Should MP's vote with their conscience.

[Porn crackers]

Refering to the imminent Embroy vote.

I thought MP's were representing their constituencies not their religion.

I think it is disgusting that some MP's are thinking of following their faithes rather than supporting people in their constituencies that are ill.

I bet Brown gives in.

Ohhhh when is this Labour Nightmare going to end.

PC

[Pervert]

MPs and conscience in the same sentence? Some mistake surely.

I think you'll find all MPs of whatever persuasion should vote the way the sad tranny in the pocket of the Tories wants them to---you know, the one representing a religion and that isn't allowed to have sex, but thinks that makes him qualified to tell everyone else what to do with their sex lives.

It's the 21st century, not the middle ages, so any priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals or popes that think they can tell the rest of us what to do can just fuck right off. If they want to comment about stuff, maybe they can tell us how disgusted they are by their colleagues abusing children.

[Officer Dibble]

"Ohhhh when is this Labour Nightmare going to end."

Nightmare indeed. I was going to mention this latest affront to the secular citizenry of Britain, but you piped me to the post, PC.

I can barely find the words to express my contempt and disgust at these arrogant, posh, middleclass, holier than thou, NuLabour twats with their trendy, in vogue, Catabolism. It just goes to show how totally detached from reality educated people who embrace ?isms? really are. How snotty, sniffy, zealous and irrational they are in their embrace of the latest ?in-vogue? world view ? and how strange that their contempt for anyone who takes an opposite view is totally at odds with the particular philosophy or religion they are espousing! An irony that totally eludes them. What a set of cunts, eh? I just can?t tell you how much I despise them.

What type of people are they that their poncy middleclass ?faith? is more important than their constituents suffering. Their faith, if faith it be, is their own private twating business. They were chosen to look after the interests of those who (perhaps foolishly) elected them, and that?s where their votes should be cast ? in support of those interests. Not to smugly fuel the fires of their own moral and religious self-aggrandizement. T? fuck wiv ?em, I say!



Officer Dibble







Officius Dibblus est amplus amor deus

[Officer Dibble]

"Officer D, with the greatest respect, I think you are the most middle class person I've ever read the writings of, congratulations you're a member."

OK then, I'll take an honorary membership, thanks. Yes, it might be advantageous to have a foot in both camps. Just don't expect me to go on any of those 'save the whale' marches or attend any divi ?diversity awareness? courses.




Officer Dibble







Officius Dibblus est amplus amor deus

[Trumpton]

What makes me angry about this situation is that Labour MPs are going to be given the opportunity to vote on their religious conscience, thus ignoring the party's three lined whip - but they were not given the same opportunity when voting for war in Iraq.

This is a clear case of double standards!

[mrmcfister]

Sorry ..have I missed something here..MPs doing something that isn't about their own snouts in the trough?

[Sam Slater]

[quote]I heard a smug academic on the radio talking about the value of an embryo consisting of maybe a 'few cells' compared with the value of a fully grown human who is sick and in need of the benefits of the research on said embryo.

This is sheer delusion.[/quote]

Delusion? That academic may have spent 10-30 years researching embryos, so if he thinks an embryo is just a clump of cells then why is he deluded, or even smug?

[quote]The real difference is that the embryo cannot defend itself and left alone would develop into what everybody would recognise as an individual human being.[/quote]

No it wouldn't. Left alone it would die. The fertilised embryo needs proteins, vitamins, minerals, water and oxygen to divide & multiply. It cannot do this, nor will the cells live long without a life support mechanism (the mother). We routinely turn off life-support machines on humans that cannot keep themselves alive naturally and so if this clump of cells cannot support themselves, where's the difference with abortion?

[quote]When we start conducting this kind of research on our own species not mention the prospect of hybridisation with other species then it marks a step where we really stop evolving as a species.[/quote]

No it doesn't. It just means we're yanking the reigns off of nature to control our own future, evolutionary path. Mind data -memes- is still evolving and has been influencing how genetic data is passed on for thousands of years. If you decide to only procreate with a blonde-haired, blue-eyed woman then you've taken a conscious step in altering the future of your genealogical gene tree. Evolution selected you to fuck and impregnate as many females as you can, but either your own mind, or the culture/society you live in is stopping you. In affect, society and culture can determine the future of our genes much more than a man in a lab-coat.

[quote]Personally I think any kind of abortion is murder,[/quote]

That's a personal opinion to which I disagree. Early life was single-sex procreation. Most of your genetic coding is junk and ignored, but has that coding for single-sex procreation. It's been selected by natute to be turned off, however, in theory, women could fertalise their own eggs. Now we're in the age of genetic manipulation and cloning, every potential cell in your body is a potential human being. Everytime you scratch your nose -not to mention jacking off to Lolly Badcock- you're killing cells that have your own, unique dna.

Like you say, it's a personal opinion; I've just given a reason for my opinion. If you killed a chimpanzee -near enough identical, genetically- it isn't classed as murder. And yet that chimp can feel pain, can experience fear, and comprehend it's own existence; it is self-aware. A fertilised embryo is not any the above.

[quote]Scientists don't really have the imagination to think that great and unique people were once disposable clumps of cells,[/quote]

Lol.....oh, I think scientists have an imagination alright!