NFR: Political Correctness.

[Rupert]

So it is your right to discriminate against others (refusing gay people the ability to adopt or marry)?

I am not discriminating against anyone, you, in fact are discriminating against me and about five million others in the UK!

Gay people may "marry" in a registrar's office (heterosexual couples may "marry" as in this manner well, this is not under threat from this proposed legislation, it is marriage in Church that is under consideration) or adopt a child. They are legally entitled to, this is enshrined in British law and nobody, to the best of my knowledge, on "our" side of the arguement is seeking to remove these equal rights from them. If anyone is, I do not agree with them.

There are plenty of government agencies who are able to arrange adoption of children who need adopting, the fact that they seem to be pretty inefficient about this is not our problem, surely? We, Catholics, give financial support to Catholic adoption agencies through the weekly collection, surely it is our right to see that the Catholic children in the care of Catholic agencies are placed with the sort of family structure that we Catholics are familiar with? Or, do we not have that right? Must we be forced to deny our beliefs? Surely that is as bad as forcing Gay people to deny their beliefs? We do not do that, they have a choice, why can't we have an equal choice?

[Blingo]

Ah, Political Correctness, how the lawyers must love it.

As a young, second-generation Irish Catholic, growing up in London in the 60's and 70's, what with the IRA doing their best to make anyone with an Irish-Catholic connection hated by all over here, I had a lot of nonsense hurled in my general direction. I have to say that most of the time the (usually) ignorant Englishman hurling the insults, derogatory remarks and plainly inaccurate slurs in my direction was usually simply displaying his own ignorance, something I was often able to helpfully point out to him, without ever getting punched for it.

Now, I accept that I am lucky enough to be relatively clever and articulate, and can keep calm enough to argue my case, and those without those abilities probably do need protecting from life's bullies (which is what racists, homophobics and the like are), so do see the need for PC rules to be in place.

However, I would also argue it goes both ways.

For example- currently there is a move to make same-sex marriages legal. We in the Catholic church, along with a number of other churches and faiths, have a huge problem with this. We see marriage as the basis of a successul and loving family relationship (in an ideal world, admittedly) which is the best place for a child to be raised in. Same sex marriages, by definition, will not lead to any children being born, however loving and caring they are, so we fail to see why they should exist. Civil partnerships are available for all couples, regardless of sexual orientation.
From research carried out, it appears that most homosexuals fail to see the need for marriage either and would not want to get married in a church which does not agree with their lifestyle choices.
Yet, this is being urged on us by a small group of fantical "equal rights" people. They are already threatening to close, or have already closed, Catholic adoption agencies for refusing to allow same-sex couples to adopt children in their care (since such relationships are contrary to Catholic teaching), this despite the fact that Catholic agencies are far more successful than any other group at getting children successfully adopted. So, in the name of PC, children suffer. Good one, eh?

I have no problem with homosexual/gay/lesbian couples having equal rights, I just think that we should have equal rights too, and those rights should include the right to disapprove of other people's lifestyle choices. After all, they clearly, and with legal backing, are disapproving of ours and starting to impinge on our rights in a very intrusive manner.

So it is your right to discriminate against others (refusing gay people the ability to adopt or marry)?

No....but is he not allowed to express his opinion?

[Blingo]

"I have no problem with homosexual/gay/lesbian couples having equal rights, I just think that we should have equal rights too, and those rights should include the right to disapprove of other people's lifestyle choices. After all, they clearly, and with legal backing, are disapproving of ours and starting to impinge on our rights in a very intrusive manner.

But you're defining "marriage" in terms which suit you and thereby denying marriage to those outside your criteria.

I think actually that this is a very different topic to political correctness.

My thing is tolerance. Others can live life how they wish but I demand that they allow me (and everyone else) the same choice.

And THAT is exactly my point. There are certain people, factions, elements of society that insist that we have to accept what THEY want or they go for example to the Race Relations Board. Now, I am not racist, believe it or not, but where does the White man go to report someone? Would he be listened to? Does the Englishman's opinion even count in his country anymore? There is just too much of a one sided argument with these people and it is not fair either.

[ImperialWhite]

Now, I am not racist, believe it or not, but where does the White man go to report someone? Would he be listened to? Does the Englishman's opinion even count in his country anymore? There is just too much of a one sided argument with these people and it is not fair either.

"I'm not a racist but..."

I agree - it isn't fair.

White people are in a privileged position in our society. Data shows this.

[TonyGilroy]

I think we'd all agree that discrimination is wrong so I don't understand any argument in favour of the right to discriminate.

Most objections to PC though come down to that when properly picked apart.

[Blingo]

Now, I am not racist, believe it or not, but where does the White man go to report someone? Would he be listened to? Does the Englishman's opinion even count in his country anymore? There is just too much of a one sided argument with these people and it is not fair either.

"I'm not a racist but..."

I agree - it isn't fair.

White people are in a privileged position in our society. Data shows this.

How do you work that out IW?

[Peabody]

Surely, the object of being PC is to encourage respect and few can argue with that aim. The trouble, there are quite a few, no, alot of people who believe that if it is in the newspaper then it is true and of course it isnt but unfortunately, PC and being PC gets a bad press.

