|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jun 27, 2021 23:17:50 GMT
If Labour lose, he'll be there even if he gets 200 votes You both seem to be assuming that Galloway will make a decision about whether to be at the count on the basis of what the result is. That means that he would have to wait until the end of the count before making a decision about whether to go to the count. Is he a Time Lord? He'll have a pretty good idea of how things have gone long before the result. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 27, 2021 23:41:58 GMT
So if I am biologically male but my personal commitment is female it’s the commitment that counts but if I am legally British but have no commitment to it at all nobody should raise questions about the commitment Not in the least related. The comment you made assumed that the terms Muslim or British are not legally defined very clearly , according to who has British citizenship, and who is an adherent of the Muslim faith. As they are there is no question as to whether anyone who is both Muslim and British are British Muslims. They simply are. Commitment is entirely irrelevant. Statehood is a fact, not an attitude or belief. Other examples have no relationship to that legal actuality. "An adherent of the Muslim faith" isn't a particularly clear definition, since there is massive disagreement within the groups that self-identify as Muslim about which sects count as Muslim. Even at the most generic level a great many Sunnis and Shias see the other group as not Muslims, and neither group considers the Ahmadis to be Muslim. |
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Jun 28, 2021 4:10:01 GMT
You both seem to be assuming that Galloway will make a decision about whether to be at the count on the basis of what the result is. That means that he would have to wait until the end of the count before making a decision about whether to go to the count. Is he a Time Lord? He'll have a pretty good idea of how things have gone long before the result. He surely knows this. He's just being pedantic. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,762
|
Post by right on Jun 28, 2021 5:46:21 GMT
Not in the least related. The comment you made assumed that the terms Muslim or British are not legally defined very clearly , according to who has British citizenship, and who is an adherent of the Muslim faith. As they are there is no question as to whether anyone who is both Muslim and British are British Muslims. They simply are. Commitment is entirely irrelevant. Statehood is a fact, not an attitude or belief. Other examples have no relationship to that legal actuality. "An adherent of the Muslim faith" isn't a particularly clear definition, since there is massive disagreement within the groups that self-identify as Muslim about which sects count as Muslim. Even at the most generic level a great many Sunnis and Shias see the other group as not Muslims, and neither group considers the Ahmadis to be Muslim. To outsiders there are few edge cases. Basically we accept that everyone who claims to be Muslim is Muslim (I probably have to make an exception for someone transparently claiming they are as a joke to forestall boogie). We ignore, sometimes conspicuously, questions about the Islamic purity of various schools. |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,419
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 28, 2021 6:13:18 GMT
Not in the least related. The comment you made assumed that the terms Muslim or British are not legally defined very clearly , according to who has British citizenship, and who is an adherent of the Muslim faith. As they are there is no question as to whether anyone who is both Muslim and British are British Muslims. They simply are. Commitment is entirely irrelevant. Statehood is a fact, not an attitude or belief. Other examples have no relationship to that legal actuality. "An adherent of the Muslim faith" isn't a particularly clear definition, since there is massive disagreement within the groups that self-identify as Muslim about which sects count as Muslim. Even at the most generic level a great many Sunnis and Shias see the other group as not Muslims, and neither group considers the Ahmadis to be Muslim. But that isn't relevant to the initial point made, which referred to the concept of being a British Muslim. Unlike you, I don't have a religious faith, so your religion and their religion are both just that - religions, and it is perfectly possible to believe either of them and be a British citizen, What I have no time for is the idea that there is something about any religion that nullified British citizenship. That is factual and a legal status, no matter what the internal definitions of any religion might be. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,889 
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 28, 2021 7:28:54 GMT
If Labour lose, he'll be there even if he gets 200 votes You both seem to be assuming that Galloway will make a decision about whether to be at the count on the basis of what the result is. That means that he would have to wait until the end of the count before making a decision about whether to go to the count. Is he a Time Lord? He can be at a remote location in contact by mobile phone. Long before being near to a declaration he can be made aware that he is a contender, or not a contender but supported enough to have had a major effect, or to have failed in his own terms. Then he makes a choice. There is absolutely no need to be at the count at all. I soon got over the compulsion to get to the count directly after the polls closed and went to a pub for some beer, to my home or another venue for a long relaxing bath and change of clothes. Then at least a snack. If at a GE there is lots of time to have a good meal first and more drink. If a council election it is tighter on time and I have been very close to result often and missed it completely twice. It doesn't matter at all. Personal comfort does. Never panic. The count really doesn't matter that much even if you win. I never won and rearely thought that I might. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,005
|
Post by Khunanup on Jun 28, 2021 8:22:51 GMT
