The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[TightEnd]

Click to see full-size image.

Click to see full-size image.

[TightEnd]

How serious are pro-European Conservatives? We're about to find out,

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/09/how-serious-are-pro-european-conservatives-were-about-find-out …

[TightEnd]

New leak of Brexit papers reveals fissures between Britain and EU

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/06/britain-must-solve-problem-of-irish-border-post-brexit-say-leaked-eu-papers?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_b-gdnnews#link_time=1504733995

[TightEnd]

Downing St is asking FTSE-100 bosses to sign a letter backing ministers' Brexit strategy - many refusing.

http://news.sky.com/story/ftse-100-chiefs-fury-at-no-10-letter-backing-ministers-on-brexit-11023229

[TightEnd]

Ruth Davidson: “Brexit could deliver a hit we can’t recover from".

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/09/ruth-davidson-brexit-could-deliver-hit-we-can-t-recover …

[TightEnd]

Liam Fox: We have turned down free trade deals because we do not have capacity

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/88704/liam-fox-we-have-turned-down-free-trade-deals-because-we

[MintTrav]

I don't get why being against abortion makes him unacceptable. There are a number of opinions that do make people unacceptable for high office, in my view, including some that he has expressed, but surely abortion is one of those issues that people can have divergent views on (albeit strongly-held ones), without that clobbering their suitability for office.

It would be an extreme minority and highly unpopular view in Britain that abortion is not an an option in instances of rape/incest/both.

Seems to be unpopular, but hardly extreme.

And anyway, isn't rape/incest a false argument that people in favour of abortions hide behind in order to get a pass for mainstream abortion, whereas it actually makes up a minute proportion of abortions carried out? So, ignoring rape and incest, is opposition to abortion unacceptable in a politician?

He specified that he meant cases of rape or incest. "Afraid so" he said when asked. So in analysing his view, the number of these cases isn't relevant. He believes these pregnancies are 'sacrosanct', this is a really extreme view.

If he is using the word 'sacrosanct' with its religious meaning (which he seems to be) then I agree that anyone who wishes to base UK laws on the views of any religion is unfit to be a public representative. But if he had just stated his views, without bringing religion into it, would that be 'unacceptable' or 'extreme'? I don't think so - it is just one opinion on one of the thousands of current issues. People have different views on things.

And what if someone else comes out and says it's okay after a rape (which, as I said, is a tiny number of cases), but not for the general population? Is that unacceptable/extreme too? People who want abortion to be available for the general population use the rape scenario as cover to get their argument through, instead of justifying their case on its own merits.

Red - I wasn't arguing whether he is right or not; just that I think the reaction to his statements is OTT.

[TightEnd]

Click to see full-size image.

[TightEnd]

The government is bungling Brexit talks – it needs to take them seriously, says stephenkb

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/09/government-bungling-brexit-talks-it-needs-take-them-seriously

[TightEnd]

Tory MPs issue Brexit transition warning

Dozens of Eurosceptic Tory MPs are warning ministers not to use a post-Brexit transitional period to stay in the EU "by stealth".

They say to remain in the single market for a period would be a "historic mistake", in a letter seen by the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41187051

[kukushkin88]

I don't get why being against abortion makes him unacceptable. There are a number of opinions that do make people unacceptable for high office, in my view, including some that he has expressed, but surely abortion is one of those issues that people can have divergent views on (albeit strongly-held ones), without that clobbering their suitability for office.

It would be an extreme minority and highly unpopular view in Britain that abortion is not an an option in instances of rape/incest/both.

Seems to be unpopular, but hardly extreme.

And anyway, isn't rape/incest a false argument that people in favour of abortions hide behind in order to get a pass for mainstream abortion, whereas it actually makes up a minute proportion of abortions carried out? So, ignoring rape and incest, is opposition to abortion unacceptable in a politician?

He specified that he meant cases of rape or incest. "Afraid so" he said when asked. So in analysing his view, the number of these cases isn't relevant. He believes these pregnancies are 'sacrosanct', this is a really extreme view.

If he is using the word 'sacrosanct' with its religious meaning (which he seems to be) then I agree that anyone who wishes to base UK laws on the views of any religion is unfit to be a public representative. But if he had just stated his views, without bringing religion into it, would that be 'unacceptable' or 'extreme'? I don't think so - it is just one opinion on one of the thousands of current issues. People have different views on things.

And what if someone else comes out and says it's okay after a rape (which, as I said, is a tiny number of cases), but not for the general population? Is that unacceptable/extreme too? People who want abortion to be available for the general population use the rape scenario as cover to get their argument through, instead of justifying their case on its own merits.

Red - I wasn't arguing whether he is right or not; just that I think the reaction to his statements is OTT.

I think I understand what you're saying. It was actually a bit of worse than that, as he was suggesting the opinion/thought was out of his hands...essentially his religion had decreed that was how he should think and who was he to disagree. To get some perspective on how extreme it is, let's try and empathise with the rape victim. How would we/he explain to them why they had to keep the child?

