Unity, Unity, Unity.

What you forget is “suggesting minor changes that will harm nobody and help quite a lot of people” is exactly the same thing as “forcing everyone to do what you want at the point of a gun” if it’s Muslims that are doing it.

I’ll have you know that there is no such thing as “a sensible accommodation of a matter of religious observance”. What you meant to say was “appeasement of terrorists”.

Blast, out-sarcasmed again.

Why all the furore? This will only effect one lesson wouldn’t it? Why not just let the ‘devout’ parents excuse their kids for that one lesson?

Seems a storm in a teacup to me.

Heh. cracking comments

I thought we lived in a secular society? If we, the WASPs, do not observe the Lord’s Day, why should minorities be allowed by law to observe their faiths during normal educational hours?

“I thought we lived in a secular society? If we, the WASPs, do not observe the Lord’s Day, why should minorities be allowed by law to observe their faiths during normal educational hours?”

The Lord’s Day? That’s the Sabbath, right? Good point, kids ARE forced to go to school on Sunday. It’s that pro-Muslim bias once again!

You’ve either won the Sarcasm Cup Final, or you’re a complete tool. I honestly don’t know which.

I can’t help but wonder how you would’ve written this up if it was about the religious sensitivities of evangelicals Christians though.

What religious ‘sensitivities’ do Christians have? No work or school on Jesus’ birth, oops! Got that. No work or study on the day of his crucification and alleged resurrection? Oh wait…hmmm yeah them poor persecuted Christians, Lions have never had it so good….

A few weeks ago this website asked how they “progressive” message could get across to the public.

It might help if you stop using in jokes such as “cloaca” as part of your message.
It’s all very knowing and smug, but everytime you *facepalm* or “epic fail” you sound like student comedians from the 90s.

It’s fine for comedy websites like b3ta or bloggerheads, but as this is one that is striving to be taken serious its, well, embarrassing.

I can’t help but wonder how you would’ve written this up if it was about the religious sensitivities of evangelicals Christians though.

That would depend, as in this case, entirely on the nature of the religious ‘sensitivities’ that were at issue.

In this case, none of the guidance strikes me as seeking, in any way, to impose unreasonable constraints on either schools or non-Muslim pupils and hence its not unreasonable to make those accomodations.

It becomes a very different matter if and when a religious group attempts to impose its specific doctrinal views, values and practices on people who don’t share their beliefs, irrespective of which religion is doing the imposing.

Try: “Ethnic minorities are set to make up a fifth of the population by 2051, according to research. According to experts from the University of Leeds, the ethnic minority share of the population will increase from 8% (2001) to around 20%.”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jHrxwzK6re2b_i7brruBXJhzJUig

According to this clip from BBCTV Newsnight about London, about 40% of the resident population was born abroad:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7368326.stm

“As in previous years, the analysis shows that it is only the wider South East (Greater London, the South East and the Eastern Region) that made a positive net contribution to the UK public finances in 2006-07, with the Northern regions, the Midlands and the South West joining Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland as a net drain on the Exchequer.”
http://www.oef.com/Free/pdfs/ukmpubfinfeat(jul).pdf

‘It might help if you stop using in jokes such as “cloaca” as part of your message.’

Richard Herring was doing cloaca jokes on ‘As It Occurs To Me’ months ago. You guys really need to catch up. You’ll be doing jokes about dead babies and bum rape next.

While I agree that there is nothing particularly unreasonable in the advice the council gives here, the tabloid outrage does reflect a widely held indignation about the principle of the council issuing such advice at all.

Many question whether taxpayers money should be used to encourage schools or any other public institutions to accommodate the sociopathologies of alien, backward cultures. If there is a legitimate use for public money in this area, surely it should be spent helping support minority communities to shed whatever aspects of their culture that are incompatible with, or a poor fit with British social norms?

In this case, that might involve giving wider circulation to the views of sensible imams that accidentally swallowing water isn’t a big deal or a culpable breach of Ramadan obligations. What the council absolutely should not be doing is urging schools to appease the strictest, most blindly doctrinaire and extreme interpretations of what constitutes good Islamic behaviour.

@Flowerpower

Is telling people what they believe is wrong, and that if they wish to live here, then they must abandon it, without any contra-evidence, going to solve any of our cultural integration issues?

If they were flat-earthers, or young-earth creationists, and we could show them why their beliefs are incorrect, maybe it would be acceptable. Telling people that what they think is wrong, because we think differently, is the approach the cloacas take.

‘If they were flat-earthers, or young-earth creationists, and we could show them why their beliefs are incorrect, maybe it would be acceptable.’

