FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Political correctness
Political correctness
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't take any fucking notice of all this bullshit. Say what you think but think about what you say, its worked well enough for me upto now "I do think people hide behind calling others politically correct in order to get away with offensive things though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't take any fucking notice of all this bullshit. Say what you think but think about what you say, its worked well enough for me upto now
I do think people hide behind calling others politically correct in order to get away with offensive things though". How do they "get away with it". Your always entitled to call them a racist if you wish | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't take any fucking notice of all this bullshit. Say what you think but think about what you say, its worked well enough for me upto now "Q.E.D. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting its such an old definition ... let's see how people define it now ... I generally agree with it, though" Well, 1997 isn't old to me  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting its such an old definition ... let's see how people define it now ... I generally agree with it, though Well, 1997 isn't old to me "My oldest was born in 1997. Life was very different then ... I am surprised and the age of the quote | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't take any fucking notice of all this bullshit. Say what you think but think about what you say, its worked well enough for me upto now " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"another term for politcal correctness is respect. imagine people saying they're pissed off coz they have to respect people? doubt anyone would take them seriously." Good point  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"another term for politcal correctness is respect. imagine people saying they're pissed off coz they have to respect people? doubt anyone would take them seriously. Good point "Exactly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's a lot on here about being politically correct, much of it negative. I've just read the best definition / description that I've seen to date: A phrase that certain conservative elements had thought up because they needed a stick to beat back at the liberals with. It was a phrase coined by people who resented the fact that couldn't treat n******, y***, s****-l*****, b**** and c******* the way you used to, who wanted to believe that it was all part of some organised agenda (and therefore reversible), rather than a natural, gradual, evolved process of increased understanding and therefore tolerence, which was leaving them all behind. Country of the Blind, Christopher Brookmyre, Abacus, 1997, p22 My asterixes, I couldn't bring myself to type the words. " In the beginning,the ethos of the politically correct was, Tolerance,respect,equality. Now,they are the most intolerant members of society,anyone who even questions their methods will be branded,sexist,racist, bigot, no matter how unfairly. it's enough to quieten even the most sincere doubters. They once stood for anti discrimination,and inequality they now openly promote,discrimination and inequality . They call it positive discrimination. Even George Orwell could not have given a more perfect example of doublethink, than positive discrimination. Changing the gender,race,Or religion,of the discriminated, Does not justify,the promotion of inequality ,and discrimination. They are fast becoming the very antipathy,of everything they once stood for. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's a lot on here about being politically correct, much of it negative. I've just read the best definition / description that I've seen to date: A phrase that certain conservative elements had thought up because they needed a stick to beat back at the liberals with. It was a phrase coined by people who resented the fact that couldn't treat n******, y***, s****-l*****, b**** and c******* the way you used to, who wanted to believe that it was all part of some organised agenda (and therefore reversible), rather than a natural, gradual, evolved process of increased understanding and therefore tolerence, which was leaving them all behind. Country of the Blind, Christopher Brookmyre, Abacus, 1997, p22 My asterixes, I couldn't bring myself to type the words. In the beginning,the ethos of the politically correct was, Tolerance,respect,equality. Now,they are the most intolerant members of society,anyone who even questions their methods will be branded,sexist,racist, bigot, no matter how unfairly. it's enough to quieten even the most sincere doubters. They once stood for anti discrimination,and inequality they now openly promote,discrimination and inequality . They call it positive discrimination. Even George Orwell could not have given a more perfect example of doublethink, than positive discrimination. Changing the gender,race,Or religion,of the discriminated, Does not justify,the promotion of inequality ,and discrimination. They are fast becoming the very antipathy,of everything they once stood for. " spot on | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's a lot on here about being politically correct, much of it negative. I've just read the best definition / description that I've seen to date: A phrase that certain conservative elements had thought up because they needed a stick to beat back at the liberals with. It was a phrase coined by people who resented the fact that couldn't treat n******, y***, s****-l*****, b**** and c******* the way you used to, who wanted to believe that it was all part of some organised agenda (and therefore reversible), rather than a natural, gradual, evolved process of increased understanding and therefore tolerence, which was leaving them all behind. Country of the Blind, Christopher Brookmyre, Abacus, 1997, p22 My asterixes, I couldn't bring myself to type the words. In the beginning,the ethos of the politically correct was, Tolerance,respect,equality. Now,they are the most intolerant members of society,anyone who even questions their methods will be branded,sexist,racist, bigot, no matter how unfairly. it's enough to quieten even the most sincere doubters. They once stood for anti discrimination,and inequality they now openly promote,discrimination and inequality . They call it positive discrimination. Even George Orwell could not have given a more perfect example of doublethink, than positive discrimination. Changing the gender,race,Or religion,of the discriminated, Does not justify,the promotion of inequality ,and discrimination. They are fast becoming the very antipathy,of everything they once stood for. spot on "Some of us were there at the beginning and still hold on to the values it was founded on .... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's a lot on here about being politically correct, much of it negative. I've just read the best definition / description that I've seen to date: A phrase that certain conservative elements had thought up because they needed a stick to beat back at the liberals with. It was a phrase coined by people who resented the fact that couldn't treat n******, y***, s****-l*****, b**** and c******* the way you used to, who wanted to believe that it was all part of some organised agenda (and therefore reversible), rather than a natural, gradual, evolved process of increased understanding and therefore tolerence, which was leaving them all behind. Country of the Blind, Christopher Brookmyre, Abacus, 1997, p22 My asterixes, I couldn't bring myself to type the words. In the beginning,the ethos of the politically correct was, Tolerance,respect,equality. Now,they are the most intolerant members of society,anyone who even questions their methods will be branded,sexist,racist, bigot, no matter how unfairly. it's enough to quieten even the most sincere doubters. They once stood for anti discrimination,and inequality they now openly promote,discrimination and inequality . They call it positive discrimination. Even George Orwell could not have given a more perfect example of doublethink, than positive discrimination. Changing the gender,race,Or religion,of the discriminated, Does not justify,the promotion of inequality ,and discrimination. They are fast becoming the very antipathy,of everything they once stood for. spot on "Load of bollocks actually! What is listed above may exist, it may not, although some of it certainly does. But it isn't political correctness. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"another term for politcal correctness is respect. imagine people saying they're pissed off coz they have to respect people? doubt anyone would take them seriously." No this is spot on | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"another term for politcal correctness is respect. imagine people saying they're pissed off coz they have to respect people? doubt anyone would take them seriously. No this is spot on "do you respect racists? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"another term for politcal correctness is respect. imagine people saying they're pissed off coz they have to respect people? doubt anyone would take them seriously. No this is spot on
do you respect racists?"Loathe them with a vengeance, along with homophobes, sexists, etc. Relevance? You've actually hit on one of the reasons I hate Brexit. It's not just the apparent harkening back to some sort of fantasy golden age Xanadu when Britian ran her own affairs and if only we could do so again we'd be great once more, it's that I used to think we lived in a tolerant, forward looking country. I now realise to said country's shame that, in fact, I don't. No doubt you'll (attempt) to shred what I've just said, frankly feel free, I won't bother to argue this time | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"another term for politcal correctness is respect. imagine people saying they're pissed off coz they have to respect people? doubt anyone would take them seriously. No this is spot on
do you respect racists?
Loathe them with a vengeance, along with homophobes, sexists, etc.
Relevance?
You've actually hit on one of the reasons I hate Brexit. It's not just the apparent harkening back to some sort of fantasy golden age Xanadu when Britian ran her own affairs and if only we could do so again we'd be great once more, it's that I used to think we lived in a tolerant, forward looking country. I now realise to said country's shame that, in fact, I don't.
No doubt you'll (attempt) to shred what I've just said, frankly feel free, I won't bother to argue this time "loathe them? Fair enough but I thought that pc was all about tolerance and respect for people of all genders, race and beliefs etc. I also loathe racists but I also dislike political correctness, or more accurately those who try to enforce it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also loathe racists" Bloddy hell, we agree on something, that's a first! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? " I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! " The blackboard thing is bollocks, it's made up, it's not true. You can call a blackboard a blackboard, it's not racist, it's an inanimate object. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! " quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men "Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men "Actually il admit I'm not so sure on that lol
Tho I usually Agree with you I'm a Crap Driver | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic? "I don't. You did | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic? "No Sane Person wants to use those Words ! And I'm sure C and M or you or Me ! Would nt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did"So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! The blackboard thing is bollocks, it's made up, it's not true. You can call a blackboard a blackboard, it's not racist, it's an inanimate object." Even if the blackboard controversy was true - which it probably isn't - why use the actions of an overzealous jobsworth to negate the positive impact of people thinking carefully about their language? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki? "I don't. But you have. Why? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?"Ok then, why don't you use those words? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong "That's because there are no blackboards any more. They are the white plastic coated wipeboards that are written on with dry wipe marker pens. Blackboards that you write on with chalk are still called blackboards but I think you can only get small ones for toddlers now? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! " And it just doesn't happen. Schools that have blackboards call them... blackboards. Most schools have whiteboards, guess what they call them? Whiteboards. There are loads of smart boards around, guess what they're called? Interactive whiteboards! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
That's because there are no blackboards any more. They are the white plastic coated wipeboards that are written on with dry wipe marker pens.
