IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
|
Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Housing benefit challenge FAILS
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
honey!oh sugar sugar. |
Ben 10 wrote:
In The Know wrote:
What these people fail to understand, is that whilest they are fawning all over these people - and telling them they are "atheletes" etc - they are actually laughing at them, in the cruelest possible way
Ignoring the mandatory ITK 'typos' - this recent statement shows his close alignment with Jim Davidson's views which are set out in another post. One must wonder how ITK ( and Jim et al) would feel if their son and/or daughter was disabled.
Would they both be 'laughing at them'?
Sadly, there remains in society this one group of people who are still mocked, dehumanised, marginalised, castigated, blamed for woes, and subjected to threatened actions that present a clear danger to their lives and futures.
To have a truly equal and moral society - and if the NHS is to have any chance of caring properly for the least of those among us - people like ITK and Davidson need to watch their mouths.
And cleanse their hearts.....
I agree that people with disabilities are demonised lately. Particularly those with "invisible" complaints who claim benefits, but I dont think un-pc terms are to blame.
Using the proper terms for disabled people, or calling black people whatever is fashionable at the time doesn't stop discrimination and racism.
Patronising disabled people is not helpful in my opinion, and it is this aspect of the olympic games that so many of us were offended by, and that they were not included in the main event. |
|
White Badger |
Ben 10 wrote:
One must wonder how ITK ( and Jim et al) would feel if their son and/or daughter was disabled.
Would they both be 'laughing at them'?
Probably |
|
Ben 10 |
In The Know wrote:
What these people fail to understand, is that whilest they are fawning all over these people - and telling them they are "atheletes" etc - they are actually laughing at them, in the cruelest possible way
Ignoring the mandatory ITK 'typos' - this recent statement shows his close alignment with Jim Davidson's views which are set out in another post. One must wonder how ITK ( and Jim et al) would feel if their son and/or daughter was disabled.
Would they both be 'laughing at them'?
Sadly, there remains in society this one group of people who are still mocked, dehumanised, marginalised, castigated, blamed for woes, and subjected to threatened actions that present a clear danger to their lives and futures.
To have a truly equal and moral society - and if the NHS is to have any chance of caring properly for the least of those among us - people like ITK and Davidson need to watch their mouths.
And cleanse their hearts.....
|
|
In The Know |
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Not necessarily. Some of the kindest people use "old fashioned" language, and some of the most "right on" PC brigade wouldn't lift a finger to help anyone. 
Quite right, honey!
What these people fail to understand, is that whilest they are fawning all over these people - and telling them they are "atheletes" etc - they are actually laughing at them, in the cruelest possible way.
It's simply "the King's new clothes". They dare not say anything different (for fear of standing out) and so continue to persecute these people by telling them they are something they even these people realise they are not !!!! |
|
steveimp |
In The Know wrote:
david wrote:
Just a reminder that ITK has past form when it comes to disabled people. He described the Paralympics as the Mong olympics. Yes folks, he regards disabled people as 'mongs'. I think that says it all.
The reason for my initial post, david, was to enquire whether these people will ever be grateful (for anything), or whether they will continue to moan continuously forever !
We already supply money to these people ... we feed and house them. No doubt we also allow their "partner / carer" to live on us as well.
We cover the costs of Doctors, nurses, hospital visits, and no doubt very expensive medicine. We probably pay for health visitors, people to put them to bed, people to get them up, people to feed them.
... and what do we get - or will ever get - (except continual moaning) in return ?
Do you think for one moment that all these legal "challenges" are paid for by these people themselves? Yep - thats right - we almost certainly pay for that as well !
ITK, having a disabled child isn't a case of "you don't have to fall off a cliff to know it hurts". If you have never had a disabled child, you simply don't know the joy that they bring, despite the fear, the hurt, the anger.
Do you honestly think I wanted a child with a limited life span?
Do you honestly think I wanted a child who needs 24 hour care (that we - and charities NOT NHS - provide)?
But he is still my child and I wouldn't swap him for the world. |
|
|
|
|
