Call for State schools to accommodate Islamic beliefs

alastair

gallag wrote: »

So what about all the posts I highlighted? would you agree they were unpalatable?

Sure, some of them are - but they're a small minority amongst a much larger majority with different views.

gallag wrote: »

and they certainly were enough of them to class as a large amount,.

No, there most certainly is not.

gallag wrote: »

unless you thought they were not unpalatable? how do you explain this, I mean everyone can see them, it's there in black and white, and yes please show me a Catholic forum with so many, or even one post so accepting of rape.

One? Okay - here you go.

gallag

alastair wrote: »

Sure, some of them are - but they're a small minority amongst a much larger majority with different views.


No, there most certainly is not.



One? Okay - here you go.

some of them? what ones did you find acceptable? also there are 37 posts on the first page of that thread and I have highlighted 9 that any sane person would find offensive (not you apparently? ) and I have not even finished the page yet, how can you not call that a large amount? How? as i said its right there in black and white! everyone can see it, how can you just say it does not exist? and a link to some obscure blog is not what I asked for!

now you will agree I do my best to answer your questions, if you could oblige, if I posed that question on this very forum would there be a very different tone to the thread compared to the one we are debating? and why would that be?

alastair

gallag wrote: »

some of them? what ones did you find acceptable? also there are 37 posts on the first page of that thread and I have highlighted 9 that any sane person would find offensive (not you apparently? ) and I have not even finished the page yet, how can you not call that a large amount? How? as i said its right there in black and white! everyone can see it, how can you just say it does not exist? and a link to some obscure blog is not what I asked for!

I'm quite sane, cheers.

What did I say "did not exist"?

It's a Catholic discussion blog. And it's clearly supporting the notion of 'legitimate rapes', as distinct from ' non-legitimate' rapes.

Let me know when you've tallied up the numbers, eh?

gallag wrote: »

now you will agree I do my best to answer your questions, if you could oblige, if I posed that question on this very forum would there be a very different tone to the thread compared to the one we are debating? and why would that be?

I'd hazard that there would also be a clear majority opposed to rape within marriage, but then you keep insisting on equating the views of a self-selecting community within a religious forum, with a national forum. And you insist on ascribing the views of a small minority of posters with the entire forum. Here's a clue as to how to interpret forums - one poster does not speak for another, or indeed anyone beyond themselves. I wouldn't want anyone to think you spoke on behalf of my views, and I'm sure the opposite is true.

gallag

alastair wrote: »

I'm quite sane, cheers.

What did I say "did not exist"?

It's a Catholic discussion blog. And it's clearly supporting the notion of 'legitimate rapes', as distinct from ' non-legitimate' rapes.

Let me know when you've tallied up the numbers, eh?


I'd hazard that there would also be a clear majority opposed to rape within marriage, but then you keep insisting on equating the views of a self-selecting community within a religious forum, with a national forum. And you insist on ascribing the views of a small minority of posters with the entire forum. Here's a clue as to how to interpret forums - one poster does not speak for another, or indeed anyone beyond themselves. I wouldn't want anyone to think you spoke on behalf of my views, and I'm sure the opposite is true.

You didn't answer my questions! how many of the posts I highlighted do you disagree are distasteful and how do you figure 9 out of 37 (with probably more to come) not a large number? and some nutters blog is not the same as a forum encompassing many different views, I could find a blog supporting any disgusting mindset but to find such a nonchalant attitude to woman's rights in one thread is much more disturbing.

just to be clear.
1) are there any of the posts I highlighted that you disagree are distasteful?

2) would you agree that so many distasteful views in one page is disgusting?

alastair

gallag wrote: »

You didn't answer my questions! how many of the posts I highlighted do you disagree are distasteful and how do you figure 9 out of 37 (with probably more to come) not a large number? and some nutters blog is not the same as a forum encompassing many different views, I could find a blog supporting any disgusting mindset but to find such a nonchalant attitude to woman's rights in one thread is much more disturbing.

just to be clear.
1) are there any of the posts I highlighted that you disagree are distasteful?

2) would you agree that so many distasteful views in one page is disgusting?

You asked for a Catholic forum that excused rape - I provided one. The commentators do indeed hold a variety of views (within their faith anyway).

