Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Dear Jacob Rees Mog...

265 replies

MoiraRosesMeltdown · 06/09/2017 11:16

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41172426

.....You may think that abortion is "morally indefensible", and that
"Life is sacrosanct and begins at the point of conception", even in cases or rape or incest.

You can have an opinion on this when you have a uterus, have been raped or have been abused yourself. You can never know why individual women make this heartbreaking decision. You are supposed to represent the public. Keep your insulting, patronising opinions to yourself.

Yours sincerely,
Women of the world

OP posts:
Capricorn76 · 06/09/2017 13:36

Of course he would try and push his agenda if he were PM and what's more I think he would be able to do it almost unopposed. Lessons can be learned from Brexit where the majority of Tory MPs are remainers but sit in silence whilst their leader pursues the hardest of Brexits. Party before country every time.

morningconstitutional2017 · 06/09/2017 13:39

Indeed. Women don't have abortions for the fun of it. This daft bloke needs a bloody great slap and a jolly good talking to. Shall we form an orderly queue?

CSLewis · 06/09/2017 13:53

"Women don't have abortions for the fun of it."

Has anyone, ever, in the history of the world, made that claim? I doubt it.

Did Jacob Rees-Mogg? Of course not.

OP: would you permit a female MP (in possession of a uterus) to voice those same views?

i.e. is it the views that are problematic or the fact that it's a man who holds them?

Ta1kinPeece · 06/09/2017 13:54

Rees Mogg in 1999

awful man
CSLewis · 06/09/2017 13:58

"He himself differentiates between issues like gay marriage (choices people make for themselves) and his perception of abortion (something being done to what he believes is a vulnerable new life). Yet he is not going to use his platform to fight for them? He is either lying or he lacks the integrity to stand up for his (admittedly repugnant) principles."

There is a third option: he's intelligent enough to realise that legislation to ban abortions will never garner enough votes to make it into law, so he will be pragmatic, and choose issues to fight for where he does have some chance to bring about change.

Caprianna · 06/09/2017 14:04

Shocking that the level of politicians in charge today is such that this have-i-got-new-for-you-politician might actually become PM. You couldn't make it up.

supersop60 · 06/09/2017 14:05

It's all very well saying that people are entitled to their views and opinions. Yes, they are. But when those opinions could be converted into policy or law, then there is a direct effect on all of us.
Sorry for x-posting; I have scanned rather than RTWT.

squishysquirmy · 06/09/2017 14:05

He states that gay marriage is different to abortion law, in that gay marriage is something people do with themselves whilst abortion is something done to a feotus, and that is why he finds abortion morally indefensible compared to gay marriage. Yet he opposed and voted against gay marriage. So why, when he feels that the moral grounds for opposing terminations are so much more significant, would he shy away from doing so if he had the opportunity?

HelenaDove · 06/09/2017 14:05

Wonder which way he voted on the tax credits rape clause. Like i cant already guess.

CSLewis · 06/09/2017 14:07

"So we know JRM would never have an abortion. OK that's fine. What I fail to see is why he thinks his opinion should have a bearing on anyone else's bodies or choices."

He DOESN'T think his opinion should have a bearing on other people's choices. He was asked by the interviewers to spell out his personal views, so he did. If he hadn't answered their question, you'd all be accusing him of dishonesty and political machiavellinism. (I may have made that last word up.)

Given that so many of you think his views are so abhorrent as to make him un-electable as either MP or Party Leader, shouldn't you all be very happy that he has laid them out so clearly and publicly?

HostaFireAndIce · 06/09/2017 14:10

There is a third option: he's intelligent enough to realise that legislation to ban abortions will never garner enough votes to make it into law, so he will be pragmatic, and choose issues to fight for where he does have some chance to bring about change.

Yes, like Jeremy Corbyn and getting rid of the monarchy. I think he said quite early on that he wasn't going to pursue this as policy, even though he is a Republican (shame, I'd have voted for that!)

CSLewis · 06/09/2017 14:10

squishy, he is ONE MAN. We live under a system of parliamentary democracy. JRM can vote against abortion at every chance he gets - it will in no measure increase the likelihood of a repeal of abortion rights in this country.

Mummyoflittledragon · 06/09/2017 14:14

He is full of vile, puerile comments. And certain sections of society lap it up because he's a posh boy. Ewwwww.

It appears there's soon going to be a massive vacuum where centrist governments once jostled for power. The way this country is headed, we are going to have a far right "Conservative" party, not dissimilar to BNP, a far left "Labour" party resembling some kind of quasi communism and a massive vacuum in between. There is a massive need for a credibly centrist party, which stands for us all.

