Re: Political Correctness Gone Silly.
Rich...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>On , , Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:31:23 +0000 (UTC), Re: Political Correctness Gone
>Silly., Carnations <Beau...@Carnations.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:23:22 +1300, Mr. Scooter wrote:
>>
>><plonk!>
>
>If your father took you along to the local brothel it might have saved a lot of
>trouble and disappointment for him later on.
What are you trying to say, Scooter? Are you advocating that father's
take their children to a brothel?
Geopelia
"Br. Scooter" <br.sc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:dtrbj5tf7mpmgvg70...@4ax.com...
> On , , Sat, 26 Dec 2009 22:07:08 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> Silly.,
> generally faggy.
> Apparently fathers used to take their sons along to their brothel to get
> them a
> good grounding in sexual techniques.
> Not to some cheap and sleazy knocking shop type of brothel that employed
> shanks
> and sluts but a proper bordello.
> Obviously not all fathers but it was known to happen in some circles.
>
It was often done in Victorian times. But in those days, girls were
supposed to remain virgins until marriage, so how else was a lad supposed to
learn?
Now prostitution is legal here perhaps it will become more common.
hellicopter
> On , , Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:31:23 +0000 (UTC), Re: Political Correctness
> Gone Silly., Carnations <Beau...@Carnations.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:23:22 +1300, Mr. Scooter wrote:
>>
>><plonk!>
>
> If your father took you along to the local brothel it might have saved a
> lot of trouble and disappointment for him later on.
>
> --
> "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
> to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
> Anatole France.
If you lock someone in a cupboard its an offense.
If you force someone to do something they don't want to, its an offense.
The integrity of every legal citizen hangs on the notion of intent,
to be forcible 'tested' is an offense against this mans son.
You do not have the right to test for homosexuality, you do
not have the right to force anyone into a any test they are not
privy to.
Also its dumb, since tests without consent test for consent
to the test as much as the results of the test. If you don't
like the tester you will always fail the test because
there is no reward for you to pass.
Government, bad governments that is, goes on witchhunts,
they test citizens without their knowledge in the hopes
of getting around the problem of sample's awareness of
being tested (above). But even this is mistaken, since the problem
of the observer comes into play, the predispositions of the
experimenter to select tests (even unconsciously). The
whole notion of entrapment is wrapped up in this story.
The funny thing is the kid didn't want to lose his virginity to
some slut, and the father now thinks him gay, he got the
result he was looking for, the age old mistake of bad government
which looks into problems only to find consent for its
agenda! Like Bennett and the gang family on benefit for decades.
Goes to show how some get stupid when they get the notion its their
right to interfere with something that is not their business.
i.e. Bennett's inability to respect privacy is a need to
abuse power, seen to be, a desire to appear, because a
lack of self-confidence, leads to a need to be the hero,
thus the search for a witch begins.
A father does not control the sexuality, or has a right to
know about the private sexual habits of a minor! Its called
perversion.
And this father is now alleged sex offender in my opinion.
-Newsman-
wrote:
But it seems Kiwi women can't keep their legs together for five
minutes at a time. Ugly or not, no problem since there's no need to
look at the mantlepiece when you're poking the fire.:
Tilly
> Silly.,
> generally faggy.
Do you really think that taking a 'suspiciously, lisping, mincing, swishing
or acting
generally faggy' boy to a brothel is going to change the boy's sexual
leanings?
It's child abuse motivated by ignorance..
> Apparently fathers used to take their sons along to their brothel to get
> them a
> good grounding in sexual techniques.
> Not to some cheap and sleazy knocking shop type of brothel that employed
> shanks
> and sluts but a proper bordello.
> Obviously not all fathers but it was known to happen in some circles.
>
> --
> "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
> to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
> Anatole France.
Tilly
news:pan.2009.12...@carnations.com...
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:26:08 +1300, Tilly wrote:
>
>> Do you really think that taking a 'suspiciously, lisping, mincing,
>> swishing or acting
>> generally faggy' boy to a brothel is going to change the boy's sexual
>> leanings?
>> It's child abuse motivated by ignorance..
>
> bare faced prejudice.
Perhaps he has latent homosexual feelings? Obviously he feels threatened in
some way by gay people.
So much for being the Christian he claims to be!
>
> The father was ignorant in thinking that taking a 14 year old boy to a
> whore house and forcing him to
> have sex with a female prostitute would change his sexual orientation; but
> is most likely just as
> prejudiced as Greg is.
The only result will be that the son hates his father and with good reason!
>
> --
> "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
hellicopter
I doubt it. Invading the sexual privacy of another is a form of rape.
If found guilty the father will have a sex offender charge against
him. And rightly. I do not get why Scooter defends this fathers latent
homosexuality, his fear of homos is based like all fear on a denial
of his own frustrations, his own interest and fear of being a faggot
himself. He can only fear something like that if he believed it
possible in himself. Yeah, like father like son.
Pooh
"Tilly" <paul...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hh6k4l$dgp$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Which probably explains Scooter ;O)
>> Apparently fathers used to take their sons along to their brothel to get
>> them a
>> good grounding in sexual techniques.
>> Not to some cheap and sleazy knocking shop type of brothel that employed
>> shanks
>> and sluts but a proper bordello.
>> Obviously not all fathers but it was known to happen in some circles.
>>
>> --
>> "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
>> to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
>> Anatole France.
>
>
>
> --
> femai...@gmail.com
>
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Geopelia
"Carnations" <Beau...@Carnations.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2009.12...@carnations.com...
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:26:08 +1300, Tilly wrote:
>
>> swishing or acting
>> generally faggy' boy to a brothel is going to change the boy's sexual
>> leanings?
>> It's child abuse motivated by ignorance..
>
> bare faced prejudice.
>
> whore house and forcing him to
> have sex with a female prostitute would change his sexual orientation; but
> is most likely just as
> prejudiced as Greg is.
>
Unless the father was present throughout the proceedings, how would he know
what happened?
Some men just want to talk to a nice sympathetic girl. They pay for her
time, so why not?
And if the boy was only fourteen, the management wouldn't have accepted him
as a client.
Geopelia
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:08:17 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> Silly.,
> molestation.
Don't charge the poor girl, charge the father. What is appropriate at
eighteen is wrong at fourteen.
(And in these days of cougars, a young man can be taught for free by an
experienced older woman.)
Squiggle
Interesting numbers.
But just how does that work out? I keep hearing about the man-drought in
NZ, how are women having more partners than the men?
Options:
1) A large number of male tourists have a really good time in NZ, Or NZ
women put it about a lot while on holiday overseas?
2) The NZ population has a large proportion of rug-munchers?
3) The survey is distorted by less than honest answers. Although I would
expect this to swing the results the other way, the men inflating the
number of partners, and the women understating it.
4) the women included BOBs* in their partner count?
So ladies, which is it?
* Battery Operated Boyfriends
religionofpeas
-Newsman-
wrote:
You are now implying that non-consensual acts of virtually any kind
are rape. But you must know this cannnot be true.
Rape is attempted or accomplished non-consensual sexual intercourse,
and nothing else.
Try using your own brain and **think** about what you are saying,
rather than mindlessly parrot the hysterical bandwagon mentality of
today's pea-brained PC dupes.
Tilly
> On , , Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:02:58 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> Silly.,
> "Tilly" <paul...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"Carnations" <Beau...@Carnations.com> wrote in message
>>news:pan.2009.12...@carnations.com...
