superstar1

Like i said, we live in a chav society here in the UK where all the white brits will only vote for X-factor and have aspirations to nowheresville. That's why we are a soft touch, here for the taking.

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

So it's only white Brits that are lazy then?

jaynesbitt

Its a well known fact that religion is a none debatalbe subject as its all down to personal choice,u cant make someone's mind up 4 them (unless your russian ofcourse)

90% of the time its an avoided subject in a public sense,newspapers,tv, radio and so on. all due to the fact people have made there faith a personal matter,therefore anything said against any religious belief automatically becomes a personal attack!

The majority of religions have been around so long that u cant expect them to rearrange and adjust there so called 'facts' too suit the needs of another culture/countries laws.

Unfortunatly this is the modern world we live in and a vast quantity of religions are out dated and old,therefore dont agree or marry with the new modern day laws

Thats my 2 cent

Jay

Martin2005

Eh?

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

Alan C

You may have read recently that The 57 Muslim countries of the UN are trying to push a new binding law that calls for the 'Combating Defamation of Religion'.

Here's one link... Washington Times - U.S. fights Islamic anti-defamation push

They feel Islam is being subjected to racism and intolerance and therefore should be made the focus of a law that would make it illegal for this thread, and all the other threads, conversations, journals and TV programmes on religion, to criticise their stance, God or behaviour.

The unbelievable irony from these 57 countries of which (correct me if I'm wrong) none are truly democratic, is that they are using the democratic UN to force restriction of expression on the very freedom of expression we all take for granted.

The loss of freedom of expression would be just the start as Islam forces itself more and more on those free countries that allow them this freedom (The Netherlands springs to mind as a country in trouble). But Islam itself, as we all know, is one of the most intolerant religions on Earth.

For those about to leap to the defence of Islam... ask yourself one question. How many of you would like to move back to, live and raise children (including your daughters) in one of these countries as, say, a Wahabi Muslim?

Islam continues it's slow creep by taking advantage of and hypocritically undermining western values. These values aren't perfect, but I know which side of the fence I'd rather be sitting.

It's not the people... it's what they belive in.

The Zohan

I heard something about this on R5 live a week or so back and could not find any references to it. It is a worry and we do need to look at how compatible Islam is with western society and where it really is leading for the sake of everyone and before it is too late and civil unrest takes over.

Holland is a good case n point!

finalzero

It's funny, if this was anything related to Judaism/Israel you would have the megaphones out screaming anti-semitism (thats gotta be the best get-out-of-jail card).

This is not about the religion only... Ask a handful of the public 'white' english population and they will associate any asian/ethnic person to Islam and vice-versa - so this goes much deeper.

Based on some of the topics on SNet lately I can see there is a lot of pent up racists aggression bubbling away under the surface and I can kind of see why... doesn't help when you got a few MI5.. erm I mean Muslim Fanatics going about making sure they are seen as the lunatics they are trying to portray.

Then you have the crumbling economy and an inept goverment, doesn't help one bit and makes these people that much more bitter.

It's not religion that is the problem but the people manipulating the religion to their own end, we are just too ****ing stupid to handle something delicate like religion and beliefs - much easier to not believe in anything.

Alan C

But Muslims are duty bound to put their religion first. Like the Bible there's good moral and uplifting stuff throughout, but it's the bad stuff that gets ignored or quashed.

But the problem is it's still there as can be seen when the extremist views and actions surface. It hasn't gone away. In fact, it can't go away as both the good and bad bits are inextricably linked.

So if you think about it, the moderate views as expressed by Les and others are simply handy smoke screens that prevent us from seeing within and (this isn't intentional by any moderate) it thus allows the extremist views and actions a base in which to grow....

Luan Pra bang

You are wrong. Turkey being the most obvious example.

The Zohan

Nail hit firmly on the head Alan and you have expressed something i have felt but not been able to put into words (well, not as eloquently) for some time.

Dedrater

Well, not "obvious" at all is it Luan, forcing people to work for the military for a minimum amount of time isn't really a shining example of demonstrating that the power lies in the body of citizens.

Alan C

I wouldn't say 'obvious' as the various human rights issues, censorship and military interventions (including executions) into politics put this on uneven and rocky ground; and are preventing them immediate and full accession into the EU (social and justice freedom, fundamental rights issues to name 3 of 8 major stumbling blocks).

But I'm happy to concede due to their (in an Islamic context) excellent secular, homosexual and gender equality views.

