Maura Durante amd AlQuida

dathi1

Anybody see the article in the Herald. She was surprised that former Al Mahajorun spokesperson due to give an AlQuida gig at the philosophical society in TCD would not shake her hand because he was a Muslim. Pity she doesn't visit some of the outer suburburbs not too far from the TV3 studios where Algerian "asylum seekers" seeking asylum because their their version of Islam is too extreme for Algeria.
I leant a lawn mower to one a couple of months ago and he was abhorred when I offered the hand of friendship to his wife.

tallus

hmm that's crazy alright, I think everyone has a right to believe in what they want to, but they should at least pay heed to how we live if they want to live here.

Memnoch

He doesn't want to shake her hand because his religion forbids him from making physical contact with any woman that is not his wife. I know in our free thinking and somewhat promiscious society this kind of attitude seems alien, but I don't see why it's such a big deal.

I think on things like this it's not difficult to respect other people's cultural values. He isn't asking her to put on a burka, she shouldn't ask him to touch her, seems like a fair deal :P

tallus

Yeah but that's a double edged sword if you ask me.

Doctor Benway

dathi1 wrote:

Pity she doesn't visit some of the outer suburburbs not too far from the TV3 studios where Algerian "asylum seekers" seeking asylum because their their version of Islam is too extreme for Algeria.

Is it really because their version is Islam is too extreme (and I'm not doubting that it may very well be extreme) or is it because of the record of the Algerian State security services against 'extreme' Muslims. Their human rights record is pretty appalling.

therecklessone

Still not sure this is a politicall issue, possibly humanities?

tallus wrote:

Yeah but that's a double edged sword if you ask me.

How so?

dathi1

Still not sure this is a politicall issue, possibly humanities?

AlMahoruun, AlQuida, Multiculural interaction. The recent debates in TCD. I suppose the best way to brush it under the carpet would be to put it there.

dathi1

or is it because of the record of the Algerian State security services against 'extreme' Muslims. Their human rights record is pretty appalling

cuts both ways. FIS have killed hundreds of thousands of their fellow muslims there.

therecklessone

dathi1 wrote:

AlMahoruun, AlQuida, Multiculural interaction. The recent debates in TCD. I suppose the best way to brush it under the carpet would be to put it there.

I wouldn't give up the day job yet, your mind reading skills leave a lot to be desired.

A discussion on the cultural differences between different ethnic groups is best suited to the humanaities board IMHO. I'm able to read between the lines and see you're "see, multiculturalism is a baaaaaaaaad idea" slant, how many others can?

Memnoch's explained the thinking behind the gesture:

Memnoch wrote:

He doesn't want to shake her hand because his religion forbids him from making physical contact with any woman that is not his wife. I know in our free thinking and somewhat promiscious society this kind of attitude seems alien, but I don't see why it's such a big deal.

Its not that big a deal, is it? If Durante had offered AlMahoruun non-Halal meat and he'd refused would you have a problem?

dathi1

Its not that big a deal, is it? If Durante had offered AlMahoruun non-Halal meat and he'd refused would you have a problem?

I dunno about meat eating....but its a very common human natural thing for humans to greet each other in a natural way like smiling and shaking hands. male and female have done this for millions of years.

therecklessone

dathi1 wrote:

I dunno about meat eating....but its a very common human natural thing for humans to greet each other in a natural way like smiling and shaking hands. male and female have done this for millions of years.

Not in Japan.

Bowing (ojigi) is a very important custom in Japan. Japanese people bow all the time. Most commonly, they greet each other by bowing instead of handshaking. It is impolite not to return a bow to whoever bowed to you. Japanese people tend to become uncomfortable with any physical forms of contact. But, they became used to shaking hands with westerners.

Source

dathi1

dathi1 wrote:

AlMahoruun, AlQuida, Multiculural interaction. The recent debates in TCD. I suppose the best way to brush it under the carpet would be to put it there.

The mods of politics(or admins) decide those kind of things anyway.
You do not have to pay heed to what other posters(or mods of other boards) say regarding the above.

Decision-It stays here and we see where it runs too.

therecklessone

Earthman wrote:

The mods of politics(or admins) decide those kind of things anyway.
You do not have to pay heed to what other posters(or mods of other boards) say regarding the above.

It was a personal opinion Earthman, not an attempt to elbow into the moderating process. Just wanted to clear that up.

Anyway, if its greeting people you're interested in dathi1, be very careful in Germany.

