The Hazards of Belief

robindch

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

LOL, feminism is pure cancer, who needs self preservation when you can hitch your wagon to male flagellation and delusion.

JPNelsforearm - this isn't really the standard of post which is appropriate to A+A. Up your game a little, please.

jackofalltrades

From everyones favourite source.

A six-mile perimeter could be created around an area of North London to help Orthodox Jews avoid restrictions on the Sabbath.

Fishing wire would be suspended from tall poles to create the boundary for what would become a huge eruv, acting as an extension of the walls of a home which would give Jews greater freedom.

Explanation as to why it's needed here.

Why would Orthodox Jewish people need an eruv?

According to Jewish law, there are strict restrictions on what people can do on the Sabbath.

It’s well known that anything that could be considered work, for example, is forbidden.

However, it is also forbidden to use wheelchairs and prams, and to carry items including keys, glasses and food, outside of one’s own home or garden.

It’s also forbidden to carry babies outside of the home.

An eruv would essentially extend what is considered the ‘home’, meaning that Orthodox Jewish people could use wheelchairs and carry their keys in that area on the Sabbath.

Really don't like the idea of going to this extent to accommodate religious peoples need to bend the rules.
Also the redefinition in peoples mind that public spaces could be considered private can't be a good idea.

MrPudding

jackofalltrades wrote: »

From everyones favourite source.


Explanation as to why it's needed here.



Really don't like the idea of going to this extent to accommodate religious peoples need to bend the rules.
Also the redefinition in peoples mind that public spaces could be considered private can't be a good idea.

They are just lucky that their god is so fcuking stupid he can be tricks by fishing line.

MrP

Bristolscale7

MrPudding wrote: »

They are just lucky that their god is so fcuking stupid he can be tricks by fishing line.

MrP

NSFW language

cowboyBuilder

Unbelievable that this is the mayor of London

http://www.conwayfor.org/sadiq_khan_fails_to_condemn_anjem_choudary_rally


It's gonna happen folks, Sharia Law coming to the UK.

Trent Houseboat

cowboyBuilder wrote:

It's gonna happen folks, Sharia Law coming to the UK.

They're taking their time, that was a year ago.

silverharp

Ali Selim trying it on.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/rté-rejects-muslim-scholar-s-appeal-for-daily-ramadan-prayer-1.2670599

RTÉ has turned down calls by a prominent Muslim scholar in Ireland to broadcast a call to prayer for the next month to mark the end of the Ramadan fasting period each day.

The ninth month of the Muslim year, Ramadan begins on Monday and more than a billion Muslims around the world do not eat or drink between dawn and sunset.

Hilarious reasoning why it's not allowed.

Fair play to the Catholics for having their call to prayer at a set time. If only the Muslims could manage this, then RTÉ would obviously facilitate it.

:pac:

PopePalpatine

What happens when Da'esh take over a university?

JPNelsforearm

Delightful, if the one thing western Europe has been lacking recently, its diversity of homophobia, the Anglicans need to step their game up.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/03/tory-police-commissioner-objects-gay-sauna-plans-close-mosque/

The sauna’s owners withdrew the application after receiving a barrage of homophobic abuse from the local Muslim community.

Greenhouse Health Club in Luton has been operating for 18 years,

LBC told Luton Herald & Post that it had received 103 letters of objection, citing concerns over “cultural sensitivity”, the sauna’s “proximity to places of worship”.

It also received a petition signed by 430 local residents which included homophobic comments with their signatures, including assertions that homosexuality is a “brain disease” and that it is caused by “incorrect thinking”.

In a letter of objection sent to Luton Borough Council (LBC), she said that the application had caused “widespread offence and very deep concern,” and warned that if it permission was granted “a number of potential policing issues may arise” due to the sauna’s proximity to a “very significant Luton mosque”

robindch

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016...-close-mosque/

The breitbart site is a very silly right-wing propaganda site, so - like admitting that one enjoys farting in a bath or urinating in a swimming pool - it really is something that's best avoided in polite company, and in A+A.

silverharp

^^

its very easy to square the circle, triangulate the story. either the story is accurate or its not

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/06/02/police-commissioner-objected-to-gay-sauna-license-because-its-too-close-to-a-mosque/

