| Ironic don't you think? 07:41 - Mar 14 with 3924 views | bluelagos |
Some people will be off to church today, to stand inside, in silence and remember in a dignified way a lost friend, or relative, mother or maybe just to remember Sarah Everard, a young lady brutally murdered.
I wonder if they should be worried about arrest or handcuffing or fines or is that only applicable for people who chose to stand outside, in silence and remember in a dignified way a young lady brutally murdered?
I wonder why are those people in support of the yesterday's police actions on the grounds of public safety not calling for them to break up the many church services today? Services which are more dangerous given they are inside.
Do tell... [Post edited 14 Mar 2021 7:58]
|  |
| |  |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:42 - Mar 14 with 1340 views | Bobbychase |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:40 - Mar 14 by WeWereZombies |
When I say disappear I don't mean that they are temporarily channelling H.G. Wells and have become invisible. I mean that they have left their homes, at the time that they normally do to go to church. Maybe they are off to someone else's home to watch 'Songs of Praise' (not on until quarter past one, so going off at a quarter to ten is some major savouring of the pre-match build up). |
Songs of Praise, although I don't watch it, is on in the afternoons isn't it?
They're off to Asda. |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:43 - Mar 14 with 1339 views | WeWereZombies |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:32 - Mar 14 by J2BLUE |
His point is that a minority of any group will break the rules. Posting an example is utterly pointless.
The point we should be concerned with is the one the OP raises about masked protesters socially distanced outdoors being treated like they were. |
'Posting an example is utterly pointless.'
And this is how the death of empirical evidence and fact based reasoning starts, slippery slope towards a World ruled by gossip and fear mongering ahead, I wonder which organisations can gain from such a situation? But I have faith that they will. |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:43 - Mar 14 with 1338 views | J2BLUE |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:40 - Mar 14 by WeWereZombies |
When I say disappear I don't mean that they are temporarily channelling H.G. Wells and have become invisible. I mean that they have left their homes, at the time that they normally do to go to church. Maybe they are off to someone else's home to watch 'Songs of Praise' (not on until quarter past one, so going off at a quarter to ten is some major savouring of the pre-match build up). |
Once football got put behind closed doors did Big Dave from number 48 still leave his house at 2?
Sounds like you need to get a life mate. Wouldn't exactly be uncommon to replace something they did with something else. God is, apparently, everywhere so maybe they went out in nature? |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:44 - Mar 14 with 1337 views | m14_blue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:23 - Mar 14 by GlasgowBlue |
Church services aren’t allowed under the current COVID restrictions. [Post edited 14 Mar 2021 9:24]
|
They are in England. |  | | |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:45 - Mar 14 with 1323 views | J2BLUE |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:43 - Mar 14 by WeWereZombies |
'Posting an example is utterly pointless.'
And this is how the death of empirical evidence and fact based reasoning starts, slippery slope towards a World ruled by gossip and fear mongering ahead, I wonder which organisations can gain from such a situation? But I have faith that they will. |
No you're right. If you can post one example then clearly they are all at it.
I don't think your method is some sort of gold standard evidence like you seem to think. | |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:46 - Mar 14 with 1326 views | StokieBlue |
I totally disagree with the heavy-handed way the Met handled the protests last night.
Having said that:
Whilst you might not agree with the rules, one is within the rules (with a very limited scope) and one was deemed outside the rules.
Your point distils down to saying the public should pick and choose which rules they follow going forward which isn't a great idea in my opinion.
If you have an issue with the rules then that anger should be focused at the government, not people on here who want people to follow the established rules, especially since some might still be anxious and worried about mixing before vaccinations are completed.
The risk of the protest last night might have been very small (although distancing wasn't brilliant, being outside is important as you've highlighted). However the original protest was blocked because a very large number of people were likely to attend and whilst standing in a field is fine, travelling to and from the field and socialising around that isn't.
Are there any reasons (and they may be) that people couldn't protest in the alternate ways suggested by the original event organiser?
SB |  | | |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:48 - Mar 14 with 1312 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:40 - Mar 14 by WeWereZombies |
When I say disappear I don't mean that they are temporarily channelling H.G. Wells and have become invisible. I mean that they have left their homes, at the time that they normally do to go to church. Maybe they are off to someone else's home to watch 'Songs of Praise' (not on until quarter past one, so going off at a quarter to ten is some major savouring of the pre-match build up). |
Are you keeping tabs on all churchgoers and making notes as to when they are leaving their homes? All of them? |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:49 - Mar 14 with 1311 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:43 - Mar 14 by WeWereZombies |
'Posting an example is utterly pointless.'
And this is how the death of empirical evidence and fact based reasoning starts, slippery slope towards a World ruled by gossip and fear mongering ahead, I wonder which organisations can gain from such a situation? But I have faith that they will. |
I'm wrong on this. I live in Scotland, and didn't realise that churches are re-opening in England today. [Post edited 14 Mar 2021 9:54]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:51 - Mar 14 with 1297 views | m14_blue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:49 - Mar 14 by ArnoldMoorhen |
I'm wrong on this. I live in Scotland, and didn't realise that churches are re-opening in England today. [Post edited 14 Mar 2021 9:54]
|
I’m afraid that’s not true.
