ban of piglet in the uk

desiredbard

Lads has the world gone mental or what
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005450600,00.html
NOVELTY pig calendars and toys have been banned from a council office — in case they offend Muslim staff.

Workers in the benefits department at Dudley Council, West Midlands, were told to remove or cover up all pig-related items, including toys, porcelain figures, calendars and even a tissue box featuring Winnie the Pooh and Piglet.

Bosses acted after a Muslim complained about pig-shaped stress relievers delivered to the council in the run-up to the Islamic festival of Ramadan.

Muslims are barred from eating pork in the Koran and consider pigs unclean.

Councillor Mahbubur Rahman, a practising Muslim, backed the ban. He said: “It’s a tolerance of people’s beliefs.”

Hobbes

You know that story is only in the SUN and BNP news. Hardly glowing recommendation that it is true or not. Personally if I was you I would post it to the www.snopes.com forum and they will find out if it is true or not.

I will tell you that your outrage is misplaced. Pigs are offensive to the religon and it would be putting up animal porn calenders in work to westeners (you get the drift). Not to mention this is nothing new, 2 years ago pig related stories were removed from certain UK schools as they had mostly muslim members.

marco murphy

BNP news...

Need you say anymore :rolleyes:

rcunning03

Hobbes wrote:

You know that story is only in the SUN and BNP news.

BNP as in British National Party ?

marco murphy

I refer to it as British Nazi Party.

whiskeyman

desiredbard wrote:

Bosses acted after a Muslim complained about pig-shaped stress relievers delivered to the council in the run-up to the Islamic festival of Ramadan.

this sounds like work of our very own Pigsback.ie handing out the pink stress pigs.
I read last week (in a proper newspaper) that they had planned a huge campaign in the UK for their site there, but it was postponed as it was due to occur on 7th July - day of the London Bombings. It is being pushed this week though.
The same article never mentioned the link with Muslims and pigs.

Osman

Greetings,

I am a muslim and I, myself, would not find these things offensive. I am against the ban but who cares what I think?

Peace

eth0_

Is it any wonder muslims get racist abuse when people print **** like that.

Even if it's true, I bet it wasn't a ban based on a complaint from a muslim. Seems ridiuclous.

marco murphy

I went off topic a little, i wouldnt mind this either

Hobbes

rcunning03 wrote:

BNP as in British National Party ?

yep, however I am seeing it reported elsewhere but the same story more or less word for word.

marco murphy

Media...

desiredbard

Thanks for the answers, coming from Holland where these things actually would make sense (that’s how screwed up it is) I was surprised to read this.
On one of the forums in the Netherlands some members occasionally refer me to strormfront pages (ha,ha very funny) because I do have sincere doubts at this kind of behaviour, and am outspoken regarding these kind of issue's. However please bare in mind that I do not intend to hurt anyone’s personal feelings with this:

Integration, and acceptance has to come from both sides, and in my home country I see the political correct left wing wooly sock tree huggers make the law more or less.

An imam that refuses to shake the hand of one of our ministers (a woman) and then states that he himself is insulted makes my blood pressure rise. Especially with an amount of fanatics parading around in the Netherlands and the UK I do not think that this is the behaviour that is going to help

(In an ideal world the female minister would not have stuck her hand out and the imam would have out of respect for one another, but maybe I''m naive)

Back to the piglet issue, in my opinion its absolutely ridiculous, that an image of a piece of English culture, I mean which kid does not read Winnie the Pooh, or at least know who/what he is, is banned from an office. I mean that’s taking it a bit over the top. What next make pig-farming illegal? I mean it’s a choice is it not to look at an image or eat the meat?

The same goes for the issue regarding the schoolbooks above, what about the non-Muslim children, are they not allowed either to get in touch with Piglet. As far as I am aware the Jews do not make a problem about the pink little critter, and to them pork is not kosher either.

