Democratic Muslims imposing their ways again

[ChezGiven 0]

Instinctively I feel like that's not quite right although I can't actually argue with any of that.

 

Still hungover?

[NJS 3978]

We are right about pre-marital sex, drugs and women's rights though. Thats the whole point.

 

What I was getting at above when I mentioned a middle ground is that I absolutely believe people should have the right to those things but I still feel sometimes that our morals are a bit too loose - I suppose it's just my upbringing but I think excessively casual sex is still sort of wrong.

[ChezGiven 0]

We are right about pre-marital sex, drugs and women's rights though. Thats the whole point.

 

What I was getting at above when I mentioned a middle ground is that I absolutely believe people should have the right to those things but I still feel sometimes that our morals are a bit too loose - I suppose it's just my upbringing but I think excessively casual sex is still sort of wrong.

 

Fine, just dont address it by issuing a moral decree 'thou shalt not have excessive casual sex'

[NJS 3978]

We are right about pre-marital sex, drugs and women's rights though. Thats the whole point.

 

What I was getting at above when I mentioned a middle ground is that I absolutely believe people should have the right to those things but I still feel sometimes that our morals are a bit too loose - I suppose it's just my upbringing but I think excessively casual sex is still sort of wrong.

 

Fine, just dont address it by issuing a moral decree 'thou shalt not have excessive casual sex'

 

Absolutely - I think there are lots of things which I have a problem with morally which I wouldn't dream of proscribing. I think we almost have the balance between morality and law correct in the west as a whole and one of the things I strongly believe in is non-interference in private consensual activities - though I think that principle should be extended to drug use.

[Park Life 70]

Never realised [people worry so much about sex.

[Renton 17775]

Never realised [people worry so much about sex.

 

Don't underestimate the power of catholic guilt to completely fuck up your attitude towards sex when you've been exposed to it all your child life. The cunts.

[ChezGiven 0]

Never realised [people worry so much about sex.

 

Don't underestimate the power of catholic guilt to completely fuck up your attitude towards sex when you've been exposed to it all your child life. The cunts.

 

Yeah but maybe masturbating in the bogs at work is wrong?

[Andrew 4220]

Never realised [people worry so much about sex.

 

Don't underestimate the power of catholic guilt to completely fuck up your attitude towards sex when you've been exposed to it all your child life. The cunts.

 

Yeah but maybe masturbating in the bogs at work is wrong?

 

more from a hygiene perspective than anything else

[ChezGiven 0]

Never realised [people worry so much about sex.

 

Don't underestimate the power of catholic guilt to completely fuck up your attitude towards sex when you've been exposed to it all your child life. The cunts.

 

Yeah but maybe masturbating in the bogs at work is wrong?

 

more from a hygiene perspective than anything else

 

I shit in business class, its always a bit cleaner in there.

[Guest alex]

Instinctively I feel like that's not quite right although I can't actually argue with any of that.

 

Still hungover?

Not even wearing a hat.

[Happy Face 29]

Am I allowed to say that I find fundamentalist Islam the most depressing and joyless cult going?

 

I'm not so sure....

 

Ross Douthat, The New York Times, today:

 

In a way, the muzzling of "South Park" is no more disquieting than any other example of Western institutions' cowering before the threat of Islamist violence. . . . But there's still a sense in which the "South Park" case is particularly illuminating. . . .

t's a reminder that

Islam is just about the only place where we draw any lines at all

. . . .Our culture has few taboos that can’t be violated, and

our establishment has largely given up on setting standards in the first place. Except where Islam is concerned

.

 

The New York Times, March 28, 2010:

 

A Texas university class production of "Corpus Christi," by Terrence McNally, below, has been canceled by college officials citing "safety and security concerns for the students" as well as the need to maintain an orderly academic environment, The Austin Chronicle reported. "Corpus Christi," Mr. McNally’s 1998 play depicting a gay Jesus figure, was scheduled to be performed on Saturday as part of a directing class at Tarleton State University in Stephenville, Tex. But early on Friday, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst condemned the performance, saying in a press release that "no one should have the right to use government funds or institutions to portray acts that are morally reprehensible to the vast majority of Americans." Although Tarleton's president, F. Dominic Dottavio, first defended the students' right to perform a play he considered "offensive, crude and irreverent," university officials changed course late Friday night,

canceling the performance after receiving threatening calls and e-mail messages

, according to The Star-Telegram.