Why? Why would telling flat earthers or young earthers they are wrong be acceptable but refusing to accommodate the superstitious beliefs of other religionists be wrong?

‘Telling people that what they think is wrong, because we think differently, is the approach the cloacas take.’

Epistemic relativist bullshit alert! So it is not the business of schools to distinguish between knowledge and superstition? And *you* would never tell somebody that what they think is wrong because they simply think ‘differently’?

It is not the school’s business to enable the perpetuation of religious practices: education should be secular. Why is excusing one religious group from sex-education different from refusing to teach about contraception to respect the religious sensibilities of another? Should we ban teaching about abortion in anything other than horrified terms? And in any case sex education is a scientific matter: the taboo is to avoid arousal. Sex lessons are anything but arousing.

It’s sad enough that parents poison their childrens’ minds without the state doing it on their behalf.

GipsyPrince @ 15

You raise the analogy of creationism. And with regard to creationism, we do exactly as I suggest. We do not issue guidance aimed at appeasing creationists. Instead, we have legislated to prevent creationism being taught as part of the science curriculum in state schools.

Is telling people what they believe is wrong, and that if they wish to live here, then they must abandon it…. going to solve any of our cultural integration issues?

Yes.

I’d say we have already broadly won the battle on female circumcision, are making progress on honour killings, and making inroads on forced marriages.

Don’t you think we should have told immigrant groups that female genital mutilation, murdering their sisters and daughters, or forcing girls into marrying is wrong?

Would you extend your unwillingness to be judgmental to, say, suttee or cannibalism?

But my main point was about the need to support moderates rather than extremists. If we were giving advice on how to be sensitive to Christians, would we use as our reference point the the religious requirements of mainstream Church of England Christians or the absurd observational demands of one of the whackier hardline sects such as the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland?

We shouldn’t allow a minority of fundamentalist nutters to define what is standard Islamic practice.

“Many question whether taxpayers money should be used to encourage schools or any other public institutions to accommodate the sociopathologies of alien, backward cultures. If there is a legitimate use for public money in this area, surely it should be spent helping support minority communities to shed whatever aspects of their culture that are incompatible with, or a poor fit with British social norms?”

Yes, let’s mould these ‘alien, backwards’ savages into the image of Flowerpower. What this country really needs is millions of proto-fascists about the place.

Bob B – so what we’re saying is that the area of the UK with the most immigrants is the most profitable area?

Well, I can hardly wait for 2050 then – once we’ve increased the ethnic population north of the watford gap significantly, we can expect it to cruise to profitability all by itself.

Or something. If that’s not the point you’re trying to make, I’m unsure why you bring those disparate articles together. I’m also unsure why it’s at all relevant to this post.

Personally, I’m all for ignoring religious sensibilities in schools – including dumping easter holidays – but I’m never going to get it. If we’re going to be one-religion, and can’t get no-religion, I’m all for pushing to the many-religion side of the spectrum instead.

What’s your point, Bob B?

“all that’s being suggested here that schools might consider schedulling internal tests, mock exams, etc. around Ramadan, where possible, so as not to put any kids that are fasting at a disadvantage.”

and then;

“Does that sound like the council ‘forcing’ schools to delay exams?”

Yes it does, when they don’t issue equivalent advice for other religions.

“Yes it does, when they don’t issue equivalent advice for other religions.”

When was the last time a school held an exam on Christmas Day, Matt? Or Good Friday? Or any Sunday?

The depth of thought that has gone into ‘Operation Cloaca’ is best illustrated by the fact that the campaign seeks to defend children from sexual thoughts provoked by sex education despite naming itself after a sexual organ – and one obscure enough that most people would have to look it up.

Genius.

Maybe you’d also like to join the Campaign to Stop Fucking Swearing.

“So the advice here is that if you run Sex-Ed classes during Ramadan then all you’ll get is slew of Muslim parents exercising the right to withdraw their kids from those lessons, so you might as well schedule the lessons around Ramadan and save yourself the bother”.

Hmmm. So everyones education gets disrupted to satisfy a minority. Contrast with catholic adoption agencies having to close (rather than accept gay adoption) or christian nurses having to remove crucifixes, or registrars being disciplined for refusing gay marriages.
In some instances the individual must change to suit the institution, in others the institution to suit the individual ?
Seems unbalanced, plus you are ignoring the fact that the body issuing the guidance also funds education, hence it is clearly coercive.

@ 22 “When was the last time a school held an exam on Christmas Day, Matt? Or Good Friday? Or any Sunday?”

Er, they are christian religious holidays. If you prefer to have the muslim equivalent then go to a muslim country.

