Rees Mogg or Corbyn?

[KeithPratt]

i think he outlines his points perfectly reasonably here. He accepts his views are out of step with pretty much everyone else and that even if he did try to propose a law to support his views, it would be shot down by Parliament.

[Diamond Dog]

From Sept last year.

Well, I think JRM might very well be in with a chance of being leader in 2022. I like him - he's a charismatic and forthright person with a very powerful oratorical skill who says what he thinks and articulates himself in a way that very few politicians are able to. In the Good Morning interview he articulated his faith and his views on certain views, but crucially that religion and politics are separate things (something Tim Farron wasn't able to and as such he lost the leadership position).

Would the Liberal Left criticise a Muslim politician who also (not accepting gay marriage for example) held the same views?

If you're happy to endorse a guy that thinks it's his job to tell women what to do with their bodies, fine. He's a Neanderthal

And the answer to the second point is absolutely yes. You can have the opinion, doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Especially when it discriminates against those who have no choice over their sexuality. But that's because I'm not a Neanderthal.

At least you're staying true to your beliefs.

As am I.

[yomptepi]

Of course, from my previous post: "He opposes foreign aid, manision taxes, the bankers' bonus tax, increases in welfare for the disabled.
He supports zero hours contracts [and] the bedroom tax."

Of course he does. He is a conservative.

The mansion tax was a pathetic idea. Poll tax in a different hat.
Banker's bonus tax was stupid. As has been proven. Within a year they had found new ways to avoid it if it was introduced. You cannot kid a kidder. Wasn't it that economic illiterate Ed Ball's idea? Thought he could raise enough to pay off the national debt with it if I remember...Ha ha.
Zero hours contracts are the future. Of course including the benefits of employment is essential, but a lot people do want flexibility in their hours. Especially those with more than one job.

You sound an Ed Milliband throwback drone.

[copehead]

Unless I missed it Toby never responded to the concerns raised about Mogg.

I attempted it, but the subject of abortion is such a minefield to start with that I ended up not bothering with it, especially when I would be pretty much on my own. It's the sort of discussion that is preferable face to face, rather than the nuance free realm of the bulletin board.

Why is giving women autonomy over their own bodies in the face of bigoted, patriarchal, 3000 year old religious clap trap a minefield?

Seems like a very straight forward moral and ethical conundrum to me, especially from a libertarian perspective.

But funny how many so called libertarians have a problem with it.

L.I.N.O. s

[copehead]

And what has it proved?

It's proved that Toby backs Mogg's position on abortion but that he doesn't have the conviction to argue his case.

Pathetic.
Does any discussion regarding Mogg have to be balanced by his Catholicism. He accept's it is a major barrier to political office, but it is his faith, and he accepts it. Does it have to colour the rest of his views too. Or is it just a nice big stick to beat him with. Even though he has no political ambition as far as leading the tories is concerned. Don't you feel it is a stupid trying to discuss his views on Europe and using his views on abortion to influence them?

The trouble with Mogg's Christianity is that it is a Pick n Mix, he likes the bits about telling women what they have to do but dislikes the bits about rejecting worldly wealth

He uses some aspects of Abrahamic religion ( I don't think Jesus ever said anything about abortion ) to justify his political views whilst ignoring the central tenets of Christianity entirely.

The man is a cunt there is no getting around it

[Belle Lettre]

the leader of BCB's metropolitan elite hipster clique.

Griff?

[yomptepi]

the leader of BCB's metropolitan elite hipster clique.

Griff?

Who else qualifies..

[yomptepi]

Unless I missed it Toby never responded to the concerns raised about Mogg.

I attempted it, but the subject of abortion is such a minefield to start with that I ended up not bothering with it, especially when I would be pretty much on my own. It's the sort of discussion that is preferable face to face, rather than the nuance free realm of the bulletin board.

Why is giving women autonomy over their own bodies in the face of bigoted, patriarchal, 3000 year old religious clap trap a minefield?

Seems like a very straight forward moral and ethical conundrum to me, especially from a libertarian perspective.

But funny how many so called libertarians have a problem with it.

L.I.N.O. s

You clearly have no grasp of the concept of faith, and what it engenders. Hardly surprising really...

[copehead]

You clearly have no grasp of the concept of faith, and what it engenders. Hardly surprising really...

Selective faith.

Mogg has complete faith that he knows best what women should be allowed to do with their own bodies because a 3000 year old book tells him what to think.

He appears to have less faith in the actual teachings of Jesus Christ, all that renouncing worldly wealth crap.

I withdraw cunt.

Hypocritical cunt is better.

In my view you don't get to choose what parts of the Bible you use as a political guide; or if you do perhaps you should let the Leviticus stuff slide and concentrate on what God actually said about loving your neighbor as yourself and renouncing the materialism of this world.

The Moggs of this world use the Bible as a selective moral instructor for what they think others should do; he lives less by the words of Jesus Christ than I do and I don't even believe he existed.