 

Dallas Star-Telegram, April 8, 2010 (h/t Queerty):

 

A Fort Worth theater that had agreed to show a student-directed play with a gay Jesus character has withdrawn its offer. The board of directors of Artes de la Rosa, which runs The Rose Marine Theater on North Main Street, decided Thursday against offering the venue for the production of Corpus Christi, just one day after saying it would. A March performance set for a directing class at Tarleton State University in Stephenville was abruptly

canceled after the school received threatening emails

.

 

It looks like Ross Douthat picked the wrong month to try to pretend that threat-induced censorship is a uniquely Islamic practice. Corpus Christi is the same play that was scheduled and then canceled (and then re-scheduled) by the Manhattan Theater Club back in 1998 as a result of "anonymous telephone threats to burn down the theater, kill the staff, and 'exterminate' McNally." Both back then and now, leading the protests (though not the threats) was the Catholic League, denouncing the play as "blasphemous hate speech."

 

I abhor the threats of violence coming from fanatical Muslims over the expression of ideas they find offensive, as well as the cowardly institutions which acquiesce to the accompanying demands for censorship. I've vigorously condemned efforts to haul anti-Muslim polemicists before Canadian and European "human rights" (i.e., censorship) tribunals. But the very idea that such conduct is remotely unique to Muslims is delusional, nothing more than the result of Douthat's ongoing use of his New York Times column for his anti-Muslim crusade and sectarian religious promotion.

 

The various forms of religious-based, intimidation-driven censorship and taboo ideas in the U.S. -- what Douthat claims are non-existent except when it involves Muslims -- are too numerous to chronicle. One has to be deeply ignorant, deeply dishonest or consumed with petulant self-victimization and anti-Muslim bigotry to pretend they don't exist. I opt (primarily) for the latter explanation in Douthat's case.

 

As Balloon-Juice's DougJ notes, everyone from Phil Donahue and Ashliegh Banfield to Bill Maher and Sinead O'Connor can tell you about that first-hand. When he was Mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani was fixated on using the power of his office to censor art that offended his Catholic sensibilities. The Bush administration banned mainstream Muslim scholars even from entering the U.S. to teach. The Dixie Chicks were deluged with death threats for daring to criticize the Leader. Campaigns to deny tenure to academicians, or appointments to officials, who deviate from Israel orthodoxy are common and effective. Responding to religious outrage, a Congressional investigation was formally launched and huge fines issued when Janet Jackson's breast was displayed for a couple of seconds. All that's to say nothing of the endless examples of religiously-motivated violence by Christian and Jewish extremists designed to intimidate and suppress ideas offensive to their religious dogma (I'm pretty sure the people doing this and this are not Muslim). And, contrary to Douthat's misleading suggestion, hate speech laws have been used for censorious purposes far beyond punishing speech offensive to Muslims -- including, for instance, by Catholics demanding the banning of plays they dislike.

 

It's nice that The New York Times hired a columnist devoted to defending his Church and promoting his religious sectarian conflicts without any response from the target of his bitter tribalistic encyclicals. Can one even conceive of having a Muslim NYT columnist who routinely rails against Christians and Jews? To ask the question is to answer it, and by itself gives the lie to Douthat's typically right-wing need to portray his own majoritarian group as the profoundly oppressed victim at the hands of the small, marginalized group which actually has no power. But whatever else is true, there ought to be a minimal standard of factual accuracy required. The notion that censorship is exercised only on behalf of Muslims falls far short of that standard.

 

source

[Renton 17775]

I ran the gauntlet of hate to see Jerry Spinger the Opera at the Theatre of Royal a few years back. Well, it was more a gauntlet of tutting come to think of it, I think the Chirstians were more scared than me.

[Park Life 70]

The right wing Christians are off their rockers basically. But by some strange coincidence might be part of the core groups that stand upto the madness of the Federal dictatorship. Swings and roundabouts ain't it.

