The Hazards of Belief

recedite

The islamic cultural centre/museum would presumably include prayer rooms, so it would therefore be a mosque in disguise.
On the other hand, if it is 4 blocks away from ground zero, it has nothing to do with the 9/11 site. But the proximity does make it a bit insensitive.

oscarBravo

recedite wrote: »

The islamic cultural centre/museum would presumably include prayer rooms, so it would therefore be a mosque in disguise.
On the other hand, if it is 4 blocks away from ground zero, it has nothing to do with the 9/11 site. But the proximity does make it a bit insensitive.

You think there should be a Muslim-free zone within a certain number of blocks of ground zero?

Or you think that Muslims should be allowed in that area, as long as they're not too overtly Muslim?

Or are you just taking the piss? Because that's the kindest explanation I can think of.

Mark Hamill

recedite wrote: »

The islamic cultural centre/museum would presumably include prayer rooms, so it would therefore be a mosque in disguise.
On the other hand, if it is 4 blocks away from ground zero, it has nothing to do with the 9/11 site. But the proximity does make it a bit insensitive.

The science block in UCD has (or had when i went there) a muslim prayer room, is the science block therefore a mosque in disguise?

Manchester Airport has prayer rooms. Didn't realise it was a mosque in disguise!

I'll take the ferry home next time.

JPNelsforearm

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The science block in UCD has (or had when i went there) a muslim prayer room, is the science block therefore a mosque in disguise?

Why is a science block pandering to religious/political whims? Does it also have a commissar room?

Lurkio

recedite wrote: »

The islamic cultural centre/museum would presumably include prayer rooms, so it would therefore be a mosque in disguise.
On the other hand, if it is 4 blocks away from ground zero, it has nothing to do with the 9/11 site. But the proximity does make it a bit insensitive.

......why is it insensitive....?

Lurkio

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Why is a science block pandering to religious/political whims? Does it also have a commissar room?

No, though it does allow mixing of the races in the cafeteria.

Links234

You know, with the completely dismissive reaction to the article about the lengths women in Iran have to go through to avoid ire from religious morality police, and the rather absurd 'mosque in disguise' comment, it's almost as if some posters aren't very critical of Islam at all, they're just using atheism as a cover to bash all muslims. It's rather peculiar.

Lurkio

Links234 wrote: »

You know, with the completely dismissive reaction to the article about the lengths women in Iran have to go through to avoid ire from religious morality police, and the rather absurd 'mosque in disguise' comment, it's almost as if some posters aren't very critical of Islam at all, they're just using atheism as a cover to bash all muslims. It's rather peculiar.

It's a complaint made in more places than this. We complain about people ticking the box "catholic" in the census when they aren't in fact remotely religious, where they label one and a half billion not only as conservatives, but extremists bent on international terrorism. Challenge them and get a denial, go through their posts and see the truth.

And then we have the far right, suddenly concerned for secular values, when a good part of their stock in trade is often social conservatism as regards the role of women in society and access to abortion.

That being said, in this specific country we've very few openly far right types, and even many on here, despite the cover of anonymity, often only express their views by thanking posts, rather than saying the same thing overtly themselves.

JPNelsforearm

Lurkio wrote: »

No, though it does allow mixing of the races in the cafeteria.

Very unhygienic one would think....

Lurkio

Deleted User wrote: »

Manchester Airport has prayer rooms. Didn't realise it was a mosque in disguise!

.

....theres even muslim writing on the planes...
http://www.globalaviationresource.com/reports/2011/manairport/images/35.jpg

Lurkio

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Very unhygienic one would think....

..only for those overly concerned with racial hygiene.

recedite

There's a bit of a difference between a place of work or study allocating a private room for devout muslims to pray in (given that they are supposed to pray at certain times of the day) and building a purpose-built islamic cultural centre/islamic museum/prayer hall and sticking it in a block of apartments.

marienbad

recedite wrote: »

There's a bit of a difference between a place of work or study allocating a private room for devout muslims to pray in (given that they are supposed to pray at certain times of the day) and building a purpose-built islamic cultural centre/islamic museum/prayer hall and sticking it in a block of apartments.

