Originally Posted by
Juan Tugoh
Allowing rubbish to be debated unchallenged as if it is entirely legitimate lends it a credence it does not deserve. To challenge such dangerous anti-democratic nonsense as the closed shop is not only reasonable, it is sensible. Allowing rubbish like this to be discussed as if it were reasonable allows extreme views to flourish, what other democratic rights would you like to be quietly done away with so that your views are allowed to take hold?
That is why people get "hot under the collar" when someone suggests we do away with democratic rights because they do not fit in with the views of one particular pressure group, in this case the unions. Thank God it has no chance of becoming law.
I didn't suggest allowing the debate to go unchallenged. Once more, for yourself and the others who have difficulty keeping up...My comment did not condone, support, or demand the closed shop.
The point was made that had there been one at BASSA and compulsory secret ballots had voted in the reps, the incumbents may not have been voted in.
Which part of "You were also wrong (again) in your assumption that I would expect everyone to regard the closed shop as reasonable." or "I respect your right to belong or not belong", escaped you?
That said,, a suggestion is not rubbish just because you believe it to be.