Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Is your MP a relic from the 1950s?

Spectator has a handy list

  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#41 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 42,263 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:28 AM

Greg Mulholland's my MP. He's a lib dem but he's ok. I've had lots of dealings wit him via local amatuer rugby and other stuff.

The MPs and others who go on about marriag being for the procreation of children puzzle me. Does this mean that heterosexual couples who are unable or don't wish to have xhildren should b prevented from marrying?
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#42 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,618 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:32 AM

When we announced that my son would not be christened, my daft ma-in-law was horrified as she believed he would not "come on"..mind you, she is from Wigan. My son is now a well- built 6 ft 2in. god knows what he's be like if he had been christened. His cousin Dave is 6 ft 7!

Oh and back on topic. my MP , Peter Tapsell, voted against. Mind you , this is Lincolnshire where we have no truck with left wing parties such as BNP and UKIP.

Edited by JohnM, 06 February 2013 - 11:58 AM.


#43 Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed
  • Moderator
  • 5,605 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:54 AM

My MP voted for it. Our next door independant (currently) MP voted against it (her speach wittered on about divorce despite her affair with a married man).

My old MP voted against it and he is Labour. (I think he is also anti-abortion, anti stem cells, etc)
With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

#44 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,364 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:04 PM

I doubt the whole thing tells you anything anyway, MP's would back anything if they thought it would get them another term.

#45 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,392 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:20 PM

Friend of rugby league and all around good egg, Clare Balding is now to marry her civil partner Alice Arnold.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#46 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,162 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:22 PM

Friend of rugby league and all around good egg, Clare Balding is now to marry her civil partner Alice Arnold.

#notoncupfinalday

If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.

 


#47 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,844 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:24 PM

What amused me was the reaction in certain below-the-line comments sections, where people played what I like to call the 'slippery slope game' and imagined that one sensible change in the law, which represents decades of change in societal views, meant the end of society.

Aside from 'does this mean I can marry my sister and the rest of the women on my street', my particular favourite was one that suggested we would now get people 'trying to marry the Eiffel Tower'.

I don't have a local MP, but there were a number of comments suggesting that this was probably part of an EU Directive.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#48 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,844 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:25 PM

Friend of rugby league and all around good egg, Clare Balding is now to marry her civil partner Alice Arnold.


I know literally loads of LGBT people who aren't getting married imminently, so this law is stupid and inappropriate.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#49 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,392 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:26 PM

Of course you can't marry the Eiffel Tower. It's French. No sane Englishman would marry a Frencher and you're not allowed to marry if you're mad.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#50 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,618 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:57 PM

What amused me was the reaction in certain below-the-line comments sections, where people played what I like to call the 'slippery slope game' and imagined that one sensible change in the law, which represents decades of change in societal views, meant the end of society.

Aside from 'does this mean I can marry my sister and the rest of the women on my street', my particular favourite was one that suggested we would now get people 'trying to marry the Eiffel Tower'.

I don't have a local MP, but there were a number of comments suggesting that this was probably part of an EU Directive.


numerous on the Mail saying they wanted to marry their hamster, cat etc, It should not be allowed on the grounds it would deplete the animal gene pool. the plan is working though, as many also claimed to be leaving the Tory Party to join UKIP. Good riddance!

#51 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,683 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:02 PM

Many blokes would love to be married to a Frenchwoman. If you can't understand their language they can't come out with the English Wife's constant refrains that "You never listen to me. You never hear a word that I say. I might as well talk to the wall."

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#52 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,392 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:18 PM

Many blokes would love to be married to a Frenchwoman.


Those late night films Channel 4 used to show have a lot to answer for.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#53 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,683 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:20 PM

It's the raison d'etre of Sky Arts

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#54 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,162 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:46 PM

This thread could go anywhere.

If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.

 


#55 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,392 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:48 PM

This thread could go anywhere.


It'll unravel your jumper.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#56 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,162 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:57 PM

It'll unravel your jumper.

Dancing in the disco, bumper to bumper...

If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.

 


#57 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,392 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:05 PM

Dancing in the disco, bumper to bumper...


*jaw drops*
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#58 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,364 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:09 PM

And they can now get on with their lives in the same fuss-free way.

It's regular 'guys and guys and girls and girls' though. That's what marks them out.

Most of them have never been marked out though. I find it irritating and just plain wrong to portray things like up until 10-20 years ago, gays were living a life of fear constantly being harangued by mobs of cavemen armed with pitchforks. (I'm sure that has happened sometimes)

There were gay couples living together long before now and most people knew who they were. Even homophobic people tended to leave them alone content to call names or make limp wrist gestures. That's not to imply there wasn't a lot of discrimination and grief put their way - but then many other people suffered too in various ways. But ultimately no one really gave a toss that much, as long as they were ok people that was enough for most people.
It wasn't quite the stone age it is often portrayed as.


#59 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,683 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:10 PM

French and Disco and Bumper.



Edited by Wolford6, 06 February 2013 - 02:10 PM.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#60 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,683 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:28 PM

What happened before if an ostensibly heterosexual couple wanted to marry and one of them was transgenderised? Did the surgically-modified partner have to prove they were a bodily-functional man or woman?

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users