France successfully bans the Burqua

[tom502]

Walking around with what is basically a mask, that isn't even upheld by any so-called religious text, should not be allowed. Try wearing a ski mask next time you go to the bank.

[tom502]

And more importantly, immigrant need to adapt to their host nation, not force the host nation to adapt to them. When in Rome.... If they love their mask so much, they should not have moved to a secular nation.

[shikitohno]

And more importantly, immigrant need to adapt to their host nation, not force the host nation to adapt to them. When in Rome.... If they love their mask so much, they should not have moved to a secular nation.

True, but it seems rather stupid that a nation that sort of sells itself as being very tolerant of others and promises freedom of religion will quickly back peddle when it doesn't like how you choose to make use of those rights. It'd be like if you were Jewish, and Japan said, "You can be as Jewish as you want! Come over here." before you arrived, and when you show up they go "Oh my god, there's a man wearing a funny hat so small, he needs hair clips to hold it on his head! Let's get to making that sh¡t illegal!"

[Premium Parrots]

guess I can't wear a burka and hang out in the womens restrooms anymore.

[tom502]

Stop stealing my lines!

[visiON]

guess I can't wear a burka and hang out in the womens restrooms anymore.

Only in France.... You can still do it in the US

[Premium Parrots]

Stop stealing my lines!

sorry Tom but it WAS one of the funniest things that you've posted. I figured if you don't say it....then I will. lol

[tom502]

Rael: ‘Banning minarets isn’t enough! Islam itself should be banned!
Debate surrounding a proposal to ban construction of minarets in Switzerland is something Swiss Raelians are following very closely. They deplore the fact that the heart of this controversy has been sidetracked by focusing on physical towers and minarets when the real debate is the philosophy behind these symbols.
“Those supporting the proposed minaret ban are the very same people who refuse to serve Raelians in bars, or to rent them conference rooms,” said Chris Antille, spokesperson for the Swiss Raelian Movement. “They are also the same people who deny Raelians the right to organize philosophical debates, and they have even refused our spiritual leader, Rael, the right to reside in Switzerland!”
Antille said such denial of fundamental rights constitutes a violation of basic freedoms guaranteed by accepted international accords.
“Although the Raelian teachings are in perfect harmony with the Declaration of Human Rights, the Swiss authorities refused Rael’s right to stay on Swiss territory,” he said. “To justify that refusal, they used the pretext that Rael’s teachings ‘could cause a public disturbance.’ ”
Nothing could be further from the truth, Antille said, adding that those who actually do present just such a risk are not singled out.
“If there is one philosophy that totally contradicts the Declaration of Human Rights, that philosophy is Islam,” Antille declared. “Rather than attack the Raelian philosophy, which advocates non-violence, the Swiss government should demand that Muslims living on Swiss territory remove those parts of the Koran that promote racism, discrimination and violence.”
[He went on to cite several examples taken directly from the Koran. See below.]

In a speech given in 2006, following events linked to some controversial caricatures of Mohamed, Rael described what the International Raelian Movement has called “a pronounced lack of reciprocity in terms of basic human rights.” Here is what he said:
“It’s shocking to see Muslims imposing double standards in our modern societies. For example, they request the right to build mosques in the West, and to preach in them so they can convert a maximum number of people to their religion. And all citizens [in the West] are free to convert to Islam.
“But in Muslim countries, construction of churches is forbidden, and anyone preaching a non-Islamic religion is guilty of a crime punishable by a long-term prison sentence. Those who convert to another religion – thus apostatizing from Islam – can be sentenced to death.
“These are double standards. As long as absolute reciprocity [concerning freedom of religion] is not adhered to, Muslims should not benefit from the freedom in Western countries that they refuse to visitors in their own countries. Therefore, for as long as it remains illegal in Islamic countries for atheists and those of other religions to proselytize, Muslim proselytizing should likewise be forbidden in Western counties.”
In the same speech, Rael also described the fanaticism that certain Muslims develop when applying teachings of their sacred texts.
Only one solution can counter the extremism that breeds violence and hate, he said.
“Forbid any religion that teaches violence or racial and ethnic hatred,” Rael declared.
He added, “We would never accept a political party that advocates such hatred, and it would be immediately forbidden. Why then accept such a position from a religion, which conditions the behavior of younger generations far more than a political party does? We must therefore forbid the Islamic religion as long as Muslims continue these horrible teachings that are internationally illegal.”
In a statement released on Tuesday, the college of Swiss Raelian Guides asked that Swiss authorities and Swiss citizens “start acting less like cowards and more like representatives of a responsible state that guarantees fundamental freedoms.”
The remainder of the statement stated, in part:
“To be ‘politically correct’ in Switzerland right now means defending the right of Muslims to build minarets while at the same time attacking cults and refusing them use of conference rooms. This position obviously discriminates against philosophical movements not dating from the Middle Ages.”
The Swiss population should unite and request that all religious texts promulgated on Swiss soil be validated by an independent committee that would assess such texts in terms of their accordance with the Declaration of Human Rights. The committee would then issue recommendations based on those assessments.
If Swiss Muslims agree to follow the committee’s recommendations, they could thereafter benefit from all rights and privileges granted to Swiss residents. But if they refuse to comply and continue to condone the practice in Muslim countries of denying freedom of religion within their borders, then reciprocity should be applied and the practice of Islam should be forbidden on Swiss territory, including all symbols of this religion, such as the minarets.
For more information about Rael’s position on militant Islam (which of course is also the position of the International Raelian Movement) see: http://fr.raelpress.org/comment.php?comment.news.75
*Here are a few of the more explicit extracts from the Koran, as cited by Antille:
Koran Sura IX .5
“Kill all the infidels everywhere you find them, capture them, besiege them, and create ambushes. However, if they convert, if they give money ….. Then let them go in peace, because Allah is forgiving and has pity on them.”
Koran Sura V, 51
“Oh believers, do not become friends with any Jews or Christians, because they are their own allies. Anyone who becomes friends with them will become like them and God cannot be a guide to such a pervert.”
Koran Sura IV,34
“Men are superior to women, thanks to the qualities which God has endowed on them in order to raise them above women. Reprimand those women whom you fear are not obedient, banish them to separate beds, and beat them.”
http://raelianews.org/news.php?extend.384

