Honeymoon

[West London Singh]

WLS, I can only assume the thesis is not going well and your letting off a little steam here.

Yes and no.

Yes, you're right the thesis is not going well. I've had mental block for several days now. In theory, I've done enough research to write a 500,000 word paper but in practice....I've hit a major stumbling block.

But no.....I ain't letting off steam here. Whether I'm happy or sad....grey or gay.....tired or buzzing....the one thing I always do is impart my knowledge. I don't need an excuse for it. Its something i was born to do. Thats all i was doing on this thread 'till some geezer came along and threw a spanner in the works.

[Guest ARGH]

the one thing I always do is impart my knowledge. I don't need an excuse for it. Its something i was born to do.

And we are most grateful, O learned one. Maybe one day, cretins such as ourselves can reach your level of intellectual superiority.

[singher23]

Veerji all he did was present a different opinion than yours. You are acting like he purposely started an argument just to spite you.

Let's everyone calm down. Btw WLS, what's the topic of your thesis?

[West London Singh]

Veerji all he did was present a different opinion than yours. You are acting like he purposely started an argument just to spite you.

Let's everyone calm down. Btw WLS, what's the topic of your thesis?

Well, thats not entirely true. For no reason at all he abused me and suggested to the mods that I be banned from this forum. But never mind eh ?

The crux of my paper, in simple terms, really boils down to the genesis of race discrimination legislation in the UK. I don't wanna go into too much detail because even talking about it hurts my brain at the moment, but....in a nutshell....my contention is that race discrimination laws in England were never designed to combat race discrimination. They exist simply as a quid pro quo for the blatantly racist immigration laws that were drafted by the same men at the same time. Using this as a foundation then, the body of the paper tries to see where it all fits in with Rawls' theory of justice. Rawls, of course, is the worldwide acknowledged authority on the concept of justice and if i had to sum up the theory in one sentence (as relevant to my paper) it would be that lawmakers make laws designed to protect the weak because those lawmakers know that they too could one day end up in that weak position. Using Rawls' contention as a foundation then my argument (when i eventually get to it) is that the lawmakers (who are invariably white men) can never make laws for the benefit of non-white men because the lawmakers know they can never, one day, end up being in that position.

There's alot more to it than that bruvs......a hellava lot more....but thats the best i can put it in laymans terms.

But, you know what fella.....We sikhs are inherently tied to the very heart of the history of race discrimination legislation in this country. The first time race discrimination ever genuinely became against the law in this country was as a direct result of the election in Smethwick and the racist smears against the Sikhs there. And the first time anyone was ever prosecuted for racism in this country, using the new laws, it was in direct consequence of the racist abuse directed at the MP of Southall because of the Sikhs that settled there.

But no.....it hurts my head just thinking about it now so I wish to say no more. I'd much rather have a heated debate about the pagan origins of the white man's festivals and traditions.

[Akal Warrior]

Well, thats not entirely true. For no reason at all he abused me and suggested to the mods that I be banned from this forum. But never mind eh ?

The crux of my paper, in simple terms, really boils down to the genesis of race discrimination legislation in the UK. I don't wanna go into too much detail because even talking about it hurts my brain at the moment, but....in a nutshell....my contention is that race discrimination laws in England were never designed to combat race discrimination. They exist simply as a quid pro quo for the blatantly racist immigration laws that were drafted by the same men at the same time. Using this as a foundation then, the body of the paper tries to see where it all fits in with Rawls' theory of justice. Rawls, of course, is the worldwide acknowledged authority on the concept of justice and if i had to sum up the theory in one sentence (as relevant to my paper) it would be that lawmakers make laws designed to protect the weak because those lawmakers know that they too could one day end up in that weak position. Using Rawls' contention as a foundation then my argument (when i eventually get to it) is that the lawmakers (who are invariably white men) can never make laws for the benefit of non-white men because the lawmakers know they can never, one day, end up being in that position.

There's alot more to it than that bruvs......a hellava lot more....but thats the best i can put it in laymans terms.

But, you know what fella.....We sikhs are inherently tied to the very heart of the history of race discrimination legislation in this country. The first time race discrimination ever genuinely became against the law in this country was as a direct result of the election in Smethwick and the racist smears against the Sikhs there. And the first time anyone was ever prosecuted for racism in this country, using the new laws, it was in direct consequence of the racist abuse directed at the MP of Southall because of the Sikhs that settled there.

But no.....it hurts my head just thinking about it now so I wish to say no more. I'd much rather have a heated debate about the pagan origins of the white man's festivals and traditions.

I didn't come on here 'for no reason' to start trouble with you. I did not appreciate your comments. You said: "The day the white man starts to follow my traditions is the day I'll start to follow their pagan traditions. Untill that day, to hell with their 'honey-wine drinking period after a wedding'.

Is that not ignorant? You said Jesus was 'made up'. How would you feel if people started saying disrespectful comments about Sikhi? You're educated...we get it. You don't need to keep on repeating how smart you are, and how much confidence you have. Just because you use your big words, and read the dictionary a few times, doesn't mean you make sense. i jumped into this conversation because of your attitude. I'm not sure what sort of life experiences you've had with white people, but i really hope you don't act like this in public, and make us all look bad. Calm down bro. The world is not against you. Too many "Zeitgeist" movies? (which was also made by white people)

[singher23]

Ok so your degree is in some sort of social or public policy field?

[West London Singh]

Ok so your degree is in some sort of social or public policy field?

Well no. I have a degree in Law and the masters I am doing now is also Law. Reading Law takes many forms, and sometimes when you go into legal theory you naturally go into the realms of politics, sociology and history. You see, what I'm trying to do is go way beyond and way deeper than what a judge would do when he tries to deconstruct legislation by making a purposive interpretation of what the drafters of the law were intending. Thats not enough for me.....You might call what I'm doing 'legal sociology' but what I'm trying to do is analyse the political, social and economic conditions that lead to the drafting of the laws. It serves no actual useful purpose, but its an acknowledgement that the law needs to be looked at with a critical eye....rather than the traditional approach which accepts the norms and traditions. And a sub area of this is critical race theory, which although not widely read in UK law schools, is a very major part of the American and Australian schools (perhaps because of the very racist pasts of those 2 nations....which had openly racist legislation). I would proudly consider myself a critical race theorist. You start with a very simple, but true presumption : That all the laws are made by white men. You then critically examine the impact those laws have on non-white minorities. Not just laws but also the legal norms. Those norms are the white man's norms. They ain't mine. If I was an immigrant fresh off the boat then I would have no right to question those norms. But......there has been a non-white presence in England since the 17th Century. This is our my country every bit as much as it is the white mans. My forefathers have had to accept the white mans norms for long enough. Its time for people like me to impose my norms now.

So...er.......cut a long story short...no. Its not in the social or public policy field as such.

[Guest gk]

West London Sikh,

I think there's a line between confidence and arrogance and you definitely seem to have gone above and beyond! Interesting projection onto others being timid if they intepret you in this manner...but let's face it this is an internet forum where many 'features' of ones personality are very different to those displayed in reality. That said, enjoy your 'confidence' mate.

[Guest kullykhalsa]

After reading this forum its obvious to most that WLS is intelligent, but not as much as he thinks.

p.s i also have a masters and therefore my opinion is valid lol

[Guest Yess singh]

Haven't read all comments but dnt see any issue with honeymoon...if you dnt want to be part of any pagan ritual then just change it to 'after wedding holiday' or something lol, dnt see the big deal!

Good chance for couple to get to know each other in my opinion!

Sometimes i think people just argue or disagree for the sake of it!