|
lmaoboy1998 posted:If you're incapable of talking to other people, even those who share your overarching ideology but disagree with you on a few of the specifics, then you're probably not cut out for politics or for representing other people's interests generally. From the top of the page: [edit] Last page  [/edit]MrL_JaKiri posted:The argument Tatchell makes - that by sharing a platform she can argue with him - would hold more water if it was a debate or more free form and not a talk with a stated topic. If she appeared and used her speech to criticise Tatchell then that would be the news story, and she'd be vilified for using an unrelated event to criticise Tatchell. She's choosing not to appear. That's it. serious gaylord posted:Theres a lot of whats wrong with student left politics right here in this thread. Look straight away as anything negative is construed as an attack or a threat. Things are gladly misinterpreted for the worst possible outcome just to fit the narrative that's wanted and outright lies are published as truth. After the first paragraph I thought you were going to go on to support her, not oppose her! She has chosen not to appear at an event. This has been reported as the NUS "No platforming" Peter Tatchell. That's a massive misinterpretation to fit the narrative that student activists are just a bunch of cry babies.
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Actually the real problem with the left is we're all chewing our knuckles over this and not talking about the fact 260,000 people have signed the petition to get a motion of no confidence in Jeremy Hunt debated in parliament. Which I signed, even though it completely misses the point that the problem isn't Jeremy Hunt, the problem is that any on-message Tory in his position would have done exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Actually the real problem with the left is we're all chewing our knuckles over this and not talking about the fact 260,000 people have signed the petition to get a motion of no confidence in Jeremy Hunt debated in parliament. The second such petition, I believe. The first got roughly the same signatures, but didn't amount to much as they glossed over the no confidence in favour of talking about the contracts last year. It's at least the third time there's been a no confidence for Hunt too - the BMA told parliament they had no confidence in Hunt in 2013.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Actually the real problem with the left is we're all chewing our knuckles over this and not talking about the fact 260,000 people have signed the petition to get a motion of no confidence in Jeremy Hunt debated in parliament. There will be a govt response and that response will be "this is not what e-petitions is for"
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:This has been reported as the NUS "No platforming" Peter Tatchell. That's a massive misinterpretation to fit the narrative that student activists are just a bunch of cry babies. Who's reported that the NUS is "No platforming" him? It isn't implied in the Guardian article.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Namtab posted:There will be a govt response and that response will be "this is not what e-petitions is for" Pretty much! Behold the last petition for this exact thing: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/104334
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
I think we're conflating two seperate things here. As an individual, she is not required to talk to anyone or debate anyone or tolerate anyone she feels holds damaging opinions. She should, you could argue, but that point is she doesn't HAVE to. However, as the NUS LGBT rep, she is absolutely obligated to do all of those things. She's not just a random woman off the street. Her job is to represent and defend a position in public. This involves discussion and debate with people she may disagree with. To shirk out of that is just intellectual cowardice. e: Also, the NUS has no official position on him. This is purely her own decision. e2: And it's not loving 'rape culture' to suggest that her position carries certain obligations. Her gender is completely immaterial. ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
hit button posted:Those seem like consistent positions to me, not that there would be anything wrong with changing your mind about something anyway. Tatchell held the former opinion until at least July last year, and now he's made a complete 180 on the issue. And despite his fervent belief in the right of Christians to be homophobic, he has a nasty habit of denigrating Muslim homophobes, to the point of hijacking anti-EDL protests. It's almost as if he's being incredibly selective here. e: By Tatchell's logic, she also No Platformed the National Trans Youth Conference in Birmingham last November by declining an invitation. She already had a prior commitment to go to another LGBT conference, so she sent me to represent the NUS LGBT Campaign instead. TinTower fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
I'd imagine he still holds the former opinion. It isn't incompatible with the latter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
