Charl91 Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 No idea why people would be offended. You don't look much like Whoopi Goldberg if you're white - that would be a shit costume. No one complains if you paint yourself green to go as the Hulk.
Dr The Singh Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 No idea why people would be offended. You don't look much like Whoopi Goldberg if you're white - that would be a shit costume. No one complains if you paint yourself green to go as the Hulk. Agreed, that's just silly, was Michael Jackson accused of racism for turning himself white!!!!!
Dr The Singh Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 Was it Hope Powell? it was Sol Campbell, he was upset he didn't get the role, but reckons if he was white he would have.
Soup Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 You don't get killed for leaving Islam. Most Muslims are not barbarians. I've known plenty of practicing Muslims who have sons and daughters - some of whom are Muslim and some are westernised and do not follow their parents and siblings religion. None of their family or community have fell out with or tried to harm the non-religious ones. The 'Islam leavers' are treated the same as they always were by other Muslims in my experience. Leaving Islam,you make it sound like some club that was made up a few thousand years ago cause there we're other clubs that some people didn't like.Oh hold on a minute.....
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 Well, this is certainly an entertaining debate. Hello there The thing is, it is very hard to put levels on bad things. Just because having a "banterish" joke about gay people is not as bad as the slave trade does not mean that it is not bad at all. I was not comparing the two in terms of which was better or worse but in terms of how things which are deemed completely acceptable by a culture can be one day shown to be the opposite. I bet 30 years ago people thought that "paki" and "nigger" were just harmless jokes that everyone said but it is only with the gift of hindsight and continued discussion that we can see them for what they are which is, at worst, bigoted hatred worthy of our complete vitriolic bashing or, at best, pathetic and stupid ignorance which is embarrassing to see grown men spout out. My argument these days is not that these things are "as bad" or "not as bad" as the slave trade or the inequality of women but that it is so so so depressing to see a group of grown men/women literally acting like a pack of jibbering, salivating animals and shouting "I've got a foreskin" or "I bet you take it up the arse" to another bunch of grown men/women and I can’t see why saying that you believe this to be wrong should get rounds of "lighten up man, it's banter, it's PC gone mad!!". As I said I just cannot see why grown adults would want to shout such childish (and very hurtful sometimes) comments at other grown adults? And, as an extension, why other grown adults would waste time and energy defending someone's right to call another man a bender? Surely there are more worthwhile, useful causes than fighting for the rights of the poor, mistreated moron to have the right to call a gay man a bender like in the good old days and make fun of Leicester cos there's like, loads of pakis n that. Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing and you cannot hope to ban people based on ignorant views but maybe we can hope to make it less likely for people to want to shout abusive chants by having discussions like this. I say again, do you want to fight for the right that a man can stand up at a football match and shout "I bet you take it up the arse" to a whole sea of people because they come from a town that has a well known gay scene? Do any of us want to be fighting that fight? Up the foxes!! Not sure how to do nested quotes so I will just put the post you were referring to so your reply can be seen in context. Your post above was in response to me saying this (I have bolded parts of both my text and yours to show how you have ventriloquised me and made an argument against a point I haven't made): "To the people who are bringing up slavery and racism etc in defence against accusations of chronic offence-taking, do you realise the hugely arrogant implications of what you're saying?Justifying your sensitivities by comparing your offence to the repulsion felt by anti-slavery campaigners is so self-absorbed. Do you honestly believe you are in the same position as they were? And do you honestly believe that the ending of the slave trade could be best described as a response to it being found "offensive"? Wouldn't that be an embarrassing and insulting misnomer? There is a middle ground here that some people are denying with this false dichotomy. You don't have to be a chronically offended prude to find some of what is chanted at football matches quite distasteful, but at the same time you don't have to be a foaming-at-the-mouth neo-Nazi for not deeming "offence" to be an important factor in decision-making at all. "We can see you holding hands" - this is, at most, mildly distasteful. It's quite boring, predictable, and unimaginative. It is in no way a orchestrated anti-homosexuality campaign or a foundation for mass hatred. The fact that people are "offended" by it is really a red herring. Who cares if you're offended? Being offended does not in and of itself deserve some extra level of entitlement. It's an insult to gay people to take offence on their behalf for such minor and insignificant treatment when they have, within living memory, received such awful treatment from other people far worse than a few hundred blokes trying to be funny at a football match. That genuinely is offensive. On a side note, I work at Brighton Gay Pride each year and, great fun though it is, if you want to see truly "offensive" things I recommend it, you'll see things you can never unsee lol" I am not making the "banter" argument. I don't think it's relevant, and trying to get people to justify their defence of "banter" and then noticing the discrepancies in their explanations is like playing tennis without the net. You will also notice that I did not make comparisons about the respective struggles or plights of particular minorities; I compared people like you, bystanders, in each instance. You did it again in the response I have quoted above - like it or not, when you mention the slave trade as a comparison in this argument, it is really yourself you are appraising. It's a tacit pat on your own back, putting yourself in the category of the great emancipators who fought exceptional hardship and misery at great risk. The fact that you notice the two scenarios are not similar is precisely the point - they are not similar, making your comparison all the more conceited and self-congratulatory.
Guest MattP Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 people still blacking up....dear oh dear Well it would have looked pretty stupid had she turned as "Sister Act" being white wouldn't it? If it's not intended to be offensive I don't see the problem, no one moaned at Stars in their Eyes "blacking people up" when they wanted to impersonate a black singer or vice versa. It would have looked ridiculous coming as Ray Charles with a pale face and ginger hair. How can people not manage to differenciate between people dressing up in a racist way to cause offence (i.e black and white minstrels) and dressing up to look like someone for a fancy dress party. Where has everyones common sense gone? What kind of an appalling existence must you live to be offended by someone dressed up as Whoopi Goldberg.
