Tim Ireland on tabloids, media, blogs and politics
Nadine Dorries and Christian Concern For Our Nation
This entry was posted on
Thursday, May 8th, 2008 at
5:15 pm and is filed
under Christ..., The Political Weblog Movement.
Nadine Dorries has been making out that her campaign crusade to restrict abortions is nothing to do with her religious beliefs… so why, pray tell, is her campaign crusade so closely tied to a network of Christian politicians and evangelical organisations?
(Psst! Christian Concern For Our Nation / CCFON are a modest lot; take a look at where/how they list themselves as ‘supporters’ on websites they created here and here.)
Even more soon… let’s give Nadine some time to take this on board first. Nadine? Any response?
PS – Watch Tim Montgomerie completely fail to declare an interest as he hails this “cross-party campaign” (supported not by 200 MPs as he claims but instead 13 Conservative MPs and one MP each from Labour and the Lib Dems).
| Print article | This entry was posted by Tim Ireland on May 8, 2008 at 5:15 pm, and is filed under Christ..., The Political Weblog Movement. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed. |
Comments are closed.
about 4 years ago
Dorres is a loon. Is she a christian fundamentalist?Have you seen this in the current edition of the New Statesman:-Was it Campbell?Tony Blair's former chief of spin, Alastair Campbell, may after all have sexed-up the notorious 45 minutes WMD claim when the case for invading Iraq was being madehttp://www.newstatesman.com/200805070002
about 4 years ago
No one can say that a decision has nothing to do with their religious beliefs and not be lying. Otherwise, what would be the point of the religion?
about 4 years ago
"Ad hominem circumstantial" involves pointing out that someone is in circumstances such that he is disposed to take a particular position. Essentially, ad hominem circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a person. The reason that this is fallacious in syllogistic logic is that pointing out that one's opponent is disposed to make a certain argument does not make the argument, from a logical point of view, any less credible.
about 4 years ago
1. The point that's being raised, dizzy, is that Nadine is being a little bit modest about what may or may not be influencing her far-from-credible arguments.2. Where does this leave all of those dipsticks who dismiss valid concerns raised about Iain Dale on the basis that I'm Blairite/Brownite/obsessed?3. Wait… don't answer that. You're barred. For publishing my home phone number on your website and calling me at home, shouting at me like a git:http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2008/03/look…(Incidentally, I've just heard that paedo-smearing tosspot Dennis Paul is now separated from his wife and living alone a few blocks from the only thing left in his life… his job as a glorified cleaner. I think there may be some sort of 'curse of Bloggerheads' at work. Just so you know. HAND.)
about 4 years ago
I see Dizzy selectively copy-pasted from wikipedia:"On the other hand, where the person taking a position seeks to convince us by a claim of authority, or personal observation, observation of their circumstances may reduce the evidentiary weight of the claims, sometimes to zero."Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Ad_homine…
about 4 years ago
A standard technique from Dizzy:http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2007/11/dizz…