[ritchiebaby]

It's not just the BBC, 0762, it was also on the Jeremy Vine programme on Channel 5. Jemma Forte said that her beliefs were a "red flag" about her suitability as leader of the SNP. Jeffrey Archer, to his credit, was incredulous that her committed Christianity and living by her Christian beliefs would be held against her as a suitable candidate.

[0762]

The British media is full of this toxic shit now ritchie - previously discussed extensively on this Sb board well before Kate Forbes ever arrived on the scene and hardly touched upon when she became the Finance Secretary. Never questioned of any PM in England btw and suddenly we're seeing totally different poisonous media attacks on an individual based on religious beliefs and voting with a conscience. Same goes for Yousaf, no scrutiny re his Muslim religion. I think Kate Forbes is being honest on issues that a lotta dishonest politicians down south will "avoid like the plague" and lie through their teeth or avoid the question totally. I reckon Kate Forbes will not do that although she has already said that she respects the democratic decision re intractable issues like the GRR one and others that cover minority groups. It's her opinion and she's being up front re that opinion and her respect for democracy. Is her straight answers "against the herd" (and public opinion) as being suggested?? I suppose some of her opinions maybe that way and others not. It appears to be a right-of-centre stance IMO. I still want to hear what she has to say re the nitty-gritty stuff - Scottish independence and the way forward with strong leadership and zeal, the cost of living crisis, energy poverty, the Scottish economy etc. Also IMO we were always gonna see a frank and healthy exchange of differing views during this leadership debate apart from on the fringes of the party where there will be strong clashes of opinion. The ultimate decision will be with the SNP membership anyway!! It will be bizarre if the SNP choose a poorer candidate because of a culture war!!

[ritchiebaby]

0762, I applaud Kate Forbes' honesty and integrity for espousing her Christian beliefs. She's nothing like the lying toads who say what the woke brigade want to hear, probably not believing their own words for a minute.

I'm not in the least bit religious, but she is like a breath of fresh air dispelling all the vitriol that is coming her way. She is worth a hundred mealy-mouthed apologists, who are afraid to say what they really think for fear of offending someone. Her critics have obviously no qualms about offending her, so why should she care tuppence about what they think?

Well done, Kate!

[0762]

Yep! Kate Forbes' comments were said as a democrat who would legislate on issues like GRR if that was the settled will of the Scottish Parliament. I notice a lot of her full response not being mentioned by conniving political reporters with another anti agenda! That type of response/attitude is far more progressive than the opposition parties that refuse to accept Holyrood decisions on gender reform or holding a referendum on independence. As previously mentioned, I don't recall other party leaders being interrogated on their religious beliefs and this should not be allowed to dominate the SNP leadership contest. There were several live tv debates last summer on the Tory leadership contest and the BBC and other broadcasters should have a duty to provide similar coverage of this SNP contest for many non-SNP members to hear a proper debate on the major issues facing Scotland. The format must allow candidates the time and space to put forward their visions for Scotland and confirm the SNP record in govt. We need to hear the benefits of independence and how our energy-rich nation can emulate our nearest much wealthier neighbours, particularly as we are stuck in a UK facing years of stagnant growth where none of the Westminster parties are honest enough to admit Brexit has been a disaster, with no plans for a return to freedom of movement or the single market. However, the cynic in me tells me that ITV/STV, and more esp the BBC, have shown nothing but contempt for the SNP and yes campaign, in general, over the years. So they should absolutely NOT be given the free airtime programme to insult the cause and manipulate a serious process of debate into farce, which they will do - I think nobody believes they will use impartial interviewers and studio audiences. Therefore, there must be an alternative provision for SNP members (and others), something like a TNT internet broadcast or similar. Again it shows me, and others, what we are up against when we are swamped with such an undemocratic representation of Union biased media reps up here that was fairly self-evident at the recent hastily convened formal resignation announcement from the FM at Bute House - an eyeopener!! I reckon Steph Brawn was the only indy-supporting reporter in that press-media audience - that is not a proper democratic position where almost all of them are skewed to one side of the political divide and are owned and/or controlled from outside Scotland.

[hibeejim21]

Not for me lads.

She just cannot lead a socially progressive party and have those kind of views. She needs to vote based on what her constituents want, not what her invisible friend tells her is right.

"Ms Forbes has said that people should not be excluded from political office because they are a member of a particular faith."

Yet she admits she would vote to exclude people from basic human rights because of her faith ? She can get to xxxx.

[St Charles Owl]

Not for me lads.

She just cannot lead a socially progressive party and have those kind of views. She needs to vote based on what her constituents want, not what her invisible friend tells her is right.

"Ms Forbes has said that people should not be excluded from political office because they are a member of a particular faith."

Yet she admits she would vote to exclude people from basic human rights because of her faith ?  She can get to xxxx.