Buce Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 You don't get killed for leaving Islam. Most Muslims are not barbarians. I've known plenty of practicing Muslims who have sons and daughters - some of whom are Muslim and some are westernised and do not follow their parents and siblings religion. None of their family or community have fell out with or tried to harm the non-religious ones. The 'Islam leavers' are treated the same as they always were by other Muslims in my experience. It largely depends on the interpretation of Islam; many Islamic scholars do advocate death for apostates: http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/apostasy.htm
The Doctor Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 You don't get killed for leaving Islam. Most Muslims are not barbarians. I've known plenty of practicing Muslims who have sons and daughters - some of whom are Muslim and some are westernised and do not follow their parents and siblings religion. None of their family or community have fell out with or tried to harm the non-religious ones. The 'Islam leavers' are treated the same as they always were by other Muslims in my experience. "Whosoever turns back from his belief (irtada), openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever ye find him, like any other infidel."
LanguedocFox Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 "Whosoever turns back from his belief (irtada), openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever ye find him, like any other infidel." Not being picky, but if you read Leviticus, there are about a dozen things for which people should be killed, usually by stoning to death, including blasphemy, adultery, homosexuality, and (if you're a child) being rude to your parents. As Ricky Gervais said, Thank god I'm an atheist.
Dr The Singh Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 Can we not bring Islam into this, or start a new thread. My 2 pence, according to hadiths the great prophet himself prescribed death to apostates, that is a fact
Guest MattP Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 It largely depends on the interpretation of Islam; many Islamic scholars do advocate death for apostates: http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/apostasy.htm Considering some Islamic countries still have the death penalty for it, I think it's fair to say it's an issue that should cause concern and be addressed by any right minded people.
shade Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 can we at least all agree that racist, homophobic, religious redheads are at the bottom of the foodchain?
Soup Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 can we at least all agree that racist, homophobic, religious redheads are at the bottom of the foodchain? What is a religious redhead?
Banks Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 Think it was the female player for Man City, Toni Duggan. Just had a look at her, she's fit as ****...
GingerrrFox Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 I love how people get angry about me calling people from Brighton fairies but it's ok to call Redheads bottom of the food chain. I like the hypocrisy of the whole thing. But don't worry, unlike a bunch of puffs I'm not so easily offended.
Dr The Singh Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 I'm a puff, and the hypocrisy of people on here assuming puffs are weak and get easily offended, unlike redhead religious I'm not being hypocritical
shade Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 I love how people get angry about me calling people from Brighton fairies but it's ok to call Redheads bottom of the food chain. I like the hypocrisy of the whole thing. But don't worry, unlike a bunch of puffs I'm not so easily offended. yeah but homosexuals can't defend themselves, whereas ginges are hard as nails, rusty nails!
Munshi Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 Ohgod. Muslims don't kill you if you leave Islam, and you aren't forced to join Islam either. You can get these 'quotes' and 'facts' from anywhere and I can tell you for sure that Killing in Islam is strictly forbidden. It's a bit like football though, you get your fair share of fans who spout some real bullshit, similarly you get a few Muslims who don't know what there doing and are idiots. Hate when Muslims particularly are categorised,when actually most of them have done nothing wrong.
Guest MattP Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 Ohgod. Muslims don't kill you if you leave Islam, and you aren't forced to join Islam either. You can get these 'quotes' and 'facts' from anywhere and I can tell you for sure that Killing in Islam is strictly forbidden. It's a bit like football though, you get your fair share of fans who spout some real bullshit, similarly you get a few Muslims who don't know what there doing and are idiots. Hate when Muslims particularly are categorised,when actually most of them have done nothing wrong. Very inoffensive, but unfortunately completely inaccurate. It's quite common in the Islamic World to be killed for leaving Islam. In 2013, 20 countries across the globe prohibited its citizens from apostasy; in these countries, it is a criminal offense to abandon one's faith to become atheist, or convert to another religion.[7][8] All 20 of these countries were majority Islamic nations, of which 11 were in the Middle East. No country in the Americas or Europe has any law forbidding apostasy and restricting the freedom to convert to any religion. Furthermore, across the globe, no country with Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, agnostic or atheist majority had any criminal or civil laws forbidding or encouraging apostasy, or had laws restricting an individual's right to convert from one religion to another.[9][10][11][12] The following are some nations that treat apostasy under their criminal laws. Iran – illegal (death penalty)[13][14][15] Egypt – illegal (3 years' imprisonment)[15] Pakistan – illegal (death penalty[15] since 2007) United Arab Emirates – illegal (3 years' imprisonment, flogging)[16] Somalia – illegal (death penalty)[17] Afghanistan – illegal (death penalty, although the U.S. and other coalition members have put pressure that has prevented recent executions)[18][19] Saudi Arabia – illegal (death penalty, although there have been no recently reported executions)[15][20] Sudan – illegal (death penalty, although there have only been recent reports of torture, and not of execution)[21][22] Qatar – illegal (death penalty)[23] Yemen – illegal (death penalty)[23] Malaysia – illegal in five of 13 states (fine, imprisonment, and flogging)[24][25] Mauritania – illegal (death penalty if still apostate after 3 days)[26] Morocco – illegal to proselytise conversion (15 years' imprisonment)[27] Jordan – possibly illegal (fine, jail, child custody loss, marriage annulment) although officials claim otherwise, convictions are recorded for apostasy[28][29][30] Oman – legal in criminal code, but according to the family code, a father can lose custody of his child[31]
Dr The Singh Posted 5 March 2014 Posted 5 March 2014 Maybe someone aught to have told Abu Musa that, during the prophets reign, cus he was doing what the prophet wanted him to do
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.