Partisan politics

[smoothmoniker]

Originally Posted by flaja

There is no moderate, liberal or conservative view on ________ - only a morally right one and a morally wrong one.

You can find people on this forum who will fill that gap with everything from taxation to universal health-care to the war in Iraq. And, SHAZZAM! we have instant partisan politics.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

You can find people on this forum who will fill that gap with everything from taxation to universal health-care to the war in Iraq. And, SHAZZAM! we have instant partisan politics.

I am not saying that things like war and the availability of health care are not moral issues, but only fools would equate things like taxation with life and death moral issues like abortion.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by flaja

There is no moderate, liberal or conservative view on abortion- only a morally right one and a morally wrong one. Human life begins at conception and any abortion that is performed when the mother’s life is not endangered by continuing the pregnancy, is murder. The view that any and all abortion is OK is the liberal view only to the extent that this is the view that people who are liberal on other issues tend to support.

And yet if that were as true as you so loudly attest that it is, there would be some kind of way you can back that up besides simply declaring it to be so.
you can't, so it isnt. end of story.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by Ibram

And yet if that were as true as you so loudly attest that it is, there would be some kind of way you can back that up besides simply declaring it to be so.
you can't, so it isnt. end of story.

How do you know that what I say is not true? How many people who are liberal on other issues are against abortion?

[DanaC]

My understanding is that if an MP says something that another MP finds personally insulting the offended can invite the offender to repeat what was said someplace outside of the Parliament building.

I don't think it's insults that are frowned upon, so much as impugning honour; more specifically, a member of parliament cannot accuse a fellow member of lying whilst on the floor.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I don't think it's insults that are frowned upon, so much as impugning honour; more specifically, a member of parliament cannot accuse a fellow member of lying whilst on the floor.

Accusations of lying are issued on a pretty regular basis in American politics.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I don't think it's insults that are frowned upon, so much as impugning honour; more specifically, a member of parliament cannot accuse a fellow member of lying whilst on the floor.

He should particularly avoid this if the other fellow has just tripped and measured his length upon the carpet.

[DanaC]

Do incumbents in the U.K. have the franking privilege whereby they have free postage for anything they want to mail to their constituents? Members of Congress have this power (but I don’t think the President does), so incumbents could easily outspend any limit imposed by law.

At a local level, I am allowed something in the region of 50 1st class and 100 2nd class stamps for use in my work (cannot be used for electioneering, paid for by the public purse). During the election period all expense incurred contacting the electorate must be within the spending limit, including postage. Anything that has the party ID on it, or any statements designed to promote myself electorally must be included. If a supporter lets me use their office space ( I cannot use my townhall office) I must include a calculation of how much that office space would theoretically have cost me were I to rent it. Any cost above £25 must carry a receipt and any donation above £50 must include full donator details.

The parliamentary levels are much bigger, but MPs operate within tight spending limits on postage and communications as well. Throughout their MPs are allowed to spend a certain amount, claimable as an expense from the public purse, on communications as long as they are not overtly campaign orientated: news letters and the like. During the election period, similar rules apply as to local campaigns though I am unsure of the amount allowed.

What risks can there be in debating an important public issue with a civil tongue and mutual respect between political opponents?

There are no risks in debating in such a manner. However, you are dealing with a political system and tools designed to promote calm can just as easily be abused as respected.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by DanaC

There are no risks in debating in such a manner. However, you are dealing with a political system and tools designed to promote calm can just as easily be abused as respected.

How could tools designed to promote calm be abused? Can you give some specific examples?

And surely a politician who is concerned more about political issues than political advancement could engage in passionate debate about critical issues without telling lies or hurling offense insults at their political opponents. The trouble is that very few politicians care more about political issues than they do advancing their political careers.

[DanaC]

There is no moderate, liberal or conservative view on abortion- only a morally right one and a morally wrong one. Human life begins at conception and any abortion that is performed when the mother’s life is not endangered by continuing the pregnancy, is murder. The view that any and all abortion is OK is the liberal view only to the extent that this is the view that people who are liberal on other issues tend to support.

Mmm. This is probably a topic you and I should avoid discussing Flaja :P

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by flaja

There is no moderate, liberal or conservative view on abortion- only a morally right one and a morally wrong one.

That would make it a pretty useless example of how Hillary is "not a moderate" then, don't you think?

[flaja]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

That would make it a pretty useless example of how Hillary is "not a moderate" then, don't you think?

She is a liberal on this issue because she holds the position that is generally associated with liberals. She associates with liberals on this issue, thus she is not a moderate.

[smoothmoniker]

flaja, I'm not interesting in defending those positions on abortion, I'm just presenting the possibility of a moderate position. Thank you, however, for so aptly demonstrating my second point.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

flaja, I'm not interesting in defending those positions on abortion, I'm just presenting the possibility of a moderate position. Thank you, however, for so aptly demonstrating my second point.

So you don’t think abortion is a moral issue rather than just a political one?

You think we can murder people in moderation?

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by flaja

She is a liberal on this issue because she holds the position that is generally associated with liberals. She associates with liberals on this issue, thus she is not a moderate.

Ah, of course. You can't be a moderate unless you agree with the conservative position. You are obviously very well-versed on the concept of spectrums.