Religion The Fucking Left

[Scouse]

From what I read, the appeal judge determined that the trial judge erred. Since the first trial was in front of magistrates, and not a jury....

Regardless. What do we gain if we find him guilty of such a heinous crime.

A crime we are all mandated to think is a crime by law - which tells us that if we are outraged - whether we are or not.

What do we gain from all this?

 

[Hawkwind]

Poor example of these types of prosecutions, possibly the Count Dukula one would have been better. Silly twat for teaching a dog to raise his paw when anyone said a famous nazi salute but it was a joke and anyone older than 45+ saw worse on BBC tv comedies in the 80's (Freddie Starr comes to mind).

 

[Wij]

Poor example of these types of prosecutions, possibly the Count Dukula one would have been better. Silly twat for teaching a dog to raise his paw when anyone said a famous nazi salute but it was a joke and anyone older than 45+ saw worse on BBC tv comedies in the 80's (Freddie Starr comes to mind).

Without getting into the rights and wrongs of the legal angle I object to calling him a silly twat when widely available evidence shows him to be a nasty little cunt.

 

[Hawkwind]

Without getting into the rights and wrongs of the legal angle I object to calling him a silly twat when widely available evidence shows him to be a nasty little cunt.

Outside of that prosecution I'd never heard of him or seen any of his comedy, so object all want. I reserve the c word for people I know deserve it 😀

 

[Scouse]

Regardless. What do we gain if we find him guilty of such a heinous crime.

A crime we are all mandated to think is a crime by law - which tells us that if we are outraged - whether we are or not.

What do we gain from all this?

Dog/bone.

I'm yet to see an argument which is for all this. Which answers these questions and makes the case for constructing society like this in a cogent, logical manner.

I'm totally open to the possibility that I'm completely missing the point and if someone can explain to me why we've abandoned our enlightenment principles and how that has improved our society then I'm fully prepared to take a long hard look at myself and amend my position if necessary.

@Gwadien? You're a teacher. Teach me

 

[DaGaffer]

From what I read, the appeal judge determined that the trial judge erred. Since the first trial was in front of magistrates, and not a jury....

So the legal system fucked up and the legal system decides it will have another go. What kind of Kafkaesque bullshit is this?

The guy is an arsehole, but this was an waste of everyone's time the first time round, doing it again is pure witch hunt.

 

[Gwadien]

Dog/bone.

I'm yet to see an argument which is for all this. Which answers these questions and makes the case for constructing society like this in a cogent, logical manner.

I'm totally open to the possibility that I'm completely missing the point and if someone can explain to me why we've abandoned our enlightenment principles and how that has improved our society then I'm fully prepared to take a long hard look at myself and amend my position if necessary.

@Gwadien? You're a teacher. Teach me

Abandoned enlightenment? Ooookay then.

Honestly, I can't be bothered, you're saying the sky is purple and I'm saying no, you're being told the sky is purple and your response is no, the sky is defo purple without considering it's what you're being told.

I wasn't the only one who came to the same conclusion...

 

[gunner440]

All this for a joke? Well, a joke that was shared on a public platform?!

 

[Hawkwind]

The guy is an arsehole

Since when is that a crime.
The problem is the authorities are taking notice of the mob outrage on social media. Forced into taking action, fearing they will get targeted for not taking action. Public interest blown up by a mob. We are now back to the 1600's with witch trials!

 

[Scouse]

Honestly, I'm not up to the task because I don't really want to think about it.

It was a simple question - explain what we get from laws that lead to these sorts of prosecutions. What we gain as a society. What value there is laying waste to people's lives because of it that makes all the expense, effort and pain worth it.

What do we gain?

 

[Scouse]

Since when is that a crime.

Since the left amended the law (to great protest - people predicting exactly this sort of outcome) in 2003.

The problem is the authorities are taking notice of the mob outrage on social media. Forced into taking action

I disagree. People told Labour that this sort of shit would happen if they chose to legislate social media in this way.

Labour - and the anti-free speech lot (and I include Gwadien squarely in this) likes people like this getting prosecuted. They don't care if we don't gain - it's just "the left" giving people they don't like a kicking and trying to change humans into something they find acceptable. It's why Gwadien has expressed his admiration for China - even though it's horribly oppressive and murderous - like every far-leftist government. Maybe he doesn't want to go as far as China - but if you go some of the way you get some of the oppression.

It doesn't make logical sense and, importantly, can't be justified rationally - and when asked to provide a response you get "can't be bothered" or "not interested". But that's just a cop-out - it's because no rational argument exists.

So there's a religious belief at the heart of "the left" - one just as dangerous as....

We are now back to the 1600's with witch trials!

....this sort of shit. And the 20th Century is littered with the tens of millions of bodies (e.g.) that prove exactly this argument.


So yeah. I've a dog with a bone - because petty prosecutions like this one, brought about because of legal changes made by "the left" - and accepted by a lot of society because they like to see twats get a kicking - indeed means abandoning that enlightenment principle.

The reason this principle: "I detest what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it" - is important is because it's our first line of defence against oppression. If you uphold that principle then you make it impossible for governments to start passing these sort of laws.

But we've abandoned it. And I accuse people like @Gwadien (and others on this forum) of putting us all in danger for their failure to defend that ideal.

 

[Aoami]

Prosecutors clarify offensive online posts law

New guidelines could result in fewer people being charged for offensive messages on social networks such as Twitter, prosecutors say.

www.bbc.co.uk

Keir Starmer not a leftist confirmed. Momentum will love it.

 

[Scouse]

From that article @Aoami:

The guidance comes after a string of controversial cases, including the prosecution of a man who tweeted a joke threatening to blow up an airport.

