ECHR interfere in British Soverignty...
- Thread starter Castiel
- Start date
Just to brag that he is a law student presumably, which is pretty meaningless anyway.
As someone said before you are literally asking an essay question... I could give you 5000 words on why ECHR has benefited the people of this country but I honestly don't have the time and 99% of people here will probably ignore it because it would be either too much to read or too complicated to understand.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion I just think this kind of debate will never really go anywhere.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion I just think this kind of debate will never really go anywhere.
To be fair to him, I sympathise to some extents with his possition. Unless you've studied law (or something similar) you are probably not going to have a very fair, wide ranging or in depth understandingof the EU. I'm aware it sounds snobby, but until I went there, I thought I knew things, but I didn't really have a clue.
I remember when I busted into a large thread in SC to 'reveal' that EU law can be binding in the UK without any further action from the UK government, oh dear
Last edited:
lol, I'd really like to hear that.
I remember when I busted into a large thread in SC to 'reveal' that EU law can be binding in the UK without any further action from the UK government, oh dear
Detail which laws and how.
Regulations are directly binding in member states with no further implementation necessary.
http://ec.europa.eu/eu_law/introduction/what_regulation_en.htm
I disagree, anyone with a modicum of intelligence and objectivity can understand how the EU mechanism works, it only needs some reading and study.
Simply calling people bigots because they may hold a different view than him is disingenuous to say the least.
Unless people are prepared to impart their knowledge rather than making disparaging remarks like 99% of us are bigots, or 99% of us wouldn't understand, then no-one would learn or understand anything.
Last edited:
I am interested in all points of view when it comes to politics.
Please give me 5000 words.
Same could be said of any discussion over politics.
It's an argument used by the proponents sometimes (not throwing this yet), indicating that the issue is too complex for 'you/people' to understand.
Therefore give up.
The bigot comment was because every time if you read between the lines of Speaker's Corner you will see:
We hate immigrants
We hate people on the dole
We hate taxes on the rich
We hate that we can't kill burglars
blah blah
Don't get me wrong, sorry if I offend you, there are a lot of intelligent debates there but there are also a lot of posts and people who think like the above which is why I said 99% bigots, maybe I should rephrase that to 75% ? Would that be better?
Edit: I forgot, We hate Europe.
We hate immigrants
We hate people on the dole
We hate taxes on the rich
We hate that we can't kill burglars
blah blah
Don't get me wrong, sorry if I offend you, there are a lot of intelligent debates there but there are also a lot of posts and people who think like the above which is why I said 99% bigots, maybe I should rephrase that to 75% ? Would that be better?
Edit: I forgot, We hate Europe.
Specifically, it is an appeal to accomplishment fallacy.
It sounds more like he doesnt truly understand it himself so he assumes no-one can.
I know very little about the EU outside my own remit, I would appreciate people telling why and how something is as it is, or at least pointing me toward a source of information to explain why I am wrong, rather than saying "its too complex for you to understand", how on Earth would he know what was too complex for my understanding?
Perhaps you'd be better received if you actually tried, ideally with evidence, to show people why they may be wrong/misguided/misinformed, rather than the objection by fallacy approach you seem to be taking.
Fear not, I only agreed with some aspects of his post
I certainly wouldn't go as far to call anyone a bigot!
I fully agree with your last paragraph. I really, really hate coming accross as jerk-ish as I might have done in this thread. I usually try to spend as much time as possible explaining my possition or my view point, as I tend to do with evolution, but with the EU there is a political spin that makes it very hard indeed to people to change their opinions. This is further confounded by the fact that contrary to popular belief, the EU is very complicated and it is not easy to understand at all.
So yes, people should be interested in these issues and should debate their opinion freely. But if somebody, for example, doesn't know what an EU Regulation is, it's quite hard to take their opinion seriously.
Absolutely.
I don't think that's very fair.
I think branding 99% of people in there biggots is a bit OTT yes nor is 75% much better, there are actually many rational contributions from most people. I don't agree with them all, but I appreciate the effort and thought that goes into peoples representations. You do get extreme views, but generally rational ones (away from race). It is the minority who try to shove extreme political and economic views on people.
Can I also point out a few things, arguments aren't automatically negative.
It isn't about 'hating' Europe or the Germans or whatever. I simply dissagree with it and think it presents a very poor return for UK taxpayers investment without citing the inherent wider economic moral problems.
It doesn't need to equate to a Little Englander mentallity or what not.
Last edited:
Fear not, I only agreed with some aspects of his post
I certainly wouldn't go as far to call anyone a bigot!
I fully agree with your last paragraph. I really, really hate coming accross as jerk-ish as I might have done in this thread. I usually try to spend as much time as possible explaining my possition or my view point, as I tend to do with evolution, but with the EU there is a political spin that makes it very hard indeed to people to change their opinions. This is further confounded by the fact that contrary to popular belief, the EU is very complicated and it is not easy to understand at all.
So yes, people should be interested in these issues and should debate their opinion freely. But if somebody, for example, doesn't know what an EU Regulation is, it's quite hard to take their opinion seriously.
I know you take a great deal of time to impart your knowledge, and nothing I said was aimed at you personally.
Whether you take someone seriously or not, explaining their error should be the first point of call, if they still disregard that, then dismiss their opinion.
Kedge/cosmogenesis anyone?