The real problem isn't just grammar; it is also a matter of culture. An English-speaker is not used to making the distinction between the familiar and formal you (except in the similar "Mr. Brown" vs. "Bob" situation). The German-speaker is very much aware of it and can become very uncomfortable when the du/Sie rules are broken. German-speakers tend to keep their distance longer with acquaintances than English-speakers do. German business colleagues who have worked together for years continue to address each other as Sie. It does not mean they are unfriendly, but they are maintaining the important German division between truly close friends and mere acquaintances.

So what are the rules? Every beginning German student learns that you use Sie for formal address (Wie heißen Sie? - What is your name?) and du (plural, ihr) for the familiar (Hans, hast du deinen Mantel? - Hans, do you have your coat?). Sie is for strangers or people you don't know well. Only God, children, pets, close friends, and family members are addressed as du.

Source

IIRC, younger German's tend not to be as fussy regarding this (perhaps because they're more used to Anglo-Saxon influences on their culture?), but imagine all that fuss over the word "you"...

dathi1

Not in Japan.

I lived in Japan back in 96 for 1 year. Great place! Bowing is customary between people but hand shaking is now also quite common. Male and Female interaction is very natural just like here. However a Japanese person in Ireland would not expect you do not shake hands with his wife or partner. Durante was upset because he wouldn't shake hands with her because she was female but Mark Cagney got the hand shake because he's male. If you think that type of behaviour is normal and acceptable here well...

therecklessone

dathi1 wrote:

Durante was upset because he wouldn't shake hands with her because she was female but Mark Cagney got the hand shake because he's male. If you think that type of behaviour is normal and acceptable here well...

I'd expect a member of the TV3 news team to be informed enough to know the basics of the Islamic faith, and as such I'd expect her to see the gesture for what it was and not an affront to her gender.

Juts copped we've been spelling her name wrong, its Derrane.

fly_agaric

dathi1 wrote:

However a Japanese person in Ireland would not expect you do not shake hands with his wife or partner

Yes. They probably believe in "when in Rome...", whereas very devout (extremist) muslims believe in "my way or the highway". I mean, if you have a direct line to God, your way of doing things just has to be better. Right? Anything else is just, well, evil.

grubber

therecklessone wrote:

I'd expect a member of the TV3 news team to be informed enough to know the basics of the Islamic faith, and as such I'd expect her to see the gesture for what it was and not an affront to her gender.

Juts copped we've been spelling her name wrong, its Derrane.

I would expect a member of the TV3 news team to make it clear in a polite but firm manner that Ireland is a country in which shaking hands is a gesture of friendship, and equality of the sexes prevails.

GuanYin

dathi1 wrote:

I dunno about meat eating....but its a very common human natural thing for humans to greet each other in a natural way like smiling and shaking hands. male and female have done this for millions of years.

You might see it as accepting common local gestures, others would see it as tolerance of religious beliefs.

I think its a small harmless thing if a religious belief interfere with a custom. Its not a patch on the action of the beliefs of the predominant religion in Ireland that is directly responsible for the deaths of god knows how many in Africa.

grubber

psi wrote:

Its not a patch on the action of the beliefs of the predominant religion in Ireland that is directly responsible for the deaths of god knows how many in Africa.

Explain please

GuanYin

grubber wrote:

Explain please

The Catholic Church expressly forbids contraception. So much so that they have actively disuaded those at risk of HIV in sub-saharan africa from using condoms.

They believe that only through morality and abstinence may the scourge of HIV be removed from africa.

In the meantime though, thousands are at risk to HIV, who would not be were it not for the catholic churches presence and teachings, which is ironic, as they actually care for approx 40% of africa's HIV sufferers in thei rmissonary aide stations. It is slightly be glib and disingenious of me to point out that they are effectively making work for themsleves.

One case highlighted last year, where the wife of a HIV infected man decided, on the advice of the local church, not to use condoms during sex with her husband - effectively condemning herself to death by AIDS, showed the extent of the issue.

Now in this country most people don't strictly practice the teaching of the catholic church, but Ireland is a well educated developed country. Many of the missionaries in Africa are Irish missionaries and they, it can be argued, are holding the conviction of their faith.

By comparison, not shaking hands with a woman can be let slide, I'd imagine and it hardly puts Ireland (as a country predominantly Catholic and a church with the governments ear, no matter what Bertie says) in any sort of a position to make a moral highground judgement on the practices of beliefs of other religions.

Memnoch

fly_agaric wrote:

Yes. They probably believe in "when in Rome...", whereas very devout (extremist) muslims believe in "my way or the highway". I mean, if you have a direct line to God, your way of doing things just has to be better. Right? Anything else is just, well, evil.

I'm sorry but this is riduculous. I know plenty of muslims who feel they shouldn't touch women they are not married to, or consume alcohol etc etc etc. That doesn't mean they are extremists that want all non-muslims (including me, their friend) to die and go to hell etc.

