Politically Correct or Incorrect Bullshit Of The Day

[steamjon]

Originally Posted by snowy25

The problem with the police, as seen in recent months with very a severe crime is that they often refuse to do anything for fear of being called racist. That is why so many people in the north of England were able to get away with horrific crimes for so long.

Two of the worst offenders from these northern towns and seemingly protected by the police were Cyril Smith and Jimmy Savile.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by beutelwolf

Moreover, it would end up as an unsolved crime in their crime statistics.

In the 1970s they might have said "toughen up lad!", but that does not cut it any more...

Yeah those crime stats, valuing quanity over quality has made lowering crime illusionary endeavor...

[snowy25]

Originally Posted by steamjon

Two of the worst offenders from these northern towns and seemingly protected by the police were Cyril Smith and Jimmy Savile.

That is slightly different though. Those two were protected at all levels from the very bottom to the very top. I am talking about gangs of a certain minority grooming and kidnapping and sexually abusing dozens of children. These people were only allowed to do this because the police and authorities did not want to get involved for fear of being labelled racist. Had someone at the time had the balls to stand up and take shit for being racist dozens of kids would never have been abused. All those that stood by and pissed around protecting their own asses should have gone to jail alongside the sick fucks that committed the actual crimes. Just like all those that knew about those 2 prominent figures should have gone to jail also for failing to protect the victims.

[Decadence]

Originally Posted by Devius

The Mail on Sunday reports that NHS doctors have been told not to call pregnant women "mothers-to-be" because it might offend transgender people.

Good grief. They act like they're one & the same. I'm still trying to find where it's written that anyone ever guaranteed everyone they'd never be offended by anything. I'm still waiting for the first instance of child birth among surgically created "women".

Originally Posted by diamelsx

Umm this is a trend other institutions are doing. The Ivy league seems to have taken the lead on this. Plus add to the fact that Notre Dame is a Catholic institution and even though their numbers have dropped significantly in recent years 52% of latinos identify as Catholic. Don't leave out the fact the leader of that church is latino an d last but not least close to 40% of self identified US Catholics are latino, you think the church may have an interest in accomodating those demands?

I had no idea the numbers were like this. According to the 2010 census, 16% of the American population were Hispanic, mostly Mexican. That's documented residents. Doesn't take into account millions of illegals. Around the same time, the Catholic Church reports that roughly 31% of it's nearly 70,000,000 members were of the same demographic.

Numbers notwithstanding, it's not an excuse for an organization to circumvent US law. A university picking and choosing what laws it'll live within is just as bad a former president who was famous for selective enforcement of the law.

It's funny that a couple of years ago, due to the constant unchecked invasion from Mexico, the State of Arizona tried passing it's own immigration laws because the Feds weren't interested in enforcing the existing ones. The outrage was predictable as was its source. It was struck down. You can't pass a law that contravenes a federal law.

Unless, of course, we're talking sanctuary cities/campuses/whatever. That's perfectly acceptable even though it contravenes the EXACT SAME LAWS. Double standards? Hypocrisy? Goddamn right.

Besides, at the end of the day, how many of the millions of basically illiterate people that sneak into this country are going to apply to and be accepted to a 40k/year private university? It's not a stretch that most of this crap is nothing more than misguided solutions desparately seeking a problem.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by Decadence

Numbers notwithstanding, it's not an excuse for an organization to circumvent US law. A university picking and choosing what laws it'll live within is just as bad a former president who was famous for selective enforcement of the law.

I hope ýou are kidding about this. The First Ammendment. You heard of it? Right? Religous organizations that object to laws on religous grounds have been known to get exemptions. Even the last president had to give in on the ACA on relligous grounds cause of the Hobby Lobby decision.

Originally Posted by Decadence

It's funny that a couple of years ago, due to the constant unchecked invasion from Mexico, the State of Arizona tried passing it's own immigration laws because the Feds weren't interested in enforcing the existing ones. The outrage was predictable as was its source. It was struck down. You can't pass a law that contravenes a federal law.

The Constitution Article VI Clause 2 explains this situation well enough...

Originally Posted by Decadence

Unless, of course, we're talking sanctuary cities/campuses/whatever. That's perfectly acceptable even though it contravenes the EXACT SAME LAWS. Double standards? Hypocrisy? Goddamn right.

