Originally Posted by
-:Undertaker:-
Yes there is a difference in the actual membership/shortlist, but thats the only one. I'm sorry but it boils down to this very simple question; do you or do you not support having membership/candidates picked based on the colour of their skin or other factors such as their sexuality. From your reply, I gather that you do. Quite honestly you are just as bad as the British National Party if that is the case and you are in no position (neither are the main parties) to criticise the BNP.
It is wrong to decide on race, because thats genuine racism.
It is only 'indirectly racist' because it is the BNP, why are the Tories, Labour and the Liberal Democrats all not in court also over their membership shortlists? - I wonder, could it possibly be because its a witchunt between one group of people who judge based on the colour of their skin against another group which uses the same idealogy only its not politically correct to do so.
I will defend the BNP stance because the more I see people such as yourself asking for 'positive discrimination' to be brought in (which is racism but worded more nicely) I will continue to point out that you are as bad as the BNP itself. What is my answer to parliament? - here is my simple answer and its an answer most people would agree with and is an answer which is based on fairness and common sense; elect/choose people based on what they can do, not who they are.
That is how you get an elected parliament which is based on fairness and a parliament which is not based on who you are, but what you can do.