-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="572141" data-time="1460599864"><p>Are you saying it does not matter if change is good or evil? Because change happens?<br>
That appears to be what you are saying.</p></blockquote>
<br>
I don't know how I missed this post. <br><br>
Only appears that way in your micro world BSG. <br><br>
I'm saying that the multiculturalism change happening in New Zealand is acceptable to<br>
Me -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="572255" data-time="1460620937">
<div>
<p>I contend that MC is here to stay and in fact most of us if not all have spent our entire lives in multicultural societies and that MC is not going away and will become more prevalent.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I also wonder if the ills of MC aren't forced down our throats as we buy saris to wear, grab tacos and stir fry and kebabs to eat. Are we living in our world or in tv world? Serious question.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>It is a great vehicle to leap on a bandwagon that spouts "you're the problem, yes all of you, and if you fuck off we'll all be rosy again" A little bit like the KKK doctrines IMO</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Amidst MC in the UK and Europe, certain Islam ghettoes have risen and people are making observations about nations within nations and the youth "flocking" (presumably more than one in a thousand) to join jihadi groups and there is a " danger of sacrificing a generation of young British people to values that are antithetical to the beliefs of most of us, including many Muslims" (a generation? fuck! You mean every british kid? fuck!) </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I contend that MC isn't to blame as much as a disenfranchise with British society, and a British way of life. The same shit that plagues all countries in 2016. I say this because non muslims join up</p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't want to get in between the participants here, but can I just point out that the multiculturalism that the Daily Telegraph, who wrote the article BSG linked to allude to, is not simply multiple cultures living together. It's an ideology-driven set of policies that encourages different cultural groups to live alongside one another without requiring, or even encouraging, integration or interaction. New Labour in the UK specifically moved away from policies which encouraged "interculturalism" and formally adopted a model that encouraged cultural uniqueness and diversity.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's interesting, Siam, that you point out the rise of Islamic ghettos in the UK, as these have risen in part due to national and local government policy. It was well-intentioned but in retrospect it doesn't appear to have been the best idea because it meant that different ethnic and religious groups didn't have to even try and understand each other, as they were enabled to live large parts of their lives without leaving their own immediate community.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But New Labour came into power nearly 20 years ago, and in the interim you have a generation of children born into these "ghettos" that's now in its late teens, who like the feeling of belonging that such a setup allows but bemoan the inevitable downside: they can't readily fit into a workforce they have avoided training for and never interacted with, and they resent the impact on their lives. What you call disenfranchisement is to some extent simply people wanting to have their cake and eat it. They have chosen to avoid the outside world but somehow think it nevertheless owes them a living, or at least a job. I imagine that young people who live like this are easy pickings for fiery talkers who give them someone to blame and an easy answer.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>From that perspective the experiment has indeed been a failure I think.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I suspect the bainlieues of Paris aren't much different</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="572265" data-time="1460623744">
<div>
<p>I don't know how I missed this post.<br><br>
Only appears that way in your micro world BSG.<br><br>
I'm saying that the multiculturalism change happening in New Zealand is acceptable to<br>
Me</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>
Micro world because I asked you a question to clarify? err ok</p>
<p>Your clarification makes far more sense than the original.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="JC" data-cid="572270" data-time="1460624781">
<div>
<p>I don't want to get in between the participants here, but can I just point out that the multiculturalism that the Daily Telegraph, who wrote the article BSG linked to allude to, is not simply multiple cultures living together. It's an ideology-driven set of policies that encourages different cultural groups to live alongside one another without requiring, or even encouraging, integration or interaction. New Labour in the UK specifically moved away from policies which encouraged "interculturalism" and formally adopted a model that encouraged cultural uniqueness and diversity.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's interesting, Siam, that you point out the rise of Islamic ghettos in the UK, as these have risen in part due to national and local government policy. It was well-intentioned but in retrospect it doesn't appear to have been the best idea because it meant that different ethnic and religious groups didn't have to even try and understand each other, as they were enabled to live large parts of their lives without leaving their own immediate community.