I find your opinions distasteful tbh, but I don't assume they reflect on anyone else in the thread. The issue here is not whether a minority of posts are, in and of themselves distasteful, but whether they reflect broader attitudes in an entire religion. They clearly do not - they don't even reflect a majority of posters in that thread.

gallag

Ok, I think you agree with me anyway that the muslim religion is completely at odds with western ideals, as you say yourself trying to compare a muslim forum with a forum comprising of wider irish society is unreasonable as they are so mismatched.

I will bow out now confident that people have seen with there own eyes how far the leftist agenda will go to excuse the indefensible, and when that fails roll out the whataboutery I. e look what some Christians said!!!

as always I recommend people investigate the things posted in here for themselves and form their own opinion but never feel like asking the questions makes you a bad person or a racist!

Timberrrrrrrr

gallag wrote: »

Ok, I think you agree with me anyway that the muslim religion is completely at odds with western ideals, as you say yourself trying to compare a muslim forum with a forum comprising of wider irish society is unreasonable as they are so mismatched.

I will bow out now confident that people have seen with there own eyes how far the leftist agenda will go to excuse the indefensible, and when that fails roll out the whataboutery I. e look what some Christians said!!!

as always I recommend people investigate the things posted in here for themselves and form their own opinion but never feel like asking the questions makes you a bad person or a racist!

You have been weighed

You have been measured

You have been found to be wanting.

alastair

gallag wrote: »

Ok, I think you agree with me anyway that the muslim religion is completely at odds with western ideals,

A bit strange that you would think so. Let me be perfectly clear - I don't. Again - I'd suggest you actually meet and socialise with some muslims, and let us know if you reckon they're at odds with western ideals.

gallag wrote: »

as you say yourself trying to compare a muslim forum with a forum comprising of wider irish society is unreasonable as they are so mismatched.

Just as attempting to equate a Catholic forum with a national one would be unreasonable.

gallag wrote: »

I will bow out now confident that people have seen with there own eyes how far the leftist agenda will go to excuse the indefensible, and when that fails roll out the whataboutery I. e look what some Christians said!!!

The leftist agenda? Heh. You seem a little desperate there tbh.
And you're the one who asked for Christian examples.
And you're 'bowing out' without telling us how many of your 'distasteful' posts stack up against reasonable ones in that thread? Seems a little convenient.

gallag wrote: »

as always I recommend people investigate the things posted in here for themselves and form their own opinion but never feel like asking the questions makes you a bad person or a racist!

I'd add to that, you might consider some honesty in how you present what you've discovered. It lends a touch more credibility - which - unfortunately, you've destroyed with all the misrepresentation of what you found.

rozeboosje

There is no such thing as "The" Muslim Religion. There are, so I'm told, 1.5 billion people on this planet who self-identify as "Muslim", so there are 1.5 billion "Muslim Religions" out there. Some Muslims are quite happy to embrace secular ideas. Others aren't. The first lot will fit right in, the second lot will have a problem which will manifest itself by demands for deference that only deserve to be laughed out of school. But to apply the broad brush to a cohort of 1.5 billion people, ANY cohort that big, is beyond stupid.

masonchat

rozeboosje wrote: »

There is no such thing as "The" Muslim Religion. There are, so I'm told, 1.5 billion people on this planet who self-identify as "Muslim", so there are 1.5 billion "Muslim Religions" out there. Some Muslims are quite happy to embrace secular ideas. Others aren't. The first lot will fit right in, the second lot will have a problem which will manifest itself by demands for deference that only deserve to be laughed out of school. But to apply the broad brush to a cohort of 1.5 billion people, ANY cohort that big, is beyond stupid.

What a pile of contradictory poo

Islam is the religion of muslims , you say there is no muslim religion but then1.5billion different muslim religions , you say not to apply abroad brush then follow that by saying there is 2 types , them that will and them that wont

rozeboosje

I can't help it if that was too difficult for you to follow

masonchat

Its not difficult just nonsensical

rozeboosje

Only if you don't bother trying to get it, and are keen to jump to conclusions. Where, for example, did I say that there were EXACTLY 2 types and that EVERY Muslim is either one or the other excluding any other possibility? That is what YOU decided to make of it, and all I can conclude is that a bit of nuance is too difficult for you to follow.

