Scotland: Campaign Launched To Prevent State Ownership of Children…

The Scottish Government’s planned Named Person scheme will undermine parents’ authority over their own children and allow state officials unprecedented powers to interfere with family life. That’s why so many are saying NO2NP.

The NO2NP campaign has just been launched amidst claims that, although the Named Person legislation is not due for implementation until 2016, already parents are being told by the authorities that their children have a Named Person overseeing their well-being.

We discussed this legislation in early February, although not many parents appeared to be too worried about it, some saying it would come to nothing. Well, according to the parents on the video, it certainly has come to something for them.

Is the “Say No To Named Person” campaign a good idea? Should the Catholic Church in Scotland support it? Should parents protest, vigorously, this invasion of family life, which is surely tantamount to re-defining the family as the politicians north and south of the border have so arrogantly re-defined marriage?

We should do everything we can, in practical and spiritual terms (a novena to the Holy Family springs to mind) to prevent what is, in fact, the Scottish State taking ownership of the nation’s children. Tell us your ideas for practical and spiritual action to combat this latest assault on personal freedom and family life. Or maybe you disagree: perhaps you think this legislation is a good idea… Really?

56 responses

  1. We hear much about the pros and cons for Scottish Independence but this issue of the Named Person is the one which decided me against voting YES.

    We were discussing it on Thursday night at the WRI and I was surprised at how ignorant many women were about it; however, they know about it now and most have swung against independence because of this.

    There is a certain arrogance within the Scottish government which is evident in the way they will not listen to any opposition and just railroad their legislation through.

    • Crofterlady,

      You speak for me, that’s for sure.

      The last time we launched a thread on this I was amazed at the lack of concern among parents. Even in conversation, I heard parents say things like “Oh it will come to nothing…” “How can they appoint a state guardian for every child in Scotland, can’t be done.”

      Well it obviously IS being done, but more importantly, those parents amazed me because they appeared not to have grasped the fact that once a law is in place, it can be invoked at will, and that is crucially important.

    • Crofterlady, you speak for me be too. I’ll be voting against independence too. I guess this state guardianship will be part of the new Cinderella Law we’ve been hearing about. All this is very worrying and very sinister.

  2. I am definitely not voting YES in the independence vote now. I have lots of reasons why I don’t want independence but this is now top of the list.

    Saying that, I have been bemused at the reaction of parents I spoke to about it – they really do seem to be simpletons, trusting the government not to do anything untoward. I am really gobsmacked at their naiveté.

    • Josephine,

      I’m not sure labelling the parents you refer to as “simpletons” is charitable or likely to change hearts and minds.

      You are clearly very concerned about this, and rightly so. So wouldn’t it be better to try to educate any parents who perhaps do not realise the ramifications, rather than engaging in name calling?

      • Petrus,

        I didn’t mean to name call parents, I worded that badly, as I only meant that the parents I speak to, very nice people, are too trusting of the government. They really do believe what politicians say and they think they want the best for us. I don’t happen to agree with that, I think it’s naïve. I shouldn’t have said they were simpletons as it does come across as uncharitable. However, about your suggestion to educate parents, I have found that they don’t believe anything that puts the government in a bad light, they think they are concerned about child abuse. It’s very hard to make these parents see what is actually going on, but I apologise for offending you.

  3. The arrogance of the Scottish government, with their ill thought out planned named person scheme. But then maybe not, it might well be the 1984 syndrome – keep the population under surveillance at all costs. It is sinister indeed. Perhaps this link might add to what has already been said by those who spoke in the video.

    http://www.schoolhouse.org.uk/uploads/2014/04/NamedPersonBriefing2014-2.pdf

    I will be voting NO in the independence referendum later this year.

    • “Arrogance” is the word, I agree. The Scottish government is extremely arrogant. It was bad enough that they passed this Named Person law, but to have it up and running before the due date is breathtakingly arrogant.

