Eh? This whole story began because a religious leader suggested that religious groups might be allowed to organise their own affairs. As I made clear above, I'm not generally in favour of organised religion, but I do respect other people's views.
But you seem to be making out that being Muslim is a nationality, like being Chinese. It's not, it's a religion. And Muslims come from all over the world. Yes, some of them are even white Britons.
So what's this about special demands for mosques? They don't demand mosques. They build them. In the same way that Christians build churches. Why is that special treatment? I don't believe in faith schools, but given this Government's enthusiasm for them, it doesn't seem unreasonable for Muslims to want their own. That's not special treatment - that's equal treatment.
Hi supersub,
The response to your post is so plain and obvious that given time, I am sure you would be able to se it yourself.
So I shall give you that time.
Regards.
Prashna
Hi all,
The HDD containing the o/s in my PC is reporting failure imminent thru its S.M.A.R.T. system.
I might lose touch at any time. So may not be able to respond further.
Just to let you know, so you understand.
I am sure when I have my PC is fixed, the debate would still rage on.
See you then.
Regards.
Prashna
I have never claimed that the Muslims are asking for "stoning people to death". I would have liked to have quoted you exactly, but could not because of your liberal use of caps.
Prashna, I have never said that you said the above. You see, that part of my post was addressed to everyone that is reading this thread, not to you alone. Apart from responding to certain remarks that you have made, I am also making general comments. I'm sorry that you thought that this part of my post was directed solely at you. It wasn't.
I apologise for the capitals. They also were not aimed solely at you. They were the textual equivalent of me tearing my hair out in frustration. Not only because of you, although you contributed! Which is really silly of me - to take any of this nonsense seriously, I mean.
xxx
The confusion surely arises through calling it 'Sharia Law' - many people, including a lot of people on this thread think that this is going to replace the large body of laws which make up our justice system. It's not. Nor did the Archbishop suggest that it should. NO ONE IS GOING TO START STONING PEOPLE TO DEATH IN THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN, NORTHERN IRELAND, CHANNEL ISLANDS, ISLE OF MAN, ORKNEY ISLANDS, SHETLANDS OR THE ISLE OF WIGHT.
So what's the problem?xx
The problem that people face is that through world events and the media there is a possibility, (no matter how remote) that it could be the thin edge of the wedge. Even more so when turkey joins the EU.
Just to add an off topic point "we are only seconds away every day of someone being stoned to death"
The confusion surely arises through calling it 'Sharia Law' - many people, including a lot of people on this thread think that this is going to replace the large body of laws which make up our justice system. It's not. Nor did the Archbishop suggest that it should. NO ONE IS GOING TO START STONING PEOPLE TO DEATH IN THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN, NORTHERN IRELAND, CHANNEL ISLANDS, ISLE OF MAN, ORKNEY ISLANDS, SHETLANDS OR THE ISLE OF WIGHT.
So what's the problem?
I couldn't have put that better, Sunanda. Is Islamaphobia in the dictionary yet?
Ooh you're a brave man, james! 🙂
Couldn't agree more with you that what we need is love. And lots of it. Unconditional love. Not just for some, but for everyone.
xxxx
Thanks Sunanda. Not sure why you say 'brave', mind, but thanks just the same...
Yes, love for everyone, even people that we disagree with! One thing about love is that it's best to first to give love, it always comes back multiplied! I'd imagine that if you talk to Prashna lovingly, he might drop his crystal clear, but tit-for-tat logic.
jamesk - I liked your post (although i may not agree with everything you've said) and i sure as hell like your style 😎
Thanks happy - not sure what 'my style' is, but glad you like it!
I might lose touch at any time. So may not be able to respond further.
Regards.
Prashna
Live long and prosper while you are away.
There also seems to be a muddling of equality and people being treated equally. If you want everyone to be treated equally then you can’t favour one group over another – everyone has to be treated exactly the same. Sounds great - except then things like disabled parking bays would then be illegal as they “favour” the disabled over the non-disabled. So in order to give equality to disadvantaged groups (e.g the disabled) you can’t treat everyone the same – it’s not possible. So yes some groups do have to be treated more favourably than the rest in order to achieve equality.
__________________
Happygirl
happy girl i am classed as disabled and use these parking bays .
i wish to god i did not have to use them, i am sure that those who are disabled would find you making comparisons offensive, we do not have a choice whereas other minority groups do.
Hi supersub,
The response to your post is so plain and obvious that given time, I am sure you would be able to se it yourself.
So I shall give you that time.
Regards.
Prashna
OK, I give up. What's the response? Or do I need more time?
happy girl i am classed as disabled and use these parking bays .
i wish to god i did not have to use them, i am sure that those who are disabled would find you making comparisons offensive, we do not have a choice whereas other minority groups do.
I think you need to re-read my post. My comments simply used disability as an example to show that sometimes you can't achieve equality by treating everyone equally. My post isn't about the rights or wrongs of disability parking bays.
happy girl i am classed as disabled and use these parking bays .
i wish to god i did not have to use them, i am sure that those who are disabled would find you making comparisons offencive, we do not have a choice whereas other minority groups do.
Well said it is obvious to anyone that you have no choice and as an example it bears no credibility.
I am sure that happy girl did not mean to offend.
Why is the past history of the British Empire relevant to this discussion?
Are you implying that the British Muslims see themselves as empire-builders in this country?
No dear - I'm not. I mentioned the British Empire merely to illustrate to those who think that the Brits abroad repsect local laws - that this isn't the case at all.
The fact is that Britain has had many many groups of immigrants over the last century or two even. The Chinese, for example.
You never hear too much about them
Why? Because they blend in, try to respect the local culture, integrate as much as possible.
Doesn't mean they give up their culture, or food or dress. You only have to look at the popularity of the Chinese take-aways and restaurants, their colourful New year parades to realise that. But they do integrate, because they actually try to.
The Muslim immigration has occurred largely in the last 2-3 decades. Hardly a day goes by without yet another Muslim demand or plea for special treatment. A Mosque here, a Madrassa there, an Islamic school elsewhere. Then there are the long drawn law suits about Islamic dress and compensation claims. The list just goes on and on.
What about Chinese Muslims ? What group have you plonked them into ?
I know your feelings - I mean - you can barely walk down the road now without bumping into a Mosque or Madrassa :rolleyes:.
Muslims have been here for generations and a lot came as lascars in the 19th century - indeed the first Mosque was built in 1889. If it upsets you that there are Mosques and Madrassas (which are basically like the Christian Sunday schools and the lessons usually take place within the Mosque building), then why is it OK for Hindus to have their temples, Sikhs their Gurdwaras, Jews their synagogues etc ? Surely you weren't advocating active discrimination against Muslims ?
Why is the past history of the British Empire relevant to this discussion?
Its very important because all the Islamic fundamentalism that you see today all over the world is a result of what the British did - deliberately or inadvertently I don't know.