F*ck the Tories: a Thread Dedicated to Suella Braverman

[icowden]

Stop lying.

You are like a broken record. Just because someone says something that you believe to be untrue and they believe is true, that does not make them a liar. It's called a different viewpoint.

They are only a liar if they intend to deceive you. Aurora does not.

 

[monkers]

You are like a broken record. Just because someone says something that you believe to be untrue and they believe is true, that does not make them a liar. It's called a different viewpoint.

They are only a liar if they intend to deceive you. Aurora does not.

Incorrect, I am not the only audience member here, Aurora intends to deceive me and others. I haven't been the only person to notice.

If a person makes a mistake then I have no problem with it, but after being provided with links to the truth, when they either keep repeating 'the error' it becomes a lie. No matter how frequently a lie is repeated, it remains a lie. It should never be allowed to become the truth. Further when a person tells lies about me, I will speak up and call them a liar whoever they are. Aurora lies lots and uses all other kinds of deceits, and I'm not the only who has been on this thread to notice.

 

[classic33]

There's no blanket ban in the Equality Act but there is no case by case required in every sense either. A gay men's choir doesn't have to assess each individual woman who wants to join. They can exclude them for simply being women. Likewise a school doesn't have to decide on an individual basis which male pupils who identify as girls can use female facilities. It would be unworkable for service providers to operate on an individual case by case basis and the law doesn't require them to.

If challenged, they'd have to prove that any exclusion was lawful.

As for service providers, one I do know of are placing the unisex disabled toilets within the women's toilets. They were challenged over their non provision, and their answer was to place them there.
They are now looking at unisex toilets only.

 

[classic33]

Incorrect, I am not the only audience member here, Aurora intends to deceive me and others. I haven't been the only person to notice.

If a person makes a mistake then I have no problem with it, but after being provided with links to the truth, when they either keep repeating 'the error' it becomes a lie. No matter how frequently a lie is repeated, it remains a lie. It should never be allowed to become the truth. Further when a person tells lies about me, I will speak up and call them a liar whoever they are. Aurora lies lots and uses all other kinds of deceits, and I'm not the only who has been on this thread to notice.

Convince yourself it's true, and it makes it easier to believe. Say it for long enough and you stand a chance of persuading others it is true.

There's also the point at which it ceases to be a lie, because enough believe it to be true.

 

[monkers]

We were having a conversation about schools.

I said that the EqA was not the only act, but in particular the Children's Act and the Public Sector Duty Act among others apply.

The AS response .. gay men's choir. In the case of the gay men's choir it should be obvious to every man and his dog that neither the Public Sector Duty Act or the Children's Act apply.

Therefore AS just returns to some examination of a clause in the EqA as before - pretending that the Children's Act or the Public Sector Duty Act don't apply to schools, where there is a legal duty and usually an school-held ambition to build a kind and inclusive community.

We also have some pretence that blanket bans are available under the EqA. High Court judgements have ruled otherwise. The Commission has said that the correct action is to proceed on case-by-case basis. Quotes have been made, links provided, yet it continues.

Honestly most days it feels like teaching a pig to sing.

 

[AuroraSaab]

We were having a conversation about schools.

I said that the EqA was not the only act, but in particular the Children's Act and the Public Sector Duty Act among others apply.

These have sweet fa to say about how schools should deal with children with body dysphoria but you constantly invoke them, the UN, the EU, and Uncle Tom Cobley and all, as though they take precedent over UK legislation that does tell schools how to balance the rights of various groups.

We also have some pretence that blanket bans are available under the EqA. High Court judgements have ruled otherwise. The Commission has said that the correct action is to proceed on case-by-case basis. Quotes have been made, links provided, yet it continues.

And yet everyday people are excluded from stuff because their exclusion meets the criteria of the EA, whether it's on age, race, sex, or any other of the protected characteristics. No individual case by case required.

Honestly most days it feels like teaching a pig to sing.

Ah the pompous arrogance that we've come to know and love. You honestly can't have a single discussion without descending into abuse. It must be exhausting being you.

 

[monkers]

These have sweet fa to say about how schools should deal with children with body dysphoria but you constantly invoke them, the UN, the EU, and Uncle Tom Cobley and all, as though they take precedent over UK legislation that does tell schools how to balance the rights of various groups.



