Safe Speed Forums

And it doesn't make being told that we must embrace it "right" either.

Or should we only think and believe what we are told to think and believe?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

But you (appeared) to be saying that those views were the views of a "narrow-minded reactionary racist bastard". I am none of those.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Hear here. I don't perceive the problems PaulAH and others are voicing their opinions so strongly against. In fact I see them shouting more than the people they claim are forcing opinions on them.

Ohhh, the irony.

Well, some people's sexuality will play a proment roll in their personality or their stage performance, be it straight or gay, and thats probably here to stay unless the BNP get elected.

I appreciate that you may not go around shouting "look at me i'm straight" but many homosexuals don't walk around saying "look at me i'm gay" either. However many heterosexual performers on the otherhand do ; they conduct themselves in an aggresively heterosexual manor equivalent to that of Graham norton, its just less noticed because people are used to it.

Do you have similar objections to overtly heterosexual performances?




I think homophobia is gradually heading towards an equivelent status as racism in that, eventually coming out with comments such as 'i don't approve of homosexals' will be of equivalent social magnitude as 'i don't approve of pakistanis'; something most people wouldn't dream of coming out with in the middle of a busy multicultural office, for instance.

Thankfully, the closing of this discrepancy can only be a good thing in my opinion. It will show we have evolved a species to a higher civilisation than we were before, not looking down upon normal and natural human behaviour.

I am tempted to tell you to fuck off back to the ignorant hole you came from.

My great grandparents and grandparents were treated with precisely the same suspicion as todays immigrants are, and had to put up with the same insults and catcalls (sometimes members of my family still do).

The only difference is now that some have the opportunity to spread mass hysteria and propagate prejudice through the ignorant population much more quickly, therefor making it even harder for individuals to make their case and establish themselves before stereotypes stand in their way.

You say you are not allowed to express an opinion. Well, I am talking from experience, not opinion, so do not tell me that I am missing something that you feel in a better position to speak about and expect me to listen to you.

If my descendants had arrived today I expect you'd be wanting to say to them something not dissimilar to my opening line.

Jordan....

Tom Jones....

I get offended at people telling me that views contrary to their own are those of a "narrow-minded reactionary racist bastard"!

So let's suppose I support the Liberal Party, e.g., and PembrokeStephen supported the Labour Party, does that make my views (because they're contrary to his), those of a "narrow-minded reactionary racist bastard"?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Well, I'm still struggling with the premise on which you're basing your argument: I can't recall ever having been told I must embrace homosexuality in the way you describe - indeed, the only time I've ever seen that kind of issue being presented in that way is in the pages of newspapers like the Daily Mail, on one of their "Political Correctness Gawn MAAAAD!!" type rants.

Perhaps what you're confusing for "being told that we must embrace it" is when the message goes out that being discriminatory about it (homosexuality, race, gender, whatever...) is unacceptable.

I'd be the first to accept that tolerance can go TOO far, but a lot of the attitudes I've seen displayed on this thread, regarding gender, sexuality or race, have been - to my mind at least - a long way beyond the pale. I though we'd moved on from those kinds of views 40 years ago, and it sickens me to see them still being glibly trotted out and justified.

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

Good examples, i couldn't of picked 2 better pesonalities to highlight the utter hipocrysy of the situation I tried.

Tom Jones is horrifically and outrageously heterosexual yet it he is someone most of the anti-glamourisation brigade would gladly take home to meet thier grandmas.

And he wears leather trousers..............offensive eh?

Well said.

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

It could be, but I rather doubt it.

How does another's sex, race or religion affect you at all? It cannot, and I rather suspect that you are being 'offended' by the rantings of other small-mined bigots writing in newspapers rather than any actual personal experience.

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

Actually I find both Tom Jones' and Jordan's "act" to be pretty offensive too, so either I'm not actually quite the hypocrite you make out, or perhaps I just prefer performers who are a little more subtle about how they display their sexuality.

As said earlier, I agree that most homosexuals don't make a big deal about it, which is also fine by me. The only thing I'm uncomfortable with is the small minority such as EJ and GN, or moreover the media who seem to think it's something to aspire to.

Perhaps the way I see it is a bit like dyslexia. I'm not prejudiced against people with dyslexia, and I'm perfectly happy to accept that it affects various aspects of their life and that in some circumstances we might need to make special allowance for it. Indeed I'd be the first to applaud someone who says "look what I've achieved despite my dyslexia", as I see that as a good example to us all.

But I wouldn't feel too comfortable about someone saying that they are better at reading and writing because they are dyslexic, nor would I like to be told that because a few percent of the population are so afflicted we should therefore abandon the notion that correct spelling is a good thing, or in any way worthy of attainment.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

I've kept out of the "gay" debate on this thread because I agree there seemed to be a fair amount of homophobia flying about.

I don't think there has been much sexism, although the point cooperman raised about "child-bearing" is close to it (in a "by definition" sense) but is a point that I've heard made by a number of small businessmen (I can see their point of view by don't really agree with it).

I have no truck with racism, and in general welcome "positive" immigration. BUT that is a worthwhile political debate to be had about the philosophy of multiculturalism (which is a "newish" thing) as opposed to take a view of practicing an "accomodating" form of integration.

Sorry JT, that last post wasn't meant to be a personal dig against you, though i can see thats probably how it looked. Its clearly something that people on both sides of the debate feel quite strongly about and i'm probably getting a little carried away.

What an amazing series of posts which emanated from one about speeding!

Here's my two pennorth - points should be decoupled from speeding fines unless it is a really dangerous offence, we are a tolerant nation but people who choose to come and live here must be prepared to integrate into our society (you mustn't be able to choose which country's laws you obey in this country). Multi-culturalism has a lot to answer for particularly the indigenous people not being allowed to celebrate their way of life, religion etc for fear of upsetting someone from a different way of life. And our laws are becoming too restrictive (heading towards Big Brother and the "thought crime" of 1984) and are being interpreted to support the aggressor not the victim particularly where the complainant is legally classed as a child. OK maybe I am a grumpy old man but the way the country is going, another country like Switzerland seems quite appealing these days.

the "child bearing age" argument makes about as much sense as the rest of the tripe posted on this thread.

If you have a choice of hiring a female of child bearing age or a male of the same age, the odds are in your favour. Why? If the female decides to wrecklessly go and get themself pregnant (thereby ensuring the future of the species, and that YOUR pension and old age care are supported) they have, by law, to give you notice of intention to take maternity leave. The recommendation, and common practice, is that the notice is given as soon as the pregnancy is confirmed - about 12 weeks gestation. That gives the employer 25 or so weeks to find cover.

The male employee deciding to leave? 4 weeks, cheerio.

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

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

Where has this actually happened?

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

Hear hear...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Birmingham & West Bromwich at least. I know this for a fact, as this is the area in which I live and have seen it first-hand with my own eyes.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

What has happened (links to documented evidence and not just heresay please) and how exactly has it affected you?

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