Well, when is somebody not chewin' a wasp on there? Call Kaye, BBC Radio Scotland's morning current affairs program and some might say, party political broadcast for the labour party.
This isn't about that though, its about gay marriage. Firstly, I have no interest in it, I'll never do it, which is something I have in common with all those wasp chewing religious types who were phoning in this morning venting their spleens on the topic.
When I said I had no interest, I meant personally, socially speaking, I do. You see, people don't turn gay as an adult, some might come to terms with it then but it'll have been there from the start. The supreme irony here is, people who don't know how this works use the notion of someone 'turning' gay in support of the argument that you're not born that way when the reality is, its the very same prejudice and negativity that drives that person to hide or deny it until adulthood in the first place.
It is an elegant vicious circle.
For me, I'm not concerned about adults in this, its the young people growing up with an alternate & unavoidable sexuality. They are being made to feel so wretched, so abjectly miserable that they see taking their own life as the only option, young people are killing themselves with out even being able to say why; imagine feeling so desperately terrible that in your final moments as you give yourself up to oblivion, even then; you can't bring yourself to tell any one why?
I never quite got as far along that particular route, but I'd be a big fat liar if I denied contemplating it as an option, but as I said, I'm an adult now so please save your concern for someone more deserving.
The debate on gay marriage is an odd one, we have an ideal held by some foisted on a few, about a biological imperative foisted on that few by fate itself. We have two very vocal minorities claiming the moral high ground and a monopoly on reason while in the middle we have a silent majority who don't give a toss. Then in amongst all that, we have a small sliver of our young people listening with growing horror - young gay people in the process of finding out they are not turning into the person wider society expects them to be and more over, coming to realise there is nothing they can do about it but accept a life of vilification.
I haven't read of any young person not being able to come to terms with their religion and taking their own life because of it, marriage is not a religious construct, people have been doing it for centuries, swans do it and I reckon we can assume swans are at the very least agnostic if not atheist in their beliefs. I agree with rights to religious freedom but people have to understand that that franchise stops within your own sphere of existence, you can't foist it on any one else. If you truly believe your faith is being eroded, it says more about your religious fortitude than anything else.
I understand some churches don't want to conduct same sex marriages, to be honest I couldn't understand why a same sex couple would want to press the issue and be married in a setting which does not tolerate their existence, if they were doing it to make a point then its not a point I agree with at all.
This morning on the execrable Call Kaye I found myself in a quandary, there were 77,508 responses to the Scottish Government's same sex marriage consultation. I found myself claiming the rest of the population who didn't respond as being not bothered so basically in favour. I then realised this was hypocritical because I've decried on several occasions the 40% rule imposed on the referendum on devolution that took place in 1979, an explanation of which can be found here. (Very quickly if you can't be arsed, it just meant people who didn't vote were counted as no's so the referendum was lost. a shameless bit of sophistry from the UK at the time.) I'd hate to adopt the same policy to bolster my own points about same sex marriage.
Gordon Wilson, ex-SNP MSP (and leader) was on saying we should have a referendum on the topic, what makes him or any one else think more people would turn out for that than did for the consultation? I suppose it would be more widely advertised but look at the AV or the Police Commissioners referenda that took place (down south); hardly anyone bothered their arses about it. As a measure of feeling it would be meaningless, counting the votes of those who sat at opposite ends of the spectrum and no one in between.
My point is, this debate is adding to the general background hum of disapproval for something we have no control over, fate decides what blows your skirt up, fashion or lifestyle might make you more open-minded but since fate planted that tendency too, its entirely moot. Making young people, children even, feel so excluded, so alone and so hated because a section of society believes in a set of ideals supposedly based on love, forgiveness and acceptance, seems illogical at best and a huge double standard at worst.
Some religions tell young people same sex relationships are unnatural and less deserving of respect than heterosexual affiliations while at the other end of the spectrum, gay pride marches & the media tell them they need to invest in some arseless chaps and adopt an overly camp/butch pretence if they want to fit in.
