Are the new suggestions about rights for homosexuals acceptable?
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1922914,00.html
see here for link
Related posts:
- How can it be acceptable that schools are so strapped for cash that they are selling playing fields to fill gaps in budgets?
- No Euro Charter Of Human Rights for the UK
- Do you think parents evenings can or indeed should be replaced with such things as txt messaging or chat rooms with teachers for advice and progress reports of your children?
- Is it in anyway acceptable for money intended for the clearance of landmines to be used to finance a war effort?
- DO you think its acceptable for the police to randomly stop and search school children and when they have established they are guilty of nothing, to photograph them and obtain their details to build a database?
PocketDemon - March 31st, 2009
Why not? Well, providing they don't get watered down, as the article suggests, then…
Okay, there probably should be a responsibility of people of any persuasion to 'act with decency' (aka it's as off-putting seeing a hetrosexual couple being 'overly affectionate' as it is a homosexual couple), but since it's looking at removing discrimination it can only be a good thing.
Well, if you expect everyone to contribute to a common tax pool then everyone deserves the same rights & opportunities, & as the same expectations would be placed upon businesses/establishments catering for either side then…
it's probably more disturbing that it suggests that minority religious groups could scupper the plans – not that they aren't entitled to an opinion, but there are better things that this country could do than to have more discrimination.
loopyg4eva - March 31st, 2009
No matter who does what, when and why, there is always going to ne someone that takes exception to it, and because of that, there is always going to be discrimination of sorts.
It really doesn't matter what the subject is, it just goes to show that you can't please everyone all of the time. Moreover, you'd be a fool trying.
Live and let live – let bygones be bygones woukld result in a lot less aggravation.
One problem with that though;
It's just too friggin' EASY!! and people just can't bear to see others enjoy themselves without having something to say about it.
Always the way.
I can't say I read the article in it's entirety – I didn't feel the need to read another dirge about society being guided into a baseless law or policy borne of hypocrisy and delusion.
So, to me – no, the changes aren't acceptable – change never is, because, quite simply, so long as people aren't causing anyone significant or notable emotional or physical distress, they should be left to their own devices.
I was, I am, and I will be – those that don't like it?
I would make a suggestion, but it'd get moderated!!
vultan - March 31st, 2009
The idea that organisations should be allowed to opt out of laws they don't like based on their religion is unacceptable. The law is the law (and this law is entirely positive – the idea that people should be discriminated against based on who they prefer to sleep with is dreadful, as bad as racism in my opinion).
If a faith school decided that it was OK, based on its religion, to start beating disobedient pupils, then they'd be prevented. If a faith school, based on its religion, started teaching children that Jews are the source of all evil in the world, then they'd be prevented. Why should legislation about homosexuality be any different? And how can a school claim to be offering education to its pupils if it refuses to even acknowledge certain topics?
rasputin1309 - March 31st, 2009
we are either a modern society or we are not and being a modern society involves ensuring society as a machine of the state is free from discrimination – if we cannot ensure this then we may as well go back to medieval times and start burning witches again
nutbatfruitbar - April 1st, 2009
Pi**ing hell. Stop for a minute to look something up and my answer disappears!
Basic gist of it was: People have the same rights. All people. Black, white, atheist, Catholic, Asian, gay, straight, asexual polymorphs with pink mohawks… They all pay the same taxes, so why should they not reap the same benefits?
It's wrong to tell a civil partner that they will have to have a seperate bedroom in a B&B. It's wrong to deny the possibility of having a child naturally to a stable couple in a loving relationship who can provide a balanced background and upbringing… just because the couple is made up of two women. It's wrong to tell a support group that they cannot meet in a public venue in the evening because the venue is used as a Catholic school in the daytime and the support group is for gays, lesbians and bisexuals.
The suggestions for certain groups to dodge the law are wrong.