I have nothing against blacks and mexicans I just don't want them in my neighborhood

Is it racist to not want people of other colours, cultures in your neighborhood?

  • Total voters
    21
ah
lucysnow's world is inhabited by anachronistic tribal societies and .....spear chucking

so much for a one world govt

/chuckle
 
check out gates getting assaulted in brussels

Gates_PieFace-6984.jpg
 
S.A.M. said:
I presume the legal system still works in England and both the protestors who attacked Nick Griffin and those who attacked Warsi will be treated by the judicial system as required.
Click to expand...

If they choose to make an issue of it yes. My point is that moderate muslims who do become a part of secular society are feeling the pressure by fundies.

Islamic extremists have created "no-go" areas across Britain where it is too dangerous for non-Muslims to enter, one of the Church of England's most senior bishops warns today.

The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester and the Church's only Asian bishop, says that people of a different race or faith face physical attack if they live or work in communities dominated by a strict Muslim ideology.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1574694/Bishop-warns-of-no-go-zones-for-non-Muslims.html

Looks like the fundies are also vocal about who they want in their supposed communities except it isn't a matter of simple sentiment as the OP example you posted, that is an example of active racism.
 
My point is that moderate muslims who do become a part of secular society are feeling the pressure by fundies.
Click to expand...

This sounds like that identity thingy which makes people who are different uncomfortable in their midst.

This is because they want a community thats redolent of their identity minus foreign influences that threaten their comfort.

Look at these poor Jews, faced with a brash woman playing a tape recorder on the Sabbath!!!!!

I was mindful I would need to dress conservatively and keep out of harm's way. But I made my mistake when I parked the car and started walking towards the protest, not fully sure which street was which.

By the time I realised I'd come up the wrong street it was too late.

I suddenly found myself in the thick of the protest - in the midst of hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Jews in their long coats and sable-fur hats.

They might be supremely religious, but their behaviour - to me - was far from charitable or benevolent.

As the protest became noisier and the crowd began yelling, I took my recorder and microphone out of my bag to record the sound.

Suddenly the crowd turned on me, screaming in my face. Dozens of angry men began spitting on me.

Spit like rain

I found myself herded against a brick wall as they kept on spitting - on my face, my hair, my clothes, my arms.

It was like rain, coming at me from all directions - hitting my recorder, my bag, my shoes, even my glasses.

Big gobs of spit landed on me like heavy raindrops. I could even smell it as it fell on my face.

Somewhere behind me - I didn't see him - a man on a stairway either kicked me in the head or knocked something heavy against me.

I wasn't even sure why the mob was angry with me. Was it because I was a journalist? Or a woman? Because I wasn't Jewish in an Orthodox area? Was I not dressed conservatively enough?

In fact, I was later told, it was because using a tape-recorder is itself a desecration of the Shabbat even though I'm not Jewish and don't observe the Sabbath.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/06/2617502.htm?section=justin
Click to expand...

Really what did she expect not respecting the sentiments of the people living there?
 
I don't care if they feel this way for themselves but why do they have to try and interfere with the lives of those who are living differently and NOT in their community?

The example of the jewish woman is a bit different than the example I posted wouldn't you agree?
 
In what way exactly? Doesn't majority win by your account? Of course as I pointed out direct democracy depends on the size of the circle you choose to draw. The results are skewed by the population size you choose to frame the argument.
 
Its different because in the examples I gave someone came out and assaulted another. If you beat someone for walking through your neighborhood its an assault. This woman had walked into a heated protest. Anyone walking into a heated protest might come across such behavior. Its not as if they were looking for her as was the case of the Baroness. As you well know I believe that immigrants should integrate and assimilate into host societies. I don't believe in Sharia law nor the Beth Din. Truth is though Sam that the muslims in Europe cause a lot more problems than jews but that's besides the point. I think that in Europe where you have a nation that is homogenous like Denmark or heterogenous like England you need to have a cohesive set of values that are followed by all members. There needs to be some kind of tie to the national identity or the society will find nothing but internal strife.

In the example you gave does not include the right to be violent towards a different group of people. It doesn't say 'can I assault another' or 'is it racist to assault another' based on race etc.

In the example you gave its a matter of self-segregation but that isn't the same as interfering with life and limb.
 
What does it mean, Lucy, when you have to reduce yourself to justifying such behaviour?
 