And yet everyday people are excluded from stuff because their exclusion meets the criteria of the EA, whether it's on age, race, sex, or any other of the protected characteristics. No individual case by case required.



Ah the pompous arrogance that we've come to know and love. You honestly can't have a single discussion without descending into abuse. It must be exhausting being you.

Because you are an idiot. It doesn't matter how many quotes, how many links, how many High Court judgement, the bigoted pronouncements of Aurora Saab shall be supreme.

I prefer the High Court because it has actual entitlement to find for effective remedy. You however prefer guidelines from the EHRC whose independence was stolen by Liz Truss. So here it is from Melanie Field formerly of the EHRC ...

Melanie Field, then the EHRC’s joint-acting chief, quoted the EHRC’s statutory code of practice that supports a “case-by-case basis” in response to fears that “indirect discrimination can be justified on a blanket basis”.

Go on keep going ...

 

[Bromptonaut]

I knew Melanie Field c1989. She was a sprog EO on my team. The girl done well..

 

[AuroraSaab]

You however prefer guidelines from the EHRC whose independence was stolen by Liz Truss. So here it is from Melanie Field formerly of the EHRC ...

When you think the EHRC agree with you you like them, when they don't you think they are biased....

 

[monkers]

These have sweet fa to say about how schools should deal with children with body dysphoria but you constantly invoke them, the UN, the EU, and Uncle Tom Cobley and all, as though they take precedent over UK legislation that does tell schools how to balance the rights of various groups.

'Body dysphoria' is not a protected characteristic in law, but 'gender reassignment' is. The Public Sector Duty Act does apply to all of the nine characteristics.

I do not 'invoke' anything. In this context, i do not 'invoke' from the EU, or any uncle be they Uncle Tom Cobley or any other. Yes, I've made use of reference to our human rights under the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. The UK is a founder member of the UN and we remain members. UN law places obligations on member states to ensure that it fulfills its duties under their membership. The UK was a founder member of the Council of Europe which is an official observer of the UN. The 30 articles of the UN are pretty much copied and pasted into the Council of Europe, and pretty much everywhere else. The Council of Europe includes the European Court of Human Rights. This court is in effect the supreme arbiter of human rights in the UK. It is supreme over our own supreme court. You make not like that, nonetheless it remains a fact. Leaving the EU had no effect on the UK needing to adhere to rulings made in the ECtHR. UK courts are required to consider these rulings in addition to UK law. You may not like that either, but there it is.

I'm pleased to see that you've now started to use the word 'balance'. That's progress.

 

[monkers]

When you think the EHRC agree with you you like them, when they don't you think they are biased....

I think the EHRC is now biased. They are supposed to be an independent body, but that was frustrated when Liz Truss made a political appointment of someone with a know anti-trans stance. It was, but now it isn't. Melanie Field is not that person. My argument therefore is not with her.

I used the EHRC because you reject everything else, but now it should be clear to you that even your choice of source does not agree with you.

Blanket bans are out, case-by-case assessments are in.

 

[icowden]

Because you are an idiot. It doesn't matter how many quotes, how many links, how many High Court judgement, the bigoted pronouncements of Aurora Saab shall be supreme.

And the rest of us have to put up with your constant personal attacks and pushing of pro-trans propaganda without any supporting evidence to back it up.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could just have a discussion. But of course you don't seem to want that any more.

 

[monkers]

And the rest of us have to put up with your constant personal attacks and pushing of pro-trans propaganda without any supporting evidence to back it up.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could just have a discussion. But of course you don't seem to want that any more.

What I quote is the law, this is not 'pro-trans propaganda'. I also draw on personal experience as a former school and college manager. If you'd just learn to read it would be a good start, by that I don't just mean having the ability to say the words out loud.

The personal attacks are not unidirectional so don't play the innocent with me.

 

[Bromptonaut]

And the rest of us have to put up with your constant personal attacks and pushing of pro-trans propaganda without any supporting evidence to back it up.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could just have a discussion. But of course you don't seem to want that any more.

Monkers is one of the people here who can support her posts with evidence.

Others, you included IIRC, appear to almost wilfully misunderstand - I'm thinking self ID here.

 

[Fab Foodie]

I thought we had a seperate thread for this subject?