My compliments to Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the leader of the Muslim Council of Britain, who has managed to persuade Nanny that his comments on Radio 4; in which he accused gay people of spreading disease, and described civil partnerships as "harmful", were all in the best possible taste and not deserving of prosecution.Sir Iqbal Sacranie said:
"It does not augur well in building the very foundations of society, stability, family relationships
And it is something we would certainly not, in any form, encourage the community to be involved in.
Each of our faiths tells us that it is harmful.
I think,
if you look into the scientific evidence that has been available in terms of the forms of various other illnesses and diseases that are there,
surely it points out that where homosexuality is practised there is a greater concern in that area."
These comments drew a protest from some listeners, and the Metropolitan Police launched an inquiry.
However, the police now say that they will not be charging Sir Iqbal.
The Muslim Council of Britain even said that it did not understand why their leader was being investigated.
"To be honest,
we thought it somewhat surprised when we heard that Sir Iqbal was being investigated by the police
for merely articulating the mainstream Islamic viewpoint about homosexuality."
That speaks volumes about their understanding of modern Britain!
As if by coincidence, Sir Ian Blair The Metropolitan Police Commissioner has decided to end costly police inquiries into supposedly politically incorrect views voiced on radio and TV.
Current rules compel police to investigate complaints, but officers are said to be exasperated because they have to treat all of them as potential 'hate' crimes.
A Metropolitan Police spokesman said:
"Where complaints are made to police about allegedly discriminatory language,
we have a duty to review what has been said
to ensure that the law has not been broken
and to refer the matter to the Crown Prosecution Service for a decision when necessary.
However, in the light of recent complaints generated by comments broadcast in the media,
the Commissioner has asked for a review to examine where the boundary lies between freedom of speech in a democratic society
and the appropriate police response and action to deal with formal complaints alleging the law has been broken.
It will not influence police action in relation to any cases already being looked into. Some cases will always justify investigation by police."
Now the question is, when a gay (or for that matter straight) person makes a public criticism of Islam; will Nanny, the police and the Muslim Council of Britain be so understanding and tolerant?
Isn't Nanny very odd, overlooking remarks such as this (remarks, by the way, which I am in complete agreement with) uttered by a Muslim, yet if I, an ordinary white, middle aged male and longterm UK citizen, uttered them I would be pilloried.
ReplyDeleteIt is being argued by some, quite correctly, that this PC nonsense is stiffling reasoned and proper debate about issues which concern us, such as health, crime, immigration, taxation, the current reliance on the Nanny state by some (well... actually... many).
The Institute for the study of Civic Society is also arguing these points, and I feel in complete concurrence with them (their website is at www.civitas.org.uk).
They state "Anthony Browne argues in 'The Retreat of Reason' that political correctness, which classifies certain groups of people as victims in need of protection from criticism and allows no dissent to be expressed, is poisoning the wells of debate in modern Britain.
Members of the public, academics, journalists and politicians are afraid of thinking certain thoughts. Political correctness started in academia, but it now dominates schools, hospitals, local authorities, the civil service, the media, companies, the police and the army.
Since 1997 Britain has been ruled by political correctness for the first time. Anthony Browne describes political correctness as a 'heresy of liberalism' under which 'a reliance on reason has been replaced with a reliance on the emotional appeal of an argument'. Adopting certain positions makes the politically correct feel virtuous, even more so when they are preventing the expression of an opinion that conflicts with their own: 'political correctness is the dictatorship of virtue'." Well said, as far as I am concerned!!
On a personal note, I do agree that there can be some recognition of long standing 'same sex' relationships, but as for civil partnerships being considered the equal to a conventional marriage between a heterosexual couple, I can state here that, having been married (to a woman!!) for nearly 28 years, nothing is as equal, and my wife and I find it quite offensive that they should be considered equal in the eyes of the law.