Blackboards that you write on with chalk are still called blackboards but I think you can only get small ones for toddlers now?"You can still find blackboards in schools but they're not common, dry wipe pens being so much better than chalk. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong "Maybe you're mis-hearing 'whiteboard'? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Maybe you're mis-hearing 'whiteboard'?"Or you're believing the tabloids? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?
Ok then, why don't you use those words? "Because they can be taken as an insult. Nothing to do with political correctness. Why is a manhole now called a utility hole? Has a man, or hole ever been upset by that? I could call my friends a tranny or a black twat and they won't find it offensive and will give as good back as they get but it might upset someone who hears it so should all language be censored for fear of offending someones sensibilities? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?
Ok then, why don't you use those words?
Because they can be taken as an insult. Nothing to do with political correctness. Why is a manhole now called a utility hole? Has a man, or hole ever been upset by that? I could call my friends a tranny or a black twat and they won't find it offensive and will give as good back as they get but it might upset someone who hears it so should all language be censored for fear of offending someones sensibilities? "Again, manholes are called.. manholes. Mate, check your suppositions first. I wasn't sure if I was right about this one so I did a quick check, loads of .gov sites talking about manholes. Google is my friend too! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?
Ok then, why don't you use those words?
Because they can be taken as an insult. Nothing to do with political correctness. Why is a manhole now called a utility hole? Has a man, or hole ever been upset by that? I could call my friends a tranny or a black twat and they won't find it offensive and will give as good back as they get but it might upset someone who hears it so should all language be censored for fear of offending someones sensibilities? "And there we have it, you don’t use certain words because they can be offensive. That’s it, that is political correctness. You my friend, are politically correct, you do the very thing you claim to hate others for doing!!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?
Ok then, why don't you use those words?
Because they can be taken as an insult. Nothing to do with political correctness. Why is a manhole now called a utility hole? Has a man, or hole ever been upset by that? I could call my friends a tranny or a black twat and they won't find it offensive and will give as good back as they get but it might upset someone who hears it so should all language be censored for fear of offending someones sensibilities?
And there we have it, you don’t use certain words because they can be offensive. That’s it, that is political correctness. You my friend, are politically correct, you do the very thing you claim to hate others for doing!!!!! "how is not insulting people being politically correct? What is it if I call you a dick? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?
Ok then, why don't you use those words?
Because they can be taken as an insult. Nothing to do with political correctness. Why is a manhole now called a utility hole? Has a man, or hole ever been upset by that? I could call my friends a tranny or a black twat and they won't find it offensive and will give as good back as they get but it might upset someone who hears it so should all language be censored for fear of offending someones sensibilities?
And there we have it, you don’t use certain words because they can be offensive. That’s it, that is political correctness. You my friend, are politically correct, you do the very thing you claim to hate others for doing!!!!! "You Two would make a fortune if you had your own Joint TV Debating Show | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's a lot on here about being politically correct, much of it negative. I've just read the best definition / description that I've seen to date: A phrase that certain conservative elements had thought up because they needed a stick to beat back at the liberals with. It was a phrase coined by people who resented the fact that couldn't treat n******, y***, s****-l*****, b**** and c******* the way you used to, who wanted to believe that it was all part of some organised agenda (and therefore reversible), rather than a natural, gradual, evolved process of increased understanding and therefore tolerence, which was leaving them all behind. Country of the Blind, Christopher Brookmyre, Abacus, 1997, p22 My asterixes, I couldn't bring myself to type the words. In the beginning,the ethos of the politically correct was, Tolerance,respect,equality. Now,they are the most intolerant members of society,anyone who even questions their methods will be branded,sexist,racist, bigot, no matter how unfairly. it's enough to quieten even the most sincere doubters. They once stood for anti discrimination,and inequality they now openly promote,discrimination and inequality . They call it positive discrimination. Even George Orwell could not have given a more perfect example of doublethink, than positive discrimination. Changing the gender,race,Or religion,of the discriminated, Does not justify,the promotion of inequality ,and discrimination. They are fast becoming the very antipathy,of everything they once stood for. spot on
Load of bollocks actually!
What is listed above may exist, it may not, although some of it certainly does.
But it isn't political correctness."That's a bit like saying "a big boy done it,and ran away" Denial is not proof of innocence. If not the politically correct,who coined the phrase,and now promote, positive discrimination. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?
Ok then, why don't you use those words?
Because they can be taken as an insult. Nothing to do with political correctness. Why is a manhole now called a utility hole? Has a man, or hole ever been upset by that? I could call my friends a tranny or a black twat and they won't find it offensive and will give as good back as they get but it might upset someone who hears it so should all language be censored for fear of offending someones sensibilities?
And there we have it, you don’t use certain words because they can be offensive. That’s it, that is political correctness. You my friend, are politically correct, you do the very thing you claim to hate others for doing!!!!!
how is not insulting people being politically correct? What is it if I call you a dick?"Yes! Not insulting people is what politically correctness is! What did you think it was? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's a lot on here about being politically correct, much of it negative. I've just read the best definition / description that I've seen to date: A phrase that certain conservative elements had thought up because they needed a stick to beat back at the liberals with. It was a phrase coined by people who resented the fact that couldn't treat n******, y***, s****-l*****, b**** and c******* the way you used to, who wanted to believe that it was all part of some organised agenda (and therefore reversible), rather than a natural, gradual, evolved process of increased understanding and therefore tolerence, which was leaving them all behind. Country of the Blind, Christopher Brookmyre, Abacus, 1997, p22 My asterixes, I couldn't bring myself to type the words. In the beginning,the ethos of the politically correct was, Tolerance,respect,equality. Now,they are the most intolerant members of society,anyone who even questions their methods will be branded,sexist,racist, bigot, no matter how unfairly. it's enough to quieten even the most sincere doubters. They once stood for anti discrimination,and inequality they now openly promote,discrimination and inequality . They call it positive discrimination. Even George Orwell could not have given a more perfect example of doublethink, than positive discrimination. Changing the gender,race,Or religion,of the discriminated, Does not justify,the promotion of inequality ,and discrimination. They are fast becoming the very antipathy,of everything they once stood for. spot on
Load of bollocks actually!
What is listed above may exist, it may not, although some of it certainly does.
But it isn't political correctness.
That's a bit like saying
"a big boy done it,and ran away"
Denial is not proof of innocence.
If not the politically correct,who coined the phrase,and now promote,
positive discrimination.
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's a lot on here about being politically correct, much of it negative. I've just read the best definition / description that I've seen to date: A phrase that certain conservative elements had thought up because they needed a stick to beat back at the liberals with. It was a phrase coined by people who resented the fact that couldn't treat n******, y***, s****-l*****, b**** and c******* the way you used to, who wanted to believe that it was all part of some organised agenda (and therefore reversible), rather than a natural, gradual, evolved process of increased understanding and therefore tolerence, which was leaving them all behind. Country of the Blind, Christopher Brookmyre, Abacus, 1997, p22 My asterixes, I couldn't bring myself to type the words. In the beginning,the ethos of the politically correct was, Tolerance,respect,equality. Now,they are the most intolerant members of society,anyone who even questions their methods will be branded,sexist,racist, bigot, no matter how unfairly. it's enough to quieten even the most sincere doubters. They once stood for anti discrimination,and inequality they now openly promote,discrimination and inequality . They call it positive discrimination. Even George Orwell could not have given a more perfect example of doublethink, than positive discrimination. Changing the gender,race,Or religion,of the discriminated, Does not justify,the promotion of inequality ,and discrimination. They are fast becoming the very antipathy,of everything they once stood for. spot on
Load of bollocks actually!
What is listed above may exist, it may not, although some of it certainly does.
But it isn't political correctness.
That's a bit like saying
"a big boy done it,and ran away"
Denial is not proof of innocence.
If not the politically correct,who coined the phrase,and now promote,
positive discrimination.
we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it "That's doesn't really answer the question though,does it. Or are you denying,that the politically correct are promoting positive discrimination,as an option. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those who loathe political correctness, why do you miss the days when you would openly hear words like; homo, fag, tranny, spastic etc? Why was the world better when people said those things? I think everything has limits ? I hate the words above yet I think calling a Blackboard a Wipe Board is Daft , and Probbally insults the intelligence of Blacks ! quite right and what the fucks a Chairperson etc etc. And this might not be pc but everyone knows that women can't drive as well as men
Stop trying to deflect, come on CandM, why do you want to go around using words like fag and homo and tranny and spastic?