>>> On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:26:08 +1300, Tilly wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you really think that taking a 'suspiciously, lisping, mincing,
>>>> swishing or acting
>>>> generally faggy' boy to a brothel is going to change the boy's sexual
>>>> leanings?
>>>> It's child abuse motivated by ignorance..
>>>
>>> Greg has a problem with the fact that gay people exist. In his case it
>>> is
>>> bare faced prejudice.
>>
>>Perhaps he has latent homosexual feelings? Obviously he feels threatened
>>in
>>some way by gay people.
>
> If you had read my posts over the last 15 years you would know that.
> You prefer to get all excited about what you think I wrote.
>
>>So much for being the Christian he claims to be!
>
>
>>> The father was ignorant in thinking that taking a 14 year old boy to a
>>> whore house and forcing him to
>>> have sex with a female prostitute would change his sexual orientation;
>>> but
>>> is most likely just as
>>> prejudiced as Greg is.
>>
>>
>>The only result will be that the son hates his father and with good
>>reason!
>
> being a
> homosexual.
It is none of his father's business whether his son is homosexual and he
certainly shouldn't be taking him to a brothel to force him to have sex with
a woman so he can find out. Given what the father did we have some idea of
his attitudes, he's homophobic . Do you really think a 14 year old child
would come out to a homophobic father?
Clearly the mother was outraged, she apparently reported the father to the
police.
Tilly
> On , , Sun, 27 Dec 2009 03:44:05 +0000 (UTC), Re: Political Correctness
> Silly., Carnations <Beau...@Carnations.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> swishing or acting
>>> generally faggy' boy to a brothel is going to change the boy's sexual
>>> leanings?
>>> It's child abuse motivated by ignorance..
>>
>
> point
> this out in the past and you have maliciously, deceitfully and dishonestly
> continued to lie about what I said and pointed out.
> I have lots of friends who are homosexuals, male and female. We just don't
> base
> our friendships on sexual preferences. They don't get told of my
> heterosexual
> preferences and I don't get told of theirs. Our friendships are based on
> other
> things, hobbies, beliefs, activities etc.
>
>>In his case it is bare faced prejudice.
>
> write by
> kill filing me and then assuming what I say and read what I actually write
> you
> wouldn't have to lie about me and attempt to demonise me.
> Still my attempt to change your habits is more than probably doomed to
> failure
> by your prejudices and assumptions.
>
>>The father was ignorant in thinking that taking a 14 year old boy to a
>>whore house and forcing him to
>>have sex with a female prostitute would change his sexual orientation;
>
> homosexual. Most of the time he wasn't even in the room.
Yes he did force the boy who was so upset he went home and told his mother
(in tears )what his father had done.
The boy was distraught, so distraught the father was reported to the
police..
It is none of a fathers business what sexual orientation his child is,
unless the child approaches the parent wanting to talk about it. If the
child has good communication and feels accepted by his/her parents they
will do it in their own good time ,when they are ready.
Alternatively a parent might gently broach the subject if they sense their
child is being teased at school or suffering because of their perceived
sexual orientation.
>
>>but is most likely just as prejudiced as Greg is.
>
> I'm not the prejudiced one, you are.
> You talk about "breeders" with contempt, dispargement and derision.
> That is the real prejudice.
Tilly
> On , , Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:02:58 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> Silly.,
> "Tilly" <paul...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"Carnations" <Beau...@Carnations.com> wrote in message
>>news:pan.2009.12...@carnations.com...
>>> On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:26:08 +1300, Tilly wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you really think that taking a 'suspiciously, lisping, mincing,
>>>> swishing or acting
>>>> generally faggy' boy to a brothel is going to change the boy's sexual
>>>> leanings?
>>>> It's child abuse motivated by ignorance..
>>>
>>> Greg has a problem with the fact that gay people exist. In his case it
>>> is
>>> bare faced prejudice.
>>
>>Perhaps he has latent homosexual feelings? Obviously he feels threatened
>>in
>>some way by gay people.
>
> If you had read my posts over the last 15 years you would know that.
> You prefer to get all excited about what you think I wrote.
>
>
Your point? Most Jews are accepting of homosexuality apart from some
ultra-Orthodox fanatics.
Even they are accepting of homosexuality as long as a homosexual isn't
practising.
>>> The father was ignorant in thinking that taking a 14 year old boy to a
>>> whore house and forcing him to
>>> have sex with a female prostitute would change his sexual orientation;
>>> but
>>> is most likely just as
>>> prejudiced as Greg is.
>>
>>
>>The only result will be that the son hates his father and with good
>>reason!
>
> He obviously already did if he wouldn't be honest with his father about
> being a
> homosexual.
>
-Newsman-
wrote:
Your rationalising seems based on your (presumably) never having been
in the same position as that boy's father found himself; i.e.
challenged for his own innate sense of self-worth and identity ("God,
what have I sired?) plus a quite understandable, "What will the
neighbours think of me and my family?"
This is not to excuse the father's behaviour, which apppears to have
been a tragically misled sense of righteous duty to "put the boy
right" once and for all, or have it out. Possibly the father isn't
too bright?
It seems this is an appalling case of misjudgement driven by the
father's own primal and socially induced fears and prejudices. Worth
bearing in mind, though, that this is in a country whose superficial
culture is one of calculated, bonehead machismo, which itself is only
an attempt to thinly veil New Zealand's all to evident sexuality
undertow: a nation demonstrably, overtly and legislated
pro-homosexualist in its (mainly lesbian-driven) propaganda, politics
and practices.
Indeed, such is the coarse, stomping, lumpen mannish-ness of so many
NZ women - mostly under the age of 50 - that it can be no accident.
It is an in-your-face ugliness like no other I can think of since it
is these same strident women who, with their rackety clack-voiced
opinions, arrogate to themselves a state of lofty grace to which all
must unquestioningly and uncritically accede.
These are the diseased, degenerate minds the father has been up
against, but I fancy he has never quite realised it, so subliminal and
far-reaching has been their influence - "the hand that rocks the
cradle" et al.
Two words: culturally degenerate
Tilly
news:4b37db9f...@news.eternal-september.org...
It's pathetic that any man's sense of self-worth and identity is somehow
tied to the sexual orientation of his son. If the truth be told neighbours
really don't give a damn about
what sexual orientation their friends children are unless it directly
affects them..Reasonably intelligent people are concerned with the personal
qualities of a person not what their sexual orientation is. It isn't an
issue once you know
a person.
> This is not to excuse the father's behaviour, which apppears to have
> been a tragically misled sense of righteous duty to "put the boy
> right" once and for all, or have it out. Possibly the father isn't
> too bright?
His behaviour seems to indicate he isn't too bright. He's a bully.
>
> It seems this is an appalling case of misjudgement driven by the
> father's own primal and socially induced fears and prejudices. Worth
> bearing in mind, though, that this is in a country whose superficial
> culture is one of calculated, bonehead machismo, which itself is only
> an attempt to thinly veil New Zealand's all to evident sexuality
> undertow: a nation demonstrably, overtly and legislated
> pro-homosexualist in its (mainly lesbian-driven) propaganda, politics
> and practices.
It's not pro-homosexualist it's pro equality. Homosexuals have every right
to be treated equally.
>
> Indeed, such is the coarse, stomping, lumpen mannish-ness of so many
> NZ women - mostly under the age of 50 - that it can be no accident.
> It is an in-your-face ugliness like no other I can think of since it
> is these same strident women who, with their rackety clack-voiced
> opinions, arrogate to themselves a state of lofty grace to which all
> must unquestioningly and uncritically accede.
lol.
