Is Islam right for Ireland?

dav3

SSr0 wrote: »

It's beyond me how you have not been site banned yet. 90% of your post are personal insults.

Banned? What happened to free speech and 'if you're easily offended you should stay off the internet'? It can't all be a one-way street can it?

Anyway, you lads should keep reporting every post, I'm sure the mods love it.

PlaneSpeeking

Taytoland wrote: »

It's got nothing to do with skin colour. We do not see Buddhists or Sikhs running around Europe blowing children apart with home made bombs, knifing people to death, crushing them to death with vehicles and they aren't white either. It's purely ideology, that's it. Most people don't like the ideology and the havoc it's causing in Europe.

And Sikhs have to carry a kniife! My maths teacher from many years ago is Sikh and we thought him the coolest for showing us his dagger!

AfterLife

Cordell wrote: »

I'm one of those and I'll be genuinely interested in why you are against us coming here. You can PM me if you want to.

If you were British you would be alright. Unless you were Muslim and British.

dav3

SnakePlissken wrote: »

So your post was about him then, how about being an adult and standing over your posts instead of name calling when called out on them.

Her. How are you jumping to that conclusion?

I see we're getting into the playing-the-victim-card stage of the thread.

Hold on a second, let me break out my violin.

Billy86

Cordell wrote: »

I'm one of those and I'll be genuinely interested in why you are against us coming here. You can PM me if you want to.

All I can guess is that it's the common misconception that Romanian = Roma, which has to be irritating as if I'm correct they make up 2-3% and is a tally higher in Bulgaria. Romania is also over 90% Christian and just 0.3% Muslim so that is genuinely the only reason I can think of.

Either that, or they're just against all migration from anywhere full stop.

SSr0

dav3 wrote: »

Banned? What happened to free speech and 'if you're easily offended you should stay off the internet'? It can't all be a one-way street can it?

Anyway, you lads should keep reporting every post, I'm sure the mods love it.

Just wondering, as I have a few things I would like to get off my chest about you.

SnakePlissken

dav3 wrote: »

Banned? What happened to free speech and 'if you're easily offended you should stay off the internet'? It can't all be a one-way street can it?

You truly believe you've carte blanche to personally attack posters in-lieu of, I don't know, actually attempting to post a mature, adult, argument for your dissenting opinion? **** me.

dav3 wrote: »

I see we're getting into the playing-the-victim-card stage of the thread.

Hold on a second, let me break out my violin.

Really? I mean, is this the only level of debate you're capable of?

ELM327

ELM327 wrote: »

I'm not a racist. I'm a nationalist. There's a big difference between the two. If a white person from say Romania was coming here I'd be against it. Same as for a black/brown/yellow/blue whatever else. Colour doesn't come into it. It's about national pride and respect for your country's dominion and its borders.

So, would you allow any other nationality other than Irish live here?
What criteria would you have to allow someone be here?

dav3

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Really? I mean, is this the only level of debate you're capable of?

Don't flatter yourself. There is absolutely zero debate happening in this thread, unless your bar is set fairly low.

It's mostly ranting, raving and lying by the same tired jaded faces, circle jerking each other into frenzy while believing they have some form of safe space on the website.

SnakePlissken

dav3 wrote: »

Don't flatter yourself. There is absolutely zero debate happening in this thread, unless your bar is set fairly low.

It's mostly ranting, raving and lying by the same tired jaded faces, circle jerking each other into frenzy while believing they have some form of safe space on the website.

Good man.

ancapailldorcha

ELM327 wrote: »

Who was that? I haven't read that and I've read back through the recent posts.

Here:

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

You might be okay with kids getting maimed by acid just because daddy's backward "faith" says mummy can't go out in the UK without looking like a dalek put away for the night but I am very much not.

Captain Obvious

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Here:

I believe that poster was misrepresenting the argument made, much like the article posted. How clumsy.

Snake Plisken

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You truly believe you've carte blanche to personally attack posters in-lieu of, I don't know, actually attempting to post a mature, adult, argument for your dissenting opinion? **** me.




Really? I mean, is this the only level of debate you're capable of?

Yeah I just reported him, the tedious digs at posters being re-reg accounts is getting boring at this stage. If anyone suspects an account is a re-reg, they know where the report button is. But the likes of him and a few others just prefer to throw around accusations.

SnakePlissken

Careful now, you'll be accused of playing the victim card, or called a snowflake, it's all certain posters have the mental capacity to contribute to the discussion.

enricoh

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Careful now, you'll be accused of playing the victim card, or called a snowflake, it's all certain posters have the mental capacity to contribute to the discussion.

