Human Rights and impending revolution!

Sep 9, 2000
Here's a little lite offering to make you chuckle if you are tiring of the Gore/Bush twostep...
A national newspaper in the UK (The Guardian) with a somewhat left-wing viewpoint, is preparing to legally challenge the British Crown over various acts of Parliment, dating back over three hundred or so years, that determine how the Monarch is selected. Various moral and religious standards must be met before the king or queen or whatever is crowned. They mustn't be divorced, married to a divorced person, definately being a Roman Catholic is a big no-no, as is being married to one (dated back to King Charles 1st and Queen Henrietta, also King James 2nd, who were rather naughty, and didn't cut the mustard as far as the ramrod-backed, teas-slurping British public were concerned!)
This is because Britain finally recognises that it is illegal to hold bias against anyone on religious, racial or whatever grounds, and passed the Human Rights Act, which came into force in October.
This promises to be a major source of amusement, as the Goverment have already stated they can't say they will, or won't, prosecute the paper's editors for treason, of all things!
It may also means that the succession would have to be redetermined right back to the English Revolution (1688), when the Brits kicked out James II, on the grounds he was dumb and ugly.
Who knows? I may be England's next king!
***Arise Sir Uncle Bill! I dub thee 'Baron Bir-Gorkha'***
Yours, with a little twinkle in his eye,
Just thinking...I don't think that the presidential election would have been this close if either party had promised a HI khukuri for every responsible man, woman or childe in America.


Sorry but I can't chuckle over such idiotic goings-on. It's the dumbest of the dumb, I have concluded, to think that it's desirable, or even possible, to redress the wrongs and evils of the past by punishing or blaming the descendants of those who committed them. It's even dumber when a government takes such efforts seriously, thus lending them credibility.
There are many so-called 'minorities' in American society who would condemn me and label me an oppressor, for instance, merely because I was born of 'pure' western European ancestry. (My American Indian blood is not cosmetically obvious.) This prejudicial tendency seems to be growing, with racial and cultural chauvinism giving opportunity to many self-serving demagogues; and encouraging the splintering of our global community.
Looking to the past and dredging up old resentments is pernicious tribalism, and something the global human species can no longer afford.
We are all the descendents of both saints and sinners, after all. We must learn to see each other in the present, not as refugees of the past: as brothers and fellow passengers on a fragile Earth, we must be willing to work together to find unity, for the sake of not only our present, but our uncertain future.

The sword cannot cut itself, the eye cannot see itself.

[This message has been edited by gunhou (edited 12-07-2000).]
Hell, maybe the British government can take every individual American to court over our clearly treasonous behavior in the late eighteenth century and hang the whole lot of us as traitors...

I think the lawyers are finally taking over the world.