To be angry at my BF's response to the current issues around abortion?

[ConfusedatAmerica]

I've been with my partner for just around 2 years. I've always struggled with his strong opinions and attitude to some things that I am deeply passionate about. Mainly my stance around women's issues, sexism and the way that men treat women.

I messaged him today sharing a video of a Tory MP in the House of Commons stating that women should NOT have an absolute right to bodily autonomy, and that this should be a point for political debate. His response was as follows :

'I can't be too upset with that MP, he has a right to an opinion and he was discussing it in the right fashion in the right arena - I don't agree with him, but I can't be angry at him because his belief is different to mine.'

I told him that his response was upsetting to me because if the MP had been discussing something that took away his bodily autonomy I would be angry on his behalf, especially with something as fundamental as bearing children.

He responded saying that 'All it is is in opinion and that the MP's opinion has no influence on the current state of affairs.' He then went on to say 'Are you angry at the Pope for every time he speaks? His opinion has much greater influence, and the Pope has been spouting antiabortion and homophobic statements for generations - point your anger towards people with much power. Not towards people with much power, not towards insignificant back benchers whose ideals don't meld with the zeitgeist.'

I responded and said that actually yes, I am angry at the Pope for his stance and that he should also not use his platform of power to state what he does. I also stated that Trump ended up in power through the backing of small minded individuals exactly like this MP.

It's not the first time we have disagreed on these sorts of issues. He has an attitude that regardless of experience everyone should be able to voice whatever opinion they feel (including himself and yes he can have some very polarising opinions), my attitude is that if your opinion does harm to another faction or undermines or wishes to take away another persons human rights then no you should not be entitled to share that opinion and that as a society we have a duty of care to ensure that these individuals are stopped.

AIBU here?

Brexit is a bad example as it was put to the country and the country voted not just the MPs.

It might have been interesting to see what the result would have been if the Americans had put this to a referendum.

Totally agree with this.

Spot on. They also like to defend people who imply that women's rights are temporary and up for debate, as though that isn't an absolutely abhorrent position to take. If the same position was taken over the rights of men....well it just wouldn't happen would it? Men aren't subject to the whims of the law, they are entitled to their rights.

Brexit is absolutely not a bad example @BigFatLiar as it illustrates a situation in which a harmful political opinion is introduced by MPs (the EU is bad and controlling, Britain is better off alone) it's amplified and advertised (through lies and fear) and then there's a vote, leading to people choosing something that is just bad for the country, in the belief that it's the right thing to do.

Brexit wasn't one rogue MP's opinion, it was positioned by the PM with support from a majority of MPs. This is not what's happening here. If BJ or anyone in his cabinet had the same opinion only then would this be comparable to Brexit.

Which people shouldn't have an automatic right to free speech? People you disagree with?

Do you think you should have an automatic right to free speech? What if you say things someone else finds questionable?

Brexit happened because of a referendum, not because of a back bench MP spouting off. So it's not really a useful comparator.

In this particular case, the MP is giving his opinion on the law in the US - so, no, doesn't affect people in the UK. In the UK we have very sensible laws on abortion and there's no push to change those laws.

We don't actually have free speech in the UK- only America. Freedom is a relative term anyhow as it's easily contradicted by other laws such as not inciting hatred.

There are no absolutes. With absolute freedom, we have anarchy. I think, all in all, we need a bit of restriction

This.

the MP is giving his opinion on the law in the US

Those poor colonials bet they're regretting that tea party now. Leave them on their own and this is how they behave!

Of course we have free speech. We can say whatever we like so long as the thing we are saying isn't an illegal thing to say. It's not illegal to say that you don't agree with a woman's right to abortion.

I think you might mean we don't have a ratified right to free speech but that doesn't mean we cannot exercise our freedom to say disagreeable and uncomfortable things until it butts heads with unlawful/hate/libellous speech.

I think, all in all, we need a bit of restriction

So your idea of restriction is not, say, banning pornography, or putting age limits on internet access, or even amending hate speech laws, or anything else that most people would find reasonable enough to debate. Your idea of restriction is that "not everyone should have an automatic right to free speech" and presumably you think that the people who don't have that right are the ones who don't agree with you, @thebeesknees123?

It's sheer ignorance. And an entirely unwarranted confidence in the idea that their own opinions will somehow be protected.

Hate when people say all opinions should be respected and then the opinions in question are misogyny, homophobia, and racism.

I absolutely no not agree that all opinions should be respected. Complete bollocks.

Christ just dump him. He sounds like an arsehole and thick as shit all at the same time.

'ideals don't meld with the zeitgeist'

How pretentious is that?

Ooohh the irony.

I agree with him btw. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, whatever it is.

That's pretty much most of MN in a nutshell though, isn't it.

There should be a law against bigotry - especially in Parliament

Bigots should be robustly challenged in public so that the weaknesses in their arguments can be laid bare for all to see.

Free speech should be preserved...absolutely. do you have to agree with him? Absolutely not. Are you compatible? Dosn't sound like it.

It's bigotry to say that those who disagree with you shouldn't have rights. You'd be arrested under your own law @thebeesknees123

Do you think it’s because deep down he doesn’t see it as big a deal as you?

would he react like that to things about men?

it sounds like the way he is saying it feels a bit condescending and almost telling you off for being annoyed. He just needs to say “yeah it’s shit I’m sorry” but it’s like he can’t just do that for you, so I get your frustration.