The EU
Mood:  down
Now Playing: Audioslave
Well, the EU - a contentious subject that has recently been rolling around the papers (tabloids and spreadsheets alike), the Houses of Parliament - and also Europe.

One thing that always strikes me about this topic is the completely polar opinion by the two sides - the EU supporters and haters. Are the supporters “papering” over the cracks in the wall to make it appear perfect? Or are the haters offering up misinformation and representation to adversely affect public perception? One thing is for certain, in the eyes of the media – there is no room for middle ground.

With contempt for public intelligence shown by two sides, you would be forgiven for thinking that there is no public to inform in this nation of ours… hands up those whom can actually honestly say they know what the EU offers us? Please, sceptics – keep your hands down unless you have read the constitution… reading the Sun does NOT qualify as being informed!!
It appears a large majority of the nation knows nothing about the EU, about its policies, the way it works – and just what our say in Europe is about…
The government appears all too cavalier with contempt of the idea of information for the public – and the Sun newspaper is all to cavalier with its reporting of facts and figures. Simply put, one side believes we won’t understand – and therefore won’t inform us, and the other is adamant that we require our opinions to be made for us with irrevocable evidence to support it (hello? Present facts and we can make our own decisions you know…)

Wake up UK! It’s time to clear the fog of mystery around the EU – read information, stop buying the Sun newspaper – and make yourself informed! We can only make an informed judgment about what is best for our nation – when the nation is informed. Whilst we allow the media to make our opinions for us, we stand little chance of having our nations best interests served. After all, how does cavalier and simplistic reporting to bolster circulation sales actually have the nation’s best interest at heart? Capitalistic reporting will only answer to money, not truth.

Religous Incitement
Okay, an older topic admitedly, but a meaty subject that can be briefly glossed over upon is a good way to get started I think...

After reading a few articles about this, there are a few things that one could see as cause for concern. Not least, the apparent ambiguity of the law in the eyes of the "layman" - so to speak. What has been gleaned so far is that the law will protect religions from people trying to incite hatred against its practioners... which is all for a very good cause; however, it raises a few issues that I personally have with how it appears at face value.

1) Due to the abiguous nature of defining exactly where a line can be drawn, is this not going to be open to "retribution" and simple "tit for tat" court cases/charges for clever lawyers to argue about inside a court to great cost? Does it not leave open the opporunity to interpret the law as needed by a prosecutor/judge? Simply put, if someone offends you slightly in an ambigious way - are you then going to be able to search for a charge to bring? (interpretation).

2) Since we do attempt to protect and cater for minority religions (not enough at present), what about those in the majority? We have seen religious extremists whom call for people to rise up and kill... but if the reverse was true, I personally do not feel the treatment (basically ignoring them) would be the same. There also seems little attempt to rectify or address what appears to be a common misconception.

Whether the law is more clearly defined, or indeed - whether people are even aware of the law, remains to be seen. One thing is certain, to really comment about it - I will have to read up on the subject myself and evaluate it... without the media viewpoint/interpretation that we have all been given to date.