I don't. You did
So why do you want to use words like nigger and chink and paki?
I don't. But you have. Why?
Ok then, why don't you use those words?
Because they can be taken as an insult. Nothing to do with political correctness. Why is a manhole now called a utility hole? Has a man, or hole ever been upset by that? I could call my friends a tranny or a black twat and they won't find it offensive and will give as good back as they get but it might upset someone who hears it so should all language be censored for fear of offending someones sensibilities?
And there we have it, you don’t use certain words because they can be offensive. That’s it, that is political correctness. You my friend, are politically correct, you do the very thing you claim to hate others for doing!!!!!
how is not insulting people being politically correct? What is it if I call you a dick?
Yes! Not insulting people is what politically correctness is! What did you think it was? "not insulting people is not insulting people. Political correctness is an attempt to not discriminate which can lead to insults. Anyway, pub time, chance to ogle the barmaids tits | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" "a big boy done it,and ran away" " Another Christopher Brookmyre (see OP) novel, was that on purpose? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"another term for politcal correctness is respect. imagine people saying they're pissed off coz they have to respect people? doubt anyone would take them seriously. No this is spot on
do you respect racists?"kind of. i respect they are people in their own right but i don't respect their opinions on race and/or religion, immigration, and shit like that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it "we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
That's doesn't really answer the question though,does it.
Or are you denying,that the politically correct are promoting positive discrimination,as an option."It's not like there is some centralised organisation of political correctness that promotes certain things. I try to politically correct, and I have never promoted positive discrimination. There is even legal protection against positive discrimination in this country, so it's really not something to worry about. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
That's doesn't really answer the question though,does it.
Or are you denying,that the politically correct are promoting positive discrimination,as an option.
It's not like there is some centralised organisation of political correctness that promotes certain things. I try to politically correct, and I have never promoted positive discrimination. There is even legal protection against positive discrimination in this country, so it's really not something to worry about."Gives a bit of insight as to people's mind set though. In fact,as I said above,they are fast becoming the antipathy of all they once stood for. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority."Thank you. There is no right time,to practice discrimination. That's how it started first time round. It was wrong then,it's still wrong now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now."Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality""I will explain in mine - through being politically correct and through supporting shite like the EU | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
I will explain in mine - through being politically correct and through supporting shite like the EU"you are politically correct too, at least some times. So how are we promoting discrimination and inequality? Can we have some concrete examples? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality""Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination. I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade, Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
"You do realise that "the politically correct brigade" is not an actual organisation, don't you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
You do realise that "the politically correct brigade" is not an actual organisation, don't you?"Shhhh, you're not supposed to talk about it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
"Thats no problem, as has been said 3 times now, positive discrimination is illegal in the UK (Equality Act 2010) so I don’t know why you are concerned about it. Im just glad that the issue has been cleared up for you now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
You do realise that "the politically correct brigade" is not an actual organisation, don't you?"Neither is it an official military unit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now."sorry, just had a google and we don't, it's called positive action what i described. positive discrimination is something different and still illegal in this country. anyway, positive action makes sense in a world where we were told certain people are only fit for certain roles in society. it shows minorities (underrepresented in certain areas) that they are capable of doing those jobs. it has a positive knock on effect when people are influenced to do things out of the norm for their gender/status. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
sorry, just had a google and we don't, it's called positive action what i described.
positive discrimination is something different and still illegal in this country.
anyway, positive action makes sense in a world where we were told certain people are only fit for certain roles in society. it shows minorities (underrepresented in certain areas) that they are capable of doing those jobs. it has a positive knock on effect when people are influenced to do things out of the norm for their gender/status."Yes, I did see your comment and I was going to mention the difference, but you beat me to it. Something I've taken advantage of in the past, and I have no shame about this, is the guaranteed interview scheme relating to disability and employment. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
sorry, just had a google and we don't, it's called positive action what i described.
positive discrimination is something different and still illegal in this country.
anyway, positive action makes sense in a world where we were told certain people are only fit for certain roles in society. it shows minorities (underrepresented in certain areas) that they are capable of doing those jobs. it has a positive knock on effect when people are influenced to do things out of the norm for their gender/status.
Yes, I did see your comment and I was going to mention the difference, but you beat me to it.
Something I've taken advantage of in the past, and I have no shame about this, is the guaranteed interview scheme relating to disability and employment. "i was just googling why we had that (positive discrimination) and found out it was something different to what i described instead. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
You do realise that "the politically correct brigade" is not an actual organisation, don't you?
Neither is it an official military unit "
Not a military unit,more a shared ideology,
always well meaning,
all too often misguided.
Although I did have a wee picture in my head.
where all the female members wore a red uniform.
A red beret,
red pencil skirt,
just tight enough to show the outline of the stocking tops,
and suspender catches,
A tight white blouse,open just enough to show an expanse of cleavage,
with a red blazer,tapering in at the waist,
And 6 inch red patent high heels.
Oh here,now I've got a semi.
if they dressed like that,
even I would be promoting positive discrimination.
Though a bit pointless,if like you,they neither supported,nor promoted positive discrimination.
Be ironic,if I was the only one.
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
You do realise that "the politically correct brigade" is not an actual organisation, don't you?
Neither is it an official military unit
Not a military unit,more a shared ideology,
always well meaning,
all too often misguided.
Although I did have a wee picture in my head.
where all the female members wore a red uniform.
A red beret,
red pencil skirt,
just tight enough to show the outline of the stocking tops,
and suspender catches,
A tight white blouse,open just enough to show an expanse of cleavage,
with a red blazer,tapering in at the waist,
And 6 inch red patent high heels.
Oh here,now I've got a semi.
if they dressed like that,
even I would be promoting positive discrimination.
Though a bit pointless,if like you,they neither supported,nor promoted positive discrimination.
Be ironic,if I was the only one.
"You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong "Mostly because schools have smart boards now and not blackboards. 
Why would you call a white smart board a blackboard? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
You do realise that "the politically correct brigade" is not an actual organisation, don't you?
Neither is it an official military unit
Not a military unit,more a shared ideology,
always well meaning,
all too often misguided.
Although I did have a wee picture in my head.
where all the female members wore a red uniform.
A red beret,
red pencil skirt,
just tight enough to show the outline of the stocking tops,
and suspender catches,
A tight white blouse,open just enough to show an expanse of cleavage,
with a red blazer,tapering in at the waist,
And 6 inch red patent high heels.
Oh here,now I've got a semi.
if they dressed like that,
even I would be promoting positive discrimination.
Though a bit pointless,if like you,they neither supported,nor promoted positive discrimination.
Be ironic,if I was the only one.
You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality. "Have you been reading any of this thread??? I note in this country we now call it positive action, Just Playing with words,same meaning. This is where people will be given preferential treatment, Based on their gender race or religion. As always preferential treatment for one,is always to the detriment of another. If that's not inequality,and discrimination,then my dictionary is giving the wrong meaning for those two words. Could you now answer the question I asked above,the one you chose to ignore. who first coined,and promotes,the phrase and ethos of positive discrimination/action, if not the politically correct brigade. Fingers crossed for an answer this time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
we do. but it only applies if candidates are equally qualified and the area is underrepresented by minorities -then the minority is given priority.
Thank you.
There is no right time,to practice discrimination.
That's how it started first time round.
It was wrong then,it's still wrong now.
Im politically correct, please can you explain how, in your opinion, I " now openly promote,discrimination and inequality"
Oops My mistake,it must be some other group that openly supports positive discrimination.
I could have sworn it was the politically correct brigade,
Ah!well,maybe it was all a dream.
You do realise that "the politically correct brigade" is not an actual organisation, don't you?
Neither is it an official military unit
Not a military unit,more a shared ideology,
always well meaning,
all too often misguided.
Although I did have a wee picture in my head.
where all the female members wore a red uniform.
A red beret,
red pencil skirt,
just tight enough to show the outline of the stocking tops,
and suspender catches,
A tight white blouse,open just enough to show an expanse of cleavage,
with a red blazer,tapering in at the waist,
And 6 inch red patent high heels.
Oh here,now I've got a semi.
if they dressed like that,
even I would be promoting positive discrimination.
Though a bit pointless,if like you,they neither supported,nor promoted positive discrimination.
Be ironic,if I was the only one.
You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality.
Have you been reading any of this thread???
I note in this country we now call it positive action,
Just Playing with words,same meaning.
This is where people will be given preferential treatment,
Based on their gender race or religion.
As always preferential treatment for one,is always to the detriment of another.