How ?? They still have to pray at certain times of the day ?

recedite

Links234 wrote: »

You know, with the completely dismissive reaction to the article about the lengths women in Iran have to go through to avoid ire from religious morality police, and the rather absurd 'mosque in disguise' comment, it's almost as if some posters aren't very critical of Islam at all, they're just using atheism as a cover to bash all muslims. It's rather peculiar.

Why don't you go try and set up a transgenderist bar in Riyadh. Let us know how you get on with the ordinary muslims.

oscarBravo

recedite wrote: »

There's a bit of a difference between a place of work or study allocating a private room for devout muslims to pray in (given that they are supposed to pray at certain times of the day) and building a purpose-built islamic cultural centre/islamic museum/prayer hall and sticking it in a block of apartments.

Yes, there's a bit of a difference.

Can you explain why it's insensitive to have an islamic museum in downtown Manhatten?

recedite

marienbad wrote: »

How ?? They still have to pray at certain times of the day ?

I'm pretty sure the luxury condominiums will be completely private. I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't even get inside the lobby when its finished. So why the need for a public "private room" to pray in?

oscarBravo wrote: »

Yes, there's a bit of a difference.

Can you explain why it's insensitive to have an islamic museum in downtown Manhatten?

The top two floors of the building were demolished by a piece of fuselage from one of the 9/11 airplanes which had already passed through one of the the twin towers, and which left this building structurally unsafe.
You previously stated that the fact that all those hijackers were salafists was merely a coincidence, and what they really had in common was that they were all humans, so you probably still don't get why it would be "insensitive" to rebuild it as an islamic cultural centre, but most people would see the connection straight away.

marienbad

recedite wrote: »

Why don't you go try and set up a transgenderist bar in Riyadh. Let us know how you get on with the ordinary muslims.

How is this relevant ?

cowboyBuilder

recedite wrote: »

Why don't you go try and set up a transgenderist bar in Riyadh. Let us know how you get on with the ordinary muslims.

Now now ... don't mention that you "racist".

Don't you know, we can't be critical at all of a dangerous ideology, but they can do what they want - because it's "culture" and religion - and we must respect it.

Trent Houseboat

cowboyBuilder wrote:

Now now ... don't mention that you "racist".

Don't you know, we can't be critical at all of a dangerous ideology, but they can do what they want - because it's "culture" and religion - and we must respect it.

I'm having flashbacks to last year when people were falsely claiming that they were being called homophobes (instead of racists.)

Next I expect to hear from a poster who had previously been in favour of letting muslims build secret mosques in the general area of ground zero, but after witnessing others called racist bigots the poster has changed their mind.

oscarBravo

recedite wrote: »

The top two floors of the building were demolished by a piece of fuselage from one of the 9/11 airplanes which had already passed through one of the the twin towers, and which left this building structurally unsafe.

I can see how it might be insensitive to build an aviation museum on the site on that basis.

You previously stated that the fact that all those hijackers were salafists was merely a coincidence...

No, I didn't.

...and what they really had in common was that they were all humans, so you probably still don't get why it would be "insensitive" to rebuild it as an islamic cultural centre, but most people would see the connection straight away.

Ah. It's insensitive because "most people" conflate Islam with terrorism. Gotcha.

Mark Hamill

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Why is a science block pandering to religious/political whims? Does it also have a commissar room?

Why is it pandering? Why is it not just making allowances for? It was a small room, with some space for muslims to pray in quiet. I imagine it is much cheaper than the christian chaplain employed in UCD.

