Threads

See more results

Topics

Usernames

Mumsnet Logo
Please
or
to access all these features

Lib Dems - the truth about these people
56

growell · 20/04/2010 23:07

Voted on unanimously within their party a couple of years ago (was NIck Clegg an MP then?):-

"Youngsters aged 16 and 17 should have the right to watch and appear in explicit pornography, the Liberal Democrats decided yesterday"

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/let-16yearolds-visit-sex-shops-and-see-explicit -porn-say-lib- dems-567128.html

Sorry but scum of the earth.

OP's posts:
Please
or
to access all these features

gaelicsheep · 20/04/2010 23:09

Yawn.

Please
or
to access all these features

anastaisia · 21/04/2010 00:40

yes, that's exactly what the policy they voted on said.

No sensationalism in the press at all.....


The Working Group does not accept that people should have access to sexually
explicit material only from the age of 18:
(a) The law treats persons aged 16 as adults for the purpose of identifying the
age at which a person may lawfully choose to have sex and therefore the
age at which a woman may choose to have a baby, and also the age at
which a person may lawfully marry.
(b) The Working Group can see no sensible justification for the law to treat
those over 16 as still requiring special protection in relation to watching sex
acts on a film or video, or in relation to the purchase of a sex aid. It makes
no sense to say that a person is mature enough to choose to have sex at 16
(and to have a baby), but not mature enough to watch such an act on a
video and deal responsibly with sexually explicit materials.
(c) In addressing this issue, the Working Group does not accept that to lower
the relevant age to 16 will mean that young persons will be exposed to
sexually explicit material which would otherwise be entirely hidden from
persons aged 16 or 17 who wish to see it. Such material is readily available
on the Internet.
(d) For all these reasons, the Working Group does not consider that it would be
right to confer a discretion on local authorities to adopt a minimum age limit
of 17 or 18 as appropriate for the purchase of sexually explicit material, any
more than it would be appropriate for a local authority to have such power
in relation to the age at which young persons may lawfully have sexual
intercourse.

The policy document then goes on to talk about stricter regulation of sex industry to protect workers and under 16s.

Essentially they believe that if at 16 you are classed as adult enough to get married and have children you should really be classed as an adult properly.

Whether the age of consent should be raised rather than other things brought down to it might be a more interesting debate than posting a link saying 'oooh look; press makes a story sound shocking Aren't they such nasty horrible people.'

Please
or
to access all these features

thumbwitch · 21/04/2010 01:49

good post anastaisia.

Please
or
to access all these features

ShadeofViolet · 21/04/2010 09:58

You already posted this within the Lib dems thread - whats wrong, not get enough attention then???

What do you have against the lib dems?

Please
or
to access all these features

tartyhighheels · 21/04/2010 10:03

You need to really have a look at the policy rather than the dumbed down daily mail reader version

Please
or
to access all these features

OrmRenewed · 21/04/2010 10:05

FNAR at 'scum of the earth' . Now come on! They aren't the BNP.

Please
or
to access all these features

crystal123 · 21/04/2010 11:04

Thumbwitch. No it's not a good post. Many young people aged 12 appear 16 or 17 and could easily end up in explicit pornagraphy. Young people need protecting from perverts, and those who would exploit them in this industry. The Liberals/Libdems or whatever they now call themselves use weasel words to advocate the explotation of children.

Please
or
to access all these features

animula · 21/04/2010 11:15

It's weak-minded to think that legislation that introduces a massive consistency around the legal age of adulthood will do anything to curtail exploitation.

Which doesn't stop at 16, or 18, or even 30, anyway, for heaven's sake. That piece of legislation was an insane way to deal with exploitation.

I thought Anataisia's post was good, too.

Please
or
to access all these features

animula · 21/04/2010 11:18

@ "weak-minded" that is an awful thing to say. sorry. I meant weak thing, sloppy thinking. And I'm afraid I slipped into the cliches of a superseded past there. Gone for good reasons. that's what happens if I don't pause a bit.

Sorry.

