American Religious Right visit

Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,740
"Incitement to hatred" laws are ineffective because they are virtually always unenforceable, even where race and religious hatred are concerned. This is largely because those doing the incitement know the boundaries and slyly skirt around them while still promoting their message. Keeping unwelcome foreigners who promote subversive, bigoted ideas is an additional option. There is no good reason to allow foreigners who promote harmful doctrines into the country.
The rules should be made and enforced by the democratically elected government of the day.
Do you mean 'laws'?
We have those, and we can make more.

But a chanting mob shouldn't decide who gets to speak.
 


Buchaill Dana

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
10,144
That's you saying what somebody else is allegedly saying.
Grown-ups prefer to hear it for themselves and to make up their own minds.
We aren't discussing grownups. We are discussing public schools allowing a foreign extremist preach to kids. You would have the pitchforks out if Muslim was involved.
 

Buchaill Dana

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
10,144
Do you mean 'laws'?
We have those, and we can make more.

But a chanting mob shouldn't decide who gets to speak.
Nobody is arguing he can't speak.tbe issue is the taxpayer is funding this in state schools. Let him tour all the churches he wants.
 

Golah veNekhar

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
2,500
We aren't discussing grownups. We are discussing public schools allowing a foreign extremist preach to kids. You would have the pitchforks out if Muslim was involved.
He is in no way an extremist unless you consider small "o" orthodox Catholics extremists.

We are not talking about Bishop Richard Williamson here.
 

raetsel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
9,446
Do you mean 'laws'?
We have those, and we can make more.

But a chanting mob shouldn't decide who gets to speak.
No, that power should always rest with the government.
Answer this question for me. Do you not deplore the way that the promotion of negative attitudes to gay people leads to alienation within families? Do you accept that parents have a duty to love, respect and accept their children regardless of whether they turn out to be gay or straight?
 

Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,740
No, that power should always rest with the government.
Answer this question for me. Do you not deplore the way that the promotion of negative attitudes to gay people leads to alienation within families? Do you accept that parents have a duty to love, respect and accept their children regardless of whether they turn out to be gay or straight?
That's your question? Really?
 

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,256
The taxpayer is funding this?
You can back that up, I presume.
The schools would have been taking students out of class to listen to Evert's bigoted ráméis, wasting the students' time and by extension, taxpayers' money.
 

cunnyfunt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
6,745
Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo are examples, however they have far less influence than Mercurial makes out.
Show the evidence of their specifically religious influence with a few quotes there like a good lad
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
31,573
If its in school time, which it is, yes, of course. This isn't an optional talk after hours.
Even if it were outside school hours, unless someone else pays for the use of the school premises, extra heating and lighting, the caretaker's overtime etc, it's still the taxpayer who's paying.

Obv if there's an entry fee - and enough takings to cover those costs - then fair enough.
 

raetsel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
9,446
That's your question? Really?
It is my question, and I note that you dodged answering it.
Which doesn't really surprise me as it doesn't sit well with happy clappy, "family values" Catholicism.
"A family which prays together, stays together" and all that pseudo-wise bunkum sounds great, but once the 16 year old son announces that he is sexually attracted towards his own gender he either has to suppress and renounce it or he is out the door faster than a whippet and ostracised.
 

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,256
God mustn't like Evert if he punished him with the lurgy. I hope he has travel insurance to get a refund on his flight.

EOQuDaXWoAIrapN?format=jpg&name=900x900.jpg
 
Last edited:

Buchaill Dana

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
10,144
Even if it were outside school hours, unless someone else pays for the use of the school premises, extra heating and lighting, the caretaker's overtime etc, it's still the taxpayer who's paying.

Obv if there's an entry fee - and enough takings to cover those costs - then fair enough.
Correct and right.

That said, there is an interesting conversation to be had about the right of faith schools to promote their particular brand of religion. This guy is extreme, but we are working on the basis that Catholic schools cannot put forward a homophobic line. Is that a valid assumption?
 

Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,740
It is my question, and I note that you dodged answering it.
Which doesn't really surprise me as it doesn't sit well with happy clappy, "family values" Catholicism.
"A family which prays together, stays together" and all that pseudo-wise bunkum sounds great, but once the 16 year old son announces that he is sexually attracted towards his own gender he either has to suppress and renounce it or he is out the door faster than a whippet and ostracised.
Speak for yourself and your own family.
 


Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top