Religion of Perpetual Rage: Now We Have Veil Rage!

[BoogyMan]

Link Here (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/10/06/uk.straw/index.html?section=cnn_topstories)

LONDON, England -- A senior British Cabinet minister has sparked fury by saying that Muslim women who wore full veils made community relations more difficult.

Jack Straw wrote in a newspaper that a veil was "a visible statement of separation and difference" and that he was more comfortable dealing with female visitors to his local political office with their faces uncovered.

But Muslim leaders in Straw's Blackburn constituency in northwest England said many Muslim women would find his comments "offensive and disturbing."

Straw, leader of the House of Commons and the former foreign secretary, said he was concerned that "wearing the full veil was bound to make better, positive relations between the two communities more difficult."

Asked on Friday if he would like veils to be discarded altogether, Straw said: "Yes. It needs to be made clear I am not talking about being prescriptive but with all the caveats, yes, I would rather."

"You cannot force people where they live, that's a matter of choice and economics, but you can be concerned about the implications of separateness and I am," he told the BBC.

Straw originally wrote in the Lancashire Telegraph that he asked women to remove their veils in his constituency office. "I felt uncomfortable about talking to someone 'face to face' who I could not see," he wrote. No one had refused his request, he said.

Straw pointed out that he defended Muslims' rights to wear head scarves and that wearing a full veil "breaks no laws."

But opposition politicians rounded on his comments. Conservative policy director Oliver Letwin said it would be a "dangerous doctrine" to instruct people how to dress, while Liberal Democrat chairman Simon Hughes described the remarks as "insensitive and surprising."

And Straw faced criticism in his own constituency. The Lancashire Council of Mosques said the Commons leader had "misunderstood" the issue and it was "deeply concerned" by his "very insensitive and unwise" statement.

"For such a seasoned and astute politician to make such a comment that has shocked his Muslim constituents seems ill judged and misconceived," a spokesman told the Press Association.

"Many of these women find Mr. Straw's comments both offensive and disturbing."

The radical Hizb ut-Tahrir organization said the Muslim community "does not need lessons in dress from Jack Straw."

"He has once again shown that for Cabinet ministers it is open season on Muslims and Islam," said spokesperson Nazreen Nawaz.

However, Daud Abdullah, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said he understood Straw's views. "This (the veil) does cause some discomfort to non-Muslims. One can understand this," he said.

And some of Straw's colleagues backed Straw, with chairperson Hazel Blears saying his request to constituents was "perfectly proper." Downing Street said the Commons leader was expressing a private opinion.

[Alonzo]

To many female muslims it would be akin to telling Sikhs to take off their turbans, or Jews to take off their yarmulkes. He's being attacked from all sides, muslims and non muslims alike. There's nothing wrong with the response.

[BoogyMan]

To many female muslims it would be akin to telling Sikhs to take off their turbins, or Jews to take off their yarmulkes. He's being attacked from all sides, muslims and non muslims alike. There's nothing wrong with the response.


You are right Alonzo, he should not be allowed an opinion and the reaction, no matter how foolish, no matter how overblown is just!

Egads man, if this were christians berating someone for commenting about their actions (they most likely wouldn't do this anyway) would you be defending their actions? Standing up for their freedom of expression?

The point is one comment, an opinion and nothing more, creates a firestorm of invective, and aplogizers are only emboldening that response.

[Alonzo]

Lets see an american politician publicly admit to asking all nuns to remove their habits when he sees them, or to ask for priests, pastors etc. not to dress in religious attire. They would be condemned.

[BoogyMan]

Lets see an american politician publicly admit to asking all nuns to remove their habits when he sees them, or to ask for priests, pastors etc. not to dress in religious attire. They would be condemned.


Any person has the right to an opinion. Answer the question posed to you!

He didn't ask for the uncovering of the hair, just the face.

[Alonzo]

Any person has the right to an opinion.Â*Â*Answer the question posed to you!

Then ask the question. The only question in your post was the reaction if christian behavior had been attacked.

And if you truly believe what you are suggesting, don't attack muslims and non muslims for stating their opinion. And don't attack me for stating my opinion.

Your comment is absurd. A right to an opinion does not grant you a right to avoid criticism, or a right to prevent others from expressing their opinion.

He didn't ask for the uncovering of the hair, just the face.


Point? Religious obligation is religious obligation. If someone is forced to violate what they believe to be a religious requirement then it should be condemned, barring issues where the requirement harms others.

[BoogyMan]

Then ask the question. The only question in your post was the reaction if christian behavior had been attacked.

And if you truly believe what you are suggesting, don't attack muslims and non muslims for stating their opinion. And don't attack me for stating my opinion.

Your comment is absurd. A right to an opinion does not grant you a right to avoid criticism, or a right to prevent others from expressing their opinion.

I asked a question which you completely dodged and made up some garbage that you THOUGHT I meant. An attack? What attack Zo, substantiate that garbage.

There is however a HUGE difference in what you would like to portray as going on and what is actually going on with regard to this story. Don't go do any research on your own though.

Point? Religious obligation is religious obligation. If someone is forced to violate what they believe to be a religious requirement then it should be condemned, barring issues where the requirement harms others.

This is completely hillarious coming from you Zo, totally and completely hillarious and I almost got caught up in your obfuscation. Get back on topic.

[Alonzo]

I asked a question which you completely dodged and made up some garbage that you THOUGHT I meant.Â*Â*An attack?Â*Â*What attack Zo, substantiate that garbage.

You condemned my opinion while claiming people have a right to their opinion. They do, but they have a right to oppose anothers opinion as well.

And I did not dodge anything. I answered the only question asked. If you want me to answer a question then go ahead and ask it now.

There is however a HUGE difference in what you would like to portray as going on and what is actually going on with regard to this story.Â*Â*Don't go do any research on your own though.

I read the story before you posted it.

But tell me, what's really going on?


This is completely hillarious coming from you Zo, totally and completely hillarious and I almost got caught up in your obfuscation.Â*Â*Get back on topic.


And where have I ever attacked a religion except when it was harmful to unwilling participants?

[BoogyMan]

Topic, its at the top of each post.Â*Â*I won't be diverted again.Â*Â*

You didn't answer the question you accused me of attacking you, no such attack happened.Â*Â*

Lose the superior attitude and check out this video: Click Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up-p7t9yAvs&eurl=)

[Alonzo]

That doesn't tell me anything new.

Second, you condemned me for opposing the opinion of Straw, using the argument that he has the right to an opinion.

Your post contained a strong condemnation of my opinion. That counts as an attack. I never claimed it was a personal attack, I simply called it an attack. Attacking opinions is perfectly acceptable, but that doesn't mean it can't be called an attack.

[BoogyMan]

Obfuscation once again. Those point of this post is that it takes little or nothing to create muslim rage these days. The next thing you know, non-muslims continuing to breath will create muslim rage.

[Elrathin]

Wanna Create Rage for Christians? Make Gay Marriage Legal. Watch what happens with so called Christians at that point.

[BoogyMan]

Wanna Create Rage for Christians?Â*Â*Make Gay Marriage Legal.Â*Â*Watch what happens with so called Christians at that point.


Like I told Zo, there is a topic, try sticking to it.

[Elrathin]

Like I told Zo, there is a topic, try sticking to it.


You conservatives don't.

[BoogyMan]

We don't? You got me there Elrathin, I haven't been trying to keep this thread on topic all night even in the face of liberals attempts to hijack it.

Egads

[Elrathin]

We don't? You got me there Elrathin, I haven't been trying to keep this thread on topic all night even in the face of liberals attempts to hijack it.

Egads


This thread maybe, but I don't see you crying foul when your conservative brothers derail other threads.

[BoogyMan]

Elrathin, conservatives arent exactly welcome around here and I don't speak for anyone but myself. I am not and will not be held to account for the actions of others.

If you will notice I started this thread and that is why I asked you to stay on topic.

[Elrathin]

Elrathin, conservatives arent exactly welcome around here and I don't speak for anyone but myself. I am not and will not be held to account for the actions of others.


Really? I have yet to see you speak against one of Chesswarsnow rants and raves and he claims he is a conservative. In fact you have posted in some of his threads without one iota of a disagreement with his methods.

Sounds like you don't care as long as it is a conservative doing it.

[BoogyMan]

I think you need to do some research and go read some more threads as I have done just what you say that I havent. I just don't do it by calling names and verbal abuse.

[Elrathin]

I think you need to do some research and go read some more threads as I have done just what you say that I havent. I just don't do it by calling names and verbal abuse.


Care to point me where you spoke against Chesswarsnow?

[BoogyMan]

It has been a while but if you use the search tools you will find where I disagreed with him in his posts. Disagreement does not mean dislike nor does it mean disrespect as you seem to intimate.

[Elrathin]

It has been a while but if you use the search tools you will find where I disagreed with him in his posts. Disagreement does not mean dislike nor does it mean disrespect as you seem to intimate.


Yep, I found none, so if you would be so kind as to link it, it would be appreciated.

[BoogyMan]

You couldn't have looked that far back that quickly Elrathin. I have been posting here for quite some time and as I remember it has been a while since I spoke up. You are going to actually have to read the threads though.

[Elrathin]

You couldn't have looked that far back that quickly Elrathin. I have been posting here for quite some time and as I remember it has been a while since I spoke up. You are going to actually have to read the threads though.


So in other words there isn't any. Thanks for proving that. When you provide proof otherwise I'll admit it, but until then my point stands. You are for conservatives spouting off crap, but not liberals.

My point was what have you spoken against Chesswarsnow, since he hasn't been here that long, it is quite clear you haven't. That was my point, thank you for proving it.

[BoogyMan]

You can choose to behave however you wish and if you cannot figure out the search function it is not my burden to aid you. I have spoken against Chess, but I have disagreed with him several times.

When you can muster the energy to use the search tool you can come back and I will gladly accept your apology for the slanderous spew in your previous posting.

[Alonzo]

EL, he spoke against chess's comments on muslims before.

And, boogy, I did not go off topic and I answered the questions that I saw you asked, when you asked them.

[CheesyMuslim]

Sorry bout that,

1. But anyone can speak out against my *Most Powerful Words*.
2. But, that doesn't mean that person is right, now does it?
3. Sure Boogy may or may not have had a weak moment, I for one can't remember.
4. But what if he has or hasn't?
5. My words have a way of effectually changing space and time, now who wants to stand in front of them?
6. You can step in-front of my words like an oncoming train, but I wouldn't advise it.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Elrathin]

Sorry bout that,

1. But anyone can speak out against my *Most Powerful Words*.
2. But, that doesn't mean that person is right, now does it?
3. Sure Boogy may or may not have had a weak moment, I for one can't remember.
4. But what if he has or hasn't?
5. My words have a way of effectually changing space and time, now who wants to stand in front of them?
6. You can step in-front of my words like an oncoming train, but I wouldn't advise it.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHA. THanks for the laugh Chess, I needed that today. :D