>
> These are the diseased, degenerate minds the father has been up
> against, but I fancy he has never quite realised it, so subliminal and
> far-reaching has been their influence - "the hand that rocks the
> cradle" et al.
>
> Two words: culturally degenerate
I agree.
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:25:47 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> Silly.,
No it is not moron.
Judaism doesn' permit prejudice or hatred towards homosexuals ,although some
members of
Chassidic sects are hateful towards them..On several occasions senior
Rabbis have said homosexuals are to be accepted by their community and can
attend shuland even takle a role in leading a service as long as they
aren't practising homosexuals.Even if they are practising homosexuals they
are to be treated with understanding.
Jews tend to be well educated and most of them are quite broadminded. Tel
Aviv has a large homosexual population
and homosexuals living there are generally accepted.
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:02:35 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> It isn't exactly the kind of statement that suggests acceptance, it is
> bluntly
> against.
> I would suggest Orthodox are much more against homosexuality rather than
> just
> accepting it.
You are ignorant. Senior Rabbis are responsible for interpreting theTorah
and they provide commentary on what is and what isn't acceptable.
Homosexuals who aren't practising are allowed to remains as members of
religious communities.
Stoning used to be permitted for adultery, (in practise it very rarely
happened) but it's not any more. Things don't always stay the
same.Ultra-orthodox men didn't used to be permitted to serve in the army,
they are now.
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:17:43 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> something isn't one thing it MUST be the other. It can never be something
> else.
My religion has nothing to do with the discussion as I wasn' replying in
the first instance from a Jewish perspective just a human one, yet you don't
miss an opportunity to make negative remarks about Judaism and Jews..
You will deny it of course ,but at the very least you are a closet
anti-semite, who will no doubt say 'I have many Jewish friends' which is a
load of crap .
One thing that is patently obvious is you have a thing about Jewsand tarnish
them all with the same brush.
>
>>Do you really think a 14 year old child
>
> I wouldn't call a fourteen year old a child unless the mother has been
> treating
> him like one since toddlerhood.
>
>>would come out to a homophobic father?
>
> It is a simple honest courtesy to either answer yes or no to a simple
> question
> like that.
In your world perhaps and much easier done when parents are accepting.
It's very difficult when one has a homphobic gay bashing father.
>
>>Clearly the mother was outraged, she apparently reported the father to the
>>police.
>
> It can be the mothers fault if the child grows up homosexual, usually by
> coddling the boy and making excuses to the father and not making him act
> like a
> boy.
This is a load of hogwash as recent research shows.
Nonsense. I lived in a flat above my landlord who had a seven year old son
who was obviously gay even then.
Hugh knew fromma very young age he was gay and has never had any interest in
women except as friends.
Neither his mother or father were molly coddlers
His uncle is gay despite the fact he was brought up doing masculine things
on a farm and so is his nephew. None of them have molly coddling mothers.
I have met a couple of gay men who say they were abused by men as children
and that it affected their sexuality.
> I firmly believe that Homosexuals are made not born.
Obviously you believe it.
Geopelia
adults, who will encourage him to speak about his feelings and explain
things, and who will not take advantage of him.
Be sure he is warned about the predators who may approach him, and the sort
of things they might do and say.
And most important, be sure he knows about Aids and safe sex well before he
is old enough to experiment.
The boy may realise he is not gay, after all.
Who knows?
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:38:13 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> until
> you find an interpretation you agree with.
You can talk, Christians also choose what they can and can't do ,such as
having women
clergy, allowing homosexual clergy. etc.........
> I could say more but won't.
In wouldn't if I were you, undoubtedly it wuld be more ignorant anti Jewish
garbage,.
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 15:36:50 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> Silly.,
> Who knows if he ever will.
> I know a few former gays who became practicing heterosexuals when they
> experimented and realised their homosexual practices didn't measure up to
> what
> they experienced with heterosexuality and decided to become non
> homosexuals.
> They weren't pressured or de programmed by anyone either.
> Intellectual honesty was what they said changed them.
I have two gay friends who came out after they had married, in both cases
years after.
They spent years trying to suppress their honosexuality and finally decided
they had to be
intellectually honest with themselves and live honestly.
I suggest you read the following:
British Lions rugby legend Gareth Thomas: 'It's ended my marriage and nearly
driven me to suicide. Now it's time to tell the world the truth - I'm gay'.
Gareth Thomas is a sporting legend. He captained Wales in 2005 to their
first Grand Slam victory since 1978. The same year he captained the British
Lions tour of New Zealand.
With 100 caps to his name - more than any other player in Welsh history - he
has one of the fiercest reputations on the field, and a row of missing front
teeth to prove it...................................
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:04:49 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
>
>>You will deny it of course ,but at the very least you are a closet
>>anti-semite, who will no doubt say 'I have many Jewish friends' which is a
>>load of crap .
>
> down in
> flames. Are you really saying I don't have Jewish friends? How on earth
> would a
> sad little person like you know anyway? Is there a register for all Jews
> to say
> who their friends are and it is available to all other Jews?
I know a lot of Jews and about a year ago at a conference I asked if anyone
knew you Greg.
Not a one.
>
>>One thing that is patently obvious is you have a thing about Jewsand
>>tarnish
>>them all with the same brush.
>
> I have nothing against Jews, you continue to lie about me to the extent
Then stop making negative statements about Jews and Judaism.
Your own saviour was born a Jew,died a Jew and practised Judaism.
.
I could
> form the opinion that Jews are not particularly concerned abut the truth
> or is
> only restricted to Jewish Zionists?
And you would be wrong.
> I have problems with Zionists and their murderous practices to the
> Palestinians.
> I have always stated that and you have taken it on yourself to lie about
> me and
> regard my dislike of Zionists to a hatred of Jews.
It is your anti-Jewish statements I judge you by not your anti-Zionism..
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>Do you really think a 14 year old child
>>>
>>> I wouldn't call a fourteen year old a child unless the mother has been
>>> treating
>>> him like one since toddlerhood.
>>>
>>>>would come out to a homophobic father?
>>>
>>> It is a simple honest courtesy to either answer yes or no to a simple
>>> question
>>> like that.
>>
>>In your world perhaps
>
> In every bodies world. Just simple courtesy thank you.
>
>>and much easier done when parents are accepting.
>>It's very difficult when one has a homphobic gay bashing father.
>
> Are you saying the father in this case is a homophobic gay basher?
> He was prepared to lash out a fair bit of money to check if his son was a
> homosexual, that doesn't sound as though he was a hater of any kind. It
> sounds
> as though he loved the boy and wanted to do right by him.
>
>>>>Clearly the mother was outraged, she apparently reported the father to
>>>>the
>>>>police.
>>>
>>> It can be the mothers fault if the child grows up homosexual, usually by
>>> coddling the boy and making excuses to the father and not making him act
>>> like a
>>> boy.
>>
>>This is a load of hogwash as recent research shows.
>
> You have chosen research that agrees with your original conception.
>
>>Nonsense. I lived in a flat above my landlord who had a seven year old son
>>who was obviously gay even then.
>>Hugh knew fromma very young age he was gay and has never had any interest
>>in
>>women except as friends.
>>Neither his mother or father were molly coddlers
>>His uncle is gay despite the fact he was brought up doing masculine things
>>on a farm and so is his nephew. None of them have molly coddling mothers.
>
> How much involvement did the uncle have with the boy?
Not a lot, he lives on a farm.
