Corbyn to be PM within 6 months?

[Cyril Haearn]

I think it is gr8 that little Ulster gets a bit more attention. Won't be for long unfortunately

For many people living in mainland Britain, Ulster is a faraway country of which one know little. Many surely know Eire better than Ulster, one imagines, or France

[Psamathe]

In the last few posts about abortion,which is way off topic BTW,has been men debating an issue that's non of their concern IMO

If the pope (a man) stopped his ongoing and outspoken objections I wonder if this would become a non-issue in relation to NI and it's devolved laws on this. It's not so much the opinions on one man (any individual can hold pro/anti opinions) but that he determines the rules of a large wealthy and controlling organisation ...

Ian

[meic]

I dont think the pope's views influence the DUP, except possibly to thwart him.
The DUP are quite vehemently on the other side.

[horizon]

Meanwhile the Queen's speech passes and Corbyn sacks more Ministers as Labours Brexit chaos continues...

Al

Whaaat!? He's PM??!!

[Cunobelin]

The Glastonbury "interviews" showed once again how populist Corbyn is. Promise your audience whatehey want to hear and of course you will be popular

It included the news that one of his first and prioritised tasks is to scrap Trident... the one he is scrapping, his Party isn't scrapping, he then wasn't scrapping because it is Party policy, but apparently isn't following Party Policy despite agreeing that he was and is now again going against Party Policy and scrapping it

If May "flip-flops" on polices then Corbyn spins like a top

I think you have to distinguish between what Corbyn wants to do (as an individual) and what Labour would do (as a party). It is never going to be the case that everybody in a Party agrees with every Party policy. Corbyn has always been against Trident and has always said he wants to scrap it. But he has also said that Labour Party policy is to keep Trident so he as a Labour Party PM would be implementing Labour policies (and I've seen him say that he would work for a nuclear free world through other means (TV interview)).

Corbyn has been completely consistent on this. May however is telling us one thing one minute then changing the next. So a massive difference between the 2.

Ian

My apologies, I misunderstood "the first thing I would do as Prime Minister is to scrap Trident"

[PH]

My apologies, I misunderstood "the first thing I would do as Prime Minister is to scrap Trident"

Except of course he never said that.

[pwa]

Possibly. The Home Office came up with this definition.


So anyone who vocally opposes individual liberty, mutual respect, and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs, is considered to be an extremist.

Given the prevailing attitudes regarding mutual respect, it might be easier to put the handful of respectful innocent on the Isle of Wight, and make the rest of the UK a prison for the guilty. May would be Prisoner Number One.

Abortion ends up as a tangled knot of conflicting morality whichever direction you come at it from. No easy answers. But if you take the view (and you may not) that an unborn child is a child, you can see how some may say that abortion is the killing of a child, and should any individual be free to do that? Now I know that is not the only way to look at it, but I put that forward to show how a caring person who is normally all for individual choice may have trouble with the concept of abortion. I do not automatically write off people because of their stance on this issue. I think we should listen to what people say on this and if their views seem to come from a good place, accept that. Needless to say, there are harsh dogmatists on both sides of the debate.

Abortion is merely a form of contraception.

Plain wrong. Contraception prevents conception. Abortion deals with the product of conception. Whether that difference matters to you is up to you.

[pwa]

In the last few posts about abortion,which is way off topic BTW,has been men debating an issue that's non of their concern IMO

Perpetuating the drift (sorry) your assertion that men have no right to be concerned in this matter only hold true if you believe that an unborn child is not a child. If it is a child (as some of us believe) the killing of that child is a concern for all of us. Or we can turn that around and ask whether we should allow the killing of pre-birth children that we allow should be extended to post-birth children if their parents want it. Ridiculous and distasteful, I know, but it does show how arbitrary we are with the lines we draw on this matter.

For the record, my opposition to some abortion does not go as far as the law in NI, which prevents the abortion of an unborn child very much loved by the mother but with deformities that would make life outside the womb impossible. Such an abortion would, for me, be carried out for the best of reasons, with the welfare of the child and mother both taken into account.

[pwa]

In the last few posts about abortion,which is way off topic BTW,has been men debating an issue that's non of their concern IMO

If the pope (a man) stopped his ongoing and outspoken objections I wonder if this would become a non-issue in relation to NI and it's devolved laws on this. It's not so much the opinions on one man (any individual can hold pro/anti opinions) but that he determines the rules of a large wealthy and controlling organisation ...

Ian

I don't know if you have an RC background, Ian, but the pope is the head of a religious movement that opposes abortion. He does not choose that stance, it is given to him.

