FREEDOM!!!!

As I make posts here and there about Scotlands politics (you may have noticed) and at this time when it might lead to the break up of the UK, bit of a historic event if it does, the final act of the end of Empire, I thought I'd better make a thread for it.

Speech by the Scottish Chieftain Calgacus before throwing the Romans out of Scotland:

"Battles against Rome have been lost and won before, but hope was never abandoned, since we were always here in reserve. We, the choicest flower of this nation's manhood, were hidden away in her most secret places. Out of sight of subject shores, we kept even our eyes free from the defilement of tyranny. We, the most distant dwellers upon earth, the last of the free, have been shielded till today by our very remoteness and by the obscurity in which it has shrouded our name. Now, the farthest bounds lie open to our enemies; and what men know nothing about they always assume to be a valuable prize.
A rich enemy excites their cupidity; a poor one, their lust for power. East and West alike have failed to satisfy them. They are the only people on earth to whose covetousness both riches and poverty are equally tempting. To robbery, butchery and rapine, they give the lying name of 'government'; they create a desolation and call it peace."



Latest thing on the modern political scene to come along is this wonderful example of how not to make a case for the Union. Following the labour parties annihalation at the Scottish elections by the SNP they are in the midst of an exceptionally dull leadership campaign for a new Scottish Labour Leader. Head of the Labour Party and defender of the Union Ed Miliband was interviewed about the Scottish Labour election and failed to name the three candidates running- he got two but didn't know the name of the third, who is the front runner! You would think he would at least learn the names of members of his own party who could be about to lead his party in Scotland and will be at the forefront of the Union case.
A perfect example of how bothered the Londoncentric parties really are about Scotland.
Its things like this which explain why so many of us want to go it alone."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-15104173

Found it on youtube, pretty funny really!!




To defend Mr Ed I'm sure the name was on the tip of his tounge! But really England is the only place that matters. Scotland, Wales and NI are all pretty unimportant.


Still not as bad as this:

While I don't have a clearly defined opinion on the issue of Scottish independence, I do find most of the critiques of the idea by English politicians to be quite hypocritical in light of the general attitude towards independence movements in other countries (such as Kosovo, South Sudan, etc.).

Also, I don't really know anything about Ed Milliband, but he looks really young. Did Labour just want to turn 180 degrees after Gordon Brown?

Won't all the little Scotshobbits starve if the Anglehobbits don't feed them?

"Did Labour just want to turn 180 degrees after Gordon Brown?"- Eldo

It was more like they imploded. Their main problem was that is traditionally thought of as the Labour Party was a completely different beast under Blair that was more often right of centre than left- this caused a huge divide between the grass roots and the party- but for so long as they kept winning elections it was tolerated. Once they lost the knives were out. The leadership moved back to the left aligning itself with the Unions again, but that is proving electoral suicide in England right now and giving the right wing press a field deal with claims of Ed Miliband being in the pocket fof his Union pay masters (they are the main funders of Labour) and calling him 'Red Ed.'
In the past Labour could at least count on the North of England, Scotland and to a lesser extent Wales for support. But Scottish Labour are in a mess and suffered a humilating defeat to a landslide SNP victory and the Welsh have have turned away from them too. Only area I'm not sure how Labour support is holding up in is North of England- Kafria would have a better idea of that than me.


And Orwell it was well known we provide the oil that pays for all of Britains food and everything else including sunshine.

Today marks the end of cheap alcohol deals in supermarkets. New SNP legislation comes into force banning the sale of cheap drink if you buy in bulk- so no more 3 bottles of wine for a tenner deals at supermarkets.
It follows on the heels of a report showing Scots consume 23% more alcohol than the English or Welsh (could have at least compared us to some proper competition- like the Irish) and years of research showing we may have a tiny drink problem as a nation.
According to the BBC news page "Wine accounted for the largest rise in consumption, with sales more than doubling since the mid 1990s."- don't get the wrong idea here and imagine Scots sipping some delicate red wine in a steet cafe, for wine read buckie which is a 'tonic wine' and for 'street cafe' read gutter and you've about got the picture.
Next step in the SNP's attempt to stop us being a nation of alcoholics (curse them!!) is minimum pricing so no more cheap bevvy of any sort.