Guidance is a sticking plaster for bad laws. We know that prosecutors and police always try to bend them as far as is possible and once out in the open laws are often interpreted in different ways that they were originally intended.

However, Labour knew this when they changed the laws. And yet people are being prosecuted for making jokes.

 

[ECA]

I don't know if you realise Scouse but the conservatives have been in power for the last 11 years.

 

[Scouse]

I don't know if you realise Scouse but the conservatives have been in power for the last 11 years.

Yay @ECA !! What ya been up tae?

I've said this very thread that perhaps we all know that Labour gets up to this sort of shit and that is a large part of why they don't get elected.

When challenged to tell us what we gain from this the biggest leftie here walked out of the room.

Labour doesn't want the power to change people's lives for the better without the power to dictate what is acceptable thought.

So they throw away their ability to do real good for all the great things they stand for because they are, unfortunately, cunts.

 

[Scouse]

Labour’s preoccupation with ‘values’ is a basic political error | Alan Finlayson

Demands for change are the raw material of politics. Keir Starmer needs to start addressing them, says politics professor Alan Finlayson

www.theguardian.com

 

[ECA]

I'm confused scouse.

News publishers warn plans could 'criminalise public interest' reports

A consultation by Priti Patel 's Home Office closing this week wants to update the 1989 act to account for changes in the digital age, especially around data transfer.

www.dailymail.co.uk

A right wing rag is fuming that the conservative home secretary are trying to stifle the press ?
Is priti patel a secret leftist?
Are the conservatives communists?

I'm so conflicted, all those sigma male youtubers told me this was the lefts problem.

 

[Raven]

Neither side of the extreme are interested in what other people have to say. It's not a left/right issue, it's an issue with nutters.

 

[Scouse]

I'm confused scouse.

Clearly. Because I've repeatedly pointed out problems with "the right" (if you want to call it that).

That doesn't absolve "the left" from their absolute fuckwittery. And if they want to get voted in and beat the fucking right, then the fucking left needs to ditch their abject idiocy.


Or we could just leave the Tories in power?

 

[Scouse]

Neither side of the extreme are interested in what other people have to say. It's not a left/right issue, it's an issue with nutters.

Yes, in many respects - because the left/right thing isn't a true representation. It absolutely is to do with "nutters" - although "nutters" mean vast huge swathes of the population at large.

So, really, it's to do with humans being dicks.

But if we're not going to just dismiss it all - and look at specific things - then "the left" is a useful term. And Labour needs to take a good long hard look at itself if it wants to get elected and, instead of just making things worse by making their asshattery an indespensible part of electing them - they ditch that shit and do the good they're capable of.

 

[Wij]

Yes, in many respects - because the left/right thing isn't a true representation. It absolutely is to do with "nutters" - although "nutters" mean vast huge swathes of the population at large.

So, really, it's to do with humans being dicks.

But if we're not going to just dismiss it all - and look at specific things - then "the left" is a useful term. And Labour needs to take a good long hard look at itself if it wants to get elected and, instead of just making things worse by making their asshattery an indespensible part of electing them - they ditch that shit and do the good they're capable of.

They could start by allowing us to call people with cocks men.

 

[Scouse]

They could start by allowing us to call people with cocks men.

Absolutely.

And maybe concentrate on this sort of thing instead of being OUTRAGED that people get upset and passing laws that criminalise the nasty people, eh?

 

[Hawkwind]

They could start by allowing us to call people with cocks men.

Or even have a discussion about men's issues without laughing or making derisory comments, that would be a good start.

 

[Scouse]

Or even have a discussion about men's issues without laughing or making derisory comments, that would be a good start.

Fucking patriarchy.

You're just a potential rapist waiting to happen.

 

[Gwadien]

hahahahahahahahahahaha

In one page;

'Fuck Trans rights'

'What about mens rights?'

lol.

You've all become a parody.

 

[Scouse]

In one page;

'Fuck Trans rights'

'What about mens rights?'

1) Nobody here has even come close to saying "fuck trans rights" - and you know my posting history in the other thread. Noone else has been more supportive of trans rights than me.

2) Mens issues aren't to be scoffed at or ignored. If we want equality - true equality - then men's issues, which are just as real as anyone else's issues - are not to be ignored.


You might think this is "parody" - but as a member of "the fucking left" you knee-jerk react like you just have above and then wonder why huge swathes of society are pushing back.

 

[Gwadien]

1) Nobody here has even come close to saying "fuck trans rights" - and you know my posting history in the other thread. Noone else has been more supportive of trans rights than me.

2) Mens issues aren't to be scoffed at or ignored. If we want equality - true equality - then men's issues, which are just as real as anyone else's issues - are not to be ignored.


You might think this is "parody" - but as a member of "the fucking left" you knee-jerk react like you just have above and then wonder why huge swathes of society are pushing back.

My heart bleeds for middle class men

Nice one applying a label by the way, makes things more palatable?

 

[Scouse]

My heart bleeds for middle class men

1) You didn't respond to the first point.
2) Nobody said anything about the middle classes.


This is exactly why there's a thread called "the fucking left" - and why Labour isn't getting voted in. Because the fucking left doesn't really give a shit about equality, or fairness or coming to a reasonable accomodation with people they disagree with.

 

[Gwadien]

'Defender of trans rights!'

 

[Scouse]

View attachment 44719

'Defender of trans rights!'

Nuance. As a teacher you'd think you'd be capable of it.

1) It was funny. In my opinion.
2) Finding it funny doesn't mean I don't defend trans rights.
3) I also defend @Wij's right to say that - whether I 100% agree, 100% disagree or anything in between.

You have a "with us or against us" mentality that's almost the calling card of the fucking left. That's why they're the fucking left.