ukiphome.com

Christina · 03-07-2006, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

I don't think so. While I'm sure there is a decent portion of religous and traditionalists within UKIP, I know most of my branch couldn't give a rats ass whether Gay people marry each other.

Adopting kids is another matter though.

Fair enough. Not sure if Chad supports adoption by same-sex couples, but if he doesn't, I don't see how that fits NP, NP.

One has to bear in mind that not every couple is allowed to adopt, and the same stringent standards of scrutiny should apply to same-sex couples too.

progcon.org · 03-07-2006, 10:21 AM

It's not an issue for me either, but just because I would use an NPNP approach to policy doesn't mean I would force traditionalists to agree with me, quite the opposite.

I'll take my approach to policy, and let people make up their own mind based on the overall package.

We want a smaller state with less meddling and moralising from politicians thanks.

Mikeuk · 03-07-2006, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christina

One only has to check out the CDA forum to find out you are a fanatic

Care to quote something I've said which proves I am a 'fanatic'?

Actually that's about the last thing I am. I find it very difficult to get worked up about anything these days.

Christina · 03-07-2006, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeuk

[One only has to glance at conservativehome.com to taste the rabid flavour of these unprincipled powed-crazed fanatics.

Imagine that these totally intolerant self-same Tories had been born in Germany early in the c20. No prizes for guessing which 'inspirational leader' these brainless lemmings would have ended up supporting.

After all, isn't it a fact that 'Dave is always right' ? :twisted:

Mikeuk · 03-07-2006, 10:55 AM

Sorry, are you trying to make a point?

I don't think sarcasm and contempt are quite the same as fanaticism, somehow.

Incidentally, do you really suppose that the OAP membership of the Tory Party favours 'gay marriage' either?

Mikeuk · 03-07-2006, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by progcon.org

We want a smaller state with less meddling and moralising from politicians thanks.

Good point Chad.

During the 1980s it was the libertarian element within the Conservative Party which encircled the pro-EU wets by bringing together libertarians and Monday Clubbers with an agenda which allowed reactionaries (within limits) to be as reactionary as they liked, as long as they backed Thatcher.

There was something for everybody within this 'Radical Thatcherism' which achieved an enormous amount, and the key achievers were all young men and women in their 20s.

A lot is written about the point where Fascists and Communists meet - much of it nonsense. More interesting, I think, to focus upon the points where libertarians and authoritarians meet, and why. I've always been fascinated, but not surprised, by the fact that Mussolini kept a copy of Max Stirner's 'The Ego and his Own' perpetually by his bedside.

Within UKIP, we need to create something of the liberty-inspired elan of the 1980s Federation of Conservative Students.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-07-2006, 10:21 AM	#82 (permalink)
progcon.org Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 934	It's not an issue for me either, but just because I would use an NPNP approach to policy doesn't mean I would force traditionalists to agree with me, quite the opposite. I'll take my approach to policy, and let people make up their own mind based on the overall package. We want a smaller state with less meddling and moralising from politicians thanks.

03-07-2006, 10:55 AM	#85 (permalink)
Mikeuk Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Fareham Posts: 5,761 Party: Conservatives	Sorry, are you trying to make a point? I don't think sarcasm and contempt are quite the same as fanaticism, somehow. Incidentally, do you really suppose that the OAP membership of the Tory Party favours 'gay marriage' either?