Goozay Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 10 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said: It was a free vote and Democracy won Humza meanwhile managed to get out of attending the vote Aye, and if Forbes had the opportunity in that free vote she confirmed she would vote against. Not abstain, not find something else to do that day, she said she would vote against. That's why there was a media shitstorm at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted March 31 Author Share Posted March 31 3 hours ago, Goozay said: Aye, and if Forbes had the opportunity in that free vote she confirmed she would vote against. Not abstain, not find something else to do that day, she said she would vote against. That's why there was a media shitstorm at the time. Yes because unlike Humza she was, stupidly, honest She also said she was just one vote and if she was FM she would not govern as a dictator or roll back rights that have already been won Meanwhile joycemcmillan @joycemcm OK, can anyone explain to me why we are having so much high-profile, detailed criticism of the Hate Crime Act this week, when it is about to be implemented, & not during the long period when it was under consideration at Holyrood. Were people & orgs unaware of it? Or what? Joanna Cherry KC @joannaccherry Some of us did. When I argued for adequate freedom of expression defences for gender critical feminists, Nicola Sturgeon called me a transphobe, I was sacked from my SNP front bench role & received threats of rape. It had a chilling effect as was intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 4 hours ago, Goozay said: Aye, and if Forbes had the opportunity in that free vote she confirmed she would vote against. Not abstain, not find something else to do that day, she said she would vote against. That's why there was a media shitstorm at the time. Tbh a lot of conservative Christians at the time would have voted against it as they believed it goes against marriage which was seen in Western society as a relationship between one man and one woman and was seen that way for hundreds of years. It was particularly difficult for conservative Christians to understand why gay folks wanted marriage equality when civil partnerships gave legal recognition and protection to those in same-sex relationships. Many conservative/traditional Christians were actually supportive of civil partnerships. Since the Government allowing same-sex marriages very few conservative/traditional Christians would seek to roll back this legislation. Many like Kate, at the time would have voted against it, but have now accepted it even if they personally think such relationships are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goozay Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 2 hours ago, Ally Bongo said: Yes because unlike Humza she was, stupidly, honest She also said she was just one vote and if she was FM she would not govern as a dictator or roll back rights that have already been won Meanwhile joycemcmillan @joycemcm OK, can anyone explain to me why we are having so much high-profile, detailed criticism of the Hate Crime Act this week, when it is about to be implemented, & not during the long period when it was under consideration at Holyrood. Were people & orgs unaware of it? Or what? Joanna Cherry KC @joannaccherry Some of us did. When I argued for adequate freedom of expression defences for gender critical feminists, Nicola Sturgeon called me a transphobe, I was sacked from my SNP front bench role & received threats of rape. It had a chilling effect as was intended. Sheesh. You've gone from "Forbes would never have said that/That's a lie/Got to be a type-o/She actually said the opposite" To "at least she told the truth" in an embarrassingly short amount of time. I'll leave you to your "Joanna Cherry - hooray/Humza_Sturgeon - boo" pantomime cheerleading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted March 31 Author Share Posted March 31 11 hours ago, Goozay said: The significant difference between Kate Forbes and Humza is that Kate Forbes said that she would impose her religious beliefs on the country. This is what you said which was and still is - A LIE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 7 hours ago, Ally Bongo said: This is what you said which was and still is - A LIE That's certainly my understanding. Kate would have voted against it (past tense) but wouldn't seek to repeal it now. I think she was quite clear and quite consistent but that didn't stop her detractors from twisting what she'd actually said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 20 hours ago, Goozay said: The significant difference between Kate Forbes and Humza is that Kate Forbes said that she would impose her religious beliefs on the country. you are full of shite pal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 16 hours ago, Goozay said: That was Forbes' apology. What she was apologising for was saying that if she had the opportunity to vote against gay marriage in Parliament she would take that opportunity, because of her faith. That's why she lost the support of a lot her MSP colleagues. colleagues that will be looking for a new job because of Humza's incompetence, who would still have a long career as a snp msp/mp if Forbes had gotten in.. oh the irony... i have however heard that there is many who opposed Forbes now lobbying to have humza kicked out and endorse Forbes as leader,, amazing how the prospect of being kicked out by the electorate can change the stance of politicians Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 15 hours ago, Goozay said: Aye, and if Forbes had the opportunity in that free vote she confirmed she would vote against. Not abstain, not find something else to do that day, she said she would vote against. That's why there was a media shitstorm at the time. the media shit storm was because they new how competent forbes would be in office and apart from her Christian faith, there would have been zero leverage on her,,,none!