| | Jack Straw v The Veils Page 4 of 5 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) | MSG 78 You forgot to include those Muslims who do not agree with the veil, and those Muslims who use it to subjugate women.
You forgot to state what the "problem" is, the one that would be solved if we set fire to those people, as you suggested. Or was it yet another case of you wishing to commit a violent act against those with whom you disagree? Does that remind you of anyone?
OT There is nothing in the Muslim instruction manual about the wearing of the veil. It merely states that women should be modestly dressed. In that case, it is open to interpretation of the individual, but it is the Muslim male who makes that decision, not the female. As such, I consider the veil to a manifestation of something alien to out modern society...that a woman is subservient to her man. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/17/2006 4:49:34 AM | It's ok Helly - I left my veil at home with my copy of the "JIhadi's Guide To Hating Freedom" they'll never spot me.....
@Vim:
Does that remind you of anyone?
Yes - I included them in my list already.
but it is the Muslim male who makes that decision, not the female. As such, I consider the veil to a manifestation of something alien to out modern society...that a woman is subservient to her man.
Not always the case - there are many Muslim women who choose this mode of expression without reference to men.
If that is your argument it doesn't work. Sometimes veils are enforced, sometimes not. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/17/2006 5:10:26 AM | MSG 81 So, it's ok for you to advocate violence, but not for anyone else, right?
You didn't explain what you meant by the problem that would be solved by this violent act against your "enemies"...or am I hoping for too much? | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/17/2006 6:29:10 AM | | Respect works two ways. We cannot have a situation where it is one set of beliefs that is considered to be sacrosanct but not another. Modern democratic societies are a result of consensus and you can't be both in and out. Take your pick. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/19/2006 1:29:18 PM | Well ..... thanks for this.
The fact is that there is nothing in the religion that requires women to wear a veil ..... and let's be absolutely honest/open .... it's a little 'more' than a 'veil'. It's a 'disguise'. Why?
I can 'understand' women in the past forming this idealogy/adopting its principles .... but I cannot 'understand' in the present. I have a 'sense' of the 'userper' here. (Please don't contact me BNP ....... I'll contact you if ever I feel the need ..... which is most unlikely).
Jack Straw's comments? I'm afraid I agree. When in Rome ...........
I would be horrified to learn that any western child was being 'taught' by a woman wearing the 'veil'. I doubt it would be considered 'acceptable' in 'western' schools ....... but there are 'other' schools ....... I'm sure they are all 'fee-paying' ...... but are they? How exactly are they 'funded'? I'm sure you and I are 'paying' at the end of the day ...... after all, we 'pay' for the inadequacies/inefficiences of our Govt. ..... so why not 'the rest'. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/19/2006 1:37:50 PM | I'm bemused. 'Set fire to Nazis'? Are you 'serious'? What precisely 'determines' a Nazi?
What determines a BNP supporter? .... a little Englander? ....... and what the hell 'determines'[ an 'Islamophobe'?!?!
I assume you are Islamic. Tell me ......... what are the fundamental differences between Islam/Christianity. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/19/2006 2:08:02 PM |
I'm bemused. 'Set fire to Nazis'? Are you 'serious'?
No. It's irony. If anyone else sets fire to them I'll rush and get some water - and bring it across the continent through France and Spain personally.
What precisely 'determines' a Nazi?
I am not using the term in its original sense of referring to a member of the National Socialist Party in Germany during the 1930s but rather in its meaning where it is interchangeable with the word 'fascist'.
According to the Wiki: "Fascism is a radical political ideology that combines elements of corporatism, authoritarianism, nationalism, militarism, anti-anarchism, anti-communism and anti-liberalism."
I would agree with this although I would also add other key characteristics, the most notable and relevant to the present time would be the following definition:
Fascism is an extreme measure taken by the middle classes to forestall lower-working class revolution; it thrives on the weakness of the middle classes. It accomplishes this by embracing the middle-class' love of the status-quo, its complacency and its fears of:
1) Generating a united struggle within the working class
2) Revolution
3) Losing its own power and position within society
I think in postmodern terms the three points above are still valid but now since the defeat
of Communism #2 and #3 are increasingly not a real threat so the focus is solely on#1 and this translates to mass brain-washing of the sheep...er...I mean middle class citizens.
What determines a BNP supporter?
Someone who expresses support for the policies of the BNP.
.... a little Englander?
