A story recently out talks about a mother whom was breastfeeding her child that was asked not to. Apparently she "caused an uproar" by this normal act. I want to point out that while the article headline claims that this was due to Muslims, nothing in the text shows that to be true. 

 

Britain has been in ass-kiss mode with Muslims for years, and I don't get it. A blind man was removed from a bus with his seeing-eye dog because a Muslim freaked out because dogs are ritually unclean. Really? Are people that just had sex no longer allowed on British Busses because they are ritually unclean? Can I hop on with a package of bacon? 

 

Women Constables are asked to wear a head covering when entering a Mosque. Really? Are the Male Constables issued sideburns for entering Hasidic Synagogues? How about a Yarmulke?  There is no reason that those in authority need capitulate to others. You believe this, I believe something else, there is no reason for me to act like anything else is the case. 

 

The idea of Sharia Courts is absurd to me as well. How can you have a system that is not regulated by the government, yet it is binding? A system of law that does not recognize women as equal? Gays as legal and ethical beings? Shouldn't the law of the land stay with that of the country rather than entering this slippery slope? Sharia Banks, Mortgage companies, and courts. Why allow the division? Set up a bank that only those of one religion can use. Why not white only banks? 5th generation British only banks? Why is it absurd one way and not the other? 

 

Clearly the division is causing the expectation that blind people can't use the bus or that women can't breastfeed in public. It's barbaric and time that the British people stand up for themselves. If you don't stand up for yourselves sooner or later, there is going to be a legal precedent set that is not going to be favorable or in accordance with long standing British Law. You'll want to have nipped it in the bud before you get to that point.

 

Views: 3597

Tags: Breastfeed, Muslim, Women, culture

Comment by George Thain on July 14, 2011 at 4:02pm
I would like to point out a couple of things. Firstly the story about the women's constables comes from the Express. The Express needs very little encouragement to write a story about foreigners being evil without any actually evidence or story behind it. Other papers covering the story point toward the Christian community of Avon and Somerset also requesting non-uniformed officers to cover their shoulders whilst in a place of worship. As for the blind man there is no proof in there that they were muslims who wanted him off the bus, only he thinks outburts may of come from Asian people.

Sharia Courts in the UK are not actually courts. They do not have any legal power. They deal with civil cases, there are Jewish courts that deal with the same thing. If I had a civil issue with someone and we both agreed that the panel should be made up of our parents then that decision would also be legally binding. There is also a misconception of Sharia Banks, they are not banks only for Muslims, they are banks that are run by Muslim law. Anyone can set up an account with one, although why a non-Muslim would want to is beyond me.

There is a strong culture in the UK to blame everything on the Muslims, it is no surprise that they wish to stick to their own communities and traditions when they are seen as the enemy within. The way is not to discriminate against them but to educate people on both sides and to help the communities integrate. Much like the 'native' populace has done with Blacks, Irish and Eastern Europeans in recent years.
Comment by Gaytor on July 14, 2011 at 4:43pm

I assume that the blind man comment is in regards to the breastfeeding woman. I don't see any proof that it was Muslim myself. 

 

I'm aware that the Sharia Courts are Civil. The problem with then is that entering into them as a cultural decision allows for discrimination based on religious teachings. For example, if a father dies and a male and female child are left, if the daughter enters the Sharia Court out of a sense of duty, she is likely to receive only half of what the son gets. There are social pressures within groups to enter into these agreements. If you are to seek equality, only one set of rules can apply. So apply it to Jewish courts too.

 

Sharia Banks - Thanks for the point that non-Muslims could join. I suppose that if everyone is welcome... then the complaint goes away, and this seems to be the case. 

 

As for donning anything for another group or religion by the police force, I'd say no. At what point would it stop? They show up and treat everyone equally. How many outfits should the keep in the patrol car? I take and accept your point that the news may point a finger at a scapegoat. So maybe the criticism should be more broad about appeasement or all religions? 

Comment by George Thain on July 14, 2011 at 5:14pm

I think for civil cases people should be able to take the judgement from any party they wish. The issue as you point out is whether female members of Islam get a fair deal out of the Sharia Courts are are taken their against their will. I feel this is more of a case of a societal problem rather than a legal one. I have a textbook on UK Civil Law somewhere that has a good list of pros and cons on religious courts, I shall try and find it later.

 

I agree that the criticism should be about a broader appeasement of religions rather than just an appeasement of Islam. I think your blog post annoyed me slightly as my family are constantly on about how the muslims are destroying everything, especially when we live in a part of the UK which is 99.2% White British.

