Ah, the way to do it is to lobby lobby lobby. They're Lords so they have nothing better to do. Get in touch with AB, the Queer Rights Co-chair and ask her what QR are doing about it and whether it's something that OUSU can lobby on (lobbying on something like this would be almost unanimously supported!) Then QR would write a decent letter and send a copy to every Lord (OUSU has their addresses somewhere) outlining why equal rights are important etc and then asking for their views and reasons for holding those views. Some nutcases will write back with hateful nonsense, but most will be sensible (or at least moderate) and those that are reasonable but still wrong can receive a second lobbying. Those who are mad and hateful can have their letters leaked to the Daily Mirror
( ... )
Religious people are flawed... An example being most people drink and get drink (even religous people I'm sure), yet the Bible says, in Ephesians 5:18: "Don't be drunk with wine, because that will ruin your life. Instead, let the Holy Spirit fill and control you
( ... )
People seem to think that, because it is a "religious belief" or a "religious viewpoint" that it is automatically worth respect and/or listening time out of all proportion of the normal way of deciding things.
Because people believe stuff because a) a historical figure said so b) a book said so (Mein Kampf, anyone?) or c) because the voices in our heads/the heads of our leaders said so - and this makes their views somehow of major importance, and what's more handled with kid gloves?
Any belief that stands up to rigourous discussion and thought gets near-universal respect. The rights of humans, the ideal of charity, the right to freedom of conscience. If some thought needs special measures to keep it propped up, doesn't that say somethign rather damning about the strength of intellect of those who wilfully believe that thought?
Any belief that stands up to rigourous discussion and thought gets near-universal respect. The rights of humans, the ideal of charity, the right to freedom of conscience. If some thought needs special measures to keep it propped up, doesn't that say somethign rather damning about the strength of intellect of those who wilfully believe that thought?
Yikes! First of all I'd say there are plenty of beliefs that do seem to stand up to rigorous discussion and thought which are completely bonkers, such the concept of a man and woman (for example, assuming everyone is either male or female.) I'd go as far as to include "the ideal of charity" in this. As long as charities exist the government can relinquish some responsibility. This can be a good thing, but what happens to vital medical charities when the economy slumps? Finally, and probably most importantly, the ideas of equality and acceptance do need to be propped up. They're unnatural ideas (in the same way as good hygeine is unnatural, or eating healthily) so they must be taught
( ... )
Comments 12
Reply
Thanks for the information Aidan! Also, it is a good excuse to be in London:
"Gay rights NOW!!! Oh while we are here we may as well pop over to Soho for some gay porn" :p
Reply
Reply
~ Tommy
Reply
People seem to think that, because it is a "religious belief" or a "religious viewpoint" that it is automatically worth respect and/or listening time out of all proportion of the normal way of deciding things.
Because people believe stuff because a) a historical figure said so b) a book said so (Mein Kampf, anyone?) or c) because the voices in our heads/the heads of our leaders said so - and this makes their views somehow of major importance, and what's more handled with kid gloves?
Any belief that stands up to rigourous discussion and thought gets near-universal respect. The rights of humans, the ideal of charity, the right to freedom of conscience. If some thought needs special measures to keep it propped up, doesn't that say somethign rather damning about the strength of intellect of those who wilfully believe that thought?
Reply
Yikes! First of all I'd say there are plenty of beliefs that do seem to stand up to rigorous discussion and thought which are completely bonkers, such the concept of a man and woman (for example, assuming everyone is either male or female.) I'd go as far as to include "the ideal of charity" in this. As long as charities exist the government can relinquish some responsibility. This can be a good thing, but what happens to vital medical charities when the economy slumps? Finally, and probably most importantly, the ideas of equality and acceptance do need to be propped up. They're unnatural ideas (in the same way as good hygeine is unnatural, or eating healthily) so they must be taught ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment