|
|
Post by samfregreenock on Feb 10, 2013 0:19:03 GMT 1
That's the first time I've looked at that. "Webshite"
It's complete pish, could do with a proof ( not poof) reader too
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwatson on Feb 10, 2013 15:35:27 GMT 1
Thanks for the pic Sam...and yer no far wrong regarding the webshite from Inverclydes alleged voice at Westminster.
He did reply to my email and I will share once I have composed an appropriate response...
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwatson on Feb 10, 2013 16:25:28 GMT 1
----- Original Message -----
From: MCKENZIE, Iain
To: Jim Watson
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 1:25 PM
Subject: RE: Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill
Dear Mr Watson,
It would not be possible to release the emails and hand written letters on this subject from constituents, I have read this bill very closely indeed and voted against a bill which did not deliver true equality of marriage or reassure the Christian community, it also has relevance to Scotland. I would ask that if you have not done so please read the bill and it will become evident it requires additional work, this will be done at committee which I vote for.
The bill can deliver True Equality and give confidence to the Churches they will not end up in court. Happy to keep you updated with the progress of this bill and amendments made to make it do exactly what everyone wants to see.
Regards
Iain McKenzie MP
Inverclyde PPS to Margaret Curran, Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland
Iain McKenzie MP
Inverclyde/Scotland
01475 791820
20 Union Street Greenock Inverclyde PA16 8JL
iain.mckenzie.mp@parliament.uk
House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwatson on Feb 10, 2013 16:25:44 GMT 1
Dear Iain,
Thank you for your reply and I note the contents thereof.
Firstly, it is possible to release all of the correspondence that you have received on this matter. It would not breach any data protection rules since you, as a Member of Parliament, are not regarded as being a public body. I did state that you should remove all aspects that could identify the original sender. So is it not perhaps more appropriate to state that you are unwilling to release the aforementioned correspondence?
I am also of the opinion that the bill still leaves inequality in relation to civil partnerships for heterosexuals. I think the provisions to protect those who have religious objections does what is intended and that the provision for Scotland recognises that this is a devolved matter that needs the permission of the Scottish Government Ministers for it's reciprocity to apply to Scotland, subject to the Scottish Parliament passing similar provisions.
However, I am more intrigued that there are aspects that you feel need to be changed. Can you please list what you would require to be amended before you vote for the bill? Are you giving a commitment to support this bill if and when these amendments are made?
I look forward to your reply with interest
Kindest Regards
Jim Watson
|
|
|
|
Post by tiddles on Feb 10, 2013 16:35:16 GMT 1
LOL Excellent!
|
|
|
|
Post by tiddles on Feb 10, 2013 16:48:02 GMT 1
What a snivelling bastard he is.
"voted against a bill which did not deliver true equality of marriage or reassure the Christian community"
What the hell does it have to do with this mythical, "Christian Community". Left to them homosexuality would still be illegal and people in dreadful, abusive marriages would not be able to divorce.
The overwhelming majority of people in this country do NOT attend church. And local Catholic churches that used to have at least half a dozen priests have to use nuns for services and churches have closed. As to the so-called, Protestant churches, they are becoming extinct with most of their churches either put to other uses or up for sale.
And as to the Church of England and their homophobia..sheesh, if you took gay clergy out of the C of E, they have precious few celebrants.
I really don't swallow (no pun intended) BIGOT'S assertion that he, "listened to the views of his constituents". I reckon we have a closet fundamentalist there. I well remember his election leaflet telling us all how he met the Walnut Whip at the church and they are still active members.
In my area, we have Jim Murphy who is an ultra Catholic yet he managed to tow the line and vote for the bill. I reckon the Millipede will have noted BIGOT'S actions and marked him down for any promotion now or in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by linda wallace on Feb 10, 2013 17:20:59 GMT 1
just sent jocky over the link so i think he will be working his magic.....
jim i never even noticed what i put "sucked up to david cairns" lol......
|
|
|
|
Post by samfregreenock on Feb 10, 2013 18:13:38 GMT 1
What a snivelling bastard he is. "voted against a bill which did not deliver true equality of marriage or reassure the Christian community" What the hell does it have to do with this mythical, "Christian Community". Left to them homosexuality would still be illegal and people in dreadful, abusive marriages would not be able to divorce. The overwhelming majority of people in this country do NOT attend church. And local Catholic churches that used to have at least half a dozen priests have to use nuns for services and churches have closed. As to the so-called, Protestant churches, they are becoming extinct with most of their churches either put to other uses or up for sale. And as to the Church of England and their homophobia..sheesh, if you took gay clergy out of the C of E, they have precious few celebrants. I really don't swallow (no pun intended) BIGOT'S assertion that he, "listened to the views of his constituents". I reckon we have a closet fundamentalist there. I well remember his election leaflet telling us all how he met the Walnut Whip at the church and they are still active members. In my area, we have Jim Murphy who is an ultra Catholic yet he managed to tow the line and vote for the bill. I reckon the Millipede will have noted BIGOT'S actions and marked him down for any promotion now or in the future. And here was me thinkin' that Murphy was just a two-faced prick.......... |
|
|
|
Post by jimwatson on Feb 10, 2013 20:22:17 GMT 1
If I can be fair to Inverlcyde's voice at Westminster, getting a reply within one day is pretty impressive....even if it does not actually say anything!
