By allowing this to happen in Glasgow city centre, they really are clutching at straws if they think the orange vote is going to save them.

Why allow and pander to this kind of thing? It’s 2015 ffs!

“OrangeFest” Set To Take Over Glasgow This Saturday

Thankfully I’m leaving the country this weekend! 😆

Well I’m glad I visited last weekend and not this coming one, especially after Sunday’s football match.

In addition to all the normal, and frankly sensible, objections to this sort of thing I’d also like to add “crimes against music” to the list. Have you every had to listen to the bands? There are awful with intonation so poor that it hurts.

They do seem to speak some sense 😉

However, it comes just days after the official voice of the Lodge in Scotland, The Orange Torch, branded the country a “nation of psychiatric basket cases” for returning 56 SNP MPs in May’s election. The article goes on to call the Scottish electorate “barking mad” for being “won over by the lying propaganda and fruitcake delusions of the SNP”. It’s unclear whether the Lodge have lived up their pledge to invite all of Glasgow’s politicians, although it seems unlikely the city’s seven SNP MPs will receive much of a welcome at it.

Seriously though I thought the SNP was in charge of Scotland, surely they can legislate against this if it’s not appropriate ?

The council will have final say on this, run by labour.(though I canny see that lasting long.)

This all seems a bit odd to me.

I grew up in Northern Ireland and before the Troubles started, lots of people just used to go out to the parades and fields no matter who was behind it – it was just a day out and one of the things you used to do. Clearly that was lost a long time ago.

How do you get back to the position where it is just another activity and day out without the idiots hijacking it?

The question is whether the council has any workable grounds not to allow it. It’s dressed up nicely as a ‘cultural and social event’, whatever the undercurrent of religious bigotry and intolerance.

Would an SNP council be able to ban it either?

“canny” that’s twice in 5 mins on different threads, are you trying to exhaust your Scottish vocabulary before your trip abroad, to Carlisle ? Don’t forget your passport. 😀

it was just a day out and one of the things you used to do

Sadly these events get hijacked, then people blame religion.

Is Scotland no longer a country that allows freedom of speech?

We live in a democracy and even the odious have the right to do this. To prevent or ban them doing this cheapens democracy.

Not sure how to address the violence that surrounds the event but I assume that has as much to do with history as it does alcohol and idiots.

The council cannot just block events because they don’t agree with them, and not blocking them does not mean they agree with the organisation.

Aye. I recall many years ago people at a place I worked trying to make sectarianism sound fun. Went a bit quiet when I asked them how many friends they’d buried having that fun.

Maybe idiots want to be tribal and if it wasn’t this, it would be something else. At least this is predictable and manageable.

Does Bonfire night get hijacked by anti Catholics? Or does it need a more mature nation to get past the reasons for a national celebration.

I shall now retire to Yorkshire the home of Guy Fawkes

jambalaya – Member
“canny” that’s twice in 5 mins on different threads, are you trying to exhaust your Scottish vocabulary before your trip abroad, to Carlisle ? Don’t forget your passport.

Haha, canny help myself sometimes! 😀

Junkyard – lazarus
We live in a democracy and even the odious have the right to do this. To prevent or ban them doing this cheapens democracy.

Dunno, consider the number of marches they are allowed in Glasgow. Seems to me that their right to march and take over the streets is somewhat unbalanced.

Personally, I’d ban the quasi-miltaristic marches, republican ones too(which are just an embarassment.)

This is just an extension of those. It’s not democracy, it’s just triumphalism.

We live in a democracy and even the odious have the right to do this. To prevent or ban them doing this cheapens democracy.

Well freedom of speech seldom extends to hate speech. In any case freedom of speech doesn’t mean that a council must allow you to express your odious beliefs, it means that you can’t be arrested for expressing them.

I see that tory boy supreme Boris Johnson is desperately courting the anti capitalist vote.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/million-masks-march-2014-thousands-gather-for-anticapitalist-protest-in-london-9842407.html

How do you get back to the position where it is just another activity and day out without the idiots hijacking it?

It’s a tough one .
Just like casual racism and homophobia ,all that religious bigotry and intolerance is often handed down in families ,then kept going through generations.
Because,it’s only a bit of banter,they are just having a laugh,some of their best mates are … etc,etc.

Surprising, and not in a good way, how many of you are willing to trample on the rights of a minority just because you dont like them or what they stand for.

How many marches do they have out of interest – I have no idea to be clear and its a real question.

Well freedom of speech seldom extends to hate speech.

Its not hate speech its just views you dont like.

In any case freedom of speech doesn’t mean that a council must allow you to express your odious beliefs

So freedom of speech means the state can prevent you then 😕

it means that you can’t be arrested for expressing them.

at least we agree they are doing something that is perfectly legal

We have to protect the rights of those we like the least
Freedom of speech is pointless if you can only do/say things the state likes

Junkyard – lazarus
Surprising, and not in a good way, how many of you are willing to trample on the rights of a minority just because you dont like them or what they stand for.

