Jack Straw and the Muslims!

Zombrex

Sesshoumaru wrote:

So you're saying not only are faith based indoctrination schools ok, but your version of secular schools would also encourage this superstitous rubbish?

Yes and learning about the Incas in history encourages ritual sacrafice ... :rolleyes:

You should not be scared of education. I can't think of one area in life where ignorance is a better option that understanding.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

How can you condone exposing young childrens minds to ancient superstitous beliefs in sky gods and such???

Children are children. They are not idiots. I remember learning about the 1916 uprising in primary school. When I was in London the following year I didn't kill any English police men. The thought never even crossed my mind.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

I'm talking about rediculous stuff like exempting Sikhs from wearing motorcycle helmets.

I wouldn't approve of that at all, but to be honest I've never heard of that happening.

But you see Sesshourmaru that is what is known as a "good reason"

Not being able to see someones lips while speaking isn't a good reason to tell someone not to wear a veil. If it was no one woudl ever talk to each other on the phone.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

It would be unfair for Muslim workers to demand they be given all the morning shifts just because they are unallowed to eat after the morning during Ramadan.

Again I would agree with that, but again I haven't heard of that happening. Of course if a Muslim asked his boss and the boss didn't mind I see no problem with it.

But again wearing a veil is not like that at all. It doesn't effect anyone else appart from the wearer, beyond the rather vague "it makes me uncomfortable" argument.

It is necessary that your co-workers are productive and safe while working, and that they interact with you in a polite manner. It isn't necessary that they make you feel all fluffy, warm and safe inside. Imagine if I said to my boss that walking to someone over the phone makes me very uncomfortable because I can't tell if they are lying or not, and therefore I was going to wait a week before Paddy is next in the office to talk to him. I would imagine my boss would be none to pleased with that response. Yet you think it is acceptable to say that you are uncomfortable talking to a Muslim woman wearing veil who is right in front of you?

Sesshoumaru wrote:

It violates my right to live in a harmonious society.

You don't have a right to live in a harmonious society, because everyone definition of harmonious is probably different and they all conflict with each other. For example you complaining about Muslims wearing veils I would view as being in conflict to our cultures harmonious relationships with Muslims. Are you violating my rights? Or theres?

HelterSkelter

CiaranC wrote:

I was talking about the specific case of wearing the veil in a school or civil service job etc.

In my opinion, aside from the fact that it is disconcerting and strange to the westerner, wearing the veil is a political and religious statement analgous to wearing the sash or a youth defence pin. They are statements about rather extreme interpretations of religious beliefs, none of which I like or am comfortable with. I do realise we live in a free society, and people are free to have loony ideas if they like. In the same way, people are free to respectfully ask others not to wear such things which they are uncomfortable with.

There is a girl I work with who wears low cut tops which show some of her clevage. If some old timer here had a problem with that do you think he has the right to ask her to cover up?

CiaranC wrote:

Which brings us back to the issue of respect, which hasnt been addressed. Apparently its OK for a woman to wear a veil in the west, even though it runs contrary to western culture and makes some people uncomfortable. This is not at all disrespectful. But asking her to remove it is disrespectful. Who decides where the balance lies?

Also, how many western women do you know who would travel to somewhere like Iran and ignore local custom? Do you think many men would wear a tshirt with a cartoon of the prophet on it and explain it away as being reflective of liberal free-speech secular culture in the west?

Double standards methinks.

You are totally missing the point. A Muslim woman who covers up is not offending any non-Muslim Irish person. However an Irish woman who goes to a Muslim country and didn't cover up would be offending them in the same was as (some, a lot probably) Irish people would be offended if some woman from another country came here and walked around with no top on.

Zombrex

CiaranC wrote:

Which brings us back to the issue of respect, which hasnt been addressed. Apparently its OK for a woman to wear a veil in the west, even though it runs contrary to western culture and makes some people uncomfortable.

How does it run contrary to western culture?

Or do we not have any devote Christians in the west?

CiaranC wrote:

This is not at all disrespectful.

Who is it disrespectful to? Western society as a whole?

How does a Muslim woman wearing a veil even effect you, let alone set out to insult you?

If a Muslim woman wears a veil she is not directly effecting anyone. She is just going about her business. If a western goes up to her and asks her to remove her veil he/she is directly effecting the Muslim woman.

Imagine if a Muslim man came up and asked an Irish woman on O'Connel St. to wear a veil. Now that would disrespectful and rude, because he is directly effecting her.