Timberrrrrrrr

rozeboosje wrote: »

There is no such thing as "The" Muslim Religion. There are, so I'm told, 1.5 billion people on this planet who self-identify as "Muslim", so there are 1.5 billion "Muslim Religions" out there. Some Muslims are quite happy to embrace secular ideas. Others aren't. The first lot will fit right in, the second lot will have a problem which will manifest itself by demands for deference that only deserve to be laughed out of school. But to apply the broad brush to a cohort of 1.5 billion people, ANY cohort that big, is beyond stupid.

The same can be said about any religion.

rozeboosje

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

The same can be said about any religion.

Of course. And of any political ideology.

Timberrrrrrrr

rozeboosje wrote: »

Of course. And of any political ideology.

So there are no.catholics, prodestants or Christians in the world either. 7 billion individuals who.make up.nothing. / of the world imo.

rozeboosje

I'd love to see how you worked that one out from what I said.

K-9

gallag wrote: »

Ok, I think you agree with me anyway that the muslim religion is completely at odds with western ideals, as you say yourself trying to compare a muslim forum with a forum comprising of wider irish society is unreasonable as they are so mismatched.

I will bow out now confident that people have seen with there own eyes how far the leftist agenda will go to excuse the indefensible, and when that fails roll out the whataboutery I. e look what some Christians said!!!

Eh, you asked for the answer :pac:

WakeUp

this Ali Selim dude is an interesting character when you look into him, some of his views on certain things like the stoning of women for example as being "symbolic". thats a warped mindset to have about such a horrible practice in my opinion. some of the things he is suggesting for our schools belong in the dark ages. In Ireland people mix we dont segregate. this individual Selim in my opinion once again, appears to me to be slightly detached from the realities of Irish society. I think he needs a reality check.

K.Flyer

I can never understand why some people come to Ireland saying that they want to live here "...because of the people", "...because of the culture", "...because of the history", "...because of the standard of education", "...because of the work opportunities" blah blah blah etc etc etc.
And then turn around and say "...well, actually, while we do love Ireland for all those reasons, we want Ireland to change from the way it has been doing things, to the way we want to do things. And then get all snotty and worked up about it when there are told No.
Now either people come here for the way Ireland is, (in the same way as people leave because of the way Ireland is), or they are coming here with another agenda in mind.

Nodin

K.Flyer wrote: »

I can never understand why some people come to Ireland saying that they want to live here "...because of the people", "...because of the culture", "...because of the history", "...because of the standard of education", "...because of the work opportunities" blah blah blah etc etc etc.
And then turn around and say "...well, actually, while we do love Ireland for all those reasons, we want Ireland to change from the way it has been doing things, to the way we want to do things. And then get all snotty and worked up about it when there are told No.
Now either people come here for the way Ireland is, (in the same way as people leave because of the way Ireland is), or they are coming here with another agenda in mind.

What agenda would that be?

alastair

K.Flyer wrote: »

I can never understand why some people come to Ireland saying that they want to live here "...because of the people", "...because of the culture", "...because of the history", "...because of the standard of education", "...because of the work opportunities" blah blah blah etc etc etc.
And then turn around and say "...well, actually, while we do love Ireland for all those reasons, we want Ireland to change from the way it has been doing things, to the way we want to do things. And then get all snotty and worked up about it when there are told No.
Now either people come here for the way Ireland is, (in the same way as people leave because of the way Ireland is), or they are coming here with another agenda in mind.

Who was getting snotty?

Mind you, what's this fantasy of the country remaining unchanged, or of plain old home-grown indigenous Irish not wanting change themselves? Anyone with a stake in this nation has every right to lobby for changes, for better or worse.

rozeboosje

As demographics change, as technology changes, as our understanding of reality changes with scientific advances, as the world becomes more and more interconnected all our societies must necessarily change to keep up with all that. There is nothing inherently wrong with that.