Fortunetly there are some obvious ways round it- you can order the cheap deal stuff from English supermarkets or just drive across the border and get it.

I thought the SNP were the good guys! Politicians, they're all the same. Promise you all the buckie you can drink and then... well, they turn out to be a pack of wowsers...

Gay Marriage. The Scottish government is in a consultation period to make same-sex marriage legal (currently its just civil partnerships not marriage). And the Catholic Church in Scotland has come out all guns blazing.

"Bishop of Paisley Philip Tartaglia said a Scottish government which backed same-sex marriage did not deserve the support of the Catholic community."- there is a childish side of me giggles at the idea he is a man in a dress and everytime someone addresses him they have to say 'tart' as part of his name!

"Bishop Tartaglia's comments came after the most senior Scottish catholic, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, said legalising same-sex marriage would "shame Scotland in the eyes of the world".- don't know about that, or care really. 6 out of 10 Scots are in favour according to recent polls- maybe the 4 out of 10 against are all Bishops!

"The cardinal said allowing such a change would have "huge implications" for society and would represent a "grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right".- hetrosexual marriage is a human right? I had no idea.

The Archbishop of Glasgow said allowing gay couples to marry in a traditional sense would be pointless as it would not result in the creation of a "natural family".- ahh well presumably then he is equally against adoption which s also not 'natural'.

"Governments do not have the authority to say what marriage is or to change its nature or to decree that people of the same sex can marry."- ahh so the Church is trying to claim authority and power here over democractically elected governments. Mmmm.

"He said dismissing objections because they came from a religious body was "tantamount to an incitement to religious intolerance".- I'm not sure how a year long consultation by the Snp govenrment with Scotlands religous bodies counts as 'dismissing'.

The bishop added: "A government which favours and allows for same-sex marriage does wrong. It fails in its duty to society. It undermines the common good. It commits an act of cultural vandalism.
Such a government does not deserve the trust which the nation, and including many in the Catholic community, has shown in it."

And there is the threat- do this and we will preach against you from the pulpit.


The Churches should feel lucky- if I was in power I would not have bothered asking them at all given this sort of response was as entirely predicatable as it is lamentable.

*all quotes from the BBC.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Next step in the SNP's attempt to stop us being a nation of alcoholics (curse them!!) is minimum pricing so no more cheap bevvy of any sort.

Does this mark the end of your support for the SNP, Petty?

Pettytyrant101 wrote:"Bishop Tartaglia's comments came after the most senior Scottish catholic, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, said legalising same-sex marriage would "shame Scotland in the eyes of the world".- don't know about that, or care really. 6 out of 10 Scots are in favour according to recent polls- maybe the 4 out of 10 against are all Bishops!

It has never ceased to amaze me that the Catholic Church believes itself to be in a position where they can issue moral condemnations against LGBT individuals (or any individuals, for that matter) when the pedophilia scandal and their attempts at covering it up have gone for so long. Gee, Cardinal O'Brien, what's more shameful: extending human rights and openness to more of society or enabling pedophiles to continue to attack children?

For that matter, who does Cardinal O'Brien worry about offending? Why should any individual or country withhold rights from certain segments of their populations just because it will upset bigots?

Why bring this up again?

Perhaps because it's one of the big political debates of the day? At least Petty is bringing it up in the context of an ongoing thread about Scottish politics instead of making a thread dedicated solely to the discussion of homosexuality, unlike someone I could name.

Yea, yea, yea.

I'm just giving you a hard time, dude.

Yes it is here becasue it is particularly topical in my neck of the world at the moment.
And to add to it there is this;

Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie has attacked senior figures in the Catholic church for attempting to "control" views on gay marriage.
Mr Rennie said: "I have the utmost respect for the work of the Catholic church in so many areas.
"But to threaten to invoke some sort of block vote is an affront to a liberal democracy and one that we must challenge.
"Many individual Catholics have told me they will not be following their leaders against the issue of equality for same sex marriage."

