[djmobley]

I was responding to a claim that “[as] a member of the EU we have never once, ever been “forced” into anything.”

I have not made any claim about those laws causing me trouble, but the ability of the EU to force laws on the UK certainly troubled me.

[spzb]

OK, I'll rephrase. What laws have been imposed on the UK by the EU that wouldn't have likely been brought in by the Westminster government?

[djmobley]

By definition, the laws the EU have forced on the UK were opposed by the UK government, and would not have made their way into UK law had they not been forced by the EU.

[IfOnlyYouKnew]

You're like five levels deep in trying to obfuscate that you can't think of a single example of that supposedly huge harm you want to avoid.

[djmobley]

What I’ve actually been doing is resisting attempts to conflate two separate claims:

1) The claim that the EU has never forced the UK to do anything. Sheer nonsense. This is the claim I disputed all those levels above;

2) The claim that laws the EU has historically forced upon on the UK have been harmful.

There are plenty of examples of the latter (take the Tampon Tax as one [0]), but that’s not the claim I was making.

I haven’t advanced the latter claim because it is irrelevant.

Providing evidence of historic harm is not a prerequisite for principled opposition to the EU having the power to impose laws and overrule national courts.

[0] https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01...

[spzb]

So that's the definition. What's the specific example?