Safe Speed Forums

Just for starters - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/210672.stm

I have to pop into a meeting, but I'll provide you with some more later, if you like?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

No, not at all.

First of all, your decision to belong to a political party is a choice you make. An Asian doesn't get to choose his ethnicity; a gay man doesn't get to choose his sexuality, and none of us gets to choose our gender.

So we're talking about two levels of discrimination here before we even start: that on the basis of what people are, and that on the basis of what they think.

Secondly, there is the question of what form the discrimination takes. If I consider your views (please note the "if") to be those of a "narrow-minded reactionary racist bastard", then I have expressed a personal opinion. I am not saying that I intend to take any action on the basis of that opinion, nor am I advocating that anyone else do so. Arguably, if you wanted to stretch a point, you could claim that my statement was along the lines of "Will no-one rid me of this turbulent priest?", but I think that'd be reaching a long way.

So I would argue that my hypothetically having those feelings about your views would not, in fact, be discrimination. It wouldn't be polite, subtle, or respectful, but neither would it be discriminatory.

In a way, I think you're making the same mistake with my comments as you appear to be making regarding this issue in general: you don't appear to understand the idea that being expected not to act in a discriminatory way towards certain groups of people is not the same as being expected to advocate or support their practices. Equally, you're perfectly entitled to THINK what you like about homosexuals, other races, or women, but you can expect to reap a certain amount of criticism when you ACT on those thoughts - and, as in this case, acting would include expressing those thoughts.

All of which is a long-winded explanation of why I would think it perfectly reasonable, to use your example, to accuse you of being a "narrow-minded reactionary racist bastard" if, in my personal view, you were to express views which led me to feel that way about you. And you, of course, would be equally free to address me as a "bleeding heart pinko commie liberal who knits his own lentils" in response if you saw fit to.

It's called "freedom of speech", and it still (mostly) exists. Be assured that when people start trying to prevent it, you and I will probably be standing on the same side of the barricades...

_________________
--
For your comfort and convenience, please stop reading now.

How, exactly, did this affect your Christmas eight years ago?

Does this foreign invasion bother you or is it OK because it mentions Christmas?

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

Winterval? Why the problem? As a churchgoing Christian, I'd prefer it if there was some other festival to attach the excess and alcoholism and blatant materialism to, rather than the celebration of the birth of Christ.

Christian country? Don't make me laugh.

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

You do that. And it'd be good if you can find something a bit less than 8 years old, too.

Still, on the subject of "Winterval" (the subject of that link), misguided as I think that was, Birmingham City Council did make it very clear that they were not attempting to ban the word "Christmas" - indeed, that year the traditional "Happy Christmas Birmingham" was to be found in lights over Birmingham's Council House.

So they weren't banning anything, or taking anything away from Christmas as it stood. In fact, the only people who could genuinely have had a problem with what went on there were those who had misunderstood (creatively, or otherwise) what was going on, or people who begrudge the idea that we might want to find a way of extending our winter/Christmas festivities to include people of other faiths.

So, as an example of where "political correctness" caused "indigenous people not being allowed to celebrate their way of life", you've shot yourself in the foot a bit with this Winterval one, haven't you?

Maybe I can help...

A classic case, still reported as extant, is the "Baa Baa Rainbow Sheep" idea, which some idiot in - again - Birmingham came up with, and which was so roundly condemned by parents of black children - the very people it was supposed to be trying not to discriminate against - that the council promptly rescinded the ban.

Again, you can't really use that as a current argument, because it was shot down in flames quite quickly, so see if you can try a little harder to find one. I'm sure they exist, but I suspect that, if you engage in a little open-minded research, rather than just reading the headlines, you'll find that they're a lot rarer than you think.

There is a problem with people in local authorities getting a hair up their arse about stupid things like this, and rushing into rash and ill-considered decisions. Almost invariably, once the furore has died down, they quietly back out of their ludicrous plans, and go back to doing things properly. It's annoying, because all they ever ACTUALLY achieve is to add fuel to the fires of the "Political Correctness Gone Maaaaad!" crowd, as exemplified by the Daily Mail.

Furthermore, a lot of these cases that get reported as fact turn out, on investigation, to be no more than rumour, or at worst an idea that someone had floated. The Daily Mail is particularly bad at taking these stories and turning them into "fact" - it does it constantly on the question of European regulations, and anything to do with "PC". And where do most of the reactionaries' for-instances come from? Yup, the Daily Mail. If I'd had a quid for every "it's a known fact" story from the Mail that, on the basis of 10 mins research, I've been able to completely discredit, I'd be using a rather posher computer to access the Internet...