> His uncles behaviour toward the boy could have had a lot to do with the
> fact he
> was homosexual as you claim.
He hardly saw him..They lived in Vanuatu for years. His older brother is
straight,so is his sister.
By the time they returned to NZ his parents knew he was gay.
>>I have met a couple of gay men who say they were abused by men as children
>>and that it affected their sexuality.
>
> I have met men, some of whom are friends who say that being sexually
> abused had
> nothing to do with their sexual orientation.
>
>>> I firmly believe that Homosexuals are made not born.
>>
>>Obviously you believe it.
>
> Of course I bloody well believe it, I wouldn't say so if I didn't!
> Gee, you show stupidity with every line.
> I said "I firmly believed"... Then you say "obviously you believe it"
> That is what I said, why do you make such a fatuous reply?
> Obviously not to impress me with your lack of intelligence.
Tilly
news:pan.2009.12...@carnations.com...
>
>>> His uncles behaviour toward the boy could have had a lot to do with the
>>> fact he
>>> was homosexual as you claim.
>>
>> He hardly saw him..They lived in Vanuatu for years. His older brother is
>> straight,so is his sister.
>> By the time they returned to NZ his parents knew he was gay.
>
> moron. He has neither the desire
> nor the capacity to understand what you are saying.
>
>
> --
> "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
Yes I know.
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:45:11 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> You have never told us what branch of Judaism you belong to, how about
> enlightening us?
> Do you belong to a branch that has homosexual and women rabbis?
I am Orthodox, although Orthodox friends who visit from OS say it is closer
to Conservative..
>>
>>> I could say more but won't.
>>
>>In wouldn't if I were you, undoubtedly it wuld be more ignorant anti
>>Jewish
>>garbage,.
>
> You are once again lying about me.
> I am not anti jewish.
> You are a Christophobe and anti Christianity.
What a load of garbage!!!!
Your assertion is ridiculous, just plain laughable.
Tilly
> On , , Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:56:45 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone
> Silly.,
> Rugby is a game that has an incredible amount of close male contact, in
> rucks
> reaching up under other mens crutches and gripping their shorts for
> purchase in
> the ruck. Certainly makes you wonder, doesn't it?
> I am proud to say I marched at Hamilton and New Plymouth in 1981 against
> the
> South African racist tour and managed to stop the Hamilton game.
So did I, in Auckland and Hamilton.
> Other members of my deceased family were rabid rugby followers and never
> spoke
> to me after that until they died, despite my attempts to talk to them.
> Still
> they are all dead and I'm not.
-Newsman-
wrote:
>"-Newsman-" <sla...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:4b37db9f...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:25:47 +1300, "Tilly" <paul...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Br. Scooter" <br.sc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:v8iej55m0dkecd0ap...@4ax.com...
>>>> On , , Sun, 27 Dec 2009 03:44:05 +0000 (UTC), Re: Political Correctness
>>>> Gone
>>>> Silly., Carnations <Beau...@Carnations.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:26:08 +1300, Tilly wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you really think that taking a 'suspiciously, lisping, mincing,
>>>>>> swishing or acting
>>>>>> generally faggy' boy to a brothel is going to change the boy's sexual
>>>>>> leanings?
>>>>>> It's child abuse motivated by ignorance..
>>>>>
>>>>>Greg has a problem with the fact that gay people exist.
>>>>
>>>> I have no problem with homosexuals at all, I have been at great pains to
>>>> point
>>>> this out in the past and you have maliciously, deceitfully and
>>>> dishonestly
>>>> continued to lie about what I said and pointed out.
>>>> I have lots of friends who are homosexuals, male and female. We just
>>>> don't
>>>> base
>>>> our friendships on sexual preferences. They don't get told of my
>>>> heterosexual
>>>> preferences and I don't get told of theirs. Our friendships are based on
>>>> other
>>>> things, hobbies, beliefs, activities etc.
>>>>
>>>>>In his case it is bare faced prejudice.
>>>>
>>>> Your lies preceed you as usual. If you didn't run and hide from what I
>>>> write by
>>>> kill filing me and then assuming what I say and read what I actually
>>>> write
>>>> you
>>>> wouldn't have to lie about me and attempt to demonise me.
>>>> Still my attempt to change your habits is more than probably doomed to
>>>> failure
>>>> by your prejudices and assumptions.
>>>>
>>>>>The father was ignorant in thinking that taking a 14 year old boy to a
>>>>>whore house and forcing him to
>>>>>have sex with a female prostitute would change his sexual orientation;
>>>>
>>>> He didn't force the boy, he merely wanted the boy to prove he wasn't a
>>>> homosexual. Most of the time he wasn't even in the room.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes he did force the boy who was so upset he went home and told his mother
>>>(in tears )what his father had done.
>>>The boy was distraught, so distraught the father was reported to the
>>>police..
>>>It is none of a fathers business what sexual orientation his child is,
>>>unless the child approaches the parent wanting to talk about it. If the
>>>child has good communication and feels accepted by his/her parents they
>>>will do it in their own good time ,when they are ready.
>>>Alternatively a parent might gently broach the subject if they sense their
>>>child is being teased at school or suffering because of their perceived
>>>sexual orientation.
>>
>> Your rationalising seems based on your (presumably) never having been
>> in the same position as that boy's father found himself; i.e.
>> challenged for his own innate sense of self-worth and identity ("God,
>> what have I sired?) plus a quite understandable, "What will the
>> neighbours think of me and my family?"
>
>It's pathetic that any man's sense of self-worth and identity is somehow
> tied to the sexual orientation of his son.
If so, then it *is* so. Your commentary is redundant.
>If the truth be told neighbours really don't give a damn about
>what sexual orientation their friends children are unless it directly
>affects them.
Depends who and what those "neighbours" are, relative to someone like
the father in this story.
>Reasonably intelligent people are concerned with the personal
>qualities of a person not what their sexual orientation is. It isn't an
>issue once you know a person.
Reasonably intelligent people don't drink-drive and end up killing and
injuring others; nor do they run up impossible debt buying the latest
but already obsolexcent toy....blah blah blah....
>
>> This is not to excuse the father's behaviour, which apppears to have
>> been a tragically misled sense of righteous duty to "put the boy
>> right" once and for all, or have it out. Possibly the father isn't
>> too bright?
>
>His behaviour seems to indicate he isn't too bright. He's a bully.
That's as may be, but it doesn't alter by one iota the essence of my
commentary,
>>
>> It seems this is an appalling case of misjudgement driven by the
>> father's own primal and socially induced fears and prejudices. Worth
>> bearing in mind, though, that this is in a country whose superficial
>> culture is one of calculated, bonehead machismo, which itself is only
>> an attempt to thinly veil New Zealand's all to evident sexuality
>> undertow: a nation demonstrably, overtly and legislated
>> pro-homosexualist in its (mainly lesbian-driven) propaganda, politics
>> and practices.
>
>It's not pro-homosexualist it's pro equality.
Which is exactly the kind of all-too-easy PC "equality" that suits
people like you just fine, since it imposes no intellectual, moral or
material challenge to your own existence or beliefs.
But, to demonstrate some consistency on your part - and even a little
moral and intellectual honesty, who knows? - perhaps you'd now care to
show what is so good about the social, economic and deprived
citizen-status equality of those Palestinian families trying somehow
to get by under the current laws (and US-provided helicopter gunships)
of the State of Israel?
