Is this country morally bankrupt?

Iam64

No I do not believe our country is morally bankrupt. I don’t see gg13’ s apples and pears comment as racist.

This election is contributing to attempts to simplify complex problems by demanding one word answers “yes or no” the interviewer demands as some politician attempts to explain it really isn’t that straightforward.

Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and swathes of Africa are full of children orphaned in wars.

I agree.👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

GrannyGravy13

No the U.K. is not morally bankrupt

Gaza is a complicated situation, multinational negotiations are needed not unilateral decisions made off the cuff by our Hone Secretary.

I agree, and he may well not even be an MP in a fortnight.

Obviously not MOnica. We are judged on what one minister says when parliament has been dissolved, in response to a journalist wanting a yes/no answer to a complex situation.

You cannot label a country as 'morally bankrupt' on the basis of what one government minister says. What about the other 67 million of us? Do we not count when deciding whether a country is morally bankrrupt?

Feverjo

Let’s face it, some people’s compassion dims dramatically for non-white, non-Christians. We find all kinds of excuses to view some children as less worthy of our love and compassion.

Let's face it Christian children are the most persecuted, and marginalised in the world.
Some people find excuses to ignore the facts.

Sorry if my post derails.

Might I suggest we give a donation to Unicef to help these children.

Glorianny

GrannyGravy13

Glorianny

GrannyGravy13

I have family experience of looked after children the safe guarding of these or any orphaned children must be paramount.

There are hours and hours of interviews with the prospective foster/adoptive parents. Multiple references , and interviews with employers and close family members, before the legal process can begin and the adults get to meet the child/ren.

It is not as simple as putting them on a plane to the U.K.

I would not like to see any short cuts taken which could leave any overseas orphans, wherever they come from in a situation which could be more detrimental than that they are already in.

So you think living in a country which is being raised to the ground with indiscriminate bombing and gunfire is a better place to leave a child?

I assume you would be/are happy to ship these children to the U.K. with no safeguarding checks, and to a family they probably have no knowledge of, to a life totally alien to them?

As a former teacher I would have thought you would put the safeguarding of any child uppermost.

Safeguarding requires that a child be in a safe place first. The safe comes before the guarding for a reason.

Catching up and increasingly finding debate shut down by hectoring, in fact imo a bullying shouty approach by Gloriannie.

the safe comes before the guarding for a reason. Is this a serious suggestion, that our safeguarding policies are disregarded? I understand the emotional reaction but the risks are too high

Of course I didn't. And of course Glorianny knows that; it is her usual modus operandi on many threads.

I was speaking logistically.
Glorianny has at last realised the difficulties too with the borders.

If I could I would gather up all those children myself and bring them to safety. A ridiculous notion I know but it is heartbreaking to see their suffering. Who could fail to be moved?
But know I can't.

There are many other countries too where children suffer still despite our efforts over the years. We helpless in the face of wars, civil wars, corrupt governments in those countries, rebels, terrorists.

Meaning I assume (perhaps I'm wrong) that the UK is not morally bankrupt unless its politicians have the same standards as Hamas.

Read the subsequent responses where moral bankruptcy as a blanket description is being debated. It means different things to different people.

I'm fed up with your hectoring style of debate - the way you deduct "abc" from "xyz" and then demand, "is that OK with you?" You browbeat.

Whatever I say will be interpreted by you to suit your agenda which appears to have narrow parameters of right and wrong answers.

I do not believe that Callistemon213 sees orphaned children from Gaza as a threat. But you obviously think that is what she meant. And nothing I or she says, or anyone else, is going to change that perception.

A good try Dickens

... it wasn't a try Glorianny. I genuinely don't believe Callistemon213 means what you insist she does.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Glorianny

Well some may think it is OK to compare UK politicians with Hamas. I don't.

That's why they're apples and pears.

Good grief!
😂😂😂

Do give it a rest Glorianny.

Well some may think it is OK to compare UK politicians with Hamas. I don't.

Dickens

Glorianny

Dickens

Callistemon213

Yiu are twisting completely what I said. What a truly offensive post, Glorianny.

I can see - quite clearly - how what you have said has been twisted so that it implies something entirely different to the point you were making.

