Reuters Fact check: London’s Cenotaph war memorial was not defaced on 3 June

[Old Greg]

So, would you remove every statue that offends someone? Would you remove Churchills statue?

I thank you for the slippery slope argument underpinning these questions.

The answers are: no and no.

Would you welcome a statue of Hitler being erected in the East End of London or would you be worried that it offended someone? See what I did there?

[woohoo]

I thank you for the slippery slope argument underpinning these questions.

The answers are: no and no.

Would you welcome a statue of Hitler being erected in the East End of London or would you be worried that it offended someone? See what I did there?

Different arguments. I tend to not get offended by statues and buildings.

[vetran]

I thank you for the slippery slope argument underpinning these questions.

The answers are: no and no.

Would you welcome a statue of Hitler being erected in the East End of London or would you be worried that it offended someone? See what I did there?

We do have a statue of Bomber Harris & Churchill that seems to upset a few people.

Maybe a statue of B'liar is called for? The Iraqis know what to do with a good statue

[BlueSharp]

I thank you for the slippery slope argument underpinning these questions.

The answers are: no and no.

Would you welcome a statue of Hitler being erected in the East End of London or would you be worried that it offended someone? See what I did there?

So you only want the right sort of racist removed? You're going to sh*t the bed when you learn about Henery VIII and his anti-woman/catholic agenda.

[Old Greg]

Different arguments.

This is kind of the point. They are all different arguments.

Taking down a statue of a slave trader does not mean taking down a statue of Churchill. If people want to argue for the latter, let them. But people should have an honest debate about the former, without trying to pollute it with a daft slippery slope argument. Otherwise you may as well argue that heroin should be legalised, because next thing we know, alcohol will be banned.

[ladymuck]

Simple solution. Ban all statues. Remove all that exist. Buildings are not to be named.

[Old Greg]

So you only want the right sort of racist removed? You're going to sh*t the bed when you learn about Henery VIII and his anti-woman/catholic agenda.

I've not said anything about racists. I was talking about slave traders. Do please try to keep up (although you're clearly cross about the whole thing).

As for Henry VIII, make an argument for each case individually. If you're bothered about statues of Henry VIII, say something. If you're bothered about people who are bothered about statues of Henry VIII, go and find someone to have a go at. If you're bothered about people who are bothered about other statues but not about Henry VIII and you're worried about inconsistency, then be consistent and also worry about people who care about or donate to one cause but not about / to another similar cause. Otherwise you are being inconsistent yourself, so maybe you could just have a stern word with yourself.

[woohoo]

Simple solution. Ban all statues. Remove all that exist. Buildings are not to be named.

Apart from the Liver Building obviously.

[Old Greg]

Simple solution. Ban all statues. Remove all that exist. Buildings are not to be named.

Simple argument: reductio ad absurdum fallacy to avoid the issue. Is that the next line of defence after abandoning the slippery slope?

[Old Greg]

Apart from the Liver Building obviously.

Actually there's a campaign to rename it, by the victims of this man.

'Liver branding' surgeon Simon Bramhall fined GBP10,000 - BBC News