Quote: A Horseradish @ 19th May 2015, 10:44 PM BST
I notice you don't have anything to say about the inherent discrimination in economic inequality.
I wouldn't agree with the banning of pub signs as I feel that history can't be rewritten. This one is trickier than the fighting cocks. But I think it is quite helpful to acknowledge that even in something as barbaric as early racial prejudice, there could be glimpses of humanity. The people in this picture are guilty of nothing other than being naive and they could possibly be kindly in intention. It was the state machine which was responsible for nastiness in the climate including keeping normal folk uneducated.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11389651/Village-pub-embroiled-in-race-row-over-sign-showing-black-boy-being-scrubbed-in-bath-by-white-couple.html
Give us a chance, mate.
If you add something on after posting, then I might not necessarily see it before I've posted an initial reply.
As for the racial issue, in German language there is a wonderful current example. The 'Mohrenkopf'.
You may know of Tunnock's tea cakes? They're sort of chocolate covered marsh mallowy things. they'r every popular in the German speaking world. In German this type of sweet is usually called a 'Moor's head' (Mohrenkopf).
This is now widely being changed because it's 'racist'.
But nobody can quite explain what is supposed to be racist about it.
A jam filled doughnut is a 'Berliner', one particular sausage is a 'Wiener' (a citizen of Vienna) and another is a 'Krakauer' (Krakovian).
Nobody would call these racist.
But a 'Moor's head' supposedly is racist. It seems the mere connotation with anything black is now deemed politically incorrect, whether there is anything racist about it or not.
Quote: A Horseradish @ 19th May 2015, 10:57 PM BST
No he wouldn't need to oblige there because the BNP are rightly not covered by anti-discrimination legislation.
Well, it's hard to see how anti-discrimination legislation really has covered the gay marriage cake.
You see, the baker didn't refuse to trade with the customer because he was gay.
He has served him before and since. (Hard to argue discrimination in my mind)
He wasn't even refusing to make a gay marriage cake.
But he didn't want to produce a cake with a pro-gay-marriage slogan.
Now sure, the court found that anti-discrimination law applied.
But the baker, rightly in my opinion, argued he was being forced to produce a political message with which he disagreed.
Hence my BNP example.