  4. That video took my breath away. This is totalitarianism, pure and simple.

    It’s a true saying, “be careful what you wish for” – anyone who votes for Salmond’s Scotland deserves all they get IMHO.

  5. I wonder if the couple who received the letter from Falkirk Council could sue them, as they lied on paper about the Named Person being appointed. Either they lied or they’ve acted illegally since the law doesn’t come into force until 2016. I would think Mr and Mrs McIntosh would have a strong case since their children have already been given named persons. Unless parents involved in this take action, the government will get away with it.

    The Catholic Church should definitely take a lead in speaking out against this law. They could do what they did for the marriage campaign and provide template letters for parents to use to make their protests. Something has to be done and everyone with influence should bring it to bear without any delay. Catholic priests and teachers in particular should be making their voice heard about this.

    • That’s an excellent point about suing Falkirk Council. On the face of it, they have a strong case but my guess is it would come down to cost – lawsuits are expensive and I don’t imagine legal aid will be available for suing the authorities.

  6. I agree with all the comments so far. However, I’m slightly puzzled why a lot of contributors are stating that they are voting “no” in September because they disagree with this law.

    The law has already been passed. It was passed by the devolved Scottish Government. Whether there is a “yes” vote or “no” vote in September is largely irrelevant. The law will still stand.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m voting “no”. If the issue is that voters/contributors don’t want to vote “yes” because it will be rewarding a SNP government, then I can understand that, but that’s not clear from the comments so far.

    • Petrus,

      I’ve said many times on this blog that I’m voting “no” because I believe that the Scottish government is totalitarian – they pushed through the same sex marriage legislation despite overwhelming opposition from the people in the consultation process, and they not only pushed through this legislation in February without due consultation (even a sham consultation) but they are permitting it to be implemented ahead of time. Anyone who votes YES in February, truly deserves what they get.

      I’m not at all puzzled, therefore, that people are taking this latest insult to our intelligence as a reason to vote “NO”. Whether or not the law has already been passed is irrelevant. The FACT that it has been passed is a very good reason to send a signal to Alex Salmond and his merry men (and women of course!) that we’re on to him and we’re not going to reward him for passing evil legislation. If you think about it, the FACT that the Abortion Law was passed in 1967 remains a first class reason NOT to vote for any political party in the UK. If we take the attitude that evil laws have been passed so what’s the point, we might just give up the ghost altogether.

      If it’s not clear from the comments, as you say, then that may be because the bloggers thought their rationale was self-evident. I got it right away but then, as I have tried to tell you before, I’m highly intelligent, clever, glamorous, slim, fashionable and… oh yes… very humble 😀

      • Editor,

        With respect, you would need to start campaigning to abolish the Scottish Parliament. That makes as much sense as voting “no” because of these issues.

        As far as I am aware, there was no serious opposition within the Scottish Parliament to any of the laws you mention. So, will bloggers here lobby for the abolition of the Scottish Parliament?

        • Petrus,

          I am not campaigning for any political cause. If only I had the time. I didn’t vote FOR devolution and think it’s largely an irrelevance as I think the entire joke of “democracy” is an irrelevance. The current Birmingham schools fiasco proves that. It’s fine to have Faith schools as long as they don’t teach that Faith! Then they will be silenced on the grounds of a threat to national security or attacking “British values” – you know the ones, free sexual licence for all, especially homosexuals and transgenders and any challenge to such sexual licence is regarded as an affront to the great British value of tolerance. Talk about crazy mixed up kids with the emphasis on “crazy”.

          Ditto, it’s wonderful to have families as long as those families don’t want to teach their children anything contrary to the mores of the Scottish State. No thanks.

      • Editor,

        One more thing, is voting “no” rewarding those involved in “Better Together”, including the Labour Party and Conservative Party, both of which supported the abominable laws mentioned in your post above? Should we, then, disengage completely from the political system and abstain from voting completely, including the September referendum?