Crawl back under yer rock u racist knuckledragger! Eh, that's about all ive got unfortunately. U and yer tired, jaded friends.
This should get a couple of likes off my fresh n vibrant mates!!

Technocentral

Ridiculous question, no religion is right for anywhere, logical secularism the only way not superstition of any sort.

Hector Savage

Technocentral wrote: »

Ridiculous question, no religion is right for anywhere, logical secularism the only way not superstition of any sort.

True, but apparently criticism of a certain ideology that has mainly brown skinned followers is "racist"

I would love to know if everything else was the same - terror attacks,FGM, child brides etc - but the demographics of Islam was mainly white europeans - how would it be accepted by todays liberals?

PlaneSpeeking

Technocentral wrote: »

Ridiculous question, no religion is right for anywhere, logical secularism the only way not superstition of any sort.

See your point but the mother was a Baptist - scariest thing she believed in was making kids go to the Sunday School she taught at!

Most branches of Islam - Waahabiism (sp ?) is particularly dangerous and the mosque many of the students in my college attend has had several very "questionable" speakers. They are great kids but impressionable and missing home, I fear for them.

PlaneSpeeking

Hector Savage wrote: »

True, but apparently criticism of a certain ideology that has mainly brown skinned followers is "racist"

I would love to know if everything else was the same - terror attacks,FGM, child brides etc - but the demographics of Islam was mainly white europeans - how would it be accepted by todays liberals?

I asked one of the achingly progressive crowd I work with that if FGM was a purely US practice would they support it.

Apparently the US doesn't have a "long standing culture" and so no, they'd think it was cruel.

Bat crap insane.

Hector Savage

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I asked one of the achingly progressive crowd I work with that if FGM was a purely US practice would they support it.

Apparently the US doesn't have a "long standing culture" and so no, they'd think it was cruel.

Bat crap insane.

Totally unhinged mentally ill lunatics.

PlaneSpeeking

Hector Savage wrote: »

Totally unhinged mentally ill lunatics.

Never a truer word spoken.

The same person actually believed the "child migrants" into the UK story - and even when I pointed out one was about the age, size and shape of her son (who is 31) she didn't believe it!

"War changes a child". Yeah WWII made my dad and aunties skinny cos of rationing. He never looked like a brick sh**house at 12!

ELM327

Hector Savage wrote: »

Totally unhinged mentally ill lunatics.

Yes.
Those people do more damage to anyone from the left trying to pose a realistic rationale, than the likes of Islamist terrorists.

aroundthehouse

I was watching citizen khan last night and it was very funny, he was trying to get his daughter into a catholic school on a scholarship because it was free and hilarity ensued

Timberrrrrrrr

Hector Savage wrote: »

Totally unhinged mentally ill lunatics.

Ah not all americans are bad.

ArthurDayne

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I asked one of the achingly progressive crowd I work with that if FGM was a purely US practice would they support it.

Apparently the US doesn't have a "long standing culture" and so no, they'd think it was cruel.

Bat crap insane.

Are you sure these people are progressives? I can't think of any person I know, (and I mix in a fairly liberal social and career environment) who would ever defend the practice of female genital mutilation.

Just to point out of course -- male genital mutilation remains perfectly OK in Ireland from a legal perspective and has been for many years. Clearly we aren't as enlightened here as we like to think we are but, being the clear champion of anti-mutilation that you are, I presume you are campaigning tirelessly to end the practice.

I would certainly support you in that endevaour.

Stigura

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Tonight I'll take the tablet to bed and watch XHamster, less chance of being cross examined.

Aaaah, jesus fcuking christ! And, like a complete wombat, I googled " Xhamster "!!! ROFLMAO!

Roger Hassenforder

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Are you sure these people are progressives? I can't think of any person I know, (and I mix in a fairly liberal social and career environment) who would ever defend the practice of female genital mutilation.

Just to point out of course -- male genital mutilation remains perfectly OK in Ireland from a legal perspective and has been for many years. Clearly we aren't as enlightened here as we like to think we are but, being the clear champion of anti-mutilation that you are, I presume you are campaigning tirelessly to end the practice.

I would certainly support you in that endevaour.

Tell me you're not comparing FGM to circumcision?

ArthurDayne

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Tell me you're not comparing FGM to circumcision?

If a religious person (of whatever faith) has their child's foreskin cut off for religious reasons and for no medical purpose whatsoever -- then how else can circumcision be described as anything other than the mutilation of the genitals?

EDIT: The United Nations itself has described FGM as : "Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve altering or injuring the female genitalia for non-medical reasons and is recognized internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women"

Seems more than comparable to me.

ELM327

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Tell me you're not comparing FGM to circumcision?

