UK politics - Hamsterwheel
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 69
Posts: 412
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.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 70
Posts: 925
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.
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.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 69
Posts: 412
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.
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.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,439
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.
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.
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: South Beds
Posts: 82
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?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 56
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by KelvinD
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.
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.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 69
Posts: 412
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).
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).
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 64
Posts: 1,941
Originally Posted by VP959
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.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 70
Posts: 925
Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose
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.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,143
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.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 64
Posts: 1,941
Originally Posted by sitigeltfel
The "sisters" are strangely silent. Feminism has been exposed as a sham, created solely to denigrate and destroy the white male.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 44
Posts: 2
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.
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.
One of the main causes of poverty in this country is debt not low income/benefit payments. The extortionate credit interest charged to keep people in a perpetual spiral of debt is scandalous. Many families who would otherwise have an adequate income are trapped in a never ending cycle where all they can afford to pay each month is the interest and none of the capital. This is of course the aim of these predatory lenders.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Richard Burtonville, South Wales.
Posts: 2,094
where all they can afford to pay each month is the interest and none of the capital. This is of course the aim of these predatory lenders.
CG
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 69
Posts: 62
I'm not blaming the poor, because it's a concomitant of their overall situation but bad money management is often at the heart of it. Driving back from Stansted last night with my son when his gf phoned. She wanted him to lend her money to lend to a work colleague who has got herself into debt.
The cause of this debt? She threw a lavish Halloween party. Well I regard it as lavish when you are buying kids special outfits for a single evening when your rent is overdue. Of course there are all sorts of pressures on parents, many of whom are virtually kids themselves. It's the system innit?
The cause of this debt? She threw a lavish Halloween party. Well I regard it as lavish when you are buying kids special outfits for a single evening when your rent is overdue. Of course there are all sorts of pressures on parents, many of whom are virtually kids themselves. It's the system innit?
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,143
Aw, bless.....only UKIP could claim a "good result" by coming, erm, second.... a mere 13000+ votes behind the winner....!
Conservatives win Sleaford by-election - BBC News
And yes, I have noted, before the rattle banging and collective dribbling begins, that, both Labour and the Lib-Dems didn't exactly gain a significant number of votes.....not unsurprising however in a constituency which would vote for an amoeba if it wore a blue rosette.
Conservatives win Sleaford by-election - BBC News
And yes, I have noted, before the rattle banging and collective dribbling begins, that, both Labour and the Lib-Dems didn't exactly gain a significant number of votes.....not unsurprising however in a constituency which would vote for an amoeba if it wore a blue rosette.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 70
Posts: 925
The BBC this morning keep saying that UKIP came a distant second, with emphasis on the word "distant". Only through gritted teeth do they mention that Labour fell from second place to fourth. It must hurt the poor dears to have to admit it!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 430
Originally Posted by KnC
... not unsurprising however in a constituency which would vote for an amoeba if it wore a blue rosette.
I agree with sitigeltfel, those who live off our TV Licence fees must find life very difficult these days, i.e. they have to live off the money taken from people who are ... who are ... more ... right wing than they are!! (They must struggle to get words like that out!)