        • Petrus,

          You made the point I frequently make. Catholics really do have to disengage from the political system unless we want to have the blood of unborn babies on our hands. I have long disengaged from the political system since I cannot square voting for any party which supports and promotes the murder of babies in their mother’s womb. Not even if my taxes are reduced and one party has better housing and employment policies than another. A fat lot of use better housing and employment prospects are to children who may not make it through the nine months pre-birth thank to the evil abortion act supported by all the UK political parties. Thus, I cannot vote for any party.

          I will make a point of voting in the referendum, however, just because I can say NO – if there were a way of saying NO in every other election, I’d do so. As it stands, all I can do is spoil my paper in other elections since I cannot vote for any candidates.

          Comprenez vous the noo? (Are you impressed with my French?)

  7. Testing once again.

    I keep getting told to slow down because I am posting too fast. Why is this when there can be 24 hours between posts?

    • Frankier,

      The Wonders of WordPress. One of our bloggers tells me that he types his comments in Word first and then pastes them onto the blog. He does it because his posts can be lengthy and he doesn’t want to risk losing any, so he always has a copy to replace anything lost through WordPress machinations. Maybe you should try that.

      Anyway, is that it? Don’t you want to tell us your thoughts about the fact that your children’s Name Person may have access to their medical records, over-rule you (in the best interests of your child, of course….) etc?

  8. Editor

    If you go back to my posting at 10:13 the explanation is there as to why there has been little comment from me. It has become a hit and a miss. The one at 10:13 managed to get through but five times out of six I get the same message.

    As well as that, I only manage to make comment when I take a wee (tea) break from cutting down conifer trees and digging out the roots, filling to a skip, planting hedges, cutting down tree branches from a scaffold with a saw with an extending handle (while trying to keep safe) and building walls.
    Not to mention the 0.75 acre of grass I have to cut and strim. And that is only the programme for this week. The daisies seem to just drop their heads when I pass by with the mower as they are back up the next day.

    That is why I laugh when people who couldn`t get out of my road “blaw” about being busy

    As for cutting and pasting, I wouldn`t have a clue.

    For the record, if I was a child and needing a mentor there`s no one I would like better than Alex Salmond to accompany me through life. Just think of the freebies available.

    • Frankier,

      I’ll be sending you my home address in a minute – our garden needs YOU!

      As for your problems with WordPress – a real pain, I know. For example, your “sorry I forgot to mention” comment went into moderation for absolutely no reason. Really annoying.

      But cutting or copying (which is better because you can save it on your computer whereas cutting and it’s gone forever) and pasting, it is really easy.

      All you do is type your comment onto a Word document and then use you mouse to cover it (try it with a “this is a test comment” first until you get it right) and then when you see the blue cover over your words, click once on your mouse and you will see a list of options which includes “cut” and “copy”. Select “copy” then (having saved your comment on your computer) come back onto the blog and where you would usually type your comment, place your mouse, click on it and select “paste” – then your comment will appear in front of you. If WordPress then plays games, you can try again, just by clicking “paste” and it usually goes up second time round. At least you have it copied on your computer until you succeed. To hang with the digging out roots etc. That MUST wait (at least until after you’ve weeded our garden! )

      I had a great laugh at your comment about having Salmond as a mentor and all the freebies you’d enjoy. That’s a new angle. I didn’t think of that. Maybe I’ve been too hasty in denouncing this new law 😀

      • Not so fast, Editor, I’m sending Frankier my address AND airfare!!!! Not just for the gardening, I’m hoping he will be an inspiration to quite a few people I know!

        • JOBSTEARS

          That`s me back in the house: chased in by the midgies, although you probably call them mosquitoes. It`s a good job I spotted your reply. I was on the verge of taking up the offer to nip up to Glasgow to do a bit of weeding but I was a bit wary of the cheque bouncing.

          I am not too keen on the flying, a bit sore on the arms, but when I saw the word airfare I was seduced. If you send me your address, and the airtickets, I will be on stand by to move whenever I get the call.

          I say airtickets because I will be taking my mentor along, big Alex, he is a dab hand at chewing the cud, sorry, the grass as soon as it is mowed.