Ok the fact that the Sun has this article says a lot however, and although I would not visit the BNP site, these are exactly the people who feed on this. And a lot of people who would be anxious in the current east west culture conflict would be dragged over to another extreme. And no matter if it is Bushes Republicans Fundamentalism or Muslin fundamentalism; they are both two very sick extremes.

The non-acceptance from certain Muslims for things in western culture appears to be close to such fundamentalism sometimes. Western Culture is supposed to accept women wearing a headscarf or (worse) burka. Something that would indicate the inferiority of women, in a culture that accepts for decades (and not centuries as some other fundamentalist would like you to believe) the equality of both sexes. The whole piglet issue is, for me, an exaggerated childish, attention seeking charade from a couple of fundamentalist Muslim whiners (again I am not meaning to insult anyone its just my feeling on an issue which is about a children’s icon / toy)

marco murphy

Holland was in a bad way this year

How is it now?

Hobbes

desiredbard wrote:

Back to the piglet issue, in my opinion its absolutely ridiculous, that an image of a piece of English culture, I mean which kid does not read Winnie the Pooh, or at least know who/what he is, is banned from an office.

How many kids work in an office? English Culture is sort of misnomer as people who live in England are part of the English Culture. Maybe part of English cultures history.

are they not allowed either to get in touch with Piglet. As far as I am aware the Jews do not make a problem about the pink little critter, and to them pork is not kosher either.

Cultures vary and it is quite understandable. For example Pigs to Koreans are a sign of good luck/fortune.

You are right though, acceptance has to come from both sides.

Osman

Greetings desiredbard,

I agree with your points concerning the piglet ban and the imaam. I understand that it was not your intention to offend, however, I have a problem with your following points:

desiredbard wrote:

Western Culture is supposed to accept women wearing a headscarf or (worse) burka.

Racism.

desiredbard wrote:

Something that would indicate the inferiority of women, in a culture that accepts for decades (and not centuries as some other fundamentalist would like you to believe) the equality of both sexes.

Neither the headscarf, nor the burka indicates the inferiority of women. Moreover, Islam fully regards men and women as equals. The headscarf as well as the Burka are worn by the woman's choice. The following is an article to further clarify:

Are Women inferior to men in Islam

In future, I hope that you will educate yourself about a religion, before making assumptions.

Peace

desiredbard

Poblachtach, yeah things were pretty tensed, its calmed down a bit but there is a bit of mistrust. The good thing, from a racist point of view is that the latest arrested fundamentalist were all white, if you know what I mean, They were not from origin from a Muslim country

Osman, I know what you are saying and I believe it partially true, I mean there is such a thing as peer pressure. I experienced it myself two years ago on a train in Holland, Getting into the train, there are two lad little hat on, those wide white religious clothing things (Djebella's???) And the felt it necessary to harass two girls because their skirt is just over the knee.

First of all these girls were not Muslim, second of all the fact that these women were considered whores because they were dressed like that might have been uttered to raised the guards that came to assistance in the next station but nevertheless.

I remember seeing a documentary on the BBC on this tribe in Africa where the women all put these clay plates in their lips. It was by choice but everyone did it so the next generation followed suit.

What I fear is seen the two unrelated examples above, would if those lads from the train had a sister, the sister be allowed to dress jeans and normal top (I am not talking Britney spears but even then if she had that bad a taste and little self-respect) or would the future wife from any of these lads have the choice?

Someone dressed up in such a white pyjama (I do not mean it offensive, I think its djebella but lets presume I'm completely ignorant) or a woman covered up from head to toe strikes me immediately as a Muslim. People like these cause misunderstanding and hatred. I mean its not difficult for people to be afraid and hate what they do not understand.

Even though Islam would not be my religion the Koran holds certain important key values as does a Bible / Torah, But Islam is for many people synonymous with sexism, intolerance, gay bashing, suicide attacks.

Of course the majority (I hope) does not condone this but, there are Imams that preach hate and you never hear anything about this until another extremist is picked up and the Mosque highlighted in the press. But there are more Muslims going there, and they are not all extremists, right?

