Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Methven Hornet

Never forget that England is, at heart, a progressive nation

123 posts in this topic

So you would rather me describe your opinion as astute or intelligent? 

That would involve me giving a flying one, so no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dreadful.

 

The nasty side of a pre-occupation with "rights" and "equality", the criminalisation of people with a different point of view.

Heard the details on the news. Not nice at all.

 

But I see he's 13k better off now so God has helped him out after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard the details on the news. Not nice at all..

John Cravens Newsround?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank goodness this sort of thing can't happen here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-26816850

 

If there is one slight silver lining to that report it is that at least we live in a country where the police don't get away with mistreating people, and the press are free to report it. If I'm honest though I don't think that police mistreating a prisoner is completely on topic for a discussion about gay marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is one slight silver lining to that report it is that at least we live in a country where the police don't get away with mistreating people, and the press are free to report it. If I'm honest though I don't think that police mistreating a prisoner is completely on topic for a discussion about gay marriage.

Technically the topic is that England is a progressive nation, yet someone was arrested for their beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically the topic is that England is a progressive nation, yet someone was arrested for their beliefs.

 

There was a famous Piloti cartoon in Private Eye:

 

'I was imprisoned for my beliefs ...

 I believed I wouldn't get caught'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically the topic is that England is a progressive nation, yet someone was arrested for their beliefs.

Added to which he was arrested for his beliefs about homosexuality. And all he said was the usual "hate the sin, love the sinner" bit. He wasn't even preaching about homosexuality but two lads asked him what the bible said about gays and then mocked his beliefs by simulating sex acts (annoying) and then PC Plod got involved. Talk about thought crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank goodness this sort of thing can't happen here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-26816850

 

Obviously an over-reaction from the police to arrest and take the man to a police station for the day. 

 

But as an example of shocking liberal intollerance it hardly even begins to compare to the thousands upon thousands of prosecutions, beatings, bullyings, and everyday humiliations visited upon gay people over the years in this country. These rare incidents always get posted in threads like this, as if they somehow balance everything out. They don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously an over-reaction from the police to arrest and take the man to a police station for the day.

But as an example of shocking liberal intollerance it hardly even begins to compare to the thousands upon thousands of prosecutions, beatings, bullyings, and everyday humiliations visited upon gay people over the years in this country. These rare incidents always get posted in threads like this, as if they somehow balance everything out. They don't.

While I agree with the thrust of what you are saying, I don't think the article was intended to balance things out. More as an example to say are we really as progressive as we think? One group gaining rights should not mean another are denied their opinion - however unpalatable it may be.

Some people *will* be opposed to homosexuality, whether through religion or whatever, these people should not be now rounded up and put in jail because their views are out of step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with the thrust of what you are saying, I don't think the article was intended to balance things out. More as an example to say are we really as progressive as we think? One group gaining rights should not mean another are denied their opinion - however unpalatable it may be.

Some people *will* be opposed to homosexuality, whether through religion or whatever, these people should not be now rounded up and put in jail because their views are out of step.

 

Actually, I think articles like this are quite often posted in order to create the impression there's been some sort of quid pro quo in terms of one minority gaining rights at the expense of another in a zero-sum way, with some kind of specious equivalence.  And it's nonsense.  Thousands upon thousands of religious people are not being prosecuted, bullied, beaten, committing suicide, being refused jobs, or having their lives ruined for simply holding the view that homosexuals are sinners.  Hyperbolic talk of people being 'rounded up and put in jail' is ridiculous - and that was the point I was making. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But this guy was put in jail for his views?

Nothing imaginary about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I think articles like this are quite often posted in order to create the impression there's been some sort of quid pro quo in terms of one minority gaining rights at the expense of another in a zero-sum way, with some kind of specious equivalence.  And it's nonsense.  Thousands upon thousands of religious people are not being prosecuted, bullied, beaten, committing suicide, being refused jobs, or having their lives ruined for simply holding the view that homosexuals are sinners.  Hyperbolic talk of people being 'rounded up and put in jail' is ridiculous - and that was the point I was making. 

 

 Hyperbolic talk of people being 'rounded up and put in jail' is ridiculous

 

I may have missed that particular talk.  

 

Is there a discrimination and prejudice league table and only those with the most points count?  In which case , it may be that many other groups win by coming higher up the table than homosexuals.

 

I am sure the vast majority of people would condemn the baiting that went on n that case. It's just that they haven't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I think articles like this are quite often posted in order to create the impression there's been some sort of quid pro quo in terms of one minority gaining rights at the expense of another in a zero-sum way, with some kind of specious equivalence.  And it's nonsense.  Thousands upon thousands of religious people are not being prosecuted, bullied, beaten, committing suicide, being refused jobs, or having their lives ruined for simply holding the view that homosexuals are sinners.  Hyperbolic talk of people being 'rounded up and put in jail' is ridiculous - and that was the point I was making. 

I'd say that it illustrates the intolerance of the supposedly tolerant. Some groups are deemed to be "victims" and others "the establishment". It's okay to be intolerant of any group deemed sufficiently empowered. We shouldn't care about conservative Christians because it's only a few of them being harassed by the police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Hyperbolic talk of people being 'rounded up and put in jail' is ridiculous

 

I may have missed that particular talk.  

