(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-10 07:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] goblinpaladin.livejournal.com
"But you're oppresssing our right to oppress others!"

"...yes, we are. I'm glad you noticed."

(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-10 08:00 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tsunami-ryuu.livejournal.com
"People may have different orientations but we need to have laws that will fence in our behaviour, as it were."

... so he's esentially saying that people may be gay and he has to accept their existance, but they CANNOT HAVE SEX.

Okay then.

Props to Parliament for a level-headed, sound decision. Sadly, I doubt Congress would have been able to reach the same conclusion.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-10 01:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmseward.livejournal.com
Labour supporters were whipped to attend and vote.

Isn't that taking support of alternative lifestyles a little far?

(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-11 04:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] torrain.livejournal.com
I'm wondering if that means "were told to attend and how to vote" or just "were told to attend and vote".

I am guessing the former, but damn the language barrier, anyway.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-11 04:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
Told to attend and how to vote. That's what the party Whip is for.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-10 10:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] publius1.livejournal.com
'religious groups would be obliged to rent out halls for "gay wedding" receptions.' -- it shouldn't, probably, but I still get annoyed seeing that in quotation marks.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-11 10:00 am (UTC)
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)
From: [personal profile] matgb
There was an interview with one of the loons in the car on the way to London Tuesday.

"It's not right us being forced to allow gay couples to share a bed in our guesthouse"

Interviewer - why shouldn't the law protect them as it does you?

"Because it's against our beliefs to let people do things in private where we can't see them"

Interviewer - so what would you say if a gay couple didn't want a Christian couple in their guest house

"Ah, well that wouldn't be allowed, the law says so, so we'd take them to court"

Desk, meet head. In fact, Mat, pull over car, get out, and scream at world. Then buy a coffee as you're half asleep.

200 votes to 68. In the notably, um, young and tolerent? House of Lords.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-18 04:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] silmaril.livejournal.com
"It seems to me, in my simplistic way, that what they (the opponents of the regulations) are arguing for is quite simply the right to discriminate and the right to harass.

"And those arguments are being made in the name of Christianity."


What I love most about that quote---and I love all of it in various ways---might be the humility it displays. "In my simplistic way." Why can't I visualize any politician hereabouts saying something like that?

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 5th, 2026 02:30 pm