“Hmmm. So everyones education gets disrupted to satisfy a minority. Contrast with catholic adoption agencies having to close (rather than accept gay adoption) or christian nurses having to remove crucifixes, or registrars being disciplined for refusing gay marriages.”

The difference being that allowing the adoption agencies and registrars to continue with their bigotry would have meant them imposing it on others, whereas the council’s suggestions are harmless.

“In some instances the individual must change to suit the institution, in others the institution to suit the individual ?”

Why is that shocking? Different circumstances require different responses.

“Seems unbalanced, plus you are ignoring the fact that the body issuing the guidance also funds education, hence it is clearly coercive.”

Look up “clearly”. It doesn’t mean “could potentially be but no evidence suggests it is”.

“Er, they are christian religious holidays. If you prefer to have the muslim equivalent then go to a muslim country.”

So now you’re imposing your religion on me? Sounds pretty hypocritical. In any case, the point stands that nobody needs to offer advice like this for the major Christian holy days because they’re written into the calendar.

@ 27 It’s not “my religion” it’s the official religion of this country. And I’m not forcing you to do anything, quite the opposite. If you want to work on Sundays/bank holidays, go ahead.

“The difference being that allowing the adoption agencies and registrars to continue with their bigotry would have meant them imposing it on others, whereas the council’s suggestions are harmless.”

“Harmless” according to who ? The non-muslim kids who will miss swimming, the taxpayer that paid for the guidance, the kids whose exams are moved ?
This leftie attitude that if its a favoured minority then they are all harmless minor adjustents that everyone can accomoddate without any fuss, if they are not favoured minorities it’s imposing bigotry etc etc. Its double standards

“Why is that shocking? Different circumstances require different responses.”

They are not “different circumstances”, just differnt individuals/instititions, one favoured group and one unfavoured group.
You really are making this rubbish up as you go along aren’t you

“@ 27 It’s not “my religion” it’s the official religion of this country. And I’m not forcing you to do anything, quite the opposite. If you want to work on Sundays/bank holidays, go ahead.”

I don’t see why Christianity, official religion or otherwise, should be imposed on me or anyone else. And you’re arguing that kids are forced not to have exams and swimming lessons on certain days. They’re evidently forced not to have them on Sundays, either.

““Harmless” according to who ? The non-muslim kids who will miss swimming, the taxpayer that paid for the guidance, the kids whose exams are moved ?”

They won’t miss swimming, it’ll just happen on a different day. What if the swimming lessons are on Friday and the Muslims kids ‘miss’ them on Good Friday? The tax issue is really a different argument, but I’m prepared to pay a small amount to encourage social cohesion.

“This leftie attitude that if its a favoured minority then they are all harmless minor adjustents that everyone can accomoddate without any fuss, if they are not favoured minorities it’s imposing bigotry etc etc.”

‘This’ leftie attitude? It’s not my attitude. I think you mean “an attitude not being discussed here and therefore irrelevant but that I’m going to raise anyway for some reason”.

Of course, show me where I said we should extend special privileges to favoured minorities and you’ll have proved me wrong.

“Its double standards”

Coming from the guy who thinks Christianity should be forced on us regularly but that a few schools doing the same for Islam is appalling? Look in the mirror, kid.

“They are not “different circumstances”, just differnt individuals/instititions, one favoured group and one unfavoured group.”

I explained already why the circumstances are different. Are you interested in a discussion, or are you going to ignore what I say because my actual statements don’t fit your paranoid world-view?

“You really are making this rubbish up as you go along aren’t you”

Mirror!

The problem, Matt, is that you’ve identified the guidance as suggesting changing the status quo to suit Muslims, without really addressing the fact that the status quo itself is designed to accommodate Christianity. Given that we continue to allow that, it’s not unreasonable for schools with a high number of Muslims to do something similar.

Chaise Guevara @ 18

Do you think female genital mutilation, honour killings, forced marriages, or making threats of extreme violence towards homosexuals or apostates is acceptable behaviour in Britain, or not?

Why do you label people ‘proto-fascist’ for suggesting that such practices, though traditional and accepted in some parts of the world, should be abandoned by people moving from those countries to the UK?

As it happens, many immigrants choose to distance themselves from such practices immediately upon landing. It is only the most reactionary and extremist who continue to argue for them. But it is that reactionary and extremist minority who you and the Left constantly wish to appease.

“Do you think female genital mutilation, honour killings, forced marriages, or making threats of extreme violence towards homosexuals or apostates is acceptable behaviour in Britain, or not?”

Not.

“Why do you label people ‘proto-fascist’ for suggesting that such practices, though traditional and accepted in some parts of the world, should be abandoned by people moving from those countries to the UK?”