[NJS 3978]

I ran the gauntlet of hate to see Jerry Spinger the Opera at the Theatre of Royal a few years back. Well, it was more a gauntlet of tutting come to think of it, I think the Chirstians were more scared than me.

 

I like Kevin Smith's story about how he joined the group of people at his house protesting about Dogma who had no clue who he was so he was able to have quite a reasonable discussion with them about their objections - of course none of them had seen it.

[Rob W 0]

"the madness of the Federal dictatorship"

 

what did the Romans ever do for us??

[LeazesMag 0]

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/172511...lt-to-war-dead-

 

FURY OVER INSULT TO WAR DEAD

 

Tohseef Shah faced only minor charges

Saturday May 1,2010

By Chris Riches A MUSLIM who daubed ­graffiti glorifying Islamic terrorism over a war memorial has walked free from court despite showing no remorse.

 

Veterans and MPs reacted with fury after Tohseef Shah, 21, was freed having shown no contrition for painting vile slogans on the memorial to Britain’s war dead.

 

GENERAL ELECTION 2010: GET THE LATEST NEWS AND ANALYSIS HERE...

 

 

Using spray paint, Shah desecrated the monument to generations of heroes with “Islam will dominate the world – Osama is on his way” and “Kill Gordon Brown”. But Crown Prosecution lawyers decided not to pursue the most serious charges for racially or religiously motivated crimes.

 

Instead, Shah was prosecuted on the minor charge of criminal damage and ordered to pay a mere £85 costs and £500 compensation. Roy Whenman, vice-chairman of the local Royal British Legion branch, described the offence as diabolical.

 

“There’s nothing worse in my eyes than discrediting a war memorial,” he said. “It dishonours those who have given their lives for our country. What I would say to them is there are other ways of expressing your anger about certain issues.”

 

Dennis Fletcher, chairman of East Staffordshire Racial Equality Council, said: “Graffiti of any type is ­terrible but when it includes what appears to be racist material it has to be considered utterly unacceptable.”

 

Tory MP Patrick Mercer, a former Army colonel, said now was the time to bring in strict laws and punishments for yobs who insult our war heroes.

 

Mr Mercer, MP for Newark and Retford, said: “It strikes me that this is a gross disrespect of our war dead. It really does not help the deeply law-abiding and respectful Muslim community and I hope the next Conservative government will legislate against this sort of thing and introduce serious punishments.”

 

SEARCH UK NEWS for:

 

Magistrates in Burton upon Trent, Staffordshire, heard on Thursday that Shah and a friend defaced the memorial, owned by East Staffordshire council, on December 10 last year. The comments were sprayed across the plinth outside Burton College.

 

A street cleaner reported the incident and photographed the damage and pictures of the offensive comments were shown in court.

 

CCTV footage showed two figures spraying the slogans on the memorial. Although they could not be clearly identified, the footage showed one of the vandals discarding the spray can.

 

Shah, who has no previous convictions, was later identified from DNA on the can and admitted his actions.

 

Andrew Bodger, prosecuting, said information about Shah and photos of the graffiti were sent to Crown Prosecution Service headquarters in London for a review by senior lawyers.

 

They decided there was insufficient evidence that the crime was racially or religiously motivated, which could have led to more serious charges and a harsher sentence.

 

Mr Bodger said: “Shah wouldn’t give an explanation as to why he had done it and has shown no remorse for this very sensitive matter.

 

“The words were cleaned off without difficulty at a cost of £500. The CPS specialist unit was sent the pictures, as well as his mobile phone records, to see if there was a racially or religiously motivated connotation.

 

“It was decided there was not enough evidence to prove this, and they decided it was politically motivated. It has caused great offence to the community.” Shah admitted criminal damage and was given a two-year conditional discharge.

 

Mumtaz Chaudry, defending, dismissed any claims that Shah, of Horninglow, Burton, held extremist views.

 

He said: “This is nothing to do with his religious beliefs, his family’s beliefs or his cultural beliefs. He is just an ordinary guy. He is remorseful, but at the time of his police interview he was simply answering questions and didn’t realise that was the right time to show remorse.

 

“He has no extremist views. His action was uncalled for, but we make mistakes. It was a stupid mistake and he is determined not to repeat it.”

