Re: The witch-hunters : Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:21 pm  

I've always been pro gay but I do worry that everyone is being pushed into having the same opinions on anything contentious. If he opposes it and he genuinely believes in the reasons (other than pure prejudice) then he shouldn't be hounded out of a job for it.
It's almost akin to the thought police of 1984.
I'm all for people challenging opinion but trampling peoples opinions into dust is too extreme for me.

Re: The witch-hunters : Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:43 pm  

Wire Yed wrote:

I've always been pro gay but I do worry that everyone is being pushed into having the same opinions on anything contentious. If he opposes it and he genuinely believes in the reasons (other than pure prejudice) then he shouldn't be hounded out of a job for it.
It's almost akin to the thought police of 1984.
I'm all for people challenging opinion but trampling peoples opinions into dust is too extreme for me.

On the other hand I am a child of the 1950s and so was brought up in an era when it was perfectly acceptable and reasonable to hold prejudiced views and to openly discriminate against black and Asian people, and the vast majority of the generation above me did, with no shame or embarrassment simply because thats what everyone did and it was very much reinforced by what was seen on TV most evenings.

It took the Race Relations Act of 1976 to change peoples viewpoint, to stop TV production company's from using race as a cheap shot or as the butt of a joke and even then the change was very slow - I was told in 1980 by a regional manager at the company I worked for to sack one electrician because he was Asian, no other reason, he'd spotted the name Patel on our weekly wages submissions and didn't want to see that name the following week and I can assure you that it was nothing to do with the quality of work as that particular manager had never met the bloke - he was based 300 miles away.

Sounds quite shocking now doesn't it but working for a building company at the time you could be barred from having a job just for having a scouse accent (have you read Ricky Tomlinsons biog ?) so the colour of your skin was always going to be a problem, christ knows what would have been said if being gay was mentioned - yes, you do need a change in the law and you do need to enforce the law quite firmly before some individuals will see the error of their ways.

Re: The witch-hunters : Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:15 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

I was told in 1980 by a regional manager at the company I worked for to sack one electrician because he was Asian, no other reason, he'd spotted the name Patel on our weekly wages submissions and didn't want to see that name the following week and I can assure you that it was nothing to do with the quality of work as that particular manager had never met the bloke - he was based 300 miles away.

What did you do when ordered to sack someone for the offence of being called Patel?

Re: The witch-hunters : Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:04 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

What did you do when ordered to sack someone for the offence of being called Patel?

I didn't, we only had two electricians on that site and it was 100 miles away with two months left to run on the contract, financial argument meant that my boss had no justification for his opinion - it was still his opinion though.

We had quite a few incidents like it too including a black West Indian electrician of ours who was asked to leave an office building in Leeds while he was carrying out maintenance there, we got a phone call asking if we'd send "another" electrician the next day, by "another" they meant a white one.

Incidentally both of those were Approved Electricians, a higher grade than your run of the mill qualified electrician so both were most capable of doing the work and had taken time and money to gain their higher qualifications - thats the way it was in the 1970s, THATS why the law is often required to change public perception.

Re: The witch-hunters : Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:56 am  

Religions being forced to marry people whose centuries old book has always been against it though?

I'm pro gay and atheist, there's nothing I wouldn't love more than equality and an end to superstition in the mainstream.

Either ban religion altogether or let them live it the way they want to live it. Forcing them to marry gay people isn't something I'd agree with myself.

I'm all for civil partnerships, I'm all for religious union if the heads of that religion changed thrir minds, but forcing them I don't agree with, why would a gay guy want to be part of a religion that believes their existence is an abomination?
Why force churches to do something their book teaches against?

The Mozilla guy is against gay marriage not necessarily against gays in general (I don't know though tbh).

I think this guy has issues, but he has his religion and he doesn't want things forced into it. How is it different to if a government makes them add vishnu in to be inclusive of Hindus?

I hate religion but it is what it is and I understand why they would fight it and give money to the cause.

Re: The witch-hunters : Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:26 am  

Wire Yed wrote:

I hate religion but it is what it is and I understand why they would fight it and give money to the cause.

I understand that too but my point is that changes in attitudes that are ingrained deep in society (whatever that society is) take a long time and will involve the use of the law given that the law is accepted as the will of that society - you have to accept the position otherwise there is no society and no concensus on anything.

I too don't understand why a gay person would want to be a part of an organisation that openly discriminates against them but that is the enigma and the draw of religion that on the one hand pulls followers in with the promise of "family" and then dictates what they can and can't do.

Re: The witch-hunters : Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:26 am  

Wire Yed wrote:

Religions being forced to marry people whose centuries old book has always been against it though?

I'm pro gay and atheist, there's nothing I wouldn't love more than equality and an end to superstition in the mainstream.

Either ban religion altogether or let them live it the way they want to live it. Forcing them to marry gay people isn't something I'd agree with myself.

I'm all for civil partnerships, I'm all for religious union if the heads of that religion changed thrir minds, but forcing them I don't agree with, why would a gay guy want to be part of a religion that believes their existence is an abomination?
Why force churches to do something their book teaches against?

The Mozilla guy is against gay marriage not necessarily against gays in general (I don't know though tbh).

I think this guy has issues, but he has his religion and he doesn't want things forced into it. How is it different to if a government makes them add vishnu in to be inclusive of Hindus?

I hate religion but it is what it is and I understand why they would fight it and give money to the cause.

The marriage equality legislation does not force any religion to carry out same sex marriages. It allows them to (except in the case of the CoE), which is something entirely different.

So what we have is a bunch of religious people who aren't going to be forced to get married to a gay person, aren't going to be forced to conduct the marriage ceremony of a gay couple (unless they work as registrars), but still can't live and let live. The religious groups are not the ones being persecuted here.

Re: The witch-hunters : Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:40 am  

Is law the same in America?

Re: The witch-hunters : Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:52 am  

Wire Yed wrote:

Is law the same in America?

I think so, though I stand to be corrected. The opposition to the law over there, as here, seems to be that The Bible forbids it and that gay people can't possibly bring up normal, healthy children.

Re: The witch-hunters : Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:11 am  

Don't get me wrong I'm an atheist, I'm just trying to strike a balance.

Forcing the church to do something against what they stand for I don't agree with, let them have their antiquated ways and let them slowly die off naturally when people get fed up of them and their ignorance and intolerance.

I don't believe a group of people with a core set of beliefs should have something they are dead set against forced down their throats (excuse the pun).

To me it's the same as the government forcing religion down mine like that of centuries ago.

I can cope with an element of intolerance for the greater good, they're not lynching them just not allowing them to get married into a belief system that thinks they're wrong.