British voters wake up and ask - Who are the DUP?

[rott]

29 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Ah yes, the benign Apprentice Boys of Derry.

 

"In 1969, the Apprentice Boys' parade around the walls of Derry sparked off three days of intensive rioting in the city, known as the Battle of the Bogside. The disturbances are regarded by some as the start of the Troubles."

This is one way of saying that republican terrorists orchestrated a riot following an annual and peaceful parade to commemorate the relief of the siege of Derry. Incidentally the longest siege in British history.

[robblok]

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

Having only a basic knowledge of the history of British political movements, I based my comment on the article which purported to explain who the DUP are and what they have done.  I have never heard of them otherwise. There was no mention of violence or terrorism in the article.

The article represented the DUP as moral conservatives, and I though to myself that this is exactly what May will need as ally as she goes into negotiations with the dark anti-civilization forces of the EU.

 

I would say they are religious fanatics, and I know that suits you well. What is it with Christians (and other religious people Muslims ect). That they feel the need to rule on personal matters like gay marriage, euthanasia, these things don't harm others at all. I can see that a Christian would not commit euthanasia.. or support a gay marriage in his family.  But why the need to ban it for those who do want it. (again can understand if you don't want a gay marriage in a Church). Why the need to make laws banning these things while all you have to do is follow your own religion and not partake in things you don't like. I am not telling Christians what to do on personal matters.. why do they take it upon themselves to do that for others. 

[Grouse]

The marriage of convenience between Arlene and Teresa is an ABOMINATION!!

[JAG]

The marriage of convenience between Arlene and Teresa is an ABOMINATION!!

You sound just like Ian Paisley!

[Grouse]

9 minutes ago, JAG said:

You sound just like Ian Paisley!

How perspicacious of you! ?

[thaihome]

[canuckamuck]

52 minutes ago, robblok said:

I would say they are religious fanatics, and I know that suits you well. What is it with Christians (and other religious people Muslims ect). That they feel the need to rule on personal matters like gay marriage, euthanasia, these things don't harm others at all. I can see that a Christian would not commit euthanasia.. or support a gay marriage in his family.  But why the need to ban it for those who do want it. (again can understand if you don't want a gay marriage in a Church). Why the need to make laws banning these things while all you have to do is follow your own religion and not partake in things you don't like. I am not telling Christians what to do on personal matters.. why do they take it upon themselves to do that for others. 

I have never made a law, so don't blame me. Laws in a democracy are usually representative of how a culture feels about certain behaviors and practices. You may not be aware of this, but in the past westerners primarily took their moral cues from the Bible, and the citizens agreed with the most of the morality laws of the time. That is democratic and fair wouldn't you say? Now the west has gone very humanistic and Christian morals are considered repressive and discriminatory. So now those old laws are passing away and laws are now mostly based on the moral compass of political correctness. 

I can't see where your anger is coming from, your side is definitely ruling the day. It is very unlikely any new Bible based legislation will see the light of day in this era. The cultural Marxists have nearly completed the long march to tear down western society, as can be seen in the constant attack on everything once considered moral and foundational. The next step of course is the establishment of global communism. And I am sure you will like that much better than this horrible society, which created the highest standard of living in history; benefiting not only itself but raising the quality of life for the whole planet. Yes you will be much happier if you survive the massacre that accompanies it. 

Edited June 11, 2017 by canuckamuck

[rott]

14 hours ago, Mojomor said:

The KKK are pussies by comparison.

Can you provide any links, references or evidence to support this claim. Otherwise I feel that many on here will judge it to be meaningless, groundless and baseless and suspect your real motives. Are you trying to make the anti-DUP mob look dim.??

[robblok]

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

I have never made a law, so don't blame me. Laws in a democracy are usually representative of how a culture feels about certain behaviors and practices. You may not be aware of this, but in the past westerners primarily took their moral cues from the Bible, and the citizens agreed with the most of the morality laws of the time. That is democratic and fair wouldn't you say? Now the west has gone very humanistic and Christian morals are considered repressive and discriminatory. So now those old laws are passing away and laws are now mostly based on the moral compass of political correctness. 