The issue of if it is rude or not is if you are asking someone to go out of their way to please you.

CiaranC wrote:

Also, how many western women do you know who would travel to somewhere like Iran and ignore local custom?

Pretty much every single western woman who has ever gone there. Or do you think they all convert to Islam and start praying to Mecca?

There are legal decency standards in Muslims countries, just like there are here. You can't go naked in Ireland, even if you wished to.

That is different to whether you follow, or are even aware, of local customs and traditions.

For example there is a difference between not standing up for the national anthem at a New York baseball game and running naked onto the pitch. One might get you a few cross looks, the other will get you arrested.

Irish people in somewhere like Iran have to follow the legal decency laws, but they don't have to (and most often don't) follow the tons of local customs and habits that you find in Muslim countries.

If a Muslim woman is following all our legal requirements set out in our public decency laws what right do we have to expect her to go even further and actually give up parts of her religion for us, when we don't expect Irish people to do the same in foreign countries.

Double standards me thinks.

Sesshoumaru

Wicknight wrote:

Yes and learning about the Incas in history encourages ritual sacrafice ... :rolleyes:

You know perfectly well thats a ridiculous example. That is history class and the context of the lessons would be totally different to a religous class with a religion teacher.

Wicknight wrote:

Children are children. They are not idiots. I remember learning about the 1916 uprising in primary school. When I was in London the following year I didn't kill any English police men. The thought never even crossed my mind.

Ever heard of Santa Claus? Ever believe in him? The Easter Bunny? The Tooth Fairy?

Wicknight wrote:

I wouldn't approve of that at all, but to be honest I've never heard of that happening.

But you see Sesshourmaru that is what is known as a "good reason"

Not being able to see someones lips while speaking isn't a good reason to tell someone not to wear a veil. If it was no one woudl ever talk to each other on the phone.

It has happened in the UK

If you are driving or riding on a 2-wheeled motorcycle on a road you must wear a helmet. Passengers in a sidecar don't have to wear a helmet and neither does a Sikh who is wearing a turban. Also, no helmet is needed if someone is pushing the motorcycle on foot.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_506862-02.hcsp
Your logic leads us down this road. We have to respect rediculous ancient superstitions? Perhaps Muslim women will be exempt from wearing a helmet? Might interfere with their religous garb?

Wicknight wrote:

Again I would agree with that, but again I haven't heard of that happening. Of course if a Muslim asked his boss and the boss didn't mind I see no problem with it.

It has happened and their manager will probably agree whatever the fairness of it because more than likely the PC Nazis will pounce and call him a rascist(whatever that has to do with religion?) and a bigot etc.

Wicknight wrote:

But again wearing a veil is not like that at all. It doesn't effect anyone else appart from the wearer, beyond the rather vague "it makes me uncomfortable" argument.

It is necessary that your co-workers are productive and safe while working, and that they interact with you in a polite manner. It isn't necessary that they make you feel all fluffy, warm and safe inside. Imagine if I said to my boss that walking to someone over the phone makes me very uncomfortable because I can't tell if they are lying or not, and therefore I was going to wait a week before Paddy is next in the office to talk to him. I would imagine my boss would be none to pleased with that response. Yet you think it is acceptable to say that you are uncomfortable talking to a Muslim woman wearing veil who is right in front of you?

Talking to someone on the phone is not the same as being in the same room as someone but you can't see their face because their religous beliefs say you are a sexual predator who will rape them if they reveal their mouth to you.

Wicknight wrote:

You don't have a right to live in a harmonious society, because everyone definition of harmonious is probably different and they all conflict with each other. For example you complaining about Muslims wearing veils I would view as being in conflict to our cultures harmonious relationships with Muslims. Are you violating my rights? Or theres?

Yes we should all just give up on this idea of living in a peaceful society and get busy killing each other then.

Zombrex

Sesshoumaru wrote:

You know perfectly well thats a ridiculous example. That is history class and the context of the lessons would be totally different to a religous class with a religion teacher.

It is a ridiculous example, the point being to show how ridiculous your position that simply being exposed and taught about world religions will brainwash students into follow those religions (which one if you learn about all of them btw?). How exactly does this happen?

In history you learn about world history. In an R.E class you learn about world religions.

No religion is pressed upon the students as being the "correct one", just like you wouldn't expect an history teacher to get his students to believe ritual Inca sacrafice was actually a great idea.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Ever heard of Santa Claus? Ever believe in him? The Easter Bunny? The Tooth Fairy?