-Newsman-
> tied to the sexual orientation of his son. If the truth be told neighbours
>really don't give a damn about
>what sexual orientation their friends children are unless it directly
>affects them..Reasonably intelligent people are concerned with the personal
>qualities of a person not what their sexual orientation is. It isn't an
>issue once you know
>a person.
>
>> This is not to excuse the father's behaviour, which apppears to have
>> been a tragically misled sense of righteous duty to "put the boy
>> right" once and for all, or have it out. Possibly the father isn't
>> too bright?
>
>His behaviour seems to indicate he isn't too bright. He's a bully.
>>
>> It seems this is an appalling case of misjudgement driven by the
>> father's own primal and socially induced fears and prejudices. Worth
>> bearing in mind, though, that this is in a country whose superficial
>> culture is one of calculated, bonehead machismo, which itself is only
>> an attempt to thinly veil New Zealand's all to evident sexuality
>> undertow: a nation demonstrably, overtly and legislated
>> pro-homosexualist in its (mainly lesbian-driven) propaganda, politics
>> and practices.
>
>It's not pro-homosexualist it's pro equality. Homosexuals have every right
>to be treated equally.
Really? Then how about racial and religious equality, Tilly?
Here, fresh in today and specially for you, is just one more piece of
barefaced Jewish racial exceptionalism and discrimination, reflecting
your hypocritical brand of "equality".
So, Tilly, how are you with this, eh? Do tell.
Tilly
The child wasn't refused admission on the basis of his ethnicity/race ., it
was based on the fact he isn't Orthodox.
His father was raised Orthodox his mother underwent a conversion and is
Progressive ie Reform.
Reform Judaism doesn't observe halacha (Orthodox religious law) and Reform
conversions aren't recognised by the Orthodox Jewry anywhere in the world.
This is the first I have heard the claim that the child was rejected
because his mother was formerly RC and I have read a lot about it.I wonder
if the parents imagine that was why he wasn't accepted, if this reason was
given in writing.or if it is hearsay. I will have to ask one of my British
Jewish friends.
The school in question is an Orthodox Jewish day school and Orthodox Jews
observe halacha..ie.They strictly observe Jewish law. Progressive Jews
don't. Since the son wasn't raised Orthodox and apparently doesn't observe
halacha he was never going to get in unless he underwent an Orthodox
converion.
I seriously doubt an Orthodox school would reject the child of a formerly
RC mother who had undergone an Orthodox conversion and who observes halacha
, in fact they would embrace the woman and her child.,
Once a woman undergoes Orthodox halachic conversion matrilineal law applies
forever.
IMO an Orthodox day school should have the right to select pupils who are
Orthodox and observe halacha.
There are Jewish schools for Reform Jews..
The judge obviously doesn't understand halacha or the difference between
Orthodox and Reform Jewry., what they learn, how they are educated and how
they observe Judasim. (for example most don't eat kosher food).
I wouldn't be surprised if the Orthodox fear the kid might bring a ham
sandwich to school.
Earlier this year there was a high profile case in Israel in which an
Ashkenazi Chassid Orthodox school wouldn't accept a Sephardi Chassid
Orthodox child because they weren't Ashkenazi. There was an uproar in
Israel about it and rightly so.
Tilly
I don't agree with many of Israel's policies .I disagree with the
destruction of Palestiian houses
in E Jerusalem and elsewhere , the behaviour of fanatical settlers and
the suffocating blockade of Gaza just to name a few. The boycott should be
relaxed so that the Gazans can rebuild.
I have an intense dislike of fanatics whether they be Israeli or
Palestinian.They'e incorrigible and they prevent solutions to the complex
problems in the area.
Tilly
Obviously and IMO such a father needs help to cope with his
insecurities..
our commentary is redundant.
Agreed
>
>>If the truth be told neighbours really don't give a damn about
>>what sexual orientation their friends children are unless it directly
>>affects them.
>
> Depends who and what those "neighbours" are, relative to someone like
> the father in this story.
In my experience neighbours talk about things for about five minutes flat
and then forget about it,
unless it impacts their lives.
>
>>Reasonably intelligent people are concerned with the personal
>>qualities of a person not what their sexual orientation is. It isn't an
>>issue once you know a person.
>
> Reasonably intelligent people don't drink-drive and end up killing and
> injuring others; nor do they run up impossible debt buying the latest
> but already obsolexcent toy....blah blah blah....
That's not always the rule.I have met a few otherwise intelligent people who
risk drinking and driving occasionally and feel they have to have every
new toy.
From my observation this usually changes when they reach middle age.
>>
>>> This is not to excuse the father's behaviour, which apppears to have
>>> been a tragically misled sense of righteous duty to "put the boy
>>> right" once and for all, or have it out. Possibly the father isn't
>>> too bright?
>>
>>His behaviour seems to indicate he isn't too bright. He's a bully.
>
> That's as may be, but it doesn't alter by one iota the essence of my
> commentary,
>>>
>>> It seems this is an appalling case of misjudgement driven by the
>>> father's own primal and socially induced fears and prejudices. Worth
>>> bearing in mind, though, that this is in a country whose superficial
>>> culture is one of calculated, bonehead machismo, which itself is only
>>> an attempt to thinly veil New Zealand's all to evident sexuality
>>> undertow: a nation demonstrably, overtly and legislated
>>> pro-homosexualist in its (mainly lesbian-driven) propaganda, politics
>>> and practices.
>>
>>It's not pro-homosexualist it's pro equality.
>
>
> Which is exactly the kind of all-too-easy PC "equality" that suits
> people like you just fine, since it imposes no intellectual, moral or
> material challenge to your own existence or beliefs.
Please provide evidence that NZ is 'pro-monosexualist', ie.that homosexual
rights exceed those of the rest of the population..
What do you mean by 'people like you' .
You are arrogant in you assertion that it suits people like me because it
imposes no intellectual, moral or material challenge to my existence or
beliefs. It's bullshit.
> But, to demonstrate some consistency on your part - and even a little
> moral and intellectual honesty, who knows? - perhaps you'd now care to
> show what is so good about the social, economic and deprived
> citizen-status equality of those Palestinian families trying somehow
> to get by under the current laws (and US-provided helicopter gunships)
> of the State of Israel?
>
>
Tilly
news:hhek34$ksv$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Corection: 'pro *homosexualist*
ie.that homosexual
> rights exceed those of the rest of the population..
> What do you mean by 'people like you' .
> You are arrogant in you assertion that it suits people like me because it
> imposes no intellectual, moral or material challenge to my existence or
> beliefs. It's bullshit.
>
>
>> But, to demonstrate some consistency on your part - and even a little
>> moral and intellectual honesty, who knows? - perhaps you'd now care to
>> show what is so good about the social, economic and deprived
>> citizen-status equality of those Palestinian families trying somehow
>> to get by under the current laws (and US-provided helicopter gunships)
>> of the State of Israel?
>>
>>
>
> --
> femai...@gmail.com
>
-Newsman-
wrote:
The Chief Rabbi pronounced the boy **non-jewish**. EOS.
>His father was raised Orthodox his mother underwent a conversion and is
>Progressive ie Reform.
>Reform Judaism doesn't observe halacha (Orthodox religious law) and Reform
>conversions aren't recognised by the Orthodox Jewry anywhere in the world.
The Chief Rabbi pronounced the boy **non-jewish**. EOS.
>
>This is the first I have heard the claim that the child was rejected
>because his mother was formerly RC and I have read a lot about it.I wonder
>if the parents imagine that was why he wasn't accepted, if this reason was
>given in writing.or if it is hearsay. I will have to ask one of my British
>Jewish friends.
