RJRB Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Why do you believe that? Have you got any examples of this happening? I bet you haven't. What you betting.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 UK repealing the HRA? Won't happen, for various reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitisbad Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 you should be free to do whatever you want so long as it doesn't impact upon anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 The nature of human rights is that they aren't consequentialist, they are the exact opposite. They are applied solidly and consistently, and the outcome can differ massively. Sometimes that is fine, and sometimes the outcome can seem massively unfair. Your option would be to balance infavour of the best outcome, which could sometimes mean that somebody doesn't have the "right to a family life" - which would go against human rights. It's a very old debate about justice essentially. In the context of the legislation in question that is mainly dead wrong. Torture is the only human rights breach which is never permitted to be engaged in under any circumstances by the HRA. Certainly article 8 is not an absolute right - if it was we couldn't send anyone to jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 you should be free to do whatever you want so long as it doesn't impact upon anyone else. Yes- that's precisely the UK's legal system. Contrast the Europeans'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 People like Teresa May are always in favour of anything which errodes the rights and working conditions of the lower orders. The reasons she cites for wanting rid of it are a sham. She is just pursuing the traditonal tory policy of consolidating the position of the rich and powerful. Of course, even the most die hard old school tories have more sense than to come out and say it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Are terrorists and illegal immigrants always part of the lower orders, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bojangles Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 . . . . . I believe that others who have actively plotted against the uk population,and preach hatred against the west are also protected by the human rights issues. . . . . Why do you believe that? Have you got any examples of this happening? I bet you haven't. How many do you want? Independent - Human rights halts Abu Hamza extradition. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/human-rights-court-halts-hamza-extradition-2021528.html Mail - Human rights stop Hamza being stripped of UK passport. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326906/Hate-preacher-Abu-Hamza-wins-human-rights-bid-UK-passport.html Those 2 came up in 5 seconds on Google - type in the name of any other recent terrorist and you'll see how they, too, used the HR farce to dodge justice or at the very least cost the taxpayer more by complicating the preceedings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big time Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 This thread was crying out for a poll ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big time Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Totally don't agree. If you read what the act covers it is not just about our capacity to deal with criminals and deportees. The act enshrines many basic entitlements that affect our everyday lives. I don't think we should wish that swept away just because it causes Mrs may a few procedural difficulties. In fact the idea of doing so is plain ridiculous. It covers: the right to life freedom from torture and degrading treatment freedom from slavery and forced labour the right to liberty the right to a fair trial the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it the right to respect for private and family life freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs freedom of expression freedom of assembly and association the right to marry and to start a family the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property the right to an education the right to participate in free elections the right not to be subjected to the death penalty Ooo yes, the tories would stop us participating in elections and starting a family if not for the human rights act preventing them from doing so You insult peoples intelligence by saying that doing away with the human rights act will lead to a restriction of any of the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.