The Catholic Church have been wading into another emotive topic here too- sectarianism. The SNP have being trying to create a bill to stamp down on it but are having difficulty in determining what constituets a sectarian act and what is freedom of expression.
One area in particluar the Catholic Church has been stressed about is the sign of the cross, which under certain circumstances could be deemed sectarian.
However First Minister Alex Salmond met with the Head of the Catholic Church in Scotland with the following carefully worded outcome.

Mr Salmond said a clause guaranteeing freedom of speech would be inserted into the legislation, while details of past sectarian-related incidents would be published. He said this would continue on an on-going basis.
He added: "The cordial and friendly discussions allowed me to hear the church's concerns directly and explain to them the aims behind our efforts to stamp out sectarianism.This legislation was never meant to stop freedom of expression in Scotland - it is about bearing down on sectarianism and other offensive behaviour in Scotland, and stopping the expression of bigotry and hatred that the overwhelming majority of people in this country wish to see come to an end."
Bishop Philip Tartaglia, said; "I share the concerns of the Scottish government that sectarianism should be eradicated from Scottish society.
"Fears that the wide remit of the 'offensive behaviour bill' might impinge on the freedom to hold and express otherwise inoffensive views appear to have been recognised and are being addressed.
"I particularly welcome the first minister's commitment to track and analyse sectarian crime on an on-going basis using all data relating to Section 74 of the Criminal Justice Scotland Act 2003. Clearly, we cannot tackle a problem without first measuring it."

However he did add on the subject of gay marriage; "Our discussions also afforded me an opportunity to reiterate the Catholic Bishops' publicly stated commitment to strenuously oppose any moves towards same sex marriage."

So friendlier on one front and still hostile on the other.

So am I to understand Mr Tyrant wants Independance so he can... so he can... oh my goodness... so he can Marry another Gentlehobbit!? Well, another Scotshobbit, anyhow...

Now Odo lets not be hasty! But if we are to be an independent country we have to decide if we are the sort of independent country who lets Hobbits of the same sex marry if they wish. I happen to think we should be that sort of nation. And in general most Scots hobbits have a similar view as the debate goes like this.

hobbit 1- "A hobbit should be able to marry whoever they like."
hobbit 2- "Will they still get their round in when it's their turn?"
hobit 1- "yes, of course they will."
hobbit 2- "Well thats ok then. By the way, its your round, try not to spill the drink while you mince to the bar and back."

odo banks wrote:So am I to understand Mr Tyrant wants Independance so he can... so he can... oh my goodness... so he can Marry another Gentlehobbit!? Well, another Scotshobbit, anyhow...

Not at all dear Odo, don't fret!

What he wants is an independant Scotland with a government not tied down by the ransoming nature of one part of that society. (not simply the catholic church who can pull his kind of behaviour, I believe that stateside it is called lobbying and is actually a job for some folk! )

Devils advocate question here, surely this comes down to your idea of what marriage is? If marriage is a religious ceremony where two people ask god to join them together for the rest of their lives with his/her blessing then who is allowed to partake is in the hands of the church officiating, isn't it? However if marriage is the contract whereby one chattel is given/sold to another (or mutally agree to give themselves to each other if you must be modern!) then it is simply a matter for the law and we know government make them up to suit themselves all the time!

Oh!and hi again (Squach insists I say hi for her too )

On the surface I agree Kafria. If marriage is a ceremony conducted by religious folk on behalf of God then I see no argument for non religous folk to have it- but the same must hold true for all non religous folk- even hetrosexual couples- but the Church don't seem to be going out of ther way to bar them from marriage so seems a bit hypocrtical.
That and I suspect, although I don't know, that marriage ceremonies predate the Churches by a considerable amount of time and they merely coopted them into their own ceremonies- so any claim to solely religous use of the word marriage is probably suspect in the first place.