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But New Labour came into power nearly 20 years ago, and in the interim you have a generation of children born into these "ghettos" that's now in its late teens, who like the feeling of belonging that such a setup allows but bemoan the inevitable downside: they can't readily fit into a workforce they have avoided training for and never interacted with, and they resent the impact on their lives. What you call disenfranchisement is to some extent simply people wanting to have their cake and eat it. They have chosen to avoid the outside world but somehow think it nevertheless owes them a living, or at least a job. I imagine that young people who live like this are easy pickings for fiery talkers who give them someone to blame and an easy answer.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>From that perspective the experiment has indeed been a failure I think.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I suspect the bainlieues of Paris aren't much different</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Thanks for clarifying better than I have about the differences of multiculturism between Europe and here.</p> -
<p>Interesting point JC and yes the methodology of New Labour (can we now re-name this Outmoded Labour?) smacks of social engineering. Interesting too that in the article quoted by BSG the protagonist, while admitting that these policies have not worked is simply suggesting more social engineering, just in a different direction. Would www really want to place our trust in those that have signally failed in the past despite their apparent qualifications of being:-</p>
<p> </p>
<p>1. Human rights commissioner</p>
<p>2. Black</p>
<p>3. Political activist for (his view of) multiculturalism</p>
<p>4. Left wing politician</p>
<p>5. Populiser of the term "Islamophobia"</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't much like these discussions as they often bring out the worst in people who are in the main quite normal. I hate it that people that normally I would be happy to argue a point with exhibit blatantly sectarian views or others that seem ignorant of how PC policies and outlooks in the west are causing so much discord. I sometimes wonder if some of you guys actually take in anything the other side are saying or just stick with your views.</p> -
<p>Ok, I'll start of slowly for these replies:</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="572026" data-time="1460577833">
<div>
<p>Except you guys have just shown you didnt actually read the article I linked to.</p>
<p>It was a direct quote from the article form the ex Human rights and equalities commissioner in the UK he was also a left wing politician. </p>
<p>So claims it is an incorrect thread title is frankly a bit silly and just trying to deflect.</p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>You decided on this thread title. You chose a quote with a word with a broad meaning (especially down here in the Southern Hemisphere) and applied it to something specific. Then you wrote post after post about Islam. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Calling the title incorrect isn't deflecting from anything, I discussed the data in the article - which in turn should alert you to the fact I did read the article..</p>
<p style="font-size:12px;background-color:rgb(247,247,247);"> </p>
<p> </p>
<p style="font-size:12px;background-color:rgb(247,247,247);"> </p>
<br><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
<p> </p>
<p style="font-size:12px;background-color:rgb(247,247,247);"> </p>
<p> </p>
<p style="font-size:12px;background-color:rgb(247,247,247);">As for shouting down,... classic Bullshit form those wanting to close down debate. The only attempting shutting down of debate in this thread is coming from those who think that there is nothing wrong with Islam.</p>
<p style="font-size:12px;background-color:rgb(247,247,247);"> </p>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't want to shut down debate, but in general not much debate tends to go on in these types of threads - although I will say this particular one has seen more actual polite debate than similar ones. I don't think anyone on this thread has said there is <em>nothing</em> wrong with Islam. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="572096" data-time="1460593741">
<div>
<p>Great post in total Nepia, but I can't agree with you on the above. But I don't want to diverge this topic, so I'll just say that in my opinion, the above is just flat out wrong.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I think it's ok to diverge the topic, there's a few diversions already. I'm actually interested in what is actually flat out wrong in those two comments - remembering that I was discussing the multicultural aspects of Singapore's society and not solely immigration. Plus, I'm pretty certain that Sweden has been frequently brought up in similar threads - but of course I'm way too lazy to search for it. </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="572128" data-time="1460596764">
<div>
