Crematorium

[Michael1954]

It's possible that running to the press was key in reinstating the cross. Councillors don't mind favourable things being written about them in the press but seem to get upset when they are criticised.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Or the least productive way of winning an argument. If you genuinely believe that making a public song and dance about something is better than talking things over in private then I pity you.

Your life must have been Hell if every objection to stupidity involved running to the press.

Still trying very hard to fit in aren't you?

Negative post after negative post, boy, you're a natural, would you like a job as a moderator?

Far better than discussing in private or, washing linen (stained or otherwise) in public:-

Just the smallest, the most minuscule, amount of common sense could have prevented the need for this thread in the first place.

P.S. I do know your ignoring me it doesn't matter, your digging the hole, I'm just waiting around the edge peeing on the sides making it slippery in case you try to get out.

[Barrie Yates]

Welcome back Mr Moss.
Why you would bring the memory of Jaysay into this thread is far beyond me.
I, and a number of others on HC and on here, will be pleased that the original Cross has been restored and common sense prevails. It is very good of you to admit that you were wrong, a great pity that it has taken a considerable period of time - over two months in fact. A forced apology perhaps?
With regard to Hyndburn Chat, my understanding is that despite warnings you were banned for breaking the few rules that there are on that site - of course there are always people who don't think that rules apply to them.
Your letter published in the Observer makes a number of interesting points but unfortunately does not give any pertinent details.
My confusion mainly arises concerning your paragraphs 8 through 10.
“The Market Hall is fantastic” – a number of long standing stalls have closed in recent times, recent photographs show an impressive interior but very few customers and if you look when on your frequent shopping excursions in there you will see that only a few stalls have queues at them. The 2 cafes are quite busy as is the central seating area, perhaps you should take note of the criticisms levelled here, HC and the Observer letters from time to time.
“The Town Centre” – I am very confused as to what you class as a “curio shop”. There is a thread on HC at the moment asking what shops the members would like to see – but of course, you are unable to access HC. Comments, by many people, point out the preponderance of Charity Shops, Pound Stores, Betting Shops and Amusement Arcades, Burger/Kebab Shops and empty shops.
“Dazzling array of very good cafes and pubs” – how many pubs are there in the Town Centre Mr Moss? There are good cafes, but not that many very good cafes, unless we have different standards
You have previously stated that you shop in Accrington a number of times every week, now we understand that you also shop in Rishton several times a week. Perhaps you class buying a newspaper as shopping which I suppose it is technically.

Finally, do I understand from your last sentence in Post 79 that you are accusing me of lying?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

If they had such an issue with it why didn't they ask to speak to me before going to the press?

It's not an unreasonable question.

Maybe those concerned felt that their requests would have fallen on deaf ears.
After all, politicians even local ones are not noted for listening to those who put them where they are....that is, serving their constituents.
Resorting to Press involvement is sure to stir things up......and at the end of the day that is what produced results.

I had the need to attend a humanist funeral at Burnley Crematorium recently......many of those attending had strong Christian beliefs(a large proportion were Catholic)........how do I know this for sure? It was for a family member.
The deceased was humanist, but his family were not.....the Christian symbolism was not offensive......and I believe that at a funeral the last thing on the minds of the bereaved is to look at the surroundings looking for things at which offence can be taken.

It seems to me that in this country we are tolerant of other religions, but that we do not expect others to be tolerant of Christians.

Finally, your admission that you misread the feelings of the local population took too long in coming and it seemed begrudged and insincere.......when you have got something wrong the admission needs to be prompt and the apologies sincere.

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by Michael1954

It's possible that running to the press was key in reinstating the cross. Councillors don't mind favourable things being written about them in the press but seem to get upset when they are criticised.

My point is that it wasn't the best way of having a discussion. Rather than a reasoned debate in private first (it would have ended up in the papers eventually anyway), it was used for maximum political capital instead.

Instead of getting a balanced news report in the local press, it ended up starting a war in the Daily Mail. The Council officers were bombarded with calls from people who said we should be clamping down on Muslim immigration (this had nothing to do with Muslims, who don't use the Crem anyway) to death threats from people who claimed to be regular church goers.

I'm sure some wil find that amusing, but the number of emails also heavily criticising the church was surprising. They wouldn't have had that if they'd not fallen into bed with Peter. I just think that is a shame.

You then get Britcliffe crowing in the papers that HBC have acceded to his 'demands' which to be honest just damages us all (and again the emails bore this out).

The saddest thing of all is that Cllr Judith Addison, also a lay preacher, wrote a magnificent Facebook post looking at things from both sides of the fence.

She was completely ignored by the press.