(I'm not going to argue a few more that you may be able to throw in as it will detract from the main thread and I can't be bothered to go through every state determining and discussing their historic and current Human Rights status and their true, measured and tested democratic position)

Luan Pra bang

The Turkish military are the guardians of the constitution and as such have the right to intevene in politics if any party violates that constitution. This has become an issue lately as there is a democratically elected religious government which is in direct contrast to the Turkish constitiution, now given your anti religion sentiment I would have thought you would have approved of the actions by the military to keep government and religion seperate or is it just a matter of any old excuse to have a pop at Muslims ?
That complete load of pap from the washington post is a case in point, the Defamation of Religion resolution was voted on in 2007 and aproved by 24 votes to 14 with 9 abstaining, now while its outward appearance may simply be to stop defamtion ie 'To damage the reputation, character, or good name of by slander or libel' it may have more sinister overtones but as yet I have not found a published verison of it in full so I cannot comment on what it says or is trying to achieve. I would assume from your comments though that you have read the resolution in full if not I am interested in your basis from claiming that it would make this thread illegal ?

Alan C

The first pass was an unbound passing of the law and is effectively putting the resolution to the UN as a pre-law if you will. The second one being pushed for is a binding result of that first pass that entitles all members to adhere and abide by.

Yes, I have read it. You can too... http://www.undemocracy.com/A-RES-62-154.pdf

It's not the easiest thing to follow (with the type of legalese that's totally unreadable) and has more hypocrisy than I can laugh at.. but it's essentially preventing free speech against religion..

Raised and sponsored by Pakistan too which has recently made an agreement with the Taliban to close girls' schools in the Swat Valley (a mere 100 miles or so from Islamabad) and its inhabitants are now under Sharia law. Part of this was due to various campaigns of Taliban violence and intimidation, including public beheadings and attacks on the military. Yet the religion of those who carry out this campaign is not to be mentioned, lest it "associate" the faith with human rights violations or terrorism. (the above is a part report.)

Crazy eh? Seems fairly obvious to me why the Muslim states would welcome this. Though they may not be under sharia law or support the Taliban, it prevents similar actions (that we may find grotesque) from being reported and criticised.

I must pick up on this.... So you're agreeing with the fact that the military have a right to guard the Turkish constitution by the simple execution of political dissidents? What a great idea... Democracy at it's best.

Alan C

Also; Islam affirms itself as the last and final revelation of God's word, the consummation of all the mere glimpses of the truth vouchsafed to all the foregoing faiths, available by way of the unimprovable, immaculate text of "the recitation," or Quran.

God, as a pretty magnificent, omnipotent and omniscient being, surely should be able to stand up to a little scrutiny... maybe providing a little .. proof maybe?

Possibly letting God defend his own corner rather than handing this enormous responsibility over to some self appointed spokes-people who can't actually agree (even within the Islamic faith) what parts are correct and right....

Luan Pra bang

I have read it three or four times now and I cannot see where it is preventing free speech the only part of it that may be construed as dodgy is the one below

5. Also expresses its deep concern that Islam is frequently and wrongly
associated with human rights violations and terrorism.

That passage though is a simple expressing of concern not really a law in anyway so I am stumped as too your issues with the resolution. It even states clearly that

10. Emphasizes that everyone has the right to hold opinions without
interference and the right to freedom of expression, and that the exercise of these
rights carries with it special duties and responsibilities and may therefore be subject
to limitations as are provided for by law and are necessary for respect of the rights
or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public
health or morals and respect for religions and beliefs

which I think is an entirely good thing. I cannot see a single law or request for a law in the document and do not really see what the problem with it is ?

Luan Pra bang

I also cannot find reference to it becoming law ? seeing as the wording of it is clearly not in legal format it seems more like a statement of intent. As far as I can see it was first accepted by the UN general assembly in 1999 and has been renewed every year since in the same way, I cannot help but think that it is just a way for some countries to try and counter act the demonizing of a religion by some countries for political gain.

Alan C

It's a resolution. This means it will be UN law if passed through the second and binding stage.

Also, read the title. It tells you all you need to know. You brush off the Washington Post clip too easily and show a lack of judgement as you've obviously not read the many, many others. The consensus is that this is and would be a curtailing of free speech against religions. As Islam is the one getting the bad press, then the fact that member states, its press etc couldn't castigate this religion for fear of UN sanctioning (whatever that would look like) means such evil acts done in the name of a religion could not be reported.

How much of an enforceable law it is, is obviously open to question and its application here on SNET would be interesting. But if the board owners were threatened with some sort of action from a Muslim who took offence to something we said, then you could find our free speech curtailed.

My problem with it is that it's a slow creep and changing tactic that Islamic countries are using to dull our ability to challenge them. The hypocrisy is that their religion and country are 'one', when it suits them. Being a 'Muslim first' shows that quite plainly. They separate the religion to give it special status and protection and then continue applying Sharia and the book and its teachings with the other hand.

