Banned from her own show

Victoria Culf is just a prawn of the right wing fascist military industrial religious complex. It's a poisonous cocktail of evil.

Go on then, scampi away!

😃

Helleofabore · Today 12:00

This sneering 'right wing' tone that comes from posters begs being questioned and clarified.

Spoilt, truculent teenagers ever wailed, "You're suuuch a fascist, Mum!"

Groan! Make it stop!*

*Keep them coming...

I think JKR agrees with you. That's why in the Harry Potter books she wrote that Platform 9 & 3/4 was at King's Crustacean.

When will it stop? Not when Labour get in. It will be on steroids

It seems so. I know there are plenty of people out there who disagree with me on many things, I still think they deserve legal representation. As good as they can afford. This sneering 'right wing' tone that comes from posters begs being questioned and clarified. I have seen before on other threads that there is nothing behind some of the labelling beyond 'they are Christian' and that some dick providing content (maybe even for free) has declared the group is 'right wing' because they are so indoctrinated to see anyone expressing concern about something that person holds as unquestionable and then some other person notes that into wikipedia and it gets taken as proverbial gospel. Look at the mess John Pesutto caused himself having staff taking wikipedia and the links on wikipedia as being unbiased statement of fact.

Why argue with a sea-lion? Don't even throw them a fish.

Or is it because others refer to them as ‘right wing’ you just mindlessly repeat it.

"Right wing" seems to be some kind of lazy dog-whistling shorthand for "A view I don't like. It doesn't fit with my ideology so it must be evil".

I was reacting to the comments about Christianity. It’s a very weird topic of conversation. I wonder how it came up?

It came up in Mishy's first comment on this thread. The following posts about Christianity were taking the piss out of commenting on the bizarre notion that every church/Christian is automatically a bad thing/person. I don't get the left-wing sneering about religion in general, tbh.

Good. They probably heard about it and offered

I prefer her case is heard.

Don't get me started on the right wing collections to send right wing famine relief to Gaza.

I did read the pink news article. I read Wikipedia too. I also read their own web site.

They have some views that I disagree with. But their legal team is there to provide service to members of their faith. Even if the case fails, should the legal team not take it? What is your point exactly?

Did you bother to read what I posted? What is ‘right wing’ about them exactly in your view? Vs just supporting Christian views? Or are the two synonymous in your mind? Or is it because others refer to them as ‘right wing’ you just mindlessly repeat it.

An artist isn’t going to be connected and clued up on all this stuff

She’s likely stressed and emotionally finding it difficult

How many organisations reached out and offered to pay? I would suggest very few or just one

Whatever all this madness is squarely at the system we have in place, and the insanity of gender

They're presumably real Christians, not evangelical Christofascists who've appropriated the word "Christian" the same way the gender soul crowd has appropriated "woman". I do understand turning to this type of funding in the US because polarization is so bad nobody on the moderate to left side will step in at this point. In this case, though, surely there would have been other options.

I think she has a case. I was reacting to the comments about Christianity. It’s a very weird topic of conversation. I wonder how it came up?

@Helleofabore please read the cases they have supported and look at other sources for the cases they have supported. The article is very well referenced. They almost always lose but make the headlines they are looking for.

You don’t need to defend them to defend their client in this instance. I think she will win.

“Observers believe…and raised questions about its funding”

Not quite the same thing as a hard fact, is it now DadJoke? I can “believe” or “raise questions” about whether the moon is made of cheese but that doesn’t make it so.

And so what if they campaign for things I, and many people, don’t agree with? They’re entitled to. I don’t agree with them on many subjects but I fully support their right to have their opinion and campaign for it. It’s called free speech and democracy. If they’re the ones ponying up the cash to support cases like this, my biggest question is, why are they the only ones doing so? Where are all the other organisations who protect freedom of speech?

Funny that the left wing seems to be against free speech and democracy when it’s suits them, demonising anyone with “wrong views”. Not very inclusive or progressive, is it?

If you like the crab forks, wait til you see the collectible spoons.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Collectible-Spoons-Reich-James-Yannes/dp/1425186955

I love MN. Nazi crab forks have made my day.

I am actually amazed at how far we are

Whats a comparable time in history? McCarthy? Something bigger

An artist and mother investigated and acted upon because she stated children are harmed

I now think ‘right wing’ is simply shorthand for ‘free speech advocates’.

And if people are so against people being able to say things that others find abhorrent, what does that say about those people?

It is remarkable how those declaring people shouldn’t be able to say things that others don’t want to hear, are often those who label others as hateful and a slew of other judgemental labels with alacrity. It is clearly hypocritical, but they never see it. They accuse others, yet are so often totaliterian and authoritarian themselves.

And it is also remarkable how this then plays out when religion is added. Because some people, and some posters particularly, who consider themselves as wonderfully tolerant, cannot tolerate religious belief. Because they consider it to be abhorrent, yet expect society to comply with their own philosophical belief. It is a fascinating cycle to observe.

Just like a legal centre set up by a Christian group to process cases that their church members want representation on, is then judged to wholly support the things people come to them to get representation on. Using this fucked up rhetoric, does this mean that every legal service then becomes a supporter of murder, rape etc? Or…. Perhaps a legal service provides legal services to people they do and do not agree with but who pay them to represent them.

That description on Wikipedia came from a Pink News article, with many typos to show the level of professionalism that media agency aspires to. And was posted by a poster who shows constantly just how little they value critical thinking and evaluation of content, who obviously think that pink news is a balanced font of information.

I don’t agree with some of the people they have represented, do I think that they should be rejected from getting legal representation? No. I also can see that at least one or two of those people won their cases because they had been subject to illegal actions and no matter whether you agree with their opinions or not, they don’t deserve to be subject to discriminatory behaviour in their job roles. One man simply was poorly treated for pointing out where they thought someone’s free speech was impeded.

As usual though, some people can only see that it is a ‘Christian’ group who supports ‘free speech’ and freedom of belief. They never see the intolerance in their zealous pursuit of totalitarian ideal- where everyone roughly complies with what is considered righteous. Same old same old.