|
Post by jean on Feb 23, 2011 11:24:24 GMT 1
He hadn't been taught much about the best human trait - humour. Oh I see. And you had?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 23, 2011 11:24:59 GMT 1
I AM an islamophobe, speaker. (Islamophobia = Fear of Islam)
Islam is the most pernicious religion in the world by a long chalk. It remains in the dark ages because whatever Muhammad did muslims may do and what Muhammed did not forbid muslims may not forbid. That gives a lot of leeway since Muhammad was a warlord, a slave trader and took child brides. Read the Qur'an, it's only short and full of invective and threats against non-muslims .
I have no problem with INDIVIDUAL muslims. I have no problem with INDIVIDUALS of any description, whatsoever.
But idividualism, which the West values, is frowned upon by Islam. Conformity and extreme partiality is what Islam expects from its adherents The Umma is not a force for good in a putatively democratic society but a force for fragmentation. There are plenty of muslim lands throughout the world for people who wish put Islam first. Let them settle there. I find the values imported by these people almost entirely reprehensible on every level in their impact on British society - personal, family, political and sub-cultural. The attraction British society has for them is almost entirely of the "cupboard love" variety.
Homosexuals, by the way, do not enjoy a very secure existence amongst the Umma. Male and female homosexuals here in the UK have been known to engage in sham marriages with eachother in order to avoid censure (or MUCH worse) and to appear to conform.
Surprising the board's gaycommunity are so supportive of this culture. No cognitive dissonance, simplex, speaker et al? Here gays are trotting off to get civil partnerships and moaning because a vicar won't "marry" them in church. Try that in Pakistan!
Put your own grotesque PC mindsets in order before criticising me and whitewashing Islam.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Feb 23, 2011 11:31:44 GMT 1
I have seen demonstrations and 'protest' marches by some groups which I find very disturbing. Rent-a-mob at its very worst.
I am not (I think) racist, but would it start to make sense if it was made a criminal offence, not a civil one, for anyone on any demonstration to have their face covered?
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 23, 2011 11:35:33 GMT 1
He hadn't been taught much about the best human trait - humour. Oh I see. And you had? If you have nothing more than that to contribute, I suggest you eff off.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 23, 2011 11:38:33 GMT 1
I have seen demonstrations and 'protest' marches by some groups which I find very disturbing. Rent-a-mob at its very worst. I am not (I think) racist, but would it start to make sense if it was made a criminal offence, not a civil one, for anyone on any demonstration to have their face covered? I know I'm not a racist since the colour of someones skin has no bearing on my opinion of them. It doesn't prevent me from saying, for instance, that African Countries are incapable of governing themselves. Sadly, it's a fact.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Feb 23, 2011 12:17:17 GMT 1
Well if you know anything about the history of the world the same could be said for a lot of countries, including at times our own - or your own!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 23, 2011 12:21:57 GMT 1
Louise asks, "Could you please explain why you think "political correctness" is so dangerous?"
It's an oxymoron - like the old joke "military intelligence".
Think of Maoist "right-thinkers" and you'll get the drift.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Feb 23, 2011 12:33:09 GMT 1
Better still, don't think of it at all - it is an invention of the libertarian Right to throw mud anyone who takes care over the way they speak.
It's as simple as that, and to take accusations of political correctness seriously when they're directed at you is to fall into a trap of someone else's making.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Feb 23, 2011 13:05:32 GMT 1
Rather like the person who mentioned at a meeting in Wiltshire that the jungle drums within the NHS were reporting - whatever. She was pilloried, but I seem to recall that was the subject of another thread.
I must not call someone black, even if they are I suppose. I can I suppose call them an idiot, but not a Scottish idiot...
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Feb 23, 2011 13:29:55 GMT 1
Rather like the person who mentioned at a meeting in Wiltshire that the jungle drums within the NHS were reporting - whatever. She was pilloried, but I seem to recall that was the subject of another thread. I must not call someone black, even if they are I suppose. I can I suppose call them an idiot, but not a Scottish idiot... Nor even, presumably, a blackguard, unless of course he is a Welsh Guardsman of Carribean extraction
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Feb 23, 2011 13:32:24 GMT 1
Well if you know anything about the history of the world the same could be said for a lot of countries, including at times our own - or your own! This is true but surely does not distract from the truth of what rsmith says There areone or two exceptions, Ghana, Botswana, Uganda (maybe)
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Feb 23, 2011 13:33:29 GMT 1
Political Correcgtness is taking care of the way other people speak
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Feb 23, 2011 13:37:12 GMT 1
Homosexuals, by the way, do not enjoy a very secure existence amongst the Umma. Surprising the board's gay community are so supportive of this culture. No cognitive dissonance, simplex, speaker et al? Put your own grotesque PC mindsets in order before criticising me and whitewashing Islam. Well said!
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Feb 23, 2011 13:59:03 GMT 1
I had forgotten how objectionable M's opinions could be!
Exactly WHAT is meant by this! Would seem that anyone on this board who says they are gay, then gets labelled as gay community , no matter how mild their opinions may be. Have I ever come out with any extreme gay rights agenda on here? No, as far as I recall, I'm more likely to get extremely heated and abusive over abtruse points of information theory, not over gay rights.
SO why does M see fit to use this label? Because it allows her to disparage and label as worthless anything anyone from the 'gay community' or the 'warmist conspiracy' may say, without further analysis. And she does the same for muslims.
There are indeed some pretty objectionable sects within Islam, just as there are some pretty objectionable sects within any religious group. FOr instance, I'm not that fond of the CofE position on women and gay rights, nor the Catholic church getting all hot and bothered about some religious groups being allowed to have civil partnerships ceremonies in a place of worship, if they so wish. Or that the US is so far behind when it comes to gay rights because of the christian right, and the slightly peculair turn religion has taken in that country.
Frankly, I think all religions are pretty much nonsense. I don't think that in that respect islam is that much worse than any other, just that historically, it hasn't been tamed as some christian excess was by a reformation. But trying to demonize islam, as if christianity (and other supposed 'sensible' religions) are so much better, at the root, just obscures the fact that once you can get people to believe nonsense as the will of some supreme being, then you can get them to believe all sorts of dangerous nonsense, whatever 'religion' it nominally is. Religions are the problem, not islam, which just happens to be the example of choice at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Feb 23, 2011 14:04:04 GMT 1
I had forgotten how objectionable M's opinions could be! ;D ;D
|
|