Police commissioner objected to gay sauna license because it’s ‘too close to a mosque’


A Conservative Police and Crime Commissioner tried to block a sex license for a gay sauna – because it’s too close to a local mosque.
Greenhouse Health Club, which has operated in Luton for nearly two decades, had been seeking a license that would allow it to sell sex toys and show adult films.
However, the owners have now withdrawn the application, after encountering strong resistance from local residents and the newly-elected Police and Crime Commissioner.
Bedfordshire PCC Kathryn Holloway, a former TV presenter who has no first-hand experience of policing, told Luton Today that the license was inappropriate because the venue was too close to a local mosque – a five minute walk away.

volchitsa

silverharp wrote: »

^^

its very easy to square the circle, triangulate the story. either the story is accurate or its not

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/06/02/police-commissioner-objected-to-gay-sauna-license-because-its-too-close-to-a-mosque/

And if it had been near a Cathedral, do you not think there would have been the same amount of opposition? I suspect there would. Certainly in Ireland, not so sure about the UK.

silverharp

volchitsa wrote: »

And if it had been near a Cathedral, do you not think there would have been the same amount of opposition? I suspect there would. Certainly in Ireland, not so sure about the UK.

it depends how you define near? a 5 min walk is about ~400m , its hardly "near". I think it would be reasonable to object if it was a residential area or small village. this looks like its around the town centre so why should anyone care?

JPNelsforearm

robindch wrote: »

The breitbart site is a very silly right-wing propaganda site, so - like admitting that one enjoys farting in a bath or urinating in a swimming pool - it really is something that's best avoided in polite company, and in A+A.

Your snobbery would have been right, before the rest of the media abdicated their responsibility and journalistic integrity during the Cologne mass rape and sexual assault by illegals from the Islamic world.

All that matters when discussing news, is fact, not source. Its binary, right or wrong, and Breitbart is right in this instance. "[s]illy propaganda", only their story is correct, silly propaganda is the Irish Times doing a weekly column by illegal immigrants on the continent, in addition to their 3/4 weekly puff pieces, in an attempt to garner public sympathy.

JPNelsforearm

volchitsa wrote: »

And if it had been near a Cathedral, do you not think there would have been the same amount of opposition? I suspect there would. Certainly in Ireland, not so sure about the UK.

And the link would have been posted in this thread if the reaction was as visceral. Moralism, when it impinges on freedom is the issue, it doesnt matter where it emanates from, be it islam, christianity or lefty social justice warriors, its all equally abhorrent.

jackofalltrades

I'd speculate the Police and Crime Commissioner seems like a fully paid up member of the "sex is dirty" brigade.
It looks like she playing to the conservative views of her voters.

PinkNews wrote:

Ms Holloway warned: “Luton Borough Council is usually particularly aware of matters of cultural sensitivity.
“I trust therefore that you will fully understand that, given the large and devout Muslim population in this area of the borough,
there is naturally a high level of religious and cultural opposition to such a business among these residents which needs to be respected, in my view.

Seems like tolerance is a one way street for herself and the other people who opposed this licence.

volchitsa wrote: »

And if it had been near a Cathedral, do you not think there would have been the same amount of opposition?
I suspect there would. Certainly in Ireland, not so sure about the UK.

Your argument is whataboutery.
I'm guessing if a similar situation happened with a Cathedral in Ireland this incidence wouldn't be brought up.
If it was posters would be accused of "having an agenda" or "wanting to bash Muslims".

recedite

silverharp wrote: »

its very easy to square the circle, triangulate the story. either the story is accurate or its not

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/06/02/police-commissioner-objected-to-gay-sauna-license-because-its-too-close-to-a-mosque/

But.. but...The Pink News site is a very silly sausage-fest propaganda site, so - like admitting that one enjoys farting in a bath or urinating in a swimming pool - it really is something that's best avoided in polite company, and in A+A.

volchitsa

jackofalltrades wrote: »

I'd speculate the Police and Crime Commissioner seems like a fully paid up member of the "sex is dirty" brigade.
It looks like she playing to the conservative views of her voters.


Seems like tolerance is a one way street for herself and the other people who opposed this licence.


Your argument is whataboutery.
I'm guessing if a similar situation happened with a Cathedral in Ireland this incidence wouldn't be brought up.
If it was posters would be accused of "having an agenda" or "wanting to bash Muslims".

