a bit of a drama queen, aren't you ?lowing wrote:
Nope I guess I should also be understanding when I can not look at my doctor because she is covered up in a burka and not allowed to show her face, or I should be understanding when I go to the gym and find out I came during Islam workout hour, or I should be more understanding when my waiter refuses t oserve me my pork sandwhich and my beer. Or I guess I should understand when a dentist refuses treatment because their patient is not wearing the proper attire. yeah I guess, it is MY problem, I need to be more understanding in our free society. Basically you are argumung that they are free to be as big a pain in the ass as they wishm, because their religion demands it.B.Schuss wrote:
well, different religions, different religious practices, I guess. Just because religious practices ( such as regular prayer or mass ) have become uncommon for the majority of people in our mostly secular western societies doesn't mean we cannot allow those who do take their religion seriously to practice it as they deem appropriate. It's called freedom of religion. As long as those practices do not represent a violation of our secular laws, of course.lowing wrote:
Like I said, no other religion is this needy or demands this kind of attention or appeasement. So no other religion is requiring anything except the freedom to worship, while Islam expects and demands everyone to get out of the way while they do it.
And as I have already pointed out, this does not seem to be the case here.
The fact that we have become so secular that the few christians in that school didn't even bother to ask for a room to pray in does not mean we cannot allow other religions to do so, does it ?
and who knows, maybe some of the christians in that school might use that room, too, and everyone learns something about the other guy's religion...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl … 011120.stmCameronPoe wrote:
Why would anyone go to a doctor clad in a burka? Why would anyone go to a shop that doesn't sell pork sandwiches to buy a pork sandwich (it's like going to a kosher place and asking for a cheeseburger, which I unwittingly did in Israel)? Why would anyone go to a dentist that cares about what you wear?lowing wrote:
Nope I guess I should also be understanding when I can not look at my doctor because she is covered up in a burka and not allowed to show her face, or I should be understanding when I go to the gym and find out I came during Islam workout hour, or I should be more understanding when my waiter refuses t oserve me my pork sandwhich and my beer. Or I guess I should understand when a dentist refuses treatment because their patient is not wearing the proper attire. yeah I guess, it is MY problem, I need to be more understanding in our free society. Basically you are argumung that they are free to be as big a pain in the ass as they wishm, because their religion demands it.
It's the old adage of the business proprietor: "I reserve the right.."
read up shit like this is happeningB.Schuss wrote:
a bit of a drama queen, aren't you ?lowing wrote:
Nope I guess I should also be understanding when I can not look at my doctor because she is covered up in a burka and not allowed to show her face, or I should be understanding when I go to the gym and find out I came during Islam workout hour, or I should be more understanding when my waiter refuses t oserve me my pork sandwhich and my beer. Or I guess I should understand when a dentist refuses treatment because their patient is not wearing the proper attire. yeah I guess, it is MY problem, I need to be more understanding in our free society. Basically you are argumung that they are free to be as big a pain in the ass as they wishm, because their religion demands it.B.Schuss wrote:
well, different religions, different religious practices, I guess. Just because religious practices ( such as regular prayer or mass ) have become uncommon for the majority of people in our mostly secular western societies doesn't mean we cannot allow those who do take their religion seriously to practice it as they deem appropriate. It's called freedom of religion. As long as those practices do not represent a violation of our secular laws, of course.
And as I have already pointed out, this does not seem to be the case here.
The fact that we have become so secular that the few christians in that school didn't even bother to ask for a room to pray in does not mean we cannot allow other religions to do so, does it ?
and who knows, maybe some of the christians in that school might use that room, too, and everyone learns something about the other guy's religion...
None of the things you mentioned have happened in this case. All that happened was that a young muslim boy wanted to have the opportunity to practice his religion in school, and followed a democratic process ( in this case, a court ruling ) to have his issue addressed. Rule of law at its best, if you will.
Really, lowing, you keep telling us that you are not an islamophobe, but from those words, it's getting harder and harder to believe you...
We have secular laws, and the courts decide when those are violated or not. That's the way these issues are handled in democratic societies that are based on the rule of law and separation of powers. Are you sure you're not afraid ?
I read through all 4 of the news articles you quoted, and found nothing of particular interest, tbh.lowing wrote:
read up shit like this is happening
you can not keep dismissing everything as a singular event and does not count. As a whole all of these singular events adds up to a pretty clear picture.Varegg wrote:
You refer to single cases from the news lowing, nothing in general ...
same response as aboveB.Schuss wrote:
I read through all 4 of the news articles you quoted, and found nothing of particular interest, tbh.lowing wrote:
read up shit like this is happening
Isolated incidents that have nothing to do with the law of the land.
