Weasel Straw strikes again (Pakistani men in Britain see white girls as "easy meat")
- Thread starter DrRingDing
- Start date
- Status
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Do they?
Even in Iran, that is not the case for religious minorities such as the Zoorastrians, who are officially recognised by the state even now.
Even in Iran, that is not the case for religious minorities such as the Zoorastrians, who are officially recognised by the state even now.
They probably think a mortar bomb is a suitable donation to the church roof fund. Public display of any religious belief other than Islam is banned in Saudi Arabia, so no churches, and that's where Wahabbism comes from.
A Muslim man can marry non-Muslim women, so long as the kids are raised Muslim.
A Non-Muslim man cannot legally marry a Muslim woman. It simply cannot happen or be recognized in Egyptian or Islam law. Any Christian who was crazy enough to try and have sex with a Muslim faces a lynch mob and / or imprisonment and / or torture.
A Christian may freely convert to Islam – and are encouraged to do so.
No Muslim may convert away from Islam. Any attempt at apostasy would lead to lynching or else to detention by the state authorities. The very, very few Muslims crazy enough to attempt to convert to Christianity in Egypt are put in loony bins and drugged / tortured / detained etc until they realize the error of their ways.
Christians are systematically pressured and incentivised to convert to Islam.
A Christian who attempts to proselytise among Muslims faces a lynching.
Muslims get huge tax breaks to build mosques. Tens of thousands of mosques have been built in Egypt over the past couple of decades. (70,000 was the figure I last read quoted by Muslim judge Ashmawi.)
Christians are forbidden to build new churches unless they get a permission from the President himself. (These as, you may suspect, are not forthcoming.) When, as happens, Christians are discovered using a house or a hall as an unlicensed church, it provokes riots and / or a pogrom – in which the local authorities are often complicit.
I could go on, but I hope the point is made.
I can't, off the top of my head, provide links to specifics of the Islamic jurists or Egyptian code. But it’s not difficult to find on-line reference to these things. If you google / wikie 'Pact of Umar/Omar' it'll give you an idea of the founding ideas upon which the tenets of dhimmitude were established. Alternatively, try ‘jizya’ or ‘dhimmis’.
Or google ‘Khaybar’ – a conquest in the career of the Prophet which has since provided a canonical model for the treatment of subject non-Muslims. (One of the chants regularly used at anti-Christian demos / church attacks etc is:
‘Khaybar, Khaybar, ya Yehud!
Jaysh Mohammed sawfa ya’ud!’
‘Khaybar, Khaybar, you Jews!
The army of Mohammed is here again!’)
ohmyliver
poppin' like a cork
I think he's referring to the fact that Islamically speaking Muslims have a duty of care for other believers in monotheism (such as Christians, Jews, um, Sabians, etc) in Muslim lands. So long as they pay taxes to the Islamic state, and abide by various conditions. However this special 'non-muslim' tax was abolished in Egypt in the first half of the 20th century.
*eta* but clearly the people doing it were using unislamic rhetoric (i.e. appeal to a national identity, rather than the ummah, or the deen)
ohmyliver
poppin' like a cork
technically that permission has been devolved to local councils since 2005. Whether that's made an actual difference to the ability to the Copts and other Christian groups' ability to build churches is a moot point.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It appears that Thomsy is right about all this. Egyptian identity cards state the bearer's religion, and this dictates which set of laws that person must obey. And the case of Mohammad Hegazi demonstrates how it is not possible to change your 'official' religion from Islam, which is given to you in the vast majority of cases at birth. In Egypt, if one is born a Muslim, one must, by law, die a Muslim.
I've been trying to find a non-Christian source for this because I hate linking to Christian sites, but it appears that only Christian news groups have been following the case at all. It is the case of a man who went to court in 2007 for the right to change his religion from Islam (presumably to Christianity). The court refused his request.
Also, I tend to agree with Thomsy that real progress in Egypt would come with a concerted campaign to end the practice of the state telling you what religion you belong to. That would be a true challenge to the Islamic supremacist assumptions that lie behind much of Egyptian law.
