Technology1 min ago
Tommy Robinson Has Promised To Donate His Mep Salary To Victims Of Sexual Abuse If He Is Elected In The North-West Of England.
99 Answers
https:/
But apparently the co-director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition says it doesn't want his money.
/// This messaging simultaneously makes the safety and very bodies of women and girls of colour invisible – because it is seemingly only white girls’ bodies that need protection, even though black and Asian girls have been significant among child sexual exploitation victims. ///
Where has Tommy Robinson suggested anything like this, and why can't Far-Right people also show concern for women's safety regardless of their colour or race?
I think that this woman has a very large chip on her shoulders and is a disgrace to 'ALL' women who have unfortunately been abused.
But apparently the co-director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition says it doesn't want his money.
/// This messaging simultaneously makes the safety and very bodies of women and girls of colour invisible – because it is seemingly only white girls’ bodies that need protection, even though black and Asian girls have been significant among child sexual exploitation victims. ///
Where has Tommy Robinson suggested anything like this, and why can't Far-Right people also show concern for women's safety regardless of their colour or race?
I think that this woman has a very large chip on her shoulders and is a disgrace to 'ALL' women who have unfortunately been abused.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Naomi - // I wonder if the politics of other donors is questioned? I’d guess not. //
That would rather depend on the politics involved, and whether or not other donors are using their donation - or more accurately, the public announcement of it, as an incentive to garner votes for them in an election.
That would rather depend on the politics involved, and whether or not other donors are using their donation - or more accurately, the public announcement of it, as an incentive to garner votes for them in an election.
-- answer removed --
AOG - // Just like the religion of the donators is never questioned. //
When a donor is presenting a right-wing agenda for a European Parliamentary election campaign, and using the announcement of his donation as in inducement to attract voters, his religion is not an issue - but his political loyalties, and intentions, are.
When a donor is presenting a right-wing agenda for a European Parliamentary election campaign, and using the announcement of his donation as in inducement to attract voters, his religion is not an issue - but his political loyalties, and intentions, are.
//That would rather depend on the politics involved, and whether or not other donors are using their donation - or more accurately, the public announcement of it, as an incentive to garner votes for them in an election. //
The politics involved shouldn't be an issue to any non-political charity - and it seems to me that Tommy Robinson's pledge has resulted in quite the opposite to that you say was intended.
The politics involved shouldn't be an issue to any non-political charity - and it seems to me that Tommy Robinson's pledge has resulted in quite the opposite to that you say was intended.
Naomi - // /That would rather depend on the politics involved, and whether or not other donors are using their donation - or more accurately, the public announcement of it, as an incentive to garner votes for them in an election. //
The politics involved shouldn't be an issue to any non-political charity - and it seems to me that Tommy Robinson's pledge has resulted in quite the opposite to that you say was intended. //
I think I failed to make my point clearly -
My own view I think aligns with yours - that a charity which by definition should be politically neutral, should accept donations from whomever wishes to donate.
However, I see the point the charity is raising, which is their choice, although I don't actually agree with it.
If 'Tommy Robinson's cynical ploy to appear generous and inclusive in order to attract voters has the by-product of money in the bank of the charity, then it makes the charity the villains of the piece if they refuse it.
I applaud their moral approach, but I do believe that in this instance, that approach is costing the charity funds, and that cannot be right.
The politics involved shouldn't be an issue to any non-political charity - and it seems to me that Tommy Robinson's pledge has resulted in quite the opposite to that you say was intended. //
I think I failed to make my point clearly -
My own view I think aligns with yours - that a charity which by definition should be politically neutral, should accept donations from whomever wishes to donate.
However, I see the point the charity is raising, which is their choice, although I don't actually agree with it.
If 'Tommy Robinson's cynical ploy to appear generous and inclusive in order to attract voters has the by-product of money in the bank of the charity, then it makes the charity the villains of the piece if they refuse it.
I applaud their moral approach, but I do believe that in this instance, that approach is costing the charity funds, and that cannot be right.