If that's not inequality,and discrimination,then my dictionary is giving the wrong meaning for those two words.
Could you now answer the question I asked above,the one you chose to ignore.
who first coined,and promotes,the phrase and ethos of positive discrimination/action,
if not the politically correct brigade.
Fingers crossed for an answer this time.
"Positive action and positive discrimination are not the same thing. Perhaps you haven't been reading the thread? Basically what you seem to be saying is that there is one thing that you dont like, and have been told multiple times, that not only does it NOT happen, but that its ILLEGAL! So there is no coining, there is no promotion, no phrasing or ethos of positive discrimination! If you are not happy with that answer, I suggest you go back and read the OP | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality.
Have you been reading any of this thread???
Positive action and positive discrimination are not the same thing. Perhaps you haven't been reading the thread? Basically what you seem to be saying is that there is one thing that you dont like, and have been told multiple times, that not only does it NOT happen, but that its ILLEGAL! So there is no coining, there is no promotion, no phrasing or ethos of positive discrimination! If you are not happy with that answer, I suggest you go back and read the OP"I'll start again,I'll keep it as simple as possible,as you seem to have problems with words. This is not about legality. This is as simple as I can put it. So cut the flannel,and try to focus on only the question. Here goes. Question:is positive discrimination,an idea of the politically correct??? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality.
Have you been reading any of this thread???
Positive action and positive discrimination are not the same thing. Perhaps you haven't been reading the thread? Basically what you seem to be saying is that there is one thing that you dont like, and have been told multiple times, that not only does it NOT happen, but that its ILLEGAL! So there is no coining, there is no promotion, no phrasing or ethos of positive discrimination! If you are not happy with that answer, I suggest you go back and read the OP
I'll start again,I'll keep it as simple as possible,as you seem to have problems with words.
This is not about legality.
This is as simple as I can put it.
So cut the flannel,and try to focus on only the question.
Here goes.
Question:is positive discrimination,an idea of the politically correct???
"NO | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality.
Have you been reading any of this thread???
Positive action and positive discrimination are not the same thing. Perhaps you haven't been reading the thread? Basically what you seem to be saying is that there is one thing that you dont like, and have been told multiple times, that not only does it NOT happen, but that its ILLEGAL! So there is no coining, there is no promotion, no phrasing or ethos of positive discrimination! If you are not happy with that answer, I suggest you go back and read the OP
I'll start again,I'll keep it as simple as possible,as you seem to have problems with words.
This is not about legality.
This is as simple as I can put it.
So cut the flannel,and try to focus on only the question.
Here goes.
Question:is positive discrimination,an idea of the politically correct???
"civil rights movement so far as i can tell. and these laws were made to counteract the previous negative dicrimination that minorities had recieved, such as slavery. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Question:is positive discrimination,an idea of the politically correct??? " Question: what's this got to do with OP? It does sound like you're trying to find a way of justifying anti-political correctness. If that is the case, why? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. " Excellent point and because of this the remain vote was totally overstated . Project fear meant that the leave vote was understated as many erred on the side of caution. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. " How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless." you don't need to refer to people as any gender anyway when you think about it. well, maybe for research purposes since we split the genders and assigned them roles and behaviours based on gender and have created a bit of a fuck up there. excluding anyone because they are *something* is offensive. a business cannot tell gay people they can't be served, same as they can't do that to someone black. if people don't wanna serve certain types of the public then they shouldn't be service providers in the first place. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. you don't need to refer to people as any gender anyway when you think about it. well, maybe for research purposes since we split the genders and assigned them roles and behaviours based on gender and have created a bit of a fuck up there. excluding anyone because they are *something* is offensive. a business cannot tell gay people they can't be served, same as they can't do that to someone black. if people don't wanna serve certain types of the public then they shouldn't be service providers in the first place." that's a bit discriminatory isn't it? And why call yourself Queen? And what does it say at the side of 3sum Queen? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong "Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones. Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'. The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense. I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back. I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman. All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO. I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals. Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. you don't need to refer to people as any gender anyway when you think about it. well, maybe for research purposes since we split the genders and assigned them roles and behaviours based on gender and have created a bit of a fuck up there. excluding anyone because they are *something* is offensive. a business cannot tell gay people they can't be served, same as they can't do that to someone black. if people don't wanna serve certain types of the public then they shouldn't be service providers in the first place." Or maybe those who are so easily offended should respect peoples religious beliefs . Their upset feelings quickly dissappeared once they got their compensation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless." Well, obviously not endless as you've given just three examples. The first being a fallacy. If a transgendered person identifies as female, surely it would be correct to refer to them as such. There is no law compelling anyone not to use gender labels. None. It is a fallacy. The second and third are always trotted out in this argument. People providing a service cannot refuse that service on discriminatory grounds. That is the law. End of. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. you don't need to refer to people as any gender anyway when you think about it. well, maybe for research purposes since we split the genders and assigned them roles and behaviours based on gender and have created a bit of a fuck up there. excluding anyone because they are *something* is offensive. a business cannot tell gay people they can't be served, same as they can't do that to someone black. if people don't wanna serve certain types of the public then they shouldn't be service providers in the first place. Or maybe those who are so easily offended should respect peoples religious beliefs . Their upset feelings quickly dissappeared once they got their compensation. " You can respect beliefs insofar as they don't impact wider societal ethics. To take your statement to its logic conclusion- if I was part of a religion that practised ritual sacrifice, would you say that people ought to respect my beliefs? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. you don't need to refer to people as any gender anyway when you think about it. well, maybe for research purposes since we split the genders and assigned them roles and behaviours based on gender and have created a bit of a fuck up there. excluding anyone because they are *something* is offensive. a business cannot tell gay people they can't be served, same as they can't do that to someone black. if people don't wanna serve certain types of the public then they shouldn't be service providers in the first place. Or maybe those who are so easily offended should respect peoples religious beliefs . Their upset feelings quickly dissappeared once they got their compensation. " How do you know this? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. you don't need to refer to people as any gender anyway when you think about it. well, maybe for research purposes since we split the genders and assigned them roles and behaviours based on gender and have created a bit of a fuck up there. excluding anyone because they are *something* is offensive. a business cannot tell gay people they can't be served, same as they can't do that to someone black. if people don't wanna serve certain types of the public then they shouldn't be service providers in the first place. Or maybe those who are so easily offended should respect peoples religious beliefs . Their upset feelings quickly dissappeared once they got their compensation. " it's not disrespecting religion to have your own feelings on love that religion doesn't agree with. religion is all about love and accepting people, not into your religion if they fail to keep the rules of that religion but, knowing that god loves everyone and forgives (what he sees as) sins. service provision is about providing a service -you cannot refuse to serve someone because you think they're unworthy as you're not allowed to judge people yourself anyway, no religion allows that because god is the judge when it comes to trying to get into the afterlife, and he will smite anyone before that stage if he feels the need to. so no, using religion as an excuse to shame or hurt someone else is never a good enough excuse. if they didn't respect the religion then they wouldn't go into the shop in the first place to be served by them, they would avoid and not pay money to them coz i wouldn't pay anyone i disrespected. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted. "Nobody has experienced those things either- the people who tend to bemoan "political correctness gone mad" are those who believe that one off stories in the news, exaggerated to sell papers are either commonplace or the norm. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted. "Excellent post and these points are often made by 'social justice' warriors with Twitter handles along the lines of 'drink male tears' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted.
Excellent post and these points are often made by 'social justice' warriors with Twitter handles along the lines of 'drink male tears' "It is the dumbing down of debate on the whole issue that gets to me the most. Surely, common sense in the matter should prevale? If this whole PC thing were as some allege, we would have laws stating such. As we don't, I can't see what the issue is. I can see why some keep clawing their nails into the subject though. Not sure they can themselves however. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted.
Excellent post and these points are often made by 'social justice' warriors with Twitter handles along the lines of 'drink male tears'
It is the dumbing down of debate on the whole issue that gets to me the most. Surely, common sense in the matter should prevale? If this whole PC thing were as some allege, we would have laws stating such. As we don't, I can't see what the issue is.
I can see why some keep clawing their nails into the subject though. Not sure they can themselves however. "Because they want an excuse to be a bigoted twat. See: the beginning of the thread... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted.
Excellent post and these points are often made by 'social justice' warriors with Twitter handles along the lines of 'drink male tears'
It is the dumbing down of debate on the whole issue that gets to me the most. Surely, common sense in the matter should prevale? If this whole PC thing were as some allege, we would have laws stating such. As we don't, I can't see what the issue is.
I can see why some keep clawing their nails into the subject though. Not sure they can themselves however.
Because they want an excuse to be a bigoted twat. See: the beginning of the thread... "Living their lives (when it suits them) by the mantra of the Daily Mail and other right-wing media, failing to see how that type of media would castigate them for their own chosen lifestyle choices, eg swinging! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted.