Mark Hamill

recedite wrote: »

There's a bit of a difference between a place of work or study allocating a private room for devout muslims to pray in (given that they are supposed to pray at certain times of the day) and building a purpose-built islamic cultural centre/islamic museum/prayer hall and sticking it in a block of apartments.

You've gone from prayer room to prayer hall, do you actually know which one will be present?

Mark Hamill

recedite wrote: »

Why don't you go try and set up a transgenderist bar in Riyadh. Let us know how you get on with the ordinary muslims.

Yes, lets lower ourselves to their most intolerant level, that's how we show ourselves to be better than them :pac:

JPNelsforearm

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Why is it pandering? Why is it not just making allowances for? It was a small room, with some space for muslims to pray in quiet. I imagine it is much cheaper than the christian chaplain employed in UCD.

Surely all of the religious guff should be confined to the one space, making allowances and giving every group a special space in every building is ridiculous, you are there to study, pray on your own time or in the designated building, which I recall, UCD has. Secular, taxpayer funded, institutions should make no allowances for your personal ****, especially a science block of all places.

MrPudding

oscarBravo wrote: »

I can see how it might be insensitive to build an aviation museum on the site on that basis.

oscarBravo wrote: »

It's insensitive because "most people" conflate Islam with terrorism. Gotcha.

Hold on a minute... First off, I am not commenting on whether or not it is insensitive, but I do want to raise this.

The event in question was aeroplanes being flown into buildings, and this was done in the name of Islam*. So you think it is understandable that an aviation museum would be insensitive but you see no problem with a mosque? Do you see the aviation museum as insensitive because you think "most people" conflate aviation with terrorism?

MrP

*I appreciate that many say these acts go against Islam, and I fully accept that, but the fact remains the people that perpetrated the act did so based in their twisted vision of what Islam was.

Mark Hamill

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Surely all of the religious guff should be confined to the one space, making allowances and giving every group a special space in every building is ridiculous, you are there to study, pray on your own time or in the designated building, which I recall, UCD has. Secular, taxpayer funded, institutions should make no allowances for your personal ****, especially a science block of all places.

By your argument, the science block shouldn't have had a canteen, seeing as there was a "designated" building on campus for eating (the main restaurant).
Also, what designated building does ucd have for muslim praying?
EDIT: And what difference would it make it had some small designated rooms dotted around campus for muslim praying, rather than a designated building?

JPNelsforearm

Eating is an essential activity for optimal brain function, prayer is not. Also, it makes sense to have a cafeterias for each building rather than one giant building that would be required to service the entire campus, the same is not true of prayer rooms.

UCD iirc, has a religious building and prayer rooms etc, its been four years since I graduated and I never used them but I remember the facilities did exist.

Its a waste of space and pandering to a religion, there are religious facilities available, why should you get special treatment?

oscarBravo

MrPudding wrote: »

Hold on a minute... First off, I am not commenting on whether or not it is insensitive, but I do want to raise this.

The event in question was aeroplanes being flown into buildings, and this was done in the name of Islam*. So you think it is understandable that an aviation museum would be insensitive but you see no problem with a mosque? Do you see the aviation museum as insensitive because you think "most people" conflate aviation with terrorism?

MrP

*I appreciate that many say these acts go against Islam, and I fully accept that, but the fact remains the people that perpetrated the act did so based in their twisted vision of what Islam was.

I probably should have used a rolleyes emoticon.

For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think it would be insensitive to have an aviation museum in downtown Manhattan. I don't think that anyone would yell at someone wearing a pilot's uniform while walking on Fulton Street. I don't think there would be any controversy if ALPA opened an office in Tribeca.

Why? Because although airplanes were used as weapons of mass destruction, "most people" understand that the average airplane doesn't intend them any harm.

It's only insensitive to have a Muslim centre in downtown Manhattan if you insist on conflating Islam with terrorism, which is every bit as reasonable as conflating Irishness with terrorism, or Catholicism with child rape.

Michael OBrien

oscarBravo wrote: »

or Catholicism with child rape.

