Discussion of article from the Mail's columnists and RightMinds contributors
:sunglasses: 62.5 % :grinning: 25 % 😟 12.5 %
By The Red Arrow
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
youngian wrote:

Today, it seems obligatory for every actor and actress — like every BBC comedian — to sign up to the same off-the-shelf, achingly politically correct opinions. Is no one in the entertainment profession capable of independent thought? Or are they just afraid they won’t get work unless they parrot identical, Lefty views?

They're in the empathy business Tom
You could go further and say that they're the true custodians of our culture - high and low.

Thank your chosen deity that history will not judge us from the preserved bitter ramblings of a misanthropic bellend like you, Tom.
By Safe_Timber_Man
Membership Days Posts
Sorry Arnold - was posting at the same time as you.

Abortion and why, in trendy middle-class circles, Mrs U dreads being asked what she does for a living
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... iving.html

Whatever we may think about abortion, shouldn’t everyone brought up in our tradition of free expression feel uneasy about this week’s decision to ban pro-Life campaigners from setting up shop outside a clinic where terminations are performed?

No, absolutely fucking not. These women, often young, going into an abortion clinic are already, on the whole, scared, emotional and vulnerable. The last thing they need at such a distressing time is some self righteous cunt waving a gruesome placard in their face and shouting inane slogans. Anecdotal, but some of these Pro-Life demonstrators who set up shop outside abortion clinics are actually fucking nasty.

Isn’t it a desperately sad reflection on our society that this historic Public Space Protection Order was directed not against violent demonstrators, yelling hatred of our way of life, but against well-meaning Christians, trying to do good?

Oh those poor "well meaning Christians" being persecuted. Fuck off, Utley.

Anyway, here's the article:

Whatever we may think about abortion, shouldn’t everyone brought up in our tradition of free expression feel uneasy about this week’s decision to ban pro-Life campaigners from setting up shop outside a clinic where terminations are performed?

Before I go any further, I should declare an interest. My wife is a strongly committed pro-Lifer, who works for the boss of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC)— and although my views are perhaps not quite as uncompromising as hers, I am firmly on her side in the debate.

I wish that people wouldn’t close their minds to SPUC’s arguments.

Indeed, it’s a measure of how dominant and intolerant social liberalism has become in modern Britain that Mrs U has come to dread being asked what she does for a living.

It’s not that she’s ashamed of her job —on the contrary, she’s proud of it and enjoys the fulfilment of working for what she regards as a hugely important cause.

It’s just that in the metropolitan, middle-class circles in which we move, you will often hear a sharp intake of breath around the dinner table when she mentions she works for SPUC.

A frisson of embarrassment tends to grip the company, putting a dampener on the whole evening, as if she had confessed to working for the Ku Klux Klan.

In fact, of course, my wife’s views on the moral value of human life, from the moment of conception to the grave, are shared by billions of people around the globe.

They are held by every mainstream world religion and church — Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim and more — and have been espoused by philosophers for millennia.

Yet this cuts no ice at the parties we attend, on the increasingly rare occasions when we’re asked. Imagine the reaction at a BBC staff meeting if anyone were to admit to supporting Brexit, and you’ll get the idea.

I should also declare that my wife donates a modest monthly sum (or to be more accurate, I give it at her instigation, since my higher tax rate makes the gift aid top-up worth more) to a charity called the Good Counsel Network (GCN).

This is one of those affected by Tuesday night’s Public Space Protection Order, issued by Ealing Council in West London to keep campaigners away from the entrance to the local Marie Stopes abortion clinic.

Now, with my weakness for seeing both sides of an argument, I can well understand the thinking behind the council’s order.

For more than two decades, six days a week, 52 weeks of the year, members of the GCN have gathered on the grass verge outside the clinic to pray, sing hymns and try to persuade pregnant women to seek alternatives to abortion.

As anyone can imagine, this must be irritating to local residents. Nor is it hard to see that it could be upsetting to women who’ve taken the traumatic decision to terminate and don’t want anyone to renew any doubts or try to change their minds at the last moment.

Let me also put it on record that I do not for one moment defend the bullying tactics allegedly adopted by some anti-abortion protesters outside clinics.

No matter how strongly they may feel about the sanctity of human life, it strikes me as cruel to shout ‘murderess’ at women arriving for terminations, or to torment them by calling them ‘mum’ and thrusting teddy bears into their hands.

