Reply to: I hope this isn't one of you -

[Whorty]

Warty seems to be suggesting this is a good thing though. Books with homophobic protagonists should be banned, etc. Lots of people believe this, even if he doesn't. TV shows that satirise racism or homophobia are pulling that content, etc.

Are you suggesting that the bible and it's homophobia is akin to satire? Inneresting ....

[SueEllen]

And that Fairies wear boots!

They do!

I see them running around the streets in wellies.

[vetran]

I was with you until you posted that as science never stands still. So these "Wokers" - as you call them - are going to prove what we currently know about humans is wrong.

And that Fairies wear boots!

[SueEllen]

That can't possibly happen as they don't follow the scientific method. They just make things up and say they're true, and, crucially, refuse to hear any argument against it.

Sush!

You are suppose to give them the benefit of the doubt and ask them to prove their hypothesis.

[NotAllThere]

I was with you until you posted that as science never stands still. So these "Wokers" - as you call them - are going to prove what we currently know about humans is wrong.

That can't possibly happen as they don't follow the scientific method. They just make things up and say they're true, and, crucially, refuse to hear any argument against it.

[NotAllThere]

Religious texts though are protected despite zero evidence of a god.

That's because the believers outnumber the non-believers. So don't get too lippy, you infidel.

Actually the original fairy tales and their donor stories make parts of the bible look a bit tame. Obviously excluding the big murders - God drowning the world but saving Gilgamesh/Noah, Herod's infanticide etc.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fairy...tory_b_6102602

Apparently Cinderella's prince was a bit like AtW and had a squirrel fetish.

https://theculturetrip.com/europe/un...g-fairy-tales/

https://theculturetrip.com/europe/ge...rothers-grimm/

Indeed. Check out the film "Tale of Tales".

[SueEllen]

A proven scientific fact .

I was with you until you posted that as science never stands still. So these "Wokers" - as you call them - are going to prove what we currently know about humans is wrong.

[d000hg]

Just view the cancelling of JK Rowling for suggesting there are biological difference between those born as a Man and those born as a Woman - A proven scientific fact that the Wokers believe is incorrect.

Warty seems to be suggesting this is a good thing though. Books with homophobic protagonists should be banned, etc. Lots of people believe this, even if he doesn't. TV shows that satirise racism or homophobia are pulling that content, etc.

[d000hg]

zero evidence of a god.

Ignoring the weakness of that assertion as being somewhat boring to argue, where is your evidence for beauty or morality? For that matter where is your evidence that homophobia or racism is bad? Books extolling the virtues of humanism sound like just fairytales to me, giving people the false impression that they matter, in any sense, in a cold uncaring universe.

[vetran]

Yes.

People still write discriminatory drivel and even worse can self-publish on sites like Amazon.

I believe he is suggesting in the mainstream not some minority Authors. I doubt many of the books on the times best seller list overtly encourage discrimination.

Just view the cancelling of JK Rowling for suggesting there are biological difference between those born as a Man and those born as a Woman - A proven scientific fact that the Wokers believe is incorrect.

[vetran]

You're surprised fairy tale books are still legal to sell? Weird.

Actually the original fairy tales and their donor stories make parts of the bible look a bit tame. Obviously excluding the big murders - God drowning the world but saving Gilgamesh/Noah, Herod's infanticide etc.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fairy...tory_b_6102602

Apparently Cinderella's prince was a bit like AtW and had a squirrel fetish.

https://theculturetrip.com/europe/un...g-fairy-tales/

https://theculturetrip.com/europe/ge...rothers-grimm/

[d000hg]

Do you really think that if someone wrote a fiction book today, with the same content and messages that are present in religious texts, that they would be allowed?

Eh? People write stuff like that all the time.

[SueEllen]

I think it's more the fact these fairy tale books have homo-phobic as well as other undesirable content that is surprising. I think Harry Potter level fairy tale books are fine.

Do you really think that if someone wrote a fiction book today, with the same content and messages that are present in religious texts, that they would be allowed?

Yes.

People still write discriminatory drivel and even worse can self-publish on sites like Amazon.

[Whorty]

You're surprised fairy tale books are still legal to sell? Weird.

I think it's more the fact these fairy tale books have homo-phobic as well as other undesirable content that is surprising. I think Harry Potter level fairy tale books are fine.

Do you really think that if someone wrote a fiction book today, with the same content and messages that are present in religious texts, that they would be allowed? Religious texts though are protected despite zero evidence of a god.

I'm all for allowing people to believe whatever they want, but I'm not up for allowing bigoted views and the preaching of these views being protected because it's 'religious'.

As for these specific sellers, they're bigoted idiots.

[vetran]

Humans don't work on pure logic though. Nostalgia and illogical sentimentality are part of who we are. To switch it around, it's actually quite common that sellers will perhaps choose a buyer (if there are multiple offers) based on who they like best, or to give a new family a house they will love, even if it's not quite the highest offer. We just sold our first ever home and preferred a charity who would use it to home veterans (or something like that) even though they couldn't quite match a higher option from some professional landlord.

Legally or morally? Where do you find this judgement?

Oh sure you can decide based on who you like but the next house was very popular and we needed to move fast. They were cash buyers £0.5 million quid in the bank apparently.

Both actually. I see sexuality to frequently be biological based so its not a moral issue and legally if proven it would be discrimination.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/la...iscrimination/