<p><strong>People need to draw a distinction between Islam and Muslims.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Islam is the ideology. Muslims are the people. You can attack Islam without attacking Muslims - I think that point is lost on a number of posters here. It's great that you know plenty of Muslims who "interpret" Islam differently to the fundamentalists and that they are lovely people that would never hurt a fly. I know plenty as well. But that doesn't mean I won't criticise their religion as being fundamentally flawed. As Sam Harris said, the only reason Muslim fundamentalism is a threat to us is because the fundamentals of Islam are a threat to us. If most Muslims do not agree with the fundamentals of their religion then their religion is badly flawed. This point cannot be overstated.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Comparing Maori (race) with Islam (idea) doesn't work. </strong>There is no ideology that Maori follow that states it is OK to abuse children. There is a very clear directive in Islam to destroy all infidels (I.E. non-believers or believers of another religion). Why should we tolerate an ideology that preaches intolerance?!</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Islam is not the only religion I will criticise harshly, but it is by far the most violent of the modern religions. They are all based on absolute nonsense and they all cause huge issues in society. A Christian and a Muslim may "tolerate" each other, but they will also look down on each other as following the wrong God etc. By design that creates tension and conflict. Dispelling the myths of religion is one of the most important issues facing man kind today IMO.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I think you're guilty of not doing the bold when responding to my comment - I specifically discuss Muslims not Islam, and Muslims as a 'group' (ideology or not they can be grouped) - like any religion, not all Muslim's interpret the religion in the same way - why do Western nations tolerate the Christian ideology that preaches intolerance? And here is where you and I agree, lets criticise the religion, but lets not criticise all the people who follow that religion. And to reiterate, my point was that the stat that 47% of respondents thought Muslims should do more to combat terrorism wasn't really relevant to anything. </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">Re: multiculturalism. Problems will always arise because you are taking two different groups of people with different beliefs and asking them to find a middle ground. There will be conflict while that middle ground is found. Some cultures will mix better then others. When you mix Islam into Western culture, the beliefs are so different that a middle ground simply cannot be found, and the conflict escalates as we are seeing in Europe.</blockquote>
<p>The differences between Roman Catholics and Protestants, and both groups with Jews at certain times in history have been as big I assume you think the people of the West and Muslims are right now. I agree there will be conflict while middle ground is found and I think history bares that out with a bunch of peoples.</p> -
"And here is where you and I agree, lets criticise the religion, but lets not criticise all the people who follow that religion."<br><br>
Problem is how do you criticise the religion without it being perceived as an attack on, you know, the people who actually follow that religion? -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="572289" data-time="1460631500">
<div>
<p>"And here is where you and I agree, lets criticise the religion, but lets not criticise all the people who follow that religion."<br><br>
Problem is how do you criticise the religion without it being perceived as an attack on, you know, the people who actually follow that religion?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I don't know if you can without some of that religion seeing it as an attack on them, but, more to the point, why did you wait until I posted and not when NQ posted the original to ask? ;)</p> -
<p>I think in all of these the core issue - <strong><em>what's the best way for a country to manage its immigration policies in a "we just care about the result, we don't care about appearing PC" way </em></strong>gets lost.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's a very big issue for NZ because we are, to a degree, at the stage many other countries were a long time ago. For Europe the problem is that first bit, but also how do we fix the massive fuckup. For NZ we haven't <em>quite</em> made the massive fuckup yet - tho' we are moving in that direction.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As BSG & JC that whole "no need to integrate, your culture & beliefs are important, stick with them even here" bullshit that Tony Blair pushed through has been a disaster, and for Europe the answer feels like that has to be reversed, and that will be painful as a whole generation have been brought up in that - multiple generations in France. So you will literally end up with the riots that hit France a few years ago when they tried to step into the Banliues.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But also the immigration policies that led there need to change too.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Tho' for Europe changing the immigration policy is only a tiny bit as they literally cannot close their doors in the way NZ or England can. So those migrants are coming, and you start sinking the boats & killing them, you make their home countries nice, or you intergrate them. Only one of those is feasible. And its as expensive as fuck.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="572261" data-time="1460623193">
<div>
<p>Multiculturalism has failed. It is a failed policy in the UK, in the sense that multiculturalism is used in the article. Fundamentally you have admitted that as you are talking about solutions, if there wasn't a problem, you wouldn't need solutions.</p>
