/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Anti-Muslim bias growing in Europe, conference told



kadafi
06-10-2005, 09:59 AM
By Daniel Flynn

CORDOBA, Spain (Reuters) - Discrimination against Muslims is becoming the main human rights challenge in Europe since the September 11 attacks and many governments are neglecting the problem, delegates told a conference on Thursday.

Violence by a small minority of Islamic militants and the West's war on terrorism have fuelled bias against Muslims, they told a meeting held in the southern Spanish city of Cordoba by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).

Jewish groups at the conference expressed concern that discussion of anti-Muslim bias -- the first time the OSCE has tackled the issue -- might divert attention from anti-Semitism, which experts say is also on the rise in Europe.

A similar conference of the 55-nation OSCE in Berlin last year vowed to fight resurgent anti-Semitism in Europe and added discrimination against Muslims, Christians and other believers to its list of concerns.

"Anti-Semitism has been combated by all European countries in a very strong way. This is a very positive thing, but in this combat against anti-Semitism they are neglecting the importance of Islamaphobia," Doudou Diene, the United Nations' Rapporteur on Racism and Xenophobia, told Reuters.

"Islamaphobia is now becoming the central challenge of European countries in the field of discrimination and racism."

"Islamaphobia and anti-Semitism are two sides of the same coin," said Abduljalil Sajid, adviser to the Commission on British Muslims. "But Islamphobia has replaced anti-Semitism as the new sharp end of racist issues in the world wherever you go."

With more than 20 million Muslims living in Europe, Islam is the second religion in many countries. Reports of anti-Muslim violence and attacks on mosques have multiplied in the wake of the September 2001 attacks on the United States by al Qaeda.

France, whose five-million-strong Muslim community is Europe's largest, has seen attacks on Islamic cemeteries rise in the past year.



More at http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...type=worldNews
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Hajar
06-10-2005, 10:16 AM
"Islamaphobia is now becoming the central challenge of European countries in the field of discrimination and racism."
Its soooo true this I see it everyday here in Holland :(

Unfortunately its not getting any better, only worser and worser...
Reply

MetSudaisTwice
06-10-2005, 10:17 AM
salam
may allah protect us all from such harmful things
Reply

Hajar
06-10-2005, 11:15 AM
yeah its bad.. people are not the same as before...
If you just walk on the street you feel people staring at you..and some even say bad things...

But It doesnt scare me... Im even the only girl in University who wears hijab and I really dont care what people think about it.. And If they do have a problem with it they are always welcome to discuse such insues with me..
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
kadafi
06-10-2005, 07:13 PM
:sl:

Subhan'Allah. I will soon he heading to Holland at the end of this month. Islamophobia is indeed on the increase.

I once read a quote by a Christian theologican who said concernin' Islamophobia:

Islamophobia does not have a rational basis. Yet it affects intelligent people who are not generally racist; its roots are deep and complex. Could it be that Islamophobia is based in a sort of envy? For Islam painfully reminds us of what we lack. It highlights our lack of faith in our common values. We envy the unitary vision of Islam, its fusion of politics and religion.

:w:
Reply

Muezzin
06-10-2005, 07:32 PM
I think all sorts of racism is wrong, and does stem from ignorance, and in some cases envy, as the theologist in the above excerpt said.

Oh, and Holland does have some good people. Like this guy for example

Trust me, he's Dutch. Read Dracula.
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-10-2005, 09:28 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by kadafi
Could it be that Islamophobia is based in a sort of envy? For Islam painfully reminds us of what we lack. It highlights our lack of faith in our common values. We envy the unitary vision of Islam, its fusion of politics and religion.[/I]

:w:
I seriously doubt that the majority of cases of discrimination has to do with envy.

I think it has to do with a base misunderstanding of Islam and an irrational fear of terrorism.
Reply

kadafi
06-11-2005, 12:08 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by imaad_udeen
I seriously doubt that the majority of cases of discrimination has to do with envy.

I think it has to do with a base misunderstanding of Islam and an irrational fear of terrorism.
Misunderstandin' is an another factor but the theologican was rather offerin' an another perspective which seems logical from an different angle.

:w:
Reply

Muezzin
06-11-2005, 05:35 PM
I think it could be envy though. I mean, put yourself in an Islamaphobic's shoes as you look at this:



The Muslim architect would go 'Mashaalaah, excellent'

The Islamaphobic architect would go 'Aww man, why didn't I build that?'

