20:52  |  10 December 11
Members Login:
Username:    Password:      

Chamber of Debate

ISLAM - Sharia for the UK

Andromeda's Blog on the subject of Extremist Anti-Segregationists stopping debate on Sharia law and Good Manners


http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2009/06/extremist-non-segregationists-break-up.html

I was there at the cancelled Sharia v UK law debate.

This is what I posted at Harry's Place at

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/06/17/al-muhajiroun-extremists-and-thugs/#comment-355918



I wonder who the extremists really are.

I was there and would have preferred the debate to have gone ahead
rather than having it stopped on the spurious grounds of infringing the rule of non-segregation.

If only someone had the presence of mind to ask those who were against and for segregation to raise their hands as well as those who didn’t care, and resolved the matter by a democratic vote, even if it meant that the segregationists would have had the day, since they were in the majority.

Not being an extremist trying to make a point, I was actually happy
where I was.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jun/18/islamist-al-muhajiroun-meeting-chaos

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/islamist-group-has-to-abandon-relaunch-debate-1707890.html

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23709001-details/Clashes+as+Muslim+extremists+attempt+to+segregate+women/article.do

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1193869/Muslim-clashes-segregation-men-women-forces-cancellation-meeting.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/jun/18/al-muhajiroun-islamist-relaunch?showallcomments=true

Having been myself accused of all sorts by subsequent commentators, I posted another comment:


It was a trumped-up reason to stop the meeting, and an opportunity was missed to have these Muslims explain to us how and why their version of Sharia is so perfect and beautiful, and for Douglas Murray and anyone else to challenge this.

If they were hiring and paying for the hall, it behoves those who wished to attend what was after all a free meeting to abide by their rules.

To do otherwise would have been an abuse of hospitality.


If invited to someone’s house and asked to remove my shoes before crossing the threshold, I would do so without hesitation and with good grace, even if it were my custom to sleep in my boots in my own home.

It is after all only good manners.
Vote: Should the Sharia for UK debate have been stopped?

Our Unique Parallel Polling System

OMOV (One Member One Vote)
Yes 11% No 89%
Yes No    
OMMV (One Member Multiple Votes)
Yes 0% No 100%
Yes No         AAA Awarded members only.

Members Comments

sherdian0 19-Jun-2009 18:5
I would agree with you, you might not like there views but this is supposed to be a free society where everyone within reason is entitled to express their views on any subject.

If we start banning or disrupting meetings just becuase we do not like their culture then how do we have the nerve to stand up and be counted when something that is serious happens.
We should ALL try to learn from each other and respect each other's cultures no matter how distasteful we might think they are.
I.e. we should all agree to disagree and accept that compromises have to be made on both sides.
Wildgoose 19-Jun-2009 17:18
YES, because the house in question is owned and run by a Humanist Organisation that opposes segregation and discrimination.

Your example does not make sense, it is completely the wrong way around.

It might be better phrased as being invited to someone's house (The South Place Ethical Society) only to ignore all the rules and any semblance of good manners by instead deliberately trampling everything underfoot.
Comment:
All comments are subject to approval.

Tool Box

My Profile
 - My Profile
 - Edit My Profile
 - Reset My Password
My Mailbox
 - Inbox
 - Sent
 - Draft
 - Trash
Search Options
Correspondents
 - List of Correspondents
 - Blocked Members
 - Refer a Friend
Community
 - Chamber of Debate
 - Classified Advertisements
 - Events
 - AAA Award
       
    Home