Religious Intolerance

[Impactor returns 2.0]

the fact that the manner in which Nick Griffin was acting is already illegal and prosecutable?

As I understand it he was arrested for being racist, not for inciting religous violence. if he had chosen his words slightly more carefully he could still be heading the BNP.

the fact that with its original wording Rown Atkinosn woul dnot be allowed to do a sketch about an Imam looking for his contact lense and that under the originally proposed wording a judge would have no option but to sentance him if he did?

And you can still be hung for defacing the £ did u know. how likely do u think that is?
Actually ive been reading the law today, Rowan could do the sketch, because its the manner in which he performs the sketch, it still needs to go to a judge who has to decide if ROwan was trying to stir up religous hatred. poking fun is not the same thing.

faith in the law. blind trust in institutions is just as dangerous as blind trust in religous doctrine.

Well didt I open a hornets nest!
My faith in the law comes from hoping that police officers are trainned well enough to do thier job.
Should I live in a paranoid society, I mean do u have faith in a Nurse that she can adminster the right medicin in hospital, that a fireman can bring u down a ladder from a burning building correctly, or that the coastguard can find u at see.
Or do you have no faith as it would be blind, and are scepticle, how do u live life? do u get on a bus and worry the driver might go the wrong way? or that you ask doctors for 2nd opinions each time in case hes wrong?
You must have some faith. I have some in the law that they wont arrest for me questioning the existance of god. and will know that if I say "god is ****" they will know that its an opinion.

Its a law that would never effect you, its in place to take out total twats with ease. I dont have a problem with it.

[Best First]

the fact that the manner in which Nick Griffin was acting is already illegal and prosecutable?

As I understand it he was arrested for being racist, not for inciting religous violence. if he had chosen his words slightly more carefully he could still be heading the BNP.

doesn't alter the factg that there already exists legal powers to deal with the thing you claim the 'new' powers will focus on.

Andhe still is head of the BNP.

the fact that with its original wording Rown Atkinosn woul dnot be allowed to do a sketch about an Imam looking for his contact lense and that under the originally proposed wording a judge would have no option but to sentance him if he did?

And you can still be hung for defacing the £ did u know. how likely do u think that is?
Actually ive been reading the law today, Rowan could do the sketch, because its the manner in which he performs the sketch, it still needs to go to a judge who has to decide if ROwan was trying to stir up religous hatred. poking fun is not the same thing.[/quote]

but it would have been if the house of lords had not reworded the bill. see? And that's what didn't get passed - the original wording. And that's why it is a good thing.

And the fact that there are old stupid laws does not mean we need new ones.

Also - given that a signifciant proportion of the muslim world are going ape over a cartoon in a newspaper is pretty proposterous to claim that if words such as 'ridicule' had not been removed that noone would try and enforce this is clearly not true.

Should I live in a paranoid society,

No, you should live in an actively democratic one that asks questions of their leaders and institutions rathet than blindly following them like sheep.

Comparing questioning policy and the powers of those that enforce it to trusting an individual nurse to do her job underscores

Its a law that would never effect you

Whether something affects me is not my main criteria for scrutinising it - but then of course we are back to the concept of an actively democratic society aren't we? Soemthing some people seem to find a bit much effort.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

And the fact that there are old stupid laws does not mean we need new ones.

But im using the example as an extreme, your looking at the new law in its most extream form in that it could effect Rowan.A for making a joke.
I dont belive, like I dont belive anyone will arrested for treason of defacing the £, that Rowan would be charged either.

Interestingly the leader of the BNP has just walked out of court facing a re-trial, under the new laws he would be locked up. the guy is clearly a total arse, the video ive seen of him telling ppl that 'Muslims are told by the Koran to rape white women' is disturbing, but not actualy illegal.

Perhaps the new law needs to be tightened up, but I would like to think that someone cannot preach those words without reprecussion. I understand it requires someone to 'judge' how he was using it.
I could say it jokingly, and someone else could say it with intenet to cause religous hatred, when u have that kind of evidence on film, and perhaps other evidence to back up the nature of person in question this law would come into play.

it wasnt passed either way, but I understand what they were trying to gain power with. im sure it will be re-worded and put back through tho? arnt many laws?

[sprunkner]

maybe cos they felt left out.