Islam does not teach that, though people like osama bin laden and the christian fanatics on the other side of the fence like to pretend it does.

It's not about doing things better or doing things right. They aren't telling irish women to not shake hands with men, they are just following their beliefs. As long as they do so without imposing them on anyone else I fail to see the issue. That is what tolerance and multi-culturalism is really about.

As I said before....
they don't ask Irish women to wear Burka's
we shouldn't ask muslim men to touch Irish women.

Ofc not all muslim men are like this, I know pleanty that are far more promiscious than any Irish person I know :P

simu

What a pointless thread. OP, do you want some sort of obligatory handshake law brought in or what?!!

fly_agaric

Memnoch wrote:

I'm sorry but this is riduculous. I know plenty of muslims who feel they shouldn't touch women they are not married to, or consume alcohol etc etc etc. That doesn't mean they are extremists that want all non-muslims (including me, their friend) to die and go to hell etc. Islam does not teach that, though people like osama bin laden and the christian fanatics on the other side of the fence like to pretend it does.

Well they must be pretty devout to go so far as not touching women they are not married to.
What they want is irrelevant. You will all die (everyone does). Will you not also go to hell because you didn't convert to Islam?

Memnoch wrote:

It's not about doing things better or doing things right.

No. That is exactly what religious beliefs are about from the believer's point of view. If such people felt they were in a position to demand the observance of these rules by decree they'd do it in a heartbeat. You'd think Irish people would know and understand that, what with the power that the Catholic church had here not so long ago.

bonkey

dathi1 wrote:

Bowing is customary between people but hand shaking is now also quite common.

This commonality of hand-shaking is, of course, because westerners knew to learn to live with Japenese customs when they went to Japan?

No, wait...that doesn't make sense....

If you think that type of behaviour is normal and acceptable here well...

You seem to think handshaking is normal and acceptable in Japan. Lets assume it is, and that you're not mistaking tolerance of foreigners ignoring local custom with acceptance. (I'm not being sarcastic here...I'm assuming you are correct).

How did it become so acceptable? From the relative handful of Japanese who'll have lived in Western nations, coming home and forcing some cultural revolution on the rest of their nation?

I don't think so.

Apparently westerners don't care about whether "that type of behaviour" is acceptable or not when they take their own behaviour abroad. Its amazing how touchy we can get when what goes around comes around.

jc

grubber

psi wrote:

The Catholic Church expressly forbids contraception. So much so that they have actively disuaded those at risk of HIV in sub-saharan africa from using condoms.

They believe that only through morality and abstinence may the scourge of HIV be removed from africa.

In the meantime though, thousands are at risk to HIV, who would not be were it not for the catholic churches presence and teachings, which is ironic, as they actually care for approx 40% of africa's HIV sufferers in thei rmissonary aide stations. It is slightly be glib and disingenious of me to point out that they are effectively making work for themsleves.

One case highlighted last year, where the wife of a HIV infected man decided, on the advice of the local church, not to use condoms during sex with her husband - effectively condemning herself to death by AIDS, showed the extent of the issue.

Now in this country most people don't strictly practice the teaching of the catholic church, but Ireland is a well educated developed country. Many of the missionaries in Africa are Irish missionaries and they, it can be argued, are holding the conviction of their faith.

By comparison, not shaking hands with a woman can be let slide, I'd imagine and it hardly puts Ireland (as a country predominantly Catholic and a church with the governments ear, no matter what Bertie says) in any sort of a position to make a moral highground judgement on the practices of beliefs of other religions.

PSI, Firstly I would have to agree that any death or suffering through hIV/Aids is tragic. And people who spread this infection knowingly or otherwise should be prevented from doing so. But I can't quite see how you square your original comment "the action of the beliefs of the predominant religion in Ireland that is directly responsible for the deaths of god knows how many in Africa" with this. The impression I'm getting from your point of view is the Catholic Church of is guily of this "crime" (which is effectively tantamount to genocide).

Are you accusing the Catholic Church of genocide?

therecklessone

grubber wrote:

The impression I'm getting from your point of view is the Catholic Church of is guily of this "crime" (which is effectively tantamount to genocide).

Are you accusing the Catholic Church of genocide?

Excerpt from the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Genocide (For full text click here)

"Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Genocide requires intent, and since HIV respects neither national, ethnical, racila or religious groups, one would have to suggest that the church intended to inflict significant damage to every such group in Africa (including Roman Catholics) for the charge to hold water. I'll leave psi to argue his/her own case, but genocide it is not.

Hobbes

fly_agaric wrote:

You will all die (everyone does). Will you not also go to hell because you didn't convert to Islam?

