Despatches Debate on Muslims and Free Speech

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 25 Oct 2006, 09:53

With the veil thing, I think the teacher was wrong and the education of children must come first. She cannot wear the veil if it impacts on her ability to do her job, IMHO. When she had her interview, she was not wearing a veil and there was a man present.
But she can do what she wants in private

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 25 Oct 2006, 10:07

grim_tales wrote:With the veil thing, I think the teacher was wrong and the education of children must come first. She cannot wear the veil if it impacts on her ability to do her job, IMHO. When she had her interview, she was not wearing a veil and there was a man present.
But she can do what she wants in private

Ahh but this is blown out, what the media didn't tell you is that the teacher says and did do was teach the kids without the veil, however if a male teacher came in, then she would cover up. So it nothing to do with the children as she did speak to them and teach without the veil, its just with a male teacher that came in.
This was also reported in Question Night last week, and not many people knew about it..

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 25 Oct 2006, 10:12

bradavon wrote:@ LD: Why have you picked at my points yet left Mark's and Yi's equally controversial comments alone? Hmmm :shock:

Because I actually didn't want to involve into this discussion and replying to ignorant comments is as useless as fucking for virginity. Your comments instead are worth replying to so feel honoured and not offended.

thelostdragon wrote:Well, if "trying" is a problem, then what is forcing democracy upon non-democrat people by wars?
Where the fuck did that come from? When did I remotely even allude to that.

It was a question. I didn't mean to imply that you said that a democratic war is not a problem. It was only a question.

I can't remember the last time I read about a pissed off Jew, Buddist or even Christian (actually I can Christian but it's MUCH less).

Does it mean we have to act equally? That we have to take our religion less seriously, because Jews and Christians seem to do? Our religion and our prophets and mostly Allah are the ones our most respect goes out to. An example would be: Imagine a rudiculous cartoon in the paper about your mother. You might say now that this is different as this would be quite a personal thing. Well, Islam is the most personal thing to Muslims.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 25 Oct 2006, 10:18

slasher13 wrote:
grim_tales wrote:With the veil thing, I think the teacher was wrong and the education of children must come first. She cannot wear the veil if it impacts on her ability to do her job, IMHO. When she had her interview, she was not wearing a veil and there was a man present.
But she can do what she wants in private
Ahh but this is blown out, what the media didn't tell you is that the teacher says and did do was teach the kids without the veil, however if a male teacher came in, then she would cover up. So it nothing to do with the children as she did speak to them and teach without the veil, its just with a male teacher that came in.
This was also reported in Question Night last week, and not many people knew about it..

Thanks

In fact I think I saw that question time programme.
I thought the initial compromise was she was allowed to wear the veil in the corridor or staffroom but not in class and she said no. But thanks for explaining.

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 25 Oct 2006, 10:24

Just to add, when LostDragon spoke about prophets, it should be mentioned that it is the following:

# 1.1 Adam آدم
# 1.2 Idris (Enoch) ادريس
# 1.3 Nuh (Noah) نوح
# 1.4 Hud (Eber) هود
# 1.5 Saleh (Shelah) صالح
# 1.6 Ibrahim (Abraham) إبراهيم
# 1.7 Lut (Lot) لوط
# 1.8 Ismail (Ishmael) اسماعيل
# 1.9 Ishaq (Isaac) اسحاق
# 1.10 Yaqub (Jacob) يعقوب
# 1.11 Yusuf (Joseph) يوسف
# 1.12 Ayub (Job) أيوب
# 1.13 Shoaib (Jethro) شعيب
# 1.14 Musa (Moses) موسى
# 1.15 Harun (Aaron) هارون
# 1.16 Dhul-Kifl (most likely Ezekiel) ذو الكفل
# 1.17 Dawood (David) داوود
# 1.18 Sulayman (Solomon) سليمان
# 1.19 Ilyas (Elijah) إلياس
# 1.20 Al-Yasa (Elisha) اليسع
# 1.21 Yunus (Jonah) يونس
# 1.22 Zakariya (Zacharias) زكريا
# 1.23 Yahya (John the Baptist) يحيى
# 1.24 'Isa ibn Maryam (Jesus) عيسى
# 1.25 Muhammad