I don’t. I quoted the part of your post that I was responding to – it was your discussion of “alien”, “backwards” cultures who should be made as much like us normal, advanced people as possible. That post didn’t suggest it applied only to extremists. So don’t put words in my mouth.

“As it happens, many immigrants choose to distance themselves from such practices immediately upon landing. It is only the most reactionary and extremist who continue to argue for them. But it is that reactionary and extremist minority who you and the Left constantly wish to appease.”

Lying to me about my desires is unlikely to work. Jesus wept.

In fact, Flowerpower, said post claimed that not swimming during a religious festival is appeasing: “the strictest, most blindly doctrinaire and extreme interpretations of what constitutes good Islamic behaviour.”

So you made your racist comments on that basis, and then when I protested claimed I was supporting murder and mutilation. You lying fuck.

@ 35

What I meant by the sociopathologies of alien, backward cultures was fully set out @17 – which you had ample time, according to the time stamp, to see before posting @ 18.

“What I meant by the sociopathologies of alien, backward cultures was fully set out @17 – which you had ample time, according to the time stamp, to see before posting”

No it wasn’t. I withdraw this: “In fact, Flowerpower, said post claimed that not swimming during a religious festival is appeasing: “the strictest, most blindly doctrinaire and extreme interpretations of what constitutes good Islamic behaviour.””, but not the complaint that you’re accusing me of being in favour of FGM just because I don’t hate Muslims.

Again, here’s the part I was responding to:

“Many question whether taxpayers money should be used to encourage schools or any other public institutions to accommodate the sociopathologies of alien, backward cultures. If there is a legitimate use for public money in this area, surely it should be spent helping support minority communities to shed whatever aspects of their culture that are incompatible with, or a poor fit with British social norms? ”

Which taxpayer funded sociopathologies are you complaining about here? Are schools being paid by the government to encourage murder and FGM? If not, you appear to be complaining about the money paid to encourage schools to accomodate moderate Muslims.

Chaise Guevara @ 37

you’re accusing me of being in favour of FGM just because I don’t hate Muslims

No, not because you don’t hate Muslims.

You have to admit that your cultural relativism is switched to intermittent today. You claim not to find FGM or honour killings at all acceptable in British society, but take hysterical exception to the phrase ‘backward cultures’, accusing me of proto-fascism and racism for using it.

You can’t have it both ways. Either you accept these traditions are examples of cultural backwardness or you should acknowledge that you think they are fine and dandy.

In my experience of these things (which is considerable) the sorts of people who want to mutilate their wives or beat up on their daughters for wearing bling and short skirts are precisely the same people who want to forbid swimming during Ramadan. And the people who want to appease the one, tend to appease the other. In fact, I’d go further. Notwithstanding Larry’s rather good wisecrack @ 2, the people who are keen on honour killings and forced marriage and who make a big deal of the risk of swallowing pool water during Ramadan are very often the sort of people who take a ….. let’s not overstate it….. ‘ambivalent’ attitude to blowing up the kufr on the underground.

And the same people who make excuses for the former outrages, also make excuses for the latter.

But then, if you were morally fastidious about terrorism, you probably wouldn’t call yourself ‘Chaise Guevara’, would you? That’s rather like calling yourself ‘Dolly Hitler’ and then claiming to be all cut up about the Holocaust.

@ 32″ without really addressing the fact that the status quo itself is designed to accommodate Christianity”.

Whether you like it or not, this is notionally a christian country, as in the Head of State is also the head of the official church. This means that christinaity has for centuries been embedded in the culture, the laws, the language, the customs and practices, including holidays. Trying to accomodate diversity in the context of a public service is expensive, a cost most would say is not worth paying for some wooly notion of “community cohesion”. If pople want diversity in a service then perhaps the state is not the best institution to provide that service

“What if the swimming lessons are on Friday and the Muslims kids ‘miss’ them on Good Friday?”

The extension of your logic is that we either observe all the holidays of all religions represented in this country – in which case productivity would probably half and no one would get an education – or we observe none of them – which would have the shareholders rubbing their hands at the thought of a 24/7/365 workforce.
What we have is a compromise, which involves people living here on the condition that they observe the extant holidays, in exactly the same way as uk migrant has to when living/working/getting educated in a muslim country

Oh bloody hell, so agreeing with the soft advice from the MCB & Stoke council about swimming during Ramadan is now agreeing with FGM and “honour” murders?! What twisted logic took the debate there… oh, right, Flowerpower. Carry on then.

Nb: As an atheistic secularist I disagree with much religious nut-jobbery; however if state schools can take on board various cultural differences then it reduces the purported need for divisive “faith” schools. And no, that doesn’t mean supporting FGM or other barbaric practises. I support the right for Christians to celebrate Easter [thus depriving non-Christian children (or, children of non-Christian parents...) of education omg!1], but I wouldn’t agree with any of them wanting to re-instate Section 28, f’rexample.

“No, not because you don’t hate Muslims.

You have to admit that your cultural relativism is switched to intermittent today. You claim not to find FGM or honour killings at all acceptable in British society, but take hysterical exception to the phrase ‘backward cultures’, accusing me of proto-fascism and racism for using it.

You can’t have it both ways. Either you accept these traditions are examples of cultural backwardness or you should acknowledge that you think they are fine and dandy.

In my experience of these things (which is considerable) the sorts of people who want to mutilate their wives or beat up on their daughters for wearing bling and short skirts are precisely the same people who want to forbid swimming during Ramadan. And the people who want to appease the one, tend to appease the other. In fact, I’d go further. Notwithstanding Larry’s rather good wisecrack @ 2, the people who are keen on honour killings and forced marriage and who make a big deal of the risk of swallowing pool water during Ramadan are very often the sort of people who take a ….. let’s not overstate it….. ‘ambivalent’ attitude to blowing up the kufr on the underground.

And the same people who make excuses for the former outrages, also make excuses for the latter.”

Got it. It’s not that I hate Muslims, it’s that I refuse to assume that any religiously observant Muslim is probably a terrorist. That’s MUCH more reasonable.

So basically you’re arguing from race hate and the assumption that anyone who is tolerant of harmless religious practices must be cool with Islamist atrocities because “the same people who make excuses for the former outrages, also make excuses for the latter”. And that means you can make that assumption about me. Can you seriously not understand how fucked up that is?

“But then, if you were morally fastidious about terrorism, you probably wouldn’t call yourself ‘Chaise Guevara’, would you? That’s rather like calling yourself ‘Dolly Hitler’ and then claiming to be all cut up about the Holocaust.”

LOL. More joined-up thinking! If someone has the surname “Guevara” as part of their pseudonym, they must be in favour of Che Guevara’s politics! Attacking my fake name? Do the words ‘bottom’ and ‘barrel’ mean anything to you?

S. Pill

the soft advice from the MCB…..

It would be a mistake to think that moderate Muslims campaign about swimming, while extremist Muslims go round murdering their daughters.

Actually, it’s the extremists who do both. A truly moderate Muslim wouldn’t give a rat’s arse about the risk of swallowing pool water being a breach of the fast.

“Oh bloody hell, so agreeing with the soft advice from the MCB & Stoke council about swimming during Ramadan is now agreeing with FGM and “honour” murders?! ”

Also, using part of a Cuban revolutionary’s name makes you pro-terrorism! By that logic, Flowerpower must be a hippy. Obviously having an off-day…

@42

Ah, good. I’ll make a note of it in my “How to Spot a Terrorist” handbook that I’m compiling for when Britain is part of the Caliphate.

Seriously now, do you think that all Muslims who don’t swim during Ramadan are potential daughter-murderers? Muslims are human beings you know, and just as contradictory and confusing as the rest of humanity with rituals and observance. One of my flatmates years ago was Muslim and more than willing to share a bottle of vodka with me until the small hours, while at the same time reading the Koran and observing Ramadan and Eid, etc (maybe not all at the exact same time, mind…)

To suggest that Muslims fall neatly into categories of “reasonable” and “nutter” is pretty risable and shows either ignorance of humanity or plain old fashioned bigotry.

Matt, I’m glad you’re here. It’s nice to have someone sensible to argue with.

“Whether you like it or not, this is notionally a christian country, as in the Head of State is also the head of the official church. This means that christinaity has for centuries been embedded in the culture, the laws, the language, the customs and practices, including holidays. Trying to accomodate diversity in the context of a public service is expensive, a cost most would say is not worth paying for some wooly notion of “community cohesion”. If pople want diversity in a service then perhaps the state is not the best institution to provide that service”

The fact that it is notionally a Christian country has nothing to do with the moral basis of this. There was no vote on the matter, and the reason there’s no big campaign to make Britain legally secular is because we tend to do a good job, in real terms, of separating church and state. What we have now is a pointless but charming tradition. You’re trying to wield it like theocracy.

Community cohesion does sound a little wooly. OK: let’s do it in the name of not needlessly upsetting and disenfranchising people.

There is a good point here, but it comes up again below, so I’ll address it there.

