|
Post by nelly on Sept 20, 2024 9:53:51 GMT
Interesting point raised on question time last night, if everyone who is entitled to claim for pension credit did so the additional cost would be greater than that saved by removing the WFA. Also quite impressed by Tim Farron who apparently has never taken up any offer of a freebie in his 19 years in parliament (He accepted once and then decided it not right to accept). He also said he didn’t think Starmer had done anything wrong though TBF; he just feels it’s not the right thing for him personally. I’ve always preferred brunettes and redheads to blondes. That’s not the same as saying I think Margot Robbie is ugly. That said, Farron once wrote to the Advertising Standards Authority asking them to provide scientific proof that faith healing didn’t work. So he’s clearly not devoid of daft opinions. [edit:] He also apparently regrets saying repeatedly that he doesn’t view gay sex as sinful (i.e. he does think it’s a sin really). It’s a KTHXBAI from me. Not many natural blondes about anyway and don't think Margot Robbie is a natural blonde. Nothing worse back in the day when you thought you'd pulled a blonde in a nightclub and then getting down below latter to find a ginger abyss. 🤣
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Sept 20, 2024 10:36:56 GMT
Farron remains an answer to a pub quiz question you won't even kick yourself for not getting right when you're told. And I'll be generous and say I wasn't a fan of his 'equivocation' regarding LGBTQ+ issues. Probably not a bad person all told, but I struggle with politicians driven by their religion. I agree. But then on the other hand I think anyone who cannot listen to Farron's sum of the whole and think "he's broadly decent and ok" is never going to be satisfied with a politician.
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Sept 20, 2024 10:38:51 GMT
Farron remains an answer to a pub quiz question you won't even kick yourself for not getting right when you're told. And I'll be generous and say I wasn't a fan of his 'equivocation' regarding LGBTQ+ issues. Probably not a bad person all told, but I struggle with politicians driven by their religion. I agree. But then on the other hand I think anyone who cannot listen to Farron's sum of the whole and think "he's broadly decent and ok" is never going to be satisfied with a politician. Anyone who doesn’t understand the separation of state and church shouldn’t be a politician, even though most (but by no means all) of the religious people I know are decent people.
|
|
|
Post by HTC on Sept 20, 2024 10:44:43 GMT
I agree. But then on the other hand I think anyone who cannot listen to Farron's sum of the whole and think "he's broadly decent and ok" is never going to be satisfied with a politician. Anyone who doesn’t understand the separation of state and church shouldn’t be a politician, even though most (but by no means all) of the religious people I know are decent people.
wasn't the whole point with Farron that he did understand that separation?
Was always under the impression his position was more that he didn't personally agree with this policies, but still voted for them, as he ultimately chose that what was best for his party / constituents / society was more important than his personal beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Sept 20, 2024 10:52:29 GMT
Anyone who doesn’t understand the separation of state and church shouldn’t be a politician, even though most (but by no means all) of the religious people I know are decent people.
wasn't the whole point with Farron that he did understand that separation?
Was always under the impression his position was more that he didn't personally agree with this policies, but still voted for them, as he ultimately chose that what was best for his party / constituents / society was more important than his personal beliefs.
My understanding is that some of his interventions on matters of conscience away from Parliament have been done by “Timothy Farron MP” so I think he only makes the distinction when he knows he won’t get away with it.
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Sept 20, 2024 11:39:02 GMT
I agree. But then on the other hand I think anyone who cannot listen to Farron's sum of the whole and think "he's broadly decent and ok" is never going to be satisfied with a politician. Anyone who doesn’t understand the separation of state and church shouldn’t be a politician, even though most (but by no means all) of the religious people I know are decent people. We're all guided by something. I don't have an issue with a religious person's principals being guided by his or her religious beliefs (there are limits of course). If people don't like what politicians with a religious grounding stand for then that's why we have a vote. I'm not religious and neither are my kids. But they were both taught in Church of England schools as I consider the core morality of the Church of England to be a good thing. They both knew right from wrong from a very early age, and are both pretty decent and kind kids. That didn't happen by magic. It was instilled by me, and school. I don't believe in the magical nonsense in the bible. But I do believe in some of its messaging. Adults should be able to take the good and ignore the nonsense from any book of fiction. I also believe in messaging in other books and teachings such as Lord of the Rings for the sake of an example, and the Koran as another. I'm also broadly onside with some pagan teachings (I believe everything has value, including plants and trees for example). I think the point I'm trying to make (in a really clumsy way) is that you don't have to be "all in" on anything. Adults should be capable of reading something and thinking "I agree with that", "but I don't agree with that". Unfortunately for this world we live in most are not...
