I GUESS we should be grateful for Caitlin Logan clearly illustrating in her article precisely why the cause of independence is on the back burner and the SNP’s popularity at the polls has dipped dramatically (I can’t bring myself to celebrate SNP’s decision to kick Mason out at last, October 17).
It’s easy to heap ire on John Mason, for whom I have no particular affinity, but while not everyone may support every aspect of his views, individual aspects of his opinion resonate sufficiently with enough voters in the community to cause the SNP’s dip in popularity. It only takes one point of strong disagreement to throw the whole SNP baby out with the indy bathwater; as the polls and election have shown.
READ MORE: John Mason expelled from SNP after Gaza remarks
To me Logan’s grandstanding on the issues she raised is fatuous, because she omits the very reason why people would join the SNP in the first place, and that is the priority of Scotland’s independence. What we’ve seen is those like Logan taking the party off on tangents, with the issues raised that clearly don’t sit well with a public whose opinion she chooses to ignore.
Given why the party was formed, and that it’s supposed to be a broad church, like with Kate Forbes’s opinion on marriage, why shouldn’t Mason advocate his views about abortion and gender recognition or whatever else? Couldn’t it be that Logan and her ilk (if I’m allowed to use the pronoun now) pushing their agenda to advocate penises in women’s spaces, men giving birth, birthing parents and not mothers, encouraging young, immature and vulnerable people to embark on irretrievable sex (under the gender misnomer) reassignment without professional counselling and generally diminishing the rights of women, are imposing their views on others – precisely what she claims Mason is doing? Isn’t that just hypocrisy?
We can debate, but it’s Logan and her ilk who get to set the agenda? No thanks! Mason has been elected numerous times. Presumably his electorate know his views and support him. Maybe after this brouhaha they’ll change their minds and dump him in 2026. That’ll be a matter for them.
READ MORE: Israeli minister and MPs to attend 'resettling Gaza' event despite international law
However, I suspect his public voted for him on the premise of independence, which those like Logan clearly have forgotten about, instead using the issue as a Trojan horse to pursue the gender, trans and anti-born-sex mantra she’s promulgating.
Recent election and poll results suggest there are many like me who can no longer countenance voting SNP because of the Caitlin Logan ilk who have hijacked the party and are setting back the hard-fought indy cause probably beyond my lifetime at least, possibly forever.
Isn’t it time for Logan and her ilk to get real? Do they truly want indy? Or is it now in the funeral pyre of Alex Salmond, the phoenix rising from it her aspired sex-and-gender-confused “nirvana” that is consigning us to the “county not country” status Salmond highlighted before his untimely demise? Don’t the SNP urgently need to decide whether it is the party of independence, or just a platform for minority lobbyists to socially re-engineer our society against its will?
Scotland is waiting!
Jim Taylor
Scotland
HOW about independence? Why not prioritize that, then form parties that reflect various views on abortion, Gaza, GRA, all that contentious stuff? Or let’s sink any hope of independence for a lifetime by focussing on “social issues”, which most people can’t agree on. I had dearly hoped to see Scotland independent in my lifetime. No chance now, thanks to stuff like this, a total diversion from the main goal. Do people like Caitlin actually want independence? How important is it to them? Not very, I suspect, compared to their social issues agenda.
John Cormack
via thenational.scot
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel