phrases

currently i am going through a phase where certain phrases make me go arrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaagh! for no other reason than they are pointless additions to a sentence, add nothing to the conversation and normally (well for me) highlight the lack of thought that has gone into the argument.

they are phrases that should be up there with "... some of my best friends are (insert minority of choice here) but......"

the first of these phrases are:
"it's 2004 and still people are (insert action of choice here)". i most recently heard this in two debates one on gay rights - generated from the fallout over gay marriages in the usa elections, secondly over the racist chanting aimed at english footballers in the friendly match they played.
in both cases the attitudes were wrong - of course gays should be allowed to marry if they want to and of course footballers of any colour should be able to play the game of their choice without hearing abuse (ok this may not stand for man united or spurs players........ - can you guess who i support ?). it goes without saying the world would be a much better and much happier place if people were more tolerant.
but by invoking the year we are in and doing it in an exasperated tone adds nothing to your point as i am willing to lay money on the fact that a similar turn of phrase has been used each year for well as long as there have been years. more than likely it appears in the diaries of anne frank and samuel pepys.

another meaningless phrase is "its my human right" most recently seen by me in an argument where a family wants to send their child to a faith school, so far so good. only problem is the child and the family do not share the faith of the school. so the school, which is faith based, is refusing them entry to the school. the result of this - the family wants to take the school, which is faith based, to court because barring their faithless child into a faith based school is an infringement to their human rights.
i wonder if i can use that next time i want to wander through the girls showers ? to stop me is an infringement of my human rights.

(one of the other commentators on this makes the great comment "oh imagine the uproar if a state school banned muslim and catholic kids because they were trying to go to a secular school", which misses several of the points to the story in order to score a cheap shot.
while not defending faith schools it is interesting that the reason the family had chosen the school was because it was good and they wanted their child to have the best - nothing wrong there. i wonder if there had been a private school near them they would have tried to get in there and claimed it as their human right to do so, or if there had been an all girls school ?
sure there are problems with state schools and if you think there are then lobby for change - make all schools the same - give all kids the same chances - don't let anyone have an unfair advantage, i shall stop this rant short of saying burn down eton, but the only true way to make education fair is not to abolish faith, sex, status based schools but to make the state schools much much better than they are now.
oh the other commentator is the tit tim lott - he writes in the evening standard, he is not as funny as me and makes about as much sense as i do.
(and a blog for the future would be - just what are human rights - is there such a thing ?)

the other phrase i can't stand is "i'm a celebrity get me out of here" i don't even watch the programme but i have to put up with people who do talking about it.