[sgreger1]

I don't shed a tear for these people.




In Italy, a Muslim woman has been killed by her husband for opposing her daughter's arranged marriage. The daughter was gravely injured after being attacked by her brother

And France ain't playing that shit:

French woman faces fine for tearing niqab from tourist's face

"I think it is unacceptable for the niqab to be worn in the country of human rights. It's a muzzle," she said.


Meanwhile:


Obama running secret prison's in Afghanistan. Prison abuse similar to guantanimo alleged.

[tom502]

Islam should be illegal in the same countries that make the Nazi party illegal, or Nazi-esque religious groups illegal. Islam is the worst thing going on in the world right now. Of course there may be individual Muslims that are decent "modern" people, but as a whole, Islam simpley cannot exist in a free modern society.

[sgreger1]

Islam should be illegal in the same countries that make the Nazi party illegal, or Nazi-esque religious groups illegal. Islam is the worst thing going on in the world right now. Of course there may be individual Muslims that are decent "modern" people, but as a whole, Islam simpley cannot exist in a free modern society.

That's actually a great question, why is nazi'ism illegal but Islam is not? Are they not very similar in nature? They believe ina superior "race" and all others must be eradicated, they want to "take over the world" by bringing forth the caliphate, they are militant. I don't see the difference between the two?

[truthwolf1]

They will take over and do it by numbers. Especially in Europe, and when that fills up in the next two decades they will be fighting with the Mexicans for neighborhoods in the USA. Muslims verses the Mexicans in gang wars.

This is going to HAPPEN.

[Roo]

Islamophobia (ie. Islam+phobia, "fear") is prejudice against, or an irrational fear of Islam or Muslims.[1] The term seems to date back to the late 1980s,[2] but came into common usage after the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States to refer to types of political dialogue that appeared prejudicially resistant to pro-Islamic argument.[3] In 1997, the British Runnymede Trust defined Islamophobia as the "dread or hatred of Islam and therefore, to the fear and dislike of all Muslims," stating that it also refers to the practice of discriminating against Muslims by excluding them from the economic, social, and public life of the nation. It includes the perception that Islam has no values in common with other cultures, is inferior to the West and is a violent political ideology rather than a religion.[4] Professor Anne Sophie Roald writes that steps were taken toward official acceptance of the term in January 2001 at the "Stockholm International Forum on Combating Intolerance", where Islamophobia was recognized as a form of intolerance alongside Xenophobia and Antisemitism.[5]

The Runnymede report identified eight perceptions related to Islamophobia:

1. Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.
2. It is seen as separate and "other." It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.
3. It is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist.
4. It is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, and engaged in a clash of civilizations.
5. It is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.
6. Criticisms made of "the West" by Muslims are rejected out of hand.
7. Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.
8. Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal.[22]

The above perceptions are seen as closed views on Islam. These are contrasted, in the report, with open views on Islam which, while founded on respect for Islam, permit legitimate disagreement, dialogue and critique.[23] According to Benn and Jawad, The Runnymede Trust notes that anti-Muslim discourse is increasingly seen as respectable, providing examples on how hostility towards Islam and Muslims is accepted as normal, even among those who may actively challenge other prevalent forms of discrimination.[24]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia

[sgreger1]

The Runnymede report identified eight perceptions related to Islamophobia:

1. Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.
2. It is seen as separate and "other." It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.
3. It is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist.
4. It is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, and engaged in a clash of civilizations.
5. It is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.
6. Criticisms made of "the West" by Muslims are rejected out of hand.
7. Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.
8. Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal.[22]

The above perceptions are seen as closed views on Islam. These are contrasted, in the report, with open views on Islam which, while founded on respect for Islam, permit legitimate disagreement, dialogue and critique.[23] According to Benn and Jawad, The Runnymede Trust notes that anti-Muslim discourse is increasingly seen as respectable, providing examples on how hostility towards Islam and Muslims is accepted as normal, even among those who may actively challenge other prevalent forms of discrimination.[24]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia

Lol, Roo. Can you dispute any of these 8 points with any evidence? Let's go down the line



1: Islam is very static, and does not recognize or accept any of the western social institutions such as drinking, women's rights, all races created eqaul, freedom to practice religion, homosexuality, etc.