What everybody needs to understand though is that changes can only come about through dialogue. Everybody has the right to seek changes in society that they think are important. But as society has become multicultural and people adhere to many different belief systems (or to none) and political ideologies and so on, the time where a ruling elite could simply assume that it could assert authority over the whole population's customs and morality is long gone, and that is something that many people find very hard to come to grips with. If anybody wants anything to change they need to convince everybody outside their own group that this change is desirable and for the better. And that is a very different challenge to convincing people from inside one's own group. If one is a religious believer, one can hold a position of authority within the religious organisation and claim to speak on behalf of a "god" or "the Church" or whatnot. Political or other ideologues can claim a special level of understanding of the founder's ideas, and claim to speak with authority about what Karl Marx or Ayn Rand said and expect their "followers" to submit to their authority. None of that will wash with society as a whole. If one seeks changes in society one will need to convince the out-group. And resorting to arguments such as "god says", "Karl Marx wrote", "the Pope declared", "it is written in the Bible/Qur'an/Bhagavad Gita" or "a Fatwah states that" will simply not be acceptable. Explain the need for change in terms that are intelligible and that make sense to those from outside the "club", and change will happen, and for good reason. Otherwise it won't, and one just has to grin and bear it.

In a multicultural society every culture that is represented within the society should have the right to express itself and to celebrate its special identity within society as a whole, but they must also accept that society does contain members from other social backgrounds who have those very same rights, and if one finds the way another part of society expresses itself "offensive" then one has to learn to look the other way at something that one finds less offensive. One cannot expect to be taken seriously while demanding that other people in society should change what they're doing without being able to provide an intelligible and acceptable rationale for that. Intelligible and acceptable to the recipient.

AlekSmart

rozeboosje wrote: »

As demographics change, as technology changes, as our understanding of reality changes with scientific advances, as the world becomes more and more interconnected all our societies must necessarily change to keep up with all that. There is nothing inherently wrong with that.

What everybody needs to understand though is that changes can only come about through dialogue. Everybody has the right to seek changes in society that they think are important. But as society has become multicultural and people adhere to many different belief systems (or to none) and political ideologies and so on, the time where a ruling elite could simply assume that it could assert authority over the whole population's customs and morality is long gone, and that is something that many people find very hard to come to grips with. If anybody wants anything to change they need to convince everybody outside their own group that this change is desirable and for the better. And that is a very different challenge to convincing people from inside one's own group. If one is a religious believer, one can hold a position of authority within the religious organisation and claim to speak on behalf of a "god" or "the Church" or whatnot. Political or other ideologues can claim a special level of understanding of the founder's ideas, and claim to speak with authority about what Karl Marx or Ayn Rand said and expect their "followers" to submit to their authority. None of that will wash with society as a whole. If one seeks changes in society one will need to convince the out-group. And resorting to arguments such as "god says", "Karl Marx wrote", "the Pope declared", "it is written in the Bible/Qur'an/Bhagavad Gita" or "a Fatwah states that" will simply not be acceptable. Explain the need for change in terms that are intelligible and that make sense to those from outside the "club", and change will happen, and for good reason. Otherwise it won't, and one just has to grin and bear it.

In a multicultural society every culture that is represented within the society should have the right to express itself and to celebrate its special identity within society as a whole, but they must also accept that society does contain members from other social backgrounds who have those very same rights, and if one finds the way another part of society expresses itself "offensive" then one has to learn to look the other way at something that one finds less offensive. One cannot expect to be taken seriously while demanding that other people in society should change what they're doing without being able to provide an intelligible and acceptable rationale for that. Intelligible and acceptable to the recipient.

Good summation rozeboosje (Netherlands ?).

It is even more germane that it is hugely relevant to modern Ireland,which is still struggling to accept the "new reality" for it's former State supported religion,Catholicism.

Luckily,in many ways,the demise of old-style Irish Catholic dogma has occurred in a relatively short time-frame,and even allowing for the cruelty and malpractices,has not involved open inter-community warfare.

Islam,on the other hand,particularly in the form so elequently espoused here,by Dr Selim,is experiencing far more violent spasms as it's "Old Guard" struggle against the march of modernity,both within and without their belief structure.

Sadly,"Grinning and Bearing It" is not a widely practiced response amongst the warring factions of Islam.

The challenge for modern Ireland,is to remain staunch in it's requirement that system changes must meet,the "Intelligible and Acceptable to the recipient" pre-qualification for consideration

Nemeses2050

just for your info...Two biggest and oldest Islamic centres disagree with Dr.Selim...

http://islaminireland.com/news/irish-muslims-organisations-praise-school-system/

realweirdo

1123heavy wrote: »

There seems to have been a major thread drift. For those worrying about how muslims view others that aren't muslim, well here's a verse of the quran.

