Jack Skellington Posted December 9, 2015 #26 Share Posted December 9, 2015 This Pew survey explains a lot... It certainly explains why Obama and Hillary Clinton are so convinced we need to get more of them into the country. Pew also found that Muslim immigrants prefer more government services and that 70 percent lean Democratic. Just 11 percent identify with Republicans. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Monk Posted December 9, 2015 #27 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) please, first off im not your "mate" i never said everyone has to hold the same opinion either. as will I say what I like and you'll just have to suck it up and deal with It freedom of speech and blah blah right and if that happens to be calling your views and opinions backwards and caveman like than oh well. We don't have freedom of speech in Britain, pal. Nor do you have it in Canada and America. If we did, Trump and Tyson's comments would have passed without incident. I'm afraid that we are becoming more like North Korea everyday, where a person is punished for holding "unacceptable" views which go against those of the ruling elite. Edited December 9, 2015 by Black Monk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Br Cornelius Posted December 9, 2015 #28 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) Black Monk, just to counter your claim that you are representative of public opinion on these matter, I would like to draw your attention to the support for same sex marriage among the British public which now runs at 70%, with even a majority of conservative voting people supporting it: In total, the proportion of Britons who think homosexual couples should be able to marry has more than quadrupled in the four decades since 1975. Almost 70 per cent now agree with gay marriage while just over a quarter (28 per cent) disagrees. When the same question was asked in November 1975, support for gay marriage stood at 16 per cent with 53 per cent disagreeing http://www.independe...ge-9278449.html Hardly indicative of Fury representing the majority of Britains as you claim. The reality is that homophobia and sexism are now culturally unacceptable in society. Br Cornelius Edited December 9, 2015 by Br Cornelius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Monk Posted December 9, 2015 #29 Share Posted December 9, 2015 You are allowed to have whatever opinions you like, you can thank the liberals for ensuring that No, I can't. If we can hold whatever views we like, why are people calling for Tyson to be barred from BBC Sports Personality of the Year? As for the liberals, they preach "tolerance" but they are, in fact, the most intolerant people in the world, as one shown yet again with their intolerance of people (Trump and Fury) who happened to just express their own beliefs and views. but if you want to be liked by those who you speak to (us) then wise up about what you say or find somewhere else more comfortable to say it.Br Cornelius How dare you tell me "wise up" about what I say? Who are you? Tell you what, why don't YOU wise up about what YOU say when speaking to me and others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron_Lotus Posted December 9, 2015 #30 Share Posted December 9, 2015 We don't have freedom of speech in Britain, pal. Nor do you have it in Canada and America. If we did, Trump and Tyson's comments would have passed without incident. I'm afraid that we are becoming more like North Korea everyday, where a person is punished for holding "unacceptable" views which go against those of the ruling elite. riiiiiiiiight. well, you have certainly filled up my crazy quota for the day thanks "pal" 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted December 9, 2015 #31 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) Whether he's "sexist" or not is just a matter of opinion. However, I bet the percentage of the British population who are bothered in any shape of form by Mr Fury's comments is around 7%, and that 7% is made up of the Metropolitan Elite Establishment, most of the media and the Guardianistas. But these people rarely represent the views of the ordinary man in the street. The other 93% of the British population have more important things to worry about. Sorry to break it to you, but I am in no way a member of this "Metropolitan Elite Establishment", nor am I involved in the media and I presume a "Guardianista" is someone who reads the Guardian newspaper? Which I do not, so I do not belong to those groups you apparently blame for all the "evils" of the world. I am very much an "ordinary man on the street", yet my views seem to differ from your own - how strange! Well, I hate to break this to you, but Mr Tyson isn't a "role model." He's boxer. In the same way, footballers aren't "role models", either. They're footballers. I wish people would stop referring to sports men and women as "role models." I think it might pay you to learn what a "role model" is, as you do not appear to comprehend the concept. As for BBC Sports Personality of the year, Andy Murray won it in 2013, this despite the fact he once made well-known anti-English comments (and yet we were told by the very people who are now complaining about the Fury comments that Murray's comments were mere "light-hearted banter" and "a joke").One