Protests Erupt In Syria Over Christmas...
News0 min ago
I Know We've Done This To Death, But...
149 Answers
... why does the sheer number of racists/homophobes/whatever in UKIP simply not bother people?
The usual response is that "all parties have bad eggs that we don't hear about." But
a) UKIP are significantly worse offenders
b) UKIP do not seem to care about their unsavoury members. Every time there's a platitude about how the problem will be solved, or how the party is taking quick and effective action - but then it transpires that the person has been behaving in such a way for a very long time, and earned no response.
Why do the same empty excuses always prove so effective? Does this really not bother people? Is nobody concerned that they may have just elected one of UKIP's legion of bad eggs to public office?
The usual response is that "all parties have bad eggs that we don't hear about." But
a) UKIP are significantly worse offenders
b) UKIP do not seem to care about their unsavoury members. Every time there's a platitude about how the problem will be solved, or how the party is taking quick and effective action - but then it transpires that the person has been behaving in such a way for a very long time, and earned no response.
Why do the same empty excuses always prove so effective? Does this really not bother people? Is nobody concerned that they may have just elected one of UKIP's legion of bad eggs to public office?
Answers
I think you are still missing the point. I'm reminded of all these people who, on expressing their views and getting criticised, throw out the "I'm entitled to my opinion" defence. Well yes, they are, and no-one ever disputed that. But then I am equally entitled to mine, an opinion which sees yours as backward or bigoted or whatever, and there is no reason why I...
12:50 Mon 26th May 2014
> In my old student union for instance there was an openly gay official who was determined to wipe out LGBT support groups. <
if the person had seen that they were not being used and thought it was a waste of union funds would he be wrong to want them shut down
he would not be anti gay, did you ask him why he was not happy with the support groups
if the person had seen that they were not being used and thought it was a waste of union funds would he be wrong to want them shut down
he would not be anti gay, did you ask him why he was not happy with the support groups
But as you say Kromo, it's been done to death. Instead, why not face up to the real issue? As one French political commentator said last night, to constantly call UKIP and their European equivalents 'racist' for having genuine concerns about immigration is simply not good enough, the concerns must be addressed.
So change the record and look at the bigger picture i.e. Why are a large portion of the electorate across Europe so fed up with the EU?
So change the record and look at the bigger picture i.e. Why are a large portion of the electorate across Europe so fed up with the EU?
I knew the guy personally. He was, frankly, a slimeball and a liar. The groups he targeted were not useless or a waste - they provided a useful service.
I know it sounds silly but you do sometimes get gay people in positions of authority who do not care much about gay rights. It's one reason why the idea of more diverse politi cians = more equality is a simplistic and unhelpful idea.
I know it sounds silly but you do sometimes get gay people in positions of authority who do not care much about gay rights. It's one reason why the idea of more diverse politi cians = more equality is a simplistic and unhelpful idea.
"Apparently most of them [the electorate] are far more gullible and stupid than I gave them credit for."
Well today's first prize for arrogance and sheer pig-headedness goes to you, kvalidir. It may have escaped your notice but one of the freedoms you carp on about is the freedom to vote for whomsoever you please without being insulted. The need for UKIP would not have arisen had the main parties simply listened to the concerns of the electorate and acted to allay their fears. Instead they were dismissed variously as "Little Englanders", racists, xenophobes, bigots and far worse when all they wanted in fact was a little say over who is allowed to frame their laws and who is permitted to settle on these shores and share in the nation's assets.
But still they seem not to get it. Last night, reacting to news of the LibDems annihilation in the EU election, Tim Farron, their president said that they have a lot of work to do to get their message across. He does not seem to appreciate that voters have listened to their message and large numbers of them (including many who previously supported the LDs) have soundly rejected it. The time is now ripe for Mr Farron and his friends to listen to OUR message and set about reacting to it.