Please
or
to access all these features

liamsdaddy · 21/04/2010 11:23

So, if you are 16 or 17, you are allowed to have sex but not to watch it?

Does this mean that 16 and 17's have to be blindfolded before having sex? So mandatory S&M for young couples?

(sorry, yes I know I shouldn't feed the trolls)

Please
or
to access all these features

crystal123 · 21/04/2010 11:48

Animula. If anyone is weak minded it's you! I correct myself, feeble minded in your case.
Legislation is put in place for a reason to protect young people. What a weak response to say that people will do what people will do.
people murder other people and legislation and the law says that some may get get life sentences for these crimes, does that mean because crime exists it should not be punished? That we should not have legislationand/law to protect people? Liberals (and you're one of them) you seem to know the manifestos/policies off by heart (so boring) would let anyone, do anything as long as you can back it up by so called facts from weasel worded policy papers. Don't use personal attacks, because you will receive them right back.

Please
or
to access all these features

ShadeofViolet · 21/04/2010 11:50

At least we know what the mainfesto is Crystal, instead of trotting out the same tripe about UKIP that you do!

Please
or
to access all these features

TheHeathenOfSuburbia · 21/04/2010 11:54

Yes, damn you liberals, reading your manifestos thoroughly and backing them up with facts!

Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! (c) Homer Simpson

Please
or
to access all these features

Pofacedagain · 21/04/2010 11:57

LOL Heathen.

Please
or
to access all these features

animula · 21/04/2010 12:02

I am loving Heathenofsuburbia this week.

Please
or
to access all these features

animula · 21/04/2010 12:08

Crystal123 I think you're mixing up your libertarians, libertines, and liberals.

Easy to do, all sit v. close together in the dictionary.

I don't think it says anywhere in the Liberal manifesto that they are going to scrap all legislation. I'm just pointing that out, in case there is anyone lurking who is thinking "hmm. is that what liberals think?" No. It's not.

Please
or
to access all these features

ShadeofViolet · 21/04/2010 12:14

I couldnt vote for the Libertines, I dont think I would like their policies on social policy or drug control.

Please
or
to access all these features

crystal123 · 21/04/2010 12:16

Shadesofviolet. Oh and linctash as well, he gave you (and others) a good pasting last night.

Please
or
to access all these features

ShadeofViolet · 21/04/2010 12:19

Who did?

Please
or
to access all these features

OrmRenewed · 21/04/2010 12:20

"weasel words"

What an annoying phrase that is. Weasel words would presumably be squeaks. Or do they communicate with smell too.

Please
or
to access all these features

crystal123 · 21/04/2010 12:20

Anastaisia> Do you hae children? how do you have time to write reems and reems as you do?

Please
or
to access all these features

stripeyknickersspottysocks · 21/04/2010 12:20

Ah good, wasn't going to vote for Lib Dems but probably will now. Cheers.

Please
or
to access all these features

TheHeathenOfSuburbia · 21/04/2010 12:25

crystal 123: I believe Anastasia used Ctrl C=> Ctrl V.

Ask your mate lincstash, he's a dab hand at it.

Please
or
to access all these features

trice · 21/04/2010 12:27

Thank you for pointing out another of the liberal democrat policies that I totally agree with crystal. Laws should make sense. It does not make sense that a seventeen year old is old enough to shag but not old enough to see others shagging.

Please
or
to access all these features

WebDude · 21/04/2010 13:00

Similarly on voting age vs going into one of the Army / Navy / RAF.

crystal123 - if you think Anastaisia writes "reams" you should see some of my posts (and Heathen... I rarely use cut and paste, but do sometimes go off at a tangent).

Trouble is, so many are used to the limitations of a tiny screen on a mobile and a text with a maximum of under 1000 characters they feel constrained to write short comments (and sometimes cause confusion, because it can be unclear who they were answering/criticising) and/or too short to properly explain (if necessary with sufficient detail) the views they have put forth.

Seems more than half on MN have a degree or higher education, but sometimes it looks exactly the opposite (or are most contributors thick from the non-degree holding group) ?

Please
or
to access all these features
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.