Granny Danger Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 This is nonsense for a start: Exactly. I never thought we'd see apologists for creationists on here but hey ho. I remember back to our collective jubilation at the Westminster election when the results didn't just bring in a huge batch of SNP MPs but saw the rejection of some odious individuals; mainly of the SLab variety. We were rejoicing the fact that these people were getting tossed out not just because of the political party they represented but that as INDIVIDUALS we thought they were toxic. Yet there are some supposed SNP voters/supporters/members on here who are apparently not too bothered with the traits and views of the individuals that will represent the Party as well as their electorate in Holyrood. Pretty hypocritical IMO. Wee quick question for Fide. Do you think everyone who is opposed to bigots representing the SNp is anti-SNP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Absolute state of this. My post didn't refer to same sex marriage, it was in relation to same sex adoption. Secondly, it wasn't about whether you or anybody else disagreed with MSPs who voted against it, but rather whether somebody who opposes gay couples adopting - purely because of their sexuality - is a bigot. I would refuse to endorse, campaign or vote for any Labour candidate who openly held such blatantly bigoted views. Would you do the same with SNP candidates? Hopefully you can respond to this without throwing your toys out of the pram about the Labour Party. Christ it's all about the hypotheticals with the SNP bashers today eh? Has the dawning realisation of another yellow tsunami got all your danders up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 You're one of the most bigoted and illiberal people I've seen here so far. Points 1 and 2 are just drivel. Point 3 is ok with the exception of private schools. What evidence do you have to demonstrate that either of the following claims are drivel: 1. Evolution can be proved by science 2. Creationism can be disproved by science Looking forward to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewDon Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Christ it's all about the hypotheticals with the SNP bashers today eh? Has the dawning realisation of another yellow tsunami got all your danders up? If you would feel happy voting for an SNP candidate openly possessing bigoted views, that's entirely your prerogative. I suppose it's slightly comforting that you're too ashamed to admit it, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Christ it's all about the hypotheticals with the SNP bashers today eh? Has the dawning realisation of another yellow tsunami got all your danders up? They should have just let us win the referendum. Now they are going to have to suffer this until the next referendum. And beyond that if we don't win.The parties which still support the union are bound to give up after a while and amalgamate. Lib Dems might just quietly disappear. Or have a final go at changing their stance to supporting FFA or independence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 If you would feel happy voting for an SNP candidate openly possessing bigoted views, that's entirely your prerogative. I suppose it's slightly comforting that you're too ashamed to admit it, though. Did you just copy and paste Scotsquid's earlier mewlings? I'm afraid only you can stop your bottom lip trembling. I can't do it for you. I've made my position abundantly clear on numerous occasions. I shall be voting SNP/ SNP until Independence. This in no way means I am supportive of bigoted views. Unless you know something about Jennifer Dunn or Dr Philippa Whitford that I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Exactly. I never thought we'd see apologists for creationists on here but hey ho. I remember back to our collective jubilation at the Westminster election when the results didn't just bring in a huge batch of SNP MPs but saw the rejection of some odious individuals; mainly of the SLab variety. We were rejoicing the fact that these people were getting tossed out not just because of the political party they represented but that as INDIVIDUALS we thought they were toxic. Yet there are some supposed SNP voters/supporters/members on here who are apparently not too bothered with the traits and views of the individuals that will represent the Party as well as their electorate in Holyrood. Pretty hypocritical IMO. Wee quick question for Fide. Do you think everyone who is opposed to bigots representing the SNp is anti-SNP? Have we established that anyone on here is voting for these candidates? Apart from being god squad. What's the problem with them? I have no problems voting for my SNP MSP or MP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Did you just copy and paste Scotsquid's earlier mewlings? I'm afraid only you can stop your bottom lip trembling. I can't do it for you. I've made my position abundantly clear on numerous occasions. I shall be voting SNP/ SNP until Independence. This in no way means I am supportive of bigoted views. Unless you know something about Jennifer Dunn or Dr Philippa Whitford that I don't. What if we don't have independence in the next five years and the SNP candidate(s) in your area for either Westminster or Holyrood in the next round of elections is someone different; someone who does have views that you yourself would regard as bigoted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Have we established that anyone on here is voting for these candidates? Apart from being god squad. What's the problem with them? I have no problems voting for my SNP MSP or MP. I think we have established that there are some SNP voters on here who would vote for homophobic candidates. The 'god squad' issue doesn't come into it, I was answering a different post with that comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Clown. Is that bottom lip of yours ever going to stop quivering? What if I go into a corner shop to buy a can of Irn Bru? How can I be 100% sure the shopkeeper isn't a homophobe? Should I just not buy Irn Bru just in case? Should I just stay in the house forever in case I mistakenly interact with a vile bigot? Except that the candidates being discussed have quite clearly displayed that they consider gay people to be second class citizens. Also the patronising tone in your posts is awfy odd considering you're not exactly capable of talking down to anyone in this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotSquid Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Elaine Smith would feel at home on this thread. She clutched her pearls before the marriage vote, being outraged that people online were calling her a vile bigot. I think that is avoidable Elaine if you refrain from being a vile bigot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 What if we don't have independence in the next five years and the SNP candidate(s) in your area for either Westminster or Holyrood in the next round of elections is someone different; someone who does have views that you yourself would regard as bigoted? Then I would consider my options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menzel Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Fair do's. What NotThePars and probably GD are wanting is to segregate the bigots from everybody else and say the SNP dinnae want your votes cos your bigots. What I'm saying is if we want independence in the shortest possible time then we need their votes and anybody else who agree with them. All I want for christmas is independence then in the new year we can get rid of them. What's wrong with that ? "ONCE we have independence" But that's true. When we