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

Robert did you remember this:
Posted 57 Minutes Ago by Online NowRobert
I have never in my life seen a greater amount of misunderstanding. It's my fault. I should remember that a person with your English proficiency (in a negative sense) is incapable of reading between the lines and picking up on the nuances. It's incredible!
That's the reason you didn't correct my next posts.
What sense, then, ask your colleague to correct them now? Who's making you do?
If I need, I will find by myself another teacher.

For me it's pretty straight forward. If a group wants to come to NZ on a visitors visa and while here they say 'I don't like homosexuals and I want to oppose the homosexual law reform legislation because I think homosexual acts should be illegal', and then they go on to organise demonstrations around that, I'd say let the govt let them in. As much as I'd like to not have to bother with them and their idiotic and prejudiced ideas, I think that as long as they don't break the law they're as entitled to visit here as anyone else. Besides, if they do any public action I'd look forward to them being roundly vilified and made fun of. I think the potential damage done to non-het people here would be outweighed by the need for govts not to make visa decisions lightly, and I trust that the gay community here could deal with the group fairly easily.

However, if a group wanted to come here on a visitor visa, and that group said: "I hate gays, god hates bundles of dry twigs for lighting a fire, all gays are evil and I want to destroy anything to do with them', than nah, they can't come here. They're the equivalent of ubertrolls, all they're going to do is cause trouble and I don't see why any nation state should have to bother with that. We're not suppressing free speech, we're saying if you want to come into our home you need to learn how to not spit.

Kea,well as you mention it, I have been having dreams about h2g2, and one about noesis but it was in goo

tries to think of ontopic comment, I don't want to let them in, while in principle perhaps we should, I was guided by what the Rev said in the article that it exposes the dangers of fundamentalism rather than promoting it

Please Bob I have remembered that right, I'm sure he said that...

And fesses up I haven't been through all the backlogue either, I got distracted...

And I should be in bed

I'd probably agree with that argument (exposing fundamentalism rather than promoting it) if it were a home game. But why on earth would you want to let another country's fundamentalists in to make a point about a kind of fundamentalism that isn't really a problem where you live?


Good grief, did I just use a sports analogy? I blame Effers.

Well I'd be more than happy to see us export all the vicious homophobes we have here already..Maybe we could have some island in the world where they can all be sent..

NO. You deal with it through argument and trust people. Thats how it works here.

Sporting metaphors are always excellent.

(Just got a load of info today to do with travel arrangements for us Olympic ticket winners. )

I don't think it is working there though. Your public attitudes towards immigration for instance seem to be getting out of hand.

Dear Robert You're so pathetic: I also know you: did you get taken because I pointed out that grammatrica do and nothing else, given that post totally inappropriate answer and then look if you agree to talk about extremism and fanaticism? And you avenged. I do not see what efforts you have done, since most of the time in 1 week I asked you about and endless lists of phrases. I must send you a check? I will be eternally grateful.

We're about to host the Rugby World Cup (which is actually a circus so far). I wish we could ban all those extremists from coming here

BARABARA, one of the things about this site, h2g2, is that while we tolerate topic drift we don't really like people having off topic personal fights in public threads. Can you please take this to Robert's Personal Space and start a thread and have it out with him there? Click on his name and you'll go to his PS.

Hey steady on kea. They are not extremists..just a bit full on in the physical department..and its a big part of gay mens culture to get off on Rugby. plus I once mentioned to you that Maori guy, Rugby fanatic, who was so lovely that I got on with so well who explained to me the primary role of women in the Haka and judging it. He was very pro woen.

*women*

If it was mainly about rugby I would care less. But it's all about big business, there's been lots of controversial things going on, some that make NZ look the backward backwater it is only in a bad way Rugby for rugby's sake is a thing of the past.

While it may not be an issue within that particular community, fundamentalism of any kind is an issue for us all. Maybe this isn't about a particular brand of fundamentalism but fundamentalism in general.

I thought so.
Power to the non-edited subconscious.

But woen does remind us that 'woman' is
a contraction of 'woe to man'.

Funny how that little factoid has been
swept under the rug these past 50 years
of woen's deliberation.


~jwf~

True Peanut, but don't we all have enough on our plates as it is? I wouldn't want to have to bother with American fundamentalism because it's essentially American and isn't really relevant to the religious fundamentalism that we get here. They're different enough beasts that they need different approaches and I can't see any advantage to NZ, or the UK, of taking on that fight.

Here on the other hand we do have a serious issue of the fundamentalist Exclusive Bretheren trying to subvert the political process (also a problem in Oz I think). Tying up resources dealing with that Baptist church is a complete waste of time and any benefit accrued from the issues being made visible in a very general way would be outweighed by the effort required IMO.

>> but you know me, sticks me beak in anyway <<

Hi Peanut - I think you have a nice beak and I for one
think you would make a better job of running the world than the
boys - I think I may be knitting my threads up

>>
But woen does remind us that 'woman' is
a contraction of 'woe to man'.
<<



I think you are mistaken there ~jwf~. Woman is almost certainly a contraction of wombman. The collective loss of memory around that in the past century or so explains alot about womb envy and how a certain 19th century psychiatrist picked the wrong organ to explain the ways of the world.

KEAFIED, I think he's got a lot of space to insult and make public his speeches, which has only a part, then please tell him that he leave me alone, because he and I do not offend the ignorant before giving me all, and that in his life he has never met one that I understand less than I do. You should not have let them right from the 'beginning. I said I'm leaving. And he's a boor and a hypocrite and darrogante 's have told some of you, too. Meanwhile, laugh at me.

I wonder who that could be. Hysterics do cause problems though