Irrelevant noise.
The Chief Rabbi pronounced the boy **non-jewish**. EOS.
Further you seem not to know that this a jewish **state** school
funded by mainly gentile British taxpayers.
It is illegal to refuse entry to any state funded UK school on the
basis of race, ethnicity or religion.
The school was in breach of UK law.
The UK Supreme Court got it right.
Tilly
The boy's mother underwent a Reform conversion and Orthodox don't recognise
Reform conversions so
that is why they consider the boy non Jewish.
It takes about 18 months to convert in Reform and usually a minimum of 3
years to convert to Orthodox Judaism. You have to really be committed to
doing it, there's a lot to learn and involves a lot of study.
I have a friend whosed mother was a RC nun but later met and married a Jew
and underwent a Reform conversion to do so..My friend e was raised in the
Reform Temple. She later chose to become Orthodox and had to go
undergo an Orthodox halachic conversion. Her children are recognised as
halachic Orthodox Jews.and can attend an Orthodox school.
>>His father was raised Orthodox his mother underwent a conversion and is
>>Progressive ie Reform.
>>Reform Judaism doesn't observe halacha (Orthodox religious law) and
>>Reform
>>conversions aren't recognised by the Orthodox Jewry anywhere in the
>>world.
>
> The Chief Rabbi pronounced the boy **non-jewish**. EOS.
See above. The Reform will consider him Jewish and Bar Mitzvah him, the
Orthodox won't.
He has the option to convert if he wants to be an Orthodox.Jew and go to an
Orthodox school or yeshiva.
>>
>>This is the first I have heard the claim that the child was rejected
>>because his mother was formerly RC and I have read a lot about it.I
>>wonder
>>if the parents imagine that was why he wasn't accepted, if this reason was
>>given in writing.or if it is hearsay. I will have to ask one of my
>>British
>>Jewish friends.
>
> Irrelevant noise.
>
> The Chief Rabbi pronounced the boy **non-jewish**. EOS.
See above.
>
> Further you seem not to know that this a jewish **state** school
> funded by mainly gentile British taxpayers.
I understood the parents pay quite a large fee for their children to
attend., but that the school gets some state funding ,much like most faith
schools here.
>
> It is illegal to refuse entry to any state funded UK school on the
> basis of race, ethnicity or religion.
So Islamic state schools have to admit Jews ,Christians and Buddhists?
I read an article this year about a state school in Britain which sacked non
Islamic teachers when a new principal was appointed and refused to admit
non Muslims.
>
> The school was in breach of UK law.
>
> The UK Supreme Court got it right.
>
As long as it is applied across the board .
--
femai...@gmail.com
-Newsman-
wrote:
Which state funded UK Islamic schools are you talking about?
>I read an article this year about a state school in Britain which sacked non
>Islamic teachers when a new principal was appointed and refused to admit
>non Muslims.
Which state funded UK Islamic school was that, and what was the
outcome? (Dead easy for you, Tilly - there are no more than four such
schools in the entire UK)
>
>>
>> The school was in breach of UK law.
>>
>> The UK Supreme Court got it right.
>
>As long as it is applied across the board .
>--
And it isn't it already? If not, name any state funded UK school of
any faith whose published rules of admission breach the relevant UK
laws on race, ethnicity and freedom of religion.
Tilly
QUOTE"
There are hundreds of state schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. In
my opinion, all such schools may be designated as Muslim community schools
with bilingual Muslim teachers. *There is no place for a non-Muslim child or
teacher in a Muslim school.*
Iftikhar Ahmad
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk
Teacher forced to resign at Islamic Women's School
AT the Al-Islah Muslim Girl's School, Audley Range, Blackburn, a school
administrator has quit her job after an e-mail campaign claimed she was a
man.
The school sent a letter to parents saying they had "irrefutable medical
evidence" Shifa Patel "was a female" despite "concerns raised by parents"
over her gender.
Ms Patel wears a hijab and full Jhaba (full length robe). The emails
circulated among parents contained private photographs of Ms Patel with
short hair and wearing a shirt and trousers.
At the Islamic school's last inspection in 2007 it was criticised for its
lack of a science laboratory and for failings in teaching the curriculum.
All over the Islamic world - even in so-called moderate countries students
can spend more than half the school week studying or reciting the Koran. All
other subjects combined are second to this - and these are the *state
schools*.
Says Ms Patel:
"The people who have done this have hurt me so badly. I will remember them
at the moment before I die and I never forgive those who did this to me."
Police called
In a bid to defuse the rumours, she underwent a humiliating medical
examination to prove that she was in fact a woman. But parents refused to
believe the results and the headteacher resorted to writing to all parents
assuring them the secretary wasn't a man. Miss Patel was finally forced to
quit after a mob of parents gathered at the Al-Islah Muslim Girls School in
Blackburn and demanded governors sack her immediately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE HORRIFYING CAMPAIGN OF ABUSE,LIES AND THREATS THAT RUINED THE CAREER OF
A HEADTEACHER-AND HER SCHOOL
Rising up from the centre of the Surrey commuter town of Woking stands the
magnificent Shah Jahan mosque. It was founded in 1889 by Dr Gottlieb
Leitner, a Jew who converted to Anglicanism.
He wanted the mosque to be part of an Oriental Institute, promoting a
greater understanding between religions.
What irony. One hundred and twenty years later, two officials from Shah
Jahan pursued a 'hidden agenda' forcibly to transform a local, secular
primary school into an Islamic faith school.
Their aggressive campaign of 'anti-Christian' lobbying and unfounded
allegations of racism and Islamophobia managed to destroy what had been a
model school. Its inspirational headmistress was reduced to a nervous wreck,
to the extent that she has now left education altogether.
Last week in the High Court, Surrey County Council was ordered to pay
headmistress Erica Connor more than �400,000 compensation for having failed
to support her. It is only now the full background to her case can be
revealed.
Using statements of evidence and interviews, it is possible to piece
together the extraordinary story of the downfall of New Monument school.
If there is one overriding lesson, it is that officialdom, anxious to
maintain political correctness, will often kowtow to radical Islam - even
if it does not reflect the wishes of the wider Muslim community.
New Monument is a maintained community school - *state-run*, with no
religious affiliation. Mrs Connor arrived in 1994 and became headmistress
four years later. Some 80 per cent of her pupils were Muslim, many with
parents illiterate in English. Half were on the special needs register.
But under Mrs Connor the school showed the second most improved SATs results
in the country. In 2001, she was invited to Downing Street in recognition of
this.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A former teacher at an Islamic school, who alleged that it taught an
offensive and racist view of non-Muslims, has been awarded �70,000 by an
employment tribunal after winning his case for *unfair dismissal*.
Colin Cook told the tribunal in Watford that pupils were taught from Arabic
books that likened Jews and Christians to "monkeys" and "pigs" at The King
Fahad Academy, which is funded and run by the Saudi Arabian Government.
The tribunal ruled that Mr Cook, a British Muslim, was unfairly dismissed
from his �36,000-a-year post at the school in Acton, West London, in
December 2006 after blowing the whistle on systematic cheating at a GCSE
exam.
The panel found that the school created a "smokescreen" to try to justify
his dismissal after 18 years' unblemished service.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article3746920.ece
--
femai...@gmail.com
Tilly
My previous post wasn't finished or thoroughly researched ..
OE sent it off when I was upstairs getting a drink.
