Topic: Vote UKIP
Anonymous A started this discussion 13 years ago #28,065
Britain needs lebensraum. Thanks.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 16 minutes later[^] [v] #416,493
Yes! Their NOT RACIST attitude is really great! I also like their NOT SEXIST and NOT HOMOPHOBIC elements!
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #416,494
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Just because they hate brown people, and gays, and women, doesn't mean they're racist or homophobic or sexist!
God I bet you're a leftist!
Just because they hate brown people, and gays, and women, doesn't mean they're racist or homophobic or sexist!
God I bet you're a leftist!
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 10 minutes later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #416,496
@previous (A)
All of that news showing party members being racist, homophobic and sexist are the just the EVIL LIBERAL MEDIA trying to defame them! Why, how could anybody interpret "nobody should hire a young single free woman" as sexist??? It's deformation of character!
All of that news showing party members being racist, homophobic and sexist are the just the EVIL LIBERAL MEDIA trying to defame them! Why, how could anybody interpret "nobody should hire a young single free woman" as sexist??? It's deformation of character!
(Edited 15 seconds later.)
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 6 minutes later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #416,500
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 12 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,559
@416,493 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
@416,494 (A)
@416,496 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2325414/Men-physically-strong-likely-right-wing-political-views.html
@416,494 (A)
@416,496 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2325414/Men-physically-strong-likely-right-wing-political-views.html
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 41 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,560
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,561
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 8 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,563
@416,496 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
This is pretty much what living in the US and watching FOX News feels like. Only, knowing that other people are watching the same thing and not laughing is scary.
This is pretty much what living in the US and watching FOX News feels like. Only, knowing that other people are watching the same thing and not laughing is scary.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 50 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,564
@416,561 (D)
Are you a Daily Mail journalist? If not, you should seriously consider getting a job there.
@previous (E)
Some people take the Mail seriously too, though, which is a little depressing.
Are you a Daily Mail journalist? If not, you should seriously consider getting a job there.
@previous (E)
Some people take the Mail seriously too, though, which is a little depressing.
Anonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 36 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,565
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22566183
UK gets a rough ride in Scotland.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22566183
UK gets a rough ride in Scotland.
(Edited 32 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,566
@416,559 (D)
@416,561 (D)
Well two can play at that game.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-less-intelligent-left-wingers-says-study.html
@416,561 (D)
Well two can play at that game.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-less-intelligent-left-wingers-says-study.html
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 58 seconds later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,567
@416,565 (C)
Farage got a rough ride, specifically. Everybody should see this, it exposes him as the crazed wingnut bastard he really is.
Farage got a rough ride, specifically. Everybody should see this, it exposes him as the crazed wingnut bastard he really is.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,575
I voted UKIP before they were popular.Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 23 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,576
ITT: damlol
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,582
@416,566 (A)> Service Unavailable - Zero size object
> The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try again later.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,585
@previous (D)
Fixed: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html
Fixed: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 21 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,590
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 21 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,592
@previous (D)
If you found any faults in the study's methodology or conclusions, you should consider bringing these to the attention of the author: [email protected] Thanks.
If you found any faults in the study's methodology or conclusions, you should consider bringing these to the attention of the author: [email protected] Thanks.
Anonymous G replied with this 13 years ago, 54 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,601
HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,607
From what I can tell, the UKIP is basically the official Daily Mail party.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 55 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,615
@previous (HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY)
More or less. A jumble of predjudices and retarded right-wing idealsism trying to hide behind a mask of tolerance and common sense.
More or less. A jumble of predjudices and retarded right-wing idealsism trying to hide behind a mask of tolerance and common sense.
HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY replied with this 13 years ago, 47 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,618
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
That's why I like the blatancy of American politics. The only obfuscation comes from the form of for the children
That's why I like the blatancy of American politics. The only obfuscation comes from the form of for the children
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 23 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #416,621
@previous (HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY)
There's plenty of deception in American politics, from what I've seen. Like Mitt Romney changing his views to suit the situation or Fox News twisting the facts around to suit its own warped view.
There's plenty of deception in American politics, from what I've seen. Like Mitt Romney changing his views to suit the situation or Fox News twisting the facts around to suit its own warped view.
HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY replied with this 13 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #416,654
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
They twist their facts around but they do not try to hide their views.
They twist their facts around but they do not try to hide their views.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 11 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #416,690
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 42 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #416,694
HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY replied with this 13 years ago, 6 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,719
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 18 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,724
Ugh. Just had a conversation involving UKIP. My cousin expressed support for them, so I pointed out their racism/sexism/homophobia. But... he didn't seem to care. Only thing that mattered to him was that they were promising we'd leave the EU. It makes me sad that their whole "let's only discuss one issue ad nasuem" approach seems to be working. Doesn't anybody even remember that the Tories are going to give us a referendum on Europe anyway? Fucking retards.
Sorry, just needed to rage. :P
@OP
Hey TTEH, you know stuff. Would us leaving the EU even be a good thing?
Sorry, just needed to rage. :P
@OP
Hey TTEH, you know stuff. Would us leaving the EU even be a good thing?
Mr. Maki !dBGi/iH4eY replied with this 13 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,725
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Racists are bad, m'kay. You shouldn't be racist. If you are racist, you're bad, because racism is bad, m'kay. It's a bad thing to be racist, so don't be bad by being racist, m'kay, that'd be bad.
Racists are bad, m'kay. You shouldn't be racist. If you are racist, you're bad, because racism is bad, m'kay. It's a bad thing to be racist, so don't be bad by being racist, m'kay, that'd be bad.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,742
@416,724 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
As an EU member state we don't pay tariffs on our exports within the EU, which make up something like 60%+ of our country's trading. UKIP et al. say if we were to leave we could negotiate entrance into the European Economic Area without being EU members by joining the EFTA (like Norway, you've probably heard UKIP prattle on about Norway), but the keyword is negotiate - there's no guaranteed entrance and in the meantime, trading would suffer.
I think most of the support for leaving comes from people who look at our contributions to the EU - something like £10 billion in 2012, admittedly a large number - but just don't understand the benefits provided to us by being in the EU, trading-wise. The EU currently has trade agreements with lots of countries, as a single entity of course, and if we were to leave the EU we'd have to renegotiate all of these.
That's not to forget all the other things that would be affected - like the free movement of people - though whether that's a bad thing or not depends entirely on if you think limiting EU immigrants is desirable (which I venture to say is the opinion of most people wanting us to withdraw). The scariest thing, IMO, is that there exists a very large number of people whose entire thoughts on the subject are based on issues like Abu Qatada, which they've no doubt read about in the Daily Mail (ignoring of course the fact the ECtHR is not a court of the European Union, but of the Council of Europe, an entirely separate entity altogether (probably confused with the European Council, which is an entity within the EU)).
Then again, there are both business leaders and economists who think leaving the EU is a good idea and would ultimately benefit us. So I don't know! I try to keep an open mind, but there's definitely a strong case for staying in the EU, and I just don't think the potential benefits of leaving outweigh the potential risks.
Anybody who professes to be absolutely certain we'd be a better or worse off needs to put down their copy of the Daily Mail/Guardian/whatever.
As an EU member state we don't pay tariffs on our exports within the EU, which make up something like 60%+ of our country's trading. UKIP et al. say if we were to leave we could negotiate entrance into the European Economic Area without being EU members by joining the EFTA (like Norway, you've probably heard UKIP prattle on about Norway), but the keyword is negotiate - there's no guaranteed entrance and in the meantime, trading would suffer.
I think most of the support for leaving comes from people who look at our contributions to the EU - something like £10 billion in 2012, admittedly a large number - but just don't understand the benefits provided to us by being in the EU, trading-wise. The EU currently has trade agreements with lots of countries, as a single entity of course, and if we were to leave the EU we'd have to renegotiate all of these.
That's not to forget all the other things that would be affected - like the free movement of people - though whether that's a bad thing or not depends entirely on if you think limiting EU immigrants is desirable (which I venture to say is the opinion of most people wanting us to withdraw). The scariest thing, IMO, is that there exists a very large number of people whose entire thoughts on the subject are based on issues like Abu Qatada, which they've no doubt read about in the Daily Mail (ignoring of course the fact the ECtHR is not a court of the European Union, but of the Council of Europe, an entirely separate entity altogether (probably confused with the European Council, which is an entity within the EU)).