I guess what facsinates me about this debate is what is marriage and who has the right to define it, for I am sure it has about as many definitions in peoples eyes as there are people getting married! Personally think the church should keep it's nose out of legal stuff! And all credit to the scots for looking at this instead of fobbing off the issue with the civil partnership thing. Can just imagine the outcry if they told all hetero couples that they could only have a civil partneship! (Unless christened, confirmed and practising!)

My worry is that the SNP are listening to the churches at all. Scotland has quite a deeply religous past- in the northern islands they were still fighting against ferries sailing on a Sunday up until a few years ago. The bulk of Scotlands population is in the central belt and is secular by and large- but the further north you go and especially the island communities you find God is still very much to the forefront, although less so than it once was. Still I have no desire to see the Churches anywhere near political power as they represent a minority of Scot these days yet still seem to have undue influence in our politics and with the media.

Now that's interesting.... As an oblivious idiot south of the border I have never really picked up on that. Comes as a bit of a surprise to hear it. Agree though that the government should be separate, although all should be consulted (not just churches)

This from wiki but seems about right. Its worth noting most peple I know who say they are Church of Scotland have only ever been in a church for Christinings/Weddings/funerals and the odd xmas celebration.


Religious affiliation in Scotland
Religion/Denomination Current religion % Religion of upbringing %
Church of Scotland 2,146,251 42.4 2,392,601 47.3
No Religion 1,394,460 27.5 887,221 17.5
Roman Catholic 803,732 15.9 859,503 17.5
Other Christian 344,562 6.8 424,221 8.4
Religion not stated 278,061 5.5 422,862 8.4
Islam 42,557 0.8 42,264 0.8
Other Religion 26,974 0.6 8,447 0.2

Base/Total 5,062,011 100 5,062,011 100


edit- anyone know when i post this why all the gaps between the figures disappear and they all squash together? Very annoying.

This is quite a good summin gup of the Scottish religous position at present.

Although issues of faith and doctrine have played a central role in Scotland’s turbulent history, Scottish society today is increasingly secular in character - bar the customary round of christenings, weddings and funerals - and relatively little troubled by religious conflict. Of the main churches, the established Church of Scotland is the largest. Presbyterian in structure, it is governed by a hierarchical system of church courts, from local kirk sessions, which operate at a congregational level, up to the annual General Assembly in Edinburgh, where clergy and lay representatives gather to debate key issues concerning church and society. Historically more progressive than the Church of England (women, for instance, were being ordained without fuss as ministers in Scotland decades before the C of E’s wranglings over the matter during the 1990s), the Church of Scotland has a long tradition of active involvement in social welfare and social justice work.
The Roman Catholic Church is another major presence, partly thanks to large-scale waves of Irish immigration in previous centuries, and is organised into two archdioceses – Glasgow and St Andrews – and six dioceses. The biggest influx from Ireland, during the 19th century, together with the largely Unionist sympathies of Protestant Scots in regard to the Irish independence struggle, once more exposed the vein of anti-Catholicism in Scotland dating back to the Reformation, which persists today in pockets of sectarian hostility, mainly in Glasgow and its environs.
There’s certainly no love lost between Catholicism and the Free Church of Scotland, a more austerely hard-line form of Presbyterianism which split from the Church of Scotland following the Disruption of 1843. Its shrinking strongholds today are in the Western Isles, notably Lewis, where it has sustained a famously successful defence of Sabbatarianism. The Scottish Episcopal Church is also significant, with other Christian denominations including Baptists, Congregationalists, Methodists, and Unitarians.
Other world faiths, as practised by different ethnic communities, are increasingly represented in Scotland, notably Islam, Judaism and Buddhism

Second post answers my next question, (I always had the impression that Scotland was in many ways largely protestant in nature so where had the rc influence come from)

so

Side track

Did you know that Arthur (yes he of legend) is probably scottish?

I didn't, but I've been reading some celtic myths for background for this nano thing. Apparently the oldest tales have him as from a tribe that had it's headquarters in Edinburgh!

so freedom fighting comes naturally!