Dear Mr Watson,
As previously stated what good would it be to release anonymous emails and letters, you will have to take my word that I have received many hundreds of emails and many hand written letters.
When this bill is debated in committee I will be asking that others on the committee raise the points that need to be addressed to bring this to true equality in marriage as at present it does not reflect this. It also requires to make more of a commitment to the Churches that upon refusal they will not end up in a court.
As offered I am happy to keep you up to speed on the progress of this bill.
Regards
Iain McKenzie MP
Inverclyde
PPS to Margaret Curran, Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwatson on Feb 10, 2013 20:22:54 GMT 1
Dear Mr. McKenzie,
Thank you for your prompt reply and again I note the contents thereof.
Firstly, I do not have to take your word for anything. All that I have asked is that you back up your normative assertion with proof. And therein lies the crux of the matter - you state that you have received many items of correspondence and all I am humbly requesting is evidence of that fact. I am not questioning the veracity of your statement but rather the feelings that you claim were expressed on behalf of the Inverclyde Community. I would welcome the opportunity to refute the majority of these alleged arguments that entrench discrimination and promote homophobia within society. The good that can be achieved via this cannot be accurately measured but with a similar bill due to be put to the Scottish Parliament it might help to stimulate debate and discussion on the issue as well as to raise the profile of the measure as it progresses through both Westminster and Holyrood. It might also encourage your constituents to take place in the Holyrood consultation process that is open until 20th March 2013.
Again, I ask you to clarify what points do you feel need addressed? Why do you feel the bill, as it stands, does not address equality? How do you propose to ensure more of a commitment to the churches that they will not be open to a court challenge in the event of non-participation? Please specifically list each clause of the bill that you disagree with, if that makes it easier for your good self. I am not asking for generalisms or pie in the sky intentions but hard facts as to which specific parts of the bill you disagree with, how you would change them and at what point you would offer your support to the bill.
Again I look forward to your reply
Kindest regards
Jim Watson
|
|
|
|
Post by linda wallace on Feb 10, 2013 20:58:17 GMT 1
notice the above picture...lol
|
|
|
|
Post by samfregreenock on Feb 10, 2013 23:08:36 GMT 1
notice the above picture...lol FFS ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Hilarious well done jock |
|
|
|
Post by Wee Jock on Feb 10, 2013 23:33:28 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by linda wallace on Feb 10, 2013 23:38:37 GMT 1
just suits him down to the ground
|
|
|
|
Post by Wee Jock on Feb 11, 2013 1:24:35 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by tiddles on Feb 11, 2013 14:17:33 GMT 1
Jock, there's only one thing to say...you're a genius!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We have laughed ourselves sick..
|
|
|
|
Post by Wee Jock on Feb 11, 2013 21:50:14 GMT 1
This is one of those topics that leaves itself wide open  |
|
|
|
Post by tiddles on Feb 11, 2013 22:09:48 GMT 1
I must say that I do find it a bit disconcerting to be faced with that boy's arse every time I login.  |
|
|
|
Post by linda wallace on Feb 12, 2013 0:20:05 GMT 1
hope he doesnt get on here lolol
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwatson on Feb 12, 2013 2:49:57 GMT 1
I must say that I do find it a bit disconcerting to be faced with that boy's arse every time I login. That's no way to refer to Inverclydes voice....  I am a bit more concerned as to where Jocky "sourced" the original for this...  |
|
|
|
Post by neartic on Feb 14, 2013 20:39:01 GMT 1
the one he has on now that bird is too good looking for that pratt, you should have put thatchers head on her
|
|
|
|
Post by Wee Jock on Feb 16, 2013 17:18:57 GMT 1
It would appear that the picture neartic refers to has been removed by the server.............Hmmmmmm.
Wonder if someone out there has a dislike for my artwork........ ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by linda wallace on Feb 16, 2013 17:32:42 GMT 1
come out come out who ever you are....lol
|
|
|
|
Post by samfregreenock on Feb 16, 2013 17:59:57 GMT 1
Dunno what was funnier, jock's "porno" photie or the fact that someone complained and got it taken down ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by tiddles on Feb 16, 2013 18:03:33 GMT 1
That's quite sinister really......One to watch! Jock, that picture makes him look like Tom O'Connor..another git! |
|
|
|
Post by samfregreenock on Feb 16, 2013 18:04:20 GMT 1
I was thinkin' of more like Peter O'Toole
|
|
|
|
Post by tiddles on Feb 16, 2013 18:08:44 GMT 1
well the last part of that name is appropriate enough!
|
|
|
|
Post by samfregreenock on Feb 16, 2013 18:09:35 GMT 1
well the last part of that name is appropriate enough! arf |
|
|
|
Post by myfindhorn on Feb 16, 2013 18:28:36 GMT 1
I wonder what McKenzie's mates in the big hoose think of all this, Lets be honest, after seeing him near naked and looking like a right prat, can you honestly see him any other way if you met him.
|
|
|
|
Post by linda wallace on Feb 16, 2013 21:39:31 GMT 1
I wonder what McKenzie's mates in the big hoose think of all this, never new they were in ravenscraig lol.... i can see it now.....itv interviewing bigot regards the pictures, then it hits the national paper's then they come to interview jocky.... |
|