Then again, there are both business leaders and economists who think leaving the EU is a good idea and would ultimately benefit us. So I don't know! I try to keep an open mind, but there's definitely a strong case for staying in the EU, and I just don't think the potential benefits of leaving outweigh the potential risks.
Anybody who professes to be absolutely certain we'd be a better or worse off needs to put down their copy of the Daily Mail/Guardian/whatever.
(Edited 41 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 23 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,748
@previous (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
Yeah, I figured as much. It's a shame that the average person isn't getting much information on it beyond IMMIGRANTS IMMIGRANTS IMMIGRANTS, but hopefully that'll change as things get closer to election time.
> Anybody who professes to be absolutely certain we'd be a better or worse off needs to put down their copy of the Daily Mail/Guardian/whatever.
Yes. Yes they do.
Yeah, I figured as much. It's a shame that the average person isn't getting much information on it beyond IMMIGRANTS IMMIGRANTS IMMIGRANTS, but hopefully that'll change as things get closer to election time.
> Anybody who professes to be absolutely certain we'd be a better or worse off needs to put down their copy of the Daily Mail/Guardian/whatever.
Yes. Yes they do.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 15 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,754
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Exactly, it's such a polarising debate, I can only hope people will start to seriously consider our options when we do, and at some point we will, have a referendum on it.
Certainly a lot of lies get posted about the EU, they try to clear up some of the myths about the EU budget, and even have a blog that responds to claims about the EU in the UK media (basically the DM & the Sun).
Exactly, it's such a polarising debate, I can only hope people will start to seriously consider our options when we do, and at some point we will, have a referendum on it.
Certainly a lot of lies get posted about the EU, they try to clear up some of the myths about the EU budget, and even have a blog that responds to claims about the EU in the UK media (basically the DM & the Sun).
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 57 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,786
@416,719 (HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY)> >labour party consists of unemployed minorities
> top lel
It's funny because it's true. :D
@416,724 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> My cousin expressed support for them, so I pointed out their racism/sexism/homophobia.
I think you mean you cherry-picked a few cases where individual party members had said/done something inappropriate and used them to try and further your anti-UKIP agenda.
Anonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 13 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,790
> I think you mean you cherry-picked a few cases where individual party members had said/done something inappropriate and used them to try and further your anti-UKIP agenda.
That is not unreasonable given that their leader is at the forefront of illfounded action and remarks.
That is not unreasonable given that their leader is at the forefront of illfounded action and remarks.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,793
Anonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,794
Really - remind us what he called the Scottish protesters a couple of days ago or how he failed to cope with an aggressive radio interview. He fell over his own local election success clearly demonstrating he has neither the maturity nor the experience to hold office.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 11 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,797
@previous (C)
> "The fact that 50 yobbo fascist scum turn up and aren't prepared to listen to the debate, I absolutely refuse to believe is representative of Scottish public opinion," Mr Farage said.
I see no problem here.
> how he failed to cope with an aggressive radio interview.
Or here.
> He fell over his own local election success clearly demonstrating he has neither the maturity nor the experience to hold office.
He is gaining experience every day. By the next general elections he will be an experienced mainstream party leader and much more capable of dealing with the pressure that comes with it.
> "The fact that 50 yobbo fascist scum turn up and aren't prepared to listen to the debate, I absolutely refuse to believe is representative of Scottish public opinion," Mr Farage said.
I see no problem here.
> how he failed to cope with an aggressive radio interview.
Or here.
> He fell over his own local election success clearly demonstrating he has neither the maturity nor the experience to hold office.
He is gaining experience every day. By the next general elections he will be an experienced mainstream party leader and much more capable of dealing with the pressure that comes with it.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,836
Anonymous F replied with this 13 years ago, 13 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,886
meanwhile in americaAnonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 17 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,891
@416,786 (J)
> Nigel Farage hit back today at demonstrators in Scotland who branded him "racist, Nazi scum" by describing them as "fascist, deeply racist" and "anti-English".
Not the way to do it, Nigel. He should have described them as persons who disagree with my point of view. At least one of them was English.
> Nigel Farage hit back today at demonstrators in Scotland who branded him "racist, Nazi scum" by describing them as "fascist, deeply racist" and "anti-English".
