Crosswords0 min ago
We Are Retreating.
36 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Sadly you didn't shut me up, I'm still here just posting when it's convenient to me and not you.
I have no problem, nor will most right minded people, with the majority of that definition, it roughly follows common sense and also curtails the proprensity of some racist individuals and groups to be able to lump the appalling actions of some Muslims on to the whole group.
That is always the beginning of marginalisations of ethnic or religious groups, the most obvious example being the third Reich's campaign against the Jews in the 30's, prior to their final solution.
I do have a problem with the following blanket definitions however.
//• Accusing Muslim citizens of being more loyal to the ‘Ummah’ (transnational Muslim community) or to their countries of origin, or to the alleged priorities of Muslims worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.//
I don't have a problem with people attributing that attitude to individual or very specific groups of Muslims, but clearly that will be untrue of the vast majority of modern British Muslims, and the distinction in speech needs to be made clearer.
//• Denying Muslim populations, the right to self-determination e.g., by claiming that the existence of an independent Palestine or Kashmir is a terrorist endeavour.//
Palestine is too thorny an issue to try to legislate around, likewise Partition in India. One should never legislate, or attempt to, around opinion itself, merely how and in what manner that opinion is expressed.
In short yet another storm in a teacup, you can think and say whatever you like, but you need to conduct yourself with care that you don't inadvertently generalise and in doing so stir up hatred.
For example it's fine to say
//Anjem Chowdry is a militant Muslim and uses his Muslim idealogy and identity to enhance what a threat to this country he is and stir up civil unrest, terrorist activities and hatred against British Western identity//
It not okay to say
//Anjem Chowdry is a rag head murderer like every other f'kin Muslim, they'd all kill us in our beds, send em all back to sand Land, none of them are any good'.
That's what people are trying to legislate against not opinion per se, and guys like whoever the bloke is in Thelands video are jumping on people's fear of being gagged, stifled and unable to express themselves, when no-one is threatening that, just the manner in which you can do it, and that is perfectly right.
I have no problem, nor will most right minded people, with the majority of that definition, it roughly follows common sense and also curtails the proprensity of some racist individuals and groups to be able to lump the appalling actions of some Muslims on to the whole group.
That is always the beginning of marginalisations of ethnic or religious groups, the most obvious example being the third Reich's campaign against the Jews in the 30's, prior to their final solution.
I do have a problem with the following blanket definitions however.
//• Accusing Muslim citizens of being more loyal to the ‘Ummah’ (transnational Muslim community) or to their countries of origin, or to the alleged priorities of Muslims worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.//
I don't have a problem with people attributing that attitude to individual or very specific groups of Muslims, but clearly that will be untrue of the vast majority of modern British Muslims, and the distinction in speech needs to be made clearer.
//• Denying Muslim populations, the right to self-determination e.g., by claiming that the existence of an independent Palestine or Kashmir is a terrorist endeavour.//
Palestine is too thorny an issue to try to legislate around, likewise Partition in India. One should never legislate, or attempt to, around opinion itself, merely how and in what manner that opinion is expressed.
In short yet another storm in a teacup, you can think and say whatever you like, but you need to conduct yourself with care that you don't inadvertently generalise and in doing so stir up hatred.
For example it's fine to say
//Anjem Chowdry is a militant Muslim and uses his Muslim idealogy and identity to enhance what a threat to this country he is and stir up civil unrest, terrorist activities and hatred against British Western identity//
It not okay to say
//Anjem Chowdry is a rag head murderer like every other f'kin Muslim, they'd all kill us in our beds, send em all back to sand Land, none of them are any good'.
That's what people are trying to legislate against not opinion per se, and guys like whoever the bloke is in Thelands video are jumping on people's fear of being gagged, stifled and unable to express themselves, when no-one is threatening that, just the manner in which you can do it, and that is perfectly right.
Naomi, Spicerack said:- //You shut the critics up nicely there, vetuste. Well done. ;-)//
It was in answer to that- the idea that people will sit up til stupid o'clock just to answer an AB thread and if they don't they have been somehow gagged :/ lol
I've outlined the blanket statements I have an issue with above, it's the two more general points i addressed in my previous post.