      • Editor

        Thanks for the instructions. I really never thought it was as simple 🙂 With a wee bit of luck I should have it conquered by Christmas. Christmas 2015.

        I`m sorry I can`t take up your offer re. the window garden but thanks for the rare opportunity. I have chosen a more exotic location. I think anyway.

        As for the named persons. I wonder how many of these “persons” will be “named” in lawsuits against the government in a few years time when some of them, despite due diligence, will be unable to keep their hands off their charges, in the same way that a number of those adopted by anything-but- gay parents will have discovered a fool-proof way of relieving the same government of a few million bawbees.

  9. Sorry, I forgot to mention.

    I thank God, Our Lady and St Joseph for allowing me to carry out the work I do, Especially when retirement age is well behind me now.

  10. I always vote for a pro-life candidate, if there is one. At the last election I wrote to them all and it was surprising how many of them disagree with abortion, same sex “marriage” etc. I can’t see any other way of affecting change. Our “Catholic” politicians are, on the whole, not Catholic, if you see what I mean? However, there are some very principled protestant ones.

    • Crofterlady,

      “disagreeing” with abortion is no big deal. Even the most rabid pro-abortionists pay lip-service to it being not the best thing, no woman really wants one, blah blah. The child is every bit as dead, every bit as butchered, whether those who are complicit in this holocaust “agree” with it or not.

      I gave up long ago bothering to vote for an individual candidate just because he/she says they are “pro-life”. No individual is going to end this state-sponsored murder. If a party is established that opposes abortion and all the rest of the immoral legislation introduced in recent years, then I’ll vote for them. The rest are a waste of space, indistinguishable one from another even in economic and other policies. It’s an unashamed race for power now. Blatant. I refuse to have any part in it.

    • “Our “Catholic” politicians are, on the whole, not Catholic, if you see what I mean? However, there are some very principled protestant ones.”

      This was proved to be true in Northern Ireland with same sex “marriage” where the majority of Catholic politicians voted in favour and the majority of Protestant ones voted against.

  11. I could not believe what I was reading! I agree with Nicky, it is ‘totalitarianism, pure and simple’.

    I think Josephine made a good point about the gullibility of the parents in accepting anything the government does as being in their best interest; ignorance or laziness, it does not matter, governments use both to achieve their ends.

    • Jobstears,

      I’m glad you agree with Nicky and Josephine because I agree with all three of you!

      As for parents – I think too many of them hold to the “keep a low profile and it won’t affect me” philosophy. Too often, those become famous last words. Unless a parent is 100% certain they are never going to have to take a child to an Accident and Emergency hospital department with bruises or broken bones, I’d be sitting up and paying attention, and signing up for the NO2NP campaign, like, yesterday!

  12. I am horrified at this Named Person law. I went onto the NO2NP website and you can see the cases on the blog video in full if you visit http://no2np.org/stories/

    I hope this is helpful because I think it’s only see the real live stories of real people that we can get an idea of how dangerous this legislation actually is.

  13. Below is an update from Christian Institute:

    Government backs away from sweeping new parenting law

    Dear supporter,

    The Government at Westminster has backed off from an elaborate parenting law, which at one stage looked set to be included in the Queen’s Speech. We have no doubt that the Government has had to reconsider because of the letters MPs have been receiving from constituents.

    Two months ago Government sources were briefing the national press to say there would be a new law criminalising deliberate harm to a child’s “physical, intellectual, emotional, social or behavioural development”. Ministers were being urged on principally by Action for Children and the NSPCC.

    We were alarmed by the wide-ranging, imprecise and dangerous proposals, which seemed to originate from a complete misunderstanding of the current law. Senior social workers rightly pointed out that the existing robust child cruelty law for England and Wales already deals with ‘psychological harm’, even though it doesn’t actually use this precise wording.