_________________
--
For your comfort and convenience, please stop reading now.

This thread should stray on track, just so long as no-one mentions PCSO's...

Often the people behind these sorts of things are acting on their opinion of what the issue is, not their experience or knowledge. Not unlike the 'Speed Kills' message and the people who call for speed cameras in a street 'before someone gets killed'.

Yes, it's exactly that. The story only has to go around a couple of times and it's being reported as fact. So "everybody knows" now that, if we all just drove slavishly at the speed limit, the KSI numbers would plummet to zero; that speed cameras are doing a fine job of making that happen, and anyone who, in the face of that knowledge, continues to speed is little better than a murderer who likes looking at pics of little kids.

And so it goes on. It's one of the reasons I find this kind of wilful ignorance so depressing: we have minds that are capable of working things out for ourselves, forming our own opinions, and acting rationally and reasonably, yet so many people not only choose NOT to think like that, but then try to claim their deliberate stupidity as some kind of virtue. Gah!

_________________
--
For your comfort and convenience, please stop reading now.

The following article makes some important points about multiculturalism as a philosophy. (It was written in the context of the Mohammed Cartoons row)

http://www.spiked-online.com/articles/0000000CAF59.htm

Well thanks for resisting it, r11co.

Of course it must have been dreadfully upsetting for your grandparents to put up with insults and catcalls. I do not condone any such behaviour, and never have. The unfortunate fact remains that many people are instinctively wary of outsiders, just as a tribesman might be if I turned up at hs homestead or a Frenchman if I moved in nextdoor. I would hope to allay his doubts by being friendly towards him. Furthermore, attitudes have changed for the better since your grandparents' arrival, such that most people wouldn't be in the least bit bothered by having an Italian neighbour or work-mate.

This is quite different from the pivotal question of overpopulation, which you have ignored.


When did I say I'm not allowed to express an opinion? Anyway, I am not expressing forceful opinions so much as making observations, which I'm perfectly entitled to do as someone who has lived here all my life and gets around a bit.


Neither have I been rude to you. It would be nice if you reciprocated.

Oh and by the way, some of my best friends are gay. And I'm not joking.

Excellent example of bait-and-switch. Notwithstanding the patronising tone of the above quote, the issue is not overpopulation and never was. However, well done for using it as a justification for the prejudice you claim not to have.

People are instinctively wary of outsiders you say, yet you accept that opinions can change. I don't see you accomodating the changes very easily.....

I give up. The original proposition was "...six million people arrive here, fragmenting society, straining our infrastructure to breaking point, altering our national character, a significant number demanding benefits to which they've not contributed a penny".

Which is overpopulation, pure and simple, coupled with the fact that some are taking the piss. It's not just me - a growing number of social commentators, including some from ethnic minorities, are aware of the problem.

I'm out of patience trying to have a sensible discussion with someone who has nothing more to offer than vulgar abuse and sarcasm. Goodbye.

Nope. The issue is migration. 'Overpopulation' is a sensationalist term and meaningless as it is a relative measure. No-one laid down any rules at which point a nation becomes overcrowded and, just like 'speed kills', mere numbers are not the measure by which the issue becomes a problem. If you believe that too many people is reallly the fundamental problem then start campaigning for fewer pregnancies.



Ahhh - there we have it - your real gripe. Weasel words if I ever saw them.

Over what time period?

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

Immigrants comprise 8% of the population and about a third of Londoners (Migrationwatch UK). The majority over the last 15 years.

Sorry, I was was out by 2%.

sorry about that, should I pack my bags now?

Up to you, Johnsher. An alarming number of people are doing just that.

Before Paul pulls the plug on this discussion - and I wouldn't blame him if he did - let me say one more thing. Look at our congested roads, not to mention the very existence of SafeSpeed, and you can see that either we are overpopulated, or the infrastructre is mismanaged, or both.

Migrationwatch UK? Don't make me laugh, do you really think that bunch of loonies are producing accurate, unbiased figures?

Try the Home Office.

And the data presented here suggests that your % is WAY out - nearer a 2% and slightly over 2 million people rise in 20 years.

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

To put it politely, shall we say the figures are somewhere between the two?

maybe so but I was asking the question as one of the immigrants you're complaining about.