I don't remember being taught he was real in a school history class, so I'm not quite sure what point you are making?

Sesshoumaru wrote:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_506862-02.hcsp
Your logic leads us down this road. We have to respect rediculous ancient superstitions?

No, I think that is a stupid exception. Wearing a scarf on your head isn't going to stop you bashing your head off ground.

Again we fall into the "good reason" category. As soon as someone comes up with a good reason why a Muslim woman should not wear a veil when talking to someone else I'm all ears. I have already said that police have the right to search a Muslim woman as much as anyone else, and just like anyone else they should carry out the search with respect to the suspect.

But so far the only reason why Muslims shouldn't wear the veil generally is the rather vague idea that it makes some people uncomfortable and is against "western values". That isn't a reason.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Talking to someone on the phone is not the same as being in the same room as someone but you can't see their face because their religous beliefs say you are a sexual predator who will rape them if they reveal their mouth to you.

Can you not carry on a converastion with someone without seeing their lips moving?

You clearly can, since you (I assume) use a phone all the time. So there goes another reason.

You seem to be just left with your own negative feelings towards the Muslim religion. As as I explained your negative feelings towards something is not a reason on its own to say it is unaccepable.

You don't have to follow the Muslim religion, and no one is exacting you to.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Yes we should all just give up on this idea of living in a peaceful society and get busy killing each other then.

How can you talk about a peaceful society when you seem to think we shoudl be going out of our way to insult and demean Muslims?

CiaranC

Helterskelter wrote:

You are totally missing the point. A Muslim woman who covers up is not offending any non-Muslim Irish person. However an Irish woman who goes to a Muslim country and didn't cover up would be offending them in the same was as (some, a lot probably) Irish people would be offended if some woman from another country came here and walked around with no top on.

Personally, I find the veil offensive. Its vulgar, and the concept behind it borders on the obscene. The idea that a woman should cover her face and body to prevent thoughts of a sexual nature arising in the mind of the male is disgusting. It runs contrary to everything Ive thought and learned about human sexuality and sexual equality.

Personally, Id find a topless woman far less offensive. I dont think Im alone in that opinion in the modern west.

Also, I equate covering the face with negativity. Traditionally, in the west, people only cover their face when they have something to hide. It denies the possiblity of traditional face-to-face communication. Its serves to divide communities by making them suspicious and distrustful of one another. I dont like it.

Also, I am of the opinion that wearing the veil is a political statement akin to wearing an orange sash or a youth defence badge. I dont like those either.

Its a bit rich to suggest that its not offending any non-Muslim irish person, when dozens have raised objections in this thread.

Wicknight wrote:

Pretty much every single western woman who has ever gone there.

I was under the impression that women would cover their hair and bodies when in Iran etc. out of respect for local custom.

Im more or less done with this thread. There have been some good points, well made, especially by Wicknight. I can see the position that I dont have to like it, just tolerate it, certainly.

I cant help but have the impression that people can get away with all sorts of lark if they wrap it up in a veil (sorry) of organised religion and demand its protections. Cant help but feel sorry for the poor bastards the PC brigade are "protecting" by shouting down any criticism though.

Sesshoumaru

Wicknight wrote:

It is a ridiculous example, the point being to show how ridiculous your position that simply being exposed and taught about world religions will brainwash students into follow those religions (which one if you learn about all of them btw?). How exactly does this happen?

In history you learn about world history. In an R.E class you learn about world religions.

No religion is pressed upon the students as being the "correct one", just like you wouldn't expect an history teacher to get his students to believe ritual Inca sacrafice was actually a great idea.

You're not getting me so I'll try and make my point a little clearer. The only place children should hear about religion is in history class and I would expect the teacher to say something along the lines of: "Now children, today we are going to learn about ancient superstitous beliefs our ancestors used to have because they didn't have science to explain simple things like the sun"

Wicknight wrote:

I don't remember being taught he was real in a school history class, so I'm not quite sure what point you are making?

Don't play dumb Wicknight. I believe you said "Children are children. They are not idiots." Yet its quite easy for parents to make them believe there is such a thing as the tooth fairy. Why do you believe its alright to fill their heads with the ravings of madmen who lived hundreds and thousands of years ago who claimed to hear voices in their head while wondering around the Arabian desert?

