-
Of course, it's a nonsense religion and you'd be deeply suspicious of anyone who believed in it
But not only is our country ruled by a monarch, that monarch is the head of a religion and I seriously doubt we could ever be anything resembling a secular - or at least theologically ambivalentor equivocal - country until that changed.
But no, Monty will also blame that on the Muslims too. Because they didnt have the good grace to see we were heading to a secular state sometime after 2050 and abandon their religions when we invaded their countries back in the 1780s, before we partitioned their country along meaningless lines and tempted them back over here to work nightshifts in the factories that served the last death rattles of our dying textile industries.
-
Satirical political cartoons, you see. Sailed very close to the wind indeed.
In the original French, at least. Most of the characters were in fact caricatures of well-known contemporary figures.
-
I don’t mean to be rude, but is there any chance you can f**k off out of this thread?
You’re like a toddler tugging at his parent's arm and demanding peppa pig while they're trying to have a conversation with another adult.
-
It's still 24% short, isnt it? Anyway, you know where this sort of nonsense polling comes from
You arent stupid enough to believe it when it doesnt fit your agenda so stop wilfully dumming yourself down to believe this **** when it does.
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-...29f72284c07084
-
But this isn't a secular country and works well
It has a state religion. And more
than half the country profess some belief in a deity.
I don't believe in this idea that 'secularism' is in and of itself inherently superior to a society with religious underpinnings. I think the tendency to lump all religions together as equally evil is pretty wrongheaded.
I don't care what people believe, I care about how they act. I do not seek to make a window into men's souls, as a wise lady once said.
-
Seems a rather mean way to describe your Easter hols, doesn't it, r?
-
Truly sickening.
Please god I will have got over this by lunchtime as I fancy a falafel but not sure at this moment I could stomach it.
-
He's so often rather beastly to me. I don't understand it.
-
I agree that belief in a deity is not in and of itself a problem
but lack of belief in a deity is the only guarantee of avoiding it becoming one and must therefore be the aim of every progressive society.
And I have said already that all religions are not equally evil.
-
We're talikng about religion, SW. Let's leave God out of it, shall we.
-
Yes but crucially it does sort of hole the idea of blaming the whole religion below the water line
You seem to find no moral problem with taking out a whole village of them in an air strike, calling the people who scream for "death to the inidels" as barbaric and evil. Then when the next terrorist atrocity happens over here you call for whatever the turn-em-to-glass de jour is with a straight face.
How's that for moral relativism?
-
Radical Islam didn't come from the Indian subcontinent, j. It came from the Middle East.
You don't think the Burqa is a Bengali or Pakistani garment, do you? No, it's a Saudi fashion that has caught on and deliberately radicalised what were moderate muslims to such an extent that it has almost become the mainstream.
So I'm afraid this isn't one you can lay at the Raj's door. This has been a choice taken by large groups of muslims in this country.
-
Ok, let's leave the polls as we can always question their veracity
But let me ask you, do you believe - instinctively or anecedotely - that many or some moderate Muslims hold values and beliefs about women and freedom of speech that are in conflict with those that we can agree are pillars of contemporary western society?
-
I'm aware of Wahabism, b
I was poking fun at the idea of "all those muslamics, coming over here".
Not only as we'd managed to sujugate their entire continent but also as a great deal of the islamic immigration in this country was people being invited over to prop up failing industry, which subsequently failed anyway.
-
Yeah, but you believe in Arsene Wenger
And Arsene Wenger Himself believes in "belief".
Ultimately it's all about how you manage the thing.
-
Yeah, those poor disenfranchised PhD students who flew those planes into the Twin Towers
-
But they're still coming, j. That rather hurts your point, doesn't it?
-
No I'm not! There was that one unfortunate incident, I admit.
But that was just a slip.
-
Of course, they had a proud history of enthusiastic subjugating themselves, didn't they?
-
Not many moderate ones, no
Quite a lot, but not all, of the first generation ones do though.
The thing is, since the turn of the century I've seen a hardening of positions on both sides with "modern secular" fundamentalists one one side and traditional muslims on the other entrenching further into positions of mutual suspicion and mistrust. You only have to look at the whole Trojan Horse hysteria to see how that actually materialises in real life.