    The Government has now published its Serious Crime Bill, which simply modernises the language of the child cruelty law to a small extent to use wording about ‘psychological harm’ – without changing the scope of the law. Ministers say they are “clarifying the law”. The Bill does not affect the right of parents to smack their children, but we believe the proposals as originally suggested could have done so.

    So in our view, and in the view of the President of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, no rewording of the law was actually ever needed in order to protect children from psychological harm in the existing child cruelty law.

    Having brought forward this Bill, there is the risk of amendments being made and we will monitor the Bill’s progress very closely. It may well be that politicians who want an elaborate new parenting law seek to amend the Bill in order to do what the Government mercifully has backed away from. Until the Serious Crime Bill has been passed by both Houses of Parliament, we must remain alert to any amendments.

    Campaigners for a new law were delighted when the Queen’s Speech mentioned the issue of child neglect, but in reality the Bill bears no resemblance to the sweeping parenting law the Government was originally floating. So we are mightily relieved.

    Many Christian Institute supporters expressed reasonable concerns to their MP ahead of the Queen’s Speech. The Government has responded. It shows that as Christian citizens we can make a real difference.

    Yours in Christ,

    Colin Hart
    Director
    The Christian Institute

  14. I’m not going to be popular here but I’m voting yes and the reason I’m voting yes is because some 25% of Scots children live below the poverty line and we are seeing more and more people turning to food banks to feed their families. It is an absolute disgrace that this is happening in a country as wealthy as Scotland, and as long as our wealth is syphoned off by Westminster to prop up a bankrupt British economy things are only going to get worse. A yes vote is not a vote for the SNP or any other party, it’s a vote of confidence in our country and it’s future. It’s a vote to say that we are just as good as other countries in the world and that we are not “too wee, too stupid and too poor” as we have been told for centuries.

    As Petrus pointed out, politicians from all parties voted for Same sex “marriage” and it wouldn’t have mattered who was in power at Holyrood because Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems all had it in their manifestos and were intent on making it law. If we hadn’t had our own parliament it would already be law now because Westminster has already passed it.

    I don’t know much about the “appointed guardian” but was told by lady today that she had speaking about it to a social worker who told her not to believe what was being reported in some of the papers.
    She said that it is not a named person for every child in Scotland, it is only those children who are deemed to be a risk or where a family has asked for help. The social worker said that when children die or are abused people start shouting that something should have been done by the social services and added that now measures are being brought in to prevent abuse and death people are now shouting that it’s interference. She claimed that the social services just can’t win.

    I don’t really know what to make of the whole thing but it will not put me off voting yes because at the end of the day, governments come and go but a vote of confidence in our country is a once in a lifetime opportunity and as one young mother told me a couple of weeks ago, “I was going to vote no but having given it much thought I am now voting yes because in twenty years time I don’t want my children accusing me of denying them what every other country on earth has, self determination.” And that’s it, we owe it to future generations that they should live in a country were children are not living in poverty and people are not wondering where their next meal is coming from.

    • Vianney,

      You are in the happy position of having confidence in Scotland and its politicians. I have none.

      The lady who assured you that every child is not going to have a Named Person is plain wrong. In the Newsnight Scotland debate back in February, the Government representatives did not deny that every child would have a Named Person but defended it. The MSP on the video (who is, thankfully, opposed to the NP law) doesn’t deny it. If you watch the video at the top of this page, you will see the letter sent to Mr and Mrs McIntosh by Falkirk Council in which it states clearly that “all children now have a Named Person” and explains that if a child is pre-school, this will be a Health Visitor, if the child is at school it will be the Head Teacher. It’s there in black and white. Check out the video.

      The argument about Westminster giving us these bad laws, such as same sex marriage anyway, that it’s not just the Scottish Government, misses the point I am making which is not that the law is here. As you rightly say, Westminster passed it anyway – the difference is that the Scottish Government blatantly ignored the outcome of the consultation on the subject. You say you object to whoever it was said Scotland is “too wee, too stupid and too poor” to govern itself, but I object, strongly, to the Scottish Government treating me and the rest of the population as if we are stupid; treating us with the utter contempt demonstrated by their reaction to the “no” vote in the same-sex marriage consultation. As a result of that contempt, I am definitely not going to reward them by voting even more power into their hands. No thanks.