There is quite a bit of a link between christianity (or catholicism) and child rape. Including sexual repression, priesthood, the absolute authority of the pope, the system of the clergy viewed as unquestionable, the threat of hell, the false claims about moral purity, the biblical references to indoctrinating children and blind faith, etc.
While you cannot conflate the two concepts as the SAME thing, it would be incorrect to say that they are not strongly linked in many ways.

recedite

oscarBravo wrote: »

Why? Because although airplanes were used as weapons of mass destruction, "most people" understand that the average airplane doesn't intend them any harm.

"Most people" understand that airplanes are mechanical objects and have no intentions whatsoever. Religiously inspired hijackers on the other hand, did intend harm.

oscarBravo wrote: »

It's only insensitive to have a Muslim centre in downtown Manhattan if you insist on conflating Islam with terrorism, which is every bit as reasonable as conflating Irishness with terrorism.

Not just in "downtown Manhattan", but in one of buildings that was hit by the hijackers.
After the Grand Hotel in Brighton was bombed by the IRA, there is no way it could have been rebuilt as an Irish cultural centre. The locals would have blocked it, and the Irish community would never have been so insensitive as to even try it.
In your fanatical adherence to extreme pc nonsense, you have become completely divorced from reality.

oscarBravo

recedite wrote: »

...fanatical adherence to extreme pc nonsense...

Ah, I see where I went wrong. I thought I was having an intelligent conversation.

Carry on.

silverharp

interesting one

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36382596

Muslim students in Switzerland must shake their teacher's hand at the beginning and end of lessons, a regional authority has ruled.

A controversial exemption from the tradition had been granted for two teenage brothers whose interpretation of the Koran meant they were unwilling to touch a member of the opposite sex.

If they continue to refuse, their parents could face a fine.

The regional authority said teachers "had the right" to demand handshakes.

Shaking teachers' hands as a sign of respect is a longstanding tradition in Switzerland.

When it emerged last month that a middle school had allowed two Syrian brothers aged 14 and 15 to avoid the tradition due to their religious beliefs, it sparked a national controversy.

The boys, whose father is an imam, said their faith did not allow them to shake hands with a woman who was not related to them.

Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga said on television that "shaking hands is part of our culture".

There are about 350,000 Muslims in Switzerland, which has a population of eight million.

Some Swiss Muslim groups said there was no religious justification for refusing to shake a female teacher's hand and urged the Swiss not to give in to extremist demands. But one Islamic organisation said a handshake between men and women was prohibited.

The family's citizenship process was halted and the migration office in Basel said it was seeking more information about the circumstances under which the boys' father's asylum request was approved.

'Relieved'

The school, in the small northern town of Therwil, had tried to find a compromise in the matter by deciding the boys should not shake hands with male or female teachers.

Later, after considerable media attention, the school turned to regional authorities to settle the matter.

The authorities said in a statement on Wednesday that "the public interest concerning gender equality as well as integration of foreigners far outweighs that concerning the freedom of belief of students".

The school said it was "relieved" at the ruling and that there was now "clarity on how to proceed".

In future, the parents or guardians of pupils in the northern canton of Basel-Country could face fines of up to 5,000 Swiss francs (£3,400; $5,000; 4,500 euros) if the pupils refuse to shake hands with a teacher.

The boys told Swiss media (in German) that "nobody could make them" shake hands with a woman, and that they "could not just delete their culture as if it were a hard drive".

JPNelsforearm

silverharp wrote: »

interesting one

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36382596

The should just have made them bow or take the knee instead.:pac:

I'll raise you...a rejection of the entirety of Swedish society, even a rejection of the life giving properties of the sun and medical science, all in the name of Islam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgRE5upxvAU

She does have a point though, the Swedes have destroyed their own society, and she is emblematic of that failure, the Kaposi sarcoma of Swedish societies underlying illness..

