tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post7088299551946700022..comments2024-03-22T06:22:08.010+00:00Comments on Stephen Law: A terrible justification for keeping TFTD exclusively religiousStephen Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-29314146389376686182009-11-20T11:08:07.124+00:002009-11-20T11:08:07.124+00:00My wife informs me that the humanists should be ke...My wife informs me that the humanists should be kept off-air for the reason that it just makes bad radio. She heard the "Thought for the afternoon" and felt it was dreadful.<br /><br />It occurs to me that the humanists are arguing for inclusiveness. In which case they should team up with all the religious types who are also excluded: the ranters, the hang 'em and flog 'em brigade, the preachers of hate, Satanists, those who torch abortion clinics, those who preach for money and of course the weird and the wacky such as the Pastafarians and the Jedi Knights (more popular than Jews, Sikhs or Buddhists in UK). This would certainly spice up the broadcast. There seems no particular reason why all the other religious groups are excluded, if the criteria really is religion.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08240399669150057121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-28952049376676010602009-11-20T08:15:26.478+00:002009-11-20T08:15:26.478+00:00We all experience discrimination subjectively from...We all experience discrimination subjectively from time to time, and some of us for most or all of the time if we belong to an unpopular minority. <br /><br />Objective discrimination, however, is a matter of observable fact and institutionalised practice. I dislike positive discrimination - in the form of women-only short lists and so on - as much as negative discrimination.<br /><br />If TFTD is, as the BBC maintain, a religious programme it should be placed somewhere else and not slotted into the middle of a daily news and current affairs programme so as to gain a captive audience.anticanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18135207107619114891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-15490735491589989702009-11-19T21:22:13.783+00:002009-11-19T21:22:13.783+00:00Perhaps the BBC's conclusion was that only a r...Perhaps the BBC's conclusion was that only a religious person can have an opinion that is fit to be dignified by the name of 'thought'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-21892860248551107032009-11-19T10:00:28.203+00:002009-11-19T10:00:28.203+00:00To give Ekklesia their due, whilst they had manage...To give Ekklesia their due, whilst they had managed to muddle up editorial impartiality with the selection of contributors (and so allow the Klu Klux Klan an airing), they were actually arguing for the remit of TFTD to be broadened.<br /><br />Personally I don't particularly mind if the content is restricted to the worshippers of middle-classness, as is the status quo, but in another context I was involved in a discussion about discrimination the other day. The consensus seems to be that discrimination is not dependent upon the intent of the discriminator, but upon the feelings of the discriminatee.<br /><br />At first this seems unworkable, as someone just has to proclaim "I am being discriminated against" for there to be discrimination, but in practice it could work because most of us don't believe we are being discriminated against, most of the time. It certainly did help me to understand the issues in a case I was involved in recently.<br /><br />If you go along with this, and I'm perfectly willing to accept that some may not, as well as dealing with rumblings by the forgotten middle class, the humanists, about TFTD, we may also need to look at the discrimination claims of far-right groups such as the BNP. Can we dismiss them out of hand because we believe they are disingenuous, or do we have to take them as seriously as we would be expected to do in a case of race or disability discrimination?Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08240399669150057121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-62392303220529271092009-11-19T09:14:31.329+00:002009-11-19T09:14:31.329+00:00To paraphrase Martin, only those who believe in fa...To paraphrase <b>Martin</b>, only those who believe in fairies need apply.The Atheist Missionaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07191035196328725888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-41247822842155479402009-11-18T17:29:13.027+00:002009-11-18T17:29:13.027+00:00Ekklesia are misquoting the judgement. What the BB...Ekklesia are misquoting the judgement. What the BBC actually said was: <br /><br /><i>"The ESC stated that the BBC Editorial Guidelines apply to all output: the mere fact that a <br />programme has a religious remit does not mean that it is outside of the application of the <br />Editorial Guidelines and so beyond scrutiny. However, the requirement of "due" impartiality <br />means that the approach required depends on the content and audience expectations for that <br />content. "</i><br /><br />The BBC regard TFTD as religious broadcasting, so they see no reason to allow non-religious groups to participate.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08240399669150057121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-23792117114315188892009-11-18T16:22:19.519+00:002009-11-18T16:22:19.519+00:00Anonymous:
Who is "routinely" comparing ...Anonymous:<br />Who is "routinely" comparing religious leaders to the Ku Klux Klan? Stephen presented a striking counterexample to demonstrate the falsity of the proposition that impartiality depends on audience expectations. And you have not addressed the issue. Smoke screen indeed.Mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-92226654920820009572009-11-18T13:57:38.958+00:002009-11-18T13:57:38.958+00:00Handbags at the ready then..
I was obviously not ...Handbags at the ready then..<br /><br />I was obviously not suggesting religious leaders are LIKE the KKK.<br /><br />I was pointing out that the principles being employed by the BBC might entail that they class such an organization as showing 'due impartiality', which is clearly absurd.<br /><br />Compare - "All vegetarians are good people." "But Hitler was a vegetarian." "So you're saying I AM LIKE HITLER?!"<br /><br />Similar smokescreen tactic!Stephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-8157533731362771272009-11-18T13:47:22.565+00:002009-11-18T13:47:22.565+00:00Perhaps the BBC are merely excluding some secular ...Perhaps the BBC are merely excluding some secular voices on grounds that they routinely compare religious leaders to the Ku Klux Klan? Maybe a slightly more, erm, <i>thoughtful</i> approach to thought for the day might be more effective.<br /><br />;-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com