They are both ridiculous ideas performed in the guise of following the will of some floating man in the clouds.


Both involve mutilating genitalia of a minor (which in my opinion should bring a prison sentence)... obviously the impact of FGM is a lot worse, but that's like saying rape is nothing because aggrevated rape is so much worse.

PlaneSpeeking

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Are you sure these people are progressives? I can't think of any person I know, (and I mix in a fairly liberal social and career environment) who would ever defend the practice of female genital mutilation.

Just to point out of course -- male genital mutilation remains perfectly OK in Ireland from a legal perspective and has been for many years. Clearly we aren't as enlightened here as we like to think we are but, being the clear champion of anti-mutilation that you are, I presume you are campaigning tirelessly to end the practice.

I would certainly support you in that endevaour.

Okay, let me just buy a new sarcasm detector, that last one's exploded.

You see they are very careful - they do not "defend the practice", none of them ever say maiming a child's hoo ha is okay. in the same way as they never say that throwing gay men off a tower is okay, or that forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist (when the other option is being stoned to death) is okay.

What they DO is support the cultures that do this and call those of us who are tired of the barbarism "racists" in a vain attempt to deflect.

So, you may not be holding the kid down with one hand and got the broken bottle in the other - but by defending these barbarous, mediaeval (sp?) idiots you're doing nothing to end this and by extension, being okay with it.

A group who considers touching someone's shoulder without permission to be sexual assault is fine with forcibly holding down a young girl and cutting her c*****is off. (Not sure I can use that words, so asterisks it is).

Incidentally, I'm very much against male circumcision unless done either a) for medical reasons as a child or b) by an adult later on who can do whatever they want.

Hector Savage

I would be against male circumcision just for the sake of it (like they do in USA) or religious reasons.
But you can't argue the effect is as bad as FGM.

I'm not cirumcised, neither is my brother or his two sons, one of my sons isn't but my youngest son is - when he was a baby he couldn't wee properly and his little todger was balooning full of wee and then flooding out - so it HAD to be done!!

But it's circumstances like these where I'd only agree with it.

I don't know if there is an equivalent for girls ? I doubt it.

ELM327

Hector Savage wrote: »

I would be against male circumcision just for the sake of it (like they do in USA) or religious reasons.
But you can't argue the effect is as bad as FGM.

I'm not cirumcised, neither is my brother or his two sons, one of my sons isn't but my youngest son is - when he was a baby he couldn't wee properly and his little todger was balooning full of wee and then flooding out - so it HAD to be done!!

But it's circumstances like these where I'd only agree with it.

I don't know if there is an equivalent for girls ? I doubt it.

But that's a medical reason for it. Same as I don't agree with cutting off someone's foot but if it has sepsis in it and it's the only way to beat the sepsis then you gotta cut it off.


If you think about it from the religious side for a second, circumcision and FGM are ridiculous concepts . God made us in his image, now lets just chop off this little bit here. The ridiculousness knows no bounds

Captain Obvious

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

A group who considers touching someone's shoulder without permission to be sexual assault is fine with forcibly holding down a young girl and cutting her c*****is off. (Not sure I can use that words, so asterisks it is).

Which group is this?

ELM327

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Which group is this?

Social justice warriors
Liberals
Rentamob protestors
AAA/PBP

All of the above

Captain Obvious

ELM327 wrote: »

Social justice warriors
Liberals
Rentamob protestors
AAA/PBP

All of the above

So just people on the opposite side of the political spectrum to you? And no doubt you will be absent of any kind of proof of someone in these groups defending FGM.

PlaneSpeeking

ELM327 wrote: »

Social justice warriors
Liberals
Rentamob protestors
AAA/PBP

All of the above

Thanks ELM, I'm currently enjoying the peace afforded by the ignore function!

Midlife

I don't get this thread?

It seems like jut an opportunity to pick out bits we don't like that Muslims do/have done and claim that this means somehow that a particular religion doesn't 'fit' a country.


I mean people just highlight acid attacks, FGM and ISIS and say this this wouldn't be good here.

Kind of obvious, no? Extremism isn't good anywhere.

Rory28

Midlife wrote: »

I don't get this thread?

It seems like jut an opportunity to pick out bits we don't like that Muslims do/have done and claim that this means somehow that a particular religion doesn't 'fit' a country.

It's seems to be simply an opportunity for people to highlight acid attacks, FGM and ISIS and say this this wouldn't be good here.

Kind of obvious, no? Extremism isn't good anywhere.

Would you like to highlight the benefits Islam could bring to Ireland?

Roger Hassenforder

ArthurDayne wrote: »

If a religious person (of whatever faith) has their child's foreskin cut off for religious reasons and for no medical purpose whatsoever -- then how else can circumcision be described as anything other than the mutilation of the genitals?

