Nick wrote:As I understand it, the new law would mean that we don't have to subscribe to the ludicrous notion that women men should pretend that statistically, they live as long as women, or that women are as bad a driver, and hence as accident-prone, as men. Such notions are patently absurd, but have come under so-called "human rights".
Can you cite the section of British or European law which currently requires that
men should pretend that statistically, they live as long as women, or that women are as bad a driver, and hence as accident-prone, as men
If, as I suspect, you are unable tro find any such legal requirement, will you withdraw your claim that such a requirement exists?
It is the politicos' mission creep which is the threat to "Human Rights". Challenge such nonsense successfully, and the problem would disappear.
Even legal semi-literates like myself can recognise that there is a distinction between laws that need replacing and interpretations that need challenging.
Do I think it a good idea? No. But nor is lunacy in so-called human rights legislation.
Can you point out the lunacy in the "so-called "human rights"" legislation, as distinct from any supposed lunacies in some courts' interpretations?