Excellent post and these points are often made by 'social justice' warriors with Twitter handles along the lines of 'drink male tears'
It is the dumbing down of debate on the whole issue that gets to me the most. Surely, common sense in the matter should prevale? If this whole PC thing were as some allege, we would have laws stating such. As we don't, I can't see what the issue is.
I can see why some keep clawing their nails into the subject though. Not sure they can themselves however.
Because they want an excuse to be a bigoted twat. See: the beginning of the thread...
Living their lives (when it suits them) by the mantra of the Daily Mail and other right-wing media, failing to see how that type of media would castigate them for their own chosen lifestyle choices, eg swinging! "i think we need to get organised and destroy the media for doing that. it attracts all the crap men to the site thinking we're prostitutes who will fuck anything. loads of people have been complaining about the fakes and wasters and crap men already. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted.
Excellent post and these points are often made by 'social justice' warriors with Twitter handles along the lines of 'drink male tears'
It is the dumbing down of debate on the whole issue that gets to me the most. Surely, common sense in the matter should prevale? If this whole PC thing were as some allege, we would have laws stating such. As we don't, I can't see what the issue is.
I can see why some keep clawing their nails into the subject though. Not sure they can themselves however.
Because they want an excuse to be a bigoted twat. See: the beginning of the thread...
Living their lives (when it suits them) by the mantra of the Daily Mail and other right-wing media, failing to see how that type of media would castigate them for their own chosen lifestyle choices, eg swinging! "I admit, it does (or did) surprise me when I see it round here, but it appears that some poepole can't see the contrdiction... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What about the pronouns 3sum queen? Can you answer my question? " don't know what you mean, reword it if you can and i'll try. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought" That old chestnut? Again? Play us another one, please. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought" Is that a (very) slightly convoluted way of saying "I know you are, but what am I?"... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure it is Bollocks ! Pretty sure schools say Wipe Board now ? But prepared to be wrong
Electronic White Boards where I work. Or Smart Boards if they have full connectivity (WiFi etc). We have black boards too, portable ones.
Never been asked not to refer to a black board or white board by any other name though, we would generally invite students 'up to the board'.
The whole concept that some people on here are propagating is nonsense.
I walked over a manhole on the way to work. It was damaged and I rang the council and reported the manhole. The person on the other end of the 'phone repeated the word manhole back.
I also write to the chairman of a local society I am a member of, referring to said person as a chairman. The fact she is a woman has never been an issue, the office is that of chairman, not person or woman.
All of the people who rant on about political correctness being bad (or even real) are swallowing the hubris of the media and others BECAUSE IT SUITS THEM TO.
I'm also looking forward to Christmas and have never been asked not to refer to it as such. The same as Easter. Neither have I been asked not to refer to Diwali, Eid or other religious holidays and festivals.
Utter bull shit spewed by people who are, whether they admit it or not, bigoted.
Excellent post and these points are often made by 'social justice' warriors with Twitter handles along the lines of 'drink male tears'
It is the dumbing down of debate on the whole issue that gets to me the most. Surely, common sense in the matter should prevale? If this whole PC thing were as some allege, we would have laws stating such. As we don't, I can't see what the issue is.
I can see why some keep clawing their nails into the subject though. Not sure they can themselves however.
Because they want an excuse to be a bigoted twat. See: the beginning of the thread...
Living their lives (when it suits them) by the mantra of the Daily Mail and other right-wing media, failing to see how that type of media would castigate them for their own chosen lifestyle choices, eg swinging!
I admit, it does (or did) surprise me when I see it round here, but it appears that some poepole can't see the contrdiction..."Which makes the whole thing rather amusing! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought Is that a (very) slightly convoluted way of saying "I know you are, but what am I?"... "or a way of saying you don't know what bigot means | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What about the pronouns 3sum queen? Can you answer my question? don't know what you mean, reword it if you can and i'll try." Just read it..... Basically can the English language live without his/her/he/she and so on? And why is that better? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought Is that a (very) slightly convoluted way of saying "I know you are, but what am I?"...
or a way of saying you don't know what bigot means"Course I do. Just like I know what being obtuse is. And no, thinking that other people, who are bigots, are bigots, doesn't make you a bigot. It makes you somebody who thinks that some poeple who behave a certain way are bigots. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought Is that a (very) slightly convoluted way of saying "I know you are, but what am I?"...
or a way of saying you don't know what bigot means"This might be of some interest: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2015/04/the-intolerance-of-bigotry-is-not-bigotry/ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless." Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What about the pronouns 3sum queen? Can you answer my question? don't know what you mean, reword it if you can and i'll try. Just read it..... Basically can the English language live without his/her/he/she and so on? And why is that better? " i think so yes. example: we have mum, dad, or parents (the last word applies to both mums and dads). now think of a mum (not your own mum but mum in general), do you assign anything at all to this word? please be honest with yourself, i do assign certain things as mumsy or something typical of a mum. now do the same for dad. do you assign anything to a dad? again i do. do you think society attaches anything to either of those roles? i know it does, although less so than it used to. now think about the word parent. it applies to both of the above. can you assign anything to this word? what you assign to this word and is anything different to what you assigned to the above? are there things that apply to only one gender so you can't assign them to the word parent because this word is not gender exclusive? yet both parents are capable of the exact same things*. so you can see that using gender specific words can turn something into something else, or exclude one gender. same for nurse and doctor...they seem to be gender specific words when in fact they are just different job roles. it's better because we are not separating the genders. we are not excluding anyone from being somethng they want to be based on gender and we are not assigning roles to specific genders now. feminine and masculine, this is slightly different as these do describe certain behaviours. but being a feminine man or masculine woman shouldn't be something strange, yet not everyone accepts this because we assign things to each gender and do not treat people like men and women are equals. *i know men cannot breastfeed but that's the only physical thing they cannot do that a female can. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying!" It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? " Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? " I raised the question of blacks to test your beliefs. I still find it worrying, and offensive, that you believe that a service provider should be able to dicriminate based on sexuality. This is fundamentally wrong. It has precisely zero to do with political correctness, it is wrong, pure and simple. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. you don't need to refer to people as any gender anyway when you think about it. well, maybe for research purposes since we split the genders and assigned them roles and behaviours based on gender and have created a bit of a fuck up there. excluding anyone because they are *something* is offensive. a business cannot tell gay people they can't be served, same as they can't do that to someone black. if people don't wanna serve certain types of the public then they shouldn't be service providers in the first place. Or maybe those who are so easily offended should respect peoples religious beliefs . Their upset feelings quickly dissappeared once they got their compensation. " I find it fascinating that on so many threads you jump to the defence of the most reactionary kind of christianity, when, by your own presence here (unless you don't actually meet and its all a spoof), you are a habitual fornicator and adulterer (presuming you swing with couples) and as such, as far as they are concered, you are destined for an eternity in hell. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ridiculous If you replace mom or dad with parent you have lost 50‰ of the meaning. For what benefit? " Er, what? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ridiculous If you replace mom or dad with parent you have lost 50‰ of the meaning. For what benefit? Er, what?" It's the new thing, "grammarithmetic". It's all the rage, apparently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ridiculous If you replace mom or dad with parent you have lost 50‰ of the meaning. For what benefit? Er, what? It's the new thing, "grammarithmetic". It's all the rage, apparently. " Yeah it's great
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ridiculous If you replace mom or dad with parent you have lost 50‰ of the meaning. For what benefit? " what meaning does either mum and dad have that parent cannot? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ridiculous question That they are male or female for one " but should that really make a difference? there is nothing a mum can do that a dad cannot, and vice versa. we have turned the role parent into two separate things for no reason. that is the ridiculous thing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? " Do you know any of the Bible? Race and ethnicity are most definitely mentioned: - Genesis 27 45-47 - Acts 2 9-10 - Judges 12 To name only 3. Surely, as a Christian, you would know the Bible? Or is this another source you are not obsessed by, but fall back on when you think it will suit your argument? You always try and circumvent the discussion and posit nonsense to avoid answering questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Do you know any of the Bible? Race and ethnicity are most definitely mentioned: - Genesis 27 45-47 - Acts 2 9-10 - Judges 12 To name only 3. Surely, as a Christian, you would know the Bible? Or is this another source you are not obsessed by, but fall back on when you think it will suit your argument? You always try and circumvent the discussion and posit nonsense to avoid answering questions. " Although I have an above average knowledge of the bible (well, knowing there's an old anew testament would do that!), I don't claim to be a scholar. I do however, understand that it was used to defend slavery in the USA. Since slave owners in the 1800s were (invariably?) christian, presumably Pat believes that they were fine to be slavers too? If not, Pat, why not, why does your argument that is basically that christian beliefs top mere antidiscrimination, not apply here? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Do you know any of the Bible? Race and ethnicity are most definitely mentioned: - Genesis 27 45-47 - Acts 2 9-10 - Judges 12 To name only 3. Surely, as a Christian, you would know the Bible? Or is this another source you are not obsessed by, but fall back on when you think it will suit your argument? You always try and circumvent the discussion and posit nonsense to avoid answering questions. " I am certain anyone could do an internet search and quote a few passages in isolation which in any event is meaningless. Being a Christian does not mean that you need to know every single line in the Bible . That would br adsurd. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ridiculous question That they are male or female for one but should that really make a difference? there is nothing a mum can do that a dad cannot, and vice versa. we have turned the role parent into two separate things for no reason. that is the ridiculous thing." Ask any child if mum and dad act the same
I see what you are getting at? But what is the point? What is the harm?