rule for a Scottish tennis player making anti-English comments and another for an English Christian boxer. As far as I am aware Murray's comments were made in a light-hearted, joking context - just as I sometimes make light-hearted joking comments about the Scots, or the Welsh, the Irish, Americans, or the Australians, etc. Mr Fury's comments were not "light-hearted banter" but a deeply held belief that is inconsistent with the notion that people are "equal in law and standing". His comments were misogynistic stereotyping that portray women not as persons with the right and ability to express their own desires and live their own lives, but as 2-dimensional caricatures subservient to the "imposing male". A load of sexist tosh, in other words. I don't care what Fury's religious belief is, nor do I care whether he is a boxer, plumber or brain surgeon. If he held any of those positions I would speak the same criticism regarding the comments he made, as would most except, perhaps, those who walk around with a chip on their shoulder blaming others for their own circumstances. Edited December 9, 2015 by Leonardo 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Monk Posted December 9, 2015 #32 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Black Monk, just to counter your claim that you are representative of public opinion on these matter, I would like to draw your attention to the support for same sex marriage among the British public which now runs at 70%, with even a majority of conservative voting people supporting it: Was that poll done by the same idiots who did the widely inaccurate polling in the run up to the General Election? I take such polls with a pinch of salt. But the polls are immaterial here. Fury is entitled to his views, whether you agree with them or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted December 9, 2015 #33 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Was that poll done by the same idiots who did the widely inaccurate polling in the run up to the General Election? I take such polls with a pinch of salt. But the polls are immaterial here. Fury is entitled to his views, whether you agree with them or not. Nobody has said he isn't, but that doesn't immunise him from being criticised for those views, archaic as they are. Or do you believe that anyone is entitled to hold whatever opinion they want on any topic, and not be criticised for having that opinion? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Br Cornelius Posted December 9, 2015 #34 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Was that poll done by the same idiots who did the widely inaccurate polling in the run up to the General Election? I take such polls with a pinch of salt. But the polls are immaterial here. Fury is entitled to his views, whether you agree with them or not. He is, as everyone has pointed out, but he will have to pay the price for that entitlement. Br Cornelius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Monk Posted December 9, 2015 #35 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) Sorry to break it to you, but I am in no way a member of this "Metropolitan Elite Establishment", nor am I involved in the media and I presume a "Guardianista" is someone who reads the Guardian newspaper? Which I do not, so I do not belong to that groups you apparently blame for all the "evils" of the world. You may not belong to those groups but you share their same pernicious views and, like them, show great intolerance towards anyone who doesn't - like Fury, Tyson and me. I think it might pay you to learn what a "role model" is, as you do not appear to comprehend the concept. Tyson isn't a "role model." He's a boxer. I wish people would stop this nonsense that boxers and footballers and other sportsmen are "role models." They aren't. They punch people's face and kick balls for a living. As far as I am aware Murray's comments were made in a light-hearted, joking context - just as I sometimes make light-hearted joking comments about the Scots, or the Welsh, the Irish, Americans, or the Australians, etc. Mr Fury's comments were not "light-hearted banter" but a deeply held belief that is inconsistent with the notion that people are "equal in law and standing". His comments were misogynistic stereotyping that portray women not as persons with the right and ability to express their own desires and live their own lives, but as 2-dimensional caricatures subservient to the "imposing male". A load of sexist tosh, in other words. So Murray's views were "light-hearted" and "joking" and Tyson's views are "sexist". Therein lie the very double standards I have already highlighted. That's the problem. The liberal metro elite - of whose views you share - decide on what is "racist" or "sexist" and what isn't depending on who said it and who it was directed at. So a Scotsman partaking in anti-English bigotry is merely partaking in "light-hearted banter." That's not racist, apparently, to partake in anti-English bigotry, especially if you're Scottish. But an Englishman - and a CHRISTIAN at that! (an English Christian is about the lowest of the low in British society in the eyes of our overlords, especially if they're white, male and have a bald head) - saying that Jessica Ennis looks nice in a dress is a "sexist, Neanderthal