Am I getting old or are our courts really becoming a joke

[Elgrande]

So persecution can be justified if it not against a minority?

[Robpthegills]

The problem is when a Minority speaks out against a supposed Majority its called Freedom of Speech

When you speak out against a minority its called racism.

I personally am against gay marriages, but then people brand me homophobic. At one time most of the world shared my opinion, now peoples opinions are changing that doesnt make it right. My goverment even told me it was wrong. When I was in the Navy you got sent to jail if you were found to be gay and discharged. Times change but that doesnt always make it right.

How many years before a paedophile stops being a paedophile and just an older person who wants a relationship with a young child, absurd as that sounds, gay marriages seemed just as absurd 100 years ago.

We are losing the right to have our own beliefs, as long as those beliefs dont materialise into criminal acts against people I really do not see the problem.

Peter Tatchell doesnt believe the church has the right to ban or not accept gay people, yet he believes he has the right to insist what the church does and what decisions they make.

The dictionary lists homophobia as an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.

well i dont believe my thoughts are irrational or extreme I just dont think its right.

[Rimshot]

I think it's just self-indulgent but harmless. I know a couple who went through a civil ceremony and they both believe that the gays insisting on 'marriage' are just short on something to protest about.

Honestly though, some of the biggest objectors seem to be people who never set foot in church. A non-issue Rob. I really cannot understand why heterosexual males ( women couldn't care less) get so worked up about it.

[Robpthegills]

its a very valid point rimshot. Some of the biggest complainers on either side of the coin have never stepped nor will ever step into a church.


I am just an old whinged, I hate homosexuality being thrown in my face by nearly every tv programme but just as much as I hate promiscuity being rammed down our throats. No soap shows a happy marriage.

Anyway I will put my grouchy head away and put on my happy head just like worzel gummidge used to do.

[Garawa]

"You mustn't say anything nasty about gays, coloureds, transgenders etc even if it is true or based on a personal belief shared by many."

Elg is right though isn't he really? We saw it with Mark McCammon. The guy was useless and was let go but won a race case against the club for victimisation, something he wouldn't have done had he been white.

[Poshgill]

Using McCammon isn't an accurate analogy Gary. McCammon went to Scally and claimed discrimination. Scally then dismissed the accusation out of hand without investigating it. Had he done so properly then McCammon would not have wo his case. In effect he won because Scally failed to do his job properly not because he was discriminated against.

[Elgrande]

But surely that's the problem Posh; the minorities now play the discrimination / race card much too often and get away with it. If I complained I was being picked on at work because of my size / age / ability to express myself coherently would that be seriously investigated? Well unless it was local government!

[Poshgill]

Well yes it should be investigated and any employer worth their salt would investigate if you made those allegations and conversley if found to be claimed maliciously then you would be subject to disciplinary action. And I have seen this happen to people regardless of their race. Also despite the hyperbole from some quarters the vast majority of black people hate to use the race card and hate those that report maliciously.

[Garawa]

I guess so but all that anyone remembers is that the club "racially discriminated against" a black player who claimed he and other black players were treated differently. What you have suggested Posh is quite a distinction from race to employment procedures and I'm sure the club would have taken steps to stress the differentiation between the two as they are labelled now (almost) as racist. I do agree with you that most minorities hate to use it but when all else fails, it is a card to play that no-one else holds.

[Poshgill]

The McCammon case is quite interesting from an employment legislation point of view. The court found in favour of McCammon, not because he was discriminated against, but because the club could not prove he WAS'NT discriminated against. It is an important distinction. Of course, the media in this country put their own incorrect spin on it and that is why it is percieved that we are a racist club (when obviously we are not).

Yet again, it was Scally that failed miserably. Any employer has a duty to investigate allegations that are made (be it race, disability, age or if the allegation is about harrasment or bullying). Once the investigation is conducted properly with appropriate records kept, then there is no way it would go to an Employment Tribunal. (unless it was found that McCammon HAD been the victim of discrimination.)

In a similar way, I used to work with an Asian train driver. He reported several people over the course of a few years for race discrimination. On the 3rd time of his reporting and with no evidence found to support his claim, I had great delight in disciplining him for malicious reporting. He appealed my decision as high as he could (the Union refusing to back him as I'd kept proper records of interviews etc) and in the end he became a model employee.