Ignore all that shite, for that is what it is: shite. I'm not saying it gets better, but there are a hell of a lot of people who are gay who don't want to get married, prefer not to wear tight t-shirts or dungarees, or smear a profundity of product in their hair, you can't see us because we're actually really very normal, which is what you are; don't let any one tell you otherwise.
That is all.
Tuesday, 5 February 2013
Friday, 1 February 2013
Shenanigans.
This will be another post about politics, fair warning. Tune out now if you can't be arsed but remember, since all topics discussed here are done so with the bar set quite low, while I can't guarantee you won't be bored; you will at least be able to grasp what's going on.
The Electoral Commission have released their recommendations regarding the running of Independence referendum, it covers a number of areas most notably, the question itself, funding and ground rules for the running of the campaign. In the run up to the report being released, the 'no' side have been urging the Scottish Government to accept all aspects of the EC's recommendation, sight unseen. Unionists have been deriding the SNP's question since it was released; "do you agree Scotland should be an independent country?" They say it leads the voter to agree, its what people like to do, which I suppose is true; if you're talking about the weather or the sartorial judgement of a work colleague. Not sure about any one else, but I like to credit (most) people with a bit more sense, so for a referendum on independence; I think most folk would realise it was a wee bit more important than sock options of a morning.
The commission decided; "Should Scotland be an Independent country?" was a better question, it was clearer and wouldn't lead anyone in to deploying a decision making paradigm similar to one they might use at Greggs during lunch. The Scottish Government in a fit of reason decided to adopt this and all the rest of the Electoral Commission's recommendation, which was nice of them. It should be noted, the EC recommendations are advisory, no government or assembly need take their advice but, ours did. So, a crushing defeat for the SNP then, Salmond back peddles, Sturgeon crest-fallen and Yes Scotland in disarray?
Well not really, its not that big a change and lets be honest for the sake of a 'do you agree' or a 'should', if the Scottish Government did tell the EC thanks but no thanks, imagine the furore... Alistair Darling, putative leader of the Better Together campaign claimed the SNP climb down as a victory for democracy, common sense and Better Together yet, in terms of funding, the Electoral Commission suggested changing a £250,000 funding advantage in favour of the Unionists to a £63,000 advantage for the Yes campaign. See that £250k advantage the unionists did have? It had it because that was how the Scottish Government had arranged funding. (I dare say they weren't happy, but that was how it worked out and they were living with it.) If that's what Darling calls a victory, how does he describe a loss?
Crucially and the main point of this post, one of the other recommendations was (and do remember Tories, Lib Dems and Labour going on at length about the SNP Government having to accept the EC's report in its entirety,) one of the other recommendations was; both sides should present information (preferably of the honest and factual variety) in the run up to the referendum so voters would know what a yes or no would mean after the referendum.
Imagine then, when on the same day the EC report was released, a representative from the 'no' side (A.K.A Better Together) in the form of Ruth Davidson (Scottish Tory leader - no, she's not that busy) refused to provide any details or information. David Cameron also managed to not answer a similar question during PMQ's the same day.
So, all the while, unionist parties and Better Together have been pressing the Scottish Government to comply, but when it comes to their own responsibilities; they're not so keen.
If you are a floating voter, have doubts or just don't know who to believe, look at the information coming from Yes Scotland then compare it that coming from Better Together. All it takes is one lie, which is all it took for me, one lie then the entire unionist house of cards came tumbling down, from BBC bias to Ruth Davidson dissembling on Scotland Tonight; it really is a no brainer.
As a reward for ploughing through all that - I know politics is boring; here's a quick joke:
I went to the zoo the other day and saw a baguette in a cage.
I think it was bread in captivity.
No? Okay, what about this one:
This guy told me he is the fastest cross dresser in the world.
I said, "Really?"
She said, "Yes."
Still no? Well, there's no pleasing some people.
The Electoral Commission have released their recommendations regarding the running of Independence referendum, it covers a number of areas most notably, the question itself, funding and ground rules for the running of the campaign. In the run up to the report being released, the 'no' side have been urging the Scottish Government to accept all aspects of the EC's recommendation, sight unseen. Unionists have been deriding the SNP's question since it was released; "do you agree Scotland should be an independent country?" They say it leads the voter to agree, its what people like to do, which I suppose is true; if you're talking about the weather or the sartorial judgement of a work colleague. Not sure about any one else, but I like to credit (most) people with a bit more sense, so for a referendum on independence; I think most folk would realise it was a wee bit more important than sock options of a morning.
