Labour councillor in FGM row

Page 3 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 9.57am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Seconded....we live in a crazy world where God wants your foreskin or part of your clitoris before he'll let you play in his funtime mansion. Or even worse it's for aesthetic reasons......Or to make the female's experience of sex so dismal that she isn't interested in it. It's horrible, horrible. Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 9.53am) I think you'd struggle to find anyone who finds this acceptable. Had a fair bit of training during staff meetings and inset days. My other half has a case where there is a worry that a girl is vulnerable. Social services, for whatever reason, are rubbish apparently.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 9.57am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Seconded....we live in a crazy world where God wants your foreskin or part of your clitoris before he'll let you play in his funtime mansion.

Or even worse it's for aesthetic reasons......Or to make the female's experience of sex so dismal that she isn't interested in it.

It's horrible, horrible.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 9.53am)

I think you'd struggle to find anyone who finds this acceptable.
Had a fair bit of training during staff meetings and inset days. My other half has a case where there is a worry that a girl is vulnerable. Social services, for whatever reason, are rubbish apparently.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 02 Aug 17 9.59am
Originally posted by nickgusset Can you imagine the furore if the party didn't take action? Can you imagine what would be out there if we allowed anything goes speech in the media? Your first point is a valid point for me....they would and do get a lot of sh1t. But it is all BS...I just wish both main parties...all parties got together and looked at free speech again and stopped the rot. The laws we have are sufficient in terms of lies and libel. If they were actually used by a press complaints board I'm sure we could find a reasonable medium. I'm just fed up with all the witch hunting.....'You said this and I'm offended....hence you're banned'...or you lose your job....so on and so forth. Why not debate ideas. Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.00am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

02 Aug 17 9.59am

Originally posted by nickgusset

Can you imagine the furore if the party didn't take action?

Can you imagine what would be out there if we allowed anything goes speech in the media?

Your first point is a valid point for me....they would and do get a lot of sh1t.

But it is all BS...I just wish both main parties...all parties got together and looked at free speech again and stopped the rot.

The laws we have are sufficient in terms of lies and libel. If they were actually used by a press complaints board I'm sure we could find a reasonable medium.

I'm just fed up with all the witch hunting.....'You said this and I'm offended....hence you're banned'...or you lose your job....so on and so forth.

Why not debate ideas.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.00am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 02 Aug 17 10.04am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Your first point is a valid point for me....they would and do get a lot of sh1t. But it is all BS...I just wish both main parties...all parties got together and looked at free speech again and stopped the rot. The laws we have are sufficient in terms of lies and libel. If they were actually used by a press complaints board I'm sure we could find a reasonable medium. I'm just fed up with all the witch hunting.....'You said this and I'm offended....hence you're banned'...or you lose your job....so on and so forth. Why not debate ideas. Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.00am) Comparing homosexuals to paedophiles isn't really a question of free speech though, nor is it about starting a reasonable debate, its about shutting down debate. Politicians in a democracy are supposed to represent their constituent, one and all, to air their own prejudices and demonise law abiding citizens. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 02 Aug 17 10.04am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Your first point is a valid point for me....they would and do get a lot of sh1t.

But it is all BS...I just wish both main parties...all parties got together and looked at free speech again and stopped the rot.

The laws we have are sufficient in terms of lies and libel. If they were actually used by a press complaints board I'm sure we could find a reasonable medium.

I'm just fed up with all the witch hunting.....'You said this and I'm offended....hence you're banned'...or you lose your job....so on and so forth.

Why not debate ideas.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.00am)

Comparing homosexuals to paedophiles isn't really a question of free speech though, nor is it about starting a reasonable debate, its about shutting down debate.

Politicians in a democracy are supposed to represent their constituent, one and all, to air their own prejudices and demonise law abiding citizens.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 02 Aug 17 10.05am
Originally posted by nickgusset I think you'd struggle to find anyone who finds this acceptable. Had a fair bit of training during staff meetings and inset days. My other half has a case where there is a worry that a girl is vulnerable. Social services, for whatever reason, are rubbish apparently. Well male circumcision isn't only acceptable but around two percent of all boys in Britain are circumcised each year. Imagine the outcry if these were girls. [Link] [Link] Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.06am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

02 Aug 17 10.05am

Originally posted by nickgusset

Well male circumcision isn't only acceptable but around two percent of all boys in Britain are circumcised each year.

