• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: axe battler | Pissed_and_messed

Discuss This

This is a loaded question :D and from the lack of responses it seems everyone else agrees.
 
It doesn't take a genius to know exactly what this thread was intended to be.

I'm not at all surprised the forum avoided it entirely.
8)

<3
 
Of course it's a loaded question but I just happened to have been watching a couple of things earlier which covered just these types of questions. I was planning on posting them up to see what peoples thoughts were anyway but wasn't sure where to put them so this thread would fit rather well.

As far as the article linked goes, I tend to agree with the author that the woman should not have been granted permission to wear a veil in court. I say this on the basis that religion is a personal choice that should not spill over into wider society. Believe whatever you want but those beliefs do not entitle you to special treatment. Courts have procedures - and I personally believe they made the wrong decision in changing those procedures to accommodate a belief system (or at least one interpretation of a belief system) - but it is ultimately the courts decision what procedures they put in place.

In relation to the stuff that will inevitably be said in response, the only connection I see is that organisations, institutions, HR websites, personal blogs, self-invented board games, rich folk, politicians, etc (couple of those may be very slightly tongue in cheek) get to make the rules that apply to themselves and others who interact with them. That and you would probably want to have some pretty good context before calling anybody a faggot in court too (even whilst wearing a niqab).

As far as the talks I mentioned above I've posted linkies below if anybody is interested. The second is very brief and is mostly a Q&A session - I don't agree with all of it but some good points are certainly made. The first has a lot more meat on the bones and I found little if anything I disagree with.

Secularism in the Age of ISIS

Islamophobia-phobia
 
I didn't even pose a question let alone a loaded one, couldn't really leave it more open than saying simply discuss and leaving a link. I copied the link from an interesting discussion in another forum. Tbh it doesn't suprise me (most of) you lot aren't capable or willing to have an objective discussion about a difficult subject. Nevermind, let's all get back to going on for endless pages about how out of out minds on cheap RCs we are.:|
 
Our Courts are secular institutions, which is the only way to be as fair as possible to people of all religions and of no religion. As such, reality sometimes has to intervene and overrule beliefs, when they are found against the interests of Justice. We in the West use facial expressions as a form of conscious and subconscious communication, and it is not unreasonable to expect someone to remove a mask from their face in a situation where absolute honesty is demanded. This is so, even if it causes some temporary discomfort. The wider interests of fairness to all persons must take precedence over imagined fears. If we allow one group of people the especial right privilege to hold a Court in contempt for the sake of not offending an imaginary being, then Justice is the loser.

The extent to which women are oppressed by religious requirements for modesty of dress, the extent to which this oppression is facilitated by those on the political Left and whether it is brought about more by misguidedly appealing for religious tolerance or fear of adverse consequences, are separate but related issues. Nobody's ends are served by not investigating them thoroughly.
 
^Well said Julie. A similar situation is Sihks not having to wear crash helmets on motorcycles or hardhats on construction sites because they CHOOSE to wear turbans.
 
There's a scene in Only Fools and Horses about that! Del has acquired some bright red equestrian helmets, which he decides he is going to recycle as safety turbans using some of Raquel's old scarves .....
 
THECATINTHEHAT said:
I didn't even pose a question let alone a loaded one, couldn't really leave it more open than saying simply discuss and leaving a link. I copied the link from an interesting discussion in another forum. Tbh it doesn't suprise me (most of) you lot aren't capable or willing to have an objective discussion about a difficult subject. Nevermind, let's all get back to going on for endless pages about how out of out minds on cheap RCs we are.:|
Click to expand...

As noted above, it just so happened that I was also thinking that topics of this nature were important, potentially difficult and (sadly) ever more timely. I don't really understand your reaction. Whilst it is eyebrow-raisingly coincidental that you would post a provocative (perfectly legitimate but certainly also provocative) thread like this just after that favourite dead hobby horse of yourself and a few other members has been dredged up again to be given yet another flogging, it is also a far more interesting topic than those some may suspect it is being used as a proxy for. Whether that was your intention or not you have to admit it is obviously going to look as though it is given the timing. As such, it does seem a little premature to be flouncing off in a huff. If objective discussion - of whatever kind - was actually the point of this thread why would you pick your ball up and stomp home without making the slightest attempt to engage in discussion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top