Petition to ban Donald Trump from UK reaches 300,000

[Paredonia]

I signed this happily. I don't want this bigot walking around in my country, leaving his filth in his wake. People yap on and on about how it's against "free speech" but you know what? I don't care. To me, free speech is no where near as important as morality, not even close. If it was a choice between living in a society that is friendly, welcoming and caring but has any form of hate speech prohibited, or a society that is completely free speech wise but is horrendous and hateful, I would choose the former any day of the week without a second thought. Morality > Free speech any day.

[Olivaero]

Attention all!
The petition has now reached enough signatures to become the number 1 most signed petition put forth to the UK government. Beating out:

Allowing more refugees
Stopping immigration
Legalizing marijuana
Vote of no confidence for Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt

Completing the top 5.

We'd like to thank the Academy. All of our fans. Our American cousins for giving us someone to unify against. And finally Suzanne Kelly, the author of the petition. Bet you didn't see this coming, eh Sue?

In case anyone was wondering, the online petitions has a life of 6 months, so you can be guaranteed that this will keep gathering support until its deadline of June 8th 2016

I'm personally hoping for a million signatures before the end, that would truly make me smile.

[Novorobo]

And when those people can vote for politicians who impose their religious beliefs on everybody else, what then?

This isn't as far-fetched as it sounds. In Canada, 1)the Liberals imported a lot of Muslims expecting them to vote for them, 2)and then they went and voted Tory over gay marriage.

3)If it's "picking and choosing" to say Muslims are disallowed for their beliefs, it's "picking and choosing" to say Trump is disallowed for his. Anything else is picking and choosing on a meta-level.

1) Sauce
2) And yet amazingly they didn't ban gay marriage and I'd wager most Muslims this time around voted for the Liberals.
3) Except not all Muslims hold those beliefs.

Also since everyone in favour of this ban like going "Think about their anti-homosexuality", I do hope you're against the immigration of Koreans, Chinese, Poles, Russians, Salvadorans, Israelis, Bolivians, and the Greeks it's too close for comfort so them as well.

1. I don't recall the specifics, but it was on local TV news a few years ago and was based on the increase in Muslim population when the Liberals were in office before 2006 and Tory candidates using gay marriage as an outreach tool to Muslim constituents. Here's the closest thing I could find to an online equivalent.

EDIT: Never mind, found something closer. It mentions Asians as well, but obviously selectiveness for opinions is more meaningful than selectiveness for race.

2. Wouldn't be the first time they threw politically inconvenient allies under the bus. Or the last.

3. So is letting them in based on how they interpret the Qur'an acceptable or not? Because it's still discriminatory based on beliefs, just in a more specific way.

Besides, it's in their holy book. In ways open to less interpretation than the Bible's homophobia, though granted part of the reason we're easier on Christianity is because it's the norm. But it's just a microcosm of the broader issue of religion influencing political views, and this effect not always being favourable to the rest of us.

Those are all nationalities, by the way.

I signed this happily. I don't want this bigot walking around in my country, leaving his filth in his wake. People yap on and on about how it's against "free speech" but you know what? I don't care. To me, free speech is no where near as important to morality, not even close. If it was a choice between living in a society that is friendly, welcoming and caring but has any form of hate speech prohibited, or a society that is completely free speech wise but is horrendous and hateful, I would choose the former any day of the week without a second thought. Morality > Free speech any day.

There is nothing "moral" about picking and choosing which perspectives can be heard.

[Gauthier]

Do you remember the time America started a petition to kick Piers Morgan out of the states because he was anti-guns? The petition was never taken seriously, just like with Trump it's just to make a political point not really to actually get the government to ban him from the UK.

Notice people are pretending there never was a petition to deport Piers Morgan because it would be inconvenient to the narrative that the UK is full of petty SJWs.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Do you remember the time America started a petition to kick Piers Morgan out of the states because he was anti-guns? The petition was never taken seriously, just like with Trump it's just to make a political point not really to actually get the government to ban him from the UK.

