The protest to remain should have been re titled "We do not believe in democracy unless the vote goes our way"
Today on tv saw Tony Blair advocating not doing anything until we have negotiated our terms of leaving, and then to decide based on that picture, forgetting the EU will not negotiate until we invoke article 50.
The UK has to leave to preserve democracy, anyone trying to stop this happening is looking to overthrow our democracy and way of life, insulting the sacrifices of millions over the years.
I have no problem with someone not agreeing with the decision but accepting they lost the vote, but the decision has been taken and made and must be carried through.
Most leave supporters would have done the exact same thing if remain had won. Anyone who claims otherwise is just not being truthful.
Anyone who is passionate about a cause which is then lost will instinctively continue to fight for it. They won't just roll over. Let's not forget what Nigel Farage said just a month and a half ago when he thought remain would win:
In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it
His prediction came true, but just with leave taking the win instead of remain. Now where are his calls for a second referendum? Or does he only mean that when he's on the losing side?
Anyway, for the Brexiteers who are so defensive over the sovereignty of UK law, perhaps they should take the whole political system into account instead of just picking and choosing what they like.
The fact of the matter is that whilst this referendum does provide the verdict of the majority of the people, there is nothing in UK constitutional law which gives priority to the verdict of referendums. However, what UK constitutional law DOES contain is the legal requirement for our elected politicians to act in what they believe is the national interest. That is legally binding. This referendum is not.
For the UK to start the withdrawal process, the decision will have to be put to a vote by Parliament. It can't be done any other way, as if the Prime Minister chooses to do it of their own accord, then it will be overuse of prerogative powers.
There is simply nothing in UK law which would allow the PM to legally make a decision of this scale without receiving the consent of Parliament first. This referendum, not being legally binding, does not give the PM the legal right to do this either - even if the result is in favour of leaving. Remember that the European Union Referendum Act 2015 - which allowed this referendum to take place and stipulated that it was not legally binding - had to be passed by Parliament first.
This means that the majority of pro-EU MPs who think it's a bad idea to leave are now left in a predicament. If they vote in favour of leaving, they will be catering to the will of the people which is not legally binding. However, at the same time, they will be going against their judgment of what they believe is in the national interest, and thus going against their legally bound constitutional obligation as elected officials.
It's a fallacy to believe that the UK democratic system is based on elected officials carrying out the will of the people. It has never been like that. The system is based on the public electing officials, for any reason they wish, who are then duty-bound to make decisions based on what they feel is best for the country as a whole.
So, in the event that Parliament does vote against Brexit, bear in mind that they would simply be doing what they were elected to do by you and every other British citizen under UK law.
If you don't like that, then vote a majority of MPs into Parliament who do believe it is in the national interest to leave. That is what your legal vote is for.