There any many situations where it is useful to know the sex of the subject of conversation | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Do you know any of the Bible? Race and ethnicity are most definitely mentioned: - Genesis 27 45-47 - Acts 2 9-10 - Judges 12 To name only 3. Surely, as a Christian, you would know the Bible? Or is this another source you are not obsessed by, but fall back on when you think it will suit your argument? You always try and circumvent the discussion and posit nonsense to avoid answering questions. Although I have an above average knowledge of the bible (well, knowing there's an old anew testament would do that!), I don't claim to be a scholar. I do however, understand that it was used to defend slavery in the USA. Since slave owners in the 1800s were (invariably?) christian, presumably Pat believes that they were fine to be slavers too? If not, Pat, why not, why does your argument that is basically that christian beliefs top mere antidiscrimination, not apply here?" I am not certain as ti why what happened in 1800 would be of any interest now , disregarding the fact that your statement about slaves is probably untrue in any event . As I treat people with respect I have no interest in anti discrimination laws. If gay marriage or partnerships go against someones Christian beliefs , they should not be expected to adhere to laws that they do not believe in. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Do you know any of the Bible? Race and ethnicity are most definitely mentioned: - Genesis 27 45-47 - Acts 2 9-10 - Judges 12 To name only 3. Surely, as a Christian, you would know the Bible? Or is this another source you are not obsessed by, but fall back on when you think it will suit your argument? You always try and circumvent the discussion and posit nonsense to avoid answering questions. Although I have an above average knowledge of the bible (well, knowing there's an old anew testament would do that!), I don't claim to be a scholar. I do however, understand that it was used to defend slavery in the USA. Since slave owners in the 1800s were (invariably?) christian, presumably Pat believes that they were fine to be slavers too? If not, Pat, why not, why does your argument that is basically that christian beliefs top mere antidiscrimination, not apply here? I am not certain as ti why what happened in 1800 would be of any interest now , disregarding the fact that your statement about slaves is probably untrue in any event . As I treat people with respect I have no interest in anti discrimination laws. If gay marriage or partnerships go against someones Christian beliefs , they should not be expected to adhere to laws that they do not believe in." What about you though? Could they discriminate against you? I can think of two commandments that you break off the top of my head... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? I raised the question of blacks to test your beliefs. I still find it worrying, and offensive, that you believe that a service provider should be able to dicriminate based on sexuality. This is fundamentally wrong. It has precisely zero to do with political correctness, it is wrong, pure and simple." It may be wrong in your eyes but the bakery concerned got enormous support in the local community . Like it or not the norm is still a mixed sex marriage . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Do you know any of the Bible? Race and ethnicity are most definitely mentioned: - Genesis 27 45-47 - Acts 2 9-10 - Judges 12 To name only 3. Surely, as a Christian, you would know the Bible? Or is this another source you are not obsessed by, but fall back on when you think it will suit your argument? You always try and circumvent the discussion and posit nonsense to avoid answering questions. Although I have an above average knowledge of the bible (well, knowing there's an old anew testament would do that!), I don't claim to be a scholar. I do however, understand that it was used to defend slavery in the USA. Since slave owners in the 1800s were (invariably?) christian, presumably Pat believes that they were fine to be slavers too? If not, Pat, why not, why does your argument that is basically that christian beliefs top mere antidiscrimination, not apply here? I am not certain as ti why what happened in 1800 would be of any interest now , disregarding the fact that your statement about slaves is probably untrue in any event . As I treat people with respect I have no interest in anti discrimination laws. If gay marriage or partnerships go against someones Christian beliefs , they should not be expected to adhere to laws that they do not believe in." Pat, you're getting more ridiculous in every post. Read back, what you wrote which is basically carte blanche for any religious group to disobey any law it feels like. Or does your view not apply to Hindus, Muslims, Buddists, Sikhs, etc? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? I raised the question of blacks to test your beliefs. I still find it worrying, and offensive, that you believe that a service provider should be able to dicriminate based on sexuality. This is fundamentally wrong. It has precisely zero to do with political correctness, it is wrong, pure and simple. It may be wrong in your eyes but the bakery concerned got enormous support in the local community . Like it or not the norm is still a mixed sex marriage . " Its one thing something being the norm, and completeley another for discriminating against people for not being the norm though, isn't it? Pubs used to have signs saying "No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish"..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works." The source will be a national newspaper . It should of course be stated that quoting a source in isolation is meaningless . I prefer to assume that what I read is true . Some narrow minded bigots will of course tend to dismiss information as being untrue if it does not suit them. I have always found that those who quote sources have really boring posts . Why would anyone want to check back to source information. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works. The source will be a national newspaper . It should of course be stated that quoting a source in isolation is meaningless . I prefer to assume that what I read is true . Some narrow minded bigots will of course tend to dismiss information as being untrue if it does not suit them. I have always found that those who quote sources have really boring posts . Why would anyone want to check back to source information." Er? Can't you see the rank stupidity of you're last sentence? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works. The source will be a national newspaper . It should of course be stated that quoting a source in isolation is meaningless . I prefer to assume that what I read is true . Some narrow minded bigots will of course tend to dismiss information as being untrue if it does not suit them. I have always found that those who quote sources have really boring posts . Why would anyone want to check back to source information. Er? Can't you see the rank stupidity of you're last sentence?" most people can't debate. this ones been not been and almost fallacy free though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought" My thoughts exactly . I have always found that those who consider other people to be bigots are themselves narrow minded and self righteous . They seem to think that only they are rigbt and are totally intolerant of other peoples views . They tend to adopt a sneering and condescending attitude towards other peoples views are claim the moral high ground. It is of course be remembered that the politically correct brigade is a nice little money spinner for some people. We even have local authorities employing diversity officers . The most nauseating part of the polically correct brigade is that they assume members of monority groups are unable to stand up for themselves..Such an attitude is both patronising and condescending . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works. The source will be a national newspaper . It should of course be stated that quoting a source in isolation is meaningless . I prefer to assume that what I read is true . Some narrow minded bigots will of course tend to dismiss information as being untrue if it does not suit them. I have always found that those who quote sources have really boring posts . Why would anyone want to check back to source information. Er? Can't you see the rank stupidity of you're last sentence?" Maybe I live in the real world . This is an internet discussion forum. In real life it may be necessary if making an important decision , it becomes irrelevant in Cyberland . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works. The source will be a national newspaper . It should of course be stated that quoting a source in isolation is meaningless . I prefer to assume that what I read is true . Some narrow minded bigots will of course tend to dismiss information as being untrue if it does not suit them. I have always found that those who quote sources have really boring posts . Why would anyone want to check back to source information. Er? Can't you see the rank stupidity of you're last sentence? Maybe I live in the real world . This is an internet discussion forum. In real life it may be necessary if making an important decision , it becomes irrelevant in Cyberland . " without facts to back yourself up you might as well have said nothing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought My thoughts exactly . I have always found that those who consider other people to be bigots are themselves narrow minded and self righteous . They seem to think that only they are rigbt and are totally intolerant of other peoples views . They tend to adopt a sneering and condescending attitude towards other peoples views are claim the moral high ground. It is of course be remembered that the politically correct brigade is a nice little money spinner for some people. We even have local authorities employing diversity officers . The most nauseating part of the polically correct brigade is that they assume members of monority groups are unable to stand up for themselves..Such an attitude is both patronising and condescending ." Stop digging....