Churches are open for private worship and communal services, albeit they need to have risk assessments and restrictions on numbers etc.
EDIT: this is for England and Wales, I believe they’re closed completely in Scotland, not sure about NI. [Post edited 14 Mar 2021 9:54]
| | | |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:52 - Mar 14 with 1301 views | Guthrum |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:29 - Mar 14 by bluelagos |
I am challenging the hypocracy of those who chose to condemn the women holding an outdoor vigil who don't also condemn those who hold indoors worship.
One is clealy more dangerous. So why would anyone chose to condemn one and not the other? |
I'm quite happy to condemn those breaking the rules (or even common sense) on indoor worship.
Moreover, I do think things could have been arranged safely for a vigil on Clapham Common (limited numbers, social distancing, masks). However, it was called hastily, the police had to advise it was against the rules as constituted, then the organisers called it off, but people turned up anyway. What transpired after that, I don't know the details (other than there were a few arrests). In other words a bit of a mess, probably fuelled by considerable anger. |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:54 - Mar 14 with 1289 views | lowhouseblue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:29 - Mar 14 by bluelagos |
I am challenging the hypocracy of those who chose to condemn the women holding an outdoor vigil who don't also condemn those who hold indoors worship.
One is clealy more dangerous. So why would anyone chose to condemn one and not the other? |
did you challenge the arrest of piers corbyn in very similar circumstances? |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:56 - Mar 14 with 1285 views | WeWereZombies |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:45 - Mar 14 by J2BLUE |
No you're right. If you can post one example then clearly they are all at it.
I don't think your method is some sort of gold standard evidence like you seem to think. |
The 'seem' in 'seem to think' was necessary there, it alerts me to a need to put myself across better. Because I certainly do not think i have provided 'gold standard evidence'.
I do want to reinforce Lagos's original point though. No one dragged the offending worshippers out of the church, handcuffed them, put them in police vans or cautioned them. The minister was spoken to, that was all. A sobering comparison to the vigil. Or, as has been mentioned earlier in this thread, the reckless celebrations of Rangers fans (which is now threatening the holding of next weekend's Old Firm match). Or on another thread, the more sedate policing of other vigils in Nottingham etc. (by police forces that do not contain an officer under charges connected with the reason for the vigil). | |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:57 - Mar 14 with 1277 views | factual_blue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:29 - Mar 14 by bluelagos |
I am challenging the hypocracy of those who chose to condemn the women holding an outdoor vigil who don't also condemn those who hold indoors worship.
One is clealy more dangerous. So why would anyone chose to condemn one and not the other? |
Your argument collapsed the moment you were reminded that churches are closed for public worship. |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:58 - Mar 14 with 1278 views | WeWereZombies |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:48 - Mar 14 by GlasgowBlue |
Are you keeping tabs on all churchgoers and making notes as to when they are leaving their homes? All of them? |
Yes, absolutely, of course I am. My apologies for not walking around blindfolded... | |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 10:17 - Mar 14 with 1255 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:46 - Mar 14 by StokieBlue |
I totally disagree with the heavy-handed way the Met handled the protests last night.
Having said that:
Whilst you might not agree with the rules, one is within the rules (with a very limited scope) and one was deemed outside the rules.
Your point distils down to saying the public should pick and choose which rules they follow going forward which isn't a great idea in my opinion.
If you have an issue with the rules then that anger should be focused at the government, not people on here who want people to follow the established rules, especially since some might still be anxious and worried about mixing before vaccinations are completed.
The risk of the protest last night might have been very small (although distancing wasn't brilliant, being outside is important as you've highlighted). However the original protest was blocked because a very large number of people were likely to attend and whilst standing in a field is fine, travelling to and from the field and socialising around that isn't.
Are there any reasons (and they may be) that people couldn't protest in the alternate ways suggested by the original event organiser?
SB |
Maybe they should have hung a Brough Market sign on the bandstand and sold some street food from it and nobody would have noticed.
Political choices were made, now they can face the consequences. |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 10:27 - Mar 14 with 1247 views | StokieBlue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 10:17 - Mar 14 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Maybe they should have hung a Brough Market sign on the bandstand and sold some street food from it and nobody would have noticed.
Political choices were made, now they can face the consequences. |
I don't even know what your post is supposed to mean? Who should face the consequences? Which political choices were made?
Your post looks a lot like whatabouterry but I'll let you clarify first. It's often hard to understand what you mean because your posts are short and often don't reference points made in the post you are replying to.
SB | | | |
| Ironic don't you think? on 10:41 - Mar 14 with 1237 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Ironic don't you think? on 10:27 - Mar 14 by StokieBlue |
I don't even know what your post is supposed to mean? Who should face the consequences? Which political choices were made?
Your post looks a lot like whatabouterry but I'll let you clarify first. It's often hard to understand what you mean because your posts are short and often don't reference points made in the post you are replying to.