“The extension of your logic is that we either observe all the holidays of all religions represented in this country – in which case productivity would probably half and no one would get an education – or we observe none of them – which would have the shareholders rubbing their hands at the thought of a 24/7/365 workforce.
What we have is a compromise, which involves people living here on the condition that they observe the extant holidays, in exactly the same way as uk migrant has to when living/working/getting educated in a muslim country”

How is that the same, given that many Muslims were born here? I can see the logic, at least, of telling someone not to emigrate to a country that doesn’t suit their religion. That’s very different from telling them they should leave their home because of it.

Your point about extending my logic… no, not exactly, but it’s a fair comment and ties in with your point above about Christianity being written into the British calendar at the bone level (although I’d say it has very little representation in law these days). It would obviously be ridiculous to observe all Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Sikh etc holidays, and stupid to cancel all of them. Given the country’s history and the comparative number of Christians to followers of other religions, I’m quite happy with things the way they are, broadly speaking. All I ask is that requests to accomodate others be considered, as long as they’re not too onerous. I really don’t think the occasional reshuffle of the school schedule does much harm, and I suspect most people who complain (not you necessarily) are motived less by what’s happening than they are by who requested that it happen.

@43

I’m reminded of a Daily Fail article I read a while back comparing Che Guevera to Osama bin Laden. You couldn’t make it up!

I’m more worried of the pro-bourgeois implications of “Chaise”

“Actually, it’s the extremists who do both. A truly moderate Muslim wouldn’t give a rat’s arse about the risk of swallowing pool water being a breach of the fast”

Another point (there are so many) that you’re missing: even if your racist bollocks were true, which it ain’t, refusing to swim isn’t the same as blowing things up (a subtle difference, but an important one). So how would accepting a reasonable request be the same as supporting terrorists?

“I’m more worried of the pro-bourgeois implications of “Chaise””

LOL. Now that you’ve pointed that out, I’ve decided that I was being deliberately ironic all along.

MCB did a U-turn ?

Hey guys, over on the other LC thread on this: I point out a Surrey County Council doc they produced with MCB, that said it is OK to swim in Ramadan….

Maybe the story all the MSM missed – is why the MCB changed it’s tune?

And all this on the day that France banned the burkha.

On C4 news Jon Snow has a woman from the Iranian & Kurdish Human Rights Agency who supports the ban. She wears no veil at all, but is a devout Muslim. She says the hijab is not a religious requirement but just a social/cultural feature of certain {backward} societies.

(She didn’t actually say the ‘backward’ but that’s what she meant).

No doubt some smartarse calling himself Carlos the Jackal or somesuch will soon pop up to tell us she’s wrong. And an eeevil racist, fascist beast.

France’s decision is petty politicking. Of the 5,000,000 Muslims in France only around 2000 wear the burkha – what’s that phrase about butterflies and wheels? I don’t agree with forcing people to wear certain clothes, equally I don’t agree with people forcing others not to wear certain clothes. “Liberté” indeed!

MCB did a U-turn ?

Not really – all that’s reflected in the Stoke guidance is the fact that there are minor variations in interpretation of the rule on fasting that might come into play, so it would sensible to ask the parents where they stand before deciding whether or not to reschedule.

She says the hijab is not a religious requirement but just a social/cultural feature of certain {backward} societies.

Yes. Similarly, women wearing trousers is not a religious requirement, but just a social/cultural feature of certain {decadent} societies. Therefore, it would be perfectly reasonable to make it illegal for women to wear trousers.

“No doubt some smartarse calling himself Carlos the Jackal or somesuch will soon pop up to tell us she’s wrong. And an eeevil racist, fascist beast.”

Oh, I see. It’s ok to be a racist moron, but if anyone points it out they’re a ‘smartarse’. Were you actually sucking your thumb when you typed that?

See I can do it too: “no doubt some idiot called Peaceandlove will pop up to point out that, as a devout Muslim herself, she is obviously a murdering psychopath and anyone who says anything nice about her is a terrorist sympathiser”.

Chaise – what I love is that you and Larry had all these twats nailed *in your first two comments*.

Yet still they come back for more. Them not very bright, am they?

“Yet still they come back for more. Them not very bright, am they?”

Them gluttons for punishment. And when them run out of arguments, them bitch and moan instead.

@ 57

You have an argument? Really? What is it? You haven’t voiced one yet. So far all we have evidence of is that you have a stock of epithets – racist, proto-fascist – which you employ when you don’t have anything substantive to contribute.

Though I don’t normally agree with flowerpower, he has two good points here. If someone posting on the Saga website used the screen name ‘Harold Shipman’, it would demonstrate a brutalized moral sensibility and an absolute lack of good taste. Posting on a political blog using the name of a political mass murderer could be argued to display a tin ear at the very least.
But the bigger point fp raises is where we as a society should draw the line about what we tolerate and what we’re willing to change our own social norms to accommodate. For too long anyone who has tried to raise these questions has been howled down as a racist. But now the Labour leadership candidates are beginning to discuss them – if in coded language. I don’t think it’s racist for a headteacher to insist on mixed-sex swimming, frankly.