Notice people are pretending there never was a petition to deport Piers Morgan because it would be inconvenient to the narrative that the UK is full of petty SJWs.

I didn't even know there was a petition to deport Piers Morgan.

[BPSR]

And what makes the worlds most efficient economic system evil again?

Because it cares more about the money than the workers.

[Zoice]

I signed this happily. I don't want this bigot walking around in my country, leaving his filth in his wake. People yap on and on about how it's against "free speech" but you know what? I don't care. To me, free speech is no where near as important to morality, not even close. If it was a choice between living in a society that is friendly, welcoming and caring but has any form of hate speech prohibited, or a society that is completely free speech wise but is horrendous and hateful, I would choose the former any day of the week without a second thought. Morality > Free speech any day.

Your heart is in the right place, but free speech is incredibly important to the process of determining what is moral. Unless we know what it means to be moral, we can't act morally (barring a fortunate coincidence). That means we listen to every point of view that is offered, and we allow people to speak.

That said, Trump is about an even mix of Hitler and metallic orange, and his views are dangerous. Nothing wrong with banning a bigoted demagogue from visiting. Incidentally, if anyone else here is Canadian. . . *Coughs*

http://you.leadnow.ca/petitions/i-suppo ... ing-canada

[Paredonia]

There is nothing "moral" about picking and choosing which perspectives can be heard.

There is if the perspective is revolting and morally wrong.

[Atomic Utopia]

And what makes the worlds most efficient economic system evil again?

Because it cares more about the money than the workers.

How does it?

[Ugatoo]

There is nothing "moral" about picking and choosing which perspectives can be heard.

There is if the perspective is revolting and morally wrong.

Morals are subjective, do you really want to set a precedent of censorship in the off chance that the right wing rises and starts to censor the regressive left?

[Eastern Equestria]

Trump just let out a kind of interesting response to being rebuked by Scottish politicians and educational institutions:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-nor ... d-35060868

"I have done so much for Scotland, including building Trump International Golf Links, Scotland, which has received the highest accolades, and is what many believe to be one of the greatest golf courses anywhere in the world.

"Additionally, I have made a significant investment in the redevelopment of the iconic Turnberry Resort, which will have massive ballrooms, complete room refurbishments, a new golf course and a total rebuilding of the world famous Ailsa course to the highest standards and specifications of the Royal and Ancient.

"If they - Nicola Sturgeon and RGU - were going to do this, they should have informed me prior to my major investment in this £200m development, which will totally revitalise that vast region of Scotland.

"The UK politicians should be thanking me instead of pandering to political correctness."


He's still an ass, of course. But I do find it funny that the UK would consider banning Trump from their country whilst continuing to enjoy his golf resorts he invested millions into and still owns.

[Zoice]

There is if the perspective is revolting and morally wrong.

Morals are subjective, do you really want to set a precedent of censorship in the off chance that the right wing rises and starts to censor the regressive left?

No they aren't, but this isn't the thread to discuss it.

[Ugatoo]

Morals are subjective, do you really want to set a precedent of censorship in the off chance that the right wing rises and starts to censor the regressive left?

No they aren't, but this isn't the thread to discuss it.

Yes they are. In the West it is not immoral for women to wear revealing clothes, but in the Middle East it is.

If morals were objective we would all share the same beliefs.

[Gauthier]

Notice people are pretending there never was a petition to deport Piers Morgan because it would be inconvenient to the narrative that the UK is full of petty SJWs.

I didn't even know there was a petition to deport Piers Morgan.

It was a White House petition started by a bunch of butthurt gunfuckers who didn't like Morgan railing against the gun culture in the U.S.

Deport British Citizen Piers Morgan for Attacking 2nd Amendment

[Imperializt Russia]

Notice people are pretending there never was a petition to deport Piers Morgan because it would be inconvenient to the narrative that the UK is full of petty SJWs.