It's something many of us have experienced from posters who want black or white answers.

You have said "xxx" which therefore means that you are "xxx" - type of debate.

Please explain it to me I can't see it.
Is it OK to compare moral standards in the UK with a terrorist organistaion or not?
I see that as a black and white situation. And I'd say definitely NOT!

Please explain it to me I can't see it.

Your OP was about moral bankruptcy over the question of orphaned children in Gaza being united with families in the UK which Cleverly refused to answer.

Subsequent posters have enlarged on the supposed moral bankruptcy question.

Callistemon213 compared our alleged moral bankruptcy with that of Hamas.

You jumped on that, and asked "why Hamas" - and she replied because the children are from Gaza.

You chose to interpret that as meaning that she saw those children as a threat - rather than the obvious fact that we are discussing Gaza which makes Hamas relevant if we are talking about moral bankruptcy.

In short, you twisted her reply to mean what you wanted it to mean to support your argument.

A good try Dickens
But Hamas was actually compared with UK politicians.
Meaning I assume (perhaps I'm wrong) that the UK is not morally bankrupt unless its politicians have the same standards as Hamas.
Which is comparing the UK with a terrorist organisation. Is that OK with you?

If you asdd the children it only worsens. Children are not Hamas.

Well done Glorianny, you're getting the picture.

👏👏👏 Dickens

This is the situation with aid.
The country has deteriorated with armed gangs ambushing aid lorries, roads impassible and UN workers fearing bombs and gunfire.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv22ymmp46ro

Glorianny

Dickens

Callistemon213

Yiu are twisting completely what I said. What a truly offensive post, Glorianny.

I can see - quite clearly - how what you have said has been twisted so that it implies something entirely different to the point you were making.

It's something many of us have experienced from posters who want black or white answers.

You have said "xxx" which therefore means that you are "xxx" - type of debate.

Please explain it to me I can't see it.
Is it OK to compare moral standards in the UK with a terrorist organistaion or not?
I see that as a black and white situation. And I'd say definitely NOT!

Please explain it to me I can't see it.

Your OP was about moral bankruptcy over the question of orphaned children in Gaza being united with families in the UK which Cleverly refused to answer.

Subsequent posters have enlarged on the supposed moral bankruptcy question.

Callistemon213 compared our alleged moral bankruptcy with that of Hamas.

You jumped on that, and asked "why Hamas" - and she replied because the children are from Gaza.

You chose to interpret that as meaning that she saw those children as a threat - rather than the obvious fact that we are discussing Gaza which makes Hamas relevant if we are talking about moral bankruptcy.

In short, you twisted her reply to mean what you wanted it to mean to support your argument.

Perhaps Glorianny would like to drive to Gaza and do the same.
You do understand Callistemon213 that Gaza is a closed country don't you?

Ooh! Well done.
Now there’s a good excuse for not doing something.

Foot in mouth moment.

Oh, you got it wt last!!
That was my point dear.

Callistemon213

Germanshepherdsmum

Callistemon’s words were entirely clear to me and were not offensive. However Glorianny is an expert in the twisting of words to suit her agenda and consequently insulting the poster.

Thanks everyone.

I explained how a friend's SIL hired a large vehicle, taking aid into Ukraine and bringing out refugees whom he took to Poland.

Perhaps Glorianny would like to drive to Gaza and do the same.

You do understand Callistemon213 that Gaza is a closed country don't you?

GrannyGravy13

Glorianny I didn’t report your post that has been deleted, despite saying I was going to, real life got in the way.

If I had I would have owned up.

I've looked back at that post GG13 and it was misunderstood by many. It's a bit ridiculous that it has been deleted as it is quoted in other posts. But I accepted your explanation and haven't raised it since.

Germanshepherdsmum

*Callistemon*’s words were entirely clear to me and were not offensive. However Glorianny is an expert in the twisting of words to suit her agenda and consequently insulting the poster.

Thanks everyone.

I explained how a friend's SIL hired a large vehicle, taking aid into Ukraine and bringing out refugees whom he took to Poland.

Perhaps Glorianny would like to drive to Gaza and do the same.

Germanshepherdsmum

Fgs Glorianny, stop digging.

Oh dear if you agree with something I must be right.