The UK is Out - New PM - and whither now for Article 50
This discussion has been closed.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.5K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 33 General Chatter
- 7 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 394 Fun & Games
- 102 BA Predictor Threads
- 32 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 289 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 112 Current West Ham
- 199 Men's First Team
- 3 Women's Team
- 11 PL2 & Academy
- 31 Management & Board
- 15 Stadium & Training Ground
- 25 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 389 Match Threads
- 61 MOTM
- 8 West Ham Nostalgia
- 34 Former Players and Staff
- 4 Past Games & Glories
- 37 Transfers
- 46 Transfer Speculation
- 87 Completed Transfers
- 54 Internationals
- 47 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 117 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 267 Other Teams & Matches
- 25 Other Players & Staff
Comments
Taught what?
That people who are attracted to members of the same sex are equal both morally and under the law, and should be respected as such and not discriminated against, feared or mocked?
Why on earth wouldn't you teach them that, amongst other things?
What would you do if one of their friends had same sex parents?
Tell them it was a sin and they would go to hell?
Or tell them that love was what was most important?
And the BFG who mooses about with dreams.
Then there's that talking badger who has to bale his frog mate out of jail after he was caugh speeding.
But don't tell the children about love!!
Jeeze ;doh
The question is simply which views are to be held as morally unacceptable.
As an extreme example, very few people have any doubt that adult sex with children is wrong.
In my view, bigotry towards homosexuals or people of other races is morally unacceptable, and someone saying 'well that's what I think' doesn't justify it.
Reading the specific posts from Pards, I find it a real stretch to interpret them as bigotry against homosexuals and I trust that is not the intent or a reflection of the discourse.
Expressions of true bigotry are certainly unacceptable.
I wasn't necessarily implying that pards held bigoted views; I was simply pointing out that there were very many circumstances where 'That's my opinion/view' is not a justifiable excuse.
I suggest you check your PMs.
Don't think what is on the curriculum?
This all started with a post showing BozJo's support for section 28, and pards agreeing with his idea that the equality of gay marriage with heterosexual marriage should not be accepted or taught in schools. The simple fact is that in the UK, under the law, gay marriage has the same status as 'straight' marriage. What is the benefit of NOT telling children that?
Some children are gay; some children will have gay parents. Not telling your children that that is perfectly OK seems to me to be wrong.
I disagree that it is impossible to do the 'right' thing with parenting.
The right thing, surely, is to demonstrate that your children are loved and lovable unconditionally, and to teach them that other people deserve respect (unless proved conclusively by their actions that they don't), regardless of their sexual orientation, colour or creed.
I didn't find it a challenge to do that.
;hmm
If schools teach that same sex marriage is as relevant and acceptable as hetrosexual marriage, do they also accept and teach that living together outside marriage is also wholly acceptable, I.certainly hope so.
Or I am most certainly damned.
I do agree that it is the primary role of parents that they demonstrate to their children that they are loved and loved unconditionally.
Even in the case where a child has committed a heinous act, they absolutely have to face the consequences of their actions, but they still must have the support of their parents, no matter how difficult that may be.
Ho hum
Your right its not difficult to...
" is to demonstrate that your children are loved and lovable unconditionally, and to teach them that other people deserve respect (unless proved conclusively by their actions that they don't), regardless of their sexual orientation, colour or creed."
& this is exactly what i do.
I do disagree with including sexual orientation or sexual education as part of a primary school curriculum, if they ask or make comments that require an explanation i will explain. but i agree with Pards, let kids be kids, tooth fairies and all you only get to be that innocent once.
I think you will find however that many peoples views differ from ours with regard to acceptance whether it be bigotry, religion or culture hence my "impossible to be right" comment
I can't see that sex education is part of Primary PSHE.
The only thing I could find was: So, I doubt if Primary schools have planned sex education lessons.
However, I can easily see how the issue might come up, especially with older Primary children, and I would expect any teacher to deal with the issue, which would include reflecting current law, imo.
The things is, a far as I can tell, Primary schools don't make it a teaching point.
Perhaps the confusion lies in people using the generic term 'schools'?
Tangentially - this conversation started after BozJon's appointment to the Cabinet, and a posting of his views on the issue.
#youcanalwaysblameBozJon
;angry
Suzanne - out of interest did they base that on any factual information or is it just based on supposition? Why would applying for a visa make any difference, surely if they want to come they will fill out some documentation in good time - or is that the problem, getting them to fill out the visa application?
I would assume these days it can all be done on-line and I am sure they are more computer literate than I am, but even I can quickly navigate my way around the Gov't website's to fill in forms which are then submitted and quickly processes.
I notice they also use the words "Likely" and "Short Term" - I would disagree, if anything there will probably be a short term increase as more will want to get in before the negotiations and changes are made - I think the reality is that the visa system for EU students will be phased in, with one phase being for existing students for their remaining time and one for new students after a certain date. For those who want to stay on after for work purposes, I would like to think there will be a system in place where six months before they graduate, there will be a way of registering this so that the student visa can be converted to a work visa or something.
NOTE: The above is an opinion only, mixed with thoughts of what I would do, as it seems the most sensible approach - I have no knowledge of Gov't plans or insider knowledge.
On a side note: I have been to visit several of our clients since the Leave vote who trade with Europe and the rest of the world, they have all reported increases in trade (mainly due to the fall in the value of the pound I would guess), one said they normally do about 30K per day but have been regularly doing over 50k per day and one day did more than 65K, which was the best in their 10yrs of trading.
Based on this I would say there is some reasons for optimism.
I think the main issue would be fees. They now pay same fees as UK students but probably will have to pay the much higher foreign student fee.
It's all based on actual facts.
Thanks for that, I can see the reason it is more stringent, but can it not be done in a way where there if a country is deemed a "low Risk" then the visa process cannot be simplified? I know where there is a "high risk" country then it are increased checks etc. both for people going to them as well as those coming from them.
I'll get more actual facts next Wednesday after I have attend an emergency meeting with the School of Medicine & Dentistry.