And just for fun:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife"
"Thou shalt not commit adultery"
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe I live in the real world . This is an internet discussion forum. In real life it may be necessary if making an important decision , it becomes irrelevant in Cyberland . "
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe I live in the real world . This is an internet discussion forum. In real life it may be necessary if making an important decision , it becomes irrelevant in Cyberland . " So, by your own admission above, what you write here is uninformed. Many of us have suspected this for some time, many thanks for confirming it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe I live in the real world . This is an internet discussion forum. In real life it may be necessary if making an important decision , it becomes irrelevant in Cyberland . So, by your own admission above, what you write here is uninformed. Many of us have suspected this for some time, many thanks for confirming it." Quite the opposite though it may not suit your views. I get my information from a variety of national newspapers . As you raised the issue I suspect that I may be more informed than you and certainly a lot more tolerant of other peoples views . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works. The source will be a national newspaper . It should of course be stated that quoting a source in isolation is meaningless . I prefer to assume that what I read is true . Some narrow minded bigots will of course tend to dismiss information as being untrue if it does not suit them. I have always found that those who quote sources have really boring posts . Why would anyone want to check back to source information. Er? Can't you see the rank stupidity of you're last sentence? Maybe I live in the real world . This is an internet discussion forum. In real life it may be necessary if making an important decision , it becomes irrelevant in Cyberland . without facts to back yourself up you might as well have said nothing." I am certain that the various national newspapers have access to all the facts. They do the job for me . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought" No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. " Are you in the brigade, then?
Can I still use a blackboard?
There are important questions that need answeing about cakes too, apparently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Not obsessed by the source? What relevance? For gods' sake, tell me you're kidding? You need to be able to quote a source for things like your allegation so that we know it's valid. I very much doubt it is, it sounds like bollocks. Since you made the allegation, it's up to you to cite your source, that's how it works. The source will be a national newspaper . It should of course be stated that quoting a source in isolation is meaningless . I prefer to assume that what I read is true . Some narrow minded bigots will of course tend to dismiss information as being untrue if it does not suit them. I have always found that those who quote sources have really boring posts . Why would anyone want to check back to source information. Er? Can't you see the rank stupidity of you're last sentence? Maybe I live in the real world . This is an internet discussion forum. In real life it may be necessary if making an important decision , it becomes irrelevant in Cyberland . without facts to back yourself up you might as well have said nothing. I am certain that the various national newspapers have access to all the facts. They do the job for me . " oh dear. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. Are you in the brigade, then?
Can I still use a blackboard?
There are important questions that need answeing about cakes too, apparently. "you can buy blackboards still yes. just schools decided to use those better electronic boards that have multiple uses. paid for by cake sales. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am certain that the various national newspapers have access to all the facts. They do the job for me . " Oh dear! Well Pat, sorry to burst your well-informed bubble but: Madeleine McCann hasn't been found. Princess Diana wasn't murdered by Prince Philip. Blackboards are called blackboards. Manholes are called manholes. We have no idea what the weather's going to be like in February. We did go to the moon. The earth is (roughly) spherical. There is no evidence for the christian bible's creation story. Sorry mate! You can't claim to be well informed by reading newspapers alone. They don't check facts, as we know to our cost (see brexit debates ad nauseam). Yes, you may be better informed than me, however, you hide it well. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As I treat people with respect I have no interest in anti discrimination laws. If gay marriage or partnerships go against someones Christian beliefs , they should not be expected to adhere to laws that they do not believe in." Yes they should because ITS THE LAW! You can't pick and choose which laws to obey! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? I raised the question of blacks to test your beliefs. I still find it worrying, and offensive, that you believe that a service provider should be able to dicriminate based on sexuality. This is fundamentally wrong. It has precisely zero to do with political correctness, it is wrong, pure and simple. It may be wrong in your eyes but the bakery concerned got enormous support in the local community . Like it or not the norm is still a mixed sex marriage . " Stuff the 'norm'. Tolerance equals progress. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As I treat people with respect I have no interest in anti discrimination laws. If gay marriage or partnerships go against someones Christian beliefs , they should not be expected to adhere to laws that they do not believe in. Yes they should because ITS THE LAW! You can't pick and choose which laws to obey!" i used to be a mormon and even they know that the laws of your country override the laws of their religion. they even talk to god, via prophets, so they can change their religious rules if they wanna. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. " which section of society does that apply mainly to now do you think? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. Are you in the brigade, then?
Can I still use a blackboard?
There are important questions that need answeing about cakes too, apparently. "Not in any brigade. Just part of a progressive tolerant society. Not sure why you are asking me if you can use a blackboard? Do you have one? As for cakes? Victoria Sponge is my favourite if you are offering one please | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. which section of society does that apply mainly to now do you think?" Any body who wants to be. Those who don't are the ones who end up arguing for 'the good old days' when you could say what you liked and if someone didn't like it then sod'em | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. which section of society does that apply mainly to now do you think? Any body who wants to be. Those who don't are the ones who end up arguing for 'the good old days' when you could say what you liked and if someone didn't like it then sod'em" I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect" I work in education. I don't try to 'appear' anything, I live it every day. Promoting inclusiveness and respect for other cultures etc We have kids from African, Eastern European and Oriental back grounds. We all faiths, cultures and preferences are explored and discussed. Tolerance through education. If they grow up tolerant then the chances are their kids will be. That's how it spreads and the human race as whole improves. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect I work in education. I don't try to 'appear' anything, I live it every day. Promoting inclusiveness and respect for other cultures etc We have kids from African, Eastern European and Oriental back grounds. We all faiths, cultures and preferences are explored and discussed. Tolerance through education. If they grow up tolerant then the chances are their kids will be. That's how it spreads and the human race as whole improves." Good man! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect I work in education. I don't try to 'appear' anything, I live it every day. Promoting inclusiveness and respect for other cultures etc We have kids from African, Eastern European and Oriental back grounds. We all faiths, cultures and preferences are explored and discussed. Tolerance through education. If they grow up tolerant then the chances are their kids will be. That's how it spreads and the human race as whole improves. Good man!" Thank you Kids are kids where ever they are from. It's weirdly nice that they'll argue tooth and nail about who on the telly is the best at sports or singing but the insults they throw at each other are never racial or religious. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Well, obviously not endless as you've given just three examples. The first being a fallacy. If a transgendered person identifies as female, surely it would be correct to refer to them as such. There is no law compelling anyone not to use gender labels. None. It is a fallacy. The second and third are always trotted out in this argument. People providing a service cannot refuse that service on discriminatory grounds. That is the law. End of. " Regardless of the law people should not be prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs . We are becoming an increasing intolerant society if people believe anyone should be penalised because of their Christian beliefs . Those who push being politically correct tend to be totally intolerant towards other members of society. I would guess that most of them work in the public sector | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. which section of society does that apply mainly to now do you think? Any body who wants to be. Those who don't are the ones who end up arguing for 'the good old days' when you could say what you liked and if someone didn't like it then sod'em I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect" The funny thing CandM is how you DONT want to appear politically correct, but as you have said yourself, you chose not to use certain words because they could offend or insult people, which is being politically correct! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. which section of society does that apply mainly to now do you think? Any body who wants to be. Those who don't are the ones who end up arguing for 'the good old days' when you could say what you liked and if someone didn't like it then sod'em I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect The funny thing CandM is how you DONT want to appear politically correct, but as you have said yourself, you chose not to use certain words because they could offend or insult people, which is being politically correct! "no its not | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. which section of society does that apply mainly to now do you think? Any body who wants to be. Those who don't are the ones who end up arguing for 'the good old days' when you could say what you liked and if someone didn't like it then sod'em I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect The funny thing CandM is how you DONT want to appear politically correct, but as you have said yourself, you chose not to use certain words because they could offend or insult people, which is being politically correct!
no its not"Anyone else want to help me out here? Is that political correctness or not? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought No. Just seeing things clearly. Political Correctness has done more to bring our society together in the last 20 years than anything else. Despite the people trying to reject it and drag us back to casual racism, sexism and religious intolerance. which section of society does that apply mainly to now do you think? Any body who wants to be. Those who don't are the ones who end up arguing for 'the good old days' when you could say what you liked and if someone didn't like it then sod'em I take it you don't want to appear to be politically incorrect The funny thing CandM is how you DONT want to appear politically correct, but as you have said yourself, you chose not to use certain words because they could offend or insult people, which is being politically correct!
no its not
Anyone else want to help me out here? Is that political correctness or not?"why is it politically correct if I choose not to call you a dick? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The funny thing CandM is how you DONT want to appear politically correct, but as you have said yourself, you chose not to use certain words because they could offend or insult people, which is being politically correct!
no its not
Anyone else want to help me out here? Is that political correctness or not?