It isn't beyond the realms of possibility that this odious man will become pm. My mother thinks he and Boris are "wonderful". She's a mysogonistic narcissist.

squishysquirmy · 06/09/2017 14:16

Yes CS he is one man (with considerably more power and influence than the average man, of course). This thread is specifically about this one man, and the views he holds. You are right if you are implying that he will hopefully never be in a position to impose his regressive views. But the reason why this won't happen is because people would oppose it. So what on earth is wrong with people (on this thread) voicing their opposition to his opinions?

Firesuit · 06/09/2017 14:16

I also reflexively distrust anyone who doesn't change their opinion as they grow up. I have heard interviews with JRM as a child. His opinions on economic policy etc (they did not ask him about abortions, obviously) are exactly the same then as they are now. Imagine not modifying your opinions (especially on technical subjects) from when you are 11 years old! Either by some miraculous coincidence you were right about everything by 11, or you are impervious to the kind of evidence and life experience which would lead to a change of mind in most of us.

It's only odd that his opinions haven't changed if you believe he was wrong at 11. If for the sake of talking to a wider audience you strip out the premise that he is wrong, all you are then saying is that he holds different beliefs to you, therefore he must be stupid.

CurryInAHurry · 06/09/2017 14:16

I think he is entitled to an opinion and as fully entitled as everyone else to speak freely about his opinions.

The problem is that men have a majority in parliament, in government, in law. JR-M has been privileged to attain his position of power and influence through Westminster school and Eton, surrounded by the privileged and men.

I am sick of these people enjoying their ill-earned freedoms and clamping down on the freedom of others.

Maybe the good people of Somerset are delighted that he represents their views. Such is democracy. If not they can vote him out at the next possible opportunity, and hopefully will.

One wonders how these posh right wing gits get themselves such grandstands across the BBC, too. Oh, I know - possible the old boy networks again.

RedToothBrush · 06/09/2017 14:17

Alternative theory.

Rees-Moog is a dropped Dead Cat to distract from 'other things'.

squishysquirmy · 06/09/2017 14:17

If we can't object to what a politician says, and it's ridiculous to worry about the way they vote, then what exactly are we allowed to concern ourselves with?

CSLewis · 06/09/2017 14:20

"I agree with your first interpretation, Morphene - that people are free to hold any opinion, and are free to use thier public position to express their opinions (except in very specific, narrow scenarios where doing so would be a hate crime).

However, unlike others on this thread I do not believe that the right to hold/express an opinion is a right to not be judged or criticised for that opinion."

I agree with your first paragraph, squishy.

However, I don't think that anyone on this thread has said that the right to hold an opinion also implies the right not to have that opinion judged or criticised. If I'm wrong, please show me where that comment was made.

We all may hold whatever opinions we choose. We are free to disagree, and argue with other people's opinions. We are free to vote for whomever best represents our point of view - just as everyone else is.

Tanith · 06/09/2017 14:21

Nah! I reckon he'll call it a day with little Pentakaidecagon (Kailey for short Smile)

Littletabbyocelot · 06/09/2017 14:22

I dont want to use emotive language because I dont agree with him & wouldnt want to cause distress but I cant understand how someone can believe what he does about abortion & still be pragmatic about it.

squishysquirmy · 06/09/2017 14:23

Fire I think the chances of an 11 year old being right about everything to the point that their view point cannot benefit from a lifetime of experience, education, and new evidence highly unlikely. I say that as someone who looks back at themselves at 11 and groans at the simplistic, naive world view I held. I was not a stupid 11 year old. But I have changed my opinions over the years (sometimes drastically, sometimes in small ways) as I learnt more. I am deeply suspicious of people who never change their mind about anything - its not a quality, its an indication that they are narrow minded and unable to absorb facts and evidence that conflict with their pre-existing world view.

CourtneyLoveIsMySpiritAnimal · 06/09/2017 14:25

I support abortion. I also support free speech and the right of people to hold views and discuss their views without being abused for it. All of this anger and hatred is another symptom of the "progressive" authoritarianism which blights all public discourse today.'

I completely agree. I find his views abhorrent and couldn't agree less with him but at the same time he was asked a question and for a politician, gave a surprisingly honest answer.

CSLewis · 06/09/2017 14:26

That was a long-winded way of saying: of course there is no problem with people voicing their opposition to JRM's views on this thread - as long as those people also allow other posters to voice opposition to their views.

Gottagetmoving · 06/09/2017 14:29

I saw Rees Mogg this morning.
I am totally left wing , atheist, and disagree with probably all of the man's views, however, he explained he supports and follows the rulings of the Catholic church. He is very serious about his faith.
If those are his beliefs then he is entitled to have them.
He also said he follows his faiths teachings of not judging others, so he would not try to impose his beliefs on you or condemn you for your choices or lifestyle.
You can't tell people their beliefs are wrong. You can educate and discuss and debate, that's all.
At least he is honest about his beliefs and is not trying to hide them and lie like other politicians do and have done.