Comment by Sassan K. on July 14, 2011 at 5:41pm

Sorry George - the period of the failed experiment of multiculturalism is dead - according to your own prime minister along with Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel among others. The fact remains due to the "bending over" backwards instead of working to secularize and assimilate immigrants - the failed policies of multiculturalism indeed instead continued to tell these Muslim communities that it is "okay" to self-segregate yourself and not adhere to the basic values of secularism and human rights when living in the west.

In America - Muslim immigrants tend to assimilate - but your problem in the U.K. and Europe is severe. You have the biggest problem with homegrown terrorism and the radical teachings of the mosques and in essence a community that is reluctant to turn in a family member who may be involved in radical circles. Fortunately, your recent anti-terror laws have been quite successful but much more needs to be done to confront the problem heads on instead of confronting the cultural barbarism that exists within the fundamentalist Islamic communities in Europe and the U.K.

It is a crime for female genital mutilation to take place in the U.K. - then why is it that not a single father has been prosecuted for this crime when it is rampant in the U.K.? Tell me, why are you willing to not follow your laws in the failed name of multiculturalism which in turn only allows these people to feel that following their culture stringently in a western and secular society is acceptable - even if that means violating human rights and women's rights.

Comment by Nina van der Roos on July 14, 2011 at 6:59pm
Interesting about the guide dog. As a family with two assistance dogs we have never experienced any issues over the dogs except with a muslim man.
Two years ago my wife Judith had an incident here in Holland with a muslim guy in Albert Heijn, a supermarket. Judith is profoundly deaf and partly sighted (a blind quadrant & no low light vision) so she has an assistance dog, a lovely natured golden retriever. 

In the middle of the store this very large bearded guy in one of those beanie hats and long shirt over jeans (talk about appalling dress sense) stood right up against my slightly built wife yelling and gesticulating wildly at Sissi. It was clear she was an assistance dog with her uniform coat and harness, there could not have been any misunderstanding and no one else in the store had any issue with the presence of a guide dog, they cannot be refused entry anywhere anyway As soon as the fool started his tirade store staff had called the cops while male staff and bystanders put themselves between him and my wife. The cops arrived and arrested him and took him away. 

The man had set on Judith because of her guide dog, he considered it unclean, but then I gather he pretty much considered everyone and everything "unclean" here. It turned out he was an illegal so he was ejected from the country. At this that time my wife was still learning to cope with newly impaired vision and for her every solo walk into town was a struggle of sheer nerve over fear and this brainless, bastard with his stupid, intolerant religous baggage was the last thing she needed. I can only imagine how it would have gone if our ten year old daughter had been there as well with her bloody great assistance dog Jos. Neither Jos or Hilke are anywhere near as patient as Judith is with stupidity.
The ass kissing of islam has gone on here as well, though it now seems to be in reverse a bit. The cynic in me wants to blame the flood of low achievers from the middle classes who managed to scrape into second rate universities to do third class degrees in sociology or social "sciences" (now there is an insult to name of science right there) and then came out looking to do something with those worthless degrees and engaged in social engineering and "embracing diversity". The best thing we Europeans could do is ship them all to Afghanistan, they would drive the Taliban freakin insane (they have certainly driven us insane). By the time those 14th century misogynists have had to listen to lectures on "Ethnic diversity" over and over and over during the long winter months they would welcome American bombs as sweet relief.
Comment by kris feenstra on July 14, 2011 at 7:10pm
I've seen the assistance dog issue with taxi cab drivers here.  Two in a row refused to take a woman

with a certified assistance dog at the airport. There was a loud and lengthy dialogue with the first driver, but on the second refusal, I think she just wanted to get home after her flight.  Legally, these cab drivers were in the wrong -- they do not have the right to refuse for that reason. However, there isn't an overly satisfactory way to deal with the issue.
Comment by Sassan K. on July 14, 2011 at 7:40pm
Wow Nina-beautiful insight. I totally emphasize with you.
Comment by matt.clerke on July 14, 2011 at 9:30pm

he was an illegal so he was ejected from the country

I assume your government ended up paying for his transport out of your country...maybe he just wanted a free ride?

 

Here in Australia we recently had a muslim call for the application of sharia law in Australia. He was practically laughed out of the country. The general consensus here is that if you want to move to Australia and live in Australia to escape from your crappy home country, don't try to bring your crappy home country with you.

Comment by Gaytor on July 14, 2011 at 9:34pm
I like the attitude Matt. I'm visiting EU countries, looking for a new home, and speaking the language and learning new ways is at the top of my list.
Comment by Great Dane on July 15, 2011 at 7:09am
Brits please, stop ass-kissing the stupid muslims!

Comment

You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

Atheist Sites

Blog Posts

Rounding Up?

Posted by Carol Foley on November 20, 2014 at 3:17am 2 Comments

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service