Most liked posts in thread: Rule of the Mob - Batley School

where do you get that from as all the reports I have seen just say the measure is English not as first language in the household

 

Although from the Express the figures it quotes are from the ONS.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/849283/immigration-news-children-speak-english-first-second-language-school

 

But those figures are English not as first language rather than no English

 

"Higher fertility" That's very diplomatic.

 

This

 

Looks like it , been furloughed / sheilded for 13 months , 1st day back at work today . 2 spells in Hospital ( 1 because of the wonderful NHS ) so all in all been a year to forget .

 

Yep. It's a stupid rule.

The right to peacefully protest should trump everything regardless of whether we agree with them or not.

Otherwise it's a slippery slope.

 

You know the difference between a proper protest and people taking the piss. Come on.

 

Two spectate questions there.

The important but though is that the right to genuinely protest should never be removed for whatever reason.

 

Yes... two separate questions and you answered neither mate.

 

Okay, let me try again.

I think we should have been allowed to mix more but that is irrelevant to the question. Its irrelevant.

On a broader scale the right to protest should never be lumped in with the rest of the restrictions. It should always be allowed.

That work?

 

Not even if their actions are genuinely putting other lives at risk?

 

Correct.

 

No doubt. But that's not the important bit.

 

That's okay.

You're only push back against those in power is peaceful protest.

If you're happy for that to be taken away for whatever reason, including the safety of the public, then that's up to you.

 

I didn't say it should be taken away, I said that it shouldn't continue when it's genuinely putting lives at risk. I really don't see your angle in even arguing that point.

As for the protest, they had it, in the first day. Was there really a need to return and force the closure of the school or should there be a train of thought that the point was made and use it to open dialogue with the aim of resolving the issue?

 

My angle is simply that rights are never taken away without the spectre of a greater threat.

However my view is simply that it is a right above all others - including the right to safety- otherwise it can easily be the away by simply saying a threat over rules it.

 

The point you're trying to make is just nonsense in this context though. The protest could have been held and the relevant points made without the threat to safety, all it would have taken was some organisation.

 

That's not the point I'm trying to make though. I'm sorry if you're misunderstanding.

The right to protest shouldn't be taken away, even on the basis of public safety or if we disagree with the pont being made.

 

If it places lives in danger, doesn't that move it strongly away from being a peaceful protest...?

I agree that the right to protest is crucial for any democracy, but a line has to be drawn somewhere doesn't it?