[yomptepi]

You clearly have no grasp of the concept of faith, and what it engenders. Hardly surprising really...

Selective faith.

Mogg has complete faith that he knows best what women should be allowed to do with their own bodies because a 3000 year old book tells him what to think.

He appears to have less faith in the actual teachings of Jesus Christ, all that renouncing worldly wealth crap.

I withdraw cunt.

Hypocritical cunt is better.

In my view you don't get to choose what parts of the Bible you use as a political guide; or if you do perhaps you should let the Leviticus stuff slide and concentrate on what God actually said about loving your neighbor as yourself and renouncing the materialism of this world.

The Moggs of this world use the Bible as a selective moral instructor for what they think others should do; he lives less by the words of Jesus Christ than I do and I don't even believe he existed.

So faith is dependent on what you think is reasonable is it?

You are a clueless twat.

[Belle Lettre]

(Relatively) new fathers are probably not the most objective critics of abortion. (Tobes, not Jakes)

[Diamond Dog]

*Taps fingers*

*Heavily*

[clive gash]

What exactly is a ‘bi-product’?

[KeithPratt]

(Relatively) new fathers are probably not the most objective critics of abortion. (Tobes, not Jakes)

Sure, I'm fully aware of that. I hope that I outlined in my post that I recognise it's an emotive and highly complex subject. I also think however that people who have not been through the emotional rollercoaster of pregnancy (whether male or female) might not be aware of just what sort of emotions can occur and how it can influence your view.

[yomptepi]

Mogg admits he is not being objective. But he is bound by his faith. I might be in a minority here, but I have always respected people of faith, whether I agree with them or not. It is not an objective thing. He also accepts that his faith is an immovable obstruction to him ever achieving higher office. It is not he who seeks leadership, but those around him who agree with him on European policy.
At least he has a policy on Europe. More than can be said for Jezza and his cabal of clueless fuckwits, who are scrabbling about trying to find some way, any way, to distance their policy from that of the government, when in reality you couldn't get a cigarette paper between them.

[naughty boy]

What exactly is a ‘bi-product’?

Who said that?

[WG Kaspar]

Rees Mogg is surely not a real name, right?

[clive gash]

What exactly is a ‘bi-product’?

*taps fingers*

*inadvertently presses ; instead of ‘*

[Goat Boy]

My point is that now I would not want to have an abortion for an unplanned child. Even if the child was going to be medically problematic, then I think the procedure of abortion - as normalised as it has become for many - sends a difficult message to society.

Consider Down's Syndrome. Now, people with Down's Syndrome live, on the whole, good lives. Sure, they might not live beyond 60 or so, and maybe they might not rise "to the top" or perhaps have families. But they are welcome and interact in society and so they should be - they are not pariahs. But Iceland - a beacon of liberalism - recently announced that it had included Down's Syndrome in the list of medical "deformities" that enable an abortion at less than 16 weeks. What sort of message does that send to all the people that have Down's Syndrome now? That they are essentially not welcome in our life? People with Down's Syndrome have an identity that is all their own - and that would be eradicated by "progress" - the desire for us to have healthy babies (which in itself is an absolutely natural desire in my eyes) could push us down a difficult place.

A mate has a downs syndrome step brother. He’s in his late 30s I think and still lives with his old man and my mates mother. I know it’s been a real strain on them, both individually and as a couple. I was reminded of them a few years ago when I was in Japan and I saw a downs syndrome man with his parents. He must have been in his 50s and the parents would have been in their late 60s at least. They weren’t talking. The parents looked tired. Maybe I was just projecting onto them but I felt very sorry for that couple. Looking after your child for potentially 50/60 years, especially one that presents challenges like that must be very hard at times. It’s not for everyone, even those who want children. Women and couples should have the chance to opt out and if that option is available to them at 15 weeks or whatever then I don’t really see an issue with that.

Your warnings about “dark territory” sound a bit like a slippery slope fallacy to me.

I remember when my wife told me at 6.45 am on the 17th October 2012 that she was pregnant. I had an overwhelming feeling of emotions all at once. Abortion is an emotional subject because the process is hugely emotional in itself. I feel that in many ways it cannot be subsumed and put into a rational process. For every person who has an abortion, there are people who are desperately trying for children and never succeed. Or as above, there are many women devastated by miscarriage and stillbirth.

The decision not to have kids can be a rational one, though and based on any number of factors: health, money, relationships, support (lack thereof) etc. I don’t want kids and my reasons are pretty rational to me, you know? You may want a child but you may rationally decide that a downs syndrome child, or a child with other disabilities is not “right” for you. I think that's perfectly understandable.

[KeithPratt]

This isn't about not having kids though; it's about the desire to terminate a pregnancy because the outcome is not desirable. Don't conflate the two.

I agree with you entirely that it is a rational decision to not have a child. It is entirely understandable. I've been there. But when it becomes normalised, then I think it becomes more and more an everyday option for people to pursue. I don't know whether that is a good thing or not.