The commission decided; "Should Scotland be an Independent country?" was a better question, it was clearer and wouldn't lead anyone in to deploying a decision making paradigm similar to one they might use at Greggs during lunch. The Scottish Government in a fit of reason decided to adopt this and all the rest of the Electoral Commission's recommendation, which was nice of them. It should be noted, the EC recommendations are advisory, no government or assembly need take their advice but, ours did. So, a crushing defeat for the SNP then, Salmond back peddles, Sturgeon crest-fallen and Yes Scotland in disarray?
Well not really, its not that big a change and lets be honest for the sake of a 'do you agree' or a 'should', if the Scottish Government did tell the EC thanks but no thanks, imagine the furore... Alistair Darling, putative leader of the Better Together campaign claimed the SNP climb down as a victory for democracy, common sense and Better Together yet, in terms of funding, the Electoral Commission suggested changing a £250,000 funding advantage in favour of the Unionists to a £63,000 advantage for the Yes campaign. See that £250k advantage the unionists did have? It had it because that was how the Scottish Government had arranged funding. (I dare say they weren't happy, but that was how it worked out and they were living with it.) If that's what Darling calls a victory, how does he describe a loss?
Crucially and the main point of this post, one of the other recommendations was (and do remember Tories, Lib Dems and Labour going on at length about the SNP Government having to accept the EC's report in its entirety,) one of the other recommendations was; both sides should present information (preferably of the honest and factual variety) in the run up to the referendum so voters would know what a yes or no would mean after the referendum.
Imagine then, when on the same day the EC report was released, a representative from the 'no' side (A.K.A Better Together) in the form of Ruth Davidson (Scottish Tory leader - no, she's not that busy) refused to provide any details or information. David Cameron also managed to not answer a similar question during PMQ's the same day.
So, all the while, unionist parties and Better Together have been pressing the Scottish Government to comply, but when it comes to their own responsibilities; they're not so keen.
If you are a floating voter, have doubts or just don't know who to believe, look at the information coming from Yes Scotland then compare it that coming from Better Together. All it takes is one lie, which is all it took for me, one lie then the entire unionist house of cards came tumbling down, from BBC bias to Ruth Davidson dissembling on Scotland Tonight; it really is a no brainer.
As a reward for ploughing through all that - I know politics is boring; here's a quick joke:
I went to the zoo the other day and saw a baguette in a cage.
I think it was bread in captivity.
No? Okay, what about this one:
This guy told me he is the fastest cross dresser in the world.
I said, "Really?"
She said, "Yes."
Still no? Well, there's no pleasing some people.
Friday, 25 January 2013
Friday the 25th of January 2013
I don't often comment on political stuff, other folk (specifically those in the links section) do it with more elan and incisiveness than I ever could. This week however, has contained a bit of howler from the Unionist Better Together crowd.
Usually you need to be a bit of a political anorak to truly understand the unionist v. nationalist argument, what the average person in the street gets in terms of news is strained through a highly biased media which ironically, you need to be a bit of a political anorak to appreciate.
This week however was a wee bit different. For months we've been told by Better Together and a panoply of unionist politicians that the referendum on Scottish Independence introduces an unacceptable level of uncertainty on the subject of EU membership. It has been the main plank of criticism for the independence argument.
So, you don't need to be a political nerd to understand when David Cameron came out with plans for an in/out referendum on EU membership earlier this week; this highlighted a significant (in fact, glaring) double standard by unionist politicians.
For a start, the Indy Ref is happening in the Autumn of 2014, if successful (and I hope we are) no one really knows what will happen with EU membership, if precedent is anything to go by, we'll still be EU citizens (there is no vehicle within the EU to revoke citizenship) so the chances are, while we will have to renegotiate terms of membership; we'd do it from the inside and so for that matter would the remainder of the UK.