<p>So many western countries have a problem, you are talking about solutions to the existing problem, some of your ideas are good. But it is ambulance at the bottom of the cliff stuff. What is the point in integrating 100 migrants a day if you are also concurrently alienating 500 via either a dangerous ideology or new migration?</p>
<p>I have never said existing residents should be removed, what I am saying is turn off the tap! Sort he current shite out... and then analyse what went wrong that you needed to put so much effort into stopping immigrants or children of immigrants from hating the country they live in.</p>
<p>I actually agree that criticizing a religion would not work to change heavily religious peoples minds. They are set, but it is very possible to temper moderates opinions, and to show that a barbaric ideology exists with Islam. I know this true because it has already occurred within Christianity. The fact that any criticism of Islam as a doctrine is attacked so aggressively is an incredibly strong sign that extremism will flourish.</p>
<p>It has got to the point where even arguing that Islam is the most dangerous mass followed doctrine in the world is seen as Islamophobia, Which is illustrative. </p>
<p>The Islamic ideology is aggresive and dangerous, not only in its texts.. but in its application in modern society, its aggressive assertion of superiority. Sure other religions had similar delusions, but they have all been criticised openly and to the point that where if any Christian priest spouted the things that many Immans spout.. it would be international news. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I think when you get to the point where any criticism of an ideology is denegrated, you have a serious problem. Combine that with a extremely expansionist ideology... add a touch of violence instructed by God.. and you have a massive problem. And then for the cherry on top... you import that into a western culture. :idiot2:</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>This is good Baron, thanks for it</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I actually don't live in the west, so really I think my views are actually skewed. When I think of minorities in the ghettoes, my references are generally cracking people who just have no real opportunities in life. The disenfranchised I know are quite energetic and possess a lot of potential and are generally pretty tolerant. Often they're great people who'd thrive if given a leg up.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Hence I don't think I'm able to comment about the western lifestyle with any real sense of authority (yeah we noticed )</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>However I do know that the trials and tribulations and fears of the western world pail into insignificance compared to life in developing countries. What middle class western people are "scared of" and the way the media select and treat events, injustices and tragedies is pretty disturbing. The coverage one incident gets over another is vastly disproportionate and to hear people say they fear terrorist attacks and disruption to their lives makes me shake my head. More chance of dying in your car.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The west doesn't have a monopoly on tragic unfair deaths - not even close.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Similarly when I see the vitriol for people and religions based on generalisations and TV coverage and hear peoples opinions of large groups of people tey've never known, I despair.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It sucks being told your way of life is shit when you ain't done nothing wrong by people who don't know you</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Having met fluffybunnys and great people from all walks of life, colour, religion and age I reckon that you can only judge on behaviour. Just my way of looking at stuff based on people I've met. It simplifies things IMO</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyway thanks to those who have contributed, I've learned from all of you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I got a timely reminder about priorities an hour ago while walking the dogs when an infant cobra reared up on me. I see snakes a couple of times a month, and usually their arses as they retreat but this little shit arced up and lunged a few times. I swung my 2 iron shaft at him (never liked that club) and eventually the little prick sauntered off with a fuck you "human" attitude. He didn't even know me ;)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>A reminder to focus on things directly in your eyesight and don't sweat the stuff you can't control</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="572290" data-time="1460631881">
<div>
<p>I don't know if you can without some of that religion seeing it as an attack on them, but, more to the point, why did you wait until I posted and not when NQ posted the original to ask? ;)</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Because you're the self-righteous one.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And that is a bullshit answer. You said yourself that it's ok to criticise parts of a religion. But how can you do that when Islam cannot be questioned or criticised in any way without Muslims being offended?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You make this out to be some kind of unfair attack on a persecuted minority. It isn't. It's criticism of the religion of that minority and questioning whether the beliefs of that religion are compatible with Western society. Do you not agree that these are legitimate questions?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Because some of these views might have been the norm in Western countries generations ago is a pretty crap argument for tolerating them in our societies today.</p> -