It is hard not to draw parallels with the race laws of Germany and elsewhere. The only difference in this case is that it is possible for those from minority groups to convert to the dominant group. But woe betide anyone who pronounces him or herself atheist. Egyptian law allows for no such thing to exist.
I've been trying to find a non-Christian source for this because I hate linking to Christian sites, but it appears that only Christian news groups have been following the case at all. It is the case of a man who went to court in 2007 for the right to change his religion from Islam (presumably to Christianity). The court refused his request.
Also, I tend to agree with Thomsy that real progress in Egypt would come with a concerted campaign to end the practice of the state telling you what religion you belong to. That would be a true challenge to the Islamic supremacist assumptions that lie behind much of Egyptian law.
It is hard not to draw parallels with the race laws of Germany and elsewhere. The only difference in this case is that it is possible for those from minority groups to convert to the dominant group. But woe betide anyone who pronounces him or herself atheist. Egyptian law allows for no such thing to exist.
Hi, ohmyliver,
I do appreciate the change. I was just trying to keep things simple in the list. As you say, the change in the law definitely has not proven beneficial in any way that I can see. Most Christians are scathing about the change - alleging that it simply let Hosni M off the hook when foreign diplomats pressure on him to licence more churches: he can now just blame it on the intransigence of provincial governors.
And in fact, I did not mean the list to sound narrowly legalistic. I'm guessing you know, but I'll note anyway, that the working of the law on churches actually gives a good idea of the practical functioning of the Islamic hegemony. I spoke to a Coptic priest whose church had been attacked (two dead) and he damned the new law as a law for the 'destruction' of churches. He said that when a licence is granted to re-build a church, the church is duly knocked down. But when the Copts try to build a new church in its place, the protests of local Muslims are so violent that the security forces intervene to 'maintain order' and simply prevent the rebuilding of the church.
I do appreciate the change. I was just trying to keep things simple in the list. As you say, the change in the law definitely has not proven beneficial in any way that I can see. Most Christians are scathing about the change - alleging that it simply let Hosni M off the hook when foreign diplomats pressure on him to licence more churches: he can now just blame it on the intransigence of provincial governors.
And in fact, I did not mean the list to sound narrowly legalistic. I'm guessing you know, but I'll note anyway, that the working of the law on churches actually gives a good idea of the practical functioning of the Islamic hegemony. I spoke to a Coptic priest whose church had been attacked (two dead) and he damned the new law as a law for the 'destruction' of churches. He said that when a licence is granted to re-build a church, the church is duly knocked down. But when the Copts try to build a new church in its place, the protests of local Muslims are so violent that the security forces intervene to 'maintain order' and simply prevent the rebuilding of the church.
Hi, littlebabyjesus.
To be honest, it's actually even worse than that for Christians.
It is, of course, the authorities who fill out and print the ID cards. And every year many, many Christians find themselves 'accidentally' registered by the authorties as 'Muslim'. It is almost impossible thereafter to have your card changed to show you are really a Christian. (It would suggest apostasy.)
It is impossible to 'prove' this is a deliberate policy of the authorities. But every Christian believes it so - partly because Muslims are never accidentally listed as Christian, and partly because it is made nearly-impossible to rectify the obvious 'error'.
This is all particularly hard upon Christian women. If registed on their ID card as a Muslim, they are not legally permitted to marry a Christian. Many spend their lives hoping and waiting for the ID to be changed. Sometimes, once they are past child-bearing age, the 'mistake' is rectified.
Christian men registered as Muslim can, of course, still marry. But their children must registered and raised as Muslim.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Pseudo-tanky, if you don't mind. Underneath the bluster and aggression, ern's just another middle-class liberal.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Pre-fixing the man's name with "the great" is hardly a eulogy
Hmmm. The Nuremberg laws were part of a complex of laws aimed at expropriating and criminalising those people whose "racial" lineage was deemed unacceptable.
So, similarity is limited, the Nuremberg laws and the state and religious laws in states where Islam is the majority religion are similar in the same way that a cat is similar to a dog: The former are both laws, and the latter are both animals, but their ambit differs massively.