Not the way to do it, Nigel. He should have described them as persons who disagree with my point of view. At least one of them was English.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,898
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,899
@previous (J)
And his response to it really showed what a tolerant, controlled man he is! Truly, this is somebody who does not let their emotions influence them.
And his response to it really showed what a tolerant, controlled man he is! Truly, this is somebody who does not let their emotions influence them.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,906
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Calling racists racist isn't intolerant, it's just stating facts.
Calling racists racist isn't intolerant, it's just stating facts.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 15 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,909
@previous (J)
You're missing my point. He showed that he's an angry twit who looses his cool easily. Not a great trait in a politician.
You're missing my point. He showed that he's an angry twit who looses his cool easily. Not a great trait in a politician.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,910
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,912
@previous (J)
> Descirbed protesters as "yobbo fascist scum"
> hung up on a phone interview when it wasn't going his way
Right, because these are the marks of a cool and collected individual.
> Descirbed protesters as "yobbo fascist scum"
> hung up on a phone interview when it wasn't going his way
Right, because these are the marks of a cool and collected individual.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 55 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,913
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,914
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,915
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)You know you're repeated sarcastic remarks are making me think that maybe you might be a little intolerant, Killer Lettuce.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,916
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 10 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,917
@416,915 (J)Yes, because sarcasm is a clear idicator of one's tolerance. They're directly linked, in fact. Practically the same thing.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,918
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,919
@416,917 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)> They're directly linked, in fact. Practically the same thing.
My
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,921
@416,917 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)Whoa, calm down there Killer Lettuce! You don't want to lose your cool. People on obscure internet forums might start calling you an angry twit.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,923
@previous (J)That's fine. I'm not the leader and face of an influential political party, so it's okay!
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 11 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,925
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,926
@previous (J)As a leader, he shouldn't let his emotions get the better of him and should be able to stay cool under pressure.
Clearly he cannot, in fact, do this!
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,927
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,928
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 15 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,930
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> "Absolutely none. But rather more than the BBC do. We could have had this interview in England a couple of years ago, although I wouldn't have met with such hatred that I’m getting from your questions, and frankly I’ve had enough of this interview. Goodbye."
Yes, he sounds like an out-of-control lunatic. Lock him up and throw away the key, I say!
> "Absolutely none. But rather more than the BBC do. We could have had this interview in England a couple of years ago, although I wouldn't have met with such hatred that I’m getting from your questions, and frankly I’ve had enough of this interview. Goodbye."
Yes, he sounds like an out-of-control lunatic. Lock him up and throw away the key, I say!
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,931
@previous (J)
It shows that he can't handle pressure. He felt like the interviewer was being "hateful" so he gave up. Not exactly professional either.
It shows that he can't handle pressure. He felt like the interviewer was being "hateful" so he gave up. Not exactly professional either.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,932
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
It doesn't sound like he "lost his cool", or that he was "angry". I don't see what is wrong with him deciding to not to continue an interview where he felt the interviewer was asking hateful questions either.
It doesn't sound like he "lost his cool", or that he was "angry". I don't see what is wrong with him deciding to not to continue an interview where he felt the interviewer was asking hateful questions either.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 8 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,939
@previous (J)
But the interviewer wasn't really being hateful. He just stated statistical facts and disagreed with Farage in a calm manner.
Oh, and there's also this:
> Protester Max Crema, 21, an economics student, suggested Ukip has "a well documented history of racism".
> Mr Farage replied: "If you believe that then you are less intelligent than you look, dear boy.
Excellent public relations. Really knows how win people over.
But the interviewer wasn't really being hateful. He just stated statistical facts and disagreed with Farage in a calm manner.
Oh, and there's also this:
> Protester Max Crema, 21, an economics student, suggested Ukip has "a well documented history of racism".
> Mr Farage replied: "If you believe that then you are less intelligent than you look, dear boy.
Excellent public relations. Really knows how win people over.
(Edited 7 seconds later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 16 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,944
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)> "I have invested the best part of my adult political life in helping to try to build up this movement and I am far from perfect but I do think I am able, through the media, to deliver a good, simple, understandable message."