I can't see where your anger is coming from, your side is definitely ruling the day. It is very unlikely any new Bible based legislation will see the light of day in this era. The cultural Marxists have nearly completed the long march to tear down western society, as can be seen in the constant attack on everything once considered moral and foundational. The next step of course is the establishment of global communism. And I am sure you will like that much better than this horrible society, which created the highest standard of living in history; benefiting not only itself but raising the quality of life for the whole planet. Yes you will be much happier if you survive the massacre that accompanies it. 

You seem to think that Christians are moral.. burning of people.. done by Christians.. moral ? Morality is something we all have not something any religion has given us. Its completely logical not to kill rape and so on. Even non Christians early societies had these things so to claim that as something Christian is just crazy.  I certainly am not a communist but a capitalist (more somewhere in between actually). You are saying that Christians are not having influence.. your wrong, in my country they are stopping progress in euthanasia because just like in this case they have the key to a majority. 

 

I have no problem with Christians voting on laws, but why oppose stuff like gay weddings and euthanasia. These are private things and only concern those involved.  I can see (but not agree) with their stance on abortion because at some point it is indeed a human and not a lump of cells so they are trying to protect (in their opinion) life of an innocent that can make no choices. I can also see how they can have their idea about other laws that concern us all, I just don't get it how they want to rule what is a private matter. 

 

Mind you Christians are not the only ones I got problems with Muslims that want to do the same are also not my favorite persons. The alcohol laws on holey days here are crazy too, but I am a guest here so not my thing to oppose. (and I almost never drink but see it as crazy that laws are needed to make religious people not drink on holey days). Just feel religion is the cause of a lot of trouble and should not be like that if it was just practiced at home without trying to force others into it.

[canuckamuck]

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

You seem to think that Christians are moral.. burning of people.. done by Christians.. moral ? Morality is something we all have not something any religion has given us. Its completely logical not to kill rape and so on. Even non Christians early societies had these things so to claim that as something Christian is just crazy.  I certainly am not a communist but a capitalist (more somewhere in between actually). You are saying that Christians are not having influence.. your wrong, in my country they are stopping progress in euthanasia because just like in this case they have the key to a majority. 

 

I have no problem with Christians voting on laws, but why oppose stuff like gay weddings and euthanasia. These are private things and only concern those involved.  I can see (but not agree) with their stance on abortion because at some point it is indeed a human and not a lump of cells so they are trying to protect (in their opinion) life of an innocent that can make no choices. I can also see how they can have their idea about other laws that concern us all, I just don't get it how they want to rule what is a private matter. 

 

Mind you Christians are not the only ones I got problems with Muslims that want to do the same are also not my favorite persons. The alcohol laws on holey days here are crazy too, but I am a guest here so not my thing to oppose. (and I almost never drink but see it as crazy that laws are needed to make religious people not drink on holey days). Just feel religion is the cause of a lot of trouble and should not be like that if it was just practiced at home without trying to force others into it.

The message of the Bible is highly moral, this is why it was so effective as a base for legal systems. Those who burned people in the name of the Bible were in error. There is no murder advocated in Christianity. (don't quote Old Testament as a reproach, those laws ended 2000 years ago)

You are completely free to find your morality wherever you like. I doubt you will find anything essential that disagrees with the Bible though.

Euthanasia is a tough subject. I understand both sides and I do lean to side of mercy. Nobody wants to be in that situation but I have been there. I won't say anymore it's too personal for here.

Gay marriage, I really don't care much about. Christians oppose it because they see marriage as sacred bond between a man and woman. But if Christians don't have a majority then they don't get there way right. It's all fair. That's how it works in a democracy. Same as your euthanasia problem, your side isn't winning because of democracy, nothing unfair about it. I am sure you will get your way eventually though, Politics have gone only one direction since the 60's

[Bannoi]

18 hours ago, JAG said:

Jeremy Corbyn appeared frequently on platforms alongside Sinn Fein leaders, including Gerry Adams, whilst the IRA campaign was under way. He attended and spoke at events to honour dead IRA terrorists and prisoners, often on the same platform as Adams.

