The Demon Headmaster Jack Straw has backed down on trying to remove the defence of freedom of speech from a new law making inciting homophobic hatred a criminal offence.
The Lords prevented the Ministry of Injustice from removing the right to freedom of speech four times before Jack Straw finally gave up.
This new law – along with the laws against inciting racial hatred – are wrong and unnecessary. The divide the population into two – those who are automatically victims and must have special protection and the rest of the population who are automatically pigeon-holed as racists/homophobes/miscellaneous -ists/-phobes and have to prove their innocence if they are accused of offending one of the afore-mentioned “victims” because of their race/colour/sexuality.
Crimes such as murder and assault are instinctively wrong, it’s something built in as a species. But crimes such as homophobia or racism are crimes of conscience, the imposition of a set of morals on the whole population with serious penalties for those that don’t live their lives according to the morals of others.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with homophobia or racism or other types of discrimination but I don’t think that we as a society have a right to impose that moral view on the whole population and punish people for not having the same morals. If someone commits a crime, it doesn’t matter whether they were motivated by their victim’s colour or religion or sexuality – they have committed a crime and the crime isn’t worse because the victim was black or a muslim or gay. If someone abused me in the street, I’m no less of a victim because I’m straight than I would be if I was gay.
This is a bad law, made marginally less bad by the intervention of the House of Lords. We really have to put a stop to this ridiculous situation where more and more groups of people are identified as automatic victims who require specific legal protection. It’s just wrong.
Spot on. Labour are obsessed with “victims”, especially if they’re black, muslim or gay.
I had a heated ‘blog’ arguement with a fellow supporter of my football team.
He explained ‘as he sits near the touchline, it gives him great opportunity to shout insults at the opposition winger’
I asked, ‘if he were black would you use that in your insults’ Oh no! he replied, ‘of course not’
So he thinks shouting ‘wanker, shorty, fat-guts, useless c*nt, dog-breath etc.’ is all part of the game, But racial insults are a no-no.
I told him i couldn’t understand his logic. If you wish to insult someone, insult them. Where does this ‘but not racially’ rule come from.
As far as i’m concerned the bloke is a foul-mouthed fool and i wish he would go support someone else. For myself i wouldn’t use any insulting term (including racial) on any player.
Neither big-mouth or me would do it to his face. So why is it o/k in the anonimity of a crowd?
Chaeck out ‘cultural marxism’. The push towards ‘hate crime’ is not incompetence or PC gone mad,it is a plan, enslve us all by our thoughts. The blue print is in ‘1984’. Worth a google search for ‘The Frankfurt school’ and Cultural marxism.
It is a view point pushed as a ‘frame’ by Common Purpose courses and graduates of Common Purpose. It is now backed up by laws for all areas of the public sector.
In Schools, if your Equality and diversity claims don’t stack up, then no matter that your school gets the best results it will fail on leadership and management, this means the senior leaders face the sack, so they pump up this crap.
The shift towards sexualisation of little kids in school via ‘sex education’ is also part of the basic marxist hand book of tactics, create division, a feeling unsureness, fill the void!
We need to get away from the idea that this is ‘just happening’, it is planned and systematic. The recent admission by the Liebour policy bloke supports this and the EU and NWO is the goal!