2. While they may have some values in common with other cultures, they are few in number.

3. I wouldn't label anything as "inferior" to something else, as that is all based on your perception of the world. However, barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist are all excellent words to describe it. Please provide any evidence that this is not the case.


Here is my evidence that it is the case:


Barbaric/Primitive: Stoning people for adultry, honor killings of own family members, killing gays due to their sexual orientation


Irrational: They will riot if 1 redneck burns a quoran in America, yet they routinely burn bibles and christian religious symbols, and persecute christians in general.


Sexist: One of the most sexist of all religions/political structure, women are forced to live life as an underclass of society. While the Quran seems to put the women in a very holy role (them being the life-giver and all), it has devolved into a scenario where women are little less than chattle. They have almost no rights, you are allowed to beat them, they can be stoned to death for the smallest of offenses, usually can't opt to get a divorce etc.


4. Violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism? Also all true. Not all Muslims though, only perhaps 1/2 of muslims are like this, but that is still a lot. Mass riots, murdering of innocents, ethnic and religious "cleansing" and genocides, praise for successfull terrorist attacks etc have all fed into people catagorizing them in this way. It is really no one's fault but their own.


5. It is a political ideology. Islam today is very much like Christianity under the Catholic church during the dark ages. It serves less as a religion and more as a political control structure than anything.


6. Criticism of the west by muslims is valid. We have been poking them with a stick for a long time. I'm not surprised they're pissed at us. Them and the rest of the world. Oh well, our stick is bigger.


7. "Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society" - This one I don't agree with. As much as I don't perosnally like them, freedom and rights are inherent to any human, from the most humble to the most violent to the most stupid.


8. Anti muslims hostility seems natural and normal because a) the war on terror has gotten everyone into the "fear muslim" trend, just like they did with the commies, the nazis, and the japs before them. b) because muslims have been extremely violent in the past 50 years. Blowing up embasies, naval ships, marketplaces, innocents, malls, skyscrapers etc. I can see why they have gained a bad name for themselves.



Normal people are willing to give a pass up to a certain point, but Islam has carved the line out in the sand and made sure everyone knows where they stand. They deserve what they get.




Bottom line: The problem is that here we have a group of people that are by and large the most racist, intollerant, violent, militant, closed minded people on earth, and they are trying to tell us that we need to be tolerant of them. Meanwhile, they are never tolerant of anything, and continue to dig the whole deeper for themselves at every chance they get. They are the kind who will shoot their wife, blow up a christian church, and then show up at a protest complaining about how the west isn't being tolerant of their religion.


Everyone should have rights and freedoms, but I certainly don't feel bad for people who bring it on themselves. They shit in the bed and now they have to lay in it.





Notice how a few whackos in the tea party have cast a negative light on the entire republican party? Notice how just 1% of people acting a certain way causes everyone even remotely related to that group to be catagorized as "right wing militia extremist christian nuts"? Same thing with islam. When 10% of them are acting crazy, and the other 90% seem to support it, they all get lumped into one group of crazies.


Funny though, because I don't ever see you defending the tea party or calling people who attack them any kind of names or accusing them of some phobia. It's almost as if it's okay for 1 group to do it, but not another. Odd.

[sgreger1]

Whoever wrote this definition of Islamophobia is just trying to create shock factor and has not based his definition off any sort of fact, especially for this:

5. It is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.

Umm, is stating facts islamophobic now?

From wikipedia:


Religion and state
Mainstream Islamic law does not distinguish between "matters of church" and "matters of state"; the scholars function as both jurists and theologians. In practice, Islamic rulers frequently bypassed the Sharia courts with a parallel system of so-called "Grievance courts" over which they had sole control.



What next; Islamophobia: claiming that the sky is blue, and that 2+2=4.


Roo, you know when people here talk about muslims, they are talking about the majority of people living in the middle east, not the westernized ones which are muslim in name only. The only radical muslims are muslims who actually practice the religion actively, and even then it's only about half of them that act in this manner that makes people hate them.







I mean really, in the US that guy who said he was going to burn a quoran (but didn't) got the worst negative press ever, yet Muslims can routinely do things a million times worse, actually killing innocent women, homosexuals, children, hell they could burn a church to the ground and the news wouldn't spend more than a few minutes on it, BECAUSE IT IS SO COMMON.


I didn't hear you defending the guy who wanted to burn the quoran. Are you christophobic?




Sura 9:14 "Fight them and God will punish them at your hands ... God will make you victorious over them";[42]