That's not what whataboutery is, hon. You could accuse me of speculation,seeing as we don't have any examples of it happening, but then you go and do exactly the same thing yourself.

No idea what you mean about Muslim bashing though - all I meant was that if a porn shop or similar were to be opened in the vicinity of a major Catholic/Christian religious edifice, the faithful would not be happy about it. And I can sympathize with that. This place was going to be selling sex toys for example. Can you honestly see little grannies in Ireland walking past that on their way to Mass and being grand with it?

(The first part of your post backs up my point, BTW - it's not a specifically Muslim issue, all religious communities would likely have a problem with it.)

robindch

recedite wrote: »

But.. but...The Pink News site is a very silly sausage-fest propaganda site, so - like admitting that one enjoys farting in a bath or urinating in a swimming pool - it really is something that's best avoided in polite company, and in A+A.

Not your funniest post ever, recedite - do try harder!

silverharp wrote: »

its very easy to square the circle, triangulate the story. either the story is accurate or its not[...]

Given that it's on breitbart, I wouldn't have bothered following up this story any more than I'd have followed up one from, say, newsmax or any other right-wing propaganda outlet.

However, the point was made... so, a quick search produces a link to a report in the Luton Herald and Post covering the same story. In fact, suspiciously the same story - putting the two texts side by side suggests that the relatively innocuous earlier report filed by the Luton H+P on May 26 (attracting eleven comments, most fairly mild), was copied, then briefly edited to fit breitbart's angry target audience, then published on the 3rd of June where it's since attracted almost 1,000 comments, most of them expressing open hatred for one group or another and couched in language which is both hostile and foul. Job done, I suppose?

I rest my case concerning breitbart

silverharp

robindch wrote: »

Not your funniest post ever, recedite - do try harder!Given that it's on breitbart, I wouldn't have bothered following up this story any more than I'd have followed up one from, say, newsmax or any other right-wing propaganda outlet.

However, the point was made... so, a quick search produces a link to a report in the Luton Herald and Post covering the same story. In fact, suspiciously the same story - putting the two texts side by side suggests that the relatively innocuous earlier report filed by the Luton H+P on May 26 (attracting eleven comments, most fairly mild), was copied, then briefly edited to fit breitbart's angry target audience, then published on the 3rd of June where it's since attracted almost 1,000 comments, most of them expressing open hatred for one group or another and couched in language which is both hostile and foul. Job done, I suppose?

I rest my case concerning breitbart

its an odd line of reasoning, the Quantum theory of digesting news? :pac:
A lot of news stories are like this, a local paper will quite reasonably write up a local story , if it has something where it might have national value a bigger outfit will pick it up. If this story had Christians objecting it would most likely ended up in the Guardian, someone would have posted it here and there would have been much chortling. However because it involves Muslims you wont see it in The Guardian
Personally I dont read any online newspaper, its more a case of what gets thrown up in twitter feeds, so Guardian, Salon, RT or Breitbart is all the same to me

robindch

silverharp wrote: »

its an odd line of reasoning, the Quantum theory of digesting news?

Not really.

Just noting that (minor local news report) + (not-positively attributed re-edit by high-profile pot-stirrer) = (more angry people, probably white and probably men)

That's not news. That's just keeping the anger inflamed, a bit like McKevitt's Alive! does.

C'est la vie

recedite

It is an odd line of reasoning alright. When the story appears in a local paper, it is declared to be "innocuous" small news. Copy and paste the same text to another source with a wider audience such as Breitbart and suddenly it becomes untrustworthy propaganda.
Either way, the story is kept under wraps, and homophobic intolerance is allowed to score another small victory.

silverharp

robindch wrote: »

Not really.

Just noting that (minor local news report) + (not-positively attributed re-edit by high-profile pot-stirrer) = (more angry people, probably white and probably men)

That's not news. That's just keeping the anger inflamed, a bit like McKevitt's Alive! does.

C'est la vie

yet a gay newspaper thought it as news?, oddly enough I was in the offices of the Pink News years ago , it was full of white men from memory . im not sure where you are going with the race thing. there was an Atheist event in Washington DC at the weekend it was whiter than cream cheese :P

robindch

silverharp wrote: »

im not sure where you are going with the race thing.