Now why do the normal guy's not grab an hate preaching Imam by the short and curly's and etc.... I mean if Lets say the Bishop of wherever start to be completely anti-Semitic (and Arabs are Semites as well, are they not?) how long would it take for the catholic or protestants to call this person to a halt, or do you think people would silently follow (Not pretending that one religion is better then the other but I'd like to think of taking the bishop by the short and curlies in that case)

Hobbes

I'll say this once. Attack the post and not the poster. Any name calling from now on will mean a temp ban.

desiredbard

Hi Hobbes

To who was this directed, if it was to me, sorry to anyone if I offended them,
I do not feel attacked at all. We are talking about peoples religion here so something that lies can be pretty up close, somebody might type someting that is misinterpreted.

If I misconstruct a sentence about burka's someone might get worried about racism. However the person did not suggest I join the BNP or any equivalent, so I do not feel offended. And am actually hoping to get into a more constructive discussion, although burka's is something we probably need a long time to agree on, but hey even that is fine as long as we can agree to disagree. (although I do not know the members of this board and their temper that well)

Osman

Greetings desiredbard,

I apologise if I misread or misunderstood you. You see, if it was a few years ago, on seeing someone wearing a burka I would most probably feel the same way as you. But now, after acquiring more knowledge of my religion, I feel admiration for those who have the courage to wear it no matter what other people think. For a woman, covering one's face is not a requirement in Islam but this just shows how great their love for God is. If you want more information about which parts of the body are permissible or prohibited to expose you can find them here and here. You may also find this link of interest (Hijab is the name of the standard veil that covers all the required parts of the body that need to be covered)

Peace,

Osman

Kernel

Osman wrote:

if it was a few years ago, on seeing someone wearing a burka I would most probably feel the same way as you. But now, after acquiring more knowledge of my religion, I feel admiration for those who have the courage to wear it no matter what other people think. For a woman, covering one's face is not a requirement in Islam but this just shows how great their love for God is. If you want more information about which parts of the body are permissible to expose you can find them

Indoctrinated.

Most parts of the body are permissable to expose according to the Western countries were the people live - don't push your Sharia on us mate! That's why freedom is such a great thing, and not something any in the west will give up easily (like Bush). There's nothing brave about a woman wearing a burka, they're pressured into it usually by the kind of peer pressure described by desiredbard's train incident.

As for the topic of the thread, that monster called political correctness has gone mad again, and we really need to stop pandering to the needs of the vast minority of our societies and grow some balls. If someone moves into our western countries then they have made a choice to live here, and we shouldn't be expected to change our way of life to suit them. That's not racism, that's common sense.

Hobbes

Kernel wrote:

why freedom is such a great thing, and not something any in the west will give up easily

So freedom to wear a burka a bad thing? I always wonder why people get hung up on this while ignoring other issues.

we shouldn't be expected to change our way of life to suit them. That's not racism, that's common sense.

But then that makes you no different then the person who comes to the country and refuses to change. Things work out better when cultures mix instead of demanding that one follow the other. Do you not see the irony in proclaming freedom yet demanding people follow your culture?

Beer is Life

Hobbes wrote:

So freedom to wear a burka a bad thing? I always wonder why people get hung up on this while ignoring other issues.



But then that makes you no different then the person who comes to the country and refuses to change. Things work out better when cultures mix instead of demanding that one follow the other. Do you not see the irony in proclaming freedom yet demanding people follow your culture?

Do you really expect us to give up our rights just to accomadate a MINORITY? Why have minorities in this country got a louder voice than the majority? It offends me that you expect me to change my life in my own country, just because it offends foreigners.

Hobbes

Beer is Life wrote:

Do you really expect us to give up our rights just to accomadate a MINORITY? Why have minorities in this country got a louder voice than the majority? It offends me that you expect me to change my life in my own country, just because it offends foreigners.

What rights are you giving up exactly? Not to have pig toys in work? Are you a council member?

