Nigel Farage, trapped in a pub

[SevenRivers]

It's not nonsense. It's a very basic commitment to treat people fairly and without discrimination. There is absolutely no problem with that. I can't put myself in the mindset of somebody who wouldn't sign up.

 

None of your business when I last signed it. You asked if I'd ever signed anything like it and I've answered your question.

 

So you used to discriminate against people before signing it I assume?

[YOLO]

OR

 

they just want all political parties to agree that racism in all its forms is wrong?

 

 

UKIP councillors would probably not vote in favour of introducing some kind of initiative such as "City of sanctuary"; quite rightly too.

 

This would be deemed racist and xenophobic though, by the global villagest zealots that dreamed up this pledge.

[I1L2T3]

So you used to discriminate against people before signing it I assume?

 

You assume wrong.

[Happ Hazzard]

So what was the point in signing it?

[dosxuk]

UKIP councillors would probably not vote in favour of introducing some kind of initiative such as "City of sanctuary"; quite rightly too.

 

This would be deemed racist and xenophobic though, by the global villagest zealots that dreamed up this pledge.

 

That would depend entirely on the reasons given for not voting in favour. A reason of "there's no money left in the barrel and we want to reopen Stocksbridge Leisure Centre with the cash this scheme would use" would be seen in a totally different light to "They're foreigners, they should bloomin' well bugger off back to where they came from and not expect us to be doing anything for them". One of them could easily been seen by most people, not just "global villagest zealots", as racist and/or xenophobic.

 

On the other hand, I suspect any request for a reason for such a decision from most UKIP representatives would be brushed off, or ignored and a complaint about attacking them unnecessarily being made in return.

[I1L2T3]

So what was the point in signing it?

 

Keep up. It's a requirement of my job. Signing it didn't change my behaviour. I was a strong believer in fairness and equality, and anti-racist anyway. Why wouldn't I sign it?

[Happ Hazzard]

Do you think people should be forced to sign things whether they agree with them or not?

[dosxuk]

Do you think people should be forced to sign things whether they agree with them or not?

 

I can't imagine many companies which have decided to implement a no-racism / no-discrimination policy would want to continue their employment of someone who basically comes out saying "I want to retain my right to be a racist and to discriminate against anyone I feel like". In which case, you're not forced to sign it, but they're not forced to continue their employment of you.

[I1L2T3]

Do you think people should be forced to sign things whether they agree with them or not?

 

If it's a requirement of a job and you want to stay in a job then yes they should do it. If the thing they are signing is sensible and neutral then it's not a problem. The thing I sign at work isn't lefty-ness gone mad. It's a basic set of policies that describe expected behaviour of employees at a major British company.

 

Nobody has yet pointed out exactly what is wrong with the Lincolnshire pledge.

[IainR]

E i e i o!!!!