Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK politics - Hamsterwheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK politics - Hamsterwheel

Old 5th Dec 2016, 10:43
  #7661 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose View Post
I disagree as both 'sources' are not the ones you would usually associate with this kind of article.

The articles say nothing that anyone with an open and enquiring mind had not already worked out and confirms the reasons why the 'silent majority' take the easy route of remaining silent because talking about it always sees the race card being played.

My particular favourite is trying to get the 'talking head lib lefty's' to explain their acceptance and understanding of Islam when you consider the manner the religion treats it's women folk, the toxicity of the question has them scampering for cover every single time.
That was my point, precisely, but better made.

I would have expected calls for greater religious freedom, and the protection of the rights of the Muslim minority to behave as they wish, to come from the left, not a condemnation of the way in which this particular religious group ignore our laws and impose their own.
VP959 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2016, 11:24
  #7662 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,385
My particular favourite is trying to get the 'talking head lib lefty's' to explain their acceptance and understanding of Islam when you consider the manner the religion treats it's women folk, the toxicity of the question has them scampering for cover every single time.
Now you're stereotyping.....

You can be a Guardian reader - I guess a bit of a "lefty/lib", whatever that is, and yet still agree with Dame Louise Casey's comments.

For the record I read the Guardian at times - I also agree with a lot of what is in the Casey report. I also agree with you that some on the left and centre have been far too silent when it comes to this issue.... but I also don't agree with some of the right wing solutions...
wiggy is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2016, 11:36
  #7663 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,945
I am not sure I am stereotyping. I am simply pointing out, as was alluded to by another poster and the articles I linked to that simply mentioning Islam generally has 'talking heads' playing the race card rather than enter into uncomfortable debating territory.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2016, 13:04
  #7664 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 67
Posts: 896
The Greens were offered £250,000 not to stand against the Libdems at the Richmond by-election.

Green Party 'Offered £250,000 Bung Not to Stand in Richmond' - Guido Fawkes Gaia Fawkes

The Greens gained 3,500 votes at the 2015 General election and when they did not stand at the by-election, the Libdems won by 1,900 votes.
sitigeltfel is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2016, 19:08
  #7665 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,431
It's not only political parties that get offered dodgy donations and choose to turn them down, eg universities have similar issues.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2016, 23:18
  #7666 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,945
Now we have Ze Germans making an emphatic statement about non integration

Angela Merkel endorses burka ban 'wherever legally possible' - BBC News
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 05:49
  #7667 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 926
About the UK, you know, that wonderful island we inhabit, the one viewed by so many on here through red, white and blue tinted glasses......

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...rking-families
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 06:37
  #7668 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 707
I think Sharia courts are an abomination and should be reined in. And the same applies to Beth Din but nobody ever complains about that. So, it seems fair to me that the government should either deprive both organisations of their court type functions and allow them both to continue to function as places for their religious points to be argued, pr let them do what they like. I would prefer the first option but only if it is applied equally to both organisations.
And as for Frau Merkel, she is sounding like a politician grasping at straws to ensure her personal success. Personally, I find the full face covering looks bloody stupid. However, I don't see it as some sort of threat to my well being. If someone wants to look stupid, then let them. What right does a government have to to tell people how to dress?
KelvinD is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 08:47
  #7669 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 369
The covering of one's face I find unacceptable. I ride a small motorcycle, and there are loads of places where I have to remove my helmet so that my face can be seen. There are damned good reasons for this in places like banks, shop and garage checkouts etc. It annoys the heck out of me that I have to take my helmet off so that the cashier and CCTV can see my face, yet some woman with her face veiled doesn't have to do the same.
VP959 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 10:10
  #7670 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 67
Posts: 896
On BBC R4 this morning, a single mother with two kids was moaning about her low wages, benefit payments and the struggle to make ends meet.
At no point did the interviewer pose the question, "what assistance do you get from the father(s) of your children?"

It probably didn't even cross his mind to consider this.
sitigeltfel is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 12:28
  #7671 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 369
It does seem crazy where signs saying "motorcyclists please remove your helmet" are very common and perfectly legal, but if anyone was to put up a sign saying "please remove any veil or face covering", for precisely the same reasons as the remove your helmet sign, it would cause outrage.

Being able to see a face to identify a person, or to better determine their intentions, seems something that is an essential requirement to me. It's nothing at all to do with racism or religious intolerance, it's plain common sense.

In practically every day-to-day transaction there is a degree of trust between those making the transaction, and a large part of that trust is based on being able to see the facial response and reactions of those making the transaction.