Kernel

Hobbes wrote:

So freedom to wear a burka a bad thing? I always wonder why people get hung up on this while ignoring other issues.

No, freedom to wear it is fine, or freedom not to wear it. Freedom is the key thing, when muslims start expecting every girl to dress like a victorian schoolteacher, then they are the ones restricting freedom.

Hobbes wrote:

But then that makes you no different then the person who comes to the country and refuses to change. Things work out better when cultures mix instead of demanding that one follow the other. Do you not see the irony in proclaming freedom yet demanding people follow your culture?

No, I don't have to change in fairness, I have no problem with cultures mixing, it is healthy and good for a society, but mixing cultures does not mean pandering to the minority. In this case it is muslims who are demanding one culture follow another.

People can choose whatever path they want, once it doesn't restrict the freedoms of others. If I want to worship a pig, eat pork, dress up like a hooker, then I'll do it, when groups of fundmentalists start complaining about how we have always lived then they begin to restrict our previous freedoms and liberties. What's next, renaming Christmas to 'The Holidays' because some few foreigners have a problem with that, just like they do with a pig toy?

If I go to a muslim country, I respect the laws and customs of the land, I don't drink, I wear what is appropriate etc.. Likewise, when they come here, they can't expect us to give up our rights to accomodate their beliefs.

Kernel

Hobbes wrote:

What rights are you giving up exactly? Not to have pig toys in work?

Well, yes in fairness. If I want a pig toy in work, why not? It reflects more poorly on the religious intolerant nutters who complained about it, than anything else.

Pig toys today, Sharia law tomorrow.

Frank Grimes

Kernel wrote:

No, freedom to wear it is fine, or freedom not to wear it. Freedom is the key thing, when muslims start expecting every girl to dress like a victorian schoolteacher, then they are the ones restricting freedom.

What Muslims are expecting this out of interest? (leaving aside fanatical ramblings of an extreme minority)

Likewise, when they come here, they can't expect us to give up our rights to accomodate their beliefs.

You're assuming all Muslims in the West are immigrants, this is not the case.

Wibbs

Kernel wrote:

No, freedom to wear it is fine, or freedom not to wear it. Freedom is the key thing, when muslims start expecting every girl to dress like a victorian schoolteacher, then they are the ones restricting freedom.

Nail on the head there. There's a definite whiff of thin end of the wedgism with some aspects of this. It's down to respect and it goes both ways. Much of our obsession with tolerance is very one way. Islam in particular seems to be treated with kid gloves by some in the west(in many ways rightfully as the majority are blamed for the excesses of the minority). Then again if a new faith came along with the same attitudes towards women as Islam, it would be slated far more.

bonkey

Kernel wrote:

If I want a pig toy in work, why not?

And if one of your workmates beings in something you find offensive....I dunno....a graphic calendar of bombing victims or something....you'll have no problems with them hanging that in your line of sight?

There's a distinction between giving up your freedom and having sensitivity towards the feelings of others.

jc

Wibbs

Sensitivity fine. PC capitulation not so good.

Frank Grimes

Wibbs wrote:

Sensitivity fine. PC capitulation not so good.

How would you differentiate between the two then?

Wibbs

Respect and freedom. Kernel's line sums up one aspect of it

Kernel wrote:

freedom to wear it is fine, or freedom not to wear it. Freedom is the key thing, when muslims start expecting every girl to dress like a victorian schoolteacher, then they are the ones restricting freedom.

If a Muslim can disapprove of how a western woman dresses and calls into question her morality, why can't I disapprove how a Muslim woman dresses and call into question the morality of a culture that feels women need to be "protected" in this way? Why can someone object to a piglet, yet I can't object to the restriction of women in Islam without drawing fire?

Rev Hellfire

Personally the whole pig thing is a total red herring and has been stated before, such a ban says more about those who implemented it than it does about islam.