Imagine the outcry if these were girls.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.06am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 10.06am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Your first point is a valid point for me....they would and do get a lot of sh1t. But it is all BS...I just wish both main parties...all parties got together and looked at free speech again and stopped the rot. The laws we have are sufficient in terms of lies and libel. If they were actually used by a press complaints board I'm sure we could find a reasonable medium. I'm just fed up with all the witch hunting.....'You said this and I'm offended....hence you're banned'...or you lose your job....so on and so forth. Why not debate ideas. Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.00am) Because, as seen on here, we would end up with a lot more 'hate' speech. Over time we've seen change in what is and isn't acceptable, socially and culturally, to say or do. Where do you draw the line at which people are or aren't offended. What about instances of inciting racial hatred? Should we allow hate preachers a voice to spread their anti western Wahhabi doctrine? I see where you are coming from, but it would lead to a darker place imo.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 10.06am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Your first point is a valid point for me....they would and do get a lot of sh1t.

But it is all BS...I just wish both main parties...all parties got together and looked at free speech again and stopped the rot.

The laws we have are sufficient in terms of lies and libel. If they were actually used by a press complaints board I'm sure we could find a reasonable medium.

I'm just fed up with all the witch hunting.....'You said this and I'm offended....hence you're banned'...or you lose your job....so on and so forth.

Why not debate ideas.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2017 10.00am)

Because, as seen on here, we would end up with a lot more 'hate' speech.

Over time we've seen change in what is and isn't acceptable, socially and culturally, to say or do.
Where do you draw the line at which people are or aren't offended. What about instances of inciting racial hatred? Should we allow hate preachers a voice to spread their anti western Wahhabi doctrine?

I see where you are coming from, but it would lead to a darker place imo.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 02 Aug 17 10.10am
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Comparing homosexuals to paedophiles isn't really a question of free speech though, nor is it about starting a reasonable debate, its about shutting down debate. Politicians in a democracy are supposed to represent their constituent, one and all, to air their own prejudices and demonise law abiding citizens. Why isn't it about free speech? These are sexualities. People get hysterical about stuff....He should have been told he was wrong and being a dick-head and move on. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

02 Aug 17 10.10am

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Comparing homosexuals to paedophiles isn't really a question of free speech though, nor is it about starting a reasonable debate, its about shutting down debate.

Politicians in a democracy are supposed to represent their constituent, one and all, to air their own prejudices and demonise law abiding citizens.

Why isn't it about free speech? These are sexualities. People get hysterical about stuff....He should have been told he was wrong and being a dick-head and move on.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 02 Aug 17 10.17am
Originally posted by nickgusset Because, as seen on here, we would end up with a lot more 'hate' speech. Over time we've seen change in what is and isn't acceptable, socially and culturally, to say or do. Where do you draw the line at which people are or aren't offended. What about instances of inciting racial hatred? Should we allow hate preachers a voice to spread their anti western Wahhabi doctrine? I see where you are coming from, but it would lead to a darker place imo. I don't believe in restricting freedom of non violent speech. I think it's a dangerous road to travel down....Who defines acceptability. I've already seen and experienced ridiculous applications. People push interpretations...because that's what idealists do. If someone has an internet connection the preacher point is a bit moot. I most definitely want to know who is saying what and who is attending their lectures. I wouldn't let anyone into the country who I thought was a security risk....But not because of what they might say.. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

02 Aug 17 10.17am

Originally posted by nickgusset

Because, as seen on here, we would end up with a lot more 'hate' speech.

I see where you are coming from, but it would lead to a darker place imo.

I don't believe in restricting freedom of non violent speech. I think it's a dangerous road to travel down....Who defines acceptability. I've already seen and experienced ridiculous applications. People push interpretations...because that's what idealists do.

If someone has an internet connection the preacher point is a bit moot.
I most definitely want to know who is saying what and who is attending their lectures. I wouldn't let anyone into the country who I thought was a security risk....But not because of what they might say..

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 02 Aug 17 10.46am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Why isn't it about free speech? These are sexualities. People get hysterical about stuff....He should have been told he was wrong and being a dick-head and move on. I'd imagine that if someone was calling you a pedophile you'd be pretty livid. Me, I'd probably deck someone if they were seriously inferring I was a child sex offender. Using free speech as a means of defending the indefensible - Denigrating 10% of the population without basis, or argument, should be a sackable offence in politics. Its no different than that ct who said 'all white people are racists' its dumb ct rhetoric aimed at gain the support of dumb c**ts. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 02 Aug 17 10.46am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Why isn't it about free speech? These are sexualities. People get hysterical about stuff....He should have been told he was wrong and being a dick-head and move on.

I'd imagine that if someone was calling you a pedophile you'd be pretty livid. Me, I'd probably deck someone if they were seriously inferring I was a child sex offender.

Using free speech as a means of defending the indefensible - Denigrating 10% of the population without basis, or argument, should be a sackable offence in politics.

Its no different than that c**t who said 'all white people are racists' its dumb c**t rhetoric aimed at gain the support of dumb c**ts.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 02 Aug 17 10.52am
Trust the left to blur the edges with waffle. FGM is not acceptable and anyone continuing this practice should be imprisoned or deported. I'm surprised circumcision of boys is still allowed other than for medical reasons. Pandering to mentals is not tolerance, it is letting standards slip and beginning a race to the bottom of civilised behaviour to accommodate the breathing of life into the failing birth rate and maybe securing a vote or two along the way. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (02 Aug 2017 11.31am)
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

02 Aug 17 10.52am

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Trust the left to blur the edges with waffle.

FGM is not acceptable and anyone continuing this practice should be imprisoned or deported. I'm surprised circumcision of boys is still allowed other than for medical reasons.
Pandering to mentals is not tolerance, it is letting standards slip and beginning a race to the bottom of civilised behaviour to accommodate the breathing of life into the failing birth rate and maybe securing a vote or two along the way.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (02 Aug 2017 11.31am)

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 11.05am
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Trust the left to blur the edges with waffle. FGM is not acceptable and anyone continuing this practice should be imprisoned or deported. I'm surprised circumcision of boys is still allowed other than for medical reasons. Pandering to metals is not tolerance, it is letting standards slip and beginning a race to the bottom of civilised behaviour to accommodate the breathing of life into the failing birth rate and maybe securing a vote or two along the way. Your imagining things stinky. The left blurring the edges? Example please and then an explanation as to how that can be attributed to all of the left, such was your insinuation.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 11.05am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Trust the left to blur the edges with waffle.

FGM is not acceptable and anyone continuing this practice should be imprisoned or deported. I'm surprised circumcision of boys is still allowed other than for medical reasons.
Pandering to metals is not tolerance, it is letting standards slip and beginning a race to the bottom of civilised behaviour to accommodate the breathing of life into the failing birth rate and maybe securing a vote or two along the way.

Your imagining things stinky. The left blurring the edges? Example please and then an explanation as to how that can be attributed to all of the left, such was your insinuation.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 02 Aug 17 11.08am
Originally posted by nickgusset Your imagining things stinky. The left blurring the edges? Example please and then an explanation as to how that can be attributed to all of the left, such was your insinuation. Boring deflection crap. Go away.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

02 Aug 17 11.08am

Originally posted by nickgusset

Your imagining things stinky. The left blurring the edges? Example please and then an explanation as to how that can be attributed to all of the left, such was your insinuation.

Boring deflection crap. Go away.

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 11.12am
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Boring deflection crap. Go away. No it's not. You've said the left are blurring the edges on the fgm issue. How so? If you're going to assert something, you need to be able to back it up else it comes across as a load of cobblers. It's not deflection, it's counter argument.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 02 Aug 17 11.12am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Boring deflection crap. Go away.

No it's not. You've said the left are blurring the edges on the fgm issue. How so?
If you're going to assert something, you need to be able to back it up else it comes across as a load of cobblers. It's not deflection, it's counter argument.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 3 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Labour councillor in FGM row

Site Map

Sponsors