hit button posted:I'd imagine he still holds the former opinion. It isn't incompatible with the latter. Seeing as the former opinion is in support of the regulations that Ashers are being taken to court over, it kind of is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
He is stating why those regulations aren't relevant in this case. The second sentence makes that distinction very plain.Peter Tatchell posted:Discrimination against people should be unlawful, but not against ideas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
If people weren't capable of changing their minds I'd be voting conservative in 2020
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
A business that sells food, which is inherently secular because it's a business, effectively refuses to serve gay people. They claim it's because of their opinion that homosexuality is a sin. Am I describing Chick-Fil-A or Ashers bakery?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Which I signed, even though it completely misses the point that the problem isn't Jeremy Hunt, the problem is that any on-message Tory in his position would have done exactly the same. i'm not sure this is true. There was a fairly senior tory who was pretty scathing about Hunt because they'd had a contract agreed with everyone before he became health secretary and he hosed it all up
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
So Hunt has that vote of no confidence thing going on, meanwhile he's still dodging doctors everywhere he goes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A business that sells food, which is inherently secular because it's a business, effectively refuses to serve gay people. They claim it's because of their opinion that homosexuality is a sin. It depends on what they're doing, if they're refusing to serve gay people, that's discrimination under any sane law. If they're refusing to make a specific cake then that's not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A business that sells food, which is inherently secular because it's a business, effectively refuses to serve gay people. They claim it's because of their opinion that homosexuality is a sin. Chick fil-a, because ashers did not want to print the message irrespective of who ordered it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Has anyone made the Jeremy Hunt Dodging Junior Doctors And/Or The Media Asking Reasonable Questions game yet, it's the story of our times
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It depends on what they're doing, if they're refusing to serve gay people, that's discrimination under any sane law. If they're refusing to make a specific cake then that's not. Namtab posted:Chick fil-a, because ashers did not want to print the message irrespective of who ordered it. A specific cake that would only be ordered by gay people. It's like saying that, as a book store, you're going to refuse selling the Quran because of its violent character, but you'll happy sell the Bible. It's indirect discrimination, and equally illegal under those regulations as direct discrimination.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:From the top of the page: Refusing to be in a room with people who have mainstream opinions (whether wrong or not) still comes across as mental. She surrendered the right to be governed entirely by how she feels when she took on the responsibility of representing other people and a particular cause. If you can't stop yourself from behaving in a way that looks mental to the majority of the population, that's fine. Just avoid politics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
lmaoboy1998 posted:Refusing to be in a room with people who have fairly mainstream opinions still comes across as mental. But enough about Germaine "I can smell your oval office" Greer. Also, that argument would mean that you should give fascists a platform. Just so you know.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A specific cake that would only be ordered by gay people. Again, as has been pointed out, by that logic you should be able to go to a gay baker and demand they make you a straight pride white power burn all the homos cake that you want to order because you're a member of the westboro baptist church and the KKK. It's a pretty stupid law if it requires that. I don't really see why a bookstore should be required to sell every book either. I don't really expect the church bookshop near me to sell the illustrated guide to BDSM.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A specific cake that would only be ordered by gay people. Straight people can also order cakes with messages supporting gay people though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A specific cake that would only be ordered by gay people. Who says straight people can't support gay marriage? (you do apparently)
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
This is the worst derail yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A business that sells food, which is inherently secular because it's a business, effectively refuses to serve gay people. They claim it's because of their opinion that homosexuality is a sin. So a Halal grocers isn't a business? What about a Christian bookshop or an Orthodox icon painter? Or maybe your definition of a business is just bonkers (and prejudiced).