What is missing in all discussions is mutual respect, something which is typically missing on both sides.
Surely you would expect your co-workers to show some sensitivity when someone finds something offensive in this case a pig. But equally it should be remembered that the burka is offensive the garb within our society.
Anyone can insult or cause discomfort unintentionally, the issue is when they are informed of this and refuse to attempt to compromise. Something to which the (more extreme) Islamic practitioners are guilt of with the siege mentality that seems to be evident at times on this forum, as indeed are elements of western society with their scaremongering.

bonkey

Wibbs wrote:

Why can someone object to a piglet, yet I can't object to the restriction of women in Islam without drawing fire?

Do you understand what their objection to the piglet is?

jc

bonkey

Rev Hellfire wrote:

But equally it should be remembered that the burka is offensive the garb within our society.

Why is it?

I am in no way offended by the burka. Does that make me not a part of society? In a minority?

Can you show me any research which indicates that I'm in a minority and that your opinion is the majority's?

I would object to anyone being forced to wear it. I don't necessarily swallow the whole "its a woman's choice" argument because it smacks a bit too much of it being a woman's choice to not have a job, stay home and raise kids before emancipation, but I'm in no way informed enough to know that this is the case for every (or any) muslim woman who wears it, so I can't find the item itself offensive.

If I did, I would probably find all worn religious symbology offensive - including wedding rings.

Hobbes

Rev Hellfire wrote:

But equally it should be remembered that the burka is offensive the garb within our society.

So if you were talking to a woman who was wearing a burka you would be offended by this? How?

Rev Hellfire

I would be offended because it is not acceptable behaviour in our society to not see the face of a person. There is no denying within western society it is seen in general as unacceptable garb and makes people uncomfortable. Now I do recognise that the intention of wearer may not be to make me or others uncomfortable, but the end result is not the same.
I would like to make clear I have no issue with the hijab or islamic dress in general I would be equally uncomformable talking to a woman with a paper bag over her head.

Beer is Life

Kernel wrote:

I have no problem with cultures mixing, it is healthy and good for a society

Just out of curiosity, and im not trying to start anything, where do you get that from? Im just wondering because all i ever see are negative effects.

Kernel

Frank Grimes wrote:

What Muslims are expecting this out of interest? (leaving aside fanatical ramblings of an extreme minority)

Many of them... but in this particular instance I'm referring to the case mentioned earlier of girls in Holland being mocked as prostitutes for wearing normal western clothes. It is the goal of Islam to have Sharia law, however, so you cant use the 'extreme minority' excuse too quickly either.

Frank Grimes wrote:

You're assuming all Muslims in the West are immigrants, this is not the case.

No, but most are, so I'm generalising. Once again, pandering to the wishes of the minority. So in your opinion, when making a statement about muslims coming into a country, I have to say something like: muslims coming into a country and those few who are already citizens or have adopted the muslim faith? There is such a thing as too PC.

bonkey wrote:

And if one of your workmates beings in something you find offensive....I dunno....a graphic calendar of bombing victims or something....you'll have no problems with them hanging that in your line of sight?

There's a distinction between giving up your freedom and having sensitivity towards the feelings of others.

Freedom is a two-way street. I might not like what someone says/believes or brings to work, but if it's not against the laws of the land, then I accept it. As supporters of freedom of speech say; 'I may not like what you have to say, but I will die for your right to say it'.

If I'm a fundamentalist Christian and someone wears a Slayer t-shirt with satanic symbols on it (which happens where I work) then I don't complain about it, I don't tell the guy he's offending me and shouldn't wear it, instead I recognise his right and his freedom to wear it. Free society is a wonderful thing.

Wibbs is right, political correctness gone mad. :rolleyes:

bonkey

Rev Hellfire wrote:

I would be offended because it is not acceptable behaviour in our society to not see the face of a person.

I guess living for some time in a country where winter conditions make not being able to see the faces of people a normal reality for several months of the year has changed my views on that.

I would see that offence as a failing of our society, personally.

Incidentally, I take it that you find Halloween offensive as well? All those kids calling at your door wearing scary masks?

jc

Kernel

Beer is Life wrote:

Just out of curiosity, and im not trying to start anything, where do you get that from? Im just wondering because all i ever see are negative effects.