I'm trying to point out just how unhelpful to the whole idea of defeating isis this thing about all muslims being accountable is but I dont seem to be making headway.
-
I mean, themsleves doing the subjugating. Not subjugating themselves.
That would just be silly.
-
oh the irony..you constantly arm grabbing look at me pathetic imbicile
living off your wives wages as some kind of house husband..pathetic cnut
-
Oh, very well. Bermuda's alright, if you're with a saucy blonde wife.
Remind me to take one with me next time :-|
-
Eachother, certainly. Does that make it better that we did it?
That we formed a company specifically to do it?
-
Have you been on Chief's crack pipe, s?
Calm yourself, old boy. It's 11 a.m. on a Tuesday. Save some rage for the weekend.
-
My only issue with Bermuda is that it's in the Atlantic.
Isn't the sea a bit nippy?
-
The Mughal empire wasn't as bad as the British Empire, though. Apparently it's fine when brown
people colonise and oppress other brownpeople. See also, the Ottoman Empire. It's only OK to blame white Western imperialism for stuff.
-
I know, it's as if 150 years of removing all their resources didnt help them at all
-
19 of the 21 were Saudis, how do we look upon the Saudis, eh?
-
You're a businessman; would it be better if people offered up your services for free?
-
We’re not really talking about religion.
We’re talking about fanatical lunatic mad**** killers.
Religion is often an excuse which people will use to attach to wars and conflict. Sectarianism in Northern Ireland is pinned on religion but in reality it is not really based on the fundamental differences between the two religious ethos, us being good and them being bad.
-
I don't know how to break it to you, but monty isn't actually David Cameron.
You've got yourself confused, now.
-
That's a shame, I was going to ask him about his crooked dad and the secret bank accounts
-
It's not a question of 'better', it's a question of why liberal historiography always begins at the
point where you can blame whitey and never goes back any further for its explanations.
Also, your tale of the poor oppressed Indians who were dragged over here to be oppressed further is rather f**ked by the fact that people of Indian Hindu extraction represent one of the most successful immigrant groups ever to have come to this country, while sub-continental muslims are still largely rat poor and ill-educated. This does suggest there's something seriously f**king wrong with their culture that has nothing to do with their 'oppression' by us.
-
There is a crucial distinction between me saying that all Muslims are accountable for their actions
(which is what I actually said) and actually holding them to account (which is what you prefer to think I said).
All I am actually doing is advocating that we fully acknowledge the nature of the problem, so that we can at least reach a point where we are allowed to say that a moderate, law-abiding Muslim who believes that the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists were wrong to depict Muhammed *is* part of the problem, without being called a bigot.
-
Neatly swerving of the point, there.
-
See, I think it mustve been the use of the word 'implicate'
Because that sort of points to being involved in a crime, which then presumably would lead them to at least in some way be worthy of censure.
Taking my devil's advocate/the whole of reasonable society mantle off for just a moment and speaking in a personal sense. Do I think the CH guys should have been able to depict mohammed? Yes. Do I think they should have? No.
Not sure where I stand in your moral spectrum there. Perhaps I've now been implicated and should be judged with all the muslims.
-
It was less of a diversion than yours, in fairness
And I think it also goes to show how we treat people differently based on their worth to us.
These muslims, prolific funders of the worst terror groups, perpetrating a violent war against a neighbouring country using arms we sold them and home to the vast majority of the 911 bombers get trained by our armed forces, sold more weapons and bunged more bribes.
We dont know what we're arguing for or against here.
-
The Saudis are revolting c**ts with whom we very unfortunately have to do business.
The alternative, of course, would be for us to undertake regime change. I - personally - would prefer that and from your attitude must assume that you would too.
However, I do wonder how the muslim world would react to GIs and squarddies trampling all over the holiest sites in Islam. http://www.awimb.com/images/smiley_icons/ohwell.gif
-
Whether or not they should have depicted Mohammed is of such irrelevance that I literally have no
idea why you would even bring it up.
Can you explain why you did?
