BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome, guest! Log in or register. (click here for help)

Latest Site News
5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5  
Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread
> An alternate PM?
Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum
vidcapper
post 20th February 2018, 03:36 PM
Post #81
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Shia LeMuffQueef @ Feb 20 2018, 02:35 PM) *
Do you still support him for PM?


You are taking this thread much too seriously.

Let's just say there are others I think would make worse PM's than him...

[I suppose you're now going to ask me who.]


QUOTE
Yes, in 2004 alone he wrote about gay issues 104 times. His gross opinions are well-known.


Having not read those articles, how can I be expected to comment on them?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Long Dong Silver
post 20th February 2018, 03:43 PM
Post #82
Group icon
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,083
User: 18,639

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 20 2018, 03:36 PM) *
You are taking this thread much too seriously.

Let's just say there are others I think would make worse PM's than him...

[I suppose you're now going to ask me who.]
Having not read those articles, how can I be expected to comment on them?


Yah of course there are hypothetical worsts - always. But that doesn't make hi any better as a candidate.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 20th February 2018, 04:06 PM
Post #83
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Shia LeMuffQueef @ Feb 20 2018, 03:43 PM) *
Yah of course there are hypothetical worsts - always. But that doesn't make hi any better as a candidate.


What reason do you ascribe his homophobia to?


This post has been edited by vidcapper: 20th February 2018, 04:06 PM
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Long Dong Silver
post 20th February 2018, 04:15 PM
Post #84
Group icon
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,083
User: 18,639

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 20 2018, 04:06 PM) *
What reason do you ascribe his homophobia to?


Closed-minded dinosaur.

There can be many reasons - the most common is some for of latent homosexuality, or just absolute rigid thinking/ brainwashing, etc. Doesn't matter. What matters is he IS a huge homophobe and not fit for an egalitarian society.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Soy Adrián
post 20th February 2018, 06:35 PM
Post #85
Group icon
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908
User: 10,596

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 20 2018, 03:36 PM) *
Having not read those articles, how can I be expected to comment on them?

So what did you base your suggestion on?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 21st February 2018, 06:27 AM
Post #86
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Feb 20 2018, 06:35 PM) *
So what did you base your suggestion on?


Which suggestion do you refer to - I have made several in this discussion?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 21st February 2018, 06:44 AM
Post #87
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Shia LeMuffQueef @ Feb 20 2018, 04:15 PM) *
Closed-minded dinosaur.

There can be many reasons - the most common is some for of latent homosexuality, or just absolute rigid thinking/ brainwashing, etc. Doesn't matter. What matters is he IS a huge homophobe and not fit for an egalitarian society.


In America, more so than Britain, religious belief is a factor, given that certain biblical passages can be interpreted as condemning homosexuality...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality

As an atheist myself, I give anything the Bible says very little credence.

I suspect that for many though, it is the revulsion over the idea of anal sex that is the driving force of their homophobia.

On a seperate issue, what does 'not fit for an egalitarian society' actually mean? It's not like you can exclude someone from society, just for expressing an opinion, however offensive it might be to some. thinking.gif
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Soy Adrián
post 21st February 2018, 12:00 PM
Post #88
Group icon
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908
User: 10,596

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 21 2018, 06:27 AM) *
Which suggestion do you refer to - I have made several in this discussion?

The idea of Richard Littlejohn being a good alternative PM.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 21st February 2018, 12:28 PM
Post #89
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Feb 21 2018, 12:00 PM) *
The idea of Richard Littlejohn being a good alternative PM.


Ah, OK - that makes sense.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Soy Adrián
post 22nd February 2018, 08:32 PM
Post #90
Group icon
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908
User: 10,596

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 21 2018, 12:28 PM) *
Ah, OK - that makes sense.

Anything else?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 27th February 2018, 07:25 AM
Post #91
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Feb 22 2018, 08:32 PM) *
Anything else?


What else did you have in mind? unsure.gif

I'm sure no=one here will be surprised if I tell you I appreciated Littlejohn's latest article (even if certain aspects of it gave me pause)...

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: 'Jeremy Corbyn's shameless use of the rich man's libel law'

Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Suedehead2
post 27th February 2018, 04:29 PM
Post #92
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,673
User: 3,272

Why should Corbyn just sit back and let an opponent libel him?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 27th February 2018, 04:53 PM
Post #93
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Feb 27 2018, 04:29 PM) *
Why should Corbyn just sit back and let an opponent libel him?