pig." Such double standards are highlighted perfectly in BBC and Channel 4 comedy panel shows. When that odious Jo Brand appears on QI saying things like "the only good man is a dead one" we are treated with howls of laughter from the audience and a round of applause. And yet just imagine the sheer OUTRAGE and BLOODCURLING ANGER from certain sections of British society had Tyson Fury appeared on QI saying "the only good woman is a dead one". The guy would be torn asunder. I don't care what Fury's religious belief is, nor do I care whether he is a boxer, plumber or brain surgeon. If he held any of those positions I would speak the same criticism regarding the comments he made, as would most except, perhaps, those who walk around with a chip on their shoulder blaming others for their own circumstances. I think Tyson is being treated particularly harshly by the media and the Twitterati because he's a white, English, heterosexual male who holds strong Christian views, all of which is frowned upon in British society today. Edited December 9, 2015 by Black Monk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Monk Posted December 9, 2015 #36 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) He is, as everyone has pointed out, but he will have to pay the price for that entitlement. Br Cornelius Why does he have to pay such a price yet Jo Brand, renowned for her sexist anti-male remarks on BBC comedy panel shows, doesn't? Why can she appear on QI and say "the only good man is a dead one" and get away with it, with hardly any furore whatsoever, yet a man is criticised for saying a certain sportswoman looks nice in a dress? I never remember such furore in the press calling for Brand's sacking from the BBC for her sexist remarks. Edited December 9, 2015 by Black Monk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewinn Posted December 9, 2015 #37 Share Posted December 9, 2015 How many people agree with Trumps views? Every time he shoots from the lip instead of the hip his rating goes through the roof, The left and driven especially the media will brow beat people into believing its a minority. The Barbara Walters interview was interesting. Everyone is worrying about trumps views, But what about the other candidates views?, unlike Trump their views are controlled by the money behind them, one wrong foot off the PC-line and sponors pull out, taking their money with them, - on the other hand Trump is using his own money so he can say what he likes when he likes. As for Tyson Fury isnt he a Gypo? i love the way he's using religion as a shield. its impenetrable. just look at his response when the media ambush him. the poor reporters dont know what to say. These Government online petitions are a load of rubbish, how many people will now search out Tyson Furys comments to see if they're indeed offended? it reminds me when on BBC radio Jonathan Ross and the sex addict Russell "im chafing" Brand over stepped the mark, the show was broadcast to over 4 million listeners. 6 people put a complaint into the BBC after the show finished. this social media crap like faceache # my ass craze took over and three days after the event those original complaints had rose to thousands, because people who wanted to be offended searched out and tuned in to see if they would be offended and guess what they were duly offended. We have irrelevant people wanting to be relevant. its why were all on these forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Br Cornelius Posted December 9, 2015 #38 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Why does he have to pay such a price yet Jo Brand, renowned for her sexist anti-male remarks on BBC comedy panel shows, doesn't? Why can she appear on QI and say "the only good man is a dead one" and get away with it, with hardly any furore whatsoever, yet a man is criticised for saying a certain sportswoman looks nice in a dress? I never remember such furore in the press calling for Brand's sacking from the BBC for her sexist remarks. its all about intent, jo brand is making a joke and thats what she gets paid for. Fury wasn't joking when he was been homophobic and sexist, he was been serious. If you can't spot the difference then you have a problem. Br Cornelius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron_Lotus Posted December 9, 2015 #39 Share Posted December 9, 2015 We have irrelevant people wanting to be relevant. its why were all on these forums. how dare you! I'm as relevant as milli vanilli...... wait... 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Monk Posted December 9, 2015 #40 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) its all about intent, jo brand is making a joke and thats what she gets paid for. Fury wasn't joking when he was been homophobic and sexist, he was been serious. If you can't spot the difference then you have a problem. Br Cornelius What a load of crap. If a man said such things about women on comedy panel show he'd get ripped to shreds, whether he's joking or not. And it's alright for women to say how sexy Beckham and Poldark look, and what they'd like to do with them - such things happen everyday on the internet - yet a man is deemed "sexist" if he says a woman looks nice in a dress. It's alright for Jo Brand to say "the only good man is a dead man", but not okay for a man