      Finally, while I understand the good intention of those who vote on economic criteria, thinking of improving the lot of the poorer members of society (count me in!) I have to repeat that in conscience, I cannot vote for any party which permits the murder of the unborn child.

      If it is a sin to vote for a pro-abortion politician, how can it not be a sin to vote for a pro-abortion party?

      • Editor, as I said, I really don’t know much about the Named Person proposals and would have thought that a social worker might just have known what she was talking about, but perhaps not.
        I know that the Government ignored what the majority had said in it’s consultation about the same sex “marriage” and it was wrong of them to do so and obviously the opposition parties ignored the people as well because they voted in favour. Indecently, I believe that the Westminster Government ignored it’s people in the same way.
        I also know that it s a sin to vote for someone who is in favour of abortion although, in all fairness, Holyrood can’t be held responsible for that as it was law before the parliament came into being. But the point is that the referendum is not an election. We are not voting for any politician or political party. We are being asked to vote on the future of our country and as I said in my earlier post, governments come and go. The SNP could be out in the next election, who knows, Johann Lamont might be the next First Minister. Heavens, what a thought!! The referendum is a separate thing all together so I certainly won’t feel guilty voting yes.

        • Vianney,

          I do understand that the referendum is about constitutional matters and not party politics. I just do not want to have done anything to help put that smug grin on Salmond’s face the day after the vote. I’d sooner say “I’ll get that Vianney one when I see him…” 😯

    • I don’t see how independence will be good for the Scottish economy. Primarily, Scotland will have to join the Euro, because the EU has ruled that Scotland will have to apply for new membership, and will therefore not be able to keep UK opt-outs, so it will not be able to have it’s own currency, or keep the pound. Scotland would either have to support the Eurozone, like Germany, or be supported by the Eurozone, like Greece. How is that any worse than wealth being “syphoned off by Westminster to prop up a bankrupt British economy”?

      That is of course, unless Scotland decides to stay out of the EU. Which is equally problematic, because Westminster has not agreed to enter into a monetary union with Scotland. Who says it will happen? So, Scotland would have to establish it’s own currency. Do you know how destabilising that will be to the Scottish economy?

      Okay, Scotland will never be governed by a Tory government again. But have some solidarity for the children living in poverty south of the border, because England will only ever be governed by Tory governments if Scotland becomes independent. That’s why Cameron has been so pathetic in defending the Union, he secretly wants Scotland to secede, because it will benefit his party, ironically named in full the ‘Conservative and Unionist Party’.

      Also, nobody seems to realise this, because Salmond is sneeky, but if an independent Scotland remains in the EU, which is SNP’s intention, Scotland will have a closed border with Ireland and the remaining UK. Yes, a closed border. You will have to pass border controls. Scotland will however have an open border (no controls) with Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, France, Germany, Spain. LOL. That’s absolutely absurd.

      Also, why does everybody assume a referendum will make Scotland independent? Scotland has no sovereignty, because sovereignty is held by the Parliament of Westminster. The Scottish government is established by an act of the Westminster parliament, it doesn’t exist of its own accord! If Scotland is to become independent, the Parliament of Westminster will have to decide it. They alone have the power, unless there is some kind of revolutionary war, or an SNP cout d’etat.

      I know how people think. They will regret having voted for independence when they realise they will have to spend somewhere in the region of £50-100 (or whatever currency there will be) each for a passport for each member of their family.

      There will be a Scottish Embassy in London, likewise there will be a UK Embassy in Edinburgh. Does anybody else think this is absolutely ridiculous?