:p :brother:
Reply

root
06-14-2005, 12:01 PM
I think it has to do with a base misunderstanding of Islam and an irrational fear of terrorism.
I think it is Islam that is misunderstanding the point. The "Dutch" are a very liberal country.

The direct slaying of their famous Artist/Film director and the calling for martydom upon the Muslim that murdered him for offending Islam shocked Holland who are asking the question. What makes Holland Dutch, and the rejection of the European constitution was/is a bid to control what it is to be dutch and to live under a Dutch constitution & not the multi-cultural political correctness of the European Union. "When in Rome live like a Roman"

You can bleat on about Islamaphobia all you want, the fact remains that such actions by Muslims only play into the hands of nationalists that don't want to see the watering down of their own nationalities..........

The killing of nationals within their own country based on Islamic rule cannot be tolerated, and so the dutch will not tolerate this.......
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-14-2005, 03:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by root
I think it is Islam that is misunderstanding the point. The "Dutch" are a very liberal country.

The direct slaying of their famous Artist/Film director and the calling for martydom upon the Muslim that murdered him for offending Islam shocked Holland who are asking the question. What makes Holland Dutch, and the rejection of the European constitution was/is a bid to control what it is to be dutch and to live under a Dutch constitution & not the multi-cultural political correctness of the European Union. "When in Rome live like a Roman"

You can bleat on about Islamaphobia all you want, the fact remains that such actions by Muslims only play into the hands of nationalists that don't want to see the watering down of their own nationalities..........

The killing of nationals within their own country based on Islamic rule cannot be tolerated, and so the dutch will not tolerate this.......
I totally agree with your conclusion.
Reply

root
06-14-2005, 04:14 PM
I think it could be envy though. I mean, put yourself in an Islamaphobic's shoes as you look at this:
I think they would say, "Yes very nice. but I don't see where one would envy when the Christians have this:



The Christian architect would go ', excellent'
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
06-14-2005, 07:42 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by root
I think it is Islam that is misunderstanding the point. The "Dutch" are a very liberal country.
Islam is a system. A system does not have 'misunderstandings'. The discrimination of a group based on their ethnic or religious background should have no place in a so-called "liberal" country. One of the definitions provided by the Oxford American Dictionary for 'liberal' is:
favorable to or respectful of indvidual rights and freedoms
When people cannot leave their homes without fear of being labelled as a terrorist or a follower of an 'evil' religion, this is not 'liberal'. This is hateful. Hate crimes are an abomination and should not be tolerated no matter how 'liberal' a people call themselves. Spreading lies, insults and misunderstandings about a religion is unacceptable, no matter which country.

The direct slaying of their famous Artist/Film director and the calling for martydom upon the Muslim that murdered him for offending Islam shocked Holland who are asking the question. What makes Holland Dutch, and the rejection of the European constitution was/is a bid to control what it is to be dutch and to live under a Dutch constitution & not the multi-cultural political correctness of the European Union.
What you cleverly refer to as "political correctness" is really emptahy, consideration and respect for one's fellow human beings. If the a country despises such values and opts for narrow-minded hate of all people who differ, then we have a severe problem.

You speak of "offending Islam" and "killing based on Islamic rule". This is part of a continual denial to acknowledge the consequences of spreading hate and slandering a people simply because they have different beliefs. Belittling the hate crimes only furthers one from understanding the reality of living in a multicultural world.

:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
06-14-2005, 07:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by root
I think they would say, "Yes very nice. but I don't see where one would envy when the Christians have this:
The Christian architect would go ', excellent'
The true beauty of a house of worship is when it is filled with worshippers, not tourists.

:w:
Reply

root
06-14-2005, 07:57 PM
Islam is a system. A system does not have 'misunderstandings'.
That is irrelevent, sine the "Islamic System" is not recognised in Holland yet it was implemented with the slaying of the Dutch film director\artist when he seemed to have offended Islam yet broke no rules as governed by his own country...........

When people cannot leave their homes without fear of being labelled as a terrorist or a follower of an 'evil' religion, this is not 'liberal'.
You failed to include fear from Ilamic ruling\law as the death of the above proved, and against salman Rushdie who still to this day cannot leave his own house through fear.....

how 'liberal' a people call themselves. Spreading lies, insults and misunderstandings about a religion is unacceptable, no matter which country
.

