Charles Kennedy

I do not think that a paedophile does have a choice - it is how he is. There are spectrums of sexuality and inclination in these matters - it is just unfortunate that paedophiles are inclined in a socially unacceptable and dangerous direction. They need to be treated as human beings with a problem, whilst at the same time making sure that all steps are taken to protect children.

I think it is OK to discuss alcoholism in this thread - CK's death was directly related to drink and he was very open about his problem. It does not seem inappropriate that his death should trigger such a discussion, whilst at the same time recognising his personal worth.

I did contact Gransnet to see if they thought it was worth splitting the thread but they don't have the technology

How and why would you split a thread?

I'm with night owl and others on this thread who sympathise with people who develop dependence on alcohol which I feel is like any other drug, except it's legal. I've both work and personal experience of the devastation caused in families when a much loved family member descends into alcohol dependence and abuse. I am unconvinced that the illness model is helpful, other than that nhs and other appropriate services should be readily available to those who want to stop.

I believe alcohol is too readily available and relatively inexpensive. It's rare to go to social events without alcohol being part of any celebration. The British have a long history of alcohol abuse and if Charles Kennedy's death contributes to more people discussing the damage alcohol can cause, that may be one of the many positive legacies left by this much loved public figure.
Mishap - your point about paedophiles is relevant here. Your'e right, paedophiles don't have a choice, it's how they are. The choice they do have is not to follow their instincts and yearnings. That is equally relevant for those of us who want to follow an unhealthy lifetyle and choose to smoke and drink. Many of us gransetters will have smoked at times in our lives. No one made us do it, yes it's hard to give up but we make the choice. I don't deny that all drugs, including alcohol, can get a grip but the issue of personal responsibility can't be ignored. Sorry if this sounds judgemental or prim as I don't mean it to. I have great sympathy with anyone whose life is blighted but I've seen too many lives, too many children's lives particularly, devastated by their parents inability/refusal to take responsibility for remaining sober/free of drugs.

georgie1601
I had expressed that Charles Kennedy's death was very sad and as I imagine you live in Scotland you may be oversensitive to any criticism of Scottish politicians.
the telegraph also ran with the Alec Salmond statement so it was not just the Spectator.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/11645853/Anger-at-Alex-Salmonds-shameful-Charles-Kennedy-comments-hours-after-his-death.html
lots of politicians of all hues get short-shrift - my view of NS as irritating is how I find her - not rude as I did not say it to her face - and it is still my opinion
sorry girls - had only just seen the accusation of rudeness when expressing an opinion.
I will let you get back to the addiction discussion

Thank you for your welcome to Gransnet, Absent, and your summary of the rules of posting.
I do agree that people should be able to express their opinions, within the law, of course. However, there is also a point which most people try to follow when posting, which is to avoid offending others whenever possible. Reading through other posts, I've noticed that some people say, "I hope this doesn't cause offence." Or "I'm not sure if everyone will agree with this..." and so on and this way of writing shows the author's empathy with others.

I believe it is possible for people to express their opinions freely and clearly while also avoiding making cheap jibes whether on or off the point. I guess this is just about courteous behaviour and should apply as much online as in real life, if that makes sense, and indeed most posters do this automatically.

For example, I feel that Gransnet posters telling Highland voters that they should be ashamed of the way they voted is patronising, rude and undemocratic. I believe these posters might have done well to consider the effect of these statements on those who voted, and those who take an interest in Scottish politics.

No, thankfully not the Oxford Debating Society, where speakers are often shouted down, but not always the courteous, thoughtful debate either (though it is in parts) that I had assumed most Grans would go for.

It was a personal opinion; I believe I have a democratic right to voice a personal opinion. As for comments on certain people, you seem to have formed an opinion about me from reading one comment on one thread so do we not all tend to form opinions about people without actually knowing them purely from reading things that they say?

would not expect NS or the SNP and their supporters to read Gransnet
tegan I quite agree

Why wouldnt an SNP supporter read gransnet?

'would not expect NS or the SNP and their supporters to read Gransnet'
If this is a quote from elsewhere, could someone please point me to where it first appeared? I'm unable to find it.

Granny23 reads it.

I believe Charles Kennedy was very popular in his constituency as well as at Westminster and I can understand why he would have a huge personal following, so, yes, if I had been one of his constituents and perhaps pissed off disillusioned with the Coalition, had voted SNP, I too might now feel ashamed. However, his death was not brought about by losing his seat however devastating and undeserved a blow that must have been for him, unless he went on an almighty bender which hastened the final haemorrhage.
Don't see the objection to Tegan's comment then or why she should be shot down in flames for it I neither saw it as a cheap jibe nor hectoring Highland voters and if any of Charles Kennedy's constituents has been offended, I imagine they could respond accordingly? If you are that person Georgie1601 please say so and perhaps give us an insight into the man from your perspective.

Grannyonce why would supporters of NS and the SNP not be members of Gransnet?

We have a number of active Scottish members on GN and some of them are likely to have voted for the Nationalists.

I'm surprised at the use of the word 'ashamed' in relation to how someone has voted. The fact that Charles Kennedy died so soon after losing his seat is not something within the control of the voters.

Nationalist voters might feel a bit sad and sorry that they didn't stick with him but I can see no reason for them to be ashamed.

"Ashamed" is not the word I would have used. They might hope that their vote (combined with the rest) wasn't the last straw that caused him to over-indulge, but they voted as their minds and hearts dictated. However, I don't think the post was worth so much anger, and the Scots have strong backs, they can and should ignore criticism for voting as they think fit, without acting victimised. Granny23 was part of the SNP campaign and was devastated by the No vote, but I have seen no such posts on here from her.

As for being irritated at Nicola Sturgeon - that is a personal opinion and is doubtless not the worst thing she will hear. Nor is it the strongest opinion you will hear on GN - note, opinion not condemnation of someone for posting their own reaction to a politician.

"You will do me the justice to remember, that I have always strenuously supported the Right of every Man to his own opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine." Tom Paine, 200 years ago, quoted from a link in another thread.

Back to Charles Kennedy, an honest and genuine man who will be missed.

to clarify my previous comment
would not expect NS or 'most' of the SNP followers to be on Gransnet sufficient to be offended by my opinion
since you all jumped on the lack of clarity - hope that is sufficient
Charles Kennedy was a very honest politician who I had much admiration for. He was never a member of the SNP always a SDP or Liberal democrat.

Still a bit ambiguous and possibly contradicting earlier post.
I admired Kennedy, think he was a man of integrity and regret his passing.
However, had I been one of his constituents I might have voted SNP despite that and would not now feel ashamed. Sad and disappointed, yes but not ashamed.
My vote would have registered the fact that I felt let down by the Libdems in coalition and the fact that good men like Kennedy were unable to change the way policies went. Add to that, I felt that the Libdems would have had even less impact now - no matter whether Tory or Labour achieved the majority.
So I see no reason why his constituents would feel ashamed and believe that was a fairly crass remark.
Perhaps you're still surprised that SNP sympathisers/voters/party members would join GN.
Why?

There are a lot of Scots GN members, and even more members who have Scottish roots, although they are a part of the diaspora. As the SNP have returned MPs to almost all the seats in the Westminster Parliament, there must be a lot of SNP voters among those Scots members. I don't follow the logic of thinking that there will not be many people with SNP sympathies reading these pages.

There were threads at the time of the referendum which shows how much interest there was. I shall find it and post a link

www.gransnet.com/forums/politics/1202600-Scottish-independence

By saying that you don't expect to find any SNP supporters on Gransnet, do you realise you've excluded between 52 - 93% of the Scottish population? 52% voted SNP in the last election and 56 of 59 constituencies voted SNP.

it 's clear that Gransnet hasn't yet caught up with this change, perhaps through the limitations of the media used. I know a lost cause when I meet it, so I will sign off from Gransnet now. Would Charles Kennedy have been disappointed in the response that I've received? I think he'd have said that things sometimes work out that way.

georgie grannyonce has not excluded anyone from GN. She has simply expressed some opinions with which I ( and others ) disagree. She is not representative of the whole of GN and is entitled to say what she thinks. In the same way, any poster is equally entitled to argue a different point.
By writing off GN as a lost cause and going off in a huff, you achieve nothing!

Maybe Georgie1601 means that there are not many people regularly posting on gransnet, so there will by definition not be many Scottish voters here?

I have been very surprised at how few posters regularly post, so that maybe what she means. I had been expecting this site to be tens of times bigger.

Totally off topic but I love the word diaspora Elegran and feel it is almost onomatopoeic. In my mind (world?) that last syllable, which I pronounce without a separate "o" i.e., pra, is like blowing a dandelion clock with all the seeds blowing away reminding us of the scattering of people from their homeland.

I think you have completely missed the point of what Georgie1601 was saying, soontobe. It was certainly nothing to do with the number of people who post on Gransnet!

Or did you mean grannyonce?