AH, //I applaud their moral approach//
But this isn’t a moral approach. It’s a wholly disingenuous approach. She said // he makes lies about the sexual abuse of girls //, but he doesn’t. She’s lying – and there’s nothing moral about that. Like many, her problem appears to be in acknowledging that there is a common factor at play here - the ethnicity of the gangs that Tommy Robinson is talking about. The popular determination to defend ethnic minorities, and the adherents of Islam in particular, becomes a dilemma when criminal/moral elements, like grooming gangs, the subjugation of women, extremism, and the despised gay lifestyle raise their ugly heads. What to do? Excuse it because ‘it’s only a minority’ who think that way - or better still deny it’s happening. More often than not, the apologist elects for one of those options which, in reality, serves only to enable the offender.
But this isn’t a moral approach. It’s a wholly disingenuous approach. She said // he makes lies about the sexual abuse of girls //, but he doesn’t. She’s lying – and there’s nothing moral about that. Like many, her problem appears to be in acknowledging that there is a common factor at play here - the ethnicity of the gangs that Tommy Robinson is talking about. The popular determination to defend ethnic minorities, and the adherents of Islam in particular, becomes a dilemma when criminal/moral elements, like grooming gangs, the subjugation of women, extremism, and the despised gay lifestyle raise their ugly heads. What to do? Excuse it because ‘it’s only a minority’ who think that way - or better still deny it’s happening. More often than not, the apologist elects for one of those options which, in reality, serves only to enable the offender.
naomi - // AH, //I applaud their moral approach//
But this isn’t a moral approach. It’s a wholly disingenuous approach. //
If the lady in question feels it is a moral approach, then I don't think it is for you or I to deny her that right, even if you disagree with the basis for her position, she still has a right to it.
// She said // he makes lies about the sexual abuse of girls //, but he doesn’t. She’s lying – and there’s nothing moral about that. //
I don't know that she is lying, nor can I speak to the veracity of what 'Tommy Robinson' says. I have no proof that she, or indeed he, is lying about what they are saying.
// Like many, her problem appears to be in acknowledging that there is a common factor at play here - the ethnicity of the gangs that Tommy Robinson is talking about. //
It may be, but again, that is a presumption on your part.
My view is not changed by your post - if this lady feels that donations from 'Tommy Robinson' are something she wishes to refuse, it is for her charity to take issue about it. I believe she is wrong in her action, but it is still her action to take, unless directed otherwise by the organisation she represents.
But this isn’t a moral approach. It’s a wholly disingenuous approach. //
If the lady in question feels it is a moral approach, then I don't think it is for you or I to deny her that right, even if you disagree with the basis for her position, she still has a right to it.
// She said // he makes lies about the sexual abuse of girls //, but he doesn’t. She’s lying – and there’s nothing moral about that. //
I don't know that she is lying, nor can I speak to the veracity of what 'Tommy Robinson' says. I have no proof that she, or indeed he, is lying about what they are saying.
// Like many, her problem appears to be in acknowledging that there is a common factor at play here - the ethnicity of the gangs that Tommy Robinson is talking about. //
It may be, but again, that is a presumption on your part.
My view is not changed by your post - if this lady feels that donations from 'Tommy Robinson' are something she wishes to refuse, it is for her charity to take issue about it. I believe she is wrong in her action, but it is still her action to take, unless directed otherwise by the organisation she represents.
Naomi. You asked for Farage's itinerary the other day.
In case you didn't find it;
https:/
Scroll down for next 3 days.
Mind how you go, the anti-fascists(lol) are blocking roads off and trying to shut down wrong speech.
In case you didn't find it;
https:/
Scroll down for next 3 days.
Mind how you go, the anti-fascists(lol) are blocking roads off and trying to shut down wrong speech.
You're on dodgy ground, there Andy, imo. (philosophically?)
You can applaud someone's moral stance if you agree it's a moral stance. But someone saying they are taking a moral stance does not make it a moral stance.
Some of the worst crimes in history were carried out by people who felt morally right.
Again, imo.
You can applaud someone's moral stance if you agree it's a moral stance. But someone saying they are taking a moral stance does not make it a moral stance.
Some of the worst crimes in history were carried out by people who felt morally right.
Again, imo.
JustGiving said religious charities such as Muslim Aid and Islamic Relief benefited most, but many donations also went to the likes of Cancer Research, Macmillan and the British Heart Foundation.
https:/
https:/
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
Jobs & Education4 mins ago
Lord Botham Falls Into An Australian...
News11 mins ago
News14 mins ago
ChatterBank15 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.