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by Barrie Yates

Welcome back Mr Moss.
Why you would bring the memory of Jaysay into this thread is far beyond me.
I, and a number of others on HC and on here, will be pleased that the original Cross has been restored and common sense prevails. It is very good of you to admit that you were wrong, a great pity that it has taken a considerable period of time - over two months in fact. A forced apology perhaps?
With regard to Hyndburn Chat, my understanding is that despite warnings you were banned for breaking the few rules that there are on that site - of course there are always people who don't think that rules apply to them.
Your letter published in the Observer makes a number of interesting points but unfortunately does not give any pertinent details.
My confusion mainly arises concerning your paragraphs 8 through 10.
“The Market Hall is fantastic” – a number of long standing stalls have closed in recent times, recent photographs show an impressive interior but very few customers and if you look when on your frequent shopping excursions in there you will see that only a few stalls have queues at them. The 2 cafes are quite busy as is the central seating area, perhaps you should take note of the criticisms levelled here, HC and the Observer letters from time to time.
“The Town Centre” – I am very confused as to what you class as a “curio shop”. There is a thread on HC at the moment asking what shops the members would like to see – but of course, you are unable to access HC. Comments, by many people, point out the preponderance of Charity Shops, Pound Stores, Betting Shops and Amusement Arcades, Burger/Kebab Shops and empty shops.
“Dazzling array of very good cafes and pubs” – how many pubs are there in the Town Centre Mr Moss? There are good cafes, but not that many very good cafes, unless we have different standards
You have previously stated that you shop in Accrington a number of times every week, now we understand that you also shop in Rishton several times a week. Perhaps you class buying a newspaper as shopping which I suppose it is technically.

Finally, do I understand from your last sentence in Post 79 that you are accusing me of lying?

The answer to pretty much all your questions is, 'Open your eyes'.

Which HC rule did I break exactly? Thou shalt not disagree with Gary Martin?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Or the least productive way of winning an argument. If you genuinely believe that making a public song and dance about something is better than talking things over in private then I pity you.

Your life must have been Hell if every objection to stupidity involved running to the press.

Well it does seem like that talking to people like you, my life overall has been quite good, but then i have never tried to use dead mates, to justify my balls ups, you really are a disgrace of a council man in my eyes.

[Barrie Yates]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

The answer to pretty much all your questions is, 'Open your eyes'.

Which HC rule did I break exactly? Thou shalt not disagree with Gary Martin?

I am still waiting to have you state whether or not you accused me of being a liar? - Post 79
I am still trying to determine where these "interesting little curio shops" are
- the definition of curio being "A rare, unusual or intriguing object".

[Neil]

I think Ken was very diplomatic explaining what actually went on. He could have gone into great depth about the shenanigans that went on but appears to have quite rightly instead played it all down a little. I was quite disappointed when I learnt from a few sources what had gone on. Some of those should have know better how to deal with it and others were involved for either personal or totally wrong reasons.

Ken has taken the flak for implementing government guidelines. I posted some comments in the Facebook thread myself which I promptly removed when I found out what was going on so I would not be used for the benefit of others

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Neil

I think Ken was very diplomatic explaining what actually went on. He could have gone into great depth about the shenanigans that went on but appears to have quite rightly instead played it all down a little. I was quite disappointed when I learnt from a few sources what had gone on. Some of those should have know better how to deal with it and others were involved for either personal or totally wrong reasons.

Ken has taken the flak for implementing government guidelines. I posted some comments in the Facebook thread myself which I promptly removed when I found out what was going on so I would not be used for the benefit of others

Whatevers gone on behind the scenes is irrelevant, the original decision was completely thoughtless and stupid FACT.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Neil

I think Ken was very diplomatic explaining what actually went on. He could have gone into great depth about the shenanigans that went on but appears to have quite rightly instead played it all down a little. I was quite disappointed when I learnt from a few sources what had gone on. Some of those should have know better how to deal with it and others were involved for either personal or totally wrong reasons.

Ken has taken the flak for implementing government guidelines. I posted some comments in the Facebook thread myself which I promptly removed when I found out what was going on so I would not be used for the benefit of others

What we do not know, we cannot comment on.
I just think it was distasteful for a deceased member(whom Ken presumed, rightly or wrongly, would have agreed with him) to be brought into the discussion.....with the aim of scoring points.
I think that is a cheap shot and one which Ken should not have used.

What ever wranglings happened in the council chamber, it should have been foreseen that the removal of the cross would have repercussions.(and any political party will make as much mileage out of the situation as they can...that is the nature of politics.....whether it be local or national)
And to justify the act as 'following government guidelines' is just a fudge.

Guidelines are just that...they are not an edict......and that is because the government hope that local representatives will know and understand the feelings of their local voters.......and do what they feel is in accord with what local people will accept.
Just because many people do not profess a religion does not mean that they will be offended by the religious artefacts that may be present in crematoria.

We are all tolerant of other peoples religions yet we want to wipe the Christian religion out of daily life(this is the religion on which the fabric of this country was built)...how sad!

[cashman]

Well said MargaretP, Fudge is the correct term, no doubt. I'm beginning to seriously wonder the reason some folk are using that as an angle.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by cashman

Whatevers gone on behind the scenes is irrelevant, the original decision was completely thoughtless and stupid FACT.

No the original decision was doing what most Councils have done and followed government guidelines as expected to do. A removeable cross in a non religious crematorium is logical. The building looks like a church but it isn't.

Those against a cross being taken off the wall and put on the table fell for a game played out by a few for their gain not the people of Hyndburn.

I think you would be annoyed at yourself if you realised who you'd been supporting.

[Barrie Yates]

Originally Posted by Neil

most Councils .

Do you have figures to back up this statement?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Neil

No the original decision was doing what most Councils have done and followed government guidelines as expected to do.

That i do not believe at all, unless you can prove otherwise.