[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41172426[/url]
[quote]Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg says he is "completely opposed" to abortion, including in cases of rape or incest.
The backbencher told ITV's Good Morning Britain that abortion was "morally indefensible".
"Life is sacrosanct and begins at the point of conception," he said.
The North East Somerset MP has recently faced questions about his leadership ambitions, dismissing reports linking him with the job as "jolly August stuff".
Appearing on Good Morning Britain, he again distanced himself from leadership talk, before being asked for his views on same-sex marriage, which he opposes.[/quote]
Jacob Rees-Mogg is certainly an eloquent and charismatic chap if you watch any interviews with him, and I don't think he's an inherently bad one either. But his Catholic views regarding morality don't hold a place in modern politics, especially seeing as this country is becoming more and more Agnostic/Atheist as time passes.
[quote] ... abortion was "morally indefensible".[/quote]
Wow, I wonder what the rock-solid iron-clad inarguable logic is.
[quote]"Life is sacrosanct and begins at the point of conception," he said.[/quote]
Ah, except you see, a lot of people don't agree, particularly with the latter point. Doesn't seem that indefensible to me, seems pretty defensible.
Religion has no place in politics.
There, argument is over.
[quote]"Life is sacrosanct and begins at the point of conception,"[/quote]
I have literally never understood this 'argument'
I remember being taught in school that some Christians believe life starts at conception, but... why?
People have sex all the time that doesn't result in babies, you're not even going to be aware that conception has happened until you take a test, and then even after you're aware, you have 9 months of carrying the child to term where a million things can go wrong before birth. Why glorify something which is probably the least consequential part, especially when it's the part that happens by accident all the time.
It's not scientific, because at that point we're literally talking about a couple of cells. Cells which individually are literally discarded by the body regularly. So why is it that the moment they come together (hopefully in both senses of the word), the female partner is locked into an ironclad contract with God to carry a child and potentially risk her life birthing it?
I would also assume he's one of the 'Christians' who believe that if the baby might kill the mother, it's God's will and she will go down with the ship. And he is, with almost no question, the next Prime Minister albeit another unchosen by an election. Keep walking back 40 years of progress.
[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;52653525]
People have sex all the time that doesn't result in babies,[/QUOTE]
Ah but that's sin. :hammered:
Don't go looking for logic here, you'll find none.
[QUOTE=Im Crimson;52653586]Ah but that's sin. :hammered:
Don't go looking for logic here, you'll find none.[/QUOTE]
I'm just saying that if there's anything that's indefensible it's the belief that life starts at conception. It's biologically false, and just complicates things for women. Now miscarriages have added guilt! And of course, abortion becomes completely verboten.
It took people a while to realise that Boris Johnson wasn't a lovable toff and was actually a proper cunt, hopefully Rees-Mogg will start to go through the same process soon
you can't believe abortion is murder and take a liberal "it's not the party policy" stance. well, you can if you're a dumbass I guess
if you believed the greatest holocaust in the history of humankind was occurring constantly you wouldn't be willing to compromise with people who rightly see it as normal and necessary
[editline]6th September 2017[/editline]
conclusion: abortion really isn't murder and jacob rees-mogg does not see it as such
ah good old hardline pro-lifers
it's times like this I encourage others to read [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/5m4lx9/i_an_atheist_just_erupted_at_my_verychristian/"]this[/URL]
side note i hope this sinks the "lol based rees-mogg at it again" memes
the funniest thing is that according to the bible life begins when the baby takes its first breath of air ki as in the lord breathes life into etc etc)
and before that its considered part of the mother's thigh, not a separste entity
[QUOTE=EcksDee;52653901]the funniest thing is that according to the bible life begins when the baby takes its first breath of air ki as in the lord breathes life into etc etc)
and before that its considered part of the mother's thigh, not a separste entity[/QUOTE]
That's pretty much how abortion up until modern times.
If the baby wasn't moving yet, go ahead and get that abortion if you're brave enough to let Dr. Mc. Unsanitary poke through your vagina.
People love this guy because he did the bants on the comedy shows. He's always held crazy views and voted according to them, I hope people don't think his views and voting history are ok because he's funny. But somehow I think that's exactly how things will go.
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;52653413]Religion has no place in politics.
There, argument is over.[/QUOTE]
/sigh, if only...