I take your point, but in a healthy society, some controlled integration benefits the society. If another culture is closer to the home culture, it's easier to integrate, but even totally different cultures can mix well if there is respect and freedom.

Take a good metropolitan place like Canada, voted one of the best places to live and total ethnic diversity. If Ireland didn't mix cultures, you would be eating spuds and carrots, in a boring and non-vibrant country, with less interesting things to do, a less powerful economy with a less qualified or effective workforce.

bonkey

Kernel wrote:

If I'm a fundamentalist Christian and someone wears a Slayer t-shirt with satanic symbols on it (which happens where I work) then I don't complain about it, I don't tell the guy he's offending me and shouldn't wear it, instead I recognise his right and his freedom to wear it.

You could ask him not to wear it because you find it offensive, and accept his decision.

Free society also gives you the freedom to complain as loudly and as vehemently against his wearing of it too.

Free society is a wonderful thing.

Only when people recognise the limitations of it.

jc

Kernel

bonkey wrote:

I guess living for some time in a country where winter conditions make not being able to see the faces of people a normal reality for several months of the year has changed my views on that.

I think western people find it more offensive because in western opinion it degrades the woman. The key thing is, in western opinion - since I'm sure many of those women don't know any better, or are indoctrinated since birth into believing covering up is good.

Kernel

bonkey wrote:

You could ask him not to wear it because you find it offensive, and accept his decision.

Free society also gives you the freedom to complain as loudly and as vehemently against his wearing of it too.

It certainly does, of course some complaints have more weight than others, thanks to our old friend, politcal correctness. If I did complain, and the company (for fear of offending my beliefs/law suit) told people they couldn't wear such things to work, then I'd be restricting peoples freedom to suit my own belief system, which is something I am against. Therefore, I would not complain. I am tolerant. The people who complained about toy pigs, ergo, are not tolerant.

bonkey wrote:

Only when people recognise the limitations of it.

jc

What do you mean by that? What are the limitations of a free society?

Rev Hellfire

To answer your questions if I was been addressed by someone on a cold winter day wearing a balaclava or any other grab which totally hides their face I would expect them out of courteous behaviour to remove it, this applies to all adults.

As for children wearing masks on Halloween I do not find it objectionable since:
a) They are children and wearing of masks is acceptable for them.
b) That is traditional behavour for that night.

Just as society kshould within reason try to accommodate emerging cultures, these cultures additionally have a responsibility to be aware and respect the dominate culture they are within. Both must come to an understanding which may require compromise on both their parts.

Additionally I dare say that my opinion is the more common one, while yours which is certainly the more accommodating and open one is not representative of Irish society as a whole.

Hobbes

Rev Hellfire wrote:

Additionally I dare say that my opinion is the more common one, while yours which is certainly the more accommodating and open one is not representative of Irish society as a whole.

I'd agree with that. I've lived in a few different countries so I am more used to accepting other peoples cultures then it seems most other people I know in Ireland.

Although comparing winter clothing to religous beliefs is hardly the same thing.

Frank Grimes

Kernel wrote:

Many of them... but in this particular instance I'm referring to the case mentioned earlier of girls in Holland being mocked as prostitutes for wearing normal western clothes. It is the goal of Islam to have Sharia law, however, so you cant use the 'extreme minority' excuse too quickly either.

The goal of most Muslims isn't to force Sharia law on non Muslims.

There is such a thing as too PC.

It's not about being too PC. Your arguments seem to be based around your opinion that all Muslims are immigrants and therefore need to abide by "our" rules. If Muslims are born and bred in the West does their opinion/beliefs not count for anything? (and please don't pick some nutcase as an example of a Western Muslim)

bonkey

Kernel wrote:

What do you mean by that? What are the limitations of a free society?

Show me a truly free society, and you'll have your answer.

Every society places limitations on its freedoms. We have societies that are relatively more free than others, but every society still has limits.

