I saw a banner advertisment on a London bus go by as I was walking Wofgang the dog in my local park. It read :
'Some People are gay , get over it!'
I found it quite amusing as the bus was half full of people looking bored , staring into space and looking out at the world.
This whole campaign by Stonewall , the homosexual activist group has stirred up controversy to the point of a reactionary bus advert by a group called 'Anglican Mainstream' . Which read :
'‘Not gay! Ex-gay,Post-gay and Proud. Get over it!’ .
I had not seen neither of them until now , after I started to look for them . There was much talk about the second one of the two on the chat show radio stations. Funnily the second was banned before being shown, by Boris Johnosn the London mayor. According to some it was his opportunity of capturing the homosexual vote in good time for the May , London mayoral election .Johnson said:
"London is one of the most tolerant cities in the world and intolerant of intolerance. It is clearly offensive to suggest that being gay is an illness that someone recovers from and I am not prepared to have that suggestion driven around London on our buses."
So then the homosexual advertising campaign won , the other was banned. What sense can one make of all this. I am in favour and always have been in peoples rights not to be persecuted on grounds of their politics , race , religion , sexual orientation etc even when it was not fashionable, . yet what when two or more of those values clash and freedom of speech is part of the equation that ends up being the casualty?
One must be free to worship and have religious beliefs, not to be persecuted or even criticised for their religious beliefs and practice. Alternatively does not one have the right to think what they want and say what they want , even if this can be offensive to another portion of the population.
Does it not occur to some , that religion itself can be offensive to some atheists or even agnostics? Or that one religion is obviously ,at logger heads with all opposing religions , as the nature of each religion is that its own particular brand owns the monopoly of the truth about life , death and the universe ? Whatever the religious say about accepting the other religion is not true.Have a conversation with a religious person and ask them what they think of the other religion and you will find at one point that:
' Yes Islam is fine , but it is written that only if you accept Christ as your saviour and son of God can you enter the kingdom of heaven...' or
' Christ is okay , respect him as one of the great prophets , but he who came after him , Mohammed , he is the final prophet of God and what he says supersedes all other statements made by those other 'lesser ' prophets ....' and so on ad infinitum .
Some forms of religion teach that to be homosexual is a sin and punishable by eternal damnation , you know the ones : , most of the so called ' great faiths ' ( a term used by the wily politicians ) or mainstream religions at one point make such references , Yet thankfully many of those that subscribe to those religions do not always dwell on such lines of their scriptures and show tolerance ; another concept that is often mentioned in their beloved scriptures.
In fact one can be a faithful follower of any religion and be able , to select , mix and match various tennets of that religion and come to their own conclusions. I think these are the religious people that I respect for having some of their own judgements and interpret things for themselves rather than having a religious 'expert' telling them the 'truth' and interpreting a pile of old manuscripts compiled together and sold as a self contained complete book of everything.
Excellent concept that: a package in the form of a book, a talisman , that you carry around with you and has an answer for everything! I have been looking for that all my life but came to the conclusion , that valuable knowledge can be gleaned from reading many different books , listening to many different philosophies , religions, looking at art etc , but most of all by life exprience , the will to learn and challenge ones own views , accepting that not knowing , and uncertainty is the reality that most of us find difficult to accept . But most of all the ongoing exploration and search for truth or truths whilst doubting whether there is one or many truths and whether this or these truths once understood are purely one's own truths and therefore open to further scrutiny ...That is a philosophical way of life rather than having a fixed belief tantamount to a collective delusion .
So was it right to have one of these opposing views advertised on on a London suburban omnibus ? or both of them or does the fact of offending one group then disallow the other group for expressing their view?
Freedom of speech : where does it start and where does it end?. It is funny how many left wing socialists are so zealous in protecting peoples rights that they are willing to go out and lynch a member of a fascist party for airing their views and they defend this abbhorent action in the name of democracy which by definition makes provision for such freedom of speech.
So the second advert was banned , So the homosexual has the freedom of expressing his / her views , nature life style or whatever . The Christian or more generally any religious fundamentalist , has the right to practise their religion and not to be descriminated against. Yet both have the right to be protected and both have the right to express their views eventhough the one's freedom of expression automatically clashes with the other's right not to be descriminated against. Therein lies the paradox of freedom of speech and the bizarre behaviour of the ' Ant-fascist league' demonstrators in various parts of the country this year ' The anti fascists ' , who in their altruistic and pathological love for freedom of speech and democracy were happy to use over whelming physical force to silence memebrs of the 'English Defence League ' fascists from expressing their views ,It seemed they were even preapared to severely assault or kill in the name of peace , freedom of speech and democracy.
So as I see the one ' acceptable ' banner on the bus roll by : ''Some People are gay , get over it!' I smile to myself as I look at the bored faces looking out at anything that captures their attention away from the dull experience of being driven around on a routine journey by bus. Even the sight of a bald headed dog walker attracted their attention . Yet as I look back at them caged in a metallic mobile , freely marketed advertising bill board , it struck me that the above statement seemed to be attributed to or somehow otherwise connected with them. visually it appeared that it was their statement. I don't know if it looked like that to any one else. And I asked my self , did anybody ask the passengers whether they would like to be driven around with such statements attached to them?