Personally I'm not that fussed about any political party's view of homosexuality. It is a fringe issue as far as I am concerned. I'm not that fussed on their views on heterosexuality either for that matter. What people get up to in the privacy of their own homes or in the bushes on Hampstead Heath (so long as they are out of sight) is their affair. UKIP's success in the polls is down to one thing and one thing only - the UK's relationship with the EU. It is a matter of vast importance to many voters - so important that they are prepared (as if evident by their apparent gullibility and stupidity) to allow the issue to rise to the top of their list of concerns. For years they have been bulldozed into submission, being forced to watch as successive governments have salami-sliced the UK's powers of self-determination and handed them on a plate to unelected Eurocrats. Now the chickens are coming home to roost and as all politicians eventually (though often belatedly) learn, they ignore the electorate at their peril.
There is no doubt that UKIP's success will not be translated into seats at Westminster next year. The "gullible and stupid" people who voted for them on Thursday will return to their senses and vote for one of the showers that are happy to see the UK reduced to the equivalent of a dozen European parish councils. But at least it's temporarily shaken them out of their expenses-fuelled stupor.
Well today's first prize for arrogance and sheer pig-headedness goes to you, kvalidir. It may have escaped your notice but one of the freedoms you carp on about is the freedom to vote for whomsoever you please without being insulted. The need for UKIP would not have arisen had the main parties simply listened to the concerns of the electorate and acted to allay their fears. Instead they were dismissed variously as "Little Englanders", racists, xenophobes, bigots and far worse when all they wanted in fact was a little say over who is allowed to frame their laws and who is permitted to settle on these shores and share in the nation's assets.
But still they seem not to get it. Last night, reacting to news of the LibDems annihilation in the EU election, Tim Farron, their president said that they have a lot of work to do to get their message across. He does not seem to appreciate that voters have listened to their message and large numbers of them (including many who previously supported the LDs) have soundly rejected it. The time is now ripe for Mr Farron and his friends to listen to OUR message and set about reacting to it.
Personally I'm not that fussed about any political party's view of homosexuality. It is a fringe issue as far as I am concerned. I'm not that fussed on their views on heterosexuality either for that matter. What people get up to in the privacy of their own homes or in the bushes on Hampstead Heath (so long as they are out of sight) is their affair. UKIP's success in the polls is down to one thing and one thing only - the UK's relationship with the EU. It is a matter of vast importance to many voters - so important that they are prepared (as if evident by their apparent gullibility and stupidity) to allow the issue to rise to the top of their list of concerns. For years they have been bulldozed into submission, being forced to watch as successive governments have salami-sliced the UK's powers of self-determination and handed them on a plate to unelected Eurocrats. Now the chickens are coming home to roost and as all politicians eventually (though often belatedly) learn, they ignore the electorate at their peril.
There is no doubt that UKIP's success will not be translated into seats at Westminster next year. The "gullible and stupid" people who voted for them on Thursday will return to their senses and vote for one of the showers that are happy to see the UK reduced to the equivalent of a dozen European parish councils. But at least it's temporarily shaken them out of their expenses-fuelled stupor.
Kromovaracun
Regarding Roger Helmer this is the headline from a New Statesman link:
/// Meet Ukip's seal-hating, gay-baiting, victim-blaming Newark candidate, Roger Helmer ///
/// He doesn't think homophobia exists, blames rape victims, and seems to be sexually confused about Earl Grey tea. ///
Now read what he actually says, is there any mention of 'seal-hating', 'gay-baiting', 'victim-blaming' 'the blaming of rape victims' or even any evidence of him being sexually confused about Earl Grey tea?
http://
Regarding Roger Helmer this is the headline from a New Statesman link:
/// Meet Ukip's seal-hating, gay-baiting, victim-blaming Newark candidate, Roger Helmer ///
/// He doesn't think homophobia exists, blames rape victims, and seems to be sexually confused about Earl Grey tea. ///
Now read what he actually says, is there any mention of 'seal-hating', 'gay-baiting', 'victim-blaming' 'the blaming of rape victims' or even any evidence of him being sexually confused about Earl Grey tea?
http://
AOG
You asked:
"People of all ages possess 'anti' sentiments on all issues, why should anti gay issues for example be any different?"
