John Carter

I think we're coming from a different frame... You're coming from what is and I'm coming from what should be, if I'm looking at it correctly

Yep. OK.

__________________
There are three kinds of people in this world: Libertarians, fascists, and those who haven't been paying attention.

Paul Birch

Not really. It's a bit of both - given what is (even if it shouldn't be) how should we behave? My position is that there shouldn't be any regulatory oligopolies - there should be free competition. If there is free competition, discrimination is permissible so long as it is not in breach of the terms or intent of any contract or prior agreement (including any charters, covenants and so forth, which are agreements too). However, if we are stuck with regulatory oligopolies, then the least bad rule may be to prohibit discrimination by them (or at least to ensure that there is always at least one firm that will serve any given client).

Oliver

I wonder in the light of Scotgirl's description of CV as hate filled. Is this all it takes to damn any organisation? Just because someone somewhere tags a group as hate motivated. Much as the media says "right wing" hardliners" etc of UKIP to damage us by this taint. The other point for me is where will the illiberal liberals draw the line on unpopular (to them) organisations, how soon would they set about removing many rights we have, as the Scottish parliament seems intent on doing by using labels of shame which they repeat parrot fashion. such as sectarian etc. If UKIP is to become anything lasting, protection of liberty must be at the heart of what we do.

yes i have described them as such and given my reasons why i belive this to be true

are you telling me i cant say that therefore stiffling my freedom of speach on this matter

would anyone here have picketed outside a cancer charity to stop them accepting legally required funds :?:

would anyone here have published the names addresses and telephone numbers of executives putting not only them but thier families in Danger :?:



this is still a huge problem in Scotland are you trying to tell me that the scottish parliment shoudl not be talking about it not accepting that there is problem for feel of people feeling labled

Benjaminw1

Yes (I assume you mean aquired). For example if a group promoting the reduction of the age of consent to 14 for hetrosexual and homosexual acts (Outrage's stance) gave money to a charity I would protest it.


Yes; because I do not subscribe to your paranoia about putting their families in danger, and because people should be accountable for their acts.

Ben

have you got a link to that sounds like nonsense

and what about these peoples children what exactly where they guilty off

Oliver

My concern is always to get to the root cause of any problem. the CV picketing allegation is a red herring the delegation from the cast of Jerry Springer Opera wanted to do a big cheque photo opportunity. This is what was threatened with a protest. the media made the rest up! The "sectarian" matters in scotland are never going to be legislated away. Also just as with hunting, it is ludicrous to make illegal on one day that which was perfectly legal the day before. The politicians who think they know best and imagine they can change peoples minds for them are fascists and if they can't accept that label, it matters not,(a rose by any other name) they want to control people and stamp out their opponents. This is not true of CV who are attempting to protect Christians from various attacks on their faith in so many provocative ways.

nope its not this supposidly Chistian organisation wanted to stop a worthwhile charity from reciving funds and did the verbal equivilent of holding a gun to the charity's head

Providing the funds where legally obtained (which they were) chistian voice shoudl not really have got involved. its hardly as if the jerry springer operal was going to do a performance in the cancer centre itsself

also according to the chistian voice website at the time they were planning to picket the cancer centures until the money was given back no matter how long it took

BritishPatriot

The children were not guilty of anything on this issue and as far as I know, nor were Christian Voice for posting the names, adresses and telephone numbers of executives allowing the public a way of contacting these people. If anyone uses these contact details to attack the executives or their children then the attacker is guilty, not the person who provided contact details.

The law of blasphemy still stands, so as far as I know Jerry Springer was illegal. Christian Voice did not want to stop a charity receiving funds, it wanted the funds the charity received to be clean.

Tom Wilde

If Jerry Springer - the Opera had been illegal under the blasphemy law, then surely CV would have tried to bring a prosecution (Like Mary Whitehouse once did a few decades ago, I believe). The fact that CV didn't try to do so indicates pretty clearly that they could see that Jerry Springer wasn't illegal. Therefore the money the Jerry Springer Opera wished to donate to the cancer charity was legally obtained.

By the way, did you get a chance to see Jerry Springer - the Opera? It was ace! However, I do take objection to the fact that CV attempted to curtail my liberty to see it.