So you call the slaying of the dutch artist and the threat to salman Rushdies life "Lies, Insults and misunderstandings. What is their to misunderstand about these Dutch & British Subjects exercising a right to free speech...... Only to be killed and threatened by death due to an Islamic law not legal in the countries that these "offences" (for want of a better word) are suppose to be claimed.

You speak of "offending Islam" and "killing based on Islamic rule". This is part of a continual denial to acknowledge the consequences of spreading hate and slandering a people simply because they have different beliefs. Belittling the hate crimes only furthers one from understanding the reality of living in a multicultural world.
Oh, right so it was the film directors fault he was murdered on religious grounds...... Or maybe you should educate yourself into his cold blooded murder.
Reply

root
06-14-2005, 08:04 PM
The true beauty of a house of worship is when it is filled with worshippers, not tourists.
Which scripture is that in...........
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
06-14-2005, 09:49 PM
:sl:
Looks like there's some miscommunication here.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar
Islam is a system. A system does not have 'misunderstandings'.
That is irrelevent, sine the "Islamic System" is not recognised in Holland yet it was implemented with the slaying of the Dutch film director\artist when he seemed to have offended Islam yet broke no rules as governed by his own country...........
The first thing I'd like to ask is, what does your statement have to do with my point? What does your discussion about the Dutch have to do with the fact that a system doesn't have 'misunderstandings' of people?

Secondly, you said:
sine the "Islamic System" is not recognised in Holland
What do you mean by 'recognized'? 'Recognized' by who? What significance is there to a particular group 'recognizing' a system?

Thirdly, you stated:
yet it was implemented with the slaying of the Dutch film director\artist
Can you tell me how you arrived at that conclusion? If I say that Asians are _____ _____ _____ (insert the type of profanities that Islam Haters are fond of) and then i get killed by an Asian, would you say that Asia had been implemented?

If I make the same disgusting insults on Jews, and I get killed, would you say that Judaism has been implemented?

when he seemed to have offended Islam
Please read the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director)
Why have you decided to belittle his abuse as "offending Islam"? Do you feel that your statement accurately describes his continual profane abuse hurled at a minorty coupled with his complete blasphemy and malicious slander of God's revelation to Humanity?

yet broke no rules as governed by his own country...........
To what extent should abuse be tolerated? Do you not see a contradiction when a party claims to be preaching tolerance yet they do not prevent a man from spreading hateful slander about a minority, thereby inciting intolerance?

Let's discuss his actual arguments against Islam and we'll see if his claims about women in Islam are true or false. You bring forward the claim with whatever evidence you have, and we'll refute it.

You failed to include fear from Ilamic ruling\law as the death of the above proved, and against salman Rushdie who still to this day cannot leave his own house through fear....
I always find it so ridiculous when rabid Islam-haters whine about having to live in fear after they heaped years of profanities and abuse about a minorty. What do you expect Muslims to do for you, honestly? Throw a party? The blasphemous and hateful comments these indviduals have made reek of intolerance, insensitivity, crueltly, and malice. Is it a crime to do this to another group? Absolutely. We should not tolerate this kind of abuse.

Your comments are as ridiculous as if a thief was to say that ever since he stole, he's been living his life in fear of the police. If you commit a crime, and there is such a thing as hate crimes, then you should not complain when you see the victims of your crime enraged.

So you call the slaying of the dutch artist and the threat to salman Rushdies life "Lies, Insults and misunderstandings.
No, I call their words/teachings lies insults and misunderstandings. All the abuse that these two individuals have heaped on Islam is easily refuted. You are welcome to debate it with me. Bring some of their claims about Islam, and I will refute them.

What is their to misunderstand about these Dutch & British Subjects exercising a right to free speech......
Is it a right to be able to insult, slander, abuse, revile and vilify the beliefs of others? Since when is it a right to treat fellow human beings lower than dirt?

And quite frankly I find the notion of "Envy" from the west a silly notion since we simply need to look at Immigration figures since no one is battering the doors of Iran etc etc to get in and escape the West........
I believe envy of Islam was mentioned, not envy of impoverished countries today with muslim majorities.

:w:
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-15-2005, 08:00 AM
Yes, the man spread terrible things in his films.

But murdering him was not right, it was, itself, a crime and the murderer(s) should be punished.

