[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Oh no - 'I do get it' but don't agree with 'it' and NEVER will.

As far as I am concerned:

'A human is a human' until he/she becomes INHUMAN by virtue of his/her inhuman acts.

Then they remain 'Human' purely in terms of Anatomy and Physiology and belonging to the genus 'Homo'. NOTHING more.

I am familiar with the 'Human Rights Act' but will never accept that its authors INTENDED it to be exploited and used to protect the 'RIGHTS' of inhuman bastards such as these and those others listed in my post.

I am sorry, but I will ask again;

What about the 'Human Rights ' of 'Humanitarian' Alan Henning and the other innocent victims and their families?

There is NO GREATER 'Human Right' than the 'RIGHT TO LIFE' and those guilty of intentionally depriving INNOCENT people of theirs - especially in the most depraved and INHUMAN of manners - SHOULD lose any rights they once enjoyed as 'Humans' including 'Human Rights', just as surely as their innocent victims lost their Right to Life.

To me, the 'Human Rights Act' has been exploited by Criminals, Murderers, Terrorists, and Subversives, just as surely as the Benefits System, The NHS, The Legal Aid System and a host of other 'Well-Meaning' innovations have been similarly exploited and abused.

I'm afraid we will have to 'Agree To Disagree' on this subject.

Then you are opposed to Human Rights, that's the long and short of it.

Human Rights for everyone or Human Rights for no one, you can't pick and choose.