SB |
By all accounts the market was rammed with non covid regulation compliant shoppers who were not manhandled by the police. The decisions about when and whennot to enforce them are entirely political in nature. | |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 10:48 - Mar 14 with 1230 views | Ryorry |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:32 - Mar 14 by gtsb1966 |
With all due respect mate you are going well over the top with all this. Because of covid gatherings are banned. No ifs no buts, they are banned. Now chill and enjoy your Sunday. |
"No ifs no buts, they are banned."
That's incorrect -
|  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:00 - Mar 14 with 1210 views | pointofblue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 10:48 - Mar 14 by Ryorry |
"No ifs no buts, they are banned."
That's incorrect -
|
Could not be automatically be unlawful but in this case I believe it was down to the police to agree to it going ahead or not. In this case they said no.
Under normal circumstances this would have been completely the wrong decision but with current Covid restrictions in place understandable. Whilst churches and Borough market are used as an excuse circumstances are different - 3000 people are not sitting together in a church whilst people are not huddled together in markets; there is constant movement and change.
The photo of the vigil prior to the arrests show why the police were in a quandary because it represented everything we shouldn’t be doing; people cannot see more than one close family member or friend at a time in a restricted manner but can stand elbow to elbow in a very close space with strangers? The police response was disproportionate and Cressida Dick... well she should have left her role after Jean De Menezes was murdered on the underground but definitely resign now. However just because the police reacted wrongly does not mean the protest should have gone ahead. | |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:12 - Mar 14 with 1205 views | Ryorry |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:00 - Mar 14 by pointofblue |
Could not be automatically be unlawful but in this case I believe it was down to the police to agree to it going ahead or not. In this case they said no.
Under normal circumstances this would have been completely the wrong decision but with current Covid restrictions in place understandable. Whilst churches and Borough market are used as an excuse circumstances are different - 3000 people are not sitting together in a church whilst people are not huddled together in markets; there is constant movement and change.
The photo of the vigil prior to the arrests show why the police were in a quandary because it represented everything we shouldn’t be doing; people cannot see more than one close family member or friend at a time in a restricted manner but can stand elbow to elbow in a very close space with strangers? The police response was disproportionate and Cressida Dick... well she should have left her role after Jean De Menezes was murdered on the underground but definitely resign now. However just because the police reacted wrongly does not mean the protest should have gone ahead. |
Vigils went ahead peacefully last night *with police agreement* in Nottingham, Birmingham and Manchester. | |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:26 - Mar 14 with 1200 views | pointofblue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:12 - Mar 14 by Ryorry |
Vigils went ahead peacefully last night *with police agreement* in Nottingham, Birmingham and Manchester. |
Smaller numbers expected, less concern about travelling - thinking about it, maybe those at the top were concerned of reprisals towards them at the protest due to who was allegedly involved in Sarah Everard’s death? Indeed, that may have fed down to the officers who were on edge and waiting for an ounce of criticism to go steaming in. A post said somewhere that the first arrests were towards the speakers on the bandstand? It could be they thought the crowd were being invited against them?
I am not saying for a moment that the officers actions or orders were right but the circumstances in London were different to elsewhere. The protest leaders even asked people not to gather although clearly disagreed with the request.
The Nottingham vigil is pictured at 19.26 with far more social distancing and no speeches seemingly taking place or reported:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/mar/13/reclaim-these-streets-vigils-
Birmingham’s was seemingly cancelled due to being unable to come to an agreement with the police so that is a closer example to London if something was held. Can’t find any photos of there or Manchester though. [Post edited 14 Mar 2021 11:37]
| |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:36 - Mar 14 with 1202 views | tiptreeblue |
Firstly, I am a non believer. Secondly, my wife is a church goer, or she was until the pandemic closed the churches around here. so to say people will be going, who do you know who goes to church? | | | |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:37 - Mar 14 with 1195 views | tiptreeblue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:12 - Mar 14 by WeWereZombies |
And yet a number of the people who previously attended church on Sunday mornings still disappear on Sunday mornings - where do you think they are going? |
Do you know people who go to church? | | | |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:41 - Mar 14 with 1194 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 09:57 - Mar 14 by factual_blue |
Your argument collapsed the moment you were reminded that churches are closed for public worship. |
Think you will find a number of church congregations are flouting the rules. Just walked past a church, dozen plus cars parked and steady stream of people entering , in a socially distanced way.
Guess they just happened to decide to go in for a quiet prayer at the same time.
People will always push against regulations. |  |
| |
| Ironic don't you think? on 12:29 - Mar 14 with 1166 views | m14_blue |
| Ironic don't you think? on 11:41 - Mar 14 by Pinewoodblue |
Think you will find a number of church congregations are flouting the rules. Just walked past a church, dozen plus cars parked and steady stream of people entering , in a socially distanced way.
Guess they just happened to decide to go in for a quiet prayer at the same time.
People will always push against regulations. |
Church services have been allowed in England throughout the 2021 lockdown | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
