• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bill will ban 'white only' BNP.

Because in free countries people are allowed to make their own clubs with their own membership rules and to hire the people they want to hire and to not hire the people they don't want to hire.

This is a basic human freedom.

Well, I'm not sure that it is as straighforward as that.

I can remember years ago, women picketing Men's clubs so that they would allow women in.

We also have laws about employment rights. Here is the link I put in before.

"A black or Jewish candidate who applied and didn't get the job on grounds of their racial or religious background would have a claim in the employment tribunal," Millar said.

"If an individual challenges and they maintain a practice not employing any visible minority people, there is no doubt that like any employer who has such practices, they can be sued," said employment barrister and chair of the Society of Black Lawyers, Peter Herbert. "When they are in receipt of public funds they will have to be an equal opportunities employer. To do otherwise would be incompatible with public office.

"I can see the equality commission mounting an inquiry into how the BNP operate now. The office of public standards could also inquire."

The questions came as BNP leader Nick Griffin was pelted with eggs at an event in Manchester. Griffin picked up a seat in the north-west of England and Andrew Brons won a seat in Yorkshire and the Humber, a breakthrough in national elections for the far-right party.

BNP poll win brings cash and staff ? and legal challenges over racism | Politics | The Guardian

We do have laws which protect people against discrimination.
 
Cant stand this attitude from labour o no the BNP have had two meps voted democratically in lets pass a law to ban them. Whilst i dont agree with the BNP in anyway its stupid to fight undemocrat ideas with undemocratic ideas.Just give them enough rope and they will hang themselves.

If anything needs changing Its the stupid PR system which means people can get seats with 8 % of the vote.
 
No.

MEMBERS of the BNP may have a history of criminality and terrorism, for which they should be prosecuted.

The other night on Question Time, a weekly political program, someone said he had a list of the No of BNP members who had criminal convictions and it took 2 pages of A4 to fit them all in.
 
I can understand from this that you also support hate speech then, right Laila?

To an extent yes but the law in UK has legislated against hate speech
 
The BNP should not be banned. People need to see what kind of assholes they are.

Exactly.

Its the main parties fault BNP got in.

Thats right, i said it. I blame Lib Dems, and especially Labour and Conservative. All hush hush on immigration, brush it under the carpet. Pretend the issue with EU does not exist. Idiots.
 
The other night on Question Time, a weekly political program, someone said he had a list of the No of BNP members who had criminal convictions and it took 2 pages of A4 to fit them all in.

I know right?

Did you see The Big Questions, it was so true what was being said.
 
No, actually, it doesn't.
Actually yes, it does.
You either allow the people the freedom to choose, or you deny them that freedom.

There's no middle ground.
Freedom is a relative term, of course there is a middle ground.
You have the freedom of movement, but you can't move through/into restricted areas.
You should spend some time in a corner thinking about this. You're saying the majority has the right to stifle the minority.
It has nothing to do with majority and minority.
Democracy can in fact prevent parties with extreme ideas that oppose democracy in a clear and obvious way from partaking in the elections.
Do you honestly believe that if Hitler came back to life and re-organized his National-Socialist party in Germany, and assuming it wins the elections, the state of Germany would just accept it with an open arms?
Really?
 
Last edited:
To an extent yes but the law in UK has legislated against hate speech
Then why didn't it ban the BNP?
Isn't it the same thing?
 
Then why didn't it ban the BNP?
Isn't it the same thing?

Their leader has a conviction for incitement to hate but these are laws for doing the incitement. They only do that in private now.
 
NOt if it hopes to remain a democracy, it can't.
So I take it as a statement from you that a country that banned a party from partaking in the election is no longer a democracy, yes?
 
Their leader has a conviction for incitement to hate but these are laws for doing the incitement. They only do that in private now.

Right, so they have broken no law
 
Right, so they have broken no law

I would have thought they have but it would need to be looked into. There is a difference between a member doing it privately through the hate law which would probably be a private conviction and something which is in their constitution.

I would have thought the fact that they say they will not employ anyone black would go against laws on racial discrimination for work - and gasp, they certainly would not employ a Muslim - again discrimination laws.

I am sure the one about black people is in their charter or constitution so it should be possible to sue them for that.

Ahhhhh! I understand. :idea: This would just result in a conviction. Harriot Harman has decided she wants to ban them. Got it.


so should parties be allowed to stand whose constitution goes against our laws?
 
Last edited:
Race-based government legislation is what has made institutionalized racism and slavery possible for hundreds of years. Now the tradition continues, only with different groups getting the short end of the stick.

All democracy is based on collectivist violence, whether racial or otherwise.
 
A political party should be open to all, regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation and religion. Any party not living up to these basic principles should be denied access to run candidates in any democratic election.

Now the BNP can be a neo nazi racist xenophobic homophobic scum party that it is and run for elections as long as they allow everyone who wants to be a member to become a member. Anti-discrimination is a basic principle of any modern democracy, especially if the discrimination is based on race, sex, sexual orientation or religion.
 
We live in a democracy, do we not ??
If at least 75% vote for a prohibition of any hate/racist/criminal group in politics....then, so be it..
The Blacks, IMO, are NOT racist...in a sense...as a minority should be allowed "extra space"....
 
The Blacks, IMO, are NOT racist...in a sense...as a minority should be allowed "extra space"....

What? :confused:

Blacks can be just as racist as anyone else.

And why should minorities get extra leg room compared to others?
 
The Blacks, IMO, are NOT racist...in a sense...as a minority should be allowed "extra space"....

This deserves some kind of basement nomination for inadvertent racism while pretending to be highly tolerant.

"You know those black people just can't act any better...."
 
A political party should be open to all, regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation and religion. Any party not living up to these basic principles should be denied access to run candidates in any democratic election.

Why? If you don't like it then don't support that party.
 
Well, I'm not sure that it is as straighforward as that.

Actually, it is.

I can remember years ago, women picketing Men's clubs so that they would allow women in.

And in a free society, those women would still be outside, because the freedom of association has no meaning unless it includes the freedom from association, too.

We also have laws about employment rights.

Those rights do not exist. The job belongs to the employer, who, in a free society, chooses whoever he wants to fill the jobs, using whatever criteria he wants to.

The employee has no right to a job, since a job is nothing more than a task someone is willing to pay someone else to perform rather than doing it himself.

We do have laws which protect people against discrimination.

Why? Free societies do not chain their citizens.

Any of them, until an actual crime is committed. Real crimes are crimes the involve violence, theft, fraud, and the like. Not hiring someone isn't a crime by any sensible use of the word.
 
The other night on Question Time, a weekly political program, someone said he had a list of the No of BNP members who had criminal convictions and it took 2 pages of A4 to fit them all in.

So?

The Democrats in the US House of Representatives have an impeached federal judge as a member in good standing. The Democrats in the Senate have a KKK member as their longest serving member.

Politicians are born criminals, why should the BNP in England be any different? How does your list compare to the criminals in office in the other parties?
 
A political party should be open to all, regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation and religion. Any party not living up to these basic principles should be denied access to run candidates in any democratic election.

Now the BNP can be a neo nazi racist xenophobic homophobic scum party that it is and run for elections as long as they allow everyone who wants to be a member to become a member. Anti-discrimination is a basic principle of any modern democracy, especially if the discrimination is based on race, sex, sexual orientation or religion.

Aren't you being discriminatory on grounds of political belief? I don't think anyone should be forced to curtail their political beliefs just because some think it un-PC or whatever.
 
Back
Top Bottom