why is it politically correct if I choose not to call you a dick?"It really upsets you to learn that you are politically correct doesn’t it? Why? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Please could you cite a source for your first paragraph. Thanks. I suspect it's up there with blackboards and manholes. As to your other two points, which are basically the same, interesting to see that you clearly think that it should be acceptable for a service provider to discriminate on grounds of sexuality. Just out of interest, do you also think the guesthouse owner should be able to refuse black people? Worrying, Pat, very worrying! It migbt be worrying to you but not to me as I treat everyone fairly and equally . I do however put Christian beliefs first and no one is going to penalise me because of them. I can see no reference to the colour of skin in the bible so I am surprised you raised the question . Unlike some forum posters I am not obsessed with the source of my information. In any event what possible relevance does it have ? Do you know any of the Bible? Race and ethnicity are most definitely mentioned: - Genesis 27 45-47 - Acts 2 9-10 - Judges 12 To name only 3. Surely, as a Christian, you would know the Bible? Or is this another source you are not obsessed by, but fall back on when you think it will suit your argument? You always try and circumvent the discussion and posit nonsense to avoid answering questions. I am certain anyone could do an internet search and quote a few passages in isolation which in any event is meaningless. Being a Christian does not mean that you need to know every single line in the Bible . That would br adsurd." I have a degree in Theology. Christ was a teacher and He implored His followers to seek to become like him. Good teachers seek knowledge, they don't blindly follow something. I can assure you that there are Christians out there who do know their Bible, maybe not word for word, but certainly what messages are contained within it. Your preponderance for pomposity and pedantry is most tiresome. When you cannot back up your bizarre rhetoric, you attempt to close down debate. I have said it before: it is like debating with a child. Carry on living in your glass house, but please, don't throw stones. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting that in this thread there have been two points raised in an attempt to ridicule political correctness. Namely 'wipe boards' and 'utility chambers'. As we know, these are non-existent but it does make me wonder how many people do make up their minds about things based on things that they know which are actually incorrect. It's not just politics, some more 'facts' that we see on fab forums include: A man's ejaculate comes from his balls. Shaving is more hygenic. If a man doesn't ejaculate often he'll damage his balls. To name but three. Returning to politics, it makes me worry in this brexit and trump era, how many of those votes were also based on knowledge that was incorrect. How about not being allowed to refer to someone as either male or female because it offends transgenders . And a Christian bakery being prosecuted becauuse they refused to bake a cake celebrating gay rights Or the Christian guest house owners who were prosecuted for failing to take a booking from a gay couple . The list is endless. Well, obviously not endless as you've given just three examples. The first being a fallacy. If a transgendered person identifies as female, surely it would be correct to refer to them as such. There is no law compelling anyone not to use gender labels. None. It is a fallacy. The second and third are always trotted out in this argument. People providing a service cannot refuse that service on discriminatory grounds. That is the law. End of. Regardless of the law people should not be prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs . We are becoming an increasing intolerant society if people believe anyone should be penalised because of their Christian beliefs . Those who push being politically correct tend to be totally intolerant towards other members of society. I would guess that most of them work in the public sector " What does the public sector have to do with this? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Aren't people who call people bigoted twats bigoted twats? Just a thought My thoughts exactly . I have always found that those who consider other people to be bigots are themselves narrow minded and self righteous . They seem to think that only they are rigbt and are totally intolerant of other peoples views . They tend to adopt a sneering and condescending attitude towards other peoples views are claim the moral high ground. It is of course be remembered that the politically correct brigade is a nice little money spinner for some people. We even have local authorities employing diversity officers . The most nauseating part of the polically correct brigade is that they assume members of monority groups are unable to stand up for themselves..Such an attitude is both patronising and condescending ." PC Brigade member and proud of it. You are, at least, consistent in your posts on these matters. You also dismiss my point, every single time, that the cases you cite broke the law. By your reckoning that makes me condescending and and self righteous, intolerant of your views and somehow making money just for stating the simple fact that the service providers broke the law. I raise this, again, only because you have now stretched your point in this thread to state that people should have the right to break the law if it goes against their religious beliefs. Others have asked you if this applies to other religions, other than Christianity, and you have avoided answering that question. I posit that, in my intolerant, money spinning, condescending manner, that is because if I bother to look I will find the threads where you have condemned people generally for breaking the laws of this land and, in particular, Muslims for their actions. You cannot pick and choose which laws you want to follow without allowing others the same freedom. Of course, if one is allowed to do that then it's not law but just guidance and norms. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Regardless of the law people should not be prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs . We are becoming an increasing intolerant society if people believe anyone should be penalised because of their Christian beliefs . Those who push being politically correct tend to be totally intolerant towards other members of society. I would guess that most of them work in the public sector " what utter nonsense.. its the law of the land and it applies equally without favour to class, culture or religion.. if its broken by someone they can not hide behind their 'religious belief's'.. therein lies intolerance and anarchy.. its not intolerance of someones beliefs its that whomever has broken the law, be they religious or not.. equality under the law regardless of one belief system having preference over another or whether someone else has no belief's.. anything else is what the scum like IS would have.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Regardless of the law people should not be prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs . We are becoming an increasing intolerant society if people believe anyone should be penalised because of their Christian beliefs . Those who push being politically correct tend to be totally intolerant towards other members of society. I would guess that most of them work in the public sector what utter nonsense.. its the law of the land and it applies equally without favour to class, culture or religion.. if its broken by someone they can not hide behind their 'religious belief's'.. therein lies intolerance and anarchy.. its not intolerance of someones beliefs its that whomever has broken the law, be they religious or not.. equality under the law regardless of one belief system having preference over another or whether someone else has no belief's.. anything else is what the scum like IS would have.. " Although Pat may be shocked to learn he is supporting the IS world view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality.
Have you been reading any of this thread???
Positive action and positive discrimination are not the same thing. Perhaps you haven't been reading the thread? Basically what you seem to be saying is that there is one thing that you dont like, and have been told multiple times, that not only does it NOT happen, but that its ILLEGAL! So there is no coining, there is no promotion, no phrasing or ethos of positive discrimination! If you are not happy with that answer, I suggest you go back and read the OP
I'll start again,I'll keep it as simple as possible,as you seem to have problems with words.
This is not about legality.
This is as simple as I can put it.
So cut the flannel,and try to focus on only the question.
Here goes.
Question:is positive discrimination,an idea of the politically correct???
NO"Hahahahahahaha that's us back to, "a big boy done it,and ran away" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Regardless of the law people should not be prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs . We are becoming an increasing intolerant society if people believe anyone should be penalised because of their Christian beliefs . Those who push being politically correct tend to be totally intolerant towards other members of society. I would guess that most of them work in the public sector " Pat, please answer my question "does your view apply to Hindus, Muslims, Buddists, Sikhs, etc?". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Regardless of the law people should not be prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs . We are becoming an increasing intolerant society if people believe anyone should be penalised because of their Christian beliefs . Those who push being politically correct tend to be totally intolerant towards other members of society. I would guess that most of them work in the public sector " lets assume then that you are discriminated against - a lot of non swingers who consider themselves pretty liberal find swinging pretty distatseful. I imagine the sort of hard-line christinas of whom you speak would shun you if they found out that you swing because, as above, it breaks two commandments, and goes against some of the other teachings of the Bible (remember Sodom and Gomorrah?). Do you think that Christians are right do discriminate against you for your fornicating? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"we don’t have positive discrimination in this country, so I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist about it
You still haven't told us how political correctness is discriminatory or promotes inequality.
Have you been reading any of this thread???
Positive action and positive discrimination are not the same thing. Perhaps you haven't been reading the thread? Basically what you seem to be saying is that there is one thing that you dont like, and have been told multiple times, that not only does it NOT happen, but that its ILLEGAL! So there is no coining, there is no promotion, no phrasing or ethos of positive discrimination! If you are not happy with that answer, I suggest you go back and read the OP
I'll start again,I'll keep it as simple as possible,as you seem to have problems with words.
This is not about legality.
This is as simple as I can put it.
So cut the flannel,and try to focus on only the question.
Here goes.
Question:is positive discrimination,an idea of the politically correct???
NO
Hahahahahahaha
that's us back to,
"a big boy done it,and ran away"
"It's just made up bullshit designed specifically to get your knickers in a twist, and I would say its working! Have you got any sources that are actually proposing positive discrimination? Why does it get you so worked up even though 1. It's not true and 2. It's against the law and so will not ever happen! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Regardless of the law people should not be prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs . We are becoming an increasing intolerant society if people believe anyone should be penalised because of their Christian beliefs . Those who push being politically correct tend to be totally intolerant towards other members of society. I would guess that most of them work in the public sector lets assume then that you are discriminated against - a lot of non swingers who consider themselves pretty liberal find swinging pretty distatseful. I imagine the sort of hard-line christinas of whom you speak would shun you if they found out that you swing because, as above, it breaks two commandments, and goes against some of the other teachings of the Bible (remember Sodom and Gomorrah?). Do you think that Christians are right do discriminate against you for your fornicating?" It is a hypothetical scenario because anyone with common sense would keep their private life just that. What possible interest would the fact that you were a swinger be to anyone else. ? Luckily most religious people are a lot more tolerant than non religious people . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