“You have an argument? Really? What is it? You haven’t voiced one yet. So far all we have evidence of is that you have a stock of epithets – racist, proto-fascist – which you employ when you don’t have anything substantive to contribute.”

Something substantive like a dig at your opponent’s screen name, you mean?

I have indeed voiced arguments:

1) You are claiming that practicing Muslims can be more or less assumed to be be terrorist/murderers/oppressors of women, which is straight-up bigotry.

2) It is disingenuous to say that defending the legitimate and reasonable concerns of Muslims is accommodating terrorism, even if some of those Muslims support terrorism themselves. If I gave a cup of tea to someone who later turned out to be a thief, that wouldn’t make me accessory after the fact.

3) It is extremely offensive to accuse someone of being in favour of extreme atrocities on the basis of zero evidence.

4) Far less importantly, attacking someone’s screen name as a way of avoiding their point is the last refuge of a soundrel.

“Posting on a political blog using the name of a political mass murderer could be argued to display a tin ear at the very least.”

I would argue otherwise, but to be honest I think this is just one of those things where some people instinctively feel one way or the other and are unlikely to change. A bit like bad taste jokes. I personally feel the Saga/Shipman example would be going too far, because it seems calculated to offend, but we all draw the line in different places.

It’s also about intent. ‘Guevara’ in my screen name is not supposed to denote “murderer” or even “communist/socialist”. It’s just part of a very crap pun.

Hey Chaise/Neil

Answer Gould’s substantive point.

I don’t think it’s racist for a headteacher to insist on mixed-sex swimming, frankly.

Well. Is it?

“Answer Gould’s substantive point.

I don’t think it’s racist for a headteacher to insist on mixed-sex swimming, frankly.

Well. Is it?”

No, not at all. For the record, I didn’t answer that originally because it wasn’t a question and I agreed with it. And I really think comment threads won’t be much improved by me posting “I agree” four hundred times.

pagar – who put you in charge?

Thanks Chaise.

Neil, somebody has to try to stimulate some decent debate on here.

It would be nice if you could contribute some original thought rather than just indulge in tribal cheerleading.

Which ‘tribe’ would that be, pagar?

Mass murderers
Although you could say Churchill was a political mass murderer. Like Sadaam, he did gas the Kurds

Also pagar, flowerpower, Matt and the rest of the right of centre boys, remember you are guests. This is a left of centre site, so manners please gentleman.

.

Although this did make me giggle
“Though I don’t normally agree with flowerpower”
When do you disagree ? Please show me the link

@ Rhys

Mass murderers

Are you sure you are posting on the right thread?

The right blog even?

And I strongly object to being described as right of centre.

Are you Welsh by any chance?

Chaise Guevara

You are claiming that practising Muslims can be more or less assumed to be be terrorist/murderers/oppressors of women, which is straight-up bigotry.

Rubbish. I’ve never said anything of the sort. Most religiously observant Muslims (e.g. Sufis, who I think constitute a majority) are moderate both politically and theologically.

The point I made (which you are deliberately distorting) is that the theological extremists also tend to be the ones that oppress women and condone or are ambivalent about such things as honour killings and terrorism. My argument was that we should support the moderates in their struggle to ensure that what counts as normative Islamic custom or behaviour is not dictated by the theological or political extremists.

I also made the point that much of what is objectionable isn’t to do with Islamic religious observance anyway, but cultural traditions and accretions specific to certain parts of the world.

It is disingenuous to say that defending the legitimate and reasonable concerns of Muslims is accommodating terrorism

No one is saying that. It is appeasing the unreasonable demands that encourages the extremists.

Sorry that you are so upset about my passing remark about your screen-name. Why isn’t it ‘Chez Guevara’? Has someone else nabbed that?

“Rubbish. I’ve never said anything of the sort. Most religiously observant Muslims (e.g. Sufis, who I think constitute a majority) are moderate both politically and theologically.

The point I made (which you are deliberately distorting) is that the theological extremists also tend to be the ones that oppress women and condone or are ambivalent about such things as honour killings and terrorism. My argument was that we should support the moderates in their struggle to ensure that what counts as normative Islamic custom or behaviour is not dictated by the theological or political extremists.”

Yes, but your definition of “extremist” seems to stretch to “people who strictly observe fasting”. Call that extremist if you will, but it’s pure racism to assume that they’re one and the same as terrorists, or oppressors of women. And here you say they ‘tend’ to be the ones who do this, but earlier on this thread you said that they were ‘precisely the same people’. And you basically called me a sympathiser with the true extremists because I don’t condemn any attempt to accomodate Islam.