Hotblack Desiato

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Kaposi sarcoma

Very revealing.

JPNelsforearm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Very revealing.

I've nothing to reveal, I mean what I say.

Hotblack Desiato

OK so no particular reason you mentioned an extremely rare cancer which almost exclusively affects AIDS patients.
Uhuh.

JPNelsforearm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

OK so no particular reason you mentioned an extremely rare cancer which almost exclusively affects AIDS patients.
Uhuh.

I didn't use it for "no particular reason". You have a foreign element, which happily consumes, yet rejects literally every single other aspect of Sweden, society and people, even 21st century medicine.
Its symptomatic of a deeper underlying malaise afflicting the host, as a kaposi sarcoma lesion would be indicative of a greater illness within a person.

robindch

Patriarch Kirill, topdog within Russia's heavily compliant Orthodox Church, has announced that the Soviet Union managed to keep its christian roots alive and well, and hence avoid the wholesale moral destruction which is now taking place in Europe and the USA.

http://ria.ru/religion/20160525/1439347404.html

BTW, from the photo in the article, it seems that Patriarch Kirill has learned from bitter experience to keep his wrists beneath the table for publicity photos.

Mark Hamill

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Eating is an essential activity for optimal brain function, prayer is not. Also, it makes sense to have a cafeterias for each building rather than one giant building that would be required to service the entire campus, the same is not true of prayer rooms.

UCD iirc, has a religious building and prayer rooms etc, its been four years since I graduated and I never used them but I remember the facilities did exist.

Its a waste of space and pandering to a religion, there are religious facilities available, why should you get special treatment?

The main canteen does serve the entire campus. The other canteens are only a secondary choice, nobody has to use them. The canteen in the science block is quite big, it could be turned into another lecture theatre or even a lab, meaning more space for academic work.

UCD has a christian church of some kind, but it doesn't have one single building purely for all religions. The prayer rooms are the designated space for muslims to pray. If it makes sense to have multiple canteens across campus, instead of just one large one (which it has anyway), why doesn't make sense to have multiple prayer rooms?

JPNelsforearm

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The main canteen does serve the entire campus. The other canteens are only a secondary choice, nobody has to use them. The canteen in the science block is quite big, it could be turned into another lecture theatre or even a lab, meaning more space for academic work.

UCD has a christian church of some kind, but it doesn't have one single building purely for all religions. The prayer rooms are the designated space for muslims to pray. If it makes sense to have multiple canteens across campus, instead of just one large one (which it has anyway), why doesn't make sense to have multiple prayer rooms?

I dont know about that, there is a religious building, I assumed it wasnt solely christian. There are chaplains, counselling, fair enough if they haven't been allocated enough space at that location, I could understand the need for multiple prayer locations. But to me it seems more of a pander to the whole "pray all day" ****e, which is unnecessary, thats a choice you make, its not up to the university to accommodate that. Its a waste of resources.

marienbad

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

I didn't use it for "no particular reason". You have a foreign element, which happily consumes, yet rejects literally every single other aspect of Sweden, society and people, even 21st century medicine.
Its symptomatic of a deeper underlying malaise afflicting the host, as a kaposi sarcoma lesion would be indicative of a greater illness within a person.

can you say this in plain English please ? are you saying to be gay is to be suffering a malaise ?

recedite

I took it to mean the lesion is symptomatic of the person having AIDs.
A person with a defective immune system can fall victim to any number of malign foreign infections, its only a matter of time before they become fatal.

JPNelsforearm

marienbad wrote: »

can you say this in plain English please ? are you saying to be gay is to be suffering a malaise ?

Gay? No, nothing of the sort, I likened the sentiments this girl was expressing/representing, to an aids lesion, a metaphor indicative of a greater underlying illness within the body of society.

You cannot consume wealth and take from society, yet reject the social contract entirely(even down to the level of rejecting scientific fact), those are the actions of a parasite, a disease.