[Lighthouse]

Spending lots of time with my sister when she has been in hospital this year we often hear the nurses say ' Now you will feel a little scratch'. Clearly injecting a blimmin great needle into one is not scratching. However 'you will feel a little p****' is no longer pc.

However the public do like to sue everybody now. I am told not to help move a gurney with my sister on it in case I hurt myself and sue etc etc. So with political correctness comes the blame culture.We all know we should not attack each other over politics or appearance or sexual orientation. But somehow we all do it. What bothers people is causing offence where none was ment. Something else that has become popular recently.

[sipwell]

Now, I am not racist, believe it or not, but where does the White man go to report someone? Would he be listened to? Does the Englishman's opinion even count in his country anymore? There is just too much of a one sided argument with these people and it is not fair either.

"I'm not a racist but..."

I agree - it isn't fair.

White people are in a privileged position in our society. Data shows this.

How do you work that out IW?

Because scientific study shows this report after report in all segments of society. Of course, the Daily Mail thinks it is bogus science. The best statistical analysis is asking 100 Daily Mail readers a completely biased question. In Belgium we have an extreme right wing party which discriminates against Muslims as they do not fit the image of a "Fleming". I am a Fleming myself and I tend to believe that as long as everyone accept some basic values (and speak the language in response to the state), they are as Fleming as I am. There is nothing PC about that: it is my deep held conviction.

The term political correctness is in itself problematic, as it implies wrong and right. I disagree with that. For me the line is drawn when someone - after you made a remark of some kind - says he or she is (rightly) hurt by it, whether you think this person is overreacting or not is besides the point. You have been disrespectful towards his or her feelings. It also applies only in cases where the issue is something a person cannot help (race, gender, disability, skin colour, intelligence,...), when it is not a choice. If jokes are concerned, isn't it more fun to tell a joke everyone can laugh with (even the butt of the joke) rather than have a joke at the expense of someone? 

I agree however that in some cases PC has become a dreadful norm, where you cannot - what the French call - "parler-vrai" (speak-truth). It is essentially in the eye of the beholder.

[Blingo]

did u read the joke?

[TonyGilroy]

I think they're all very different things.

I hate the blame culture - sometimes things go wrong despite everybody doing their best. Sh1t happens.

Health and safety has gone too far in, I think, everyones opinion, but when you get down to the detail usually there is some point behind each regulation.

You might feel a little p**** ,I'm sure, would simply be regarded as a joke whether intended as such or not. I can't believe that it's prohibited in some nursing manual.

Treating people equally and with respect though (PC as I understand it) is just good manners.

[sipwell]

did u read the joke?

The initial joke or did you write another borderline one? You can PM me. :)

[Blingo]

The original one. It might not be PC for me to PM you lol. ;p

[AlFayedsChequebook]

So it is your right to discriminate against others (refusing gay people the ability to adopt or marry)?

I am not discriminating against anyone, you, in fact are discriminating against me and about five million others in the UK!

Gay people may "marry" in a registrar's office (heterosexual couples may "marry" as in this manner well, this is not under threat from this proposed legislation, it is marriage in Church that is under consideration) or adopt a child. They are legally entitled to, this is enshrined in British law and nobody, to the best of my knowledge, on "our" side of the arguement is seeking to remove these equal rights from them. If anyone is, I do not agree with them.

There are plenty of government agencies who are able to arrange adoption of children who need adopting, the fact that they seem to be pretty inefficient about this is not our problem, surely? We, Catholics, give financial support to Catholic adoption agencies through the weekly collection, surely it is our right to see that the Catholic children in the care of Catholic agencies are placed with the sort of family structure that we Catholics are familiar with? Or, do we not have that right? Must we be forced to deny our beliefs? Surely that is as bad as forcing Gay people to deny their beliefs? We do not do that, they have a choice, why can't we have an equal choice?

But being gay is not a 'belief' is it?

As for the church not trying to take away gay people's rights - luckily they can't but it has not stopped them trying to prevent positive changes being made. Look right now at the CofE's response the the government wanting to allow Gay marriage as opposed to only Civil partnerships - Sentamu was writing in the Guardian the other day about how awful it was.

The question of catholic adoption is a difficult one - if the agencies in question receive no public funding then I guess they are within their rights to only allow catholic adoption? The problem is that you inhenrently believe that being Gay is wrong - which I think is absolutely disgusting because you are discriminating against people based on belief in a book written two thousand years ago.

What I dont understand is why Christianity has an issue with Gay people. The Bible has lots of things that have since been dropped (eating of shellfish, slavery, child marriage to name but a few) so why can you not accept that being gay is perfectly fine?

[sipwell]

The original one. It might not be PC for me to PM you lol. ;p

You seem to have a very weird opinion of me. You are aware that lefties are on the whole a lot more open and a lot less restrained by norms and values than right wing people, I hope? That is why a lot of people have difficulties with lefties. They are far less easily pinned down. I have a number of core values which are non-negotiable (equality as in respect for other people is one of them) but far less than the right wing or centre-right people.