In the west we allow people freedom to speak their minds, even if it is terrible things they speak. All people should be afforded the right to voice their opinion and not to worry about being murdered for it.
Reply

Muezzin
06-15-2005, 02:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by imaad_udeen
Yes, the man spread terrible things in his films.

But murdering him was not right, it was, itself, a crime and the murderer(s) should be punished.

In the west we allow people freedom to speak their minds, even if it is terrible things they speak. All people should be afforded the right to voice their opinion and not to worry about being murdered for it.
Well, yes and no. There is freedom of speech, but you also have to have the common sense to know that you cannot just say anything without fear of retribution. For instance, one cannot badmouth their parents without fear of an oncoming slap.
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-15-2005, 02:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
Well, yes and no. There is freedom of speech, but you also have to have the common sense to know that you cannot just say anything without fear of retribution. For instance, one cannot badmouth their parents without fear of an oncoming slap.
I understand your point, but I dont think it applies here.

And no, you can't say anything you want everywhere in the west. Some European countries to have "hate speech" laws. I dont really agree with them, myself. And I have no idea what the laws are in Holland concerning that.

But in the US, hate speech is not a defense for murder. This was cold blooded, brutal, premeditated murder and should not have happened.
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-15-2005, 03:08 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl

To what extent should abuse be tolerated?
As long as he is not physically abusing anyone, then he should not be physically abused. We cannot take the law into our own hands.


Let's discuss his actual arguments against Islam and we'll see if his claims about women in Islam are true or false. You bring forward the claim with whatever evidence you have, and we'll refute it.

I always find it so ridiculous when rabid Islam-haters whine about having to live in fear after they heaped years of profanities and abuse about a minorty. What do you expect Muslims to do for you, honestly? Throw a party? The blasphemous and hateful comments these indviduals have made reek of intolerance, insensitivity, crueltly, and malice. Is it a crime to do this to another group? Absolutely. We should not tolerate this kind of abuse.
Certainly we should not tolerate it. We should fight back and show his propaganda to be lies. But brutally murdering him makes him a martyr, a modern day Horst Wessel, for the people who buy into his hate. It certainly does little to show people that might believe him that he was actually wrong.

God needs no defender, for he is the Most Mighty.

Your comments are as ridiculous as if a thief was to say that ever since he stole, he's been living his life in fear of the police.
Not really, the police are rightful authorities and enforcers of the law. The people who murdered this man were most certainly not the rightful authorities of the law.

If you commit a crime, and there is such a thing as hate crimes, then you should not complain when you see the victims of your crime enraged.
Of course. But the enraged commit a worse crime and lose the "moral high ground" when they commit or support acts like this.

No, I call their words/teachings lies insults and misunderstandings. All the abuse that these two individuals have heaped on Islam is easily refuted. You are welcome to debate it with me. Bring some of their claims about Islam, and I will refute them.
Ameen.

Is it a right to be able to insult, slander, abuse, revile and vilify the beliefs of others? Since when is it a right to treat fellow human beings lower than dirt?
It is not right.
Reply

Muezzin
06-15-2005, 08:30 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by imaad_udeen
As long as he is not physically abusing anyone, then he should not be physically abused. We cannot take the law into our own hands.
Very true. I agree with this principle, yet at the same time I can understand the actions of the Dutch filmmaker's murderers. I don't condone them, but I understand them. It was wrong for him to make such a blatantly offensive film in the first place, but that does not vindicate his murderers.
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-15-2005, 10:01 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
Very true. I agree with this principle, yet at the same time I can understand the actions of the Dutch filmmaker's murderers. I don't condone them, but I understand them. It was wrong for him to make such a blatantly offensive film in the first place, but that does not vindicate his murderers.
I understand the anger as well. But I don't understand how you cross that line to where you are willing to stab someone to death over a film.

Anyone with a rational mind will see right through the guys crap film, anyways. The only ones who would swallow it hook, line and sinker, are the ones who think that way anyways and nothing is likely to change their minds on Islam anyways. Murdering the guy makes him a martyr in their eyes and actually justifies their hatred towards Muslims in their own minds.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
06-15-2005, 10:04 PM
:sl:
I understand what you're saying Br. Imadudeen, but there are some points that I'd like to mention.