True. Everybody else was doing it without a whole lot of scriptural precedent. Or maybe I forgot about that passage where Jesus said, "Love your enemies... and remember, blown-up enemies are easier to love!"

[Metal Vendetta]

I just think it's really ironic that these Muslims out in Gaza are all like "We are insulted that you depicted Mohammed as violent! To prove it's not true, we are going to indiscriminately kill people from your countries!"

Actually is that irony? Or is it just really ****ing stupid?

[Impactor returns 2.0]

I just think it's really ironic that these Muslims out in Gaza are all like "We are insulted that you depicted Mohammed as violent! To prove it's not true, we are going to indiscriminately kill people from your countries!"

Actually is that irony? Or is it just really ****ing stupid?

Religon eh?

[Yaya]

as I understand it, jihad came about when Mohammed and his followers needed to defend Medina against armies from Mecca. .

Actually, the issue of jihad is another concept that has been distorted by the media.

Jihad actually means "to struggle" for the sake of God. For example, if a Muslim is with a bunch of his pals who are drinking, and they are pushing him to do so, and he doesn't because he feels its wrong, that is jihad. Or to not sleep with a women who is trying to seduce you, that is jihad. The highest form of jihad is to give up your life in defense of one principles. It is not offensive attacks on innocent civilians that the media labels as jihad.

[Metal Vendetta]

Actually, the issue of jihad is another concept that has been distorted by the media.

Distorted by the media who report that Islamic fundamentalists use jihad to defend their violent actions. Uh-uh, right.

Turban with a bomb, turban with a bomb, la la la la, turban with a bomb

[Best First]

Or to not sleep with a women who is trying to seduce you, that is jihad.

hmm, not liking that definition much either.

[quopte]The highest form of jihad is to give up your life in defense of one principles. It is not offensive attacks on innocent civilians that the media labels as jihad.[/quote]

i think you will find several Muslim fundamentalists also label the latter Jihad.

[Denyer]

Jihad actually means "to struggle" for the sake of God.

And if people believed that struggle were only to be held in accordance with peaceful tenets, there would be no problem.

Take the English verb "to fight". People fight their limitations. People fight disease. People fight with artillery.

[Yaya]

i think you will find several Muslim fundamentalists also label the latter Jihad.

True, no doubt Jihad is a concept that can be perverted to further one's personal ends.

And if people believed that struggle were only to be held in accordance with peaceful tenets, there would be no problem.

Take the English verb "to fight". People fight their limitations. People fight disease. People fight with artillery.

Definitely true. That's why the greatest danger when it comes to a religion like Islam is self-interpretation and a molding of the faith to fulfill a personal agenda. Lack of knowledge of something like Islam or Christianity is quite dangerous and a true threat. That's why I think it is a big mistake to study a faith based on its followers, because very rarely is one actually following their own faith. If one seeks to learn about a faith, they should go to the source themselves. If I want to learn about Christianity, I will read the Bible and talk to bonafide scholars. About Islam, I would read the Koran and Hadith. Etc.,etc.

[BB Shockwave]

Meanwhile som eMuslims in some Middle Eastern countries are not buying anything from Denmark because a Danish paper published some cartoons of muhammed.

Of course i'm struggling to think of any Danish products that are likley to be big that's not the point. Get over it.

Why, Danish cheese! Of course it'd go runny by the time it'd get to the middle east anyway.

But now I hear palestinians are threatening Norway, Danemark and even France with terrorist attacks because of the cartoon (it featured Mohammed wearing a bomb on his head instead of a turban.

(wonder if I'd copy the link to the pic, they'd threaten Transfans too?)

So be glad those who do funny and humiliating pics of Jesus Christ that we catholics are not like this. Well, until we start the second inquisition, anyhow...

[Denyer]

I think it is a big mistake to study a faith based on its followers

Faith is a personal abstract.

Religion is that abstract as interpreted by mob rule.

the greatest danger when it comes to a religion like Islam is self-interpretation and a molding of the faith to fulfill a personal agenda

That's the case with any religion. Typically the molding (or initial choice of religion) is due to fear or revenge fantasies -- "believe or bad things will happen" and "if those people I don't like don't get punished, there's no justice".

[Optimus Prime Rib]

until we start the second inquisition, anyhow...

NOONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!