427 Million Pounds A Year Spent On Diversity Training

[Chekhov]

9 minutes ago, Mister M said:

Insofar as long as what people think doesn't affect their behaviour then I agree with you. However, we do know that what people believe does affect their actions.

For example as I said earlier people from BME communities are more likely to be found dead while in police custody, they are more likely to be sectioned, and face discrimination in wider society.

There was a case not so long ago of a registrar who lost her job because her religious beliefs meant that she refused to marry a same sex couple.

If it is a simple matter of common sense that we shouldn't discriminate on the basis of a person's characteristics, why does discrimination still exist in our public services?

Whether that is "wrong" or "right" is a matter of opinion.

We are being told what our opinions should be.

It's 1984 writ large, and people cannot even see it.

There really are none so blind.

 

 Quite apart from anything we are supposed to have freedom of religion belief. If the couple in question are that bothered they can just find another registrar.

 

>>If it is a simple matter of common sense that we shouldn't discriminate on the basis of a person's characteristics<<

 

How far do you want to go with that one ?

I am sure a propensity to adulterous behaviour, or "playing the field" generally, is probably, at least partly, genetic.

Are we to say people have a right to do that and should not be criticised either "as that is their characteristic" ?

Edited December 22, 2022 by Chekhov

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, crookesey said:

Please quote a selection of ‘The Plenty’.

You should know what you have written,

 

[Guest sibon]

8 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Whether that is "wrong" or "right" is a matter of opinion.

We are being told what our opinions should be.

It's 1984 writ large, and people cannot even see it.

There really are none so blind.

 

 Quite apart from anything we are supposed to have freedom of religion belief. If the couple in question are that bothered they can just find another registrar.

 

Not so long ago, you were whinging about your kid’s school holding online parents’ evenings. 
 

If you were that bothered, you could have just found a different school.

[Mister M]

10 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Whether that is "wrong" or "right" is a matter of opinion.

We are being told what our opinions should be.

It's 1984 writ large, and people cannot even see it.

There really are none so blind.

 

 Quite apart from anything we are supposed to have freedom of religion belief. If the couple in question are that bothered they can just find another registrar.

 

>>If it is a simple matter of common sense that we shouldn't discriminate on the basis of a person's characteristics<<

 

How far do you want to go with that one ?

I am sure a propensity to adulterous behaviour, or "playing the field" generally, is probably, at least partly, genetic.

Are we to say people have a right to do that and should not be criticised either "as that is their characteristic" ?

Why should it be down to the couple to find another registrar?

Anyway a judge ruled that it was right that she lost her job, as she could not and point blank refused to fulfill her contractual obligations.

With regards to personal characteristics, I'm happy with the provisions under the Equality Act.

[crookesey]

2 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

You should know what you have written,

 

Yes I do, in-fact I’ve still  got a RIGHT good memory LEFT between these old ears.

 

Have a RIGHT good Christmas.

[Chekhov]

3 hours ago, sibon said:

Not so long ago, you were whinging about your kid’s school holding online parents’ evenings. 

If you were that bothered, you could have just found a different school.

Typical Sibon cobblers.

I don't even know where to start with this rubbish, but lets talk objective practicality. Ones child goes to school every day for years on end, not once a lifetime.

But, as it happens, the school had a poll and a majority of parents wanted face to face parents evenings anyway.

[Chekhov]

3 hours ago, Mister M said:

Why should it be down to the couple to find another registrar?

Anyway a judge ruled that it was right that she lost her job, as she could not and point blank refused to fulfill her contractual obligations.

With regards to personal characteristics, I'm happy with the provisions under the Equality Act.

I note you did not directly answer this point. I am not interested in what some virtue signalling woke act says, I want to know what you think  :

 

>>If it is a simple matter of common sense that we shouldn't discriminate on the basis of a person's characteristics<<

 

Exactly how far do you want to go with that one ?

I am sure a propensity to adulterous behaviour, or "playing the field" generally, is probably, at least partly, genetic.

Are we to say people have a right to do that and should not be criticised either "as that is their characteristic" ?

 

>>Why should it be down to the couple to find another registrar?<<

 

Yeah I'm sure it'd be an insurmountable problem. Whilst we're at it why don't we ban people having weddings abroad or outside of the city where they live ?

Nah, it's cobblers, it's more about making a point, a point many people do not agree with and just makes them cynical about the woke world we live in

[Guest]

1 hour ago, crookesey said:

Yes I do, in-fact I’ve still  got a RIGHT good memory LEFT between these old ears.

 

Have a RIGHT good Christmas.

Yes thank you, and you too.

Nearly LEFT the season's greetings too late but that's put things RIGHT again.

[Mister M]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

I note you did not directly answer this point. I am not interested in what some virtue signalling woke act says, I want to know what you think  :

 

>>If it is a simple matter of common sense that we shouldn't discriminate on the basis of a person's characteristics<<

 

Exactly how far do you want to go with that one ?

I am sure a propensity to adulterous behaviour, or "playing the field" generally, is probably, at least partly, genetic.

Are we to say people have a right to do that and should not be criticised either "as that is their characteristic" ?

 

>>Why should it be down to the couple to find another registrar?<<

 

Yeah I'm sure it'd be an insurmountable problem. Whilst we're at it why don't we ban people having weddings abroad or outside of the city where they live ?

Nah, it's cobblers, it's more about making a point, a point many people do not agree with and just makes them cynical about the woke world we live in

With regards to "how far should we go when not discriminating", generally when it's in the public realm.

You quote the example of adulterous behaviour. In this instance, that is private behaviour, which shouldn't impinge on their public or legal duties. What consenting adults do in private is their own business. If for example one of the adulterous couple becomes a registrar, and says that she refuses to marry a couple because she doesn't believe in monogamy, then that is impinging on their ability to carry out their responsibility as an employee.

Whatever this employee believes should be irrelevant. They have job to do. If they refuse on principle, well find another job which doesn't conflict with the beliefs.

I should also add that in the real life example I quoted earlier of a woman who was dismissed from her job because she refused to marry a gay couple, she went to an employment tribunal and they upheld the council's original decision. Quite right too. Marrying people is a fundamental part of being a registrar. If she refused to do it, she was silly to think she could continue in that role.

Edited December 22, 2022 by Mister M

[Guest sibon]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

Typical Sibon cobblers.

I don't even know where to start with this rubbish, but lets talk objective practicality. Ones child goes to school every day for years on end, not once a lifetime.

But, as it happens, the school had a poll and a majority of parents wanted face to face parents evenings anyway.

You don’t know where to start, because I’ve taken a totally logically consistent position.

 

 You could have chosen another school, if you found the online parents’ evenings so problematic.

Just like the people getting married “could have chosen another registrar”.

 

You can’t have it both ways.

Edited December 22, 2022 by sibon