Segregation, discrimination. Just because the other side is nuts doesn't mean you compromise on your principles.

Did you see this question?

Just a thought but why does Europe have all these issues but the US does not?
 
Oh. Well the US is a nation of immigrants and there is also lot's of space. There are cultural differences in the states and an american mindset but its not culturally singular as many European countries are.

I'm not sure what you mean by compromising principles. Please re-phrase the question concerning segregation and discrimination. Where exactly is the compromise of principles?
 
Where you try to "cure" segregation by emphasising differences. Where has that ever worked?

There are plenty of poor Muslim immigrants in the US too. Why do they not have these "identity" crises?
 
S.A.M. said:
Where you try to "cure" segregation by emphasising differences. Where has that ever worked?

There are plenty of poor Muslim immigrants in the US too. Why do they not have these "identity" crises?
Click to expand...

Now I am really lost. Where did I say that we should 'cure' segregation by emphasizing differences? I am saying you have to minimize the differences. Ditching the burkha helps, getting rid of schools that teach children in Urdu would help, not putting up with sharia law etc etc.

I just told you why there are none of these issues in the States.

The States is not Europe nor is it Australia or New Zealand. We cannot solve a problem in one particular place by using the model from a different environment.
 
No you did not. What did the US do differently to ditch the burka, Urdu schools and sharia laws?
 
S.A.M. said:
No you did not. What did the US do differently to ditch the burka, Urdu schools and sharia laws?
Click to expand...

They haven't ditched it per se. There are probably areas in the US where women wear the burkha though I have personally never seen a woman in a burkha in NY.

And if you look at my posts I distinguish between Europe and the States. In the States people self-segregate but they still share a common space. The space in Europe is dissimilar beginning to seem smaller and smaller therefore there is more of a need to get muslims to integrate. Also the threats don't help much, nor haranguing journalists over cartoons, nor demanding schools serve halal etc etc.

Nor is it charming to take the money from the host society and never give an inch but demand that the host society shift to suit the demands of a minority.

Also I think that american muslims are more moderate and know the rednecks would string em up if they acted up like they did in Europe:p
 
Well whatever the US is doing, its working, whatever the Europeans are doing looks like a bad re-run of the run-up to 1938. Maybe the Europeans need to look at their own society and figure out what they want. Based on historical precedent alone, I would recommend purging the Muslim population. It may look bad for a while but they'll get over it.
 
I don't think the Europeans are doing anything except bending over backwards to a bunch of fundies and so now they are paying for it. But perhaps they will learn their lesson and stop all this liberal crap which isn't working.

You are wrong if you think that its the Europeans who are being intolerant its the other way around. Its not 1938 Sam, sorry you don't get a pogrom nor a genocide nor legislative racism. What you have is a bunch of loud mouthed, religious fundie extremists trying to hog tie the rest of society to their wishes and its all bullshit. Its why I hail the Swiss for their decision. You don't get to pretend that you are as victimized as the jews in nazi germany. Sorry.
 
If you read the newspapers of the time, you'll find it was also a band of loud mouthed non-assimilating religious fundies they were getting rid of then, who lived in segregated ghettoes and had strange dietary and religious laws. Why do you think Britain has a halacha court?

Its just a repeat of the same ole.

The situation was mixed for Polish Jews in the inter-war period. They were recognized as a nationality and their legal rights were supposed to be protected under the Treaty of Versailles; however, their legal rights were not honored by Poland. The Kehillah, a Jewish governing body, was not allowed to run autonomously. The government intervened in the elections and controlled its budget. On the other hand, Jews received funding from the state for their schools.

Economic conditions declined for Polish Jews during the inter-war years. Jews were not allowed to work in the civil service, few were public school teachers, almost no Jews were railroad workers and no Jews worked in state-controlled banks or state-run monopolies (i.e. the tobacco industry). Legislation was enacted forcing citizens to rest on Sunday, ruining Jewish commerce that was closed on Saturday. Their economic downfall was accompanied by a rise of anti-Semitism. In the late 1930's a new wave of pogroms befell the community and anti-Jewish boycotts were enacted.
Click to expand...

It was pretty much the same all over.
 
Ah actually they targeted ALL jews regardless.

Why is it important to you that muslims are viewed as victimized in the same way as the jews during WW2? The situation is completely different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top