Even within those, you still have the awkward situations where one freedom clashes with another, and ultimately one or both must lose out to some degree.

Both must come to an understanding which may require compromise on both their parts.

I agree. Thats why I've already started moving towards that compromise position, rather than standing on the more common societal outrage that others haven't made their compromises first.

Additionally I dare say that my opinion is the more common one, while yours which is certainly the more accommodating and open one is not representative of Irish society as a whole.

Exactly affirming the point I made in my previous sentence.

jc

Wibbs

Frank Grimes wrote:

The goal of most Muslims isn't to force Sharia law on non Muslims.

Is not one of the goals of Islam that an Islamic state is the ideal solution? The Quran/Hadith/Sharia contain both the intent and the framework to buildd such a state. While many liberal Muslims may not be in too much of a hurry to sign up for that, the intent is present in Islam. The restoration of the caliphate would be a goal of the more politicised, especially with regard to Europe.

If you look at somewhere like Pakistan. It was formed as a secular state in the 40s, by 1998 it became a country where Sharia law was in force. Bangladesh is going the same way. Nigeria is another example where Sharia law is in force in the Muslim part of the country. Look at Turkey which has a growing number of outspoken Muslim clerics calling for a return to the Islamic fold. Egypt has similar problems. The idea of "one nation under Islam" is a pervasive one.

If Muslims are born and bred in the West does their opinion/beliefs not count for anything?

Of course they do. That's the advantage of our democratic system. An advantage that's something to be proud of and worth defending.

Frank Grimes

Wibbs wrote:

Is not one of the goals of Islam that an Islamic state is the ideal solution? The Quran/Hadith/Sharia contain both the intent and the framework to buildd such a state.

I did not say that wasn't the case, did I? I was talking about Muslims not forcing their religion on people, not the establishment of an Islamic state.

While many liberal Muslims may not be in too much of a hurry to sign up for that, the intent is present in Islam. The restoration of the caliphate would be a goal of the more politicised, especially with regard to Europe.

What makes a Muslim "unliberal" for wanting to live in an Islamic state?

If you look at somewhere like Pakistan. It was formed as a secular state in the 40s, by 1998 it became a country where Sharia law was in force.

Pakistan is a Muslim country, why does it surprise you that Muslims might want to live under an Islamically based system of laws?

Of course they do. That's the advantage of our democratic system. An advantage that's something to be proud of and worth defending.

Is it all their opinions or just the ones that correspond to "Western" beliefs?

Wibbs

Frank Grimes wrote:

I did not say that wasn't the case, did I? I was talking about Muslims not forcing their religion on people, not the establishment of an Islamic state.

What's the difference. In an Islamic state for example all other religious displays would be illegal. Women of other faiths would be safer in Islamic dress lest they find themselves thought of as immoral. In some interpretations even music would be proscribed. Would many non Muslims want to live there? While it's not a direct way of forcing faith on someone, it's a pretty good way of forcing ones moral codes on those who may not agree.

What makes a Muslim "unliberal" for wanting to live in an Islamic state?

Because one could contend that an Islamic state is hardly a byword for liberalism. Not by a long way. The seperation of church and state in such a nation would be unthinkable at worst and extremely difficult to achieve at best. If it wasn't why not have a secular state in the first place?

Pakistan is a Muslim country, why does it surprise you that Muslims might want to live under an Islamically based system of laws?

Well it started off secular and then changed into a Sharia law driven Islamic state where the views of the secular and other religious faiths are largely ignored. Why not stay a Muslim secular state and let the views of the minority at least have some voice?

Is it all their opinions or just the ones that correspond to "Western" beliefs?

When their opinions don't correspond to the western ideal of a liberal state where all views are considered valid then I have a problem with it. They should have their opinion, but it shouldn't preclude or obstruct those who disagree with them. In an Islamic state that would be a difficult balance to strike, if achievable at all.

Frank Grimes

EDIT: On second thoughts, forget about it - too OT.