“I also made the point that much of what is objectionable isn’t to do with Islamic religious observance anyway, but cultural traditions and accretions specific to certain parts of the world. ”

Yes, fine. Agree with that.

“It is appeasing the unreasonable demands that encourages the extremists.”

What unreasonable demands are these? Who’s appeasing them?

“Sorry that you are so upset about my passing remark about your screen-name. Why isn’t it ‘Chez Guevara’? Has someone else nabbed that?”

‘Chez Guevara’ wouldn’t suit my purposes (and could be genuinely be interpreted as me expressing support for the guy’s politics). It doesn’t upset me, it’s just a weak, irrelevant and crappy way to conduct an argument and I thought I’d explain that to you to prevent further embarrassment.

“I also made the point that much of what is objectionable isn’t to do with Islamic religious observance anyway, but cultural traditions and accretions specific to certain parts of the world. ”

Yes, fine. Agree with that.

Well if it’s fine and you agree with it, why did you start hurling abuse when I used the phrase ‘sociopathologies of alien, backward cultures’? It means precisely the same thing.

your definition of “extremist” seems to stretch to “people who strictly observe fasting”.

No, observing the fast is fine by me. I observe religious fasts myself. But there is a world of difference between observing a fast and demanding that a secular institution or even an institution of another faith should change its timetable or cancel its lessons on the offchance that one of your co-religionists might accidentally swallow a small quantity of chlorinated water. That is (theological) extremism.

you basically called me a sympathizer with the true extremists because I don’t condemn any attempt to accommodate Islam.

Well, I think you should condemn some attempts to accommodate Islam. That you do not do so doesn’t necessarily make you a full sympathizer, but it does make you the equivalent of what Lenin termed a ‘useful idiot’. To return to where we started: I don’t think we should be any more willing to adapt our school sports classes to suit extreme Koranic literalists than we are to adapt our science teaching to suit extreme Biblical literalists (e.g. Creationists).

“Well if it’s fine and you agree with it, why did you start hurling abuse when I used the phrase ‘sociopathologies of alien, backward cultures’? It means precisely the same thing.”

What? The origination of such cultures (ie religious or non-religious) have nothing to do with whether they’re backwards. As for ‘alien’: anyone who uses that with automatic negative implications is reveal a certain amount of xenophobia, or at least creating that impression.

The point is that you are using a painfully wide definition of “extreme” and “sociopathology” – apparently not drinking water on a fast day is the sign of a dangerous zealot – and then using these definitions of yours to accuse me and the left in general of appeasing terrorists and proponents of FGM. You’re either making a leap in logic (from one type of ‘extreme’ to another), or displaying a dislike of ‘alien’ cultures that borders on the paranoid.

“No, observing the fast is fine by me. I observe religious fasts myself. But there is a world of difference between observing a fast and demanding that a secular institution or even an institution of another faith should change its timetable or cancel its lessons on the offchance that one of your co-religionists might accidentally swallow a small quantity of chlorinated water. That is (theological) extremism.”

See? Firstly, we’re talking about suggested guidelines here, not demands. Secondly, the spectre of the dreaded timetable-adjusting extremists is simply not likely to resonate with many people other than those with a knee-jerk dislike of Islam (or religion in general). You are using a word generally reserved for violent and repressive philosophies to describe something harmless and mundane.

“Well, I think you should condemn some attempts to accommodate Islam. That you do not do so doesn’t necessarily make you a full sympathizer, but it does make you the equivalent of what Lenin termed a ‘useful idiot’.”

Happy to in principle. Not going to go looking for excuses to condemn them. Show me an example of genuinely outrageous accommodation (that’s a request, not a challenge, I’m not saying it doesn’t happen) and of course I’ll back you on it.

“To return to where we started: I don’t think we should be any more willing to adapt our school sports classes to suit extreme Koranic literalists than we are to adapt our science teaching to suit extreme Biblical literalists (e.g. Creationists).”

Again, I think this is about how much impact it has on education. If our schools started teaching the events chronicled in the Koran in history lessons, for example, we’d have big problems. A minor timetable change just isn’t the same. Likewise, if Creationists had some particular holy day that coincided with the mock exam period, I’d be happy for schools with Creationist pupils to work around it.

“Show me an example of genuinely outrageous accommodation (that’s a request, not a challenge, I’m not saying it doesn’t happen) and of course I’ll back you on it.”

Thought of one! There was a trial a while back, in the US I think, where the judge let a Muslim husband off a domestic abuse charge on the basis that “it was part of their culture”. I condemn that.