Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Xaccers
Why? It's a valid question.
Or are we no longer allowed to ask questions about "contraversial" topics?
Do you think that gay policemen are overreacting/looking for trouble or not?
Yes or no? Simple as that.
|
Oh Xaccers, were that things were so simple, unfortunately this looks like just another "irregular verb"...
I stand up for my rights.
You over-react.
He is looking for trouble.
Quote:
|
A statement is a formulation of an opinion, and as such that opinion can be deemed prejudiced, but a question is a request for an opinion, and therefore although the answers can be prejudice, the question itself cannot.
|
Nonsense! Questions can be loaded either through deliberate intent or through ignorance.
"Tell me, are you still beating your wife...?!"
Quote:
|
As I've said, no patrolling officers should wear jewelery for their own safety.
|
And I agree. And had the decision of the Police been that *NO* officer should wear jewellery I wouldn't have a problem.
Since, however it is only the *male* officers who have been singled out, this is discrimination as I pointed out in my first post on this subject.
Quote:
|
Now, if some homosexual men in the force feel that they are being descriminated against because they can't wear their earings, then why claim it's gays being descriminated against when hetrosexual earing wearing male officers are also being denied the ability to wear them too?
|
Because this is targetted towards *only* male officers and, apparently, the only male officers who wear earrings/ studs are gay, so there does seem to be just a *hint* of anti-gay bias to the decision.