<p>I don't mean to trivalise the issues you have with immigration in your countries</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Is it irony that the dominant cultures in the west let people get away with stuff that wouldn't be tolerated at all in immigrants home countries?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Further proof that humans will push and push boundaries till they can't get away with nonsense, but by fuck they will if you let them</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="572299" data-time="1460634951">
<div>
<p> </p>
<p>The west doesn't have a monopoly on tragic unfair deaths - not even close.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>jeez aint that the truth... just one example from many</p>
<p>The Bam earthquakes .. killed thousands.... wiped out a ancient city.... and it got sweet fuck all coverage.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Another were the Pakistan floods a few years back.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And that doesn't even touch on the bombings in those countries. Paris and Brussels gets bombed and we get 24/7 news coverage,... happens in Pakistan.. one short news snippet. And I am as bad as everyone else. I think about it more than most I think as I have been to many of these places.. but do I comment on here as much about Peshawar bombing as a Brussels bombing? No. Is that because on some level I think Muslims bombing other Muslims is their own problem? Iprobably... but I am nto proud of that sentiment. But it also makes me think that we (the west) dont need to import that shite.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="572284" data-time="1460630230">
<div>
<p>I think you're guilty of not doing the bold when responding to my comment - I specifically discuss Muslims not Islam, and Muslims as a 'group' (ideology or not they can be grouped) - like any religion, not all Muslim's interpret the religion in the same way - why do Western nations tolerate the Christian ideology that preaches intolerance? And here is where you and I agree, lets criticise the religion, but lets not criticise all the people who follow that religion. And to reiterate, my point was that the stat that 47% of respondents thought Muslims should do more to combat terrorism wasn't really relevant to anything. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yup all of my posts have been harsh criticism of Islam, <em>not</em> Muslims. I've made that point over and over.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And the West doesn't really tolerate the Christian ideology that preaches intolerance. The West, generally speaking, have a very clear directive about separation of Church and State. Catholics are pretty much the butt of all jokes in the West nowadays. The problem with Islam is it is a political ideology. It is meant to be the law of the land - that is why those Muslims in my first post of this thread want to set up an Islamic State with Sharia law in Belgium. That's incredibly aggressive, to want to force all people in Belgium to follow your belief system and your laws.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I think most people on this thread largely agree with each other. The solutions that Siam posted will help and I agree completely, but I don't think implementing those solutions is mutually exclusive to criticising Islam or any religion for that matter. Religions are just ideas that need to be scrutinised. The more 'moderate' followers that turn their back on these out-dated belief systems the better we will be.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>My better half was raised very Catholic (PNG is a <em>very</em> religions country with 90%+ following Christianity). I repeatedly questioned her faith using Science (and also played her some George Carlin) until she realised what a crock of shit it all really is. Now she is quite angry that she wasted so much time with that bullshit. The more we openly question this stuff the more likely people are to turn their back on it.</p> -
<p>Anyone on here read persepolis?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Easily one of the best Graphic novels I have read.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's written as a sort of life story by a girl (Marjane Satrapi) who grew up in Iran during the Islamic revolution in the early 1980's. She's a bit of a rebel who is suddenly thrust into a veil and hates it. As did most of the population according to her. Really shows the average Iranian is not much different from you or me.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">In her foreword to the book, Satrapi demonstrates a deep love of her country and its cultured history. Part of her aim is to offset the West's view of Iran as a country of belligerent, fundamentalist fanatics and terrorists :</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:14px;"><span style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);">"I believe that an entire nation should not be judged by the wrongdoings of a few extremists. I also don't want those Iranians who lost their lives in prisons defending freedom, who died in the war against Iraq, who suffered under various repressive regimes, or who were forced to leave their families and flee their homeland to be forgotten"</span></span></span><br><br><span style="font-size:14px;"><span style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);">The book is basically a personal account of Marjane's childhood from aged 6 to when she left her home in 1984. </span></span></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyway, I know that it's not really on topic. But if anyone wants to read an unbiased account of what life in Iran was like during the revolution, it's definately worth a read. Being a graphic novel, it doesn't take too long to finish either :)</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="572324" data-time="1460665900">
