You have to see this!......

Britain 'racial hatred' laws are quite novel to say the least, and don't even try to investigate their 'Public Order' laws unless you have a full bottle of bex on standby.

Here is an example of where it all went....horribly wrong ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1291639/Of-course-offensive-But-black-councillor-called-Asian-rival-coconut-REAL-victim-common-sense.html

But in this story there is another interesting element.

"compensation for the slave trade" which being interpreted into UK Politics means "Lots of grants for 'black' projects"

Top of the agenda was the city's Legacy Commission, which funds ethnic minority projects and was created in part to atone for Bristol's role in the slave trade.

One of the MP's objected to such an idea.. was it a white BNP member ? nope... was it Enoch Powell back from the grave ? nope...
Perhaps it was Oswald Mosely also back from the dead ? Nope....

In fact it was an 'Asian' MP.

So, the question for discussion is "Are racial and religious hatred" laws being used as a blunt instrument for political control rather than protecting the weak and vulnerable?

Another "fundamentalist" right wing rant by Boaz/polycarp/agir. He's NOT interested in two way discussion. The purpose of his topics are to "preach USA style far right wing religious/political fundamentalism". His methodology is to talk AT you, not "with you", all done under the "guise" of inviting you to refute what he "believes" to be facts.

It's exactly the same with virtually everything he writes on this forum.

It gets him the attention he craves, and we all fall for the ploy (I'm even falling for it by even replying). It's a "game" he plays.

Boaz/polycarp/agir, I know it's hard for you to understand, but God is NOT politically affiliated with you.

Shirley Brown's comments were clearly racist, in the sense used
by "progressives".
That she was actually convicted is somewhat surprising, however,
given that she is black.
Wasn't the judge aware that only whites can be racist?
Looks like some judicial sensitivity training is in order.

Indeed Proxy :)

Benny..if this monitor of mine gives me further trouble.. I'm going to send it back...to YOU..

The topic.. just in case it has escaped you... is this:

"So, the question for discussion is "Are racial and religious hatred" laws being used as a blunt instrument for political control rather than protecting the weak and vulnerable?"

This is an important subject, and you might even have a positive contribution if you can put down the GLW for a moment.

C'mon...try.. there you go.

Just a waste of tax payers money, and I'll tell you why. Now both are in the UK, which is a white founded country, right! Now both women have dark or tanned skin, right! so the word Coconut where they are ( in the UK ) does in-fact describe the in,s and outs of the fruit! right! I believe both the two in fact are the only one,s that can get way with it, right! So Polly, how can it be racist?

And if Iam not mistaken, The fruit is brown on the out-side and white on the in-side, but I like to think we are all red in the middle and humans in general are racist all over.

God! its hard at the top.

TT.

I'm struggling to find the racial hatred in this case. Certainly, it is an attack on the lady's personal integrity, calling her a sellout. It also works on an assumption that black people should think and act in a certain way, while white people should think and act in another way. But I don't think it's racial hatred - just racial stereotyping.

Is it similar to referring to somebody's thoughts or actions as 'un-Australian'? Our politicians and various other high-profile figures have whipped this one out from time to time. The phrase also works on the assumption that Australians should think and act in a certain way, while non-Australians would not. Would we call this racial hatred, or would we call it narrow-minded stereotyping?