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
If one were to take the view that islam, according to the purist definition, has fascistic leanings, which by anyone's definition of fascism it certainly does, then it follows that those who are living to propagate islam and those who see it as the only way of life, are therefore acting as fascists, to a greater or lesser degree.
I oppose fascism in all it's forms, I despise the subjugation of women - an intrinsic part of islamic laws - and I will not tolerate the intolerant nature of the islamic culture, Danish cartoonists and fatwahs.
In any Gulf state one knows islam is law, and one modifies ones behaviour accordingly, being a guest in an islamic state.
There is little sign of the same aquiescance when islamic people choose to live and work in non-islamic countries.
More often that not, quite the opposite.
I oppose fascism in all it's forms, I despise the subjugation of women - an intrinsic part of islamic laws - and I will not tolerate the intolerant nature of the islamic culture, Danish cartoonists and fatwahs.
In any Gulf state one knows islam is law, and one modifies ones behaviour accordingly, being a guest in an islamic state.
There is little sign of the same aquiescance when islamic people choose to live and work in non-islamic countries.
More often that not, quite the opposite.
Would you judge those local Muslims to have been inspired by Islamic doctrine?
Racism
Proper Tidy
Arsed
Do you really mean that "racial" discrimination and "racial" supremacism are a unacceptable, but that "sectarian" discrimination and "sectarian" supremacism are not a problem?
Both sets of laws are designed to express, enforce and maintain the supremacy of one community over another.
Both sets of laws deny full benefits of citizenship to the members of the subordinate community.
Both sets of laws employ the threat of imprisonment, violence or death to police sexual relations between the 'inferior' and the 'superior' communities.
Do you seriously wish to repeat your claim that the only things they have in common is that they are both 'laws'?
you really a card peeks. You've played at being Jazzzz, detective-boy, now you're AWL-lite, what are we going to get next?
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
And nobody has answered the prudient question yet - is Hanne Kristin Rohde lying when she says all on-street rapes in Oslo the past few years have been committed by non-domestic residents?
Simple question really. Apparently to be wriggled out of at all costs, eh??
Simple question really. Apparently to be wriggled out of at all costs, eh??
Proper Tidy
Arsed
Proper Tidy
Arsed
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
So you think she just lied to the TV news cameras and newspapers?
Why do you think she would have done that?
Can you prove that she is lying, yes or no?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
You are the only wriggler, baby. What dozy cunt (d-b excepted) simply takes any cops word for anything? Oh, yes of course, thick wankers with absolutely no other evidence to support their 'argument'. Even if it is true, you really are scraping the barrel to find any evidence for your claims, and can only do so by ignoring all the other crime stats that explicitly contradict them. Really fucking pathetic.
Whehn are you going to stop wriggling?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I agree with this. One copper's word for it is too flimsy to give the claim any consideration.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
No, I don't. Please don't put words in my mouth.
Yes.
The Nuremberg laws denied any benefits of citizenship to Jews. They rendered them, if they happened to be German, stateless.
The Nuremberg laws didn't employ threats, they allowed legislation to be actioned that made a substantial attempt to end the problem through mass murder.
I haven't claimed that "the only things they have in common is that they're both 'laws' ". I said that their similarity is limited (and it is, in scale as in action), and that the ambit of these laws differs massively (which ist does).
Rather than repeatedly misrepresenting what I've said (twice in one post. Well done!), how about constructing an argument that deals with what I've actually said?
Proper Tidy
Arsed
I have no idea, I'm not an expert on Norwegian filth. Very unlikely though, isn't it? I mean, Oslo is a fairly big city. Not a single rape by a non-muslim? You think that is even remotely likely? Although I note you have now gone from Norway to Oslo to on-street rapes in Oslo.
Expand your fascism theory pk.
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
She's the head of rape robbery and vice in Oslo, her data is used in UNHCR reports, and her statements were made to the media personally. Why would she lie and if she was don't you think there would be a huge scandal that rippled through Brussels across the planet by now??
Proper Tidy
Arsed
Saint Hanne
- Status
Similar threads