 

Is there a discrimination and prejudice league table and only those with the most points count?  In which case , it may be that many other groups win by coming higher up the table than homosexuals.

 

I am sure the vast majority of people would condemn the baiting that went on n that case. It's just that they haven't

If you missed that talk, perhaps you should have read the post I was replying to? Just a thought...

And if you're persisting with the absurd notion that an example of police over-reaction towards someone who disproves of homosexual somehow proves that the liberal thought police are just as bad, and just the same, as years and years of prejudice, violence and victimisation towards gay people, then good for you. But don't expect everyone to agree that you've made a good point about how everyone's as bad as one another, because you haven't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that it illustrates the intolerance of the supposedly tolerant. Some groups are deemed to be "victims" and others "the establishment". It's okay to be intolerant of any group deemed sufficiently empowered. We shouldn't care about conservative Christians because it's only a few of them being harassed by the police.

I'd say it illustrates nothing more than sometimes the police can on occasions act like idiots as regards people 'taking offence' . Nobody said we shouldn't care when people are unfairly treated, so that's an aunt sally we can dismiss. It's the typical attempt to use a rare example to show liberals are just as bad as homophobic bigots that i find so lame. Maybe on occasions 'liberals' make a small number of people's lives a misery, possibly including this preacher, but let's drop the absurd notion this somehow cancels out the shameful history of gay people in this country have had to go through and still go through. And saying this doesn't mean that I'm creating some sort of league table of suffering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But this guy was put in jail for his views?

Nothing imaginary about that.

I pretty much agree with everything you have posted on this but this one. 

I guess that the police thought he was a weirdo creating a nuscience and locked him up for that.  Clearly wrong, but I do not imagine they lock up everyone with his views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it illustrates nothing more than sometimes the police can on occasions act like idiots as regards people 'taking offence' . Nobody said we shouldn't care when people are unfairly treated, so that's an aunt sally we can dismiss. It's the typical attempt to use a rare example to show liberals are just as bad as homophobic bigots that i find so lame. Maybe on occasions 'liberals' make a small number of people's lives a misery, possibly including this preacher, but let's drop the absurd notion this somehow cancels out the shameful history of gay people in this country have had to go through and still go through. And saying this doesn't mean that I'm creating some sort of league table of suffering.

The thing is that nobody is suggesting that this kind of intolerance (not an isolated case I'd say) somehow cancels out other intolerances or is comparable to it. So why bring it up?

 

What is being suggested is that as old intolerances disappear, they are being replaced with new ones and it is the supposedly tolerant liberals who are creating them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you missed that talk, perhaps you should have read the post I was replying to? Just a thought...

And if you're persisting with the absurd notion that an example of police over-reaction towards someone who disproves of homosexual somehow proves that the liberal thought police are just as bad, and just the same, as years and years of prejudice, violence and victimisation towards gay people, then good for you. But don't expect everyone to agree that you've made a good point about how everyone's as bad as one another, because you haven't.

 

 Way off beam by you deliberately mis-interpreting things.   Clearly years and years of prejudice, violence and victimisation towards gay people trumps one  provoked and unfairly treated victim of this sort of baiting. I bet the two lads involved feel so much better now they have made that one small gesture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pretty much agree with everything you have posted on this but this one. 

I guess that the police thought he was a weirdo creating a nuscience and locked him up for that.  Clearly wrong, but I do not imagine they lock up everyone with his views.

Probably not but it is worrying how little they were interested in things like evidence. A couple of (presumably gay) teenagers' words was enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically the topic is that England is a progressive nation, yet someone was arrested for their beliefs.

 

Technically, the topic is that England is, at heart, a progressive nation. Of course there are reactionary, authoritarian elements, and quite often they seem to hold all the cards (especially when you're in a cell without food, water or your medication), but that beating heart keeps winning new victories.

Oh, and the preacher wasn't arrested for his beliefs, he was arrested for public order offences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and the preacher wasn't arrested for his beliefs, he was arrested for public order offences.

The thing being that "public order offences" in this case seems to be "answering a question that he was asked" and the questioner then not liking the answer. Hard to see how that is not "arrested for his beliefs".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What is being suggested is that as old intolerances disappear, they are being replaced with new ones and it is the supposedly tolerant liberals who are creating them.

 

 

Glad we're both on the same page now. It took a while but we got there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, the topic is that England is, at heart, a progressive nation. Of course there are reactionary, authoritarian elements, and quite often they seem to hold all the cards (especially when you're in a cell without food, water or your medication), but that beating heart keeps winning new victories.

Oh, and the preacher wasn't arrested for his beliefs, he was arrested for public order offences.

 

So, back on topic, England is, at heart, a progressive nation.

 

Agree entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, back on topic, England is, at heart, a progressive nation.

 

Agree entirely.

 

A progressive nation, but with a dysfunctional police service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't think churches, mosques, synagogues or whatever should be licensed to carry out weddings.

People should get legally married in a civil ceremony at a registry office. If they want to have a religious service as well that's fine by me, but it should have no legal standing.

Marriage was a religious ceremony long before it was a civil one and these days a religious marriage doesn't in itself have any legal standing.  It is signing the register provided by the registrar that makes a marriage legal.  Clergy within the Church of England are automatically registrars as the C of E is the established church. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.