Then they better take a ticket then because a lot of religons are based on the fact your going to hell unless you join them.

GuanYin

grubber wrote:

(which is effectively tantamount to genocide).

No its not, therecklessone has explained perfectly above

grubber wrote:

Are you accusing the Catholic Church of genocide?

It depends if we're using the actual definition of genocide or the definition you have made up above.

To the best of my knowledge, the catholic church are not commiting genocide anywhere in the world.

However, they are weighing the lives (and suffering) of thousands (and we're talking tens to hundreds of thousands) against the strict adherence to their religious belief.
This is not actually the topic, I'm merely making the point that Ireland, as a predominantly christian catholic society, is in no moral position to condemn anyone elses religious theology, at least not without a hard examination of their own first.

dathi1

Apparently westerners don't care about whether "that type of behaviour" is acceptable or not when they take their own behaviour abroad. Its amazing how touchy we can get when what goes around comes around.

I don't know about "Westerners" abroad. Although I have travelled extensively in the middle east and I have put my hand on my chest as is the expected gesture when greeting Muslim women in some areas of Egypt, Yemen etc... I don't agree with it but when in Rome. Now as far as I'm concerned here in Ireland women and men are equal. ..As to when they get that equality in some Muslim countries is their problem. If you think gender discrimination is ok because its "Gods" command then so be it. I'm sure you're in the minority here....I mean over there... in that Multicultural Shangri-La that is Bern (so far).

bonkey

dathi1 wrote:

I don't know about "Westerners" abroad.

You don't? So what's your theory about how the Japenese have adopted hand-shaking? They thought it was a neato idea they saw on the TV, and decided to dump their own cultures?

And if you've travelled extensively in the middle east, you should presumably also be aware of the relative prevalence of "ex-pat" communities, where English, Irish, Americans etc. live in little Western enclaves to that they can maintain their own way of life whilst living amongst Muslims. Y'know...not doing what the Romans do.

See...you might consider that you, individually, are a good example of how you think things should be done, and I'm not questioning that in the slightest. However, I don't believe you are in any way representative, except perhaps in the insistence that it's wrong when it happens in our country.

Every time this type of conversation comes up, I'm always reminded of the "speaking foreign languages" discussions that also crop up from tiem to time where I'm quite literally embarrassed by the arrogance shown by so many people who believe little less than that English is what everyone else should be able to speak and the only langauge anyone should need to know.

far as I'm concerned here in Ireland women and men are equal.

I'm petty certain that without much effort I can give you a number of situations where not only are they not equal, but where you will in all probability agree that it is simply impractical to ignore gender.

Women priests would be an ideal starting place. When's the last time you've seen one of those in the dominant, non-discriminatory church in Ireland?

..As to when they get that equality in some Muslim countries is their problem.

Whereas when they live in a nation such as Ireland, which grants them not just equality but freedom of religion, you have an issue that they choose one over the other? Bit like those Catholics and their female priests.

Put succinctly, your problem appears to be that we grant them freedom and you don't like what they're doing with it.

If you think gender discrimination is ok because its "Gods" command then so be it. I'm sure you're in the minority here....I mean over there...

Well, the Christian religion that is predominant in Ireland believes gender discrimination is OK to a point, but like I said...its in a manner that you've either closed your eyes to or have decided that the point at which Irish people involve themselves in gender-based discrimination is ok...its just other discrimination (or being more discriminatory) thats the problem.

in that Multicultural Shangri-La that is Bern (so far).

Its not without its problems.

By and large, though, they're caused by people with stances somewhat like your own, in that they insist that others should be more like them (for whatever reason).

And of course, there's problems with those who are unwilling to live inside the strictures of the law...but they're not really the issue here because every society has those.

therecklessone

bonkey wrote:

Whereas when they live in a nation such as Ireland, which grants them not just equality but freedom of religion, you have an issue that they choose one over the other? Bit like those Catholics and their female priests.

Put succinctly, your problem appears to be that we grant them freedom and you don't like what they're doing with it.

Pretty much hits the nail bang on the head.

Bunreacht na h&#201 wrote: »

Article 44

2. 1° Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.

The constitutional right to freedom of religious expression overides the demand that Islam leaves aside an element of its belief system to assure the Irish that deep down all Muslims want to do is be just like us.

dathi1 wrote:

I dunno about meat eating....but its a very common human natural thing for humans to greet each other in a natural way like smiling and shaking hands. male and female have done this for millions of years.

Sowhere do we draw the line? You obviuosly feel that Muslim's should abandon at least one belief of their religion to fit in, so how much further do you go before you accept its ok for Muslims to practise their religion?