[editline]6th September 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;52653525]I have literally never understood this 'argument'
I remember being taught in school that some Christians believe life starts at conception, but... why?
People have sex all the time that doesn't result in babies, you're not even going to be aware that conception has happened until you take a test, and then even after you're aware, you have 9 months of carrying the child to term where a million things can go wrong before birth. Why glorify something which is probably the least consequential part, especially when it's the part that happens by accident all the time.
It's not scientific, because at that point we're literally talking about a couple of cells. Cells which individually are literally discarded by the body regularly. So why is it that the moment they come together (hopefully in both senses of the word), the female partner is locked into an ironclad contract with God to carry a child and potentially risk her life birthing it?[/QUOTE]
because science and modern medicine has created a crisis of faith where children aren't dying by the droves durring or after birth, and we now can identify when something is wrong and could be life threatening
evangelicals have no choice but to go to the extreme because they no longer have to deal with the moral issues of having 6 out of 10 babies die during childbirth (probably made up number) so they have to root somewhere that has at least a good chance of survival otherwise they have to contend with all the unnamed, unbaptized lost souls that died in childbirth.
God I've had some people defending him saying "as long as he keeps his views out of politics!!!"
[URL="http://https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24926/jacob_rees-mogg/north_east_somerset/votes"]He can't[/URL]
[QUOTE=lew06;52653402]Jacob Rees-Mogg is certainly an eloquent and charismatic chap if you watch any interviews with him, and [b]I don't think he's an inherently bad one either[/b]. But his Catholic views regarding morality don't hold a place in modern politics, especially seeing as this country is becoming more and more Agnostic/Atheist as time passes.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24926/jacob_rees-mogg/north_east_somerset[/url]
Jacob Rees-Mogg is a horrible hard-line right winger who deserves no publicity.
You're welcome to your backwards shitheap views but don't impose them on people - this man clearly has no understanding of that concept, however.
[QUOTE=meharryp;52657042][url]https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24926/jacob_rees-mogg/north_east_somerset[/url]
Jacob Rees-Mogg is a horrible hard-line right winger who deserves no publicity.[/QUOTE]
jeez look at this prick
- Consistently voted for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax")
- Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
- Consistently voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
- Almost always voted against a banker’s bonus tax
- Consistently voted against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax)
- Consistently voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity
- Consistently voted against equal gay rights
- Generally voted against laws to promote equality and human rights
- Consistently voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas
- Consistently voted against investigations into the Iraq war
- Almost always voted against a right to remain for EU nationals already in living in the UK
- Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
- Almost always voted against slowing the rise in rail fares
- Voted a mixture of for and against measures to reduce tax avoidance
and more, I figured you get the message.
dunno why he's always touted as the figurehead of proper conservatism and sensibile politics. what a bellend.
Oh yes, it's morally indefensible, unlike forcing a woman to give birth to a rapist's child. Get back in your cave you troglodyte.
the token "funny tory" is actually a massive prick, who woulda thunk it
[QUOTE=Crumpet;52657124]jeez look at this prick
- Consistently voted for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax")
- Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
- Consistently voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
- Almost always voted against a banker’s bonus tax
- Consistently voted against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax)
- Consistently voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity
- Consistently voted against equal gay rights
- Generally voted against laws to promote equality and human rights
- Consistently voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas
- Consistently voted against investigations into the Iraq war
- Almost always voted against a right to remain for EU nationals already in living in the UK
- Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
- Almost always voted against slowing the rise in rail fares
- Voted a mixture of for and against measures to reduce tax avoidance
and more, I figured you get the message.
dunno why he's always touted as the figurehead of proper conservatism and sensibile politics. what a bellend.[/QUOTE]
You see.
When abortion is simplified ideologically down to "baby-killing"; it becomes a really easy tool for moral superiority, self-righteousness and self-absolution.