I didn't even know there was a petition to deport Piers Morgan.

Yeah, full-on White House petition.
Think we had a counter-petition to not receive him back.

[Thanatttynia]

I don't think Trump will be elected (to either the Republican candidacy or to the Presidency at a later stage) because I think (and hope) that people have more sense than to elect an idiot. His popularity with those that despise the establishment is of course a bit odd because he is representative of the entire establishment - he is the commercial establishment personified. It is understandable however.

I also think you're mixing up disillusionment with the ruling elite (a shift that is being undergone in almost all Western countries after the past few disastrous years and the almost systematic failure of the elected left worldwide to run a country well for whatever reason) and this disillusionment that a lot of young semi-progressive people have with the 'SJW agenda', which I don't think weighs that heavily on the minds of the general electorate considering the 'SJW' movement is largely internet-based.

I think he will be elected to the Republican Candidacy. Those who decide to back him will remain backing him I suspect. I suspect he could narrowly beat Clinton, but Sanders would be a landslide for Sanders.

Nothing to mix up really. The failure of the conservative movement to represent an adequate opposition to the left wing agenda is what unites anti-SJW conservatives and anti-corporatist ones, etc.

You have to remember that the right wing things corporatism is a result of left wing politics.

I suppose it's failures all round then?

We'll agree to disagree on the election possibility since there's only one way to find out but I will say that I think you (and many others) may be overestimating the degree to which the electorate is tired of the establishment. Of course they are and I expect to see a lot more unrest in the next few years, particularly in young people (and perhaps the lower classes if there were any suitable movement for them to follow) but in the end I think we'll have a situation where nothing has truly changed - voters will get to the booth and think 'better the devil you know'. Perhaps I'm just being pessimistic, however.

I don't think Trump will be elected (to either the Republican candidacy or to the Presidency at a later stage) because I think (and hope) that people have more sense than to elect an idiot. His popularity with those that despise the establishment is of course a bit odd because he is representative of the entire establishment - he is the commercial establishment personified. It is understandable however.

I also think you're mixing up disillusionment with the ruling elite (a shift that is being undergone in almost all Western countries after the past few disastrous years and the almost systematic failure of the elected left worldwide to run a country well for whatever reason) and this disillusionment that a lot of young semi-progressive people have with the 'SJW agenda', which I don't think weighs that heavily on the minds of the general electorate considering the 'SJW' movement is largely internet-based.

Hell, most people don't even know what the fuck a SJW is.

As someone who is pretty old-fashioned I don't even see the problems both SJWs and anti-SJWs online as a big deal. I just say "fuck it, you might have a point, but things were worse in the past so what do you want? You want an utopia? Cause you're not gonna have an utopia".

I'd agree, but I'd just say that a lot of the anti-'SJW' hysteria is unwarranted and defensive. They're young and loud and feel (rightly in my opinion) that they live in an oppressive state, and they're trying to change it with their limited means. I don't think it's possible to live in a non-oppressive state (I don't even think we'd want to) because oppression is just prejudice hitting the big-time; human nature transposed on to national politics.

[Imperializt Russia]

No they aren't, but this isn't the thread to discuss it.

Yes they are. In the West it is not immoral for women to wear revealing clothes, but in the Middle East it is.

You realise that's actually a very, very recent thing, yes?

[Zoice]

No they aren't, but this isn't the thread to discuss it.

Yes they are. In the West it is not immoral for women to wear revealing clothes, but in the Middle East it is.

If morals were objective we would all share the same beliefs.

Sorry, I'll clarify. Some morals are better than others.

Morality is objective because while we do not all share the same beliefs, some of us are right (or at least less wrong).

[Eastern Equestria]

Do you remember the time America started a petition to kick Piers Morgan out of the states because he was anti-guns? The petition was never taken seriously, just like with Trump it's just to make a political point not really to actually get the government to ban him from the UK.