EDIT: The United Nations itself has described FGM as : "Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve altering or injuring the female genitalia for non-medical reasons and is recognized internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women"

Seems more than comparable to me.

Jesus F. Christ.
we've reached peak leftyliberalism. Youre even contradicting yourself.


One leaves a functioning, subjectivity more handsome mickey, with arguable health benifet. and not universally regarded as a violation of human rights however.

One butchers a girls lady bits as a control of female sexuality, leaving a lifetime of " recurrent infections, difficulty urinating and passing menstrual flow, chronic pain, the development of cysts, an inability to get pregnant, complications during childbirth, and fatal bleeding. "

With no known health benefits.

Midlife

Rory28 wrote: »

Would you like to highlight the benefits Islam could bring to Ireland?

Once you highlight the benefits any religion brings.

Go for it.

PlaneSpeeking

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Jesus F. Christ.
we've reached peak leftyliberalism. Youre even contradicting yourself.


One leaves a functioning, subjectivity more handsome mickey, with arguable health benifet. and not universally regarded as a violation of human rights however.

One butchers a girls lady bits as a control of female sexuality, leaving a lifetime of " recurrent infections, difficulty urinating and passing menstrual flow, chronic pain, the development of cysts, an inability to get pregnant, complications during childbirth, and fatal bleeding. "

With no known health benefits.

Not being the proud owner of a mickey but in the past an enthusiastic renter of same - is it not the case that the nasty buggers that cause cervical cancer, reside under the polo neck as it were - and removing it, removes them ???

Omackeral

Rory28 wrote: »

Would you like to highlight the benefits Islam could bring to Ireland?

Tried asking the Good Captain that myself and he told me I didn't want to know. Literally more or less what he said.

PlaneSpeeking

Midlife wrote: »

Once you highlight the benefits any religion brings.

Go for it.

Well you were asked first (btw - the answer is none for Islam) but:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/subdivisions/quakers_1.shtml

https://www.salvationarmy.org.uk/republic-of-ireland

http://www.capuchindaycentre.ie/Capuchin_Day_Centre_2013/Capuchin_Day_Centre_for_Homeless_People.html

Good sorts all.

Rory28

Midlife wrote: »

Once you highlight the benefits any religion brings.

Go for it.

I'm sure there is reason you turned my question back on me but I cant see it. Personally I think religion had its day and it should be left in the past or for people to do in their own time without it affecting other people.

Islam is not like that.

Omackeral

Midlife wrote: »

Once you highlight the benefits any religion brings.

Go for it.

Why the quantifier? Thread is about Islam in Ireland. That's what it says on the top there. It's a fair question. You're free to start another thread of course if you wish but I reckon the one posed is a valid one.

SnakePlissken

Midlife wrote: »

Once you highlight the benefits any religion brings.

Go for it.

The thread title is "Is Islam right for Ireland" and that is what is being discussed, if you'd prefer to ponder if Buddhism or Taoism is right for Ireland you're free to start a thread discussing same.

Some further disturbing statistics coming from Sweden which really highlights the naivety of those supporting open borders;

In March 2018, newspaper Expressen investigated gang rape court cases from the two preceding years and found that there were 43 men having been convicted. Their average age was 21 and 13 were under the age of 18 when the crime was committed. Of the convicted, 40 out of the 43 were either immigrants (born abroad) or born in Sweden to immigrant parents. Another investigation by newspaper Aftonbladet found that of 112 men and boys convicted for gang rape since July 2012, 82 were born outside Europe. The median age of the victims was 15, while 7 out of 10 perpetrators were between 15 to 20.

Midlife

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Well you were asked first (btw - the answer is none for Islam) but:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/subdivisions/quakers_1.shtml

https://www.salvationarmy.org.uk/republic-of-ireland

http://www.capuchindaycentre.ie/Capuchin_Day_Centre_2013/Capuchin_Day_Centre_for_Homeless_People.html

Good sorts all.

So I just need to find some examples of secular Islam or decent Islamic charities?

This seems a bit silly.

PlaneSpeeking

Midlife wrote: »

So I just need to find some examples of secular Islam or decent Islamic charities?

This seems a bit silly.

Searching for "secular Islam" ???

Fine - it's next to unicorn poo.

Midlife

Rory28 wrote: »

Personally I think religion had its day and it should be left in the past or for people to do in their own time without it affecting other people.

I agree completly

Rory28 wrote: »

Islam is not like that.

I would say extremists are not like that.

Just my opinion though.

thebull85

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INHbF3K8Wo8

Suspended sentence imminent...