Wicknight wrote:

No, I think that is a stupid exception. Wearing a scarf on your head isn't going to stop you bashing your head off ground.

Again we fall into the "good reason" category. As soon as someone comes up with a good reason why a Muslim woman should not wear a veil when talking to someone else I'm all ears. I have already said that police have the right to search a Muslim woman as much as anyone else, and just like anyone else they should carry out the search with respect to the suspect.

But so far the only reason why Muslims shouldn't wear the veil generally is the rather vague idea that it makes some people uncomfortable and is against "western values". That isn't a reason.

Whether you want to believe it or not Wicknight, alot of people have a problem with women wearing veils. We can argue till we turn blue whether thats justified or not. But at the end of the day its an obstacle to the two communities getting along. They came to Europe, so its up to them to go that extra mile to integrate into our societys. If they can't make that adjustment they can always go home. No ones forceing them to stay in Europe.

Wicknight wrote:

Can you not carry on a converastion with someone without seeing their lips moving?

You clearly can, since you (I assume) use a phone all the time. So there goes another reason.

You seem to be just left with your own negative feelings towards the Muslim religion. As as I explained your negative feelings towards something is not a reason on its own to say it is unaccepable.

You don't have to follow the Muslim religion, and no one is exacting you to.

Not seeing her lips isn't the biggest problem. The problem is what that whole freakish ninja garb symbolises. That men and women are not equal. The Quran explicitly states this

"Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other" (4:34)

Wicknight wrote:

How can you talk about a peaceful society when you seem to think we shoudl be going out of our way to insult and demean Muslims?

I would answer that we can not build a society thats stability relies on one culture submitting to another.

Zombrex

Sesshoumaru wrote:

The only place children should hear about religion is in history class

Why?

Modern world religions aren't history. They are taking place right now.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Don't play dumb Wicknight. I believe you said "Children are children. They are not idiots." Yet its quite easy for parents to make them believe there is such a thing as the tooth fairy.

Yeah when they are four Sesshoumaru. Do you still believe in the toothfairy?

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Why do you believe its alright to fill their heads with the ravings of madmen who lived hundreds and thousands of years ago who claimed to hear voices in their head while wondering around the Arabian desert?

Why would I not?

Learning about something doesn't mean you will do it. You learn about mass murder and genocide in history class, that doesn't mean the kids go "Wow, that Hitler guy must have been pretty cool, why well would our history teacher teach us about him. Down with the Jewish"

Like I said, children aren't idiots.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Whether you want to believe it or not Wicknight, alot of people have a problem with women wearing veils.

A lot of people have problems with a lot of things. A lot of people are irrational, cranky and stuborn.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

But at the end of the day its an obstacle to the two communities getting along.

Thats like saying black people shouldn't come over here because it causes racism.

The obstacle to the two communities getting long is the people who intollerant of the other side. This is true of both sides.

If you find a Muslim who expects that Irish people start acting like Muslims to help "integrate" the two communities I would be the first to tell him to feck right off. The same applies to Irish people who want to tell the Muslims to start acting and behaving more like Irish people.

Integration isn't a question of making the other side act like you. It is a question of welcoming the differences that intergration brings.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

That men and women are not equal. The Quran explicitly states this

Yes it does. So does the Bible.

People are stupid for believing these accient religions. But then there is no law against being stupid.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

we can not build a society thats stability relies on one culture submitting to another.

I think that was my original point.

Sesshoumaru

Wicknight wrote:

Why?

Modern world religions aren't history. They are taking place right now.

Cause I say so :P No but seriously have you seen some of the crap children get taught in "faith schools"? That the earth is 10,000 years old, evolution is wrong and that god clicked his fingers and all the animals we see today were suddenly created.

Wicknight wrote:

Yeah when they are four Sesshoumaru. Do you still believe in the toothfairy?

My example was rather benign Wicknight. What is happening is young kids are being put into these faith schools where this "knowledge" is being hammered into them. Where you don't get a star in your notebook for questioning. A perfect example would be the jewish bloke Dawkins interviewed in his last documentary. He looked like he was in his 40's or 50's. A british man who had been born and raised in London. He'd been sent to a jewish faith school and believed all this nonsense even as an adult. Even more telling was his accent. He had an Israeli accent, despite being born in London and spending his whole life there. If we allow these faith schools then how can we deny people the right to live in their "own communitys"? Then the next logical step is to allow these seperate communities have their own laws. Its lunacy!

Wicknight wrote:

Why would I not?