 

A CPS spokesman last night defended the decision not to bring a more serious charge.

 

He said: “The conclusion in this case was that there was insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction.

 

'While it was appreciated that what was sprayed on the memorial may have been perceived by some to be part of a racial or religious incident, no racial or religious group can be shown to have been targeted.”

[Rob W 0]

one twerp

[LeazesMag 0]

one twerp

 

Usual excuses made by the weak willed leftie appeasers allowing these things to go unchecked, in fact encouraging the immigration of those with such beliefs.

 

He's also presumably "British".

[Rob W 0]

one twerp

 

Usual excuses made by the weak willed leftie appeasers allowing these things to go unchecked, in fact encouraging the immigration of those with such beliefs.

 

He's also presumably "British".

 

 

exactly - so how would stopping immigration have helped?

[LeazesMag 0]

one twerp

 

Usual excuses made by the weak willed leftie appeasers allowing these things to go unchecked, in fact encouraging the immigration of those with such beliefs.

 

He's also presumably "British".

 

 

exactly - so how would stopping immigration have helped?

 

What it means, oh wise one, is we should have listened to Enoch Powell. Now it is far worse and getting worse.

[Renton 17775]

one twerp

 

Usual excuses made by the weak willed leftie appeasers allowing these things to go unchecked, in fact encouraging the immigration of those with such beliefs.

 

He's also presumably "British".

 

 

exactly - so how would stopping immigration have helped?

 

What it means, oh wise one, is we should have listened to Enoch Powell. Now it is far worse and getting worse.

 

Ahh, so it's not just the asians you are against, it's the blacks as well.

 

Never mind, what do you propose to do now?

[LeazesMag 0]

one twerp

 

Usual excuses made by the weak willed leftie appeasers allowing these things to go unchecked, in fact encouraging the immigration of those with such beliefs.

 

He's also presumably "British".

 

 

exactly - so how would stopping immigration have helped?

 

What it means, oh wise one, is we should have listened to Enoch Powell. Now it is far worse and getting worse.

 

Ahh, so it's not just the asians you are against, it's the blacks as well.

 

Never mind, what do you propose to do now?

 

I don't know. It is now a huge problem, and is increasing. I mostly agree with your policital statements lately Renton in the election thread etc, but you surely can see the problem here ?

[Guest alex]

Not sure how one person who was bang out of order shows there's a massive problem of any sort.

[LeazesMag 0]

Not sure how one person who was bang out of order shows there's a massive problem of any sort.

 

Now Alex, I know the rest of your 45,000 posts aren't as blind as that

[Renton 17775]

one twerp

 

Usual excuses made by the weak willed leftie appeasers allowing these things to go unchecked, in fact encouraging the immigration of those with such beliefs.

 

He's also presumably "British".

 

 

exactly - so how would stopping immigration have helped?

 

What it means, oh wise one, is we should have listened to Enoch Powell. Now it is far worse and getting worse.

 

Ahh, so it's not just the asians you are against, it's the blacks as well.

 

Never mind, what do you propose to do now?

 

I don't know. It is now a huge problem, and is increasing. I mostly agree with your policital statements lately Renton in the election thread etc, but you surely can see the problem here ?

 

Well you made the point about Enoch Powell, but I thought he was in favour of forceful repatriation of black african/carribean people more than muslim asians? And black people have, in general, integrated into the British community very well, so perhaps old Enoch was just spouting hateful bollocks.

 

Do I regard the growth of militant islamism a problem in this country? Yes, I do. I don't have the answers to it, but repariation isn't practically possible, even if it were desireable (it's not), so it's a non-starter. I guess I am fairly happy with how the government is dealing with the problem - by greatly decreasing immigration from non-EU countries (the points system), and increasing surveillance on muslim activists in this country and others (Pakistan). It's worked pretty well so far to be fair.

 

The other thing I'd do for the longer term would be to move towards a secular state and outlaw faith schools of all denominations. I'd ban face coverings as well, encourage children to swear allegiance to the country and its values, and generally take a hard line view on any religious extremism. It's not a solution but it's a start.

 

Btw, regarding the original article. It sounds shocking if it's true, but I can't help feeling massive skepticism towards anything the Express - sister paper of the Mail - states.