Some of them Jews/Christian would already know

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 25 Oct 2006, 11:20

Thanks slasher. According to Allah (the Qur'an) there were also hundreds (maybe thousands) of other prophets around the world, of whom we have no descent, though.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 25 Oct 2006, 12:05

thelostdragon wrote:
bradavon wrote:@ LD: Why have you picked at my points yet left Mark's and Yi's equally controversial comments alone? Hmmm :shock:
Because I actually didn't want to involve into this discussion and replying to ignorant comments is as useless as fucking for virginity. Your comments instead are worth replying to so feel honoured and not offended.

WTF was ignorent and controversial to my comments?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 25 Oct 2006, 12:10

BTW, actually that statistic (80% of British Muslims) was from the trailer of the show IIRC, unfortunately I missed most of the programme.
Some things remind me of that Simpsons episode where Homer and Apu go to India and some Indian guys at the airport see some happy-clappy guys singing "If You're Happy And You Know It (Clap Your Hands)"

Indian guy: Oh great... Christians.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 25 Oct 2006, 12:14

Yi-Long wrote:WTF was ignorent and controversial to my comments?

Same as the DVD-Yi... always has something to moan about, lol.

Seriously, Yi, I haven't read your post completely as it is quite long and I was in a hurry. As I said, I have no intention of arguing etc, which it would all lead to once I involve in this thread too deeply.

I'm sure your post was not ignorant as I know your usual attitude towards such topics. Mark's are a different matter which I do not want to talk about. We know that we disagree and I'll leave it at that.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 14:42

slasher13 wrote:Funny I could say the same about pubs as well, there are too many, so close them down, and build schools instead.... Double hell yeah

Lol, that's a fair point.

slasher13 wrote:Ahh but this is blown out, what the media didn't tell you is that the teacher says and did do was teach the kids without the veil, however if a male teacher came in, then she would cover up. So it nothing to do with the children as she did speak to them and teach without the veil, its just with a male teacher that came in.

Do you find that acceptable? If I were a male teacher I'd be greatly offended. But then nobody much cares what male teachers think do they?

thelostdragon wrote:An example would be: Imagine a rudiculous cartoon in the paper about your mother. You might say now that this is different as this would be quite a personal thing. Well, Islam is the most personal thing to Muslims.

I'm sorry but that's just stupid comparing your living, breathing mother with a 2,000 year old dead guy who claims to have talked to God. If that's how Muslims truly think they need to get some fucking perspective and stop expecting everyone to respect their fantasy the way they do. The cartoons should have been published.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 25 Oct 2006, 14:52

Markgway wrote:
I'm sorry but that's just stupid comparing your living, breathing mother with a 2,000 year old dead guy who claims to have talked to God. If that's how Muslims truly think they need to get some fucking perspective and stop expecting everyone to respect their fantasy the way they do. The cartoons should have been published.

Thats funny. Mohammad doesnt look a day over 1,400 years old...

Anyway, about the whole cartoons: If they're FUNNY, they should be allowed to be published. However, if the cartoons are only meant to hurt and disrespect muslims, then I'm against it.

Ofcourse, the main problem is that some muslims seem to get upset by ANY depiction of their prophet, in any way, shape or form.
Luckily, most muslims seem to still see everything in perspective and say they might not really LIKE it, but dont go MAD over it either.

