Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights
I suppose...that it could help to educate the masses. Had she known what was acceptable, and not, then perhaps Mrs. Edwards wouldn't have been so inconvenienced. Now...we all know.
Is it discussion worthy? Who knows? It seems, to me, that we can manage to create a six page discussion about a duck crossing the street...But, I see your point.
Therefore, in the interest of providing stimulating discussion, what, if anything, should become of the hapless postal clerk. I say we seperate him from his testicles, and have him watch as his scrotum is tossed sizzling into a bonfire. But, I can see where some may think that's a little unduly harsh. Still, you have to admit...he'll think twice before doing anything this jacked up again. Right?
|
I do think that it is a worthy topic of discussion. Otherwise, I wouldn't have posted.
My angle on the discussion was "Why do articles like this get printed?" I don't think that this is an example of Muslims ruling the way that non-muslims act. Do Muslim nations even require shoulders covered on passports entering their countries? I don't know. I suppose they can if they want, but that should not affect passport policy in a secular nation like Great Britain. (And as indicated by the article, it apparently doesn't affect policy).
I think that it's just an ignorant person exerting power in their small domain- a mayor of munchkin land.
This is neither here nor there, but the postal clerk was a woman. So, unfortunately, scrotum sizzling is not a possibility.