So as an quasi-caricature example:
"I believe that all fags should be burned on the steak, but I don't support baby-killing abortionism. Ergo, I'm a good person"
[QUOTE=Crumpet;52657124]jeez look at this prick
- Consistently voted for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax")
- Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
- Consistently voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
- Almost always voted against a banker’s bonus tax
- Consistently voted against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax)
- Consistently voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity
- Consistently voted against equal gay rights
- Generally voted against laws to promote equality and human rights
- Consistently voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas
- Consistently voted against investigations into the Iraq war
- Almost always voted against a right to remain for EU nationals already in living in the UK
- Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
- Almost always voted against slowing the rise in rail fares
- Voted a mixture of for and against measures to reduce tax avoidance
and more, I figured you get the message.
dunno why he's always touted as the figurehead of proper conservatism and sensibile politics. what a bellend.[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_nyx1vDiTw"][I]"OH! Do Yhou Know What A Prick Is?"[/I][/URL]
He's the archetype of a [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1922_Committee"]Tory slimeball[/URL].
At least with his record, Labour/everyone will have plenty of rope to hang him with if/when he runs for party leader.
The support for him seems so artificial too
Devil's Advocate. Inb4 hate.
It seems the position he establishes in the GMB interview is that he derives his position of morality based upon the views and teachings of the Catholic Church. It follows that should the official standpoint of the Catholic Church change, then his position on abortion would also change?
As for gay marriage - it seems it's not the fact that it's gay people that he takes issue with but rather the notion of the state governing what constitutes a marriage. It's a fine line of difference - but it seems his objection is the state intervention into a religious convention is the objection and presumably it would be the same for any and all of kinds of intervention thereafter no?
[QUOTE=Milkshaker;52673316]Devil's Advocate. Inb4 hate.
It seems the position he establishes in the GMB interview is that he derives his position of morality based upon the views and teachings of the Catholic Church. It follows that should the official standpoint of the Catholic Church change, then his position on abortion would also change?[/quote]
He is capable of independent thought though. He's flaunted as the tories """"intellectual candidate"""" not some toadie yes man. Deffering moral responsibility to others is pathetic.
[quote]As for gay marriage - it seems it's not the fact that it's gay people that he takes issue with but rather the notion of the state governing what constitutes a marriage. It's a fine line of difference - but it seems his objection is the state intervention into a religious convention is the objection and presumably it would be the same for any and all of kinds of intervention thereafter no?[/QUOTE]
He's got no issue with state benefits for married straight couples, why would he suddenly become inconsistent?
IMO he's either a bigot or he's pretending a bigot to appeal to his target demographic and fit in with his peers. Either way he's a bit of a nob.
So basically he's like boris johnson where everyone liked what a bumbling buffoon he was and then you listen to him talk and realize he's as much of a cunt as every other Tory.
Wait, there were people that liked this guy? The man always struck me as a slimy cunt.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52674673]So basically he's like boris johnson where everyone liked what a bumbling buffoon he was and then you listen to him talk and realize he's as much of a cunt as every other Tory.[/QUOTE]Yup. He did the rounds on TV shows and interviews, and everyone went "Oh, look at this amusingly posh bloke, isn't he adorable", then you hear his actual policies.
[QUOTE=Crumpet;52657124]jeez look at this prick
- Consistently voted for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax")
- Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
- Consistently voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
- Almost always voted against a banker’s bonus tax
- Consistently voted against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax)
- Consistently voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity
- Consistently voted against equal gay rights
- Generally voted against laws to promote equality and human rights
- Consistently voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas
- Consistently voted against investigations into the Iraq war
- Almost always voted against a right to remain for EU nationals already in living in the UK
- Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
- Almost always voted against slowing the rise in rail fares
- Voted a mixture of for and against measures to reduce tax avoidance
and more, I figured you get the message.
dunno why he's always touted as the figurehead of proper conservatism and sensibile politics. what a bellend.[/QUOTE]
he seems like a total meme character, how did he even win a seat did he get airdropped into a constituency he couldnt lose if he tried?
I met him in the Houses of Parliament and the moment he saw that there were people in the room, he beamed like a child that had just been given loads of sweets. I know that there is quite a lot of superficial support for him, in that they see his ~sophistication & eloquence~ and immediately presume he's one of "funny posh lot". My mother adores him, though even she says that he could never be leader because anyone with a few brain cells could absolutely destroy him with his voting history. The Conservatives can't use a Jeremy Corbyn-esque Tory (Golden Oldie) as their next candidate because everyone would just see them as a snob that doesn't understand how things actually work when you don't come fresh from Eton; they'd need someone that follows the Tory beliefs while also being someone that can gather the support of the young and old. Thus, an anti-gay marriage candidate would fall flat on their face.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.