Jump to content

Hate Crime Bill Passed


Lyle Lanley

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Zen Archer (Raconteur) said:

So will she, it's exactly her game plan.

She wont be laughing if she gets chucked in Cornton Vale* beside a few of the big dykes.

 

*appreciate its for men as well now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alta-pete said:

Agreed. I think the short version is the legislation is wholly unneccessary. I'm struggling to understand how exercised those mounting such a staunch defence of it are getting.

Staunch attack of the legislation surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure that Rowling is quite as brave as she is portraying herself either.

Asserting that sex is a biological fact or that it is not changed just by virtue of the gender by which someone chooses to identify is not and never can be a hate crime under this legislation.*

So her saying that someone identifying as a woman is actually a man - isnt an offence under the new law.

 

*stolen from Prof Adam Tomkins who helped draft the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Not sure that Rowling is quite as brave as she is portraying herself either.

Asserting that sex is a biological fact or that it is not changed just by virtue of the gender by which someone chooses to identify is not and never can be a hate crime under this legislation.*

So her saying that someone identifying as a woman is actually a man - isnt an offence under the new law.

 

*stolen from Prof Adam Tomkins who helped draft the law.

 

That would appear to address the main issue people are claiming to see with this law - other than it being a distraction and potentially unnecessary (Tomkins actually voted against it).

See just as a wee point though, it's obviously not a hate crime but will you have a whole load of hate incidents logged against your name a la Murdo Fraser?  That in itself doesn't seem right, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Not sure that Rowling is quite as brave as she is portraying herself either.

Asserting that sex is a biological fact or that it is not changed just by virtue of the gender by which someone chooses to identify is not and never can be a hate crime under this legislation.*

So her saying that someone identifying as a woman is actually a man - isnt an offence under the new law.

 

*stolen from Prof Adam Tomkins who helped draft the law.

Surely the only way we can ever get beyond that sort of argument is have a different term for feminine gender than the one used for the female sex?

Bit of a tangent I know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Peil said:

Surely the only way we can ever get beyond that sort of argument is have a different term for feminine gender than the one used for the female sex?

Bit of a tangent I know

Burds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tirso said:

See just as a wee point though, it's obviously not a hate crime but will you have a whole load of hate incidents logged against your name a la Murdo Fraser?  That in itself doesn't seem right, either.

It's all very reasonable for Murdo Fraser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Peil said:

Surely the only way we can ever get beyond that sort of argument is have a different term for feminine gender than the one used for the female sex?

Bit of a tangent I know

effeminate?  it's basically someones personality isn't it, polite society has attempted to de-gender everything apart from identity and gone the other way with it, you can't put people in boxes eh.  that's a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alta-pete said:

Agreed. I think the short version is the legislation is wholly unneccessary. I'm struggling to understand how exercised those mounting such a staunch defence of it are getting.

It's mainly because the criticisms so far are made up nonsense, factually incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I giving McCoist too much credit here, or is his comments just a tongue in cheek joke over the fact that Rangers fans hate Celtic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Melanius Mullarkey said:

Coisty eh? What’s he like?

  Hide contents

A bigot.

 

I've no idea why McCoist intervened on this issue and in this manner, but I don't think he's bigoted as we normally understand that attitude. A guy I know, slightly, played for Sunderland at the same time as McCoist, and when he moved to a club in Scotland he lodged in the McCoist family home. Guy was comparatively devout RC for a young footballer.  As far as I know, he and McCoist are still in regular social contact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Am I giving McCoist too much credit here, or is his comments just a tongue in cheek joke over the fact that Rangers fans hate Celtic?

I actually clicked and read it through my fingers and I think the "he doesn't know what a hate crime is" explanation is correct:

McCoist reckons the new laws are unenforceable - and that's exactly what the POLICE themselves think.

He said: "That's exactly what the police think about it.

"The police spokesperson has come out and more and less said that.

"He obviously can't because he'll get himself in trouble.

"He has implied it, everybody with two brain cells in their head knows it's madness, crazy.

"There is nobody in our country who thinks that is a good idea, who I have spoken to."

Of course, no suggestion that anyone asked him how he's going to be breaching it, or what qualifies as a breach of it, or what crowds of Rangers fans could possibly do which might be considered distasteful, or literally anything of any detail or substance about the subject at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah ok, so I was giving him too much credit then.  He disagrees with it because the SNP passed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Thane of Cawdor said:

I've no idea why McCoist intervened on this issue and in this manner, but I don't think he's bigoted as we normally understand that attitude. A guy I know, slightly, played for Sunderland at the same time as McCoist, and when he moved to a club in Scotland he lodged in the McCoist family home. Guy was comparatively devout RC for a young footballer.  As far as I know, he and McCoist are still in regular social contact.

"I'm not a racist, I've got friends that aren't white"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

I actually clicked and read it through my fingers and I think the "he doesn't know what a hate crime is" explanation is correct:

McCoist reckons the new laws are unenforceable - and that's exactly what the POLICE themselves think.

He said: "That's exactly what the police think about it.

"The police spokesperson has come out and more and less said that.

"He obviously can't because he'll get himself in trouble.

"He has implied it, everybody with two brain cells in their head knows it's madness, crazy.

"There is nobody in our country who thinks that is a good idea, who I have spoken to."

Of course, no suggestion that anyone asked him how he's going to be breaching it, or what qualifies as a breach of it, or what crowds of Rangers fans could possibly do which might be considered distasteful, or literally anything of any detail or substance about the subject at all.

No, the police havent said that, a spokesman from a body representing Superintendent ranks has said that the legislation requires more training because its a complex piece of legislation. There is also concern that because people are seeing this as some kind of culture war thing (with folks like Rowling who know that certain things arent criminal but uses the furore around the bill from people who havent read it) means that people will make thousands of additional reports that will put strain on a police service that has been cut to the bone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BucksburnDandy said:

Of course he is condoning bigotry. He never will call out anti-Catholic bigotry because it was what he was brought up in and has believed all his life. He will claim it means nothing, of course, but will continue to commit it and boast about it.

 

As for the new law, just don't be a dick to other people and you'll be fine. It's really that simple.

Admittedly I haven’t read the bill thoroughly, but thankfully I don’t think “being a dick” is the threshold being used here.

Edited by eez-eh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sherrif John Bunnell said:

It would be interesting to see the reaction down south if Neville or Carragher declared that they were going to take part in offensive chanting at Old Trafford on Sunday.

It would be a start if offensive chants started getting called out by the likes of McCoist, Neville and Carragher instead of sweeping it under the carpet every time it happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...