LeMaquis Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I tend to favour the view expressed in post #90. Mr Lowe's policies do not seem to accord with UKIP's policies, do they? Neither did Clark's which is why they distanced themselves from him after being forced to do so. But you still supported his right to express them. Do you support Richard Lowe's right to express his, more liberal, views? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 As long as a view is lawful, democracy entails that holding it ought not to be overly proscribed. But there's not much point joining a political party from which one dissents, is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 As long as a view is lawful, democracy entails that holding it ought not to be overly proscribed. But there's not much point joining a political party from which one dissents, is there? Are you talking about Clark whose freedom of expression you support or Lowe whose you don't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Both. They are free to hold whatever lawful views they wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 For what other reason would they deselect pro gay marriage candidates? They don't support equal rights for gay people. They're homophobic. He disagreed with UKIP policy on several fronts. The local UKIP branch is at liberty to select and deselect candidates as they see fit, that's democracy for you. He could always stand as an independent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Both. They are free to hold whatever lawful views they wish. But you never questioned Clark's decision to be in UKIP in the way you've just questioned Lowe's. Any particular reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 But you never questioned Clark's decision to be in UKIP in the way you've just questioned Lowe's. Any particular reason? Well, policy. Mr Clark has/had, er, decidedly unusual views but were they contrary to a UKIP policy as Mr Lowe's were? Oh, and whilst I'm at it: what political party do you support? I think that we should be told! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.