I'm not anti Muslim either. I'm anti religion. Especially of the religions that need to apply force, dogma, indoctrination, inhuman law and practices and hide behind placards shouting racism or religious intolerance, when in fact, in their own countries, this lack of free speech and total religious intolerance is plain to see.

Luan Pra bang

Even the washington post states that it is a re-renewing of an old resolution so all this stuff about it becoming law and a binding resolution I cannot find anywhere. In some quarters the resolution is seen as a more liberal approach forcing some Muslim countries to be more respectful to other religions.
I have read many different articles about the resolution and still cannot see what the big deal is. I have also read it a load of times and still cannot see any sinister or anti free speach aspects behind it.

Alan C

I'm no lawyer, so can't comment. Your comments seem to suggest that it's an ineffective and pointless resolution?

Unless you're versed in UN law or can see things other people can't then I'd suggest it's a little more rooted in reality than you make out. Read a little more between the lines and at the title. This isn't simply some pointless piece of paper... why bother with raising this at the UN if it was?

But as you are one for disagreeing with everything people have to say when challenging Islam (and never accepting or recognising when people have positive things to say), I'll take your comment with a pinch of salt until I see an unbiased post from you.

As it stands, I'll take the CNN and various other reports discussing this as a threat to free speech over your 'armchair warrior' response.

Let's keep this OT..

scoobysmiff

iTrader: (2)

Like this you mean:

Why the hell have the Aussies got this guy and we have a fat sack of **** called Brown who dosn't stand up for what the country wants and just lets the minorities do what the hell they want so as not to offend them....

[SIZE=3]It makes me soooooo f*****g angry .....
[/SIZE










Whole worldNeeds A Leader Like This!





Prime Minister Kevin Rudd - Australia

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks..


Separately, Rudd angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote:


'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians. '

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!'

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.'


'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'


Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

spireite

he'd get my vote

Maz

iTrader: (34)

A bit hypocritical given what they did to the Aborigines.

Martin2005

Not to mention blantantly inaccurate and sourced incorrectly.

This ladies and gentlemen is a BNP circular that was originally sent out a couple of years ago, that one contained all the same words except they were credited to Prime Minister Howard.

Well done to those that keep falling for this blatantly racist garbage.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

"We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us."

Nowt more needs to be said about the issue, really!

And yes, the sickening thing about Islamic extremists is that they often use the very values and freedoms afforded in western societies, which they apparently deplore, to advance their own agenda.

Martin2005

Apart from the fact that these words came from a far right organisation and certainly not from Kevin Rudd, but hey let's not trivial details like that derail the debate.

I agree extremism must be tackled head on, but this will be far more effective if tackled from with than from outside. Moderate Islam needs to stand up to the extremists.

Alan C

Bingo. I'd widen that to all moderate religious people who can plainly see that the word of their respective God(s) is both being tarnished, twisted and hijacked.

But, the longer it goes on.. the more entrenched with death threats and impending legal threats Islam will be. Yes, they may be poles apart... but they still have the same effect. Silencing the critics.

Once we're gagged. It's all over bar the shipping in of Sharia law etc etc etc....

bluenosewrx

iTrader: (2)

I've got a theory on this so bear with me:

I have a copy of the Koran and also have read the Bible, i think that punter Mohammed was chilling in the mountains one day and thought of a bit of a scam so the locals would take notice of him, he imagined he saw god and he told him all about how to run a religion,hangon though there alraedy is a bible so i need to call it something else,

Hey Presto- the Koran

It is scarily close in a lot of stuff and all the main characters in the Bible are all in it, i know it sound far fetched and i will prob get ripped for it but thats what i think.

BTW i beilive in Nothing so am not preaching to anyone, religion is a Bitch IMO.

Mac

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

The source is irrelevant, Martin. The sentiment is bang on: "live and let live" as far as religion and beliefs are concerned, but if you choose to live in a country, you must abide by it's laws first and foremost. If you cannot do that because of your convictions, then the country is not for you!

I find it very hard to believe that the BNP said something so moderate about people from the middle east of the Islamic faith!

I agree with you that more needs to be done by moderate, law abiding Muslims, though. It's not enough for them to just ignore these events, claiming that any regular Muslim would not dignify the actions by acknowledging them. As Robert Louis Stevenson once wrote:

"The cruelest lies are often spoken in silence"

I'd suggest that the UK population is increasingly interpreting their silence as indifference, or them condoning the actions of the extremists on some level. This, I very much believe, is most definitely NOT the way they feel!

Ns04