“ … If anyone slew a person unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land it would be as if he slew the whole humanity: and if anyone saved a life it would be as if he saved the life of the whole humanity.” (5:32)

Life - in all forms - is one of the most valued things in Islam, even in times of war Muslims are bound by certain rules, you're not even allowed to harm a tree, all hostages are to be treated with respect (harming them is a major sin !), we are also taught to be tolerant of others.

“…There is no compulsion in religion…” (Quran 2:256)

“To you be your religion, to me be mine.” (Quran 109:6)


We are also repeatedly told throughout the Quran of how close we are to the Christians and Jews, our holiest prophets were of the Jewish people (Moses, Jesus, David, Solomon etc).

Anyone who thinks as a muslim they are to kill non-believers, is either naive, ignorant, or is using Islam as a cover up for their own evil agenda. To those watching the horrors currently being committed by ISIS and thinking we're all the same, just remember there are just under 1.5 Billion Muslims in this world, and ISIS is made up of naive young people brainwashed by ignorant people who claim to know everything about islam when the fact is they know nothing.

Just as an example. The ISIS 'leader' Baghdadi was filmed wearing a watch made of gold. Considering it is forbidden for men to wear gold in Islam I think it's a bit silly taking what he says and commands as true Islam. These people are clueless and take quranic verses out of context to suit their own agendas in killing innocent people !!!!!

Apologies for drifting the thread even further but I got a sense people on here actually think 'radical' terrorists were true reps of Islam.

There is no question ISIS is a maurauding criminal gang who rape, pillage, steal and murder to satisfy their bloodlust.

They seem however to have a fanatical devotion to Mohammad and Mohammad and his original followers more resembled ISIS than anything else. That's a harsh truth that some people would love to brush under the carpet and make out Islam is based on peace and light and so on. Islam was certainly not originally spread by gentle persuasion, it was spread by forced conversion and beheadings or similar for those who refused, much as ISIS are mimicking today.

Mohammad accepted very little resistance to his claims and ISIS equally don't.

There is very little to recommend Islam as a religion of peace unfortunately. The same goes for Christianity and Judaism by the way. They all have shameful histories.

seanaway

''If anyone slew a person unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land.....

Question on this:

Define mischief in the land, please.

To my mind that leaves it WIDE open to any nut to interpret this as 'talking about a religion other than Islam'.

These people are clueless and take quranic verses out of context to suit their own agendas in killing innocent people !!!!!

Question on this:

Who's interpretation of the Quran is the 'right one' then?

Apologies for drifting the thread even further but I got a sense people on here actually think 'radical' terrorists were true reps of Islam.

I don't think this is true. I think people believe are intelligent to know that nutters are nutters. They are aware though of the cause of people becoming nutters - hence the thread.

AlekSmart

Nemeses2050 wrote: »

just for your info...Two biggest and oldest Islamic centres disagree with Dr.Selim...

http://islaminireland.com/news/irish-muslims-organisations-praise-school-system/

What is required additionally is for the Mainstream Muslim community to get their voices heard through indentifiable spokespersons,speaking as Committe's tends to reinforce the perception of Dr Selim's views as coming from an Influential Senior Cleric et al...

Perhaps we should study how the moderate French Islamic folks are now speaking out ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/26/muslims-rally-against-extremism_n_5889962.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Nodin

AlekSmart wrote: »

What is required additionally is for the Mainstream Muslim community to get their voices heard through indentifiable spokespersons,speaking as Committe's tends to reinforce the perception of Dr Selim's views as coming from an Influential Senior Cleric et al...

Perhaps we should study how the moderate French Islamic folks are now speaking out ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/26/muslims-rally-against-extremism_n_5889962.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Yes, there's a clear parallel between the two issues.

alastair

Nodin wrote: »

Yes, there's a clear parallel between the two issues.

Yes. The issue of PE lessons for girls is just another facet of the 'warring factions of Islam', just like ISIS, and the need for all Muslims to reassure everyone they're not rooting for them. You know, as part of that whole violent spasm thing.


I'm still not sure what an indentifiable spokesperson is though.