I will post all my evidence when I have finished wading through the huge
amount of information available to support my claims...
-Newsman-
wrote:
Well?
>>
>>>I read an article this year about a state school in Britain which sacked
>>>non
>>>Islamic teachers when a new principal was appointed and refused to
>>>admit
>>>non Muslims.
>>
>> Which state funded UK Islamic school was that, and what was the
>> outcome? (Dead easy for you, Tilly - there are no more than four such
>> schools in the entire UK)
Well?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The school was in breach of UK law.
>>>>
>>>> The UK Supreme Court got it right.
>>>
>>>As long as it is applied across the board .
>>>--
>> And it isn't it already? If not, name any state funded UK school of
>> any faith whose published rules of admission breach the relevant UK
>> laws on race, ethnicity and freedom of religion.
>
>
>QUOTE"
>
>
>There are hundreds of state schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. In
>my opinion, all such schools may be designated as Muslim community schools
>with bilingual Muslim teachers. *There is no place for a non-Muslim child or
>teacher in a Muslim school.*
>
>Iftikhar Ahmad
>
>http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk
Which is not **fact** but is nothing more than an expression of Mr
Ahmad's **opinion**.
>
>Teacher forced to resign at Islamic Women's School
>
>AT the Al-Islah Muslim Girl's School, Audley Range, Blackburn, a school
>administrator has quit her job after an e-mail campaign claimed she was a
>man.
>
>The school sent a letter to parents saying they had "irrefutable medical
>evidence" Shifa Patel "was a female" despite "concerns raised by parents"
>over her gender.
>
>Ms Patel wears a hijab and full Jhaba (full length robe). The emails
>circulated among parents contained private photographs of Ms Patel with
>short hair and wearing a shirt and trousers.
>
>
>At the Islamic school's last inspection in 2007 it was criticised for its
>lack of a science laboratory and for failings in teaching the curriculum.
Was the school in breach of UK law?
>All over the Islamic world - even in so-called moderate countries students
>can spend more than half the school week studying or reciting the Koran. All
>other subjects combined are second to this - and these are the *state
>schools*.
Are such **UK** schools currently in breach of UK law?
>Says Ms Patel:
>
>"The people who have done this have hurt me so badly. I will remember them
>at the moment before I die and I never forgive those who did this to me."
>
>
>Police called
>
>In a bid to defuse the rumours, she underwent a humiliating medical
>examination to prove that she was in fact a woman. But parents refused to
>believe the results and the headteacher resorted to writing to all parents
>assuring them the secretary wasn't a man. Miss Patel was finally forced to
>quit after a mob of parents gathered at the Al-Islah Muslim Girls School in
>Blackburn and demanded governors sack her immediately.
Mob rule.
Are the school's published rules of admission in breach of UK law?
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>THE HORRIFYING CAMPAIGN OF ABUSE,LIES AND THREATS THAT RUINED THE CAREER OF
>A HEADTEACHER-AND HER SCHOOL
>Rising up from the centre of the Surrey commuter town of Woking stands the
>magnificent Shah Jahan mosque. It was founded in 1889 by Dr Gottlieb
>Leitner, a Jew who converted to Anglicanism.
>
>He wanted the mosque to be part of an Oriental Institute, promoting a
>greater understanding between religions.
I know of this place. I lived not far from it for many years.
>
>
>What irony. One hundred and twenty years later, two officials from Shah
>Jahan pursued a 'hidden agenda' forcibly to transform a local, secular
>primary school into an Islamic faith school.
>
>
>Their aggressive campaign of 'anti-Christian' lobbying and unfounded
>allegations of racism and Islamophobia managed to destroy what had been a
>model school. Its inspirational headmistress was reduced to a nervous wreck,
>to the extent that she has now left education altogether.
>
>
>Last week in the High Court, Surrey County Council was ordered to pay
>headmistress Erica Connor more than �400,000 compensation for having failed
>to support her. It is only now the full background to her case can be
>revealed.
So, the school was behaving contrary to UK law.
>
>
>Using statements of evidence and interviews, it is possible to piece
>together the extraordinary story of the downfall of New Monument school.
>
>If there is one overriding lesson, it is that officialdom, anxious to
>maintain political correctness, will often kowtow to radical Islam - even
>if it does not reflect the wishes of the wider Muslim community.
This is officially sanctioned political correctness in the name of
**equality** in all things ("mustn't risk cultural offence")
inevitably falling prey to narrow interests and covert agendas, in
this instance, radical Islam.
>
>
>New Monument is a maintained community school - *state-run*, with no
>religious affiliation. Mrs Connor arrived in 1994 and became headmistress
>four years later. Some 80 per cent of her pupils were Muslim, many with
>parents illiterate in English. Half were on the special needs register.
>
>
>But under Mrs Connor the school showed the second most improved SATs results
>in the country. In 2001, she was invited to Downing Street in recognition of
>this.
Under Mrs Connor, did the school contravene UK law in respect of race,
ethinicity and religious freedom, Tilly? Yes or no will do
But, due the freedom radical activists enjoy under the freedoms that
politically correct **equality** confers - in this case, freedom of
expression -, the rot inevitably set in. That's officially sanctioned
political correctness for you, Tilly - the degenerate**equality**
disease that is fuelling cultural and societal division and
subversion, worldwide.
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>A former teacher at an Islamic school, who alleged that it taught an
>offensive and racist view of non-Muslims, has been awarded �70,000 by an
>employment tribunal after winning his case for *unfair dismissal*.
So what?
**He won simply because his employers were in breach of UK law**.
Kindly explain what is so hard to understand about that?
-Newsman-
wrote:
>"Tilly" <paul...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>My previous post wasn't finished or thoroughly researched ..
>OE sent it off when I was upstairs getting a drink.
>I will post all my evidence when I have finished wading through the huge
>amount of information available to support my claims...
And when you're well into your next bottle.
Tilly
P A T H E T IC.
Tilly
They were in breach when they failed their inspections, They weren't
teaching the curriculum as required and were spending most of the time
teaching Quaranic law . They also had no science lab as required for
teaching science in the curiculum..
a>
>
>>Says Ms Patel:
>>
>>"The people who have done this have hurt me so badly. I will remember them
>>at the moment before I die and I never forgive those who did this to me."
>>
>>
>>Police called
>>
>>In a bid to defuse the rumours, she underwent a humiliating medical
>>examination to prove that she was in fact a woman. But parents refused to
>>believe the results and the headteacher resorted to writing to all parents
>>assuring them the secretary wasn't a man. Miss Patel was finally forced to
>>quit after a mob of parents gathered at the Al-Islah Muslim Girls School
>>in
>>Blackburn and demanded governors sack her immediately.
>
> Mob rule.
>
> Are the school's published rules of admission in breach of UK law?
They are so strict that no non Muslim would apply to attend.
No, Did you bother to read the whole article? The judge slammed the
behaviour of the Muslim members of the board as well as the local authoity.
>
> But, due the freedom radical activists enjoy under the freedoms that
> politically correct **equality** confers - in this case, freedom of
> expression -, the rot inevitably set in. That's officially sanctioned
> political correctness for you, Tilly - the degenerate**equality**
> disease that is fuelling cultural and societal division and
> subversion, worldwide.
>>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>A former teacher at an Islamic school, who alleged that it taught an
>>offensive and racist view of non-Muslims, has been awarded �70,000 by an
>>employment tribunal after winning his case for *unfair dismissal*.
>
> So what?
>
> **He won simply because his employers were in breach of UK law**.