Learning about something doesn't mean you will do it. You learn about mass murder and genocide in history class, that doesn't mean the kids go "Wow, that Hitler guy must have been pretty cool, why well would our history teacher teach us about him. Down with the Jewish"

Like I said, children aren't idiots.

You really have such a fluffy nice idea of how children are taught in these faith school Wicknight Yes I'm sure they'll be taught in an open manner that encourages them to question and learn for themselves :rolleyes:

Wicknight wrote:

A lot of people have problems with a lot of things. A lot of people are irrational, cranky and stuborn.

Yes some people have a problem with conforming to the norms of a host nation state that kindly lets them live there. They should go home if they do.

Wicknight wrote:

Thats like saying black people shouldn't come over here because it causes racism.

The obstacle to the two communities getting long is the people who intollerant of the other side. This is true of both sides.

If you find a Muslim who expects that Irish people start acting like Muslims to help "integrate" the two communities I would be the first to tell him to feck right off. The same applies to Irish people who want to tell the Muslims to start acting and behaving more like Irish people.

Integration isn't a question of making the other side act like you. It is a question of welcoming the differences that intergration brings.

I didn't realise being black was a choice? Thats news to me. Maybe I'll try being black tomorrow

I think our ideas of integration differ somewhat Wicknight. In my mind integration is a process where both communities accept change. Where they both take whats best from each other and learn. Although I have a lot against islam I do realise it has its good points. As a person who doesn't drink alcohol I admire their abstenance. Although I wouldn't go as far as them in banning it altogether. But Muslims don't want to change, not one little bit. They want to come here and build their own little walled off parallel communities. Now compare and contrast that to my favourite immigrant community the chinese. How well do they integrate?(my version of integration) Very well indeed! So well in fact you can see a lot of mixed Irish/Chinese couple on the streets these days. Do you see that happening with Muslims and Irish people? Very very rarely. Your typical Muslim will head back to Pakistan when he is ready to marry to pick up his Muslim wife there. Does the situation change when the first generation is born here? Going by other countries like the UK where they are established longer the answer is no. The children born here will have their proper Muslim wife imported from Pakistan.

But you'll probably say I'm being a horrible bigot right? They should have the right to build their own little walled off parallel communities right? They have their ways and we have our own. Its just best we don't mix right?

Wicknight wrote:

Yes it does. So does the Bible.

People are stupid for believing these accient religions. But then there is no law against being stupid.

Well as an atheist I don't exactly care for the bible either. But you should at least provide a reference for that claim or you might unneccesarily upset some christians.

Wicknight wrote:

I think that was my original point.

Its great we agree on something

mountainyman

Please stop using the word Muslims. If you accept that almost no Muslim women wear a veil why say 'Muslim women' this and 'Muslim women' that.
Almost no Muslim women wear the veil, therefore when they do is it not possible that, given that this behavious is non normative, there is some deeper point?

If you know that most Muslims live in estates surrounded by Irish people why say 'Muslims want to build walled off communities'.

sesshomaru wrote:

Your typical Muslim will head back to Pakistan when he is ready to marry to pick up his Muslim wife there. Does the situation change when the first generation is born here? Going by other countries like the UK where they are established longer the answer is no. The children born here will have their proper Muslim wife imported from Pakistan

I was trying to google for information on the number of people in Ireland married to foreign partners but I couldn't find it. I suspect you are wrong.

Our Muslim immigrants are not all Pakistani for one thing.

MM

Sesshoumaru

mountainyman wrote:

Please stop using the word Muslims. If you accept that almost no Muslim women wear a veil why say 'Muslim women' this and 'Muslim women' that.
Almost no Muslim women wear the veil, therefore when they do is it not possible that, given that this behavious is non normative, there is some deeper point?

Why can't I use the word "Muslims"? Its in fashion right now The reason I say Muslims is because they are the only ones I know of wearing the full ninja suit. I also believe its the teachings of the quran that encourage this.

"Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other" (4:34)

mountainyman wrote:

If you know that most Muslims live in estates surrounded by Irish people why say 'Muslims want to build walled off communities'.

The reason I say Muslims want to live in their own little walled off parallel communities is because we can look at the UK where the symptoms are more advanced. They don't live diffused amongst the native population. They are concentrated in their own little communities. Where if opinion polls are to be believed they'd like to live under their own sharia law.

mountainyman wrote:

I was trying to google for information on the number of people in Ireland married to foreign partners but I couldn't find it. I suspect you are wrong.