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 9 hours ago, Ally Bongo said: This is what you said which was and still is - A LIE correct, a total lie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 1 hour ago, Hertsscot said: That's certainly my understanding. Kate would have voted against it (past tense) but wouldn't seek to repeal it now. I think she was quite clear and quite consistent but that didn't stop her detractors from twisting what she'd actually said. " Kate Forbes said that she would impose her religious beliefs on the country" if anyone can show me where Forbes said this then i will apologize and retract my statement that it was a lie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goozay Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 27 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said: " Kate Forbes said that she would impose her religious beliefs on the country" if anyone can show me where Forbes said this then i will apologize and retract my statement that it was a lie Deary me, Forbes isn't going to shag you pal. Forbes' religious beliefs include being against gay marriage. When asked specifically does that mean she would vote against gay marriage if it was proposed in Parliament she said "Aye, I would, because of my religious beliefs..." She hasn't changed her position on that, just apologised for the hurt caused and made some comments about equality and democracy that she'd undemined already because she's a politican that's openly against gay marriage! Now onto my original point, can any of yous Forbes fanboys give me an example of Humza getting his faith and his politics mixed up? An actual Islamic-influenced policy decision, not just an example of him practising his religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 55 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said: " Kate Forbes said that she would impose her religious beliefs on the country" if anyone can show me where Forbes said this then i will apologize and retract my statement that it was a lie I'm agreeing with you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 1 hour ago, Hertsscot said: I'm agreeing with you! Apologies, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 1 hour ago, Goozay said: Deary me, Forbes isn't going to shag you pal. Forbes' religious beliefs include being against gay marriage. When asked specifically does that mean she would vote against gay marriage if it was proposed in Parliament she said "Aye, I would, because of my religious beliefs..." She hasn't changed her position on that, just apologised for the hurt caused and made some comments about equality and democracy that she'd undemined already because she's a politican that's openly against gay marriage! Now onto my original point, can any of yous Forbes fanboys give me an example of Humza getting his faith and his politics mixed up? An actual Islamic-influenced policy decision, not just an example of him practising his religion. voting for something and imposing are two completely different things no matter hao you try to spin it, i know that, you know that, aaid knows that and so does everyone else on this thread,, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goozay Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 1 minute ago, hampden_loon2878 said: voting for something and imposing are two completely different things no matter hao you try to spin it, i know that, you know that, aaid knows that and so does everyone else on this thread,, Strong disagree I'm an atheist, but if there was a referendum for the outlawing of organised religion, I'd vote against. Just because I don't practice, my beliefs shouldn't impact on those who do, otherwise I'd be imposing my beliefs on others. And a vote by an MSP in Parliament carries a lot more weight than one person in a referendum TL/DR: an MSP should never let their faith compromise their ability to represent their constituents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 5 minutes ago, Goozay said: Strong disagree I'm an atheist, but if there was a referendum for the outlawing of organised religion, I'd vote against. Just because I don't practice, my beliefs shouldn't impact on those who do, otherwise I'd be imposing my beliefs on others. And a vote by an MSP in Parliament carries a lot more weight than one person in a referendum TL/DR: an MSP should never let their faith compromise their ability to represent their constituents. exactly and KF wouldn't let it either, regardless of how much howling at the moon you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goozay Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 13 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said: exactly and KF wouldn't let it either, regardless of how much howling at the moon you do. Except she admitted she would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 1 hour ago, hampden_loon2878 said: Apologies, No problem, and best of luck in trying to get Goozay to acknowledge your point! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 56 minutes ago, Goozay said: Except she admitted she would. OK pin point exactly when Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Police Scotland stating they don’t have the resources to police the hate crime bill. Hilarious incompetence for the SNP/greens. Can’t wait to see how this is going to pan out…. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted April 1 Author Share Posted April 1 21 minutes ago, Malcolm said: Police Scotland stating they don’t have the resources to police the hate crime bill. Hilarious incompetence for the SNP/greens. Can’t wait to see how this is going to pan out…. I'm going to make a bet that very little comes of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Has JK Rowling been arrested yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 humza is finished, the snp will take a hit in the GE,, However with ross and sarwar totally unelectable the snp may have an open goal for the next holyrood election depending on what leader they install,, every cloud and all that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted April 1 Author Share Posted April 1 14 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said: humza is finished, the snp will take a hit in the GE,, However with ross and sarwar totally unelectable the snp may have an open goal for the next holyrood election depending on what leader they install,, every cloud and all that The big problem is that it is the SNP at Holyrood who will more or less decide who is the leader/FM We saw at the last leadership election numerous trumpets saying they would not serve in a Kate Forbes cabinet That was the moment i decided to leave the SNP if Humza won because it was crystal clear that there is a large tranche of elected SNP MSPs that are not one bit interested in Independence and they need to go Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.