have it we can then do the things you and others want to do just now. This morning I was re-running several you-tube videos of Mhairi Black getting stuck intae several politicians. She was in a committee meeting with several others asking Ian Duncan Smith questions on the Pensions & Welfare cuts. I'm ignoring the Mhairi Black stuff because that's not relevant at all on this point. "ONCE we have independence" is an excuse more than a reason. Where does the buck stop with this though, Willie? It's a daft example, but what you're basically arguing is this sort of dilemma: if there was no SNP candidate standing in your ward for council or whatever, but there was one candidate supporting independence, would you vote for them regardless of anything else? Does this include, Nazis/racists/bigots* and so forth? Scottish Labour are getting absolutely smashed at the minute, one reason for this is not necessarily backing a no vote, but to do so with Tories as their bedfellows, like brothers-in-arms. What you're basically saying is the independence movement should do the same regardless of someone's views towards people of colour/LGBTQ/whatever because everything will apparently get sorted out after indy. I support independence but think this is the logical conclusion of your argument and a thoroughly rotten, regressive line. *Again, trying to illustrate a point and this is not related to any individual or party Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Except that the candidates being discussed have quite clearly displayed that they consider gay people to be second class citizens. Also the patronising tone in your posts is awfy odd considering you're not exactly capable of talking down to anyone in this discussion. Have you seen the tone Scotsquid has taken? And you're having a go at my tone? Jaysus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 If you are registered to vote in Falkirk, Larbert, Airdrie, Motherwell, Hamilton, East Kilbride, Coatbridge, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth, Stonehouse, Wishaw, Uddingston, Bellshill, Shotts, Larkhall or Chryston, and you vote SNP on the list, you are just as culpable for the facilitation of bigotry as if you vote for John Mason in Glasgow. Thank f**k there are no bigots in any of the other parties standing in these areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 SNP manifesto here: http://www.snp.org/manifesto https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/thesnp/pages/5409/attachments/original/1461145824/SNP_Manifesto2016-web.pdf?1461145824 Looks reasonably solid, even quite innovative in some areas. of course the timidity on tax is still there, but they leave the door open for the 50p additional rate from 2018 onwards. Good stuff on a public land register, a public energy company for delivering community energy projects, increasing public ownership in renewables, ambitious climate change targets, 35,000 new social rent housing and more health spending above inflation. There is also a lot of good stuff in terms of giving kids a good start in lfe and getting more women back into the work place. Even Mike 'this is not a party political broadcast for RISE, honest!' Small at Bella was impressed: http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2016/04/20/snp-manifesto-for-the-future/ Yeah, lots of interesting and encouraging stuff there. The public land register is an excellent and much needed move, which will be a nice pre-cursor to some form of LVT being introduced - easier to increase support for such a move if they can demonstrate the need for the tax to prevent the hoarding of land. I was worried they were just paying lip service to that idea at first, but this would suggest that they are taking it seriously even if moves toward it will be gradual. Retaining their majority was a stick on anyway, but it's a good manifesto that will do them no harm in securing votes. Clown. Is that bottom lip of yours ever going to stop quivering? What if I go into a corner shop to buy a can of Irn Bru? How can I be 100% sure the shopkeeper isn't a homophobe? Should I just not buy Irn Bru just in case? Should I just stay in the house forever in case I mistakenly interact with a vile bigot? That's a completely false analogy. The fact you don't know whether those people are homophobes or not makes it entirely different from situations where you do know that people are homophobes, before we even come to the point that buying something from a shop is ever so slightly different from electing someone to represent you in parliament. You do know that John Mason & Roseanna Cunningham are homophobes if you're an SNP voter in their constituencies, you do know that Murdo Fraser & Margaret Mitchell are homophobes if you're Tory voter in their constituencies, you do know that Elaine Smith & Michael McMahon are homophobes if you're a Labour voter in their constituencies. No one has said this is a reason to abandon these parties entirely if you support them and live in a different constituency, just that if you care about equal rights and oppose bigotry, you shouldn't elect a bigot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Lol at strichener's "who's the real bigots?" schtick. Think the normal demographic for that patter is Trump fans and Telegraph writers. Suppose when his entire focus on LGBT rights is ensuring people can be given a public platform to spout hatred or dismiss violence against the LGBT community it shouldn't be surprising. That's right, LOL away and continue to hide your ignorance. As I said previously, the definition of a bigot appears to pass many by, you included it would appear. I am particulary amused at how intolerence of someones's religion beliefs is not bigoted. Of course, if you have seen anything in the realms of bigotry from myself then feel free to post it. I feel quite comfortable outing people who have intolerence, the only difference is that I do not think it is the preserve of those that have intolerence towards the LGBT community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Have to say I wouldn't vote for John Mason in a million fucking years and I'm a die hard independence supporter. Also, people that do vote for him based on the party he represents are totally fine too. To suggest these people are bigots because they voted for a person such as that is bigoted as well. Throwing scumbag and other expletive about, like confetti makes them no better than the bigots they claim to hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 That's right, LOL away and continue to hide your ignorance. As I said previously, the definition of a bigot appears to pass many by, you included it would appear. I am particulary amused at how intolerence of someones's religion beliefs is not bigoted. Of course, if you have seen anything in the realms of bigotry from myself then feel free to post it. I feel quite comfortable outing people who have intolerence, the only difference is that I do not think it is the preserve of those that have intolerence towards the LGBT community. I think people who attack one religion whilst defending another could maybe be accused of doing it for bigoted reasons. Attacking the concept of religion or highlighting the intolerance and bigotry inherent within any religion and those who adhere to these religions is not bigoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StreetwiseHercules Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 What evidence do you have to demonstrate that either of the following claims are drivel: 1. Evolution can be proved by science 2. Creationism can be disproved by science Looking forward to this. Would you like to run this past me again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.