How much this goes on, I just don’t know. It is even possible that rogue members of the GCN may have resorted to such conduct, which is said to be increasingly widespread among anti-abortionists in the U.S.

All I can say, because I have Mrs U’s word for it, is that the people who run the group disapprove strongly of bullying and regard it as counter-productive. They see it as their mission to show kindness to women who may be having doubts and to offer them practical help with alternatives — whether financial support, within their limited resources, or advice on putting babies up for adoption.

In the huge majority of cases, perhaps needless to say, their efforts come to nothing. But on those rare occasions when they succeed in persuading women to carry a pregnancy through to childbirth, the results are often profoundly moving.

They say the mothers concerned almost always bless them ever afterwards for talking them out of abortion and helping them through.

Yet from the way groups such as the GCN are portrayed in the liberal media, you would think these kindly, predominantly mild-mannered and middle-aged Christians were dangerous fanatics, spewing religious hatred.

I think of a Channel 4 Dispatches programme — entitled Undercover: Britain’s Abortion Extremists — which claimed to have ‘infiltrated’ the network. Complete with wobbly shots from a ‘hidden camera’ and indistinct recordings with subtitles, it was made to appear almost as if the documentary makers had risked their lives to unearth the truth behind a sinister terrorist organisation.

Yet GCN has never made the slightest secret of its mission, methods or purpose, while the programme told us nothing that we wouldn’t have learned if the camera had been held rock-steady and in full view, with a decent quality sound recording.

This kind of casual dishonesty is typical of campaigners who call themselves pro-Choice (by which naturally they mean a woman’s choice of whether or not to abort — never an expectant father’s, let alone that of an unborn life).

All too often, they speak in euphemisms, designed to strip the abortion issue of any moral dimension, as if ending a potential human life has no more profound significance than having an appendix removed.

Take this week, when a councillor interviewed on the news after Tuesday’s vote said that Ealing had struck a blow to protect women seeking a ‘legally available healthcare treatment’.

Well, no one denies that abortion is legally available. But a ‘healthcare treatment’? Under the letter of the 1967 Abortion Act, that’s what it ought to be, since terminations were supposed to be permitted only when two doctors certified independently that continuing a pregnancy would injure the physical or mental health of the woman or existing children, or if the baby was likely to be born severely handicapped.

But let’s be honest. While, yes, some cases genuinely meet these criteria, the great majority of the 190,406 abortions carried out in the UK in 2016 simply don’t. Only by stretching the meaning of the words ‘injury to health’ to snapping point does healthcare come into the equation.

Or take that oft-repeated platitude of the pro-Choice lobby: ‘No woman takes the decision to have an abortion lightly.’ Again, this is true of a great many women who will testify that the decision was one of the most agonising of their lives.

But ‘no woman’ decides lightly? How, then, can it be explained that nearly 40 per cent of those 190,406 operations performed in 2016 were repeat terminations?

No, the fact is that abortion is increasingly seen as an accepted and commonplace procedure, with doctors and clinics ignoring the law and simply rubber-stamping applications, with no questions asked.

It has come to the point where an encounter with groups such as the Good Counsel Network can be a pregnant woman’s first contact with anyone prepared to put the other side of the argument, and reinforce instinctive doubts that so many women feel.

Many of us have met women who went through with abortions and say they’ve bitterly regretted it ever since.

Isn’t it a desperately sad reflection on our society that this historic Public Space Protection Order was directed not against violent demonstrators, yelling hatred of our way of life, but against well-meaning Christians, trying to do good?

The Mailites have generally fallen on the side of Pro-Choice.
By cycloon
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
Attacking that as illiberal is a joke. Their right to make their case is not hindered at all. Their right to intimidate and insult is. Boohoo.