<div>
<p> No. Is that because on some level I think Muslims bombing other Muslims is their own problem? Iprobably... but I am nto proud of that sentiment. But it also makes me think that we (the west) dont need to import that shite.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Agree on every single level. Took 4 pages, but I think we finally got the apex of the whole argument.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="572324" data-time="1460665900">
<div>
<p>jeez aint that the truth... just one example from many</p>
<p>The Bam earthquakes .. killed thousands.... wiped out a ancient city.... and it got sweet fuck all coverage.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Another were the Pakistan floods a few years back.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And that doesn't even touch on the bombings in those countries. Paris and Brussels gets bombed and we get 24/7 news coverage,... happens in Pakistan.. one short news snippet. And I am as bad as everyone else. I think about it more than most I think as I have been to many of these places.. but do I comment on here as much about Peshawar bombing as a Brussels bombing? No. Is that because on some level I think Muslims bombing other Muslims is their own problem? Iprobably... but I am nto proud of that sentiment. But it also makes me think that we (the west) dont need to import that shite.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>The one that shook me up yesterday is that its 2 years since 276 girls were kidnapped in Nigeria</p>
<p> </p>
<p>219 are still missing</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Can't even imagine the pain of the parents. That ain't religion or anti government strategy, that's just people being fluffybunnies of the highest order</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/04/14/boko-haram-kidnapped-276-girls-two-years-ago-what-happened-to-them/'>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/04/14/boko-haram-kidnapped-276-girls-two-years-ago-what-happened-to-them/</a></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="572300" data-time="1460635358">
<div>
<p><strong>Because you're the self-righteous one.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>And that is a bullshit answer. You said yourself that it's ok to criticise parts of a religion. But how can you do that when Islam cannot be questioned or criticised in any way without Muslims being offended?</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>You make this out to be some kind of unfair attack on a persecuted minority.</strong> It isn't. It's criticism of the religion of that minority and questioning whether the beliefs of that religion are compatible with Western society. Do you not agree that these are legitimate questions?</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Pull your head out of your arse, having a different view to you doesn't make me self righteous. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I criticise Islam to Muslims on nearly a daily basis ( have a Muslim flatmate and a couple of Muslim friends) - I've criticised Islam in this thread, I also criticise Catholicism to my Catholic mate as well. I'm sure I offend all of them at times, but that's alright, they say things that offend me as well. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>And no I'm not making it out to be an unfair attack on a persecuted minority, I'm not actually sure how you got to that.</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">Because some of these views might have been the norm in Western countries generations ago is a pretty crap argument for tolerating them in our societies today.
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Seriously, WTF are you on about? I didn't say because the we tolerated stuff generations ago we have to tolerate it now. I used a point about homophobia based on BSGs posted article to show that views can change between generations - and lets be clear here, lots of people in the west hold that exact same intolerant view. </p> -
Pull your head out of your arse, having a different view to you doesn't make me self righteous."<br><br>
Erm, I never said it did. And if you think it's legitimate to criticise Islam then what exactly is your issue with these types of threads? It's been made clear on multiple occasions that its about the religion. <br><br>
"I didn't say because the we tolerated stuff generations ago we have to tolerate it now. I used a point about homophobia based on BSGs posted article to show that views can change between generations - and lets be clear here, lots of people in the west hold that exact same intolerant view."<br><br>
And wtf is the point of that? Yes some people have stupid viewpoints in Western countries and yes generations ago your wife was expected to obey you and showing ankle at the beach was a sin. And so farking what? We're in 2016. People in Western countries who hold those views are ridiculed and marginalised. You can dismiss the results of the study with that kind of "logic", but I agree with the well-off black guy that they are a serious concern.
The Failed policy of Multiculturalism