A Joseph Rowntree Trust report

Tolerance has declined, bigotry is on the increase….

What?

Are these people living in the same country as the rest of us?

50 years ago homosexual acts could put you in prison. We now have had gay ministers, an HIV positive Cabinet Minister, a married lesbian (although the lesbian part was never illegal, the married to another woman wouldn\’t have happened) Cabinet Minister and quite rightly who you sleep with and how, in public life at least, is regarded as an irrelevance.

50 years ago we still had signs out stating no blacks or Irish.

Someone seriously wants to look around this country and say that we are more bigoted and less tolerant than the country was 50 years ago?

13 thoughts on “A Joseph Rowntree Trust report”

  1. Jeff

    Oh yes, and they justify it to themselves because, well, they are compassionate and good, aren’t they? I mean, they must be.

  2. Oh, and the mere thought of a leftist lobby group bemoaning the decline of traditional values, when the Left has worked tirelessly for forty years to destroy those very values, is enough to make me want to throw up.

  3. Legislation has always been the governments tolerances and people have always been more tolerant than that useless lot.

    However, I would say that over the last few years with positive discrimination being forced upon us we have become less tolerant as a society amusingly enough while the government has become more tolerant, of minorities anyway.

    I know I have.

  4. “we used to have free speech – we don’t now.”

    You should take that up with the Lord Chamberlain. Plenty of time to chat due to all that free time since 1968 he has since giving up censoring theatre productions.

  5. lol Miss California (I have no connection. Sadly.) has to be squashed underfoot for having a non-PC opinion.

    So yes, bigotry IS on the increase, just not in the way that most PC people think

  6. We had free speech – the Lord Chamberlain’s power over a few drama producers was small beer by comparison.

  7. Think of all the things and phrases we cannot say out loud these days.
    Think of the poor oppressed golliwog too.

  8. @11, apart from “we should kill all the Jews”, what on earth are you talking about? There’s a difference between “things you can’t say without going to jail”, which solely consists of incitement to racial hatred, which is only convicted when it reaches the level of the blood libel/death threats [*] level, and “things you can’t say without everyone thinking you’re a prick”.

    Free speech means the right for you to say whatever you want without going to jail for it; and it means I have the right to call you a prick for saying prickish things.

    Conservative types often seem to interpret things like the Miss California case (“you want a career in an industry dominated by liberals and gays? Don’t say things that they find abhorrent, then.”) as infringement of free speech, rather than an excellent example of freedom of speech coupled with freedom of association…

    [*] guess which particular sort of racial hate on racial hate accounts for the majority of ITRH convictions? If you said ‘Muslims on Jews’, you win a biscuit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *