Jump to content

Politics Episode 7: Remake of Episode 4


Recommended Posts

Raithe, is there any credence to the idea that a Conservative/DUP coalition is in violation of the Good Friday Agreement? As I understand it, a coalition with one side of the Northern Island issue (nationalists vs. unionists) is, in its necessity, an unlawful "supporting"/empowering of one side when Britain has very strictly agreed to remain neutral on the issue of Northern Ireland independence. (For anyone that doesn't know, the Good Friday Agreement is the treaty between the UK and NI and Ireland that ended the Troubles, the nationalist/unionist conflict between these three parties, and was the basis for the end of the IRA.)

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Raithe, is there any credence to the idea that a Conservative/DUP coalition is in violation of the Good Friday Agreement? As I understand it, a coalition with one side of the Norther Island issue (nationalists vs. unionists) is, in its necessity, an unlawful "supporting"/empowering of one side when Britain has very strictly agreed to remain neutral on the issue of Northern Ireland independence. (For anyone that doesn't know, the Good Friday Agreement is the treaty between the UK and NI and Ireland that ended the Troubles, the nationalist/unionist conflict between these three parties, and was the basis for the end of the IRA.)

 

Offhand, it's hard to say.

At the moment there's a lot of things up in the air. The Northern Ireland assembly is in suspension because the DUP and SInn Fein can't reach a power-sharing agreement. Having one party having the potential to heavily influence the administration could have a lot of awkward fallout. Sinn Fein while technically having seats in Westminster have always followed a policy of absenteeism because they're big on Northern Ireland re-joining the rest of Ireland, regardless of what people said in the referendums. If the DUP does head into coalition with the Tories, Sinn Fein might feel they would need to actually use their seats properly rather than have them as a PR element.

 

The Good Friday agreements were meant in some way to balance out the unionists with the nationalists, and then have a sort of limited oversight via a supposedly non-partisan British administration. But there was also a lot of vague wording in the agreement, it was originally meant to have a certain ambiguity to help bring all the varying groups together rather than try to jam specific hard lines down everyones throats, but I suppose that could be used to bend and twist it in all sorts of fun ways.

  • Like 3

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the additional context. And then there's the additional problem of Brexit and there needing to be a free border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, and yet the EU requiring a border between the EU and non-EU countries. Seems like Britain is currently stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Solution is clear. A United Ireland! :p

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

particular bad news for the wh regarding the russia probe by special counsel mueller-- michael dreeben has been enlisted to aid in the investigation on a part-time basis.  dreeben is The Guy regarding questions of criminal law.  think of as being similar to doctors.  you don't consult the country's leading oncologist 'cause all tests were negative for cancer.  is kinda early in the process, but is possible the comey revelations necessitated consultation.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited by Gromnir
  • Like 1

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

UfUaNUF.png

Quote
"Turned wrong way round, the relentless unforeseen was what we schoolchildren studied as 'History,' harmless history, where everything unexpected in its own time is chronicled on the page as inevitable. The terror of the unforeseen is what the science of history hides, turning a disaster into an epic.”

 

-Philip Roth, The Plot Against America

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever respect I had for Bernie Sanders is completely gone now. A candidate's religious convictions have no place in a confirmation hearing and his willingness to vote against a candidate strictly over a difference of opinion on religious doctrine is absolutely wrong. But I have no doubt had the candidate been a member of any other religion and made statements supporting a strict interpretation of it's doctrine Sanders would not have made a peep.

 

https://youtu.be/jjQSwYV5Qzs

  • Like 1

Get off my lawn!

Link to post
Share on other sites

huckabeesanders_pockettweet_screenshot.p

 

shortly thereafter, ms. huckabee apologized and blamed the tweet on her 3-year-old. 

 

not to sound ungracious, but by now am thinking there is no excuse for leaving your phone where the president might find it.

 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Like 2

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I believe the term is "whistleblower". :biggrin:"

 

Definition and term depends on which side you are on.

 

As for Sanders, it just shows the illogical self svering of modern Liberals/Democrats. He would be the first one to be outraged if someone attackjed the faith of a Muslim candidate. But, it isn't surprising.

DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Whatever respect I had for Bernie Sanders is completely gone now. A candidate's religious convictions have no place in a confirmation hearing and his willingness to vote against a candidate strictly over a difference of opinion on religious doctrine is absolutely wrong. But I have no doubt had the candidate been a member of any other religion and made statements supporting a strict interpretation of it's doctrine Sanders would not have made a peep."

 

lock that nut job up

The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I believe the term is "whistleblower". :biggrin:"

 

Definition and term depends on which side you are on.

 

As for Sanders, it just shows the illogical self svering of modern Liberals/Democrats. He would be the first one to be outraged if someone attackjed the faith of a Muslim candidate. But, it isn't surprising.