Personally, as a non-religious person, I just want cartoons to be funny and 'honest'. Clearly, some of these cartoons were meant MAINLY to disrespect muslims. Not very funny, except to those people who like to think very narrowminded about Islam or anything else for that matter.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:16

The cartoons were intended as satire and from what I can gather made an excellent point about terrorists' abuse of Islam as an excuse for attrocities.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:25

That was what I thought too Mark, from what I heard/read.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:34

It would seem suspicious to me that so many "moderate" Muslims (what the hell does that mean anyways?) wish to cover up this fact. Why not get it out into the open. This "cartoons insult Islam" and "Islamophobia" (the PC new buzz word) is a bunch of bullshit and everyone who can think for themselves knows it.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 25 Oct 2006, 16:39

This is a long, potentially dull post, so bear with me.

Firstly, an easy FYI: the Silk Road (the main trading route in Asia) was one of the key reasons of Islam's spread to the Orient.

OK, and on with the quotes.

I'm sorry but that's just stupid comparing your living, breathing mother with a 2,000 year old dead guy who claims to have talked to God. If that's how Muslims truly think they need to get some fucking perspective and stop expecting everyone to respect their fantasy the way they do. The cartoons should have been published.

I had actually a list of quotes from throughout the thread from various posters that I was going to comment on and question, but after being disheartened by so much ire, I decided that I wouldn't talk about them all: just this one that Mark wrote.
People have a right to believe in whatever they want to believe; God-given or state-given, take your pick, but it's there, in most societies. And in this case, it happens to be the Muslim belief that Allah and the Prophet Muhammad are as dear to them as their immediate family, if not dearer, and that depictions of them are explicitly forbidden. Now, you don't have to believe in this, nor do you have to respect this belief. But is it too much to ask to respect them, the people themselves? If you know that printing something of this nature would draw vitriol, is is too much to ask to think of a more suitable way to present the point? Yes, a picture can be worth a thousand words, but is it worth the antagonising many people when other options are available?
On the flip side, I would say that Muslims do have to do a much better job of integrating: I hate the fact that something like the veil is being used in such a destructive and divisive way. When there is nothing in the religion that states that the veil must be worn at all, let alone only in presence of men, and when it makes others (your colleagues and so on) uncomfortable, and when there is consternation on the part of parents and the general public, why pursue it?

I guess I'm just a fool who's asking the question, "Why can't we all just get along?"

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 17:27

Kurgan wrote:I had actually a list of quotes from throughout the thread from various posters that I was going to comment on and question, but after being disheartened by so much ire, I decided that I wouldn't talk about them all: just this one that Mark wrote.

I feel special.

People have a right to believe in whatever they want to believe; God-given or state-given, take your pick, but it's there, in most societies. And in this case, it happens to be the Muslim belief that Allah and the Prophet Muhammad are as dear to them as their immediate family, if not dearer, and that depictions of them are explicitly forbidden.

I never said Muslims didn't have "the right" to believe in Islam, but they shouldn't forget that their "laws" aren't our laws, and don't apply to "us" as non-Muslims. Therefore why shouldn't "we" be able to draw and publish satirical cartoons of Mohammad? If Muslims don't like it, and I never said they should, then don't buy the papers. But don't dare to tell me what I can and cannot see. That's no different from censorship and culturally is a good deal more dangerous. As for the comments about Prophets being more important than family members that just beggars belief. I simply cannot respect a person who has such misguided views on the importance of religion over family. As someone who is very close to my parents I find the idea that anyone could put a 2k old fairytale above blood deeply offensive. But then it's OK to offend people like me because I won't burn your house down....

Now, you don't have to believe in this, nor do you have to respect this belief. But is it too much to ask to respect them, the people themselves?

Yes, as explained above.

If you know that printing something of this nature would draw vitriol, is is too much to ask to think of a more suitable way to present the point? Yes, a picture can be worth a thousand words, but is it worth the antagonising many people when other options are available?

Islam doesn't seem to be a religion you can compromise with. It's either their way or fuck you. If the cartoons were purely designed to offend and nothing more then I would agree that some common sense should be used in deciding whether to print them or not. But the cartoons had a valid point to make and we're being denied our right to hear free speech.