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Again, as has been pointed out, by that logic you should be able to go to a gay baker and demand they make you a straight pride white power burn all the homos cake that you want to order because you're a member of the westboro baptist church and the KKK. Well, you couldn't, as opinions that approve the use of violence aren't protected, even though political opinions in general are due to the sectarian history of Northern Ireland. But congratulations for bringing up the stupid arguments that come up from the Tories when every equality bill is debated in Parliament.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Tbh the biggest threat to free speech in this country isn't clumsy undergraduate student politicians because they have zero effect in that region. There's more of a culture of whining about left-wing students than there is of perfidious censorhawks. So if you're on that side of decrying the failures of the young left, congrats, you're going to win that battle. How sensible. Meanwhile there are actual, powerful threats to freedom of speech and the freedom of ideas that do in fact come from this very government. But the energy everyone who moans about this one student is not expended on Prevent or such like.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
TinTower posted:But enough about Germaine "I can smell your oval office" Greer. Fascism isn't a mainstream position. Unless you believe our right wing is fascist, in which case yes. You need to be able to tolerate being in a room with UKIP supporters without having a mental breakdown to be an effective politican in the UK.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Well, you couldn't, as opinions that approve the use of violence aren't protected, even though political opinions in general are due to the sectarian history of Northern Ireland. It's not a stupid argument, you're suggesting that something should be illegal which is completely unenforceable unless you make the law ridiculously easy to prosecute under. You can't require everyone to espouse every idea in exchange for money. That's absurd.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
lmaoboy1998 posted:Fascism isn't a mainstream position.  You need to be able to tolerate being in a room with National Front supporters without having a mental breakdown to be an effective politican in the UK.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A specific cake that would only be ordered by gay people. Well that seems like a bit of an assumption. TinTower posted:It's like saying that, as a book store, you're going to refuse selling the Quran because of its violent character, but you'll happy sell the Bible. Are you sure this is illegal? Because from a secular perspective a book is a book. If you're being super vocal about the fact that the reason you're not stocking a particular book is because you're a massive racist then I'd think that would be your actual legal problem (the explicit endorsement of racism), rather than the business of not having a book in your inventory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Namtab posted:If people weren't capable of changing their minds I'd be voting conservative in 2020 N..  No!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Well that seems like a bit of an assumption. From the Equality Commission of Northern Ireland's guidelines on religious discrimination: quote:Indirect discrimination in employment occurs where a provision, criterion or practice is applied, or would apply equally to everyone, but which has the effect of putting people of a particular religious belief or political opinion at a disadvantage when compared with others and which cannot be shown to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The "proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim" line occurs several times in equality legislation, to allow things like Church bookshops to sell books relating only to their denomination. It's the difference between a Catholic mission not including reproductive health in their health insurance plan, and an arts and crafts chain doing the same.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:Meanwhile there are actual, powerful threats to freedom of speech and the freedom of ideas that do in fact come from this very government. But the energy everyone who moans about this one student is not expended on Prevent or such like. There's a weird double standard when it comes to anti-NUS talking points. People complain about No Platform, then those same people complain about the NUS working with CAGE against Prevent. Or does freedom of speech only apply to white people? makeuthink
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
UN to Britain: stop tasering children jesus christ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/united-nations-warns-uk-government-to-stop-tasering-children-a6872591.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
TinTower posted:
I mean, yes. Obviously, yes. If a large and growing share of your population believes something, refusing to debate/interact with them is unthinkably naive. You need to treat them with basic respect while also taking every possible opportunity to explain why they're wrong. Otherwise you lose the debate by default. This is why you're a student politician and won't be a proper one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
lmaoboy1998 posted:I mean, yes. Obviously, yes. If a large and growing share of your population believes something, refusing to debate/interact with them is unthinkably naive. You need to treat them with basic respect while also taking every possible opportunity to explain why they're wrong. Otherwise you lose the debate by default. This is why you're a student politician and won't be a proper one. Clegg, Miliband, Wood, Sturgeon, and Bennett: We absolutely cannot let UKIP's politics of racism and immigrant bashing to rule the day. Nigel Farage: All these so-called "refugees" are coming over with AIDS and destroying our health system from within. Literally everyone: What the gently caress. Julie Etchingham: No let's hear him out. If you think that fascism can be destroyed through dry Oxford Union-style debates you're more naive than most students.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Puntification posted:It's nice but nothing will come of it. This is absolutely true, because it has happened before. There was a 150k signature petition for exactly the same thing, it got a ten minute 'debate' in an anteroom which concluded 'something something 7 day NHS gently caress you junior doctors' and went back to selling off the NHS.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
The correct way to deal with fascists is to beat the poo poo out of them and nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:47
|
|