I thought it was a fitting metaphor, clearly not if I have to explain it:)

marienbad

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Gay? No, nothing of the sort, I likened the sentiments this girl was expressing/representing, to an aids lesion, a metaphor indicative of a greater underlying illness within the body of society.

You cannot consume wealth and take from society, yet reject the social contract entirely(even down to the level of rejecting scientific fact), those are the actions of a parasite, a disease.

I thought it was a fitting metaphor, clearly not if I have to explain it:)

Yeah you are right ,it clearly wasn't the best metaphor .

Hotblack Desiato

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

I didn't use it for "no particular reason". You have a foreign element, which happily consumes, yet rejects literally every single other aspect of Sweden, society and people, even 21st century medicine.
Its symptomatic of a deeper underlying malaise afflicting the host, as a kaposi sarcoma lesion would be indicative of a greater illness within a person.

We're all enlightened now, so we hate muslims instead of gays.

JPNelsforearm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

We're all enlightened now, so we hate muslims instead of gays.

Not just muslims, anyone who shares that type of attitude.

Hotblack Desiato

In a western country like the UK which has a sizeable and mostly well-integrated muslim population, how many do you reckon share "that type of attitude"?

I agree that religious fundamentalism of all sorts is a bad thing, but you are (imho) doing the vast majority of muslims living in the West a grave disservice.

JPNelsforearm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

In a western country like the UK which has a sizeable and mostly well-integrated muslim population, how many do you reckon share "that type of attitude"?

I agree that religious fundamentalism of all sorts is a bad thing, but you are (imho) doing the vast majority of muslims living in the West a grave disservice.

Impossible to say, people argue over the stats constantly on any thread related to Islam, the whole argument of what percentage of the muslims population are nutters is unwinnable.
I'd say anyone who is very religious(christian, muslims, jewish), doesnt work, the whole lot, more than likely fits into the "that type of attitude" bracket (look at orthodox jews in Israel and their relationship to normal israelis). It just so happens that due to the demographic harakiri Western Europe is committing the majority of religious nuts who leech off their host society are foreign muslims and their offspring.

silverharp

blogger in Singapore up on charges of insulting Muslims and Christians

Teenage blogger Amos Yee faces 8 new charges - Channel NewsAsia

Teenage blogger Amos Yee faces 8 new charges
Of the eight charges against him, five are for allegedly wounding the religious feelings of Muslims, and one for allegedly wounding the religious feelings of Christians.


SINGAPORE: Teenage blogger Amos Yee, who was jailed last year for making offensive remarks against Christianity and posting obscene images online, was charged in the State Courts on Thursday (May 26).

The 17-year-old was arrested on May 11 and released on bail of S$5,000.

Five of the charges Yee faces are for allegedly wounding the religious feelings of Muslims, and one for allegedly wounding the religious feelings of Christians. These charges are under Section 298 of the Penal Code.

The other two charges are for allegedly failing to show up at Jurong Police Division on two occasions, despite a notice from Assistant Superintendent of Police Doreen Chong and a magistrate’s order to do so. These charges are under Section 174 of the Penal Code.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Kelvin Kow asked the judge to fix an early trial date, noting that Yee is "obviously escalating his offensive behaviour in a bid to gain attention", adding that Yee "has upped both the tempo and offensiveness of his posts".

While the prosecution did not object to Yee being out on bail, DPP Kow also asked the judge to warn Yee of the potential consequences if he commits further offences while out on bail.

To that, Yee responded: "If the prosecution insists, no problem."

Yee was not represented by a lawyer, but said he would "do his best" to find one.

If convicted of deliberately wounding the religious feelings of others, Yee faces up to three years’ jail and a fine. He also faces up to a month’s jail and a fine of up to S$1,500 for failing to report to the Jurong Police Division despite an order.

The pre-trial conference has been set for next Monday, May 30, 9.30am.