16
   

THE BRITISH THREAD II

 
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 04:51 am
Children in MacBeth!!!???

Zounds!!
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 05:55 am
I've been very upset recently by remarks made about Christiano Ronaldo and Manchester United. Millions of fans follow Utd, mostly in China. Its disgraceful that the finer feelings and sensibilities of so many can be wantonly abused by disrespectful comments about MUFC. I therefore propose the law regarding hate speech about race or religion should be extended to cover football, specifically MUFC. As with religious hate speech, it would not matter if the abuse was unintentional or if it was factually correct, but if in the opinion of a MUFC fan offensive words have been used, that should be punishable by a term of imprisonment up to seven years.
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 06:36 am
Steve 41oo wrote:
... that should be punishable by a term of imprisonment up to seven years.


Preferably this time should be done in the catacombs of Anfield.
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 06:49 am
Steady on Walter old bean, that could fall foul of European Human Rights legislation.
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 06:54 am
Okay, change the location to Goodison Park then.
0 Replies
 
View Profile McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 07:10 am

Well, judging by that criterion, first you're going to have to lock up all English football fans, and the Rangers and Celtic supporters too.

Come to think of it, this is a capital suggestion.
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 07:32 am
McTag wrote:
Well, judging by that criterion, first you're going to have to lock up all English football fans..
Only if they insult The Religion, or the Prophet Matt Busby. Or say anything I dont like.
View Profile McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 01:33 pm

Who said what about our Christiano any road, chuck?
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 02:55 pm
Well someone said he was a diving cheating greasy Portuguese disgrace to football. All of which is true but I feigned mock outrage. For which, in the pub, I nearly dined on knuckle sandwich. But I thought afterwards that if one insulted the Prophet with similar words, well you could be arrested.
View Profile McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 04:14 pm

You could be arrested, if you were lucky. Otherwise, you could have your throat cut.

But, many a true word spoken in jest, eh? You can't insult anyone on the basis of race, ethnicity or religion nowadays (except if they're C of E) by law.
But to some, the most important factor which divides us is allegiance to club. Instead of black vs. white, it's red vs blue or whatever.

So for total social harmony, obviously we need a new law: say we call it Diversity Tolerance Act (Football) 2010. Aggressive chants, insulting songs, lewd gestures, major rucks and mounted police charges at fans will be all in the past, hurrah!
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 04:29 pm
What? And ruin football.

There's some Polanski MacBeth scenes on U tube. The witches are there. See if the kids did it like that.
0 Replies
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Mar, 2009 02:25 pm
McTag wrote:
You can't insult anyone on the basis of race, ethnicity or religion nowadays (except if they're C of E) by law.
But to some, the most important factor which divides us is allegiance to club. Instead of black vs. white, it's red vs blue or whatever.
I think you see my point. Its an in-group/out-group thing. "In" being protestant rather than catholic or red manc rather than blue. If we are going to say its very naughty to get into this "them and us" thing, then I really dont see why football allegiance should not be treated on the same basis as religion. I think whatever you choose to follow is fair game for criticism, attack, or damn right slander. Its up to you to fight back on an intellectual level. But criticism of someone for what he is i.e. his genetic make up is absolutely unacceptable. There is no such thing as a Muslim Christian or Hindu child, just as there is no such thing as a Labour or Communist child. Ok thats me done, Utd 1:1 I believe.
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Mar, 2009 03:01 pm
Steve 41oo wrote:

I think you see my point. Its an in-group/out-group thing. "In" being protestant rather than catholic or red manc rather than blue. If we are going to say its very naughty to get into this "them and us" thing, then I really dont see why football allegiance should not be treated on the same basis as religion. I think whatever you choose to follow is fair game for criticism, attack, or damn right slander. Its up to you to fight back on an intellectual level. But criticism of someone for what he is i.e. his genetic make up is absolutely unacceptable. There is no such thing as a Muslim Christian or Hindu child, just as there is no such thing as a Labour or Communist child. Ok thats me done, Utd 1:1 I believe.


I agree with you as long as the reference in question is to an individual person. However, if one is referring to groups of people and supposed central tendencies in the group, then one label is, by your own logic, as good (or bad) as another. I suspect the issue in the case at hand is that the speaker inferred that a particular individual truly posessed the supposed central characteristics of the group to which he referred. If so, the matter comes down to whether or not that assertion is true, or whether one agrees with it.
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Mar, 2009 03:21 pm
When Sir Bobby Charlton got the Freedom of the City this week in Manchester, the Lord Mayor [shouldn't it by Dame Mayor?] was wearing a wig.

The reason - according to the MEN - was her City-blue dyed hair ...


http://i41.tinypic.com/v2tzjk.jpg
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Mar, 2009 04:48 pm
sir bobby was not wearing a wig

Smile

Interesting response George, reply later.
0 Replies
 
View Profile smorgs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Mar, 2009 12:18 am
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=20090304181429429
0 Replies
 
View Profile smorgs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Mar, 2009 12:22 am
Someone I work with sent that to me!

It's all true...

The bogs ARE blocked and a vending machine did fall on a man!

Cans of drink are still being knicked from't fridge (thieving bastards).

A day in the life eh?

(the blow-job bit isn't true).

x
View Profile McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Mar, 2009 03:50 am

Interesting choice of name "they" made for the female actor.

Shocked Surprised Wink Smile Very Happy Exclamation Rolling Eyes Drunk
0 Replies
 
View Profile dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Mar, 2009 04:47 am
Brother in law is getting married in summer 2010

Might see some of you then.
View Profile McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Mar, 2009 05:39 am

That'd be good, dp.

My wife is an Australo-phile. In fact I think she's part koala.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Leaving today for Europe - Discussion by cicerone imposter
FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION - Discussion by Mapleleaf
So you think you know Europe? - Discussion by nimh
Sinti and Roma: History repeating - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
Serbia: Return to the past? - Discussion by nimh
 
Copyright © 2009 Horizontal Verticals :: Page generated in 0.38 seconds on 11/28/2009 at 05:20:09 Top End