shuggy's blog
Cardinal objects to "lies and misinformation"? Pot, kettle, some might think.
Pot, kettle, some might think.
Or mote, beam, eye, perhaps?
'So I think we're entitled to know what they would like the legal situation with regards to abortion to be in an independent Scotland.'
Personally I am not in favour of going back to knitting needles and Gin baths, but as I recall,it was your Labour chums who devolved the powers to the Holyrood parliament to vote on euthanasia and the death penalty, but specificaly not on abortion.
In order not to appear a hypocrite perhaps you should have asked firstly why the Labour party did this in the first place?
Lts face it Shuggy, it was for the same reason - the pursuit of the so called 'Catholic vote'.
I rather think that most Catholics would actualy rather not answer the question either, and that the 'Catholic vote' is not as anti-abortion as its self-appointed spokesmen would like to think.
As you know, Government funded Scottish Catholic schools have for years taught the kids that abortion is actualy murder. Might you also ask the labour party just why they have funded the zealous espousal of that particular view?
Lts face it Shuggy, it was for the same reason - the pursuit of the so called 'Catholic vote'.
I don't disagree. I also think you're right that the supposedly 'Catholic vote' isn't as anti-abortion as their sherperds would like to think. I don't see how this detracts from the point I'm making though.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/...fm?
id=855642007
Hmmm - seems a few MSPs, Labour and Liberal, have taken issue with our Keef. Still no word from the SNP, though...
No word from the SNP? All depends where you look, Shuggy.
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/
outp...ry9795045t0.asp
Yes, well - what would I be doing looking there? Anway, tried to and got, "Network Access Message: The page cannot be displayed" - so what does it say, eh?
From the Herald:
A senior Nationalist MP, Pete Wishart said: "The Catholic Church is, of course, entitled to its point of view on this issue, but the last thing Scotland needs is to end up like the US where churches and faith groups have an undue influence on political debate."Good for him. But was does the leadership say? What's their policy - do you know?
The link works fine on my computer. Why not go to the Courier website and click on the 'News' linkup in the top left corner.
In any case, I'm sure you'll be delighted to learn that the SNP, leadership and all, has always regarded abortion as being a matter for individual politicians to decide according to their conscience.
"matters should be decided by elected politicians voting according to their own consciences rather than unelected clerics attempting to impose theirs."
You mean in the same way that unelected liberals succeeded in imposing their views 40 years ago! Surely, democracy is all about various pressure groups attempting to persuade politicians to their way of thinking and whether it is the Catholic Church or the Mary Stopes International organisation they are entitled to push their case.
Also, the Cardinal is to be congratulated on injecting some unpleasant facts to the debate, such as, "In Scotland, we kill the equivalent of two classrooms of children every day. That's two Dunblanes a day" or to put it in 'officialese', "figures showed abortion on the increase, from 12,603 in 2005 to 13,081 in 2006."
And just to remind ourselves, those are human living organisms that are being killed - and some people still worry about foxes, badgers and whales!
I'm sure you'll be delighted to learn that the SNP, leadership and all, has always regarded abortion as being a matter for individual politicians to decide according to their conscience.
I am. Ecstatic. In fact I think I've wet myself. So why the weasel words about reserved matters, hmmm?
Also, the Cardinal is to be congratulated on injecting some unpleasant facts to the debate, such as, "In Scotland, we kill the equivalent of two classrooms of children every day. That's two Dunblanes a day" or to put it in 'officialese', "figures showed abortion on the increase, from 12,603 in 2005 to 13,081 in 2006."
There not facts - the comparison is being made because I assume O'Brien follows Augustine and believes the soul is infused at conception. But not being Catholic, we are not obliged to agree. I hope you're not giving me this, "Oh is the Catholic church not allowed to express an opinion, then?" shite, which I anticipated. Yes they can. And we can respond, "This isn't Iran, so fuck off".
Weasel words? I've no idea who the Herald spoke to, but if it was a Scottish Executive (i.e. government, not SNP) press officer, then that's exactly the sort of factually acccurate but anodyne response they could have expected.
If on the other hand, they'd bothered to get quotes from individual parliamentarians, as the Courier did, then the evidence is that they would have got a more interesting response.