Someone who is a small person and yet has an inflated and exaggerated opinion of both himself and the standing of the entity known as England in the modern world - this is invariably coupled with an ignorance and fear of any culture that they don't understand. ie the area that begins within a 10 mile radius of the national borders and extends in any direction including upwards and downwards.
....... and what the hell 'determines'[ an 'Islamophobe'?!?!
And Islamophobe is a person who manifests a neurotic and /or phobic reaction to matters pertaining to the subject of Islamic religion and culture.
I assume you are Islamic.
The word 'Islamic' is applied properly to creations and thought processes that historically have originated within the parameters of the Islamic civilization. Hence one has Islamic art, Islamic architecture, Islamic law. Surprisingly, I am none of these things as I am an independent entity which partakes of its own unique being.
Tell me ......... what are the fundamental differences between Islam/Christianity.
God does not have a son.
Jesus did not die on the cross.
That's it. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/19/2006 2:42:13 PM |
God does not have a son.
Jesus did not die on the cross.
Uhoh think I just spotted an anti christian comment there..... aren't you meant to be espousing the virtues of all faiths living in harmony, allowing each individual to believe what they wish??? Therefor do not belittle my faith if you wish me to offer the same generosity to Islam ... | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/19/2006 2:56:53 PM | MSG 87 The comments are a reference to what ISLAMIC people believe, not a statement of fact.
| |
|
| |
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/19/2006 11:44:44 PM | Ok I stand corrected, but the wording was a tad ambiguous... It's the 'that's it' comment at the end, I took it to mean that that was the way things are and tough titty, not that is the only difference....
If that Is the only difference between our religions then why is there such hatred? Why DO followers of Islam call us infidels? Why do they believe that women should remain covered? Not specifically veiled, because as we've heard that is the choice of the individual (or her husband)..but covered...Why are they not allowed in certain areas of the mosque to pray?
Is Sharia law a law specified by the Islamic religion or only by Islamic people ?
There just seems to be a huge gulf between us..I have many Muslim friends, but none who are veiled. A lot wear the headscarf and two or three wear the pinned scarf that covers the head and throat and shoulders...But none the whole veil and none want to or feel that they are any less pious because of it...
I just feel that the ladies who choose to wear the most extreme forms of the veil are excluding themselves from British society..A recent report in the mail followed a woman for a day whilst she wore the most extreme veil and catalogued the feelings of separation and solitude she underwent.. The difficulties of maneuvering and carrying out the simplest of tasks and the sheer physical discomfort... Why would anyone want someone to feel that way? especially someone they love?
I am just at a loss......... | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/20/2006 1:25:33 AM | MSG 91 I reckon that the "that's it" comment simply ended the efforts to answer a previous post, but you are also correct in assuming that the poster might have implied that the differences are very simple but what can we do. He is right if that was what he impied....the differences are there and we cannot do anything about them.
Basically, Jesus was sent to get people "back on track" and show that them that God cared etc. I reckon that the same God appeared to Mohammed to do a similar thing. The two religions share many aspects, but it is the differences that have caused the problems.
Take the matter under discussion. The bible contains several references to women being not equal to men, as well as to protecting their modesty. So does the Koran. You will find many Christians who hold those beliefs even today, just like you find some Muslims.
Certain aspects of sharia law are similar to that which has been practiced in England for centuries ie the retribution and revenge aspects. The bible refers to stoning as a form of execution, just as practiced in certain Islamic states.
Going back to the veil, I noticed there were a couple being worn in the Question Time audience last night. More than anything else, I find them intimidating, and I'm sure that a class-full of children would feel even more intimidated, even if they were being taught by the wearer. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/20/2006 1:48:43 AM | What I find both amusing and sad is how some will go to great lenghts to defend the right for those women to wear "what they like" including the mask/veil. Amusing because you will not find this in the Q'ran and sad because it is precisely this "free for all" attitude that give us all these headaches. Freedom is all-important but integration is paramount in our society and the veil is a clear statement of self-imposed separation and evident refusal to interact with others. It is also a direct insult to all men as it implies all men are sexual beasts bent on
preying on females. Let's not be sarcastic over this; we are not. It is perfectly human to find oneself admiring a woman's features but that does not imply "sin" in itself. God gave us beauty for a reason.
The fact that some women may chose to wear it "to please a husband" should make us question A) the "health" of that relationship B) the balance of both partner's minds and C) their willingness to adapt to the customs of this land. That veil would tell me the customs are not accepted hence...
