So you ignore the almost half the population, cool democracy you got there
Ignore no,I do understand that "almost half the population" wasn't enough to win.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So you ignore the almost half the population, cool democracy you got there
See, that's not what was said in June 2016.
Ignore no,I do understand that "almost half the population" wasn't enough to win.
You mean almost 70% of the population
If 70% of the population voted remain we wouldn't be debating.
How to reconcile the country - Not
This country is going down fast, it will not recover in my life; I'm so disappointed with the right wing money people who have got us here, the press that hide the truth if it doesn't suit their agenda.
The likes of Rees-Mogg and Bannon and Johnson and Tim Martin will be quids in if we crash out.
What a sorry excuse. You could have spared me from the time wasted reading it and yourself from the time wasted typing it.
You are in denial.
70%+ did not vote to leace
70%+ did not vote to leace
Or rather did not vote
How does this argument work?
What do you even mean by "giving money"? Are we talking about trade?Does the EU give money to Brazil, if so, how much?
As i said, more than 70% did not vote to leave.
Or didn't vote
The point, @England my lionheart , is that it is at the very least legit to ask whether such a result has - or should even be allowed to claim - such impressive power without the ability of Parliament to overrule it.
You do not vote for your generals, your engineers, or even your cabinet ministers. And by the same token, it is not a direct referendum's business to rule on anything nearly as major and technical as a "Brexit" - something that, to this day, is only defended because it is skilfully presented in a very ambiguous way that hides how undefined and destructive it would be.
The 2016 referendum would probably not even happen had it been proposed as legally binding back in the day.
In a way, it is too bad that it wasn't. Would have spared the British a lot of grief and harm.
I somewhat agree. The Tories were irresponsible in not overruling it.Government could have overruled it,as I said before,government is sovereign and by proposing and endorsing the referendum it becomes legal.
I somewhat agree. The Tories were irresponsible in not overruling it.
Government could have overruled it,as I said before,government is sovereign...
No, the government isn't sovereign, Parliament is sovereign.
Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change. Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution.
I'd love to know more about that poll.