-Nigel Farage
He's just an average bloke trying to make this country a little bit less of a shit-hole and yet you're constantly trying to defame him by labelling him an intolerant racist with an anger problem. I think that is very unpatriotic of you, KL.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 8 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,980
@previous (J)
> He's just an average bloke trying to make this country a little bit less of a shit-hole
However good his intentions are, they are irrelevant. It's the effect his party will have on this country that needs to be examined. Many a dictator, for example, has had good intentions and just thought that they were trying to improve their country.
> I think that is very unpatriotic of you, KL.
On the contrary, my dear Anonymous J. Looking at the facts, I've concluded that his party has several undesirable elements and that man himself has a few character flaws. Therefore, it would seem that UKIP coming to power would be bad for the country. I'm being quite patriotic in my opposition to them.
> He's just an average bloke trying to make this country a little bit less of a shit-hole
However good his intentions are, they are irrelevant. It's the effect his party will have on this country that needs to be examined. Many a dictator, for example, has had good intentions and just thought that they were trying to improve their country.
> I think that is very unpatriotic of you, KL.
On the contrary, my dear Anonymous J. Looking at the facts, I've concluded that his party has several undesirable elements and that man himself has a few character flaws. Therefore, it would seem that UKIP coming to power would be bad for the country. I'm being quite patriotic in my opposition to them.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 59 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,985
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
How would you feel about a Conservative-UKIP coalition with Dave as PM and Nigel as Deputy PM?
How would you feel about a Conservative-UKIP coalition with Dave as PM and Nigel as Deputy PM?
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 23 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,986
@previous (J)
Eh. As long as Dave was firmly in the driving seat.
Still wouldn't be happy about it, but I suppose it's a somewhat acceptable compromise. Would rather it didn't happen, though.
Eh. As long as Dave was firmly in the driving seat.
Still wouldn't be happy about it, but I suppose it's a somewhat acceptable compromise. Would rather it didn't happen, though.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 50 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,989
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,990
@previous (J)
That depends. If he was co-operative and accepted that he was part of a team and had to make compromises, then maybe. If he was a little shit and constantly opposed Dave whenever he could, then no.
That depends. If he was co-operative and accepted that he was part of a team and had to make compromises, then maybe. If he was a little shit and constantly opposed Dave whenever he could, then no.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 36 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,991
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 11 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,992
@416,990 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I think he only is so critical of the Conservative party so he can win over some of their voters. I don't think he would have a problem working with them in government. I, for one, would like to see a more right wing Conservative party, but that's not going to happen with Dave being as liberal as he is.
I think he only is so critical of the Conservative party so he can win over some of their voters. I don't think he would have a problem working with them in government. I, for one, would like to see a more right wing Conservative party, but that's not going to happen with Dave being as liberal as he is.
Anonymous J double-posted this 13 years ago, 31 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #416,993
squeegee !first/o5zA joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,008
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 4 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,034
@416,992 (J)
But I like liberal Dave! He wasn't afraid to push for gay marriage and disregard the religious bigots in this country.
But I like liberal Dave! He wasn't afraid to push for gay marriage and disregard the religious bigots in this country.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,038
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)Here we go again...
Just because someone does not agree with your point of view it doesn't mean they're a bigot.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,041
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 42 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,042
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 35 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,043
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,045
@previous (A)
I think it should be up to the church to decide whether they want to marry homosexuals or not, since it is a religious ceremony.
I think it should be up to the church to decide whether they want to marry homosexuals or not, since it is a religious ceremony.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,046
@417,038 (J)
> you gays can't have the same rights as straight people!
Anyway, that wasn't even the main point I was making. My main point was that I like his attitudes towards equality, and liked that he was willing to go against an influential group to further this goal.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't automatically like him unconditionally because of this, but it's just something that I quite like about "Liberal Dave".
> you gays can't have the same rights as straight people!
Anyway, that wasn't even the main point I was making. My main point was that I like his attitudes towards equality, and liked that he was willing to go against an influential group to further this goal.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't automatically like him unconditionally because of this, but it's just something that I quite like about "Liberal Dave".
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx double-posted this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,047
@417,045 (J)
The church needs to get with the times, though. We're not living in medieval times anymore, and it's high time they were encouraged to move away from their archaic view on gays.
I'd say that, overall, it's a good thing.