Our Muslim immigrants are not all Pakistani for one thing.

MM

I am wrong about what exactly? That muslims don't marry Irish people? Go onto the Islam board and ask them there. They'll probably be the first to tell you that mixed marriages aren't recommended in Islam. That they rarely work if ever.

HelterSkelter

Sesshoumaru wrote:

The reason I say Muslims want to live in their own little walled off parallel communities is because we can look at the UK where the symptoms are more advanced. They don't live diffused amongst the native population. They are concentrated in their own little communities. Where if opinion polls are to be believed they'd like to live under their own sharia law.

You say "we can look at the UK". Have you actually looked at the UK? Do you know any Muslims living there? I have many Muslim friends in the UK. They all work and live alongside non-muslim English people and have non-Muslim friends. Sure, their parents didn't mix much but it is much the same way as any first generation who emmigrate to a foreign country. Where's the first place an Irish person heads to in a foreign country, an IRISH pub.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

I am wrong about what exactly? That muslims don't marry Irish people? Go onto the Islam board and ask them there. They'll probably be the first to tell you that mixed marriages aren't recommended in Islam. That they rarely work if ever.

A Muslim can marry an Irish Muslim (they do exist believe it or not!) or a Muslim of any nationality. A Muslim man can marry a non-Muslim woman, a Muslim woman must marry a Muslim man (a debate for another day!) .

You seem to be under the impression that all Muslims are from Pakistan or India.

Sesshoumaru

HelterSkelter wrote:

You say "we can look at the UK". Have you actually looked at the UK? Do you know any Muslims living there? I have many Muslim friends in the UK. They all work and live alongside non-muslim English people and have non-Muslim friends. Sure, their parents didn't mix much but it is much the same way as any first generation who emmigrate to a foreign country. Where's the first place an Irish person heads to in a foreign country, an IRISH pub.

Who killed 52 innocent people on July 7th in London? Second generation muslims who were born and raised in the UK. If these men were so great at socialising with their white native peers then I doubt they could have done what they did, because then they would have been attacking their own community. But they weren't, they were attacking the non muslim community. Thats all there is in the Muslim world..... muslims and non muslims. Simple isn't it?

HelterSkelter wrote:

A Muslim can marry an Irish Muslim (they do exist believe it or not!) or a Muslim of any nationality. A Muslim man can marry a non-Muslim woman, a Muslim woman must marry a Muslim man (a debate for another day!) .

You seem to be under the impression that all Muslims are from Pakistan or India.

I didn't say it wasn't allowed, although I was perfectly aware already that muslim women aren't allowed marry outside the faith. I said it was not recommended and that 9 times out of 10 it didn't work out.

HelterSkelter

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Who killed 52 innocent people on July 7th in London? Second generation muslims who were born and raised in the UK. If these men were so great at socialising with their white native peers then I doubt they could have done what they did, because then they would have been attacking their own community. But they weren't, they were attacking the non muslim community. Thats all there is in the Muslim world..... muslims and non muslims. Simple isn't it?.

You are really showing your true colours now, you are going to tar 2 million Muslims in the UK with the terrorist tag because of what a few did??? That is like me saying "who planted all the IRA bombs in the UK, Irish Catholics". By the way, Muslims were also killed in the July 7th Bombings.

Anyway, I'm going to bow out here, there is no point in going on and on and on about this. We are getting nowhere.

Sesshoumaru

HelterSkelter wrote:

You are really showing your true colours now, you are going to tar 2 million Muslims in the UK with the terrorist tag because of what a few did??? That is like me saying "who planted all the IRA bombs in the UK, Irish Catholics". By the way, Muslims were also killed in the July 7th Bombings.

Anyway, I'm going to bow out here, there is no point in going on and on and on about this. We are getting nowhere.

Showing what colours? I don't see where you are extrapolating from my comments that I think all 2 million muslims in the UK are bad. But I guess you'd just rather tar me as a bigot and then run away before anyone starts questioning your logic?

What I am saying is that certain parts of their religion and their general attitudes to integration are creating an enviroment where people can do the sorts of things those 4 muslim blokes did on July 7th in London. Is that so hard for you to understand?

