The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Well with the parliamentary petition already at over 150,000 votes in three days there is one argument readymade for anti-Sturgeon defence purposes.

Combine this with the most recent polls showing a majority of Scots don't want a referendum ................... but of course we all know that logic is not exactly an SNP strong point, don't we?

Shaka_Zulu

beecher2 wrote: »

I feel it maybe should be down to the Scottish parliament when to hold a referendum.

What you feel in your water is of little or no relevance. As it stands it is not down to the Scottish Parliament.

TrickyTree83

I understand why the SNP have asked the acolytes to use #ScotRef rather than #IndyRef2. I don't think it's right though.

Need to check both timelines now as they're both polarised towards their own goals. #ScotRef is in absolute meltdown and talks of protest marches and unilateral moves is already being put forward by the indy support. #IndyRef2 is happy with the statement by the PM and hopes that Nicola will shut up and get on with the day job.

Edit: I've just seen the first mention of revolution on #ScotRef. :rotfl:

beecher2

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

What you feel in your water is of little or no relevance. As it stands it is not down to the Scottish Parliament.

Haha, hate to break it to you but very little of anything posted here is of any relevance to anyone else! I was merely answering a point string made with my opinion. Some of you are just so strident, is it too much to hope for a bit of discussion without people having to constantly validate their own point of view? Tiresome.

beecher2

When's the Great Repeal Act supposed to come to parliament?

TrickyTree83

beecher2 wrote: »

Haha, hate to break it to you but very little of anything posted here is of any relevance to anyone else! I was merely answering a point string made with my opinion. Some of you are just so strident, is it too much to hope for a bit of discussion without people having to constantly validate their own point of view? Tiresome.

The essence of debate?

If I hold view A and you hold view B, discussions around why those views are held and why you believe them to be correct is the very nature of debate. Discussing your opinion or my opinion without verification or validation is just twitter where people shout about their own opinion and that's that, in which we see all sorts of nonsense although right now it's good for a laugh on #ScotRef.

beecher2

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

The essence of debate?

If I hold view A and you hold view B, discussions around why those views are held and why you believe them to be correct is the very nature of debate. Discussing your opinion or my opinion without verification or validation is just twitter, in which we see all sorts of nonsense although right now it's good for a laugh on #ScotRef.

I worded that badly, I meant that people are only posting things which validate their own opinion, and can't seem to discuss wider implications.

It isn't a debate when people are just shouting 'because I'm correct' or variations thereof. If you think Shaka Zulu made his point to me as part of the very nature of debate, then you're more into the shouting at each other in pubs style of debate. My problem, not yours, just a reminder of why this board doesn't really suit my approach to Scottish politics, which needs the heat taken out of it in my opinion.

TrickyTree83

beecher2 wrote: »

It isn't a debate when people are just shouting 'because I'm correct' or variations thereof. If you think Shaka Zula made his point to me as part of the very nature of debate, then you're more into the shouting at each other in pubs style of debate. My problem, not yours, just a reminder of why this board doesn't really suit my approach to Scottish politics, which needs the heat taken out of it in my opinion.

I do get heated on here, I try not to but it's so difficult when some of the arguments I face are not based in logic or reality. I've pointed out that the arguments of some change with the wind yet I've remained quite staunch on why I voted Leave and why I think Scottish independence is a mistake. How is it possible to properly debate when one side constantly changes their stance and constantly ignores the evidence one puts forward? I do my best to read the evidence provided in defence of the Scottish independence argument and I try my best to do a reasonable rebuttal. But I'll admit I fly off the handle from time to time because the audience is so intransigent in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Take the recent Richard Murphy episode. That'll now be the cornerstone of the argument against GERS. Completely ignoring that the head of the Growth Commission (set up by the SNP) has said GERS is fine and will be used as the basis of analysis, off the back of that the same person is saying Scotland will face 10 years of unprecedented austerity. What are we supposed to do when the side of the argument against us is agreeing with us and yet the audience on here just brush it aside? That's not debate from the independence side on here, that's just propaganda.

Shaka_Zulu

beecher2 wrote: »

is it too much to hope for a bit of discussion without people having to constantly validate their own point of view?

There is no discussion whatsoever with the SNP and its supporters, they have no coherent arguments. It is all just tunnel vision to achieve their economically illiterate and bankrupt aim of an independent Scotland.

beecher2

Just think we all have to be a little more respectful of each other's opinions. You won't ever change my mind about Scottish independence as I want to live in a country which decides its own fate. You won't ever understand this, or agree which is fine but I just wish we could all debate a little on what might happen.

A discussion about whether saying 'now isn't the time' is a wise answer to 'would you block a referendum in 2019 after the Great Repeal Act' is something that really interests me, there's no right or wrong, just a political discussion on what might happen. Totally understand that others might not want that kind of discussion, and will always criticise anything I post purely because they know I suppport independence. Just gets very wearing. I think it is because these were the political discussions I had with my family growing up, and the ones I continue to have with friends. Debates where you're constantly trying to change someone's mind and prove someone wrong are fairly disrespectful in my opinion.