h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

GB

That's right, guns don't kill people, the culture
they live in does... or doesn't, as the case may be.


~jwf~

....guns just make it far far easier to kill people whether that is by intent or by accident.

Just spotted this news item -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26191047

People who don't share Green Party beliefs should be sacked.


Ri----ight

Not quite what the story says.

"Senior government advisers in any position who do not believe in climate change should be removed from their posts"

Climate change has been proven by scientists. Denying it, and using that belief when setting government policy is akin to setting laws based on belief in a deity.
You don't see shops trading restricted on Sundays just because some people in government belief in a god do you?

Oh, wait...

As the interviewer discovered, she wants everyone including the Chief Vet sacked if they don't share her beliefs.

She doesn't say anything about them using their heretic beliefs, it's enough that the sinner admits their sin.

Removed from their post is not the same as being sacked - in the Civil Service they would be moved sideways to somewhere they couldn't do any harm. I would say that senior advisors should be able to distinquish between evidence based information (climate change) and prejudice based opinion (climate change denial) if they can not demonstrate an understanding of the difference between imperical evidence and bloke in the pub/Clarksonesque?Faragian rants they should not recieve public funding

She was pressed quite hard on the point by the journalist - she wants every advisor ... regardless of their field, be it the criminal justice system, ante-natal health, culture & the arts, veterinary science or defence removed from their post if they don't agree with her.

Take Phillipa Stroud - an advisor to the Secretary of State for Work & Pensions. She's an expert on social inequality, deprivation and addictions. I have no idea where she stands on Climate Change but should she be sacked because her views might differ from the Green Party?

"if they don't agree with her."

"if they are incapable of displaying rational thought and agreeing with scientifically proven fact."


There, I fixed that for you

Yep. An argument can easily be made that climate change deniers should be disqualified for government positions due to their failure to recognize evidence in the face of delusions.

If freedom of speech implies freedom of thought
why should anyone be punished for not being able
to think about the unthinkable? Take fundamentalist
religious belief for example - the sort of people who
simply cannot accept secularist reality, who cannot
physically, mentally or emotionally engage in any
whirled view that does not include sky fairies.

Freedom must be free for all, not just Party Members.


~jwf~

We don't have a right to free so each in the UK, never have had. Common misconception brought about by people watching American television and films and getting confused.

Having said that, there's a huge difference between believing in something, and bring in a position where your beliefs and the actions you take based on them affect the lives of millions of people.

Many folks here in the States have a gross misunderstanding of what "freedom of speech" actually entails. Specifically it refers to a constitutional amendment barring the government (congress explicitly, but government in general in practice) from either using either legal punishment or prior restraint to limit private citizens' and groups' speech (within limits for public safety, the "fire in the theatre" exemption).

But many people mistakenly believe they have a right to say any damn thing they want without consequence. Lately it's been conservatives, especially pundits in the media, who make this mistake when they defend certain religious based bigotry. An example was the reaction to boycotts of a national fast food chicken restaurant chain for their stance against same sex marriage. Another good example in recent news was the owner of the L.A. Clippers basketball team. Many people felt his "freedom of speech" was being violated when the N.B.A. stripped him of his team after his racists comments. He wasn't thrown in jail or charged with any crime. His 1st amendment rights were never threatened.

<>

Absolutely. But that's not what this woman is demanding. She wants them all sacked even if their beliefs have no bearing upon their position.

The belief being in that climate change doesn't exist?

And their position being one that if it doesn't affect it directly, will almost certainly have a knock on effect.

There's nothing out there that stands on its own, everything is connected. I'm failing to see a problem here.

its a ridiculous thing to do sacking people for believing in the lack of climate change

as long as they are not working in some environmental capacity or preaching the anti-climate change message I dont see why anyone should loose there jobs

"...currently a sick joke"

Certainly there's a sick joke in there somewhere

I'm not sure what joke you refer to, but this one cracks me up.

http://www.snopes.com/info/news/mcouija.asp

A. I love the idea of a Ouija Happy Meal.
2. I love even more that so many people took this seriously.
c) I at the people who think Ouija boards are somehow "dangerous". (The boards aren't dangerous at all, delusions however...)

http://time.com/3182726/if-you-want-to-see-inequality-in-the-u-s-at-its-worst-visit-an-impound-lot/

Another in a long line of "It Sucks to be Poor in America" stories.

>>>>>>>>>
For millions of Americans a towed car can lead to a crippling spiral of stress, debt, joblessness, illness and, in many cases, incarceration.
<<<<<<<<<

Many people in the U.S. consider poverty a crime to be punished with further poverty and incarceration. Many of these people are poor themselves yet they believe the crap they hear on talk radio and Murdoch's News and vote against their own self interests. "NOPE! We don't want affordable healthcare, No rise in minimum wage either. the middle class, we'd rather have tax breaks and loopholes for billionaires, sorry, "Job Creators". Every person on the dole is a drugged out skiver so let's drug test them and make them pay for their own tests up front and only reimburse them if it's negative". (So far fewer than 1% of welfare recipients tested have tested positive but this has cost the state tax payers millions of dollars anyway).

The Ayn-Randification of America is complete.

If a civil servant was required to get a higher qualification in order to get or retain a position would all the questions in their examinations and the topic in their disitation have to be completely relevant to their post or would it be just as good if they demonstrated a capacity to assimilate evidence in a rational critical manner, descimininate between evidence and opinion and advance a reasoned well presented augument?
Would they be fit for post or get a higher qualification if they were not capable of disciminating between evidence and opinion, used evidence selectively, advanced straw-man arguments and one sided ill thought through rants based on the opinions of professional grandstanders, tabloid journalist and people who could not think their way out of a paper bag.
Do you really want the people who implement the will of our elected representatives to be the sort of people who believed in the descredited MMR scare?

Well the good thing is this woman and her party are an irrelevance and people like her have zero influence on anything. It was an old story I stumbled upon that barely made the news. Illuminating to see the far Left haven't lost their authoritarian streak though.