teams allows
Click to expand...

Starmer should definitely be involved, not least because he might have to take over after an autumn election.
 
Stroller said:
Some interesting analysis here....

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2017/06/result-happen-post-vote-survey/

Only 8% of Labour voters named Brexit as the most important issue in their decision, compared to 48% of those who voted Conservative.
Click to expand...

The Tories took in quite a bit of UKIP vote which would push their Brexit percentage up. Disillusioned voters that turned from the Tories to Labour took one look at the Tory manifesto and asked reasonably "what's in it for me?"

I understand Corbyn is now promising to repay all students loans including those of past years. No sign where the extra money is coming from. Someone has to call him out, and point out socialist France and the high unemployment there. Battering business ultimately hits the working man
 
The odious Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill have resigned. Who's going to tell disMay what to think, how to dress and when to go to the toilet now? Hopefully someone better than this pair, and God forbid that she's left with her own inner monologue to rely on.
 
GoldhawkRd said:
Here's a plus for forthcoming DUP influence. They may force a debate on abortion dates. Absent any good medical reasons, the current 6 months is too long imo, and the tales of foetuses living for some time in a stainless steel kidney bowl shames our society.
Click to expand...

That's sad when it happens but rather that than unwanted births. We definitely don't need those fruitcakes getting influence on abortion law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sb_73
GoldhawkRd said:
It's where you draw the line. Six months is too long in my view. And there are people queuing up to adopt.
Click to expand...
Only 15 per cent of fetuses born before 23-weeks survive to leave their neo-natal units and most will suffer severe health and/or physical problems. Babies born as prematurely as 21-22 weeks are nearly always born brain damaged and severely disabled – meaning that they may have very little quality of life to look forward to. There is a severe shortage of people willing to adopt severely disabled children with low life expectancy. The weight of medical opinion says 24 weeks is a sensible cut off.

Anyway, the DUP doesn't give a toss about these arguments, their position is strictly 'moral/religious'. They even deny abortions to the victims of rape. We have a good tradition of trying not to legislate on individual, moral decisions in most of this country, it would be a tragedy to sacrifice this in order to prop up a stuffed dummy Prime Minister with a bunch of batshit crazy fundamentalists.

Of course we can debate abortion cut off dates, just not to appease this lot please. For the record I am in favour of maximising choice for women while minimising risk of suffering for pre term babies. Current medical evidence and opinion says 24 weeks. If it ever came to a referendum women should get two votes each.
 
  • Like
Reactions: qprbeth, seagullhoop, kiwiqpr and 1 other person
sb_73 said:
Only 15 per cent of fetuses born before 23-weeks survive to leave their neo-natal units and most will suffer severe health and/or physical problems. Babies born as prematurely as 21-22 weeks are nearly always born brain damaged and severely disabled – meaning that they may have very little quality of life to look forward to. There is a severe shortage of people willing to adopt severely disabled children with low life expectancy. The weight of medical opinion says 24 weeks is a sensible cut off.

Anyway, the DUP doesn't give a toss about these arguments, their position is strictly 'moral/religious'. They even deny abortions to the victims of rape. We have a good tradition of trying not to legislate on individual, moral decisions in most of this country, it would be a tragedy to sacrifice this in order to prop up a stuffed dummy Prime Minister with a bunch of batshit crazy fundamentalists.

Of course we can debate abortion cut off dates, just not to appease this lot please. For the record I am in favour of maximising choice for women while minimising risk of suffering for pre term babies. Current medical evidence and opinion says 24 weeks. If it ever came to a referendum women should get two votes each.
Click to expand...

Your first paragraph relates to aborting foetuses for genuine medical reasons and I have no problem with that. I'm talking about the termination of perfectly healthy foetuses. Medical opinion is divided on 6 months. Seems a excessive amount of time to me for a woman to make up her mind if she wants to keep the child, but I'd like to hear argument on both sides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uber_Hoop
GoldhawkRd said:
Your first paragraph relates to aborting foetuses for genuine medical reasons and I have no problem with that. I'm talking about the termination of perfectly healthy foetuses. Medical opinion is divided on 6 months. Seems a excessive amount of time to me for a woman to make up her mind if she wants to keep the child, but I'd like to hear argument on both sides.
Click to expand...

Is it in anyone's interest to be bringing a baby into the world if the mother is the sort of person to make that decision after six months?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back