It was actually a joke. He's not really a whistleblower or leaker, because they were his private (and unclassified) memos that he can release however and whenever he feels like it. It might be arguably in poor taste to publicly share the private conversations between him and the president, but he's certainly within his rights, especially seeing as executive privilege was not claimed prior to him sharing those conversation.

 

In regards to Sanders, I have no real issue with what he said and would expect him to take similar issue with any candidate that publicly and repeatedly claimed a proportion of their constituencies were straight up "condemned" on no real basis*. If he didn't, then I would also lose respect for him. Has there been any such example?

 

*On a side-note, if the candidate really wanted to be consistent with their beliefs, shouldn't they have mentioned atheists and agnostics and Jews (this one being brought up by Sanders himself) and all other non-Christians in his statement? Why single out Muslims? Perhaps he did and it simply wasn't included here?

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever respect I had for Bernie Sanders is completely gone now. A candidate's religious convictions have no place in a confirmation hearing and his willingness to vote against a candidate strictly over a difference of opinion on religious doctrine is absolutely wrong. But I have no doubt had the candidate been a member of any other religion and made statements supporting a strict interpretation of it's doctrine Sanders would not have made a peep.

 

https://youtu.be/jjQSwYV5Qzs

There is such a thing as too religious and then you get all kinds of nonsense. Makes perfect sense to me to try and probe and see how far the nonsense goes. 

  • Like 1

Na na  na na  na na  ...

greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER.

That is all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would disagree with that, and would say it's not really the fundamental problem here. If an atheist exuded the same sort of hostility, this sort of superiority complex where they're looking down upon other groups and calling them "deficient" simply for their religious affiliations - not even ideological, just religious, which varies so much from person to person! - I'd say that's unbecoming of your office and your ability to represent and serve all types of Americans equally, just as much as the man in that video. This whole tribalism mentality really needs to go out the window...

Edited by Bartimaeus
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The fellow wrote that Muslims were lost and had not found God, something like that. There is every suggestion that this might pose a problem for his function as a civil servant. Now, the right answer would have been 'yes, I can separate the two, I will look after the interests of all Americans regardless of faith'. He couldn't do it. Every sentence was 'because I am a Christian ... such and such'. I'm sure his past experience has been that that kind of grandstanding goes over very well and he couldn't imagine anyone calling him out on it. 

 

Everybody has said or written something at some point that I'm sure they regret, that's not the point. He wouldn't, or perhaps didn't know how, to address the issue.

  • Like 2

Na na  na na  na na  ...

greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER.

That is all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fellow wrote that Muslims were lost and had not found God, something like that. There is every suggestion that this might pose a problem for his function as a civil servant. Now, the right answer would have been 'yes, I can separate the two, I will look after the interests of all Americans regardless of faith'. He couldn't do it. Every sentence was 'because I am a Christian ... such and such'. I'm sure his past experience has been that that kind of grandstanding goes over very well and he couldn't imagine anyone calling him out on it.

 

Everybody has said or written something at some point that I'm sure they regret, that's not the point. He wouldn't, or perhaps didn't know how, to address the issue.

I have a question, why is what he said wrong? Also the quote was taken from a religious piece to a religious school.

To a Christian, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

To a Muslim, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

Bernie condemning a person's belief to be Islamic phobic.....when again it's the very same damn shoe if someone is Muslim and thought about every other religion.

 

Bernie ****ed up by making one religion superior to another.

Edited by redneckdevil
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fellow wrote that Muslims were lost and had not found God, something like that. There is every suggestion that this might pose a problem for his function as a civil servant. Now, the right answer would have been 'yes, I can separate the two, I will look after the interests of all Americans regardless of faith'. He couldn't do it. Every sentence was 'because I am a Christian ... such and such'. I'm sure his past experience has been that that kind of grandstanding goes over very well and he couldn't imagine anyone calling him out on it.

 

Everybody has said or written something at some point that I'm sure they regret, that's not the point. He wouldn't, or perhaps didn't know how, to address the issue.

I have a question, why is what he said wrong? Also the quote was taken from a religious piece to a religious school.

To a Christian, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

To a Muslim, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

Bernie condemning a person's belief to be Islamic phobic.....when again it's the very same damn shoe if someone is Muslim and thought about every other religion.

 

It raises questions around his objectivity and ability to do his job in a way that isn't biased 

  • Like 1

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The fellow wrote that Muslims were lost and had not found God, something like that. There is every suggestion that this might pose a problem for his function as a civil servant. Now, the right answer would have been 'yes, I can separate the two, I will look after the interests of all Americans regardless of faith'. He couldn't do it. Every sentence was 'because I am a Christian ... such and such'. I'm sure his past experience has been that that kind of grandstanding goes over very well and he couldn't imagine anyone calling him out on it.