Because, according to the article, that's not the traditional way MP's resolve such matters.

I guess a couple of hundred years ago, it would be duelling pistols... tongue.gif
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Long Dong Silver
post 27th February 2018, 07:16 PM
Post #94
Group icon
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,083
User: 18,639

The only shameless thing is McCarthy era slurs.

Every Tory and Tory press that printed/ repeated those anti-democratic slurs should be in court.

It's like living in Russia/ NK at the moment.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Long Dong Silver
post 27th February 2018, 07:53 PM
Post #95
Group icon
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,083
User: 18,639

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 21 2018, 06:44 AM) *
In America, more so than Britain, religious belief is a factor, given that certain biblical passages can be interpreted as condemning homosexuality...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality

As an atheist myself, I give anything the Bible says very little credence.

I suspect that for many though, it is the revulsion over the idea of anal sex that is the driving force of their homophobia.

On a seperate issue, what does 'not fit for an egalitarian society' actually mean? It's not like you can exclude someone from society, just for expressing an opinion, however offensive it might be to some. thinking.gif


Racism and homophobia are vile no matter the reason.

We exclude people for racism. The same should go for homophobia.

Completely illogical. To disagree with black people/ with ginger people/ with gay people literally makes no sense. 'I disagree with you because you were born with blue eyes. I disagree with that.' Mm, okayyy?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 28th February 2018, 07:49 AM
Post #96
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Shia LeMuffQueef @ Feb 27 2018, 07:53 PM) *
Racism and homophobia are vile no matter the reason.


I can't disagree with that.

QUOTE
We exclude people for racism. The same should go for homophobia.
If they are just trolling, definitely - but otherwise, shouldn't they have the chance to defend themselves against possible misinterpretation?

QUOTE
Completely illogical. To disagree with black people/ with ginger people/ with gay people literally makes no sense. 'I disagree with you because you were born with blue eyes. I disagree with that.' Mm, okayyy?


It would be illogical (and heinous) if that were the *only* reason for disagreement, yes - but I hope you don't believe that people should be immune from criticism/challenge simply because they are part of a minority group?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Suedehead2
post 1st March 2018, 10:47 AM
Post #97
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,673
User: 3,272

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 27 2018, 04:53 PM) *
Because, according to the article, that's not the traditional way MP's resolve such matters.

I guess a couple of hundred years ago, it would be duelling pistols... tongue.gif

It depends on the scale of the libel. This was a pretty extreme case, so I don't blame him for taking legal action. Don't forget John Major successfully pursued a libel action over an allegation he had had an affair. We eventually found out that the thing the magazine in question got wrong was the identity of the woman involved.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 1st March 2018, 11:45 AM
Post #98
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Mar 1 2018, 10:47 AM) *
It depends on the scale of the libel. This was a pretty extreme case, so I don't blame him for taking legal action. Don't forget John Major successfully pursued a libel action over an allegation he had had an affair. We eventually found out that the thing the magazine in question got wrong was the identity of the woman involved.


makes you wonder how many other libel cases over the years have been won, only for history to prove the allegations were actually true after all...?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Suedehead2
post 1st March 2018, 03:42 PM
Post #99
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,673
User: 3,272

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Mar 1 2018, 11:45 AM) *
makes you wonder how many other libel cases over the years have been won, only for history to prove the allegations were actually true after all...?

That just underlines a major flaw with the justices system in general, namely money. When Peter Carter-Ruck was alive he had a reputation as the best libel lawyer in the UK. Whatever side managed to secure his services in a high-profile libel case usually won. That cannot be healthy in a democracy.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 1st March 2018, 03:55 PM
Post #100
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Mar 1 2018, 03:42 PM) *
That just underlines a major flaw with the justices system in general, namely money. When Peter Carter-Ruck was alive he had a reputation as the best libel lawyer in the UK. Whatever side managed to secure his services in a high-profile libel case usually won. That cannot be healthy in a democracy.


Not to mention the whole issue of super-injunctions...
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post


5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5
Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread

2 user(s) reading this thread
+ 2 guest(s) and 0 anonymous user(s)


 

Time is now: 25th April 2024, 08:29 AM