Originally posted by Surtur
Ehh, I kind of don't want to see Donald Trump with that kind of power. It's strange since that is different from Hilary. I don't want her to be president either, but I don't think of it in regards of "I don't want her having that power" though. With Trump I do.
Yeah, I was just fooling around. Just about anyone would be better than Trump, but I hope it's Sanders.
"He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “When people come under a spousal visa, after two and a half years they should be improving their English and we will be testing that – and that is important.”
Mr Cameron said he was not “blaming people who can’t speak English”, but he was singling out Muslim men who kept women confined at home without a male relative.
He said: “This is happening in our country and it is not acceptable. We should be very proud or our values, our liberalism, our tolerance. "
OMG what a terrible person, pull the sicks out of butts and realize he isn't asking for anything extreme.
Originally posted by Bardock42
The problem is that this proposal actually penalises women who are kept at home and are denied education, even if Cameron (who is a well known pig ****er) pretends it is aimed at the men who do that.Like the logic seems to be "look, if you don't treat your wife better I will beat her up"...
Yes, yet no one can controll that mechanic and building around it is silly.
If he is a pig f#$@ why is that the common use of language when we know Bill Clinton was guilty of many crimes as well?
But that's exactly what they are trying, they are trying to discourage this by actively harming the victims of this practice. It's stupid. There's better ways to try to counteract that kind of thing, and the worst is that they don't even acknowledge that they are harming these women, and instead pretend that they are helping.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that Cameron's preference of having sex with pigs, was not criminal, it's just something funny to remember....at all times. Bill on the other hand seems to have sexually harassed women, which is a lot worse. Even if he was a better leader in my estimation.
Originally posted by Bardock42
But that's exactly what they are trying, they are trying to discourage this by actively harming the victims of this practice. It's stupid. There's better ways to try to counteract that kind of thing, and the worst is that they don't even acknowledge that they are harming these women, and instead pretend that they are helping.
.
I'm biased, so what would be a better solution?
Originally posted by snowdragon
I guess I have a problem with the fact they are given 2.5 years to improve fluency. How is that an issue specifially?2.5 years to improve fluency so what is the argument against it/a reppresive religius objective, weird.
The issue is that it is only aimed at spousal visas (i.e. women who come over after their husbands have arrived earlier), and that it is framed as if this is a favour to oppressed spouses of Muslim men, when really it just penalises them unjustly.
I mean I also think it's problematic to reject people because they haven't learned the country's language. It seems like a poor measuring stick that's probably mainly to appease the "They are weird foreigners, they should be like me or get out" crowd.
Originally posted by Bardock42I mean I also think it's problematic to reject people because they haven't learned the country's language. It seems like a poor measuring stick that's probably mainly to appease the "They are weird foreigners, they should be like me or get out" crowd.
While I understand where you are coming from, I believe after 2.5 years if the worst metric is language and how well you can speak then the country is doing ok.
Can we stop with this pig nonsense? It was a wild and totally unbacked accusation, and the worst it makes anyone do is laugh at the silly things the privileged do as kids. The idea of it having any impact at all on his office is ludicrous- no-one cares.
Whereas what Trump said can at least be construed as hateful speech, and was literally said on camera as part of an official process.
There's not the remotest comparison.
As for the proposal- the only problem is that he singled out Muslim women as the issue. Whilst right now they likely are the largest group with this problem, it is not a purely Muslim issue and there was no need to make it part of a narrative like that.
As a general scheme, though, it's a good idea. The principle of visas being dependant on language skills is long established; this is tightening it. Anything that encourages more language take-up is a good idea.