First of all, the murder has benn labeled "cold-blooded" by some. Cold-blooded is:
without emotion or pity; deliberately cruel or callous

I think the killing is much better described as 'hot-blooded' or passionate since it resulted from the built up emotional rage at the abuse inflicted upon a people and their beliefs.

Secondly,
format_quote Originally Posted by Imaadudeen
As long as he is not physically abusing anyone, then he should not be physically abused.....

But in the US, hate speech is not a defense for murder.
Since many people don't realize how much value a religion has for its adherents, then let's consider another example.

There is a neighbour of yours who continually harasses you whenever he sees you in public. He calls out profanities and fabricates lies about your family, your mother and father, when you walk through the streets, attracting a crowd of listeners. You try to protest but he drowns you out with his outrageous claims of what he has supposedly seen your family doing. You become an outcast in your neighbourhood, despised by all and labeled an abominable monster. Next, he hires actors for a film about your family in which he has your family members perform heinous sins, and he upholds his movie about you as the 'revealing truth'. Evidently, no civilised country should tolerate this slander. This person should have been stopped ages before, but it is clear that the law of this country is unjust and watches quietly while you suffer far worse than any physical abuse could do to you. Obviously, this does not justify murder, but it certainly reveals where the blame lies.

I cannot fathom how any modern country could allow the prolonged abuse that the Muslims of Holland were subjected to.

Not really, the police are rightful authorities and enforcers of the law. The people who murdered this man were most certainly not the rightful authorities of the law.
okay, that was an inaccuracy in my analogy. Let me re-phrase that:
Your comments are as ridiculous as if a thief was to say that ever since he stole, he's been living his life in fear of the shopkeeper.
In my first analogy I assumed it was a civilised country in which the police would act on behalf of the victims, but clearly no one acts on behalf of the Muslims when they are abused.

:w:
Reply

root
06-15-2005, 10:14 PM
Why have you decided to belittle his abuse as "offending Islam"? Do you feel that your statement accurately describes his continual profane abuse hurled at a minorty coupled with his complete blasphemy and malicious slander of God's revelation to Humanity?
Blashpemy is not a crime under the Dutch Law or it's constitution. Yet he paid for his "Blasphemy and malicious slander" so he must have been subject to laws that both you and I are well aware of it's origins and flavour. Perhaps Islam dealt it's biggest blow. The break-up of Europe...............

Food for thought, Nice thread............

Bye.
Reply

Muezzin
06-15-2005, 10:16 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by root
Blashpemy is not a crime under the Dutch Law or it's constitution. Yet he paid for his "Blasphemy and malicious slander" so he must have been subject to laws that both you and I are well aware of it's origins and flavour. Perhaps Islam dealt it's biggest blow. The break-up of Europe.............
While blasphemy may not be a crime under Dutch law, making such a blatantly offensive film was not a wise decision given the current geo-political climate.
Reply

solid_snake
06-16-2005, 09:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hash
Mashallaah may Allaah reward you.
agreed :thumbs_up
Reply

kadafi
06-21-2005, 06:54 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by root
Blashpemy is not a crime under the Dutch Law or it's constitution. Yet he paid for his "Blasphemy and malicious slander" so he must have been subject to laws that both you and I are well aware of it's origins and flavour. Perhaps Islam dealt it's biggest blow. The break-up of Europe...............

Food for thought, Nice thread............

Bye.
Greetings,

That is incorrect. Blasemphy, or more specifically, scornful blasemphy (smalende godslastering) is regarded as an act of crime under the Dutch Law.

You can read it (if you understand dutch) at the follow site:
http://www.parlement.com/9291000/modulesf/gvgcw1pd

It is punishable with a term of imprisonment (up to three months). Van Gogh clearly violated the first rule under act 147 in which he provoked the Muslim community by utteringblasphemous remarks.

Peace
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-22-2005, 12:50 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by kadafi
Greetings,

That is incorrect. Blasemphy, or more specifically, scornful blasemphy (smalende godslastering) is regarded as an act of crime under the Dutch Law.

You can read it (if you understand dutch) at the follow site:
http://www.parlement.com/9291000/modulesf/gvgcw1pd

It is punishable with a term of imprisonment (up to three months). Van Gogh clearly violated the first rule under act 147 in which he provoked the Muslim community by utteringblasphemous remarks.

Peace
How come he wasn't charged or convicted under this law?
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-22-2005, 12:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
:sl:
I understand what you're saying Br. Imadudeen, but there are some points that I'd like to mention.

