London Banter - View Single Post - A less pleasant aspect of 'railway photography'?

Charles Ellson

On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 20:22:40 +0100, The Iron Jelloid
wrote:

Once upon a time, d wrote:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 10:56:06 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 26/08/11 10:13, d wrote:
So whats your solution then? Swing the pendulum so far the other way that
it alienates white heterosexuals?

You got any evidence that white heterosexuals as a group feel alienated
by tolerance of others?

When that tolerance swings to positive discrimination then yes. And also
when that tolerance goes against the public good - ie I have zero tolerance
of the muslim women who cover their faces (france had the right idea there)

No, France has the wrong idea there. Or at least would be wrong if done
here. Banning things, making people carry ID papers, etc, are all
European things. One of the things that has always made Britain great
is that we practice tolerance and do not randomly ban stuff. "Land of
Hope and Glory, mother of the free", and all that.

The way to defeat the kind of primitive, middle-eastern culture that
wants to keep women veiled and in medieval-style servitude is through
thorough and compulsory education of women and girls. It's not that
long ago since western women were able to throw off religious and
cultural discrimination and demand full equality. Muslim women will
follow suit as long as we make sure that they receive a full education.

Not far from me is an area which 100 years ago was full of poor Irish
immigrants. They built numerous churches, most of which are now little
used and some stand abandoned, awaiting redevelopment or ruin. The area
is now heavily populated with Muslim immigrants, and they've built
themselves a large and spectacular mosque at the top of the hill,
complete with minarets and a rather beautiful green dome. 100 years
from now, that will also be a largely disused relic, as advancing
culture steadily leaves mass religion behind as superstition.

or rastas who say that smoking canabis is part of their "religion" (what
religion would that be - the one where you laze around and do bugger
all 24/7?).

I've no problem with those who can afford it lounging around doing
nothing 24/7, after all it's in the hope of being able to do it myself
that I play the lottery! :-)

Cannabis should be legal anyway. It costs more to police than it would
to allow (plus the tax revenue we'd make), and TBH I'd rather streets
full of cannabis smokers than drunks, weed doesn't generally seem to
make people aggressive the way booze does.

Maybe not but it is commonly smoked with tobacco which is carcinogenic
by itself and has other physical and psychological (some of which has
a "chicken and egg" element) disbenefits.