Not in the least related. The comment you made assumed that the terms Muslim or British are not legally defined very clearly , according to who has British citizenship, and who is an adherent of the Muslim faith. As they are there is no question as to whether anyone who is both Muslim and British are British Muslims. They simply are. Commitment is entirely irrelevant. Statehood is a fact, not an attitude or belief. Other examples have no relationship to that legal actuality. "An adherent of the Muslim faith" isn't a particularly clear definition, since there is massive disagreement within the groups that self-identify as Muslim about which sects count as Muslim. Even at the most generic level a great many Sunnis and Shias see the other group as not Muslims, and neither group considers the Ahmadis to be Muslim. Yes it is, you self-identify your faith, it's not really for anyone else to say you're not (they can all they like, but it's none of their business). |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 28, 2021 9:03:32 GMT
"An adherent of the Muslim faith" isn't a particularly clear definition, since there is massive disagreement within the groups that self-identify as Muslim about which sects count as Muslim. Even at the most generic level a great many Sunnis and Shias see the other group as not Muslims, and neither group considers the Ahmadis to be Muslim. Yes it is, you self-identify your faith, it's not really for anyone else to say you're not (they can all they like, but it's none of their business). An approach which leads to religious labels becoming entirely meaningless. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,005
|
Post by Khunanup on Jun 28, 2021 11:24:17 GMT
Yes it is, you self-identify your faith, it's not really for anyone else to say you're not (they can all they like, but it's none of their business). An approach which leads to religious labels becoming entirely meaningless. On the contrary, it's the only way they make any sense. Religion is a deeply personal experience, no-one can define someone else's beliefs, however much they'd like to. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 28, 2021 11:38:59 GMT
But in practice they do. Sunni muslims who insist that Shia are heretical. Muslims who insist the Ahmadiyya are not muslims. Orthodox Jews who refuse to accept conversions except where done through Orthodox Rabbis. There are examples from almost all religions.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,762
|
Post by right on Jun 28, 2021 12:09:57 GMT
Yes it is, you self-identify your faith, it's not really for anyone else to say you're not (they can all they like, but it's none of their business). An approach which leads to religious labels becoming entirely meaningless. Can't we just accept there's a double standard here and be done with it? Most non Jews wouldn't accept Jews for Jesus followers as Jews. There certainly isn't a consensus among non Muslims on counting Unitarians or Mormons as Christian. However among non Muslims of you say you're a Muslim we tend to accept it at face value. And that includes Ahmadis. I don't think there's a single person here who would say an Ahmadi isn't a Muslim. Or for that matter an Alawite. They say so, we accept it. We don't really understand enough to feel confident enough to reject it. All the stuff about self definition of fissures within the community of pretty irrelevant. |
|
nelson
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,645
|
Post by nelson on Jun 28, 2021 12:18:57 GMT
An approach which leads to religious labels becoming entirely meaningless. On the contrary, it's the only way they make any sense. Religion is a deeply personal experience, no-one can define someone else's beliefs, however much they'd like to. Like membership of an ethnic group it's a two-way street consisting of self-identification and acceptance by the group you claim to belong to. Just as I can't become ethnically Japanese, because all the other people that self-identify as Japanese wouldn't consider me Japanese, someone who believes Jesus Christ was just an ordinary itinerant preacher and not the son of God can't be a Christian because other Christians wouldn't consider him/her to be a Christian. There are certain core beliefs in all religions that you have to subscribe to in order to belong to the religion. Of course there'll always be heretical sects that are on the fringes of a religion (Mormons, Jehova's Witnesses, Unitarians, Alawites, Ahmadiyya etc.) and accepted by some members of the faith but not all, but it can never be anything goes. There are limits to how far self-identification can take you. In the 70's many Muslims in Mauritius started identifying as Arabs (the nearest "strong" Muslim group), but since everyone else on the island remembered that their ancestors came primarily from Gujarat that was never accepted and they gradually had to abandon the idea. There are always limits to self-identification, because you have to be accepted by the group you want to join and often also by society at-large. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 28, 2021 12:23:28 GMT
You both seem to be assuming that Galloway will make a decision about whether to be at the count on the basis of what the result is. That means that he would have to wait until the end of the count before making a decision about whether to go to the count. Is he a Time Lord? He can be at a remote location in contact by mobile phone. Long before being near to a declaration he can be made aware that he is a contender, or not a contender but supported enough to have had a major effect, or to have failed in his own terms. Then he makes a choice. There is absolutely no need to be at the count at all. I soon got over the compulsion to get to the count directly after the polls closed and went to a pub for some beer, to my home or another venue for a long relaxing bath and change of clothes. Then at least a snack. If at a GE there is lots of time to have a good meal first and more drink. If a council election it is tighter on time and I have been very close to result often and missed it completely twice. It doesn't matter at all. Personal comfort does. Never panic. The count really doesn't matter that much even if you win. I never won and rearely thought that I might. The only important part of the count is the box samples. After that I tell everybody they can go home, otherwise they're just sitting around waiting for the result. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,889
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 28, 2021 13:30:54 GMT
On the contrary, it's the only way they make any sense. Religion is a deeply personal experience, no-one can define someone else's beliefs, however much they'd like to. Like membership of an ethnic group it's a two-way street consisting of self-identification and acceptance by the group you claim to belong to. Just as I can't become ethnically Japanese, because all the other people that self-identify as Japanese wouldn't consider me Japanese, someone who believes Jesus Christ was just an ordinary itinerant preacher and not the son of God can't be a Christian because other Christians wouldn't consider him/her to be a Christian. There are certain core beliefs in all religions that you have to subscribe to in order to belong to the religion. Of course there'll always be heretical sects that are on the fringes of a religion (Mormons, Jehova's Witnesses, Unitarians, Alawites, Ahmadiyya etc.) and accepted by some members of the faith but not all, but it can never be anything goes. There are limits to how far self-identification can take you. In the 70's many Muslims in Mauritius started identifying as Arabs (the nearest "strong" Muslim group), but since everyone else on the island remembered that their ancestors came primarily from Gujarat that was never accepted and they gradually had to abandon the idea. There are always limits to self-identification, because you have to be accepted by the group you want to join and often also by society at-large. All very sound reasoning. I do find it a pity that the same reasoning is not applied to men pretending to be women. Men know that they are men. Women know that they are not women. At that point the assertion should be cold stone dead for the reasons that you cite. Not approved by the group they attempt to assert they are part of and not approved by society at large. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,762
|
Post by right on Jun 28, 2021 16:44:03 GMT
You both seem to be assuming that Galloway will make a decision about whether to be at the count on the basis of what the result is. That means that he would have to wait until the end of the count before making a decision about whether to go to the count. Is he a Time Lord? He can be at a remote location in contact by mobile phone. Long before being near to a declaration he can be made aware that he is a contender, or not a contender but supported enough to have had a major effect, or to have failed in his own terms. Then he makes a choice. There is absolutely no need to be at the count at all. I soon got over the compulsion to get to the count directly after the polls closed and went to a pub for some beer, to my home or another venue for a long relaxing bath and change of clothes. Then at least a snack. If at a GE there is lots of time to have a good meal first and more drink. If a council election it is tighter on time and I have been very close to result often and missed it completely twice. It doesn't matter at all. Personal comfort does. Never panic. The count really doesn't matter that much even if you win. I never won and rearely thought that I might. Knowing how the boxes are turning out is actually quite important. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,889
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 28, 2021 22:56:44 GMT
He can be at a remote location in contact by mobile phone. Long before being near to a declaration he can be made aware that he is a contender, or not a contender but supported enough to have had a major effect, or to have failed in his own terms. Then he makes a choice. There is absolutely no need to be at the count at all. I soon got over the compulsion to get to the count directly after the polls closed and went to a pub for some beer, to my home or another venue for a long relaxing bath and change of clothes. Then at least a snack. If at a GE there is lots of time to have a good meal first and more drink. If a council election it is tighter on time and I have been very close to result often and missed it completely twice. It doesn't matter at all. Personal comfort does. Never panic. The count really doesn't matter that much even if you win. I never won and rearely thought that I might. Knowing how the boxes are turning out is actually quite important. Oh the technical side of observing, recording and challanging items, it is most important for the designated persons in the team. I was speaking entirely from the point of view of GG as candidate and myself as a candidate and campaigner. For them it is wise to soak, unwind, eat and drink first. Arrive late and smart, relaxed and refreshed. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 28, 2021 23:25:35 GMT
As a statisician primarily concerned with gathering data in that brief window between opening the boxes and sorting the ballots, I agree with you. I'd much prefer that those who want to natter and socialise do so elsewhere than the count - and that sometimes includes candidates. I tell people that they've got a count ticket to do a job of work. If you don't want to do that, or want to swan around, let somebody else have your count ticket. The crucial times is immediately at the start of the count. Once the boxes have been opened and verified, and papers are being sorted, that's when you can drift off, there's no more data to gather at that point, and turning up at that point is too late to be of any use. (Sorry, the formatting's gone pants, the browser died as I was typing, and then kicked me out.)
|
|
|
|
Post by michael2019 on Jul 2, 2021 5:05:08 GMT
Bang on  ! |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jul 2, 2021 16:19:56 GMT
If Labour lose, he'll be there even if he gets 200 votes You both seem to be assuming that Galloway will make a decision about whether to be at the count on the basis of what the result is. That means that he would have to wait until the end of the count before making a decision about whether to go to the count. Is he a Time Lord? Wouldn't rule it out tbh. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jul 2, 2021 19:06:23 GMT
You both seem to be assuming that Galloway will make a decision about whether to be at the count on the basis of what the result is. That means that he would have to wait until the end of the count before making a decision about whether to go to the count. Is he a Time Lord? Wouldn't rule it out tbh. The Master? |
|
!
