Quote: ajp29 @ December 1, 2007, 6:02 PM
Worrying times when people are looking for me for advice.
Anyway, I was thinking more along the lines of how/why what it provides is restrictive, than the possibility of getting rid of it or not. All I personally know is that I keep seeing reports of ridiculous court cases where people claim that their rights have been violated.
Quote: Aaron @ December 1, 2007, 6:20 PM
Anyway, I was thinking more along the lines of how/why what it provides is restrictive, than the possibility of getting rid of it or not. All I personally know is that I keep seeing reports of ridiculous court cases where people claim that their rights have been violated.
Courts and public bodies are legally bound to abide by the Human Rights Act icluding councils, hospitals, police etc
Yeah, I know, but .... >_< Nevermind.
Anyway, point is, we need to stop treading so softly around people. Someone is always going to be angered, annoyed, insulted, pissed off or something, by anything and everything that happens.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ December 1, 2007, 11:56 AMIf you transplant that scenario to London we'd have to be very careful though not to upset those 'machete wielding men' as we might be seen as being racist!
Something like that did happen in London and they were rightly and roundly condemned. I certainly don't remember any headlines winking and waving at the Merry Marauding Muslims.
The Teddy Bear case almost fades into insignificance (almost) with this example of the clearly demonstrable fairness of Sharia law.
An article from the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/17/wsaudi117.xml
"A Saudi woman has been sentenced to 200 lashes and six months prison after she was the victim of a gang rape."
Coming to a justice system near you. Along with 'honour' killings, etc. First in special case enclaves within British inner cities and then extending to the rest of the nation, if certain pressure groups get their way.
I take Frankie's point re: laws can be fair or unfair in whatever country you live in. And I agree with Aaron in that we as a society do need to stop apologising to the rest of the world for the past and deal with the present.
The first change I'd make to the Human Rights declaration is that an individual's rights is waived if they impinge on another person's rights. But saying that I'd like to meet the head of any country, East or West, that actually obeys them.
Quote: SlagA @ December 1, 2007, 7:32 PMThe Teddy Bear case almost fades into insignificance (almost) with this example of the clearly demonstrable fairness of Sharia law.
An article from the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/17/wsaudi117.xml
"A Saudi woman has been sentenced to 200 lashes and six months prison after she was the victim of a gang rape."
Sadly, I'm not surprised, and have heard of similar cases previously. Without reading the article, I'm guessing that the rationale is something along the lines of her "obviously" having been dressed "indecently" in order for men to want to rape her?
Quote: ajp29 @ December 1, 2007, 4:22 PMEr when did I say that?
You said it by implication.
Quote: ajp29 @ December 1, 2007, 4:22 PMI said we should be pragmatic. Did you read any of my post before you whipped out your sword of truth?
Yes of course I read your post! And?
Maybe you should read 'em through yourself BEFORE you post 'em? 
This isn't strictly relevant but it's just occurred to me that an Ayatollah would be the perfect PR man. Think how insignificant a writ would be if you could just fire off fatwahs against journalists and editors.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ December 1, 2007, 9:51 PMYou said it by implication.
I'm a silly sausage
I didn't imply anything about people in their own country not beong allowed their own laws 
Its unfair to misquote people
Confused of BSG
Quote: ajp29 @ December 1, 2007, 6:02 PM
can overturn it. They can do whatever they like. Its the system we have.
Parliament can scrap the Human Rights Act as they can, <what does that mean?>
, like all laws including EU regulations can overturn it <what does this mean?>
Sorry, I can't understand what you wrote due to ommisssion of some words?!
Thanks for the clarification! 
Quote: ajp29 @ December 1, 2007, 10:05 PMI didn't imply anything about people in their own country not beong allowed their own laws
Confused of BSG
I think you did imply that. You have lost me, I have read your original post and my response, and it seems OK to me? 
I'll have another look then, I would never want to misquote you mate and of course am sorry if I have!!!
At least I am not adding words you did not say to your quote, libellous allegations regarding you being an edible meat product!
I'm not going to argue over semantix, not least cos I can't spell it, but you said something like to take your argument further when I wasn't making an argument and then you said you can't have it both ways when I didn't even want it one way because I wasn't starting a debate. At least not the debate you wanted to have which, considering you were the only participant, you won.
As a guy who studied law for three years do you think I would ever say a country should not be allowed to have its own laws? But you've made it seem like I did and you're the sane one Is that clear enough? All I said was that Sharia is not a fair system just like you said some laws in this country aren't fair. I suppose by your logic British citizens shouldn't be allowed to have their own laws. You didn't say it but you implied it.
Annoyed of Angry Town 
Quote: ajp29 @ December 1, 2007, 10:24 PMI'm not going to argue over semantix, not least cos I can't spell it, but you said something like to take your argument further when I wasn't making an argument and then you said you can't have it both ways when I didn't even want it one way because I wasn't starting a debate. At least not the debate you wanted to have which, considering you were the only participant, you won.
As a guy who studied law for three years do you think I would ever say a country should not be allowed to have its own laws? But you've made it seem like I did and you're the sane one
Annoyed of Angry Town
I am sorry you are upset but you are making a lot of assumptions there!
I am at work so give me chance to defend myself lawyer!
Innocent until proved guilty I believe, or are you advocating Sharia law on this occasion?
Surprised amd puzzled by your animosity,
Frankie Rage
P.S. A lawyer who can't spell properly and doesn't complete sentences correctly so that they can be understood (see other post) won't inspire confidence in clients! Think on lawyer!
He's hungover.
Well, for a lawyer he's short on attention to detail in his own posts! Must be the sandwich he had before the 10 pints!
Dear AJP,
I have read through the posts I have made in this thread and your responses and I am satisfied with what I've said. If you are still angry, then fair enough.
Your main concern seems to be that you want it made clear that you do think other countries should be allowed to have their own laws.
I state cetegorically that if I have misrepresented your views on the above point as you allege then in spite of not having done so, I offer you an ex-gratia apology!
In addition, and to your advantage, I will ignore the FACT that you have doctored one of my posts and added words that I didn't actually write so as to give the impression that it was me wot wrote them, to whit "I'm a silly sausage" or words to that effect.
Now, how about another pint - my shout ...and here's my hand-shake offered in the time-honoured tradition of Englishmen!
Yours Up (rearrange into a well known phrase or saying)
Frankie Rage
BO (Arms)
Frankie once again you've blown something out of all proportion and shifted the goal posts to argue over something that you, not others, wanted to argue about, namely being a condesending prick.
So fine have your cake and eat it. The cake's called Mohammad and you can collect it in the Sudan