|
|
|
Post by edjelley on Sept 20, 2024 11:50:28 GMT
He also said he didn’t think Starmer had done anything wrong though TBF; he just feels it’s not the right thing for him personally. I’ve always preferred brunettes and redheads to blondes. That’s not the same as saying I think Margot Robbie is ugly. That said, Farron once wrote to the Advertising Standards Authority asking them to provide scientific proof that faith healing didn’t work. So he’s clearly not devoid of daft opinions. [edit:] He also apparently regrets saying repeatedly that he doesn’t view gay sex as sinful (i.e. he does think it’s a sin really). It’s a KTHXBAI from me. Not many natural blondes about anyway and don't think Margot Robbie is a natural blonde. Nothing worse back in the day when you thought you'd pulled a blonde in a nightclub and then getting down below latter to find a ginger abyss. 🤣 You mean does the carpet match the curtains!!?
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Sept 20, 2024 11:54:35 GMT
Anyone who doesn’t understand the separation of state and church shouldn’t be a politician, even though most (but by no means all) of the religious people I know are decent people. We're all guided by something. I don't have an issue with a religious person's principals being guided by his or her religious beliefs (there are limits of course). If people don't like what politicians with a religious grounding stand for then that's why we have a vote. I'm not religious and neither are my kids. But they were both taught in Church of England schools as I consider the core morality of the Church of England to be a good thing. They both knew right from wrong from a very early age, and are both pretty decent and kind kids. That didn't happen by magic. It was instilled by me, and school. I don't believe in the magical nonsense in the bible. But I do believe in some of its messaging. Adults should be able to take the good and ignore the nonsense from any book of fiction. I also believe in messaging in other books and teachings such as Lord of the Rings for the sake of an example, and the Koran as another. I'm also broadly onside with some pagan teachings (I believe everything has value, including plants and trees for example). I think the point I'm trying to make (in a really clumsy way) is that you don't have to be "all in" on anything. Adults should be capable of reading something and thinking "I agree with that", "but I don't agree with that". Unfortunately for this world we live in most are not... I suppose on a roundabout way that’s my point. On the one hand, he will vote for same-sex marriage because it’s party policy and his voting record is on public view; on the other hand, he ascribes to the idea that if a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination, and they shall surely be put to death. AFAICS it’s not about putting personal beliefs to one side for the good of the party with Farron, it’s knowing he’d be out of a job if he expressed them. “Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.”
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,303
|
Post by Mozzer on Sept 20, 2024 11:56:38 GMT
I tend to find that religionists find something in their religion to support their opinion on a moral matter. So a god said homosexuality is a sin. Also a god said we should love all others and that we are all created equally. So, take your pick to suit your morality. Your god's given you an out whatever you want to believe, which is nice of it/him/her.
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Sept 20, 2024 12:05:19 GMT
I tend to find that religionists find something in their religion to support their opinion on a moral matter. So a god said homosexuality is a sin. Also a god said we should love all others and that we are all created equally. So, take your pick to suit your morality. Your god's given you an out whatever you want to believe, which is nice of it/him/her. In that regard, he does say gay sex is a mortal sin*. *Repentance is an option for sinners.
|
|
|
Post by edjelley on Sept 20, 2024 12:16:15 GMT
Anyone who doesn’t understand the separation of state and church shouldn’t be a politician, even though most (but by no means all) of the religious people I know are decent people. We're all guided by something. I don't have an issue with a religious person's principals being guided by his or her religious beliefs (there are limits of course). If people don't like what politicians with a religious grounding stand for then that's why we have a vote. I'm not religious and neither are my kids. But they were both taught in Church of England schools as I consider the core morality of the Church of England to be a good thing. They both knew right from wrong from a very early age, and are both pretty decent and kind kids. That didn't happen by magic. It was instilled by me, and school. I don't believe in the magical nonsense in the bible. But I do believe in some of its messaging. Adults should be able to take the good and ignore the nonsense from any book of fiction. I also believe in messaging in other books and teachings such as Lord of the Rings for the sake of an example, and the Koran as another. I'm also broadly onside with some pagan teachings (I believe everything has value, including plants and trees for example). I think the point I'm trying to make (in a really clumsy way) is that you don't have to be "all in" on anything. Adults should be capable of reading something and thinking "I agree with that", "but I don't agree with that". Unfortunately for this world we live in most are not... Some of the ideas of various religious groups shouldn't be dismissed. The problems occur when people follow Everything they say without any dispute. Everyone needs to think for themselves, as they said in life of Brian!😀
|
|