to merely say "a woman's place is in the kitchen." The double standards are abhorrent. Edited December 9, 2015 by Black Monk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted December 9, 2015 #41 Share Posted December 9, 2015 You may not belong to those groups but you share their same pernicious views and, like them, show great intolerance towards anyone who doesn't - like Fury, Tyson and me. Intolerance? I have already said that a person is entitled to hold the opinions they hold. That I might criticise those views does not make me "intolerant", it merely makes me in disagreement. I accept that when many, many people disagree with an opinion a person holds that person feels a certain pressure as if being oppressed, but unless those people actually attempt to force that opinion to not be held then any "oppression" is simply a delusion of the one under social pressure. Tyson isn't a "role model." He's a boxer. I wish people would stop this nonsense that boxers and footballers and other sportsmen are "role models." They aren't. They punch people's face and kick balls for a living. A role model has nothing to do with occupation and everything to do with principles. A boxer can be a role model, as can a footballer, etc - so long as they exhibit principles that resonate agreeably with those to whom that person is known. In the case of Fury, his principles do not "resonate agreeably" to the majority of those to whom he is known, and so he cannot be held up to be a role model. Another boxer, expressing a belief in principles favouring equality, etc, might be a role model. I hope that clarifies somewhat for you why you are mistaken in equating occupation with the capacity to be a role model. So Murray's views were "light-hearted" and "joking" and Tyson's views are "sexist". Therein lie the very double standards I have already highlighted. What double-standards? What were the contexts of the comments made by Murray and Fury? If the contexts were different, then how can the same standard applied to both be said to be a "double-standard"? That's the problem. The liberal metro elite - of whose views you share - decide on what is "racist" or "sexist" and what isn't depending on who said it and who it was directed at. The law ultimately decides what is "racist" or "sexist", and law is enacted by those elected by the "man on the street". If those laws did not agree with the "man on the street", others would be elected to repeal those laws and enact better ones. I think Tyson is being treated particularly harshly by the media and the Twitterati because he's a white, English, heterosexual male who holds strong Christian views, all of which is frowned upon in British society today. You are wrong. He is being treated harshly because his views are perhaps a century out-of-date with modern society. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Br Cornelius Posted December 9, 2015 #42 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) What a load of crap. If a man said such things about women on comedy panel show he'd get ripped to shreds, whether he's joking or not. And it's alright for women to say how sexy Beckham and Poldark look, and what they'd like to do with them - such things happen everyday on the internet - yet a man is deemed "sexist" if he says a woman looks nice in a dress. It's alright for Jo Brand to say "the only good man is a dead man", but not okay for a man to merely say "a woman's place is in the kitchen." The double standards are abhorrent. You obviously don't watch much comedy do you More of a Bernard manning man hey Br Cornelius Edited December 9, 2015 by Br Cornelius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted December 9, 2015 #43 Share Posted December 9, 2015 How many people agree with Trumps views? Every time he shoots from the lip instead of the hip his rating goes through the roof, The left and driven especially the media will brow beat people into believing its a minority. The Barbara Walters interview was interesting. Everyone is worrying about trumps views, But what about the other candidates views?, unlike Trump their views are controlled by the money behind them, one wrong foot off the PC-line and sponors pull out, taking their money with them, - on the other hand Trump is using his own money so he can say what he likes when he likes. As for Tyson Fury isnt he a Gypo? i love the way he's using religion as a shield. its impenetrable. just look at his response when the media ambush him. the poor reporters dont know what to say. These Government online petitions are a load of rubbish, how many people will now search out Tyson Furys comments to see if they're indeed offended? it reminds me when on BBC radio Jonathan Ross and the sex addict Russell "im chafing" Brand over stepped the mark, the show was broadcast to over 4 million listeners. 