It's a riff on the "angry white men" meme. But that said, and looking again briefly at the kind of content which the breitbart serves, and being fully willing to be proved wrong, I'd put money down that the majority of breitbart's consumer base is disillusioned, angry, middle-aged, white men of limited achievements in education and life.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

It is an odd line of reasoning alright. When the story appears in a local paper, it is declared to be "innocuous" small news. Copy and paste the same text to another source with a wider audience such as Breitbart and suddenly it becomes untrustworthy propaganda.

I'm not sure if you've had the time to read either of them carefully, or both of them - side by side would be best.

The original article is fairly evenly toned, while the later plagiarized text adds almost nothing of value other than crude stereotypes. If you can't see this, then the difference in comments beneath each article might help you understand how well the second article plays to its consumers. If you still can't see it after that, well, I'm not sure there's must more I can do.

Hotblack Desiato

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

silly propaganda is the Irish Times doing a weekly column by illegal immigrants on the continent, in addition to their 3/4 weekly puff pieces, in an attempt to garner public sympathy.

I'm more concerned by their several pieces per week uncritically promoting religious woo ("Rite and Reason" but all rite and no reason), not to mention their weekly column of hate sponsored by Iona Inc.

volchitsa wrote: »

No idea what you mean about Muslim bashing though - all I meant was that if a porn shop or similar were to be opened in the vicinity of a major Catholic/Christian religious edifice, the faithful would not be happy about it. And I can sympathize with that.

I can't. They need to get the flip over themselves. Religious sexual repression merchants no longer own the public space, and this is a very good thing.

pauldla

Following the recent claim of Christopher Hitchens almost alleged conversion, Lawrence Krauss in the New Yorker wonders why Christians have a thing for deathbed conversions.

THE FANTASY OF THE DEATHBED CONVERSION

Never one to mince his words...

In the end, what evangelists don’t recognize is that atheism is not a belief system like Christianity, from which one might defect after hearing some arguments or having a few sombre conversations. It is, instead, simply a rational decision not to accept the existence of God without evidence. As wise thinkers, including Laplace, Hume, Sagan, and Hitchens, have often said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It’s hard to imagine a more extraordinary claim than that some hidden intelligence created a universe of more than a hundred billion galaxies, each containing more than a hundred billion stars, and then waited more than 13.7 billion years until a planet in a remote corner of a single galaxy evolved an atmosphere sufficiently oxygenated to support life, only to then reveal his existence to an assortment of violent tribal groups before disappearing again.

In this regard, the saddest thing about these imagined deathbed conversions is that, even if they were real, they could hardly be seen as victories for Christ. They are stories in which the final pain of a fatal disease, or the fear of imminent death and eternal punishment, is identified as the factor necessary for otherwise rational people to believe in the supernatural.

If mental torture is required to effect a conversion, what does that say about the reliability of the fundamental premises of Christianity to begin with? Evangelicals would be better advised to concentrate on converting the living. Converting the deceased suggests only that they can’t convince those who can argue back. They should let the dead rest in peace.

JPNelsforearm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

I'm more concerned by their several pieces per week uncritically promoting religious woo ("Rite and Reason" but all rite and no reason), not to mention their weekly column of hate sponsored by Iona Inc.

I'm equally as concerned, when someone is shoving their version of morality down your throat it tends to rankle, whether that moralism is religious, or secular, is immaterial.

"column of hate", no, bull****, yes.

JPNelsforearm

robindch wrote: »

I'm not sure if you've had the time to read either of them carefully, or both of them - side by side would be best.

The original article is fairly evenly toned, while the later plagiarized text adds almost nothing of value other than crude stereotypes. If you can't see this, then the difference in comments beneath each article might help you understand how well the second article plays to its consumers. If you still can't see it after that, well, I'm not sure there's must more I can do.

Breitbart are subject to Press laws in the UK a much as any other newspaper, if anything false was added, someone misquoted, a complaint can be lodged with the PCC, and a retraction demanded.

"adds almost nothing of value other than crude stereotypes", "playing to consumers" eg telling the truth as opposed to being PC. The original piece lies by omission, it buries the sentiment of the objectors and their community. Your sole complaint is one of sensibility, yours are offended.