[meic]

In the last few posts about abortion,which is way off topic BTW,has been men debating an issue that's non of their concern IMO

Perpetuating the drift (sorry) your assertion that men have no right to be concerned in this matter only hold true if you believe that an unborn child is not a child. If it is a child (as some of us believe) the killing of that child is a concern for all of us. Or we can turn that around and ask whether we should allow the killing of pre-birth children that we allow should be extended to post-birth children if their parents want it. Ridiculous and distasteful, I know, but it does show how arbitrary we are with the lines we draw on this matter.

For the record, my opposition to some abortion does not go as far as the law in NI, which prevents the abortion of an unborn child very much loved by the mother but with deformities that would make life outside the womb impossible. Such an abortion would, for me, be carried out for the best of reasons, with the welfare of the child and mother both taken into account.

That logic could be extended to (born) killing people for the "greater good" and I see no absolute reason to stop the progression of logic at the point of birth, even if it is the most obvious choice.
Rather like my moral objections to eating beasts stopping at the line between warmblooded and cold blooded, not valid in a logical progression, just a personal opinion.

Logically there isnt much difference between killing down's syndrome foetesus and down's syndrome babies, emotionally there is.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
More division as labour mp's go against corbie, three more mp's sacked...................some leader

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40451301

Off Topic on abortions..................NI women can now get it free in England-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40438390

[pwa]

In the last few posts about abortion,which is way off topic BTW,has been men debating an issue that's non of their concern IMO

Perpetuating the drift (sorry) your assertion that men have no right to be concerned in this matter only hold true if you believe that an unborn child is not a child. If it is a child (as some of us believe) the killing of that child is a concern for all of us. Or we can turn that around and ask whether we should allow the killing of pre-birth children that we allow should be extended to post-birth children if their parents want it. Ridiculous and distasteful, I know, but it does show how arbitrary we are with the lines we draw on this matter.

For the record, my opposition to some abortion does not go as far as the law in NI, which prevents the abortion of an unborn child very much loved by the mother but with deformities that would make life outside the womb impossible. Such an abortion would, for me, be carried out for the best of reasons, with the welfare of the child and mother both taken into account.

That logic could be extended to (born) killing people for the "greater good" and I see no absolute reason to stop the progression of logic at the point of birth, even if it is the most obvious choice.
Rather like my moral objections to eating beasts stopping at the line between warmblooded and cold blooded, not valid in a logical progression, just a personal opinion.

Logically there isnt much difference between killing down's syndrome foetesus and down's syndrome babies, emotionally there is.

Exactly. We draw arbitrary lines. And the message I take from that is that I should allow for other people looking at the same facts I look at to come to different conclusions on this issue. Even the DUP! Whichever side of this debate you or I take, pretending that there is only one way to look at it is lazy and wrong. The DUP seem to be at one end of the spectrum of views on this issue, but I allow them that because I can see how a good person might take that line, even if I don't take such a rigid line myself.

Northern Ireland has a lot of Protestants who are concerned about abortion, and a lot of Catholics who are concerned about abortion. My inclination is to let the people of NI work this out for themselves and not spend too much time worrying about the DUP's take on it unless they start to try to influence policy on this in the rest of the UK.

[pete75]

Abortion ends up as a tangled knot of conflicting morality whichever direction you come at it from. No easy answers. But if you take the view (and you may not) that an unborn child is a child, you can see how some may say that abortion is the killing of a child, and should any individual be free to do that? Now I know that is not the only way to look at it, but I put that forward to show how a caring person who is normally all for individual choice may have trouble with the concept of abortion. I do not automatically write off people because of their stance on this issue. I think we should listen to what people say on this and if their views seem to come from a good place, accept that. Needless to say, there are harsh dogmatists on both sides of the debate.

Abortion is merely a form of contraception.

Plain wrong. Contraception prevents conception. Abortion deals with the product of conception. Whether that difference matters to you is up to you.

Pedant. Ok it's merely a form of birth control. Quite frankly I don't see why it should matter to you or anyone else what a woman chooses to do to her own body.

[blackbike]

Even in the unlikely event of Mr Corbyn becoming PM he probably wouldn't last very long.

The Labour Party is divided and full of MPs who have no confidence in Corbyn or his policies, and party discipline is dreadful.

[meic]

It doesnt matter to me, or anybody else, if a stranger shoots another stranger.
It doesnt matter to me if females are victims of FGM.
It also doesnt matter to the population of the rUK what the population of NI get up to in their own devolved issues.

Unless such a thing as a shared society was to exist where we did consider that we had a responsibility for our fellow humans, even those we dont know, are different to us or are not born yet.

There is a difference between thinking about and discussing which we are doing here and interfering in other peoples concerns.