On the flip side, I would say that Muslims do have to do a much better job of integrating

When I was at school we had quite a few Muslim pupils whom I got on well with (I was never a racist, and we at such a young age avoided talking religion), but as soon as the bell rang, you would never see these kids anywhere near non-Muslims. I knew at the time it was odd, but it wasn't until later that I realised it was because of parental racism and inherent distrust of whites. If you asked them to play or go to a party there would always be an excuse and I doubt it's any different now. I felt sorry for them because they were forced into a kind of self-segregation that meant they could only mix with their own kind.

I hate the fact that something like the veil is being used in such a destructive and divisive way. When there is nothing in the religion that states that the veil must be worn at all, let alone only in presence of men, and when it makes others (your colleagues and so on) uncomfortable, and when there is consternation on the part of parents and the general public, why pursue it?

It's political and cultural, more than it is religious, but as soon as any debate is raised the words racist and islamophobic are bandied about like nobody's business, as a means of stemming any reasonable argument. It happens on Bullets, so we shouldn't be surprised to see in happen on a wider scale. The veil is a piece of misogynist nonsense which a bunch of cranks are trying to turn into some kind of faux feminist propaganda. Let's remember that these women "choose" to wear a veil because they live in a progressive country that allows them to.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 25 Oct 2006, 20:23

Markgway wrote:I feel special.

Yes, you're most definitely special, in a Father Dougal sort of way

I never said Muslims didn't have "the right" to believe in Islam, but they shouldn't forget that their "laws" aren't our laws, and don't apply to "us" as non-Muslims. Therefore why shouldn't "we" be able to draw and publish satirical cartoons of Mohammad? If Muslims don't like it, and I never said they should, then don't buy the papers. But don't dare to tell me what I can and cannot see. That's no different from censorship and culturally is a good deal more dangerous. As for the comments about Prophets being more important than family members that just beggars belief. I simply cannot respect a person who has such misguided views on the importance of religion over family. As someone who is very close to my parents I find the idea that anyone could put a 2k old fairytale above blood deeply offensive. But then it's OK to offend people like me because I won't burn your house down....

And just when I thought you were going to be sensible for a bit. Who's going to burn your house down? I mean, for fuck's sake, get a grip. Phrases like

I simply cannot respect a person who has such misguided views on the importance of religion over family.

and the one about the domicile torching are tolerant how, exactly? If you'd've said that it's not something that you agree with, or that it's something that you can't comprehend, then fair enough. But it wasn't.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 26 Oct 2006, 00:51

Kurgan wrote:Yes, you're most definitely special, in a Father Dougal sort of way

Oh, I don't know about that Ted... those sheep look dangerous.

And just when I thought you were going to be sensible for a bit.

NEVER!!!!

Who's going to burn your house down?

It was beheading that the extremists wrote on those placards wasn't it? My mistake.

I simply cannot respect a person who has such misguided views on the importance of religion over family.
and the one about the domicile torching are tolerant how, exactly?

Who said I was tolerant? Should I be? If I don't agree with something why should I be tolerant of it? I stand by those views. DO YOU respect Islam MORE than your own flesh and blood? Who fed you, clothed you, took you to school, looked after you when you were sick? It certianly wasn't the fucking Quoran I'll tell you that. What I'm saying is get some perspective on the importance of humanity over religion... and I like how you choose to pick up on that one item and ignored the rest of the points I made. Cheers! 8)

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 26 Oct 2006, 00:59

Markgway wrote:It certianly wasn't the fucking Quoran I'll tell you that.

It's probably good we aren't having that conversation in person.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 26 Oct 2006, 01:03

Yeah, knowing you you'd probably assault me in public.

Peaceful religion indeed.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 26 Oct 2006, 08:51

Markgway wrote:Oh, I don't know about that Ted... those sheep look dangerous.

Look, the ones in here are small, but the ones out there are far away. Small... far away.