Notice people are pretending there never was a petition to deport Piers Morgan because it would be inconvenient to the narrative that the UK is full of petty SJWs.

That was even more idiotic than this one, and I'm glad it got dismissed by the White House.

[BPSR]

How does it?

It turns the economy into worshipping a few large corps. It also supports the 1%, not the 99%.

[Paredonia]

deleted

[Thanatttynia]

Trump just let out a kind of interesting response to being rebuked by Scottish politicians and educational institutions:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-nor ... d-35060868

"I have done so much for Scotland, including building Trump International Golf Links, Scotland, which has received the highest accolades, and is what many believe to be one of the greatest golf courses anywhere in the world.

"Additionally, I have made a significant investment in the redevelopment of the iconic Turnberry Resort, which will have massive ballrooms, complete room refurbishments, a new golf course and a total rebuilding of the world famous Ailsa course to the highest standards and specifications of the Royal and Ancient.

"If they - Nicola Sturgeon and RGU - were going to do this, they should have informed me prior to my major investment in this £200m development, which will totally revitalise that vast region of Scotland.

"The UK politicians should be thanking me instead of pandering to political correctness."


He's still an ass, of course. But I do find it funny that the UK would consider banning Trump from their country whilst continuing to enjoy his golf resorts he invested millions into and still owns.

Those golf resorts have been nothing but shit for the local areas they were built in and the local people he stole off. Not many people get to enjoy golf resorts, anyway - perhaps the very rich. I find it difficult to express in words how irritatingly wrong he is on so many topics and so many points, largely because of his extreme arrogance and self-righteousness.

[Alvecia]

Trump just let out a kind of interesting response to being rebuked by Scottish politicians and educational institutions:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-nor ... d-35060868

"I have done so much for Scotland, including building Trump International Golf Links, Scotland, which has received the highest accolades, and is what many believe to be one of the greatest golf courses anywhere in the world.

"Additionally, I have made a significant investment in the redevelopment of the iconic Turnberry Resort, which will have massive ballrooms, complete room refurbishments, a new golf course and a total rebuilding of the world famous Ailsa course to the highest standards and specifications of the Royal and Ancient.

"If they - Nicola Sturgeon and RGU - were going to do this, they should have informed me prior to my major investment in this £200m development, which will totally revitalise that vast region of Scotland.

"The UK politicians should be thanking me instead of pandering to political correctness."


He's still an ass, of course. But I do find it funny that the UK would consider banning Trump from their country whilst continuing to enjoy his golf resorts he invested millions into and still owns.

Nobody from the UK takes this petition seriously. If they are then they seriously misunderstand the petition process.

[Imperializt Russia]

Trump just let out a kind of interesting response to being rebuked by Scottish politicians and educational institutions:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-nor ... d-35060868

"I have done so much for Scotland, including building Trump International Golf Links, Scotland, which has received the highest accolades, and is what many believe to be one of the greatest golf courses anywhere in the world.

"Additionally, I have made a significant investment in the redevelopment of the iconic Turnberry Resort, which will have massive ballrooms, complete room refurbishments, a new golf course and a total rebuilding of the world famous Ailsa course to the highest standards and specifications of the Royal and Ancient.

"If they - Nicola Sturgeon and RGU - were going to do this, they should have informed me prior to my major investment in this £200m development, which will totally revitalise that vast region of Scotland.

"The UK politicians should be thanking me instead of pandering to political correctness."


He's still an ass, of course. But I do find it funny that the UK would consider banning Trump from their country whilst continuing to enjoy his golf resorts he invested millions into and still owns.

Well what are they going to do?

[Allet Klar Chefs]

He's still an ass, of course. But I do find it funny that the UK would consider banning Trump from their country whilst continuing to enjoy his golf resorts he invested millions into and still owns.

It's not like he can't go bankrupt again and have them all repossessed.