Pro life cannot be defended on any sophistic 'true' liberal grounds, not without some drawn out notion of unconscious choice on the part of the unborn
By Cyclist
Membership Days Posts
Safe_Timber_Man wrote: Fuck off, Utley.
Can the forum admins not set up an algorithm which publishes this under a link every time Utley has an article published? It would save a hell of a lot of time that could be better utilised down the pub.
By Big Arnold
Membership Days Posts
Cyclist wrote:
Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:29 am
Safe_Timber_Man wrote: Fuck off, Utley.
Can the forum admins not set up an algorithm which publishes this under a link every time Utley has an article published? It would save a hell of a lot of time that could be better utilised down the pub.
Or we could all add it to our signatures so he could fuck off on a regular basis, not just after every column.
Cyclist liked this
By Safe_Timber_Man
Membership Days Posts
He's attempting to be self deprecating to soften his stance but the long and short of it is he's being a cunt:

TOM UTLEY: It’s not Italy’s fault I can’t speak Italian. So why do we pander to people who don’t understand English?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... akers.html

Many mothers and fathers will understand, I suspect, when I say that nothing is more fatal to our parental authority than having to ask the offspring for help with a computer glitch.

In our family, the pattern is always the same. There I sit, tapping away at the laptop, when suddenly a morning’s work disappears into the ether, the screen freezes or the machine takes it into its stupid head to list all my emails in the wrong order, starting in 2007. You know the sort of thing. It happens to all of us.

For the next 20 minutes or so, I attempt to find a solution for myself, trying all the usual Ctrl-Alt-Deletes and the rest, but it’s never any good. The awful moment comes when I have to summon assistance from our one remaining resident son.

Cue a pantomime of groaning, sighing and eye-rolling from the boy, as he lumbers over to shoulder his idiot father aside. His fingers flash in a blur across the keyboard and within seconds the problem is fixed.

‘Whoa there, lad, how did you do that? Would you go through it again slowly, please, so that I’ll know for the next time?’

More groaning and eye-rolling, another blur of fingers across keys — jabbing away like machine-gun fire, far too fast to follow — and then off he stalks, leaving me none the wiser until I next need his IT services.

The balance of power is all wrong. It’s no good my protesting that it’s only because he happens to have been born in the thick of the computer age that dealing with these problems comes as second nature to him, while many of us older folk tend to struggle.

Nor is it any use pointing out I have other skills that demand his respect. For example, at the age of 12, I was awarded the coveted trophy for the best ballroom dancer at Orwell Park Preparatory School for boys. So proficient was I that I always had to be the girl and dance backwards. But is he impressed? Not he.

It’s fruitless even to remind him that in the 1970s, I was admitted to the degree of Bachelor of Arts at Cambridge University, one of the finest academic institutions in the world — a qualification I later upgraded to MA (Cantab), on payment of a fiver.

No, to my disrespectful son, as I sit humiliated at the computer keyboard, I’m just a cretin, a moron, a retard — or any one of a dozen other words we’re not allowed to use any more. Now, for many years when the boys were growing up, I had this same feeling of compromised authority on family holidays in countries where I had difficulties with the lingo.

My trouble was that all four of our sons have something of a gift for languages. One is almost fluent in Italian, three get by impressively in Spanish and one also has a smattering of German.

As for myself, I still know a little Latin (which comes in handier than many may believe) but my knowledge of modern languages is confined to schoolboy French — much improved during my 1972 gap year, spent working in a hotel in the Pas-de-Calais, but long since rusted back to basics.

For that reason, I always favoured France as our destination, knowing that I could more or less understand what the locals were saying to me — and that when push came to shove, I could make myself understood by them. But occasionally the boys would get their way, and we’d be off to Italy or Spain for my ritual humiliation.

Again and again, the same scene would be played out. There I’d stand at a hotel reception desk in some out-of-the-way place, exhausted after a long drive, struggling desperately to make myself understood by the woman behind the counter.

Displaying all the vices of the Englishman abroad, I’d speak very slowly and loudly in my own language, making absurdly exaggerated hand-gestures and gurning apologetic faces. But all to no avail.

Meanwhile, our linguist sons would stand sullenly back, in the manner of Harry Enfield’s ‘I’m not your slave’ Kevin, refusing point-blank to offer their services as interpreters. Only after an eternity of watching their father suffer would one of these young sadists soften, rattling off a few words of impeccable Spanish or Italian to make everything clear.

But my point this week (and, yes, there is a point to all this) is that it’s nobody’s fault but my own that I can’t make myself understood by Italians in Italy or monoglot Spaniards in Spain.

I could have learned their languages, just as I could have mugged up on computers (plenty of my age-group are veritable technological wizards). But the fact is that I didn’t — and my communication difficulties are the price I expect and surely deserve to pay for my omission, as one of the hazards of travelling abroad.

