You couldn’t be more wrong if you tried Jno (as per).
Tilly absolutely confirms she does not believe I” believe in free speech. Or, I suppose, she does believe in free speech, just so long as she agrees with what is being spoken.
I’m intrigued how Tilly’s post, in your opinion Jno, is not confirming she doesn’t believe in free speech.
all Tilly says is that the council blocked her after receiving a petition. She does not say if she signed the petition. You have no idea whether she approved or not, you've just made that up.
Quite, NJ (apologies to whoever for my geography faux pas), but I really am intrigued to see JNO (or preferably Tilly) defend Tilly’s undoubted and undeniable refusal to accept other opinions.
https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1788481.html
lots of people refuse to accept other peoples opinions though desky! For instance those to vociferously telly people to stop testing, when they do so themselves cause theyre "curious"!
what's that got to do with food banks i har you ask? Well, just about as much as having an opinion on katie hopkins does i guess
Of course people disagree with the opinions of other people - that's a given, they may even refuse to accept the opinion of other people.
But that's completely different to stopping somebody from speaking simply because you don't like them, even though other people may have wanted to hear what was said. That's cancelling. And that's what Tilly was a part of, and that's why I made the absolutely fair point that Tilly does not like free speech.
With every fibre of my being I despise Corbyn and everything he stands for...but I wouldn't dream of being part of something that would stop him from speaking.
Is it right to speak and make assumptions about what Tilly believes...behind her back? She's not here to answer you, yet you go on and on about what you think is a given.
Maybe try posting a thread for her attention next time you see her on.
*waves to MissT "
I think anyone who has worked with or for food banks, or had contact with those who NEED them would disagree. They can be essential as a temporary measure for both homeless, and those who are really scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to feeding their family. They are not permanent, and can only be used x amount of times in s given period. Supplies given are generally only for 3 days, and the recipient must be referred to the food bank.
Obviously there may be small, locally run charities that are looser in their definition of the requirements.
Considering that food banks are getting fewer donations I'd imagine they'd need to be stricter.
I think that needs to be part of the solution...and will hopefully limit how many can use services while leaving more for the truly needy.
Hi Pasta. I admit I have quite strong feelings about food banks, based on personal experience in younger days of being really strapped for cash due to unforseen circumstances for quite a long time. Food was a priority then and we got by with no government help and with no charitable aid. Priorities seem to have changed so much now. People are far less resourceful. I won't go further into this, but I will say that I do what I can for many charities, but I will not donate to food banks. I might donate to an enterprise where people were taught how to cook and how to budget!
,Considering that food banks are getting fewer donations I'd imagine they'd need to be stricter.
I think that needs to be part of the solution...and will hopefully limit how many can use services while leaving more for the truly needy./
//For instance those to vociferously telly people to stop testing, when they do so themselves cause theyre "curious"!//
I hope that's not me, bednobs. I have never told anybody to stop testing (or indeed to stop anything else for that matter). But I admit to being mightily curious as to why they should do so. However, enough "hijacking".