Am I going to wholly trust someone who'd face I cannot see? No, I'm not. It's not irrational, racist or any form of bias, it's based on the fact that we have evolved to judge emotions and reactions from looking at each other's faces.
VP959 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 12:34
  #7672 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,431
I think Sharia courts are an abomination and should be reined in. And the same applies to Beth Din but nobody ever complains about that.
Churches also have their own ways of doing things.

For example, until very recently the Catholic church's approach to priests being involved in child molesting was to hold their own investigation, rap them on the knuckles (very lightly indeed), and move them to another parish. It's only the last couple of years that it's occurred to them that they ought to involve the authorities in actual, y'know, crimes.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 13:12
  #7673 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: South Beds
Posts: 73
Can anyone explain why a political party with nine MPs that garnered a little over 7% of the popular vote at the last general election are given so much airtime and provide 'spokesmen' to comment on issues that had their opinions been believed in 2015 would see them with more MPs?
WilliumMate is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 13:32
  #7674 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 54
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
I think Sharia courts are an abomination and should be reined in. And the same applies to Beth Din but nobody ever complains about that.
I think the phrase “Sharia Courts” is often misused. Under English law, it is permissible for civil disputes to be resolved by alternative forms of arbitration providing all parties concerned are agreeable.

The crucial thing to my mind is that a) any judgement passed does not breach English law, and b) the participants are not bullied into use of Sharia or other religious systems for cultural reasons.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 14:54
  #7675 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 369
I also think that most so-called "Sharia Courts" are, in fact, Sharia Councils, with a far wider remit than just to decide on things like divorce or civil disputes.

The main issue that's arisen from the Casey Review is that these Sharia Councils are exclusively male and frequently impose rules on their community that are contrary to UK law.

They are highly respected within their community, so when they make rulings, such as that it is acceptable for a man to forbid women to go outside his house without his permission, or it is acceptable for a man to require that all women in his house dress in a certain way, or even that is is acceptable to prohibit women from driving a car, the community accept these rulings as if they were law.

On the positive side, Sharia Councils can act as arbitration bodies and act quite sensibly when it comes to resolving disputes that might otherwise escalate and end up in court.

It all comes down to how radical each is. Here, I've been assured that our local Sharia Council only really acts as a dispute arbitration body, and to dissolve marriages (something that has to be done in this way, as Islam does not accept divorce unless it has been agreed in this way, apparently).
VP959 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 16:54
  #7676 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,945
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
The main issue that's arisen from the Casey Review is that these Sharia Councils are exclusively male and frequently impose rules on their community that are contrary to UK law.
Its that bit about this religion that troubles me most, women have absolutely no say in the manner with which they live their lives and their whole lives are lived at the behest of men and for the life of me I cannot work out how anyone can defend it.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 17:13
  #7677 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 67
Posts: 896
Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose View Post
Its that bit about this religion that troubles me most, women have absolutely no say in the manner with which they live their lives and their whole lives are lived at the behest of men and for the life of me I cannot work out how anyone can defend it.
The "sisters" are strangely silent. Feminism has been exposed as a sham, created solely to denigrate and destroy the white male.
sitigeltfel is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 18:03
  #7678 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 926
Since some of you are in the "all chaps together" mode, and quite what the direct relevance of the posts referring to that much loved topic on here....."anything to do with Islam is bad " has to do with UK politics is beyond me......thus, I hate to spoil your party, but, when it comes to women's rights and status, something about glass houses and stones springs to mind.....a little closer to home...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...at-work-report

" The "sisters" are strangely silent. Feminism has been exposed as a sham, created solely to denigrate and destroy the white male" .


Siti !

An absolute classic old boy ! .....tis now the 21st century by the way, women have the vote no less !....some of them even captain aircraft !...( feel free to take a stiff G n T here at this, presumably, revelatory news )

However, I do, truly regret I am not in a position to socially introduce to several ladies I know, who would, I assure you, be delighted to listen, in complete silence of course, as befits their perceived status by your omnipotent self ( white male ) before, alas, "educating" you as to the error of your ways....which would be a somewhat steep learning curve for you and, I have to say, would leave me convulsed in laughter.
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 18:10
  #7679 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,193
I have no problem with women flying aeroplanes - they just need a man to park them...



PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 20:22
  #7680 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,945
Originally Posted by sitigeltfel View Post
The "sisters" are strangely silent. Feminism has been exposed as a sham, created solely to denigrate and destroy the white male.
Probably the worst of the bunch when it comes to apologists. The only subject matter they steer well clear of is the how and why Muslim women are treated as they are by their men folk.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.