Today's Leggoland - The Dreaded Bill

[Kenzie1 0]

Leggo highlighted Michael Kelly's piece in yesterday's Scotsman in his piece today. Here is the piece in full:

 

The proposed new legislation to control sectarian singing in Scottish football grounds is absurd, impractical and undemocratic.

 

WHAT has caused the sudden change? Little more than a month ago, Alex Salmond was re-elected on the basis of his four-year record of sure-footed competence. A few weeks on he is blundering around, making enemies and antagonising people. First, he lauches gratuitous attacks on judges and lawyers. Now, he is ramming through the most sinister piece of legislation since the establishment of the devolved parliament.

 

It's the majority, stupid. Constrained by its minority position the previous SNP administration did, in the main, nothing, and did it very well, gaining resounding support from the electorate for its thoughtful inaction. Unconstrained, with an overwhelming majority, the gloves have come off. Taking the post of Presiding Officer, securing the chairmanship of the most important committees, cutting short debate - all these actions eliminate checks and balances. This is the insolence of office.

 

The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill is a bad bill which, in most democratic parliaments, would be subject to rigorous scrutiny and amendment to turn it into something workable. "Hoseanna" Cunningham, in her evidence to the justice committee, was forced by the logic of the bill to expose its absurdity. Out along with the Irish national anthem and Rule Britannia go songs from American musicals (You'll Never Walk Alone) and hits from the '90s (Just Can't Get Enough and Simply the Best) because any song adopted by the opposition could be seen to be provocative. Is it the words or the music that are offensive? Fans are nothing if not creative. Will they be allowed sing new words to old tunes to avoid arrest? Is the offering of a silent prayer before a penalty kick offensive?

 

The bill is woolly and subjective. It does not, because it cannot, specify which songs or symbols are banned. So it has to rely on subjective assessment and the context in which these songs are sung or the symbols used. The courts will find most of this unenforceable. The bill refers to "behaviour that a reasonable person would be likely to consider offensive". What reasonable person would be provoked by an idiot standing beside his supporters' bus blessing himself? Who could be offended by the words "No Pope of Rome, no chapel to sadden my eye, No nuns and no priests, no rosary beads, Every day is the 12th of July". That's a hysterically funny parody, not an invitation to riot. But of course, the sectarian hooligans at whom the law is to be directed are not reasonable persons. They're irreligious idiots. So how can the courts apply this standard?

 

Such is the SNP's control over the consciences and common sense of its new MSPs that this nonsense will sail through unless sufficient pressure is brought from outwith parliament to stop it.

[GovanAllan 0]

Great piece by Kelly

[biggordy 0]

Could we be missing the point here ? I would like to think(hope) our politicians are not that stupid to introduce such an un-democratic piece of legislation.

For several years now, certain individuals have been bleating about the most tenous of connections leading them to be "sorely offended".

So much so that the rolling snowball of the "sorely offended" has grown and grown with retalitory claims of being counter offended playing a huge part in the increase.

"Playing an imaginary flute", "blessing himself on the football field" the "hokey cokey" flying the Union Jack; these are examples where people claim to be offended, or mock offended, as they really are. (I felt embarrassed when lennon was reported to the police for gesturing at the last Ibrox match, a fine example of tit for tattery mock offence)

Everyone knows these folk have not been remotely offended, it's merely been a subtle attack on one institution or another by playing the sympathy card.

Those who claim to have been offended have used this era of political correctness to attack others with something which can't be proved or disproved, how to you measure degrees of "offence" ?

I'm a middle aged chap and if I stop and think about it, I am probably offended by hundreds of things from inconsiderate drivers to Lady Gaga. Just because I am offended, do I ask the police to do something about them insisting they are arrested and gaoled ? Of course not, other folk aren't too bothered about such matters. Same goes with football and religion. If you're offended by certain things, stay away. I accept that people like Lady effin Gaga, so I stay away from her gigs or refrain from watching her on TV.

 

Why should football and Religion be any different. I don't impose my likes and dislikes on others insisting that THEY have to change.

Freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I would expect any appeal to the European Court of Human Rights would have plenty to say about the loss of these freedoms in Scotland.

 

 

Anyway, sorry for ranting on chaps but this "offended" thing has gone on for far too long imo.

[Kenzie1 0]

Could we be missing the point here ? I would like to think(hope) our politicians are not that stupid to introduce such an un-democratic piece of legislation.

For several years now, certain individuals have been bleating about the most tenous of connections leading them to be "sorely offended".

So much so that the rolling snowball of the "sorely offended" has grown and grown with retalitory claims of being counter offended playing a huge part in the increase.

"Playing an imaginary flute", "blessing himself on the football field" the "hokey cokey" flying the Union Jack; these are examples where people claim to be offended, or mock offended, as they really are. (I felt embarrassed when lennon was reported to the police for gesturing at the last Ibrox match, a fine example of tit for tattery mock offence)

Everyone knows these folk have not been remotely offended, it's merely been a subtle attack on one institution or another by playing the sympathy card.

Those who claim to have been offended have used this era of political correctness to attack others with something which can't be proved or disproved, how to you measure degrees of "offence" ?

I'm a middle aged chap and if I stop and think about it, I am probably offended by hundreds of things from inconsiderate drivers to Lady Gaga. Just because I am offended, do I ask the police to do something about them insisting they are arrested and gaoled ? Of course not, other folk aren't too bothered about such matters. Same goes with football and religion. If you're offended by certain things, stay away. I accept that people like Lady effin Gaga, so I stay away from her gigs or refrain from watching her on TV.

 

Why should football and Religion be any different. I don't impose my likes and dislikes on others insisting that THEY have to change.

Freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I would expect any appeal to the European Court of Human Rights would have plenty to say about the loss of these freedoms in Scotland.

 

 

Anyway, sorry for ranting on chaps but this "offended" thing has gone on for far too long imo.

 

Fasct: Our politicians did intoduce legislaion designed solely to curb the basic human right of freedom of speech. They did so because Salmond leads a totalitarian government. There are no checks and balances due to the strength of numbers of the SNP in our parliament.

 

But the MOPEs (Most Offended People Ever) will not go away. I think they will intensify their efforts because they can see that they are gaining ground. Or were. Fortunately there has been such a backlash from all shades of political/religious opinion that the likes of "Hoseanna" (I really do like that) Cunningham and by extension, her mentor, Salmond, were shocked at the unexpected reaction to this piece of idiocy. I doubt very much that we will ever see this Bill as presently constituted, ever again. In the words of Salmonds favourite "Anthem" they have been "sent homewards tae think again".

[pete 2,499]

Good posts Kenzie and Gordy I enjoyed reading them.

[Kenzie1 0]

Good posts Kenzie and Gordy I enjoyed reading them.

 

Thank you.