Judgeing by your signature you hold all Israeli's accountable for whatever perceived injustice you imagine Israel has done? Would I be correct in saying that?

mountainyman

Sesshoumaru wrote:

What I am saying is that certain parts of their religion and their general attitudes to integration

Your understanding of 'their' attitude to integration is erroneous.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

are creating an enviroment where people can do the sorts of things those 4 muslim blokes did on July 7th in London. Is that so hard for you to understand?

People can do anything at any time.
The reason you are hard to understand is that your argument is incoherent.

MM

Sesshoumaru

mountainyman wrote:

Your understanding of 'their' attitude to integration is erroneous.


The reason you are hard to understand is that your argument is incoherent.

MM

Well besides saying I'm wrong..... have you got anything else to say? Do you have an arguement?

mountainyman wrote:

People can do anything at any time.

Yes and the enviroment they are in can determine how easy it is do whatever it is they want to do. For instance how easy do you think it would be for the IRA to go back to its old ways of killing and maiming in the current political enviroment?

CiaranC

Helterskelter wrote:

You say "we can look at the UK". Have you actually looked at the UK? Do you know any Muslims living there? I have many Muslim friends in the UK. They all work and live alongside non-muslim English people and have non-Muslim friends. Sure, their parents didn't mix much but it is much the same way as any first generation who emmigrate to a foreign country. Where's the first place an Irish person heads to in a foreign country, an IRISH pub.

Its totally disingenous to suggest that there arent huge problems with racial integration in the UK between Muslims and the rest of the population.

You only have to compare the difference between the other immigrant populations of the time, West Indians and Irish and the Muslim communties there.

I have extensive personal experience of this in the greater manchester area. I have no doubt that well meaning liberal types have exacerbated the situation by refusing to countenance the idea that an immigrant society should have to adapt to their new surroundings at all. Hence the meteoric rise of the ghastly BNP.

Zombrex

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Cause I say so :P No but seriously have you seen some of the crap children get taught in "faith schools"? That the earth is 10,000 years old, evolution is wrong and that god clicked his fingers and all the animals we see today were suddenly created.

I'm not talking about being taught stuff like science based on religious dogma or that one particular religion is the "correct" one, I'm talking about simply learning about religions.

In my school we had and RE class twice a week. In a year we had studies everything from the Popes ruling on something (can't remember what), to the religions of the islands off Indonesia.

I see little harm in simply learning about the different world religions. If you are learning about a load of religions it would be nearly impossible to this "this one is correct" anyway.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

You really have such a fluffy nice idea of how children are taught in these faith school Wicknight

As I said, I'm not (an never was) talking about faith schools. I'm talking about public secular schools where children learn about world religions not because the school is teaching that one religion is correct or right, but because knowing about religions that are practices in the modern world is a useful and handy thing to know about.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

I didn't realise being black was a choice?

Its not, but coming to Ireland is. And the argument is taht black people should not choose to come to Ireland because it upsets the racists and this leads to racism and other social problems.

This argument sounds very familar to the argument that Muslim people should not wear their traditional veil because it upsets us Irish and leads to racism and other social problems.

I both cases it is us who are actually causing the problems.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

In my mind integration is a process where both communities accept change.

I fully agree with that. If Muslims wish to come here they need to realise that this is a secular social democracy. If they can't accept that that is tough.

But I fail to see why they need to change how they dress?

There is a very good reason why I wish to keep my quite nice secular social democracy, as imperfect as it is, and there is a very good reason why I do not wish to have Islamic practices or laws applied to me.

But a Muslim woman wearing a veil does not conflict with my secular social democracy at all.

If foreign Muslims wish to live here they need to live under our system of individual freedom. But part of living under that system is taht they have the freedom to wear a veil is they so wish. That is actually our society that is giving them that freedom. We are not changing anything for the Muslims, that was already in place.

mountainyman

HelterSkelter wrote:

So what should be banned? Should Hijabs be allowed? What about Turbins? What about a cross & chain around the neck?

This is a valid point.
[1] The right to dress how one wishes is a core right.
[2] However what if one's dress causes offense?
[3] What if that offense is unreasonable and based on a false premise?
[4] What if the premise is valid but the offense is unreasonable?
[5] What do we mean by offense, is the right not to be offended a core right?
[6] Is integration an assimilative process or is it a positive duty resting with the incomer?
[7] What if the way one dresses or behaves to assert a particluar identity causes difficulties for other people who also assert that identity?
[8] Should religion be privileged over other forms of identity that give rise to a desire for self expression?
[9] Why?