 

At one such event, which he attended in 1988, held one week after the IRA murdered three British servicemen in Holland, it was  stated that “force of arms is the only method capable of bringing about a free and united Socialist Ireland.” Mr Corbyn  spoke at that event. I would suggest that he supported the IRA.

 

I spent a significant part of the first 20 years of my professional military career serving in the province of Northern Ireland. I am well aware of the hideous murderous actions of both the Republican and Loyalist terrorists. I have literally picked up body parts as a result of some of their actions, actions to which Corbyn gave his tacit support.

 

I am also well versed in how the "Troubles" began, and in how they were turned into a vicious long running terrorist campaign which led to the death of over 700 British Soldiers, over 300 policemen, and over 1800 civilians. Several were good friends of mine. I was present when one died., and I spoke to another twenty minutes before he was fatally wounded. So yes, "Grouse", I do know what I am talking about. No, I do not want to go back to those days. The DUP, whether or not you like it or its policies (I don't very much) is a legal, constitutional political party which won its seats at Westminster in a fair and open election, just as Labour, the SNP  the Conservatives and every other party did.. They have every right to take part in the current political process, and Mrs May has every right to include them in it. To refer to her as a "selfish bitch" for doing so is to sink to the level of abuse and bigotry which so often masqueraded as political discourse in Northern Irish politics during the "Troubles". 

 

Or are you up to your usual game of just trying to pick a fight?

While I agree with a lot of what you say and I personally was living there when it started with Bernadette Devlins civil rights marches the disbandment of the B Specials and the British Army being brought in albeit with no live ammunition to begin with and subsequently lived through many years of the troubles.

 

I must disagree with you regarding the right of Theresa May to involve the DUP the only reason there is peace now in Northern Ireland is because of the Good Friday Agreement that was signed and supported by the loyalist and republican communities as well as the governments of the UK and Republic of Ireland it relies on total impartiality by the UK and Irish governments.

 

This is taken from the Good Friday Agreement  "The role of the UK and Irish governments should be one of rigorous impartiality"  with her trying to do a deal with the DUP it puts the whole peace agreement in jeopardy. 

 

It just proves to me that she doesn't give a damn about the country or the peace process in Northern Ireland all she cares about is trying to hang on to power both for herself and the Tory party.

 

So I am sorry but she doesn't have a right to involve the DUP she is just a selfish <deleted> as far as I'm concerned.

Edited June 11, 2017 by Bannoi

[pcliff069]

See Sharia law

Sent from my A37f using Tapatalk

[the guest]

If Teresa May had any ounce of decency, she would immediately resign. It was quite clear she has proved to be grossly incompetent, and not fit to govern the UK. If matters were not worse enough, in their desperation to get the majority rule, they have aligned themselves with the DUP, putting into jeopardy years of negotiation to forge the 'Good Friday Agreement' into question. Her position has therefore become untenable. She has zero credibility, and when it comes for her to enter the 'lions den' with regards to the negotiation of UK's position in terms of Brexit, she will be perceived as weak, and unable to forge the best deal possible on behalf of a clearly divided nation.

 

 

Edited June 11, 2017 by the guest

[Orac]

If Teresa May had any ounce of decency, she would immediately resign. It was quite clear she has proved to be grossly incompetent, and not fit to govern the UK. If matters were not worse enough, in their desperation to get the majority rule, they have aligned themselves with the DUP, putting into jeopardy years of negotiation to forge the 'Good Friday Agreement' into question. Her position has therefore become untenable. She has zero credibility, and when it comes for her to enter the 'lions den' with regards to the negotiation of UK's position in terms of Brexit, she will be perceived as weak, and unable to forge the best deal possible on behalf of a clearly divided nation.
 
 

Not sure she can easily resign immediately without causing problems from a constitutional point of view. She has been asked by the Queen to form a government so, should she step down before the Queen's speech to parliament on the 19th and it being subsequently debated and voted on/accepted in the HoC, then Jeremy Corbyn could well be entitled to ask for permission to form a minority government as the second biggest party.

[Kadilo]

The knives are out today by her own party on the Political programmes. With the exception of Fallon no one is giving her a chance of survival. Osbourne describes her as being on "death row" which just about sums it up.