It was in answer to that- the idea that people will sit up til stupid o'clock just to answer an AB thread and if they don't they have been somehow gagged :/ lol
I've outlined the blanket statements I have an issue with above, it's the two more general points i addressed in my previous post.
No, you can hate personally- I personally hate bigots of every persuasion and I find them more prevalent in some groups more than others to be honest, but what you cannot do is use your form of expression to stir up hatred for those groups generally that you find those individuals in, because it's simply not right. No-one is asking everyone to like everything and everyone, just not to generalise and discriminate based upon someones religion (which no right minded person ought to be doing anyway).
Curses! Yet again I thought I was being clear but missed by a mile.
I can't get all wound up about "Conservative" values, even as a liberal westerner, while western liberalism is lergely conservative. I am distinguishing between big and little c, but the philosophy of western conservatism is no more and no less worthy than conservative views anywhere else in the world. I can disagree as much as I like while I am in UK, but I would feel concern for my liberty if I did the same vocally in their countries, and I have no issues with UK authorities and other agencies trying to protect us from practices we find abhorrent or which are illegal.
I said in my first post that I am against government by any religious group. I find it offensive that Parliamentary sittings and local council meetings make time for prayers, instead of focusing on the purpose for which they exist. I frequently feel I am in a minority while nominal Christians make up the majority, but I might find myself more mainstream as Islam, for example, becomes the popular faith. I supportvreligious freedom, but not where it interferes with democracy.
Hopefully that is clearer.
I can't get all wound up about "Conservative" values, even as a liberal westerner, while western liberalism is lergely conservative. I am distinguishing between big and little c, but the philosophy of western conservatism is no more and no less worthy than conservative views anywhere else in the world. I can disagree as much as I like while I am in UK, but I would feel concern for my liberty if I did the same vocally in their countries, and I have no issues with UK authorities and other agencies trying to protect us from practices we find abhorrent or which are illegal.
I said in my first post that I am against government by any religious group. I find it offensive that Parliamentary sittings and local council meetings make time for prayers, instead of focusing on the purpose for which they exist. I frequently feel I am in a minority while nominal Christians make up the majority, but I might find myself more mainstream as Islam, for example, becomes the popular faith. I supportvreligious freedom, but not where it interferes with democracy.
Hopefully that is clearer.
Yes I am because it doesn't stifle criticism, it's a massive storm in a very small teacup. I can still say and do precisely what I like and you can too, all we can't do is generalise and lump huge sectors of society together as though the actions of a minority of a group they happen to belong to represent the majority.
I'm not sure what I missed there. Are takeaway drivers compelled to take sides in something? I watched part of the video but I gave up after being told that I can't say one thing or do another. I don't recognise that world. I hold strong views, often unpopular but drilled into me through my childhood and adolescence. Many people have told me my views are wrong, but they are not black, not Asian, not from any specific faith. The people who tell me what I am allowed to say or do are people like the bloke in the video, who try to convince me that I am oppressed when I am not.
Calicogirl wascspot on in that respect. It is a big fuss over something that doesn't exist. If I try to broadcast details about an ongoing trial and get locked up, it is because I was risking a mistrial, not because I am being deprived of some mythical heritage.
I was once offered a drink by an enormous black guy in a prison gym during a visit. I asked for tea without milk and he fell about laughing, telling me I didn't need to be politically correct with him. It was almost embarrassing to explain that if I ask for black tea, people still put milk in it. That is just as true in a 95% white suburb as it is in a 60% black prison.
Calicogirl wascspot on in that respect. It is a big fuss over something that doesn't exist. If I try to broadcast details about an ongoing trial and get locked up, it is because I was risking a mistrial, not because I am being deprived of some mythical heritage.
I was once offered a drink by an enormous black guy in a prison gym during a visit. I asked for tea without milk and he fell about laughing, telling me I didn't need to be politically correct with him. It was almost embarrassing to explain that if I ask for black tea, people still put milk in it. That is just as true in a 95% white suburb as it is in a 60% black prison.