If they chose to wear it to "please God" then it is clearly an idea of God that should be discouraged as God is neither a mysoginist nor a slave-master.
It should not be banned but we should definately put efforts in educating future generations against blatant statement of self-isolation and separation of this kind. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/31/2006 12:46:51 PM | Thank you for your 'considered' response. In many ways..... I agree.
Please elaborate on 'God does not have a Son' etc.
I am a Christian. I was not 'there' when the Son of God(?) supposedly 'died on the Cross' .... and I don't 'see' that 'that' really matters. What 'matters'
is what we 'feel' but far more importantly what we 'believe' and the 'price we are prepared to pay to defend'. Sounds 'simple' ..... yet it isn't .... history shows that the 'belief' we seek to defend 'shifts its focus' (depending on who might profit) ..... ergo Iraq. Tragedy ... isn't it? Yet it doesn't have to be that way. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/31/2006 1:05:14 PM | Mmmmm ...... Jack Straw/the veils? ...... poppycock! ..... right now I have a hysterical dog that I cannot comfort ... why? .... fireworks ..... a prime example of our lack of consideration, not only for one another, but for other species. Whilst we behave with such thoughtlessness I despair for our future......... but then I don't think we have/deserve a 'future'
...... be a much better place without us. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/31/2006 1:18:01 PM | ^^^^^ Ehhh who's fault is that then??? The veil adorned Islamic fundamentalists, or the white skinned mob of Maureen Messent Islamaphobes????
| |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 10/31/2006 2:07:51 PM | | oh comon jack leave them alone!!!!! theyve been wearing it up untill now why pinpoint all of a sudden?!!! i think that this shouldnt be an issue especially with everything goin on nowadays with terrorism etc i feel that the government are making things worse and terrorists will take it the wrong way and it will backfire on us! | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 11/1/2006 11:14:15 PM |
Thank you for your 'considered' response. In many ways..... I agree.
Please elaborate on 'God does not have a Son' etc.
I am a Christian. I was not 'there' when the Son of God(?) supposedly 'died on the Cross' .... and I don't 'see' that 'that' really matters. What 'matters' is what we 'feel' but far more importantly what we 'believe' and the 'price we are prepared to pay to defend'. Sounds 'simple' ..... yet it isn't .... history shows that the 'belief' we seek to defend 'shifts its focus' (depending on who might profit) ..... ergo Iraq. Tragedy ... isn't it? Yet it doesn't have to be that way.
Hi SusieB
The Islamic belief (and mine incidentally but that doesn't matter) re Jesus and the 'Son of God' issue rests on two philosophical/theological issues.
1) The main Islamic idea is that there is only one God. Many people take this (wrongly and simplistically) to refer to an exclusivity of the Muslim religion.
In fact, it doesn't mean this at all but rather means that if an omnipotent God exists - and they claim He does - then by definition He can have no equal. Or, put another way, everything 'created' must be on a lower level than God - all things are subservient to Him. Christians would not disagree with this I think.
But there is the first problem; if God has a son and if that son is also God then that makes two Gods not one - ie two distinct entities. And this is not monotheistic.
Christian theologians have resorted to some complex arguments to resolve this issue as they re aware of its problems, but none have held water.
2) The belief that Jesus was not the son of God and not divine is not an Islamic one. It was held by the Nestorian and Monophysite (orthodox) Churches that were in the regions were Muhammad grew up. There was a debate on this issue in Christianity for the first few centuries of the Christian era until the faction that believed in the divinity gained total control
The concept is - imo - illogical and not based on Scripture (I refer to the Trinity). Nor is there any evidence in the BIble of Jesus claiming to be God - quite the contrary. He did use the words 'my father' and 'son of God' but the phrase 'Son of God' is applied to many people throughout the Old and New Testaments (can supply verses if anyone requires) and NEVER in a literal context.
Similar is the way Jesus used 'my Father' to refer to God. He taught the Disciples to pray beginning 'Our Father who art in heaven...' - is this literal too?
RE whether it 'matters' - I agree, it doesn't matter to me as a person, as someone interested in the study of religion perhaps it does and as a historian of course but you are right - what matters is how one's beliefs impact your life and those around you.
Many people who believe 'true' things are the worst of people and vice versa....things are changing though.... | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 11/2/2006 1:52:59 PM | I think after reading this thread it just confirms my thoughts that religion in any language is basically didactic crap! It's a method of controlling through the unknown. has anyone watched The Village?