While Better Together and the 'No' mob have been extolling (at great length) the years of uncertainty for business our referendum presents, Cameron is talking about having the EU referendum in five years time, an even longer period of time. Their argument is, the UK isn't susceptible to the same forces other countries are, apparently the UK is special.
One other thing which needs to be mentioned; the day Cameron's speech was reported in the press was the same day a 'poll' result was released stating support for independence had sunk to an all time low of 23%. Except it wasn't a poll, it was part of the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey which is an on going exercise where different households are 'scientifically' chosen to answer the same question on a regular basis through-out the year, between 1200 -1500 people take the survey, on its own website, it even claims not to be an opinion poll, political nerds also point out the method by which 23% was arrived at was flawed and as a 'poll' measuring support for independence or any other political settlement, due to the wording of the questions asked, it is seriously flawed. Crucially though, the figure was gleaned from survey responses from the middle of last year, why mention it now instead of back then if its such big news? Oh, hold on...
As usual, it did the job, news papers and current affairs programs on the radio and television had something other than the huge double standard dropped by unionists to report. A double whammy, they got to do down the Nationalist side with some more dodgy figures and bury a unionist turd at the same time.
When things like this go down, I really have no idea how people can still think independence from Westminster is anything other than the obvious choice.
(For what its worth, David Cameron will never have his referendum, when/if Scotland goes it's own way, both countries will have to renegotiate terms. The notion England Wales and Northern Ireland will continue within the EU minus 10% of its GDP, 30% of its land mass and vast swathes of farmland & fisheries is just daft, which coincidentally is what the Unionist side think you are when they're spooning out their nonsense.)
Usually you need to be a bit of a political anorak to truly understand the unionist v. nationalist argument, what the average person in the street gets in terms of news is strained through a highly biased media which ironically, you need to be a bit of a political anorak to appreciate.
This week however was a wee bit different. For months we've been told by Better Together and a panoply of unionist politicians that the referendum on Scottish Independence introduces an unacceptable level of uncertainty on the subject of EU membership. It has been the main plank of criticism for the independence argument.
So, you don't need to be a political nerd to understand when David Cameron came out with plans for an in/out referendum on EU membership earlier this week; this highlighted a significant (in fact, glaring) double standard by unionist politicians.
For a start, the Indy Ref is happening in the Autumn of 2014, if successful (and I hope we are) no one really knows what will happen with EU membership, if precedent is anything to go by, we'll still be EU citizens (there is no vehicle within the EU to revoke citizenship) so the chances are, while we will have to renegotiate terms of membership; we'd do it from the inside and so for that matter would the remainder of the UK.
While Better Together and the 'No' mob have been extolling (at great length) the years of uncertainty for business our referendum presents, Cameron is talking about having the EU referendum in five years time, an even longer period of time. Their argument is, the UK isn't susceptible to the same forces other countries are, apparently the UK is special.
One other thing which needs to be mentioned; the day Cameron's speech was reported in the press was the same day a 'poll' result was released stating support for independence had sunk to an all time low of 23%. Except it wasn't a poll, it was part of the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey which is an on going exercise where different households are 'scientifically' chosen to answer the same question on a regular basis through-out the year, between 1200 -1500 people take the survey, on its own website, it even claims not to be an opinion poll, political nerds also point out the method by which 23% was arrived at was flawed and as a 'poll' measuring support for independence or any other political settlement, due to the wording of the questions asked, it is seriously flawed. Crucially though, the figure was gleaned from survey responses from the middle of last year, why mention it now instead of back then if its such big news? Oh, hold on...
As usual, it did the job, news papers and current affairs programs on the radio and television had something other than the huge double standard dropped by unionists to report. A double whammy, they got to do down the Nationalist side with some more dodgy figures and bury a unionist turd at the same time.
When things like this go down, I really have no idea how people can still think independence from Westminster is anything other than the obvious choice.
(For what its worth, David Cameron will never have his referendum, when/if Scotland goes it's own way, both countries will have to renegotiate terms. The notion England Wales and Northern Ireland will continue within the EU minus 10% of its GDP, 30% of its land mass and vast swathes of farmland & fisheries is just daft, which coincidentally is what the Unionist side think you are when they're spooning out their nonsense.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)