What if that teaching assistant had been a punk rocker?
What if she had been a fascist and insisted on wearing a blue shirt?
What if she had worn a piece of gauze on her face to protect her from the disgusting smell of 'crisp breath'?

MM

Zombrex

CiaranC wrote:

You only have to compare the difference between the other immigrant populations of the time, West Indians and Irish and the Muslim communties there.

Which are ??

I seem to remember a few "get the **** out" campaigns in the past.

Any influx of immigration produces the same bigotry and xenophobia, on both sides

CiaranC wrote:

idea that an immigrant society should have to adapt to their new surroundings at all. Hence the meteoric rise of the ghastly BNP.

They are expected to adapt to their new surroundings. They are expected to follow the laws of the country the living, even if the laws are in conflict with what they wish to do.

What you seem to be talking about isn't adaptation, it is surrender of cultural identity.

desiredbard

Ended up here through the veiling issue.
Where I do agree with Jack Straw and am in full support opf the french legislation.

However this is also a fiondback post.

BBC (I believe or is it C4 has a special on women claiming and fighting for their right to visit the mosque....

[sarcasm]
What is next ... not only visit the mosque but be beside their partners as well....burning their burka's or worse demand they can walks without a headscarf in public
[/sarcasm]

Húrin

RedPlanet wrote:

I would say it demonstrates his intolerance toward islam and willingness to dismiss some of his constituents.

That is absolute bull****. He's asking them to take off their veils SO HE CAN SEE THEIR FACES, not renounce Allah.

I wonder why there are so many people who feel the need to silence all criticism of things that Muslims do just because they're Muslim.

Why do so many non-Muslims obssess over defending Muslims? Do you think they can't defend themselves? Do you think we're on the brink of sending Muslims to concentration camps?

Húrin

Wicknight wrote:

Imagine if Jack Straw merely asked a western woman to remove her top and bra while talking to them, but not actually requiring them to do so.

I would imagine the "merely" would be dropped rather quickly from your post.

That's because wearing tops is a common part of British culture, wearing veils is not. These women wearing the veils would probably be even more averse to removing their tops. If British culture evolves in a direction of topless women that's OK, but as for now that's not the case and Straw is making an effort to break down the cultural gulf between religious Muslims and secular government.

Zombrex

H&#250 wrote: »

That's because wearing tops is a common part of British culture

No, its because british women maybe embrassed by certain areas of their body being exposed in public, and it is considered rude and bad manners to ask them to expose these parts of their body which one knows might cause them embrassement.

The point is not which areas are covered and uncovered, the point is the feeling you might create in the other person by asking them to do this. The reason why you don't ask a woman to take her top off in the middle of Tescos is not because there is anything particularly wrong with seeing a womans breasts. You see womens breasts all the time. Its not a health hazzard or anything, its not going to cause you to go blind. The reason it is rude to do so is because most likely the woman will not want to do so, will be uncomfortable and embarrased by your request.

So why is it not rude to ask a Muslim woman do something that you are fully aware she may find embrassing or uncomfortable?

H&#250 wrote: »

These women wearing the veils would probably be even more averse to removing their tops.

I wouldn't recommend you do that either :rolleyes:

Zombrex

H&#250 wrote: »

I wonder why there are so many people who feel the need to silence all criticism of things that Muslims do just because they're Muslim.

Why when something like this happens people always say we are silencing "all" criticims.

Just because someone is foreign, or Muslim, doesn't mean you we have a blanket excuse to give out or criticse everything they do or believe until you are blue in the face without others pointing out that you are being stupid, hyocritical or petty.

H&#250 wrote: »

Why do so many non-Muslims obssess over defending Muslims?

Because often the errosion of civil liberties are first directed at those who are weak and without a voice, ie minorities. In the last few years Muslims have become the lipping boys and scape goats for this errosion, the excuse being that their religion breeds fundamentalism and extremism and that we must protect ourself from them and their culture.

If we don't stand up for the rights to dignity and respect for the weakest amoung us how can we expect those same rights for ourselves.

johnthesavage

H&#250 wrote: »

...Straw is making an effort to break down the cultural gulf between religious Muslims and secular government.

He is doing nothing of the sort. This is just a cynical attempt to bolster his right-wing credentials and exploit the current islamophobia, and to grab a few headlines in the gutter press. Perhaps he felt he had to match the nonsense spouted by John Reid a week or two previously.
Straw is fuelling paranoia and xenophobia for his own political gain, and dressing it up as an attempt to encourage debate changes nothing.