>
> Kindly explain what is so hard to understand about that?
Care to comment on this?
Is there one law for Orthodox Jewish Schools and another for other faith
based state funded schools?
Wandsworth Council endorses religious discrimination in education
7:00pm Monday 10th August 2009
The new Equality Bill may be working its way through Parliament, but
Wandsworth Council is still wholeheartedly endorsing religious
discrimination and segregation in education.
A recent edition of Brightside, the magazine of Wandsworth Council, proudly
announced that a "New Catholic school comes a step closer". The Council has
announced that the Saint John Bosco school will be the only completely new
school to be built in the borough as part of the *government-funded
*'BuildingSchools for the Future' project.
Unfortunately, for the non-Catholics amongst us, this will be yet another
religious school in Wandsworth that discriminates against the children of
non-religious parents and those of the 'wrong' faith.
Just take a look at some of the admissions criteria for Wandsworth's new
state school:
. Baptised Catholic students whose parent(s) and themselves are active
committed Roman Catholics.
. Baptised Catholic students who are active committed Roman Catholics.
. Baptised Catholic students who are currently attending a Roman Catholic
school.
. Baptised Catholic students for whom there is evidence that the Church
(e.g. parent(s), priest, parish worker or godparent) is actively and
prayerfully working for their Roman Catholic upbringing.
. Christians who are active in their churches which are in membership of
Churches Together in England.
. Other students, subject to their numbers and/or attitudes not endangering
the Catholic ethos of the school.
There's a further warning on the Wandsworth Council website that the
Governors will "request proof of baptism and evidence of practice from the
relevant Parish Priest or Minister." ......................
-Newsman-
wrote:
Come on, Tilly. Let's hear your incontrovertible facts on this point.
>>>>
>>>>>I read an article this year about a state school in Britain which sacked
>>>>>non
>>>>>Islamic teachers when a new principal was appointed and refused to
>>>>>admit
>>>>>non Muslims.
>>>>
>>>> Which state funded UK Islamic school was that, and what was the
>>>> outcome? (Dead easy for you, Tilly - there are no more than four such
>>>> schools in the entire UK)
>>
>> Well?
You fail yet again. You have no relevant facts to hand, have you,
Tilly?
Were they? Who told you so?
>They weren't
>teaching the curriculum as required and were spending most of the time
>teaching Quaranic law . They also had no science lab as required for
>teaching science in the curiculum..
That's twice you've posted the same stuff. What's the matter with
you, Tilly?
But allow me to press you alittle further. When, and in which court,
were these schools prosecuted and found guilty of breaching UK law,
and what was the penalty?
>
>
>a>
>>
>>>Says Ms Patel:
>>>
>>>"The people who have done this have hurt me so badly. I will remember them
>>>at the moment before I die and I never forgive those who did this to me."
>>>
>>>
>>>Police called
>>>
>>>In a bid to defuse the rumours, she underwent a humiliating medical
>>>examination to prove that she was in fact a woman. But parents refused to
>>>believe the results and the headteacher resorted to writing to all parents
>>>assuring them the secretary wasn't a man. Miss Patel was finally forced to
>>>quit after a mob of parents gathered at the Al-Islah Muslim Girls School
>>>in
>>>Blackburn and demanded governors sack her immediately.
>>
>> Mob rule.
>>
>> Are the school's published rules of admission in breach of UK law?
>
>They are so strict that no non Muslim would apply to attend.
Nevertheless, are those same rules, however strict, in statutory
breach of applicable UK laws?
Right. You've got there at last.
>Did you bother to read the whole article? The judge slammed the
>behaviour of the Muslim members of the board as well as the local authoity.
Irrelevant. **There had been no breach of applicable UK laws**. End
of Story. You've driven yourself up a blind alley, Tilly.
>
>>
>> But, due the freedom radical activists enjoy under the freedoms that
>> politically correct **equality** confers - in this case, freedom of
>> expression -, the rot inevitably set in. That's officially sanctioned
>> political correctness for you, Tilly - the degenerate**equality**
>> disease that is fuelling cultural and societal division and
>> subversion, worldwide.
As an indiscriminate proponent of the degenerate, politically correct
societal "equality" disease, you don't disagree with this?
>>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>A former teacher at an Islamic school, who alleged that it taught an
>>>offensive and racist view of non-Muslims, has been awarded �70,000 by an
>>>employment tribunal after winning his case for *unfair dismissal*.
>>
>> So what?
>>
>> **He won simply because his employers were in breach of UK law**.
>>
>> Kindly explain what is so hard to understand about that?
>
>
>Care to comment on this?
>
>
>Is there one law for Orthodox Jewish Schools and another for other faith
>based state funded schools?
As far as I am aware, in the UK, in state-funded education, the law is
the law, including matters of race, ethnicity and religion. In the
cases you cite, religious zealots - jewish and muslim **but not
Christian** you'll particularly note - committed breaches of the law
in pursuing their own self-evidently racial and religious
discrimination and exceptionalism agendas.
They got their comeuppance. And rightly so, wouldn't you say?
>
>
>Wandsworth Council endorses religious discrimination in education
>7:00pm Monday 10th August 2009
>
>
>
>The new Equality Bill may be working its way through Parliament, but
>Wandsworth Council is still wholeheartedly endorsing religious
>discrimination and segregation in education.
>
(snip)
I gather the proposed school hasn't even got as far as the planning
stages yet. The catholic exculsivity endorsement appears to be a
kite-flying challenge by the Wandsworth wallies.
Possibly interesting to see how this rigorously discriminatory
proposition is dealt with under the UK's existing educational
statutes. As it stands, it appears to be both potentially illegal and
most assuredly divisive.
Rich...@hotmail.com
wrote:
I'm struggling to see the relevance of this for New Zealand. Is this
something to do with the huge amount of money that the National Party
gave to private schools, at the same time as taking money from
children with special needs and stopping adult education classes?
-Newsman-
What is happening in the UK is an example of the social and political
difficulties that arise when special interests, some of them deriving
from traditions and cultures alien to long established customs and
practices in the host country, begin to assert themselves.
There's no reason to believe that it could not be much different in
any other country with a long history ofo immigration, this being
particularly the case with the UK which is finding itself confronted
by the consequences of its colonial past.
(snip)
WorkHard
Even more reason to have one law for all, then. It's called live
and let live.
BR
>I'm struggling to see the relevance of this for New Zealand. Is this
>something to do with the huge amount of money that the National Party
>gave to private schools, at the same time as taking money from
>children with special needs and stopping adult education classes?
FFS!! There would be no-one here who is familiar with your
contributions who would not know that you are on the payroll of the
Labour party, but do you really need it to be so blatant??
Bill.
WorkHard
That's what cheating arseholes like Richtard do. It's their modus
operandi. Steal, lie and cheat.
Rich...@hotmail.com
So you can;t see the relevance either, Bill. The 'political
correctness' of the moment in New Zealand is more about diverting
public money to private hands (including private schools) than
religious bias in schools.
Rich...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>On , , Fri, 1 Jan 2010 11:55:15 +1300, Re: Political Correctness Gone Silly.,
>It beats being a lifelong welfare bludger like you are.
>>
You will also have noticed that the only stealing, lies and cheating
mentioned are those of the National party. National promised everyone
a tax cut but only gave it to the rich - and are now borrowing money
because tax income is not enough to pay the increased benefit payments
as they did nothing about unemployment - as well as of course NAtional
and ACT MP's repeated snouts in the trough antics over personal
benefits . . .