      Also, there are going to be a lot of people who will feel entitled to Scottish citizenship for some reason or another. In a lot of cases they will not be covered under the new citizenship laws, and there are going to be a lot of angry people who will feel done out of Scottish citizenship. People who have lived in Scotland for years and feel part of this country will be told they are not eligible for citizenship. They will revert to being foreign migrants in a foreign sovereign territory. They will not like this, there is going to be a lot of anger and pain.

      Unionism would not disappear in Scotland. Scotland would become a divided state. There would be discord in Scotland for generations. People would be resentful for years to come. There would be constant political dispute for decades about what should and shouldn’t have happened. It would not be happy. People will feel their country was ruined simply because a percentage of the population was gullible enough to fall for Salmond’s jingoistic propaganda.

      Independence will be an economic disaster for Scotland. Salmond doesn’t care about Scotland. Salmond is pushing for independence because he will have the chance of becoming prime minister of a sovereign state, he will have more power than he does now. That is what it’s all about.

      • The reason for the closed border is because the UK and Ireland have opt-outs from the Schengen zone, which are historical and pre-date the treaties of Rome and Maasricht even. New EU member states do not have this privilege.

        No opt-outs will be granted. The EU does not consider Scotland a special case, believe it or not, they don’t think Scotland is that special. They will not be given preferential treatment over all the other countries that didn’t get opt-outs, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Czeck Republic, Latvia, Estonia, Slovakia, Hungary etc. etc. Especially not since other member states like Spain (Catalonia, Basque) have exactly the same secession issues as the UK does.

        I actually think SNP are criminal, that they would seek to dissolve a centuries’ old union and carve up a little island like this.

  15. Catholics have to inform their conscience and develop their understanding : to vote for a political party that advocates the mass murder of babies in the womb (and the new one- pretends that same sex sinfulness equates to Almighty God’s design for mankind and in arrogance legislates to say it is marriage!) to vote for these people is a vote for the devil. So reflect and pray and remember there are consequences to your actions ( in that little voting booth).

    • Graeme Taylor,

      Ach that won’t bother oor Vianney. I’ve heard he takes his fish ‘n chips into those wee booths and makes a meal of it, if you get my drift!

      • Editor, as voting always takes place on a Thursday it would hardly be a fish supper I take into the booth would it. Who has fish two days running?

  16. Dear Vianney

    “I was going to vote no but having given it much thought I am now voting yes because in twenty years time I don’t want my children accusing me of denying them what every other country on earth has, self determination.” And that’s it, we owe it to future generations that they should live in a country were children are not living in poverty and people are not wondering where their next meal is coming from.”

    If you think for one moment that every other country on earth has self-determination you are much more naive than your previous posts have led me to believe. I’d be surprised to know of one. The media determines what the majority of us think, That’s not self-determination. We are sheep, driven this way and that by the powers that be, and we all know what happens to sheep, don’t we?

    Graeme Taylor – spot on.

    • Therese

      I agree entirely with what you say. Governments know that the sheeple are easily conned. They know that they can be manipulated like puppets. They wish to control our minds and tell us what to think and it works a treat.

      A typical example can be seen and heard in Catholic churches now that applause has been introduced.

      You get one person starting with a wee quiet clap, then another ewe or a ram follows with one a bit louder and before the third has started everybody, except me normally, joins in. It is actually quite pathetic.

      I would love to hear how loud a third clap is but it seems they don`t actually exist.They must be at the forefront of the general applause but can`t get out of the road quick enough.

  17. In Catholic Social teaching, according to the principle of subsidiarity, the family is the lowest level of government, and higher levels of government are not permitted to interfere in family life. The father is sovereign over his family. This is statism. What kind of policies would the government of an independent Scotland be coming up with next?

  18. I am appalled. The National Secular Society must be over the moon. What are the wrongs a named person can report on and will this eventually lead to the `named person` describing he harm done to children by religion, sin, chastity and all that nonsense. This is Communism at its best. O yes, at the beginning it will sound sensible but am I to believe that in Scotland so many parents are abusing their children that such a step has to be taken. It is insulting. There should be no question of not opposing this.

%d bloggers like this: