So I'm not allowed to consider a question from multiple view points now?
Yes you can, but you should also allow me the right to be amused that your view contradicts your own morality. Aka, your view is morally wrong in your own eyes.

I often adopted various positions in an argument, I could even do a Christian Sermon if it was required of me. I could also adopt some one of your own ideological viewpoint, then criticise your view by your own ideological standard. However, there is a clear difference between "This is the view I am adopting" and "This is my view". What you have been saying is in your own words, your own "personal" view, you then comment "my own view betrays my morality".

Quote Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla View Post
I have no idea how your morals operate when you imply that the EU should ignore the will of the People in order to federalise.
Actually, you could argue that they actually were not doing that. Since we live in a representive democracy, the elected officials which represent us, are making the decisions in regards to allowing us to be federalised into the EU. Therefore, they have a political representive mandate to do this. (They don't actually need a referendum, under British law). Therefore, arguably the will of the people is not being ignored as the will of the people was to have those representatives.

HOWEVER, those who are not elected, therefore cannot make the decisions in order for us to be federalised. Only elected representives can.

So ultimately, there is not a grand illegal conspiracy going on. The comment you are referring to was when you made a comment by the Daily Mail (trash newspaper) saying about this grand conspiracy and I jokingly said "I wish it was". (As some one who sees a [democratic] United Europe as a progressive stepping stone, it was aimed at your appreciating the amusings of it, since I was basically saying "There is no conspiracy". )

Then what made the situation worse, is that Furunculus took a comment out of context from over a year ago, where I basically said the population are dumbed down by the likes of Daily Mail/Foxnews/etc, and there should be active promotion of the facts and figures and we should educate the population in critical thinking and reasoning tools, in order for them to fully function as they should in a democracy. Furunculus then said I tried to imply that we should simply ignore the population and do what we want, opposed to what I was actually saying, if that they are being manipulated and we should break them from these shackles.