So Mr. Herbert is OK with the fact that racial and relgious offenses are more thoroughly prosecuted than homophobic offenses?If you’re in England and you get into a debate with a rabid religious homophobe you better be careful what you say because you can be arrested for responding IN KIND to an offensive comment from the religious bigot since the restrictions against religious incitement are greater than those for homophobic incitement.A very uneven playing/fighting field just gets a little less uneven but still uneven and inequitable.
Make that:”So Mr. Herbert (WILL BE) OK with the fact that racial and relgious offenses are and will be more thoroughly prosecuted than homophobic offenses?When he says, “Yes, as you know insulting or abusive words are out of the protection and that I think is a major difference between the racial and religious hatred legislation. It should give the protection which the church seeks and comedians and so on seek.” is he telling us that they are out of the protection of the GLBT law even though they’re included in the race and religion law?As I said, it doesn’t seem like a debate/fight between a fundamentalist Christian and a gay person would be fair and on an even playing field.Somehow freedom of speech didn’t seem to be of such great concern when the race and religion laws were passed. Now, all of the sudden, they are paramount to a free society. I guess it all depends on whose speech one is protecting and who’s being protected from attack. There seems to be very different standards for those who CHOOSE to be Christian and those who happen to be born gay.
If I were you Zeke I’d be worrying a bit more what is going on in your own country rather than what is going on in the UK. If you were all to spend half as much time criticising your own politicians as you do ours, perhaps you wouldn’t be heading back to the dark ages.It is well documented that we are already well protected by legislation from homophobic hate crime, and increasingly this legislation is being used.Maybe you should stop worrying about us and start campaigning for something similar in your own country.
If I were you Sister, I’d stop sucking the ass of every Tory that comes down the block.Oh, and BITE ME!
Besides, you’re not even gay. You’re just a troll who surfs gay sites to sell the Tory line like a crack dealer.
Zeke, you may think that reading a few articles (more likely just the headlines of, truth be told) on the internet gives you the incite to start telling us where we are going wrong with this country, not just in relation to this, but every other occasion when you stick your unwelcome oar in, but some of us don’t.Do you really have any clue about UK and EU legislation that protects us and other groups in our society from discrimination and hate? I think not.You’re own country is getting more and more over run but creationists, evangelicalists and banjo playing nutcases by the hour yet every time there is any mention of ‘Conservative’ on this site you appear ranting and talking shite.You know nothing about this country and its governance. You know nothing about the Conservative Party or its policies (it is not actually the Republican Party or anything similar). You have yet to show you know anything about anything.You might think it is clever, you might think it is grown up, but it is neither. If you have got such an issue with freedom of speech, argue against it in your own country and see how far you get. While you’re at it you might want to argue against letting adolescents with grudges against their class mates and teachers take large numbers of firearms to High School while listening to Marilyn Manson on their walkmans.
“Besides, you’re not even gay”. Is this is some pathetic attempt to get me to kiss you or something, to ‘prove’ I am?If you want a kisss Zeke, you only have to ask. You can quite happily kiss my a**e any time you like.
Mother Superior, perhaps you ought to quit hiding behind your rancid jingoism and try to figure out why you’re such an inept spokesmodel for the Thatcherites. They might sack you, just like Labour did. It’s quite all right for honest activists to criticize backwardness or bigotry anywhere. On the other hand, hacks and retarded spokesmodels like you should preface your inane diatribes with the caution that it’s a paid political announcement from a rightwing apologist. Since you’ve forgotten, let me jog your memory: we triumphantly left the dark ages behind in 1776 by mauling the Tories. It was, by all accounts, great fun. Working people on both sides of the Atlantic are looking forward to a replay..
You can’t disguise a half-pound box of maggots by putting a layer of chocolates (with posh names) on the top, the evil always crawls back to the surface.If they were serious about reform, they would get rid of IDS, Widdecombe, Duncan Smith, Leigh, Fox,Davies etc. It can’t happen because the blue rinsed old biddies and selfish business leaders will always vote for the nastiest right wingers they can find. And they’re funded by a mad millionaire.When Hitler was dead, his followers still existed (and are still being hunted) – a change of leader can’t fix the festering underbelly of evil.
Rah, Rah, Nick is Gay etc … Yet, I’m slightly disturbed in how his sexuality, or even his personal partnership, is not mentioned on his own website Ah yes, that is a good question with which you’re about to argue: should it be a matter for a politician’s website to discuss his private life? Indeed, reading the Pinknews interview (“Does he [your partner, Jason) have to do the role of the constituency wife?”) it appears to be compulsory that Mr Herbert’s sexuality is discussed openly. By the way … “constituency wife” ??!! Good God, I’m embarrassed at the question’s phrasing.Back on track. I do notice, though, the links on “About Nick” to the Pinknews.co.uk interview, and to Nick’s biography in Wikipedia. Is this what they call, in political circles, “leaking” the information?I have no doubt that Mr Herbert is climbing the ladder of public life politics. Reading his interview I’m disturbed by his apparently practised split: when talking politically a subtle manipulation of another’s opinion by his phrases (“You and I would agree…”, “… if you’re like me …”), and when talking about himself at a more personal angle his word-choice appears quite different, warm, considerate, genuine.Mr Herbert – good luck to you. You’ve clearly put a lot of work into what you do and I hope that you’re the genuine article and I hope that you reap whatever it is that you are sowing. You leave me confused, however and this leaves me suspicious of you.
“It’s quite all right for honest activists …”. It might well be Bill but neither you or Zeke are ‘honest activists’You pedal lies and half truths, presenting fantasies that exist only within your own heads as fact. You purport to know the ins and outs of the lives we leads and how we can make then better – what we are doing wrong and why we should change them.We are quite capable, as is evidenced by the changes we are seeing in our society, to engender change without embracing your Marxist ideologies. Rational and reasoned debate, strong arguments and a focused approached have bought equalities that people in your country can only aspire to. Manning the barricades and anarchist politics do have their place I’m sure, but that place is not here.It beggars belief that you spend so much time running down this country when there are so many issues with your own.Independence was probably the best thing for both our countries. You are all free to sit out on the stoop, playing your banjos and swigging moonshine, while we continue to develop into a just, free and egalitarian society.