dennispenn wrote: » Islam. The whole lot of it is incompatible with the western world.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » We'll played. *rolls eyes Normal = "the norm" If you regard Saudi and Yemen as normal, we've a serious problem on our hands.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » Well there is your problem. You see anybody that doesnt act like you as abnormal.
fxotoole wrote: » “Those who trade freedom for security will have neither” - Benjamin Franklin
suicide_circus wrote: » good quote. the difference between America and Western Europe in this context is that The US still has a modicum of self esteem and a belief in the value of its way of life.
Odhinn wrote: » Aye. I've been working on a project - a halal pub - for some time. "An Irish Solution to An Irish problem" is our working title.
Deleted User wrote: » Ahh, but that's the thing. This isn't about accepting others. That happens all the time in western culture. This is about accepting their culture has equal (and in some ways, a superior claim for acceptance) to/than our own culture. All the while, not expecting them to accept our own culture while they're here. This is the main point. We wouldn't be having these problems if Muslims could accept western culture and live as per western practices. If they did, then they would be the same as the millions of Asians who live in western countries and we never hear a peep about them being difficult. They're accepted. Their religious or cultural practices are being followed, but there is no expectation that everyone else has to conform to them.... instead, typically, they integrate to a degree and keep their habits personal. So, yes, we are being idiots. To allow another culture to grow in our countries that has never even suggested that it would tolerate western habits.... It's idiotic that we are simply assuming that they will because that's generally what Modern Europeans do in other countries outside of Europe.
kikidelvin wrote: » Who makes all these hijabs and burqas ?.They could be made here in Ireland.Create some jobs.
FTA69 wrote: » I think the niqab is a crock of sh*t, and it's not actually representative of Islam as a whole. It's a Saudi garment that is indicative of fundamentalist Salafist Islam, something which is actually deeply hostile to ancient Muslim traditions across the world. Look at traditional clothing in places from India to Kurdistan, the idea of a woman swarthed head to toe is nowhere to be seen. And while most women choose to wear it, it's still a garment designed to limit women. Many women in Ireland chose to obey their husbands and believe their only job was to pump out good Catholic children - it doesn't mean that was progressive for women's place in society as a whole. That having been said, banning it isn't going to achieve anything. In France they banned an Islamic swimsuit and we're treated to the farcical scene of cops arresting grannies for *not* baring flesh at the beach. Proscribing a woman's clothes and banning her from wearing stuff isn't going to stop the spread of radical Islam and nor is it going to liberate anyone. It's just going to foster a "them and us" mentality and push people further into the radical camp. At the end of the day, as negative as it is, a woman walking down the road in a veil isn't going to do you any harm.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Let them Where its normal. E.g. Saudi. Yemen. Etc.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » or, you know, they want to interact with it on their terms. You seem to think there is something wrong with that.
Grayson wrote: » You're taking the comparison out of context. Someone said the burka affects the ability to identify someone (Or at least that was one of the ways to interpret it as it wasn't quite clear). I said that other things such as halloween do too. I'm not saying that they are the same. I'm saying that when it comes to the ability to identify someone there are plenty of times when we can't, like halloween, but no-one is asking to ban all of those. They don't wear it at home because that's the rule. The same goes for amish and jewish women. The same goes for Sikhs and their turbans. they're not worn 24 7. As for whether or not it's a rejection, I don't think so, but I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole because... ....It doesn't matter. We can't start making laws dictating what people should wear based on culture. We can't start drafting in laws based on culture full stop. We draft laws based on public safety and well being. And as I've said, a law banning the burka is as stupid as a law mandating it. We shouldn't even go there. It's a bad law to make That's what matters. The fact that we shouldn't start drafting in culture laws at all.
bubblypop wrote: » How so? Islam doesn't run this country. Religion doesn't dictate the laws.
Malayalam wrote: » They might have some competition with the Jains (Kidding) Even Morocco bans the Burqa...gave the stores 48 hours to get rid of all stock. Because Salafists were posing a threat to the moderate government, and this was one way to nip extremism in the bud. Maybe people on the ground in these countries who don't have the luxury of armchair debate might know a thing or two we don't about this area, I reckon.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Just the very idea of a "truly Westernised majority Muslim country" is so laughable. It's like saying you have a completely well trained and housebroken hyena.
Danzy wrote: » ( I always view it as having being in most of the world much stricter in adherence though that most other faiths. Added after Malayalm thanked post, so they may or may not agree with this line).
Danzy wrote: » Jordan would be one of the few and that is only at the higher levels of state. Its views as a Society as a whole are very regressive but it is by no means the worse. Everywhere in North Africa (bar Morocco to a degree), the Arabian Peninsula can only be described as profoundly bizarre and repressive societies. Much of the Islamic world was moderated by outside influences say by native religions, Hinduism, Buddhism in Indonesia and were relaxed about the faith, that is changing as outside influences are stripped out and the entire faith returns to a more original form.( I always view it as having being in most of the world much stricter in adherence though that most other faiths. Added after Malayalm thanked post, so they may or may not agree with this line) This return to fundamentalism has been growing for 90 years now and will keep going for as much again. The religious revival in the Southern United States started over 170 years ago and is still red hot.
bubblypop wrote: » Yes there are, it's come up time & time again on these anti Islam threads.
Malayalam wrote: » It's not an ''anti-Islam'' thread though there may be a few extreme voices. It really isn't and should not be dismissed so easily. I appreciate a great deal about Islam personally, I love the poetry of Rumi, Kabir, Attar and Ibn' Arabi, and am presently making my way (albeit very slowly!) through the entire works of Rene Guenon who was a famous western convert to Islam, and whose opinions I find very enlightening. I think many people who worry about extremist theocratic Islam have a good appreciation and respect for regular noble Muslims and, for some, even their faith.
Malayalam wrote: » I am kind of tired of ending up feeling like some right wing monster for having real concerns about fundamentalist religion being fostered surreptitiously in liberal societies, and enabled because we don't want to offend. The evidence regularly surfaces about extremist preaching and materials and online groups and quiet jihad. You know this. How do you respond?
bubblypop wrote: » I live in a Majority Muslim country, it's perfectly westernised. No issues.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » At Halloween A festival of dressing up. Of customer and masks. Where grown ups give kids sweets. Its a brutal comparison in fairness. We're talking about burkas in Dublin (And presumably inter alia Ireland) Couldn't give a toss what/how they dress in Saudi. They're not rejecting themselves. They're rejecting you. Or in other words, it's a barrier to prevent you/them having contact with each other. Why they do it? No idea. But that's with it is. A barrier to prevent contact. If it was so important to express their faith, why it wear it the whole time? Why only remove it at home? Because proponents of it regard women as chattel. Property of the men of the family. And it's the most regressive, fundamentalist Muslims that wear it. We were in Milan a few years ago. We werent let into a catholic church because the wife had shorts and shoulders uncovered. Id shorts. Wasnt a bit offended. If you want to come into a place, you should respect the "house rules." If we shouldnt be prescriptive of what people are allowed wear , should we also allow people to wear as little as possible. You'd be ok with a moving his lawn buck naked next door to a school. Where are your lines drawn?
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » There's no such thing and you are kidding yourself.
dennispenn wrote: » Do you think that I am kidding? Is Islam compatible with Western society? I've a feeling that you know very little about It and it's teachings. Islam will eat itself up when It conquers the world. Look for ancient map's of Islamic countries,then compare it to modern day maps.
DChancer wrote: » I'm usually offended by racists ,bigots, the ignorant looking for a scapegoat ,xenophobia and right wing white supremist nutjobs
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9c6ef39403f5dc93bd4b9e77a11c1821.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)
