Homophobic Bigot Loses Case.......

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-56089759
...bet she wished she'd kept her trap shut.

[pixie374]

You aren't very observant then. It's usually to someone i like, who probably won't like what I'm saying x

[Jackdaw33]

And it's goodnight from the Jim and Naomi show, with guest star Pixie. Tune in tomorrow for another enthralling edition.

[pixie374]

In fact, the only time I can see it here, is when naomi left. And she didn't post anything challenging.

[pixie374]

Lol.

[jim360]

// Trying to persuade someone to commit a crime, currently stands as incitement. Even though- we know- you literally cannot make someone commit a crime against their will.

This is getting boring.//

OK. I'm repeating what I've said over and over because, every time I say it, you seem to argue against something that I didn't say. Why does it matter, for example, that you cannot literally make somebody do something that is against their will? Incitement is about persuading people think that it *is* their will, and is in their interests, to do something criminal; not about making them act against their will. Even if you remove the "inciter", it should be clear that there are plenty of examples when people have acted in a way that is in fact against their best interests, and the best interests of others, presumably because they either thought the opposite or because they weren't thinking at all. It also shouldn't be difficult to realise that, if therefore people are capable of acting irrationally, even when sane, then it is possible for others to exploit that.

[Khandro]

Re. 'Brainwashing' and/or coercion:' People who are in groups that seem odd or even deranged by outsiders have simply decided to either mimic the group’s rituals and words to remain part of the group, or they have made the conscious decision to become a core member of the group and accept and believe the group’s core tenets. They aren’t “brainwashed”—they simply make a decision or decisions.

While occasionally these decisions lead to suicidal or criminal behaviors, even these behaviors are undertaken (unless addictive drugs are widely used by the group’s members) with a clear understanding of their consequences. Again, people who are outside of these groups discern these actions as “disturbed” or “crazed” and while they may well be, they also reflect the conscious decisions made by that group’s members'

[ToraToraTora]

gawd, you lot still going?

[andy-hughes]

I still can't subscribe to your argument pix.

For your theory to work, it would mean that every single person processes information and choices in exactly the same way.

Only on that basis can you presume that everyone makes a conscious choice to do wrong, and they are completely aware of their choice, and its consequences.

I suggest that humanity is far more sophisticated than that, and that each individual has a unique way of assimilating and acting on ideas and concepts they encounter, and no two people do the same thing for exactly the same reason.

[Zacs-Master]

I still can't subscribe to your argument pix.


Me neither. I can't quite follow Pix's logic that people can't do anything against their own will when there are many examples throughout history. Cults exist on the very principle. I also find her assertions that the law needs to catch up rather naïve.

[lady-janine]

Reap what you have sown comes to mind.

[pixie374]

Ok, I don't think we'll ever agree... cults manipulate, persuade etc, but that doesn't mean members are doing something against their own will. People stay in abusive relationships, even when not held against their will.
Anyway, please carry on- i tried!

[andy-hughes]

pixie - // People stay in abusive relationships, even when not held against their will. //

That depends on what you define both as 'their will' and also 'against their will' - and as my point states, that is different for each and every individual.

OK, I think we've gone as far as we can with that.

xx.