Maybe get rid of her and have Ruth Davison and the DUP cuddling up. That should be interesting.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

[evadgib]

40 minutes ago, Kadilo said:

Osbourne describes her as being on "death row" which just about sums it up.

Having been ousted by her less than a year ago anything this annoying little pip-squeak utters or prints has to be taken with one of those little blue packets that were once commonplace in....

 Hislop & Co had a good pop at him on Fri on HIGNFY :)

Edited June 11, 2017 by evadgib

[Grouse]

19 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Having been ousted by her less than a year ago anything this annoying little pip-squeak utters or prints has to be taken with one of those little blue packets that were once commonplace in....

 Hislop & Co had a good pop at him on Fri on HIGNFY :)

I wish I was as poor as him!

 

Actually he is very bright and makes May look exceedingly dumb!

[evadgib]

12 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I wish I was as poor as him!

 

Actually he is very bright and makes May look exceedingly dumb!

TBH the days of monied Old Etonians running the show are no longer in keeping with what's going on in the real world. We need a broad cross section at the helm from a working environment rather than those that have never seen the inside of a dole office, NHS queue or had to survive on a state pension.

[ilostmypassword]

28 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I wish I was as poor as him!

 

Actually he is very bright and makes May look exceedingly dumb!

You should have wished to be born to wealthier parents. As he apparently did.

[thequietman]

15 hours ago, shaurene said:

Hi Grouse

Orangemen refer to the Orange Lodge. They were formed by the Protistants and supported William of Orange. The Dutch Prince who came over to England with a large Army and became the King, they refered to him as William of Orange. He was strong Protistant. He sailed over to Ireland and did battle with the Irish Catholics.

Wrong, in fact  the Williamite War - in Ireland - was effectively a war between two factions for mastery over the Irish people. And far from being a war to defend Protestantism against the Catholic Church, William of Orange counted among his allies none other than the Pope of Rome - the head of the Roman Catholic Church!! The Pope and King Billy were in fact political buddies engaged in a bitter European power struggle in which Ireland's people - both Catholic and Protestant - were mere sacrificial pawns.

[evadgib]

Lets not forget that the DUP support the discontinuance of historic cases against the security forces inc veterans after B-liar let 200+ terrorists off scott free.

 

[ilostmypassword]

30 minutes ago, thequietman said:

Wrong, in fact  the Williamite War - in Ireland - was effectively a war between two factions for mastery over the Irish people. And far from being a war to defend Protestantism against the Catholic Church, William of Orange counted among his allies none other than the Pope of Rome - the head of the Roman Catholic Church!! The Pope and King Billy were in fact political buddies engaged in a bitter European power struggle in which Ireland's people - both Catholic and Protestant - were mere sacrificial pawns.

Are you contending that there were a significant number of Catholic soldiers fighting for William? I'm not saying it's not so. Just asking.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

TBH the days of monied Old Etonians running the show are no longer in keeping with what's going on in the real world. We need a broad cross section at the helm from a working environment rather than those that have never seen the inside of a dole office, NHS queue or had to survive on a state pension.

I take the point

 

I don't think we need people on the dole or OAPs actually actually at the helm

 

We need seriously bright, driven, honest people just like you and I

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

You should have wished to be born to wealthier parents. As he apparently did.

Not necessary in my day. The state to proper care of education then.

[robblok]

17 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

The message of the Bible is highly moral, this is why it was so effective as a base for legal systems. Those who burned people in the name of the Bible were in error. There is no murder advocated in Christianity. (don't quote Old Testament as a reproach, those laws ended 2000 years ago)

You are completely free to find your morality wherever you like. I doubt you will find anything essential that disagrees with the Bible though.

Euthanasia is a tough subject. I understand both sides and I do lean to side of mercy. Nobody wants to be in that situation but I have been there. I won't say anymore it's too personal for here.