'Get over it some people just happen to be riding on a bus carrying statements that do not necessarily reflect their views'
'Some People are gay , get over it!'
I found it quite amusing as the bus was half full of people looking bored , staring into space and looking out at the world.
This whole campaign by Stonewall , the homosexual activist group has stirred up controversy to the point of a reactionary bus advert by a group called 'Anglican Mainstream' . Which read :
'‘Not gay! Ex-gay,Post-gay and Proud. Get over it!’ .
I had not seen neither of them until now , after I started to look for them . There was much talk about the second one of the two on the chat show radio stations. Funnily the second was banned before being shown, by Boris Johnosn the London mayor. According to some it was his opportunity of capturing the homosexual vote in good time for the May , London mayoral election .Johnson said:
"London is one of the most tolerant cities in the world and intolerant of intolerance. It is clearly offensive to suggest that being gay is an illness that someone recovers from and I am not prepared to have that suggestion driven around London on our buses."
So then the homosexual advertising campaign won , the other was banned. What sense can one make of all this. I am in favour and always have been in peoples rights not to be persecuted on grounds of their politics , race , religion , sexual orientation etc even when it was not fashionable, . yet what when two or more of those values clash and freedom of speech is part of the equation that ends up being the casualty?
One must be free to worship and have religious beliefs, not to be persecuted or even criticised for their religious beliefs and practice. Alternatively does not one have the right to think what they want and say what they want , even if this can be offensive to another portion of the population.
Does it not occur to some , that religion itself can be offensive to some atheists or even agnostics? Or that one religion is obviously ,at logger heads with all opposing religions , as the nature of each religion is that its own particular brand owns the monopoly of the truth about life , death and the universe ? Whatever the religious say about accepting the other religion is not true.Have a conversation with a religious person and ask them what they think of the other religion and you will find at one point that:
' Yes Islam is fine , but it is written that only if you accept Christ as your saviour and son of God can you enter the kingdom of heaven...' or
' Christ is okay , respect him as one of the great prophets , but he who came after him , Mohammed , he is the final prophet of God and what he says supersedes all other statements made by those other 'lesser ' prophets ....' and so on ad infinitum .
Some forms of religion teach that to be homosexual is a sin and punishable by eternal damnation , you know the ones : , most of the so called ' great faiths ' ( a term used by the wily politicians ) or mainstream religions at one point make such references , Yet thankfully many of those that subscribe to those religions do not always dwell on such lines of their scriptures and show tolerance ; another concept that is often mentioned in their beloved scriptures.
In fact one can be a faithful follower of any religion and be able , to select , mix and match various tennets of that religion and come to their own conclusions. I think these are the religious people that I respect for having some of their own judgements and interpret things for themselves rather than having a religious 'expert' telling them the 'truth' and interpreting a pile of old manuscripts compiled together and sold as a self contained complete book of everything.
Excellent concept that: a package in the form of a book, a talisman , that you carry around with you and has an answer for everything! I have been looking for that all my life but came to the conclusion , that valuable knowledge can be gleaned from reading many different books , listening to many different philosophies , religions, looking at art etc , but most of all by life exprience , the will to learn and challenge ones own views , accepting that not knowing , and uncertainty is the reality that most of us find difficult to accept . But most of all the ongoing exploration and search for truth or truths whilst doubting whether there is one or many truths and whether this or these truths once understood are purely one's own truths and therefore open to further scrutiny ...That is a philosophical way of life rather than having a fixed belief tantamount to a collective delusion .
So was it right to have one of these opposing views advertised on on a London suburban omnibus ? or both of them or does the fact of offending one group then disallow the other group for expressing their view?
Freedom of speech : where does it start and where does it end?. It is funny how many left wing socialists are so zealous in protecting peoples rights that they are willing to go out and lynch a member of a fascist party for airing their views and they defend this abbhorent action in the name of democracy which by definition makes provision for such freedom of speech.
So the second advert was banned , So the homosexual has the freedom of expressing his / her views , nature life style or whatever . The Christian or more generally any religious fundamentalist , has the right to practise their religion and not to be descriminated against. Yet both have the right to be protected and both have the right to express their views eventhough the one's freedom of expression automatically clashes with the other's right not to be descriminated against. Therein lies the paradox of freedom of speech and the bizarre behaviour of the ' Ant-fascist league' demonstrators in various parts of the country this year ' The anti fascists ' , who in their altruistic and pathological love for freedom of speech and democracy were happy to use over whelming physical force to silence memebrs of the 'English Defence League ' fascists from expressing their views ,It seemed they were even preapared to severely assault or kill in the name of peace , freedom of speech and democracy.
So as I see the one ' acceptable ' banner on the bus roll by : ''Some People are gay , get over it!' I smile to myself as I look at the bored faces looking out at anything that captures their attention away from the dull experience of being driven around on a routine journey by bus. Even the sight of a bald headed dog walker attracted their attention . Yet as I look back at them caged in a metallic mobile , freely marketed advertising bill board , it struck me that the above statement seemed to be attributed to or somehow otherwise connected with them. visually it appeared that it was their statement. I don't know if it looked like that to any one else. And I asked my self , did anybody ask the passengers whether they would like to be driven around with such statements attached to them?
'Get over it some people just happen to be riding on a bus carrying statements that do not necessarily reflect their views'