Whilst it's true that people of all ages hold unpalatable (IMO) views, older people tend to be more anti-gay than younger people.
It's a fact that Nigel Farage has acknowledged.
You asked:
"People of all ages possess 'anti' sentiments on all issues, why should anti gay issues for example be any different?"
Whilst it's true that people of all ages hold unpalatable (IMO) views, older people tend to be more anti-gay than younger people.
It's a fact that Nigel Farage has acknowledged.
"What people get up to in the privacy of their own homes or in the bushes on Hampstead Heath (so long as they are out of sight) is their affair."
But this is precisely the problem. You are tolerant, as long as people keep quiet about it. That's not at all the right sort of attitude. Firstly, because homosexuality isn't just about what goes on in the bedroom and with whom. It's also about being able to be open about who you are. Not necessarily too open, perhaps, we don't need the details -- but it's about being able for a man to talk of "his boyfriend" without fear of judgment, to be open about his relationship in the usual way. And that certainly is something that isn't always possible around the world for gay people. In some parts of Africa it's a criminal offence. That should not be tolerated and we should say so. And those who do not, who continually vote against or abstain from such condemnation, ought to have their motives and values questioned and scrutinised.
In the meantime, as I've commented elsewhere, a good proportion of the rise in UKIP support seems to be coming from the collapse in the vote of other fringe protest parties such as the BNP in particular but also such oddities as NO2EU and the Christian People's Alliance, both of whom saw their vote share and raw vote decrease markedly from 2009. I think a large part of UKIP's surge can be attributed to their establishing themselves as the party to vote for if you want to cast a protest vote. Roughly 8.65 million people voted for the three main parties in 2009, and roughly 8.8 million voted for the three main parties this year, so in total their share of the vote has been barely hit at all and UKIP is merely picking up the scraps.
But this is precisely the problem. You are tolerant, as long as people keep quiet about it. That's not at all the right sort of attitude. Firstly, because homosexuality isn't just about what goes on in the bedroom and with whom. It's also about being able to be open about who you are. Not necessarily too open, perhaps, we don't need the details -- but it's about being able for a man to talk of "his boyfriend" without fear of judgment, to be open about his relationship in the usual way. And that certainly is something that isn't always possible around the world for gay people. In some parts of Africa it's a criminal offence. That should not be tolerated and we should say so. And those who do not, who continually vote against or abstain from such condemnation, ought to have their motives and values questioned and scrutinised.
In the meantime, as I've commented elsewhere, a good proportion of the rise in UKIP support seems to be coming from the collapse in the vote of other fringe protest parties such as the BNP in particular but also such oddities as NO2EU and the Christian People's Alliance, both of whom saw their vote share and raw vote decrease markedly from 2009. I think a large part of UKIP's surge can be attributed to their establishing themselves as the party to vote for if you want to cast a protest vote. Roughly 8.65 million people voted for the three main parties in 2009, and roughly 8.8 million voted for the three main parties this year, so in total their share of the vote has been barely hit at all and UKIP is merely picking up the scraps.
sp1814
/// Whilst it's true that people of all ages hold unpalatable (IMO) views, older people tend to be more anti-gay than younger people. ///
And what if they are, even the usual offensive definitions of their views ie 'unpalatable' homophobic etc, are not enough to change their personal views, just like the cries of 'racist' won't where racial matters are concerned.
/// Whilst it's true that people of all ages hold unpalatable (IMO) views, older people tend to be more anti-gay than younger people. ///
And what if they are, even the usual offensive definitions of their views ie 'unpalatable' homophobic etc, are not enough to change their personal views, just like the cries of 'racist' won't where racial matters are concerned.