6 people put a complaint into the BBC after the show finished. this social media crap like faceache # my ass craze took over and three days after the event those original complaints had rose to thousands, because people who wanted to be offended searched out and tuned in to see if they would be offended and guess what they were duly offended. We have irrelevant people wanting to be relevant. its why were all on these forums. Trump is, imo, a rather detestable person who holds views I do not consider representative of a society valuing liberty, equality and opportunity. Similarly, Fury's comments - while aimed at a different target - are equally reprehensible. As I said, I would not agree that Trump needs to be banned from traveling to Britain for holding the views he does, and I hope if there is any debate about it sane heads will prevail and recognise that his views do not "threaten" Britain or British society. Likewise, Fury's views do not threaten Britain or British society, however they do suggest he is unfit to be chosen as a "sporting representative for that society". 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewinn Posted December 9, 2015 #44 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Its nice to see Trump standing up and challenging the actions of people instead of falling over backwards to tell us it's a religion of peace and all is well, Yet quite clearly its not. where spending Billions and costing lives fighting Islamic terrorists. - As trump himself said. shut down Moslems coming to the US, until the countrys representatives figure out what the hell is going on. - and that's the point what the hell is going on. Where dropping bombs on Syria meanwhile the back door is wide open, and many simply walking through the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted December 9, 2015 #45 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Lets ban Trump but continue to allow hate preachers from such places as Saudi Arabia to continue to come over here and spew their hatred of the west in the local mosque, - Where's that petition. Ohh come on Steve, we both know that that petition is racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted December 9, 2015 #46 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) Its nice to see Trump standing up and challenging the actions of people instead of falling over backwards to tell us it's a religion of peace and all is well, Yet quite clearly its not. where spending Billions and costing lives fighting Islamic terrorists. - As trump himself said. shut down Moslems coming to the US, until the countrys representatives figure out what the hell is going on. - and that's the point what the hell is going on. Where dropping bombs on Syria meanwhile the back door is wide open, and many simply walking through the front. I have read comments, articles, etc by many, many people "challenging the actions" of Daesh, al-Qaeda and other Islamic fundamentalist extremist groups - and I have not heard many people criticise those comments, articles, etc. I certainly haven't criticised them. Trump isn't "challenging the actions of those who are committing wrongs", he is making a fallacious broad generalisation and trying to whip up prejudice and bigotry with a rhetoric of hatred and intolerance. Islam isn't the problem, the problem is those people who are using the religion to rule over others. Edited December 9, 2015 by Leonardo 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlitterRose Posted December 9, 2015 #47 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Lol. That's hysterical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonKing Posted December 10, 2015 #48 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Sorry BM but how do you come to the conclusion that boxers are not role models... Most usually come from poor backgrounds and actually fight for everything they have,many are real life rags to riches tales!The dedication,mental and physical toughness,and ability to overcome adversity is almost non comparable to any job on the planet. Think of Joe Louis fighting during WW2 with the weight of an entire country on his shoulders,Ali while a trash talker was a huge figure during the civil rights movement,Wlad and Vitali Klitschko both speak several languages,have doctorates in sports medicine,and both were heavyweight champs of the world,Rich Franklin (Former UFC middleweight champ) is a school teacher... I could actually list many more examples of how and why these figures make great role models and why it is important they handle themselves as such,yes some are not respectable but that comes with every walk of life and occupation. As a former fighter and now trainer i make sure everyone i train keeps a respectable manner about themselves,never know who you may influence 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Monk Posted December 10, 2015 #49 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) KATIE HOPKINS: Don't demonise Trump, he speaks for millions of Americans. And who can blame them for not wanting to end up like us? You may want to carry on navel gazing. But for many Americans, Europe is rapidly becoming an example of everything they never want to be, writes KATIE HOPKINS. http://www.dailymail...suggest-it.html Sorry BM but how do you come to the conclusion that boxers are not role models... Because they're not. They're just boxers. Edited December 10, 2015 by Black Monk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted December 10, 2015 #50 Share Posted December 10, 2015 KATIE HOPKINS? HA that woman needs to be put in a secure mental home. Its like quoting Donald duck. About Trump even the hardliners of the Republican party are turning against him 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now