LC0112G - We are talking at cross purposes. You are speaking in the strictly legal / Constitutional sense only. I am talking from the perspective of the promises they made to people, and the honesty and honour with which they claim to operate under.
Those 'promises' were made by the Cameron Government. We have a new PM, another general election, and another Government. You are attempting to hold a different Govt to the promises of the previous one.
So it may not have been legally binding, but it was most certainly binding in the more important sense that we were promised by our elected Govt. that they would implement the result. At the recent election, both main parties stood on manifestos of not only leaving the EU, but the customs union and single market, so 80% (give or take) of the votes were cast on that basis.
I disagree with that - it's the problem with our Party Politics. The idea that All Tory Voters (or MP's for that matter) agree with All Tory policies in the manifesto is bogus. Same for all other parties. The Manifesto is simply a list of policies that, if elected, that parties government will attempt to implement. There is no compulsion for any particular MP to support their Party on every policy.
To have a second referendum is to cancel the first one, which was the largest vote in the History of the country.
For me, that, to all intents and purposes kills what Democracy we have left.
How can having another vote ever be anti democratic? Almost 3 years ago we were asked if we wanted to Remain or Leave. The Govt has spent the past 2.5 years attempting to negotiate a Leave deal, and they now have that deal, but hardly anyone supports it. If Parliament end up throwing the problem back to the people again, and the majority is for Hard Brexit or some version of "May's deal", then so be it. Yes Parliament could still ignore the result of any second referendum, but I don't think it would.
As things stand, either Parliament is going to decide on Hard Brexit, some form of Soft Brexit, or No Brexit. How is it undemocratic to allow the people to make that decision if Parliament cannot?