The church needs to get with the times, though. We're not living in medieval times anymore, and it's high time they were encouraged to move away from their archaic view on gays.
I'd say that, overall, it's a good thing.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,049
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
It is not the governments place to be telling the church what to do. The people campaigning for same-sex marriage should be trying to reform the church instead of getting spineless Dave to do their dirty work.
It is not the governments place to be telling the church what to do. The people campaigning for same-sex marriage should be trying to reform the church instead of getting spineless Dave to do their dirty work.
Anonymous J double-posted this 13 years ago, 17 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,050
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,051
@417,049 (J)
What about the churches that want to conduct same-sex marriages? For example, the Society of Friends (Quakers) which have campaigning for gay marriage for over a decade.
What about the churches that want to conduct same-sex marriages? For example, the Society of Friends (Quakers) which have campaigning for gay marriage for over a decade.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 15 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,054
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,057
@417,050 (J)
> implying I was speaking in the legal sense
@417,049 (J)
Wasn't the law optional anyway? Like, a church didn't have to do gay marriages of they didn't want to? So technically nobody is being forced to do anything?
Also, nobody "got him to do their dirty work". He decided that it would be a good move to make, so he did it.
> implying I was speaking in the legal sense
@417,049 (J)
Wasn't the law optional anyway? Like, a church didn't have to do gay marriages of they didn't want to? So technically nobody is being forced to do anything?
Also, nobody "got him to do their dirty work". He decided that it would be a good move to make, so he did it.
(Edited 27 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx double-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,060
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,061
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,062
@417,054 (J)
Yes. The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1973/18
> Nullity - 11 Grounds on which a marriage is void.
[...]
> (c) that the parties are not respectively male and female;
Yes. The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1973/18
> Nullity - 11 Grounds on which a marriage is void.
[...]
> (c) that the parties are not respectively male and female;
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) double-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,064
@417,061 (J)
You support this bill, yet it expressly prohibits the Church of England from conducting same-sex marriages? Doesn't this go against your belief (@417,049 (J)) that the government shouldn't telling the church what to do?
You support this bill, yet it expressly prohibits the Church of England from conducting same-sex marriages? Doesn't this go against your belief (@417,049 (J)) that the government shouldn't telling the church what to do?
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 4 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,065
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,067
@417,061 (J)
You started debating me when I expressed my support of it in @417,034 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx) so of course I thought that.
You started debating me when I expressed my support of it in @417,034 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx) so of course I thought that.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,068
@417,062 (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
Then why can't they just erase that line of the bill?
@417,064 (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
I thought this bill made it so the Church of England could conduct same-sex marriages?
Then why can't they just erase that line of the bill?
@417,064 (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
I thought this bill made it so the Church of England could conduct same-sex marriages?
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous J double-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,070
@417,067 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I just thought calling people with different views bigots was a little unnecessary.
I just thought calling people with different views bigots was a little unnecessary.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,073
@417,068 (J)
No, its' purpose is to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages. The Church of England (and Wales) said during the government's consultation that they don't and won't want to conduct same-sex marriages, so the law will prohibit them from doing so.
No, its' purpose is to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages. The Church of England (and Wales) said during the government's consultation that they don't and won't want to conduct same-sex marriages, so the law will prohibit them from doing so.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) double-posted this 13 years ago, 55 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,074
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,076
@417,070 (J)
Maybe "bigot" was a little strong. Maybe not. They certainly discriminate, though.
@417,065 (J)
You know who does care?
Nigie. :3
Maybe "bigot" was a little strong. Maybe not. They certainly discriminate, though.
@417,065 (J)
You know who does care?
Nigie. :3
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,080
@417,073 (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
> No, its' purpose is to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages.
Exactly. This is all the government needs to do.
That is why I support the bill because the government is just changing the law so churches can conduct same-sex marriages if they wish, but it doesn't force them to do so.
> No, its' purpose is to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages.
Exactly. This is all the government needs to do.
That is why I support the bill because the government is just changing the law so churches can conduct same-sex marriages if they wish, but it doesn't force them to do so.
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
Anonymous J double-posted this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,082
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,084
100 GET
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 11 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,085
100 GET
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 13 years ago, 32 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,087
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #417,091
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 11 months later, 11 months after the original post[^] [v] #477,458
bump