Oh bollocks! Are you deliberately misunderstanding what I've written here? Unless you're suggesting the report is inaccurate, you have to come up with some explanation as to why the fact that something is a matter reserved for Westminster didn't stop the SNP leadership banging on about it during the election.
I don't have to come up with anything, though I'd be interested to know why you seem to be getting so het up at finding that the SNP has exactly the position on this matter that you claimed to want to see.
There's nothing to misunderstand. The SNP wants all powers reserved to Westminster to be transferred to Holyrood, abortion included. But wherever power lies over abortion, it'll be left as an issue of conscience for SNP parliamentarians.
Any SNP press officer or parliamentarian could have told you you that, and many did tell the Courier. However, phone one of the press officers at the
Scottish Executive, the kind who works for whoever is in power, as it looks like the Herald did, and you'll get the sort of statement you saw in the Herald.
It's nothing to do with whether powers are reserved or not, and everything to do with the difference between party and government. If it bothers you that much, instead of arguing with me, why not phone the Herald journalist and find out who it was that they were speaking to at the Executive?
Sorry, that would read better as 'the diference between government and the civil service'
If it bothers you that much, instead of arguing with me, why not phone the Herald journalist and find out who it was that they were speaking to at the Executive?
Are you kidding me on? I can't think of anything that would bother me taht much...
"figures showed abortion on the increase, from 12,603 in 2005 to 13,081 in 2006".
These statistics were *official* facts.
"the soul is infused at conception"
As neither of us is a Theist, let us set aside the "soul" and concentrate on when exactly the foetus becomes human. Abortionists are never too clear or specific which surprises me given the importance of knowing exactly when it occurs.
"And we can respond, "This isn't Iran, so fuck off"."
Fair enough, so long as I can respond to the pro-abortionists that this isn't Auschwitz so fuck off"! I wouldn't, but I'm glad to know that I could if I wanted to.
'I don't disagree. I also think you're right that the supposedly 'Catholic vote' isn't as anti-abortion as their sherperds would like to think. I don't see how this detracts from the point I'm making though.'
-----------------------------
The point is that it is mere hypocracy to ask this question of the SNP alone when the Labour party has already legislated a convenient silence on the part of its own msp's for the same reason.
On a related matter, I was pleased to see the election of an Asian msp for the first time in the form of Bashir Ahmad. I was less pleased to note his espousal of Muslim schools funded by the state, but hey, what's good for the goose ...right?
I was less pleased to note his espousal of Muslim schools funded by the state, but hey, what's good for the goose ...right?
Yes.
I think we need to keep this all to the basics. We can do without elderly celibate men with intolerant views seeking to impose these views on the political representatives elected from all the people. Especially senior clerics who have been so remiss in protecting the children among their own brethern from abuse from within their own clergy... not the best basis from which to start hysterical rants that appallingly exploit the memories of Dunblane.
A deal more of honesty on the part of this cleric would have been welcome... for example why did he not make this statement during the elction campaign period?
Then electors would have been able to question their prospective representatives on whether they were seeking election on the basis that they would be following unaccountable religious diktates irrespective of their electors' views.
Or what about some honesty and openess around the statements made by some of the group of men who seem to consort around the Cardinal? One of them on the day of the Cardinal's edict said on BBC Scotland (10..00pm mid-week) that 'we' are aiming at MSPs "who may leave their consciences outside when they go into the Parliament".
What utter arrogance and dangerous nonsense. Who are this 'we' to denounce MSPs for 'leaving their consciences outside'? Can they now name these MSPs? Presumably these are Catholic MSPs, in which case wouldn't the faithfull want to be told who they are? What an appalling road this all starts to take us down.
The Labour and SNP parties both need to demonstrate some greater public courage and candour in telling these menaces to democracy to get lost.
I trust at Mr Devine's next visit to Mass he'll be jumped on the way up to Communion, taken to a safe house (or 'Presbytery') and made to watch 'The Silent Scream' on continuous loop, his eyelids being held open by paperclips lile Alex in Clockwork Orange. While Jospehine Quintavalle and Fiona Pinto torment him as only they know how.
advance cash instant loan quick advance cash instant loan quick advance cash instant loan quick. online gambling game online gambling game online gambling game.
Commenting by HaloScan