Who said I was tolerant? Should I be? If I don't agree with something why should I be tolerant of it? I stand by those views. DO YOU respect Islam MORE than your own flesh and blood? Who fed you, clothed you, took you to school, looked after you when you were sick? It certianly wasn't the fucking Quoran I'll tell you that. What I'm saying is get some perspective on the importance of humanity over religion... and I like how you choose to pick up on that one item and ignored the rest of the points I made. Cheers! 8)

The reason I chose the one item is because what you're doing is no different to those nutjobs waving the placards. No-one's saying that you shouldn't stand by your views, but at the same time, shouldn't you be tolerant of the viewpoints held by others? Even if at the end, you come to a final decision to totally not agree with them, isn't it right to let people live how they live and respect them and their right to live as they wish to?
In the same way that you tarnish the reputation of a group of people everywhere by judging them on the actions of some of these extremists, I chose that one item out of all the points you made to illustrate to you how it feels. Ignoring the rest of what Muslims are and instead focusing on these placard wavers instead does nothing positive for nobody.

And LD assaulting you in public has nothing to do with his religion. It has everything to do with you being within arms or legs reach, Mark. 8)

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 26 Oct 2006, 12:27

Kurgan wrote:The reason I chose the one item is because what you're doing is no different to those nutjobs waving the placards.

I'm not threatening anyone who disagrees with me am I? I'm not LD.

No-one's saying that you shouldn't stand by your views, but at the same time, shouldn't you be tolerant of the viewpoints held by others?

I think it depends? Some viewpoints are tolerable (even though I don't agree with religion I'm not saying I disrespect those who do believe); I just find certain aspects of religion (in this case Islam) and some of your comments (about it's importance over family) personally offensive. My language can be blunt and caustic but it's only because I debate passionately. I don't hate anyone here. Even a certain person who wants to kick my ass. 8)

Even if at the end, you come to a final decision to totally not agree with them, isn't it right to let people live how they live and respect them and their right to live as they wish to?

Lol, I never said anything about rounding them up... just that I don't respect those who put religion about all else. I can actually like someone without respecting them, and vice-versa.

In the same way that you tarnish the reputation of a group of people everywhere by judging them on the actions of some of these extremists, I chose that one item out of all the points you made to illustrate to you how it feels. Ignoring the rest of what Muslims are and instead focusing on these placard wavers instead does nothing positive for nobody.

Fair point. I don't judge all Muslims by the acts of a few anymore I would any other religious people. George Bush doesn't represent all Christians for example.

And LD assaulting you in public has nothing to do with his religion. It has everything to do with you being within arms or legs reach, Mark. 8)

Lol, I don't think he'd get that close. I'm no drunk Russian. But thanks for your concern, mate. 8)

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 26 Oct 2006, 12:34

Markgway wrote:Yeah, knowing you you'd probably assault me in public.

Peaceful religion indeed.

Never said Islam was a peaceful religion. Islam is in fact a martial religion that is based on peace, but with a certain attitude in certain circumstances. It has a distinctive war system.

I'm not going to take the defensive part here, as this is what too many Muslims are doing in the West when they are confronted in a debate. "Nooo... you got it all wrong. Jihad is only for defense etc etc."

Bla bla bla! Uninformed people, or weak idiots I say, too tired to perform verbal Jihad.

Mark, I know that you can't relate to why we Muslims get offended when our religion is insulted. But you know that we indeed do get offended when someone cusses Islam. So it doesn't matter if you understand the reason. Not cussing Islam won't hurt, will it? You know that you are insulting us, though and that's the sad thing about it really as it was meant the way you said it.

Heck, I'm only writing this, because I usually get along well with you.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 26 Oct 2006, 12:36

Markgway wrote:I'm not threatening anyone who disagrees with me am I? I'm not LD.

Mark, stop implying facts that are completely wrong. I'm not mad, because you disagree, but because you cussed the Qur'an, which was unnecessary.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 26 Oct 2006, 12:51

You mean the f-word?

OK, that was unecessary.

Sorry if I offended in that regard.

I was just passionate about making my point.

I did.

You did.

We're probably done here.

For now.........