It has never occurred to me for a moment that the fault might lie with the Italians or Spanish for failing to make themselves understandable to their visitors (though I count it a blessing that so many of them speak English these days).

Indeed, only in mad, diversity-obsessed Britain does the idea appear to have caught on that it’s our responsibility to address foreign visitors in their own languages — or to provide interpreters at public expense if we don’t know how.

As readers with long memories may recall, this has been a subject close to my heart since 2011, when a whole lot of bumf from the local council landed on my doormat, soliciting my views on plans for traffic-calming measures in my area.

It was bad enough that this included a questionnaire enquiring about my race, religion and sexuality: ‘I am heterosexual/straight; I am gay or lesbian (homosexual); I am bisexual; other; don’t know; prefer not to say’. Could anyone explain, I wondered, what possible relevance any of this could have to my attitude to road humps?

But what really took my breath away (and this was in the depths of the debt crisis, remember) was the council’s assurance that all these documents were available not only in large print, Braille and audiotape, but in an astonishing array of foreign languages, including Portuguese, Bengali, Yoruba and Twi.

Surely to goodness, I thought, if a Twi-speaking Ashanti from Ghana can’t be bothered to learn English, it cannot be unreasonable to suggest he forfeit his right to express an opinion on whether lozenges, chicanes, ‘echelon parking with build-out’ or ‘splitter island with tree’ — or none of the above — are required in St Julian’s Farm Road, south London?

Which brings me at last to this week’s common-sense recommendation from a House of Lords committee that town halls should waste less on translating documents into foreign languages, so as to free up more cash for teaching migrants English.

True, I don’t quite see why ratepayers should foot the bill for such lessons, any more than the Government in Madrid should be expected to teach me Spanish. Clearly, however, any investment in integration must be wiser than discouraging Ghanaians from learning English by printing all documents in Twi.

But let me end with the heart-rending case, reported last weekend, of the Sri Lankan mother whose inability to speak English meant she was unable to understand midwives’ advice on how to feed her baby, who was born in an NHS hospital a year after she arrived in London as a refugee. As a result, Sinthiya Rajatheepan’s son, now eight, was left brain-damaged.

Now fast forward to a week ago today, when the High Court ruled that he should receive compensation from the NHS, expected to run into millions of pounds.

This was because the midwives failed to employ an interpreter to explain the importance of proper feeding techniques to Sinthiya, who was 21 when her boy was born.

God knows, my heart goes out to this family, and I fully accept our humane public duty to help with the boy’s upbringing. But millions of pounds’ compensation? By what perversion of sanity can the NHS be held to blame for this poor woman’s failure to understand English, in England?

Cariad, England, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
Couldnt agree more. If you're in Britain - learn English. Why should we pay for your failure to learn our language?
+644 -6
jimmy page, Somerset, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
she / the parents coudlnt understand English, didnt understand how to feed a baby and they obviously never met another parent ever but they knew how to claim com pen say shun ?
+471 -5
Gerald, Lancashire, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
The UK has lost it's War with Left wing Liberalism. That is why everything about the UK offends someone. In reality the UK offends no one but the Left wing Liberals have to find someone to be offended so they make it all up and call it the right thing to do. ? .
+341 -3
Nick, nottingham, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
Tom 's dead right as usual. I despair of England!
+306 -2

To be fair, if you move to a country I do agree that you should at least attempt to learn enough of the lingo to get by. Spending increasingly long periods of time in Spain I'm trying to practise what I preach. However, some help should always be available. It isn't "lefty liberal pandering", it's fucking human decency. Many European countries make a lot of effort to speak English to us if needed. To say "fuck you, learn our language or don't speak to us" is sadly expected from the Mail, though.
By Kreuzberger
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
Safe_Timber_Man wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:45 am
... Many European countries make a lot of effort to speak English to us if needed...
That is not so as to be able to communicate just with John Bull, it is so that they can communicated with everyone.

Knuckle-dragging Anglos tend to overlook the good fortune of being born in to the Ligua Franca and assume superiority from it instead.
youngian liked this
  • 1
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Another of the new Northern Tories (though his sea[…]

More levelling up. They got forced into the Pupil […]

Roll Call

Oh Daley, that really is just the worst news, I am[…]

Jeremy "Fucking off" Corbyn.

Even in a fluffing Tweet he looks bad tempered.