First of all, the murder has benn labeled "cold-blooded" by some. Cold-blooded is:
without emotion or pity; deliberately cruel or callous

I think the killing is much better described as 'hot-blooded' or passionate since it resulted from the built up emotional rage at the abuse inflicted upon a people and their beliefs.
I think the murderer thought about his crime, planned it and executed it with malice aforthought which makes it "cold blooded."

For it to be "hot blooded" it would have had to happen in the heat of the moment. I sincerely doubt eh murderer just happened across van Gough on the street and killed him in a rage.

He most certainly planned his attack before hand.

Secondly,

*snip*

Obviously, this does not justify murder, but it certainly reveals where the blame lies.
I understand, but the blame lies with the man who plunged the knife into the victims chest because he made a movie which offended him.

Maybe I'm wrong, but where I am from, we do not murder people (or condone their murder) for their beliefs, no matter how much we dislike those beliefs.
Reply

kadafi
06-23-2005, 10:48 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by imaad_udeen
How come he wasn't charged or convicted under this law?
:sl:

Apparantly, they were debatin' whether his actions constituded of scornful blasemphy. He has been accused of scornful blasemphy in '95 but with no avail. Furthermore, the scornful blasemphy was used rarely used in the past 50 years, and if it was used, it was used loosley. As a result there, Donner suggested that the law should be revitalizing in order to prevent such acts of blasemphy in the future. I cannot give you the present condition of whether this law, has been revitalized but I will look in to it for you.

:w:
Reply

root
06-24-2005, 02:30 PM
I cannot give you the present condition of whether this law, has been revitalized but I will look in to it for you.
It's being dropped. Blasphemy is not a criminal offence under current laws, interestingly in York (UK) you can shoot a Scotsmen but only with a bow & arrow. And if your wife is drunk you can take her to the main square and whip her.

I am not sure of the legal term for old laws that have not been repelled but are not valid anymore. The same applies to this. I am an atheist who beleives their is no god. I need protecting under law from those who would consider my words "Blasphamest"

That is why he was not charged under blasphemy, because to all tense and purpose the blasphemy laws do not exist anymore. In other words, we have moved on..........
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
06-24-2005, 10:59 PM
...to disrespect and intolerance?

:w:
Reply

imaad_udeen
06-24-2005, 11:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by kadafi
:sl:

Apparantly, they were debatin' whether his actions constituded of scornful blasemphy. He has been accused of scornful blasemphy in '95 but with no avail. Furthermore, the scornful blasemphy was used rarely used in the past 50 years, and if it was used, it was used loosley. As a result there, Donner suggested that the law should be revitalizing in order to prevent such acts of blasemphy in the future. I cannot give you the present condition of whether this law, has been revitalized but I will look in to it for you.

:w:
Interesting. Blasphemy laws sound really strange.

I don't understand a lot of laws I hear come from Europe. Many of them sound like "thought based" laws which punish those for their opinions and for speaking their opinions.

Glad I don't live there, though this place isn't perfect.

:)
Reply

kadafi
06-25-2005, 10:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by root
It's being dropped. Blasphemy is not a criminal offence under current laws, interestingly in York (UK) you can shoot a Scotsmen but only with a bow & arrow. And if your wife is drunk you can take her to the main square and whip her.
Greetings

I could not find any indications that the law has been dropped. There has attempts made by the Christian parties to drop it but I don't think they succeeded. Perhaps you could provide a link or some evidence.

Regards
Reply

Muezzin
06-26-2005, 01:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by root
I am not sure of the legal term for old laws that have not been repelled but are not valid anymore. The same applies to this. I am an atheist who beleives their is no god. I need protecting under law from those who would consider my words "Blasphamest"
The word you're looking for is 'blasphemous'. Sorry. I'm a walking dictionary.

That is why he was not charged under blasphemy, because to all tense and purpose the blasphemy laws do not exist anymore. In other words, we have moved on..........
Indeed. Now we have cameras in public places and Government monitoring of library loans, phone calls and Internet usage. THAT's progress!
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-09-2012, 10:33 PM
  2. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-25-2010, 06:27 PM
  3. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 10-19-2010, 01:55 AM
  4. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 02-28-2008, 05:53 PM
  5. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 06-29-2006, 09:10 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!