The Constitution, the Courts, and History itself will be against you if you want to fight The Church.

Originally Posted by Decadence

Besides, at the end of the day, how many of the millions of basically illiterate people that sneak into this country are going to apply to and be accepted to a 40k/year private university? It's not a stretch that most of this crap is nothing more than misguided solutions desparately seeking a problem.

Whoa! You may want to dig deeper before speaking. Although numbers are undetermined but it has been known to be in the thousands and some of best universities this nation has to offer, and that includes the Ivy League. Here is a story of an undocumented girl graduating from Harvard last May.

[Old Jud]

Originally Posted by steamjon

Two of the worst offenders from these northern towns and seemingly protected by the police were Cyril Smith and Jimmy Savile.

Not just protected by the police, it goes much higher.
Both Smith and Savile had connections to the British 'establishment', the paedophile element of the establishment that (allegedly) included a now deceased member of the royal family.
The 'establishment' certainly didn't want anyone upsetting Smith and Savile just in case they decided to spill the beans on their obnoxious chums.

[Decadence]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

I hope ýou are kidding about this. The First Ammendment. You heard of it? Right? Religous organizations that object to laws on religous grounds have been known to get exemptions. Even the last president had to give in on the ACA on relligous grounds cause of the Hobby Lobby decision.

Sorry, but I don't look at Notre Dame University as primarily a religious institution. I'm pretty sure that on their articles of incorporation they're listed as a university rather than a church. But, even conceding the old notion of the Catholic church giving sanctuary, we'll give them a pass for the moment. But as you pointed out:

Originally Posted by diamelsx

The Ivy league seems to have taken the lead on this.

Harvard and Columbia have taken similar stances. They have no religious affiliation and are normally champions of the secular progressive movement. As there's no way to classify these institiutions as religious organizations, where's the basis for giving them a pass at continually ignoring federal law?

Originally Posted by diamelsx

The Constitution, the Courts, and History itself will be against you if you want to fight The Church.

Bollocks.

This isn't a fight against the church. There are over 200 cities in America that have classified themselves sanctuary cities that ignore federal laws when it comes to prosecuting illegals. If we listen to the "separation of church and state" crowd, there's no way in hell these cities fall under the heading of "church". Further, these cities also instruct sworn police officers to NOT uphold the very laws they swore to defend.

That's sedition. IMO far worse than Arizona trying to pass their own laws. Again, hypocrisy reigns... wanting to uphold laws is swatted down; wanton, intentional disregard of law is lauded and encouraged.

Until now.

[Decadence]

Originally Posted by Devius

The Mail on Sunday reports that NHS doctors have been told not to call pregnant women "mothers-to-be" because it might offend transgender people.

It just occurred to me that Monty Python addressed the LGBTQIABCDEFGHIJK issue quite well nearly 40 years ago: I want you to call me Loretta

Genius from start to finish.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by Decadence

Harvard and Columbia have taken similar stances. They have no religious affiliation and are normally champions of the secular progressive movement. As there's no way to classify these institiutions as religious organizations, where's the basis for giving them a pass at continually ignoring federal law?

DTR. Columbia & Harvard are affiliated with the Church of England and the Puritan Church respectfully. As a matter of fact John Harvard, for which the latter school was named was a clergyman.

Originally Posted by Decadence

This isn't a fight against the church. There are over 200 cities in America that have classified themselves sanctuary cities that ignore federal laws when it comes to prosecuting illegals. If we listen to the "separation of church and state" crowd, there's no way in hell these cities fall under the heading of "church". Further, these cities also instruct sworn police officers to NOT uphold the very laws they swore to defend.

That's sedition. IMO far worse than Arizona trying to pass their own laws. Again, hypocrisy reigns... wanting to uphold laws is swatted down; wanton, intentional disregard of law is lauded and encouraged.

Until now.

IWho said anything about Cities? We were talking about religous institutions. Cities maybe a different story, but don't bet the farm on it. If enough multinationals & banks are not on board then then it will be interesting to who will win out...

[lothian]

This is why I now identify as Shootmenowogender .

https://youtu.be/yO5Hdidlh2g