Gay marriage, I really don't care much about. Christians oppose it because they see marriage as sacred bond between a man and woman. But if Christians don't have a majority then they don't get there way right. It's all fair. That's how it works in a democracy. Same as your euthanasia problem, your side isn't winning because of democracy, nothing unfair about it. I am sure you will get your way eventually though, Politics have gone only one direction since the 60's

Error, it was done in name of the Church on a large scale.. you use the same thing Muslims use.. Muslims who kill are not real Muslims. Anyway I can accept that explanation as every religion uses it when those of their religion do bad things.. then they are not real (fill in the religion of choice).

 

I wont debate that the bible has many moral things in it.. but that does not mean that other religions or non religions don't have morality. The bible just wrote them down. As for your stance on gay marriage.. that is a good one.. I also don't care much about it and if they want to marry I don't care. The other Christians seem to claim marriage as theirs.. but every religion and non religion has marriage and their definition of it so its a bit unfair for them to claim it. For many gays marriage is a good way to arrange things as all the laws are made for marriage (inheritance laws and some tax laws) To do that all with other contracts is more expensive. Of course some just want to be married. I don't see a problem there.

 

My side is the side of progress, and yes it has been winning but now with Muslims in my country joining hands with Christians it might be stalled. Who knows I just feel about euthanasia a lot and see it as important to help those who suffer a lot. I hope to never have need of it as its difficult for everyone.

 

I really don't have it in for Christians, but more for religious people who limit others (personal) freedoms, also its always funny to see religious people calling other religious people crazy as there is no proof for any of it. Other then that I don't care much about it I believe in live and let live as long as it does not directly affect me (or others) directly. I have Christian clients, Muslim clients and a lot I have no idea  what their religion is. I don't really care as long as it does not influence the business (or personal) relation too much. I can say one thing about the Christian clients I have they are a lot more giving then I am (donating to good causes and Churches) I see that of course because its a tax deductible. But if someone donates  5-10% of their income i feel that is a lot and they are better as me then. 

[canuckamuck]

I gave you a like for that Rob, with the caveat that I disagree with the first part. When I say people who were violent and tortured or burned people in the name of the church were in error, it is a fact and it can be checked. Jesus never called for or committed violence. It doesn't matter if it was done in a large scale by the church later on, it was in error. But you cannot say that is the same as Islam because Muhammad was a violent man, and he called for violence in many situations. You can follow Islam and do violence without being in error. Jesus taught, Muhammed vanquished.

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

I really don't have it in for Christians, but more for religious people who limit others (personal) freedoms

Yeah that guitar playing mob singing  " We are all rejoicing bringing in the sheep ".

The knock on front door by the Jehovah lot at evening meal time.  

[robblok]

54 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

I gave you a like for that Rob, with the caveat that I disagree with the first part. When I say people who were violent and tortured or burned people in the name of the church were in error, it is a fact and it can be checked. Jesus never called for or committed violence. It doesn't matter if it was done in a large scale by the church later on, it was in error. But you cannot say that is the same as Islam because Muhammad was a violent man, and he called for violence in many situations. You can follow Islam and do violence without being in error. Jesus taught, Muhammed vanquished.

True they were far from the same, (Mohammed and Jesus)  I agree there. Point is in the books there are a lot of good points however they are also misused and interpreted by those representing the faith.  Then one can ask is it a mistake of the religion or not.. its used as a tool.. and was during the inquisition i still blame the religion for it because without it this torture would not have happened. Not so long ago in around my villages the Christians were divided and animosity between the Protestants and Catholics. They would not buy in each others shops and rivalry on many grounds. So religion is often a reason for problems. 

 

Then again a lot of people are good and do take the good parts out of it and don't bother others. I am ok with those kinds. 

[robblok]

16 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

Yeah that guitar playing mob singing  " We are all rejoicing bringing in the sheep ".

The knock on front door by the Jehovah lot at evening meal time.  

I have had a few at my door in the past, they did not bother me much. If you read the topic you know what bothers me about them. Not knocking at doors its harmless though a bit annoying when they get too persistent. 

[Kwasaki]

11 minutes ago, robblok said:

I have had a few at my door in the past, they did not bother me much. If you read the topic you know what bothers me about them. Not knocking at doors its harmless though a bit annoying when they get too persistent. 

Yeah did read it,  just having a dig in my maverick way.