If everyone lived by high moral standards and showed everyone equal respect until proven that they don't deserve it, then we would more than likely be living a far more harmonious life. Live life by your own set of rules that leave you with a clear conscience and make you a good role model, not for what you believe in (religion) but for who you are.
Some people depend on religion as they don't have anywhere to turn. I believe that the church for some is a good place. Some people need a sense of belonging and it can provide that. I know people that are very religioius and they are caring people, but I also know people that are religious and would watch their child die before allowing them to have a blood transfusion, although some people would wonder if they new something we didn't know since blood contamination has become such an issue.
The veil issue is not religious... so why is this where the conversation is going? | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 11/12/2006 11:37:36 AM | | i say if they want to wear there veils tell them to get back to there own countries and take there of spring with them then this countrie might not be as over crowded sorry just my opinion | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 11/12/2006 11:50:21 AM | i far as i am concerned let them do what they want BUT!!!! next time a somebody comes to my door wearing a veil i will open the letter box to talk to them !!! see how they like it .
Mark | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 12/2/2006 1:49:12 PM | Ineresting to read your views. I agree/accept ..... in general.
The overriding, fundamental belief in all religions, is 'only one God'. It could be 'said' that 'Christianity' has confused the issue. Does it matter? ..... to any 'thinking' person?
No. But yes. To BNP(?) it matters hugely. (But are they 'thinking'?). It 'matters' because it 'underpins' the beliefs on which they exist. I suspect 'similar' exists in Iraq/throughout Middle East/(the world) ..... but 'why'? ..... on what basis?
]
In terms of the 'original question' ..... forgive me ....... I believe if people from 'different'[ societies want to settle in the UK ..... then they should be prepared to do so 'on our terms'. This is, in theory, a 'western society' ..... there is no 'definition' (?) between male/female ...... in your dreams ....
Take care. | |
|
Ant©
| | Joined: 11/29/2006
Msg: 97 | |
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 12/2/2006 1:55:03 PM |
Tell me ......... what are the fundamental differences between Islam/Christianity.
God does not have a son.
Jesus did not die on the cross.
That's it.
well there is the slight issue that since the crusades (or even during them), Christians arent widely known for becoming extremists and blowing themselves up in places frequented by Jews or westerners.
Makes me think of the fundamentalist mother taking to another mother, looking at their children she says "my, they blow up so fast thesedays" | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 12/2/2006 2:45:12 PM | I've just come across this ..... having responded to your later post
I'm not quite sure whether I am 'horrified' or not. I think I am 'horrified' by such a calculated/cold-bloodied attitude ....... but the 'same' could be 'said' of us.
'Nazis'? You are quite right ..... but 'why'? ..... did such views ever exist? Why do they still exist? Why is there such 'conflict' among us? I'd be pretty stupid to not realise that the 'real' reason (in the Middle East) is 'oil' ..... and what does it 'matter' that innocent individuals, particularly women and children, die in the 'process' ..... who cares? The 'real' tragedy of 'all this' is that it was/is totally meaningless. We have the 'technology' to harness solar/wind/wave power ..... yet we do not .... 'wholeheartedly' .... why??? So many of our 'politicians' are so 'involved' (i.e. profit by) the business of extracting fossil fuels. ..... thart has an 'impact' on the Iraq situation ...... read 'corruption'
God didn't have a son .... Jesus? How do you 'know' ..... were you 'there' in biblical times?
None of us 'know' .... we never will. The same can be said for any 'faith' ....... yet they are all based on the same, fairly fundamental, provision.
Regardless of my 'faith' ..... I would always seek unambiguity/a 'way forward' on basic humanitarian principles. I may be 'wrong'. I'd like to believe that we all, ultimately, want a 'better world' .... great ..... but there's a 'price'.
I 'know' few care enough to 'pay' .... sadly.
Take care. | |
|
| Jack Straw v The Veils
Posted: 12/3/2006 12:57:31 AM | Please stop writing in all those apostrophe's, I have to keep reading in accenuated scentences and they don't work, it's giving me a headache ....
Jack was right, veils aren't the thing to wear in places of important discussion and or high security .. Anywhere else I don't care.. One minor pint ..I was at a bus stop the other day and a veiled lady needed change for her fare.. She asked all the Asian people at the stop ..None of whom had change but never asked myself or the 2 black ladies who were waiting .. and I had change... So who is ostracizing the veiled ladies, us or them ??? | |
|
Home
login 