[MintTrav]

I don't get why being against abortion makes him unacceptable. There are a number of opinions that do make people unacceptable for high office, in my view, including some that he has expressed, but surely abortion is one of those issues that people can have divergent views on (albeit strongly-held ones), without that clobbering their suitability for office.

It would be an extreme minority and highly unpopular view in Britain that abortion is not an an option in instances of rape/incest/both.

Seems to be unpopular, but hardly extreme.

And anyway, isn't rape/incest a false argument that people in favour of abortions hide behind in order to get a pass for mainstream abortion, whereas it actually makes up a minute proportion of abortions carried out? So, ignoring rape and incest, is opposition to abortion unacceptable in a politician?

He specified that he meant cases of rape or incest. "Afraid so" he said when asked. So in analysing his view, the number of these cases isn't relevant. He believes these pregnancies are 'sacrosanct', this is a really extreme view.

If he is using the word 'sacrosanct' with its religious meaning (which he seems to be) then I agree that anyone who wishes to base UK laws on the views of any religion is unfit to be a public representative. But if he had just stated his views, without bringing religion into it, would that be 'unacceptable' or 'extreme'? I don't think so - it is just one opinion on one of the thousands of current issues. People have different views on things.

And what if someone else comes out and says it's okay after a rape (which, as I said, is a tiny number of cases), but not for the general population? Is that unacceptable/extreme too? People who want abortion to be available for the general population use the rape scenario as cover to get their argument through, instead of justifying their case on its own merits.

Red - I wasn't arguing whether he is right or not; just that I think the reaction to his statements is OTT.

I think I understand what you're saying. It was actually a bit of worse than that, as he was suggesting the opinion/thought was out of his hands...essentially his religion had decreed that was how he should think and who was he to disagree. To get some perspective on how extreme it is, let's try and empathise with the rape victim. How would we/he explain to them why they had to keep the child?

They don't have to keep the child. And most rape victims who become pregnant already choose to continue with the pregnancy, so the number who would be affected is a minority of an already very small number.

But you are asking me to defend something that I didn't say was my position. I tried to move the discussion away from rape to the general question of abortion, but you keep coming back to that instead of addressing my question. As I said before, that's what always happens - people constantly blur the question of abortion for everyone by switching it to abortion for rape cases.

[kukushkin88]

I don't get why being against abortion makes him unacceptable. There are a number of opinions that do make people unacceptable for high office, in my view, including some that he has expressed, but surely abortion is one of those issues that people can have divergent views on (albeit strongly-held ones), without that clobbering their suitability for office.

It would be an extreme minority and highly unpopular view in Britain that abortion is not an an option in instances of rape/incest/both.

Seems to be unpopular, but hardly extreme.

And anyway, isn't rape/incest a false argument that people in favour of abortions hide behind in order to get a pass for mainstream abortion, whereas it actually makes up a minute proportion of abortions carried out? So, ignoring rape and incest, is opposition to abortion unacceptable in a politician?

He specified that he meant cases of rape or incest. "Afraid so" he said when asked. So in analysing his view, the number of these cases isn't relevant. He believes these pregnancies are 'sacrosanct', this is a really extreme view.

If he is using the word 'sacrosanct' with its religious meaning (which he seems to be) then I agree that anyone who wishes to base UK laws on the views of any religion is unfit to be a public representative. But if he had just stated his views, without bringing religion into it, would that be 'unacceptable' or 'extreme'? I don't think so - it is just one opinion on one of the thousands of current issues. People have different views on things.

And what if someone else comes out and says it's okay after a rape (which, as I said, is a tiny number of cases), but not for the general population? Is that unacceptable/extreme too? People who want abortion to be available for the general population use the rape scenario as cover to get their argument through, instead of justifying their case on its own merits.

Red - I wasn't arguing whether he is right or not; just that I think the reaction to his statements is OTT.

I think I understand what you're saying. It was actually a bit of worse than that, as he was suggesting the opinion/thought was out of his hands...essentially his religion had decreed that was how he should think and who was he to disagree. To get some perspective on how extreme it is, let's try and empathise with the rape victim. How would we/he explain to them why they had to keep the child?

They don't have to keep the child. And most rape victims who become pregnant already choose to continue with the pregnancy, so the number who would be affected is a minority of an already very small number.

But you are asking me to defend something that I didn't say was my position. I tried to move the discussion away from rape to the general question of abortion, but you keep coming back to that instead of addressing my question. As I said before, that's what always happens - people constantly blur the question of abortion for everyone by switching it to abortion for rape cases.

I'm not asking you to defend anything. I'm pointing out why I think his stance on this is deeply flawed. I thought the discussion was about whether this opinion that he holds so dear, that he considers it 'sacrosanct' , makes him unsuitable for PM. Given it's revealed that religion guides how he thinks, I would suggest that it has.

[TightEnd]

Davis was a good man, says Nick Cohen - but he erred when he didn't question his & his supporters anti-EU fantasies

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/09/david-davis-is-heading-for-a-tragic-failure-of-his-own-making/

[TightEnd]

Theresa May should abandon Brexit talks now as Britain is “sleep walking into a disaster” - yanis varoufakis;

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4424340/economist-warns-theresa-may-abandon-brexit-negotiations/