If anything, these incidents show that islam already has an influence on our culture, if we like it or not, and that we cannot just make it go away.
it is not the facts we deny, lowing, but rather the implications/ramifications.lowing wrote:
you can not keep dismissing everything as a singular event and does not count. As a whole all of these singular events adds up to a pretty clear picture.Varegg wrote:
You refer to single cases from the news lowing, nothing in general ...
Generalizing seems to be a blanket defense every time proof is provided to back up a point. I guess it is all that you have when denial of fact does not lend itself as convenient
"I reserve the right."lowing wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/7011120.stm
Suspend their taxi permit unless private, in which case "I reserve the right."lowing wrote:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1764921/posts
Are they forcing them to wear Burkhas? No. Are they forcing you to wear a Burkha? No. Seems lame tbh I'll admit.lowing wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403693&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true
Fired. Unfit for job.lowing wrote:
http://www.buzz.mn/?q=node/898
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-04 04:16:00)
Yeah I sure as hell do.....Stop being a bunch of politically correct pussies and tell special interest to fuck off.B.Schuss wrote:
it is not the facts we deny, lowing, but rather the implications/ramifications.lowing wrote:
you can not keep dismissing everything as a singular event and does not count. As a whole all of these singular events adds up to a pretty clear picture.Varegg wrote:
You refer to single cases from the news lowing, nothing in general ...
Generalizing seems to be a blanket defense every time proof is provided to back up a point. I guess it is all that you have when denial of fact does not lend itself as convenient
No one said that what you quoted in these articles didn't happen. We just don't think it's something to worry about, or something our free, democratic society and its legal system cannot handle.
the fact that you seem to have so little faith ( sic ) in our rule of law / democratic society worries me. Because, quite frankly, I see no alternative.
Do you ?
1. was not firedCameronPoe wrote:
"I reserve the right."lowing wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/7011120.stmSuspend their taxi permit unless private, in which case "I reserve the right."lowing wrote:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1764921/postsAre they forcing them to wear Burkhas? No. Are they forcing you to wear a Burkha? No. Seems lame tbh I'll admit.lowing wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403693&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=trueFired. Unfit for job.lowing wrote:
http://www.buzz.mn/?q=node/898
I don't see that it's a big issue tbh. A mild irritant. It certainly doesn't have any meaningful impact on either the EU or the US and never will. The UK also permitted Sikhs to wear their turbans in the police force. This isn't islam-specific.lowing wrote:
1. was not fired
2. licenses not suspended
3. bad enough this is an "issue" .
4.not fired.
PC and the pussification of Europe and the US will not allow action in these cases.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-04 04:24:52)
That's the problem lowing, it doesn't add up to create a clear picture ... a few single incidents doesn't reflect as the truth as you prove it to be ... a muslim cashier that doesn't wan't to touch a wrapped pizza because it may contain pork is just pure ignorance, they are allowed to do that as long as they don't come into direct contact with the pork itself ...lowing wrote:
you can not keep dismissing everything as a singular event and does not count. As a whole all of these singular events adds up to a pretty clear picture.Varegg wrote:
You refer to single cases from the news lowing, nothing in general ...
Generalizing seems to be a blanket defense every time proof is provided to back up a point. I guess it is all that you have when denial of fact does not lend itself as convenient
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-04 04:28:12)
Another 30 pages Islam Appeasement thread shows...CameronPoe wrote:
lowing's obsession with pointed minor news stories regarding Islam betrays an irrational lack of objectivity.
Last edited by sergeriver (2008-04-04 04:29:25)
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-04 04:32:18)
Yeah, some more than others apparently. Fuck thatVaregg wrote:
Believe it or not lowing but special interest groups are here to stay and i don't really mind ... it really needs to be this way also, different people have different needs ...
Type 'evil america' into Google and see what happens lowing.lowing wrote:
Both points would be well recieved if in fact these stories were far and few between and almost impossible to find with a google search. Unfortunately that is not the case. The fact is all ya gotta do is type the word Islam and there ya go. Funny how articles about how enlightening Islam is are the ones that are hard to find. But yeah, I am making it all up.
With people like you around, Islam-averse neoconservatives, looking for stuff of this ilk it is almost guaranteed that stories like this will feature highly on Google searches. You do understand how the Google search algorithms work, don't you?lowing wrote:
Both points would be well recieved if in fact these stories were far and few between and almost impossible to find with a google search. Unfortunately that is not the case. The fact is all ya gotta do is type the word Islam and there ya go. Funny how articles about how enlightening Islam is are the ones that are hard to find. But yeah, I am making it all up.
Like I told Braddock, feel free to join in or not.......sergeriver wrote:
Another 30 pages Islam Appeasement thread shows...CameronPoe wrote:
lowing's obsession with pointed minor news stories regarding Islam betrays an irrational lack of objectivity.