 

Everybody has said or written something at some point that I'm sure they regret, that's not the point. He wouldn't, or perhaps didn't know how, to address the issue.

I have a question, why is what he said wrong? Also the quote was taken from a religious piece to a religious school.

To a Christian, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

To a Muslim, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

Bernie condemning a person's belief to be Islamic phobic.....when again it's the very same damn shoe if someone is Muslim and thought about every other religion.

It raises questions around his objectivity and ability to do his job in a way that isn't biased
Who the man in question or Bernie by making Christianity inferior to Islam?

 

Because that can be said of both, imho moreso on Bernie because of WHERE it was said.

One was said in a religious piece to a religious school and one was said at a govt hearing.

Edited by redneckdevil
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's important because Mr.As-a-Christian brings strong beliefs and values based on nothing but a book that might as well have the worth equivalent of fairytale. Imagine someone coming into office saying "I believe in the Lord of Light, thus, I find that all criminals sentenced to death should be burned, so that their souls may be purified." Indeed, a very odd argument to put up, no? I don't think this man would be elected. Now the only reason as to why hard core Christians are elected is that there are many Christians in America. But that doesn't make anything better... Politics and religion are to be strictly separated, especially if the religion in question has, historically speaking, been one of probably the two most hostile religions.

Edited by Ben No.3

Everybody knows the deal is rotten

Old Black Joe's still pickin' cotton

For your ribbons and bows

And everybody knows

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's important because Mr.As-a-Christian brings strong beliefs and values based on nothing but a book that might as well have the worth equivalent of fairytale. Imagine someone coming into office saying "I believe in the Lord of Light, thus, I find that all criminals sentenced to death should be burned, so that their souls may be purified." Indeed, a very odd argument to put up, no? I don't think this man would be elected. Now the only reason as to why hard core Christians are elected is that there are many Christians in America. But that doesn't make anything better... Politics and religion are to be strictly separated, especially if the religion in question has, historically speaking, been one of probably the two most hostile religions.

I agree with the sentiment but I believe your missing the point.

So it's bad for a Christian, okay but it's okay if your Muslim though?

That's the problem I have with what Bernie did, because just switch out Christian and replace with Muslim and Bernie would be okay because that's no longer being islamiphobia.

If so, that's some serious double standard and that's what I have a problem with.

2 religions with very extremely similar ideology and practices, but Islam is better because of islamiphobia? He's putting one higher than the other when BOTH Christianity and Islam should get the same treatment, which is practice whatever the hell you want to at home and outside of work/govt weither Christian or Muslim but at govt/work leave those beliefs at the door or at home.

Edited by redneckdevil
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The fellow wrote that Muslims were lost and had not found God, something like that. There is every suggestion that this might pose a problem for his function as a civil servant. Now, the right answer would have been 'yes, I can separate the two, I will look after the interests of all Americans regardless of faith'. He couldn't do it. Every sentence was 'because I am a Christian ... such and such'. I'm sure his past experience has been that that kind of grandstanding goes over very well and he couldn't imagine anyone calling him out on it.

 

Everybody has said or written something at some point that I'm sure they regret, that's not the point. He wouldn't, or perhaps didn't know how, to address the issue.

I have a question, why is what he said wrong? Also the quote was taken from a religious piece to a religious school.

To a Christian, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

To a Muslim, every other religion is wrong and inadequate.

Bernie condemning a person's belief to be Islamic phobic.....when again it's the very same damn shoe if someone is Muslim and thought about every other religion.

It raises questions around his objectivity and ability to do his job in a way that isn't biased
Who the man in question or Bernie by making Christianity inferior to Islam?

 

Because that can be said of both, imho moreso on Bernie because of WHERE it was said.

One was said in a religious piece to a religious school and one was said at a govt hearing.

 

 Dont get me wrong, I dont dislike Sanders but Im not a big fan of his and I have always made that clear. He makes comments that are nothing short of left wing hubris, like when he wanted to break up all the US investment banks. That would have seriously negatively impacted the global economy 

 

He is also a populist like Trump and some of his comments are unhelpful to achieve a more harmonious and tolerant society 

 

But I was talking about the man :)

Edited by BruceVC

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's important because Mr.As-a-Christian brings strong beliefs and values based on nothing but a book that might as well have the worth equivalent of fairytale...

 

You are thoroughly ignorant of one hell of a lot of theological and philosophical writings and discussion, as well as one hell of a lot of history,including the history of the very thing you think should be: "Politics and religion are to be strictly separated".

 

Please fix that.

Edited by Valsuelm
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...