Some of her comments sound like what we hear from the Christian Evangelicals we see over here in the US. They put their faith before their country and for me thats not what you want in a leader of a democratic country.

In 2021 she said - “I am a person before I was a politician and that person will continue to believe that I am made in the image of God. I make my own decisions on the basis of what decision is right and wrong, according to my faith" - that statement would ring alarm bells for me.

[hibeejim21]

Yup.

She's said she would vote against same sex marriage because of her religious beliefs. That makes her a homophobic bigot. The motivation for that doesn't really matter, Prejudice doesn't get a free pass because of religious belief.

[ritchiebaby]

No it doesn't, jim. She's much less of a bigot than her more vitriolic or dismissive critics. She's more tolerant of others' views than her critics are of her views.

Considering her constituency, her constituents might actually want her to vote in the way she would have done. As a minority group, their views should surely be considered. Or is it just groups that you agree with?

Anyway we're all prejudiced in some way, either against someone living by her religious beliefs or against the way various minority groups get their agendas accepted as though they are the majority.

[St Charles Owl]

No it doesn't, jim. She's much less of a bigot than her more vitriolic or dismissive critics. She's more tolerant of others' views than her critics are of her views.

Considering her constituency, her constituents might actually want her to vote in the way she would have done. As a minority group, their views should surely be considered. Or is it just groups that you agree with?

Anyway we're all prejudiced in some way, either against someone living by her religious beliefs or against the way various minority groups get their agendas accepted as though they are the majority.

To be fair Ritchie, the essence of tolerance is to allow people to live their lives as they wish (within certain laws of course) but we are not talking about someone living their by their religious beliefs, we are talking about someone governing by their religious beliefs and thats a whole different matter.

Surely the leader of the SNP is the public face of its platform, of the wishes and desires it has as to how Scotland is governed and what laws should be, she clearly does not approve of gay marriage for starters in which case how can the SNP reconcile their leader being against that?

Her constituents can absolutely demand things of her and maybe thats why she is their representative but there are some key human rights issues that I would have thought the SNP hold somewhat sacrosanct and she has come out against that. The vast majority of right wing Christians over here are decent people but if they were allowed to create or direct laws based on their religious convictions then they would ban anything LGBT, abortion, sex before marriage, divorce, black people voting etc etc and ultimately the majority of people do not want that.

[0762]

There is a comment in your first line SCO - "the essence of tolerance is to allow people to live their lives as they wish". Kate Forbes actually endorsed that view in her initial remarks on Monday; IMO a democratic view even if in her case she gave an honest answer to a typical "trip up" question by hostile Brit press/media cohorts who already clearly regard her as the biggest threat to their Unionist cause. It was noticeable that those end comments by her were omitted by the usual toxic Brit press/media reaction later on. She re-iterated that view today that she respected the settled will of the Scottish Parliament when a democratic parliamentary vote prevails. That is far more progressive than the opposition parties that refuse to accept Holyrood decisions on GRR or holding a referendum on independence. I always thought the SNP was a "broad church" (an unintended pun). Maybe not so after all!!? I couldn't care less if Kate Forbes is a member of the Free Church of Scotland. I believe her when she says her religious views will not impact on her upholding the LGBT+ laws of Scotland as they stand. Also many people who withdrew their support must have known her religious views before they endorsed her??? As an aside, it's worth mentioning that Humza Yousaf was apparently absent when the vote for equal marriage was ratified all these years ago in 2014 - never voted either as did Kate Forbes who just gave a straight answer to such a perceived straight hypothetical question. How can anyone who advocates for the LGBTQ+ minority, not respect the faith held by Kate Forbes? Surely respect and support for diversity is a two-way process and cannot be exclusive. There's a famous line derived from the French philosopher, Voltaire, that "I may not agree with what what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"! In my humble opinion, it takes great confidence in one's conviction to be able to take up this position. I think this was better reflected by Kate Forbes than those in the mainstream and social media who have chosen to attack her since her statement on Monday. Every single one of us has personal views about everything and there are differences of opinion about many issues, esp intractable ones. Having one's own view on anything is perfectly acceptable, but it is the collective decision that is important. Openness and honesty prevail for certain individuals like Kate Forbes while strongly abiding by the collective decision - exactly what democratic govt and leadership is about. Lastly, I must say this leadership contest, albeit early days, is getting stuck up on social issues rather than the nitty-gritty ones covering the challenges ahead in the quest for indy, tackling climate change, future energy policy, the economic crisis and the subsequent cost of living crisis etc. I can see the toxic Brit press/media like the BBC don't wanna move on, but I think there are far more pressing issues to healthily debate within the SNP membership/Scot indy movement and other nationwide Scot govt/indy-supporting organisations like the STUC, Common Weal, Believe in Scotland, TNT, the Scottish Socialist Party and many others.