What other minority gets to troop up and down the street in a miltaristic fashion about 800 times a year and finish it off with a george square gala day?

Its not hate speech its just views you dont like.

I was brought up in the that part of the world, and I’m very glad I left. The promotion of hatred and bigotry (of which this is part) amounts to hate speech in my opinion.

So freedom of speech means the state can prevent you then

No, but they don’t have to facilitate either by giving you access to a huge area in the middle of city for an extended period of time.

Junkyard – lazarus

Its not hate speech its just views you dont like.

All due respect but have you ever actually seen a glasgow march?

JY – up here there’s anti-sectarian legislation which is often argued infringes freedom of speech. So there’s a different backdrop against which to judge what should / shouldn’t be done by event organisers and Councils.

Not for decades and I was pretty young at the time.
Feel free to educate me [ not a dig – genuine comment] as I seem to be speaking from a position of English based ignorance [ and you know what I think about that ].

I retract my comments in light of the comments on here form folk who are more informed than me.

No No NO! We cannot let informed comment on this forum.

I thought that this was going to be a link to

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9ab85e30-0852-11e5-85de-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3buBcCI33

Its behind a paywall – you must know this by now- and we cannot read FT links so a precise is more useful than a link

Aye thm, we know you’ve an FT subscription, stop showing off, they rest of us ain’t getting one! 😉

copy and paste if you really want us to know what you are talking about! 😆

They don’t allow it Joe and I prefer to stick to the rules…(and they monitor and record cutting and pasting)

The sub is worth the price BTW

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9ab85e30-0852-11e5-85de-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz3buIs4Yp3

You see!

You could still precise it rather than link to it again when you have just been told [ and confirmed] that we cannot read it
I am assuming you wish to be helpful or have your point be understood
If not keep posting links to the thing we cannot read.

THM’s link has absolutely nothing to do with this thread’s subject matter, it’s to do with Labour Party policy on taxation.

THM despite maintaining this ridiculous pretense that he is “politically neutral” never misses an opportunity to have a cheap shot at the Labour Party. Or indeed any other political party, such as the SNP or the Greens, just as long as it isn’t the Conservative Party.

JY – up here there’s anti-sectarian legislation which is often argued infringes freedom of speech. So there’s a different backdrop against which to judge what should / shouldn’t be done by event organisers and Councils.

That’s circular reasoning – and in any case if there is a breach of the speech restriction laws, the punters doing it can be arrested and prosecuted. The fact that some speech is already prohibited is not a good reason to ban people from gathering and saying things that “aren’t illegal but we think might be ‘inappropriate’, ‘hateful’ and ‘bigoted'”.

Sometimes you have to pull on your big girl panties and realise that the price of free speech and democracy involves occasionally being offended (or, more likely, being mildly inconvenienced while doing your shopping) by troglodytes in obsolete headgear and not immediately arresting them for it.

Never out of the stalker’s sights!!!

Glad to see that you ignored my words, “I thought….” . On your normal form. Well done. You did notice the treads title?!?

The FT subscription definitely isn’t worth the money. Most articles you can see by answering a few questions and/or registering btw.

Konabunny – I’m not saying what I think should or shouldn’t be done. Just that there’s a different background up here, some of it law, against which the obligations of all parties have to be measured. Some of those labels such you’ve used are what the law seeks to prevent.

I don’t particularly care what they do as long as no-one gets hurt and they clean up afterwards. Outlawing spoken words doesn’t outlaw the mindset and that’s what really needs to change.

konabunny – Member
democracy involves occasionally being offended

Generally I do agree with this though, but this is outright promotion, which is an entirely different thing.

When an orange march passes by, I’ll leave it to it, and avoid it. But tbh there is far too many of them, and it goes well beyond free speach when they get to do it 800 times a year. That’s just provocation and triumphalism, not free speech or a reasonable right to demonstrate.

There’s really not 800 though, are there, really.
Maybe it is a Glasgow thing – the Orange Order organised No march in Edinburgh during the Indyref wasn’t really any problem.

Haha, canny help myself sometimes!

What’s this “canny” nonsense? You cannae spell cannae like that.

You cannae spell cannae like that

Education Scotland would appear to disagree

oldbloke – Member
There’s really not 800 though, are there, really.
Maybe it is a Glasgow thing – the Orange Order organised No march in Edinburgh during the Indyref wasn’t really any problem.

Generally there aren’t a great deal of problem, as most people avoid them. Issues will tend to come from the crowds that follow them infighting, policing costs, and the amount of disruption they actually cause. But that’s the point, why should i have to avoid them or get stuck behind them in traffic, Because a bunch of neaderthals think that they have a right to march on the queens highway and jam it up the catholics?

It’s difficult to find uptodate stats but here’s 2003, the amount of them isn’t going down imo.

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2005/01/20583/50704

A snapshot of the number of marches in the strathclyde area 2003
orange – 713
catholic – 16
other – 250
total – 979

in scotland
orange – 853
catholic – 20
other – 839
total – 1,712