"Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

[TrueStranger]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

I would have no problem with civil unions between immeidate family members, no. I would be concerned if the arrangement was romantic and if they tried to have children though, due to the health risks that introduces.

Homosexuality IS a health risk.

While estimates show that gay and bisexual men and other men who have sex with men comprise only about 2% of the U.S.population, this group accounts for most new HIV infections (61% in 2009)

http://www.kff.org/hivaids/upload/3029-12.pdf

 

[glo]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

Only if the people have sex. My concept of civil union has nothing to do with sex.

That's interesting.
I guess for us 'religious types' marriage is seen as closely connected with having sex (and raising children).

What other reasons would there be for civil unions? I assume legal ones? Or just wanting to make a formal commitment to each other?

For those people you mentioned who should not have sexual intercourse for medical reasons (such as closely related relatives), do you think that should be determined in the union vows? Or a promise made to that effect?

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

I guess for us 'religious types' marriage is seen as closely connected with having sex (and raising children).

What other reasons would there be for civil unions? I assume legal ones? Or just wanting to make a formal commitment to each other?

Note how I split "Civil Union" and "Marriage" apart above. Civil Union to me is solely for the legal benefits, which are numerous. Everything from tax implications, to visitation rights and surrogate decision making, to estate issues, legal commitment to one another (requiring legal divorce to dissolve), etc, with legal paperwork put through city hall. Marriage to me is the spiritual or traditional or emotional union, with a ceremony in a place of worship (or wherever), which has no legal attachments and can be recognized or not recognized by others as they see fit.

If you look at the history of marriage you will see that they started off being very similar to my idea of civil unions, though the arrangements were a bit off by our standards today. Women, who were considered property or considered the more vulnerable sex in need of protection etc, were given to the husband by the father, usually a dowry was involved, and the husband would protect her etc. If you look at gender roles within marriage in Islam in fact, you see duties that are owed to one another between the partners and rules for them regarding those outside the marriage. These are things that can be included within civil unions to make them binding in law, like any other contract. I personally find the traditional marriage contract from ages past as anti-woman, but modern civil unions need not be that way.

If the state wants to get involved to make these "rules" of marriage mean anything then it has to be a formal contract, and if we are to keep the church and state separate then it has to be separated from the religious or spiritual version of "marriage". I don't see why you can't have both and just keep them apart. You can have your civil union and your marriage. I can have my civil union without a marriage. The homosexuals can have their marriage too, and you can go on telling them it isn't a "real" marriage according to Islam and they can shrug that off since they are not muslim.

For those people you mentioned who should not have sexual intercourse for medical reasons (such as closely related relatives), do you think that should be determined in the union vows? Or a promise made to that effect?

I don't think civil unions should have "vows". I think civil unions should have written and binding legal contracts. I think incest should probably be discouraged outside the contract, by the state. Maybe a law should apply, or maybe just an educational campaign. I am not an expert regarding the affects of incest and inbreeding, so I don't know which is more appropriate.

 

[GuestFellow]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

No you don't.

Yes you do. Other people when they see homosexuals getting married, may demand to get married to their immediate family members, their pets or objects. It's a possibility.

Only if the people have sex. My concept of civil union has nothing to do with sex.

These concepts can lead to people having sex and this possibility exists. Not everyone has sex before marriage.

There is a possibility that they will regardless of if they are married. Why do you presume that immediate family members that want to have sex will wait until they are married?

When an act is legalised and people tell you it is acceptable, then it's likely more and more people will do it. Sometimes by officially recognising immediate family relationships, it's a possibility more and more people will engage in these sorts of behaviour because they believe it is acceptable.

It explains why homosexuals want to get married so badly. They want to be accepted and recognised. The more something is accepted, the more people will do it.

So I'm referring to the impact legalising homosexuality will have.

 

[glo]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

Thanks, Pygo.
I have spent much time pondering the meaning of marriage in the religious, spiritual, legal and secular sense.
It means so many different things to different people.

So I appreciate reading your thoughts on it.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

Yes you do. Other people when they see homosexuals getting married, may demand to get married to their immediate family members, their pets or objects. It's a possibility.

There are a lot of case studies you can look at. I happen to live in one. Gay marriage is legal in Canada. I don't feel any less heterosexual. We don't have droves of people demanding to marry their dogs. There are plenty of other places that have legalized gay marriage and they don't have droves of people demanding that either.

Thanks, Pygo.
I have spent much time pondering the meaning of marriage in the religious, spiritual, legal and secular sense.
It means so many different things to different people.

I think the fairest way to address all the conflicting views on marriage (and there are so many) is to separate the legal and spiritual aspects, and then let people all have what they want regarding hte spiritual / traditional. The gays can get "married" but you need not recognize it Do you think that'd be an acceptable compromise? And if so, do you think we could ever get such a thing signed into law?

 

[GuestFellow]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

There are a lot of case studies you can look at. I happen to live in one. Gay marriage is legal in Canada. I don't feel any less heterosexual. We don't have droves of people demanding to marry their dogs. There are plenty of other places that have legalized gay marriage and they don't have droves of people demanding that either.

Time will tell. The legalisation of gay marriages will not lead to mass crowd of people desiring to marry their dogs. Of course their sexuality will not change unless they want to experinment. However, there will be some people that want to marry their immediate family members, objects or animals. There are people like that and want their voices heard. So I'm saying legalising homosexuality could lead to other people wanting to be recognised and accepted.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

So I'm saying legalising homosexuality could lead to other people wanting to be recognised and accepted.

Well sure. Gays probably couldn't have come out of the closet and demanded equal rights and fair treatment had blacks and women not fought for their civil rights beforehand and blazed the trail for social change and cultural fairness and equality. This is not a bad thing.

 

[GuestFellow]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

Well sure. Gays probably couldn't have come out of the closet and demanded equal rights and fair treatment had blacks and women not fought for their civil rights beforehand and blazed the trail for social change and cultural fairness and equality. This is not a bad thing.

Well there always have been changes in society and I'm not denying what your saying is true. The civil right movement provided a firm foundation for homosexuals. I'm glad homosexuals are protected from physical/verbal abuse, so something positive did arise. However, I still suspect there will be long-term consequences for gay marriage.

 

[Abz2000]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

lol,
it was adam and eve, not adam and steve.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

it was adam and eve, not adam and steve.

Actually it was Ug and Uhn and their girl, Mmmh.

 

[جوري]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

Actually it was Ug and Uhn and their girl, Mmmh.

at the risk of being banned-pls. don't share your boudoir narrative on the forum!

 

[Santoku]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

You're probably going to get banned for being an idiot. But just thought i'd correct you;

"indigenous"? What?

What's the difference between those who came on boats and those who came by plane, if they're both born in the same country? I believe Scientists say that most Brits are ancestors of Norman/Viking invaders.

Not to mention how the ancestrial goes all the way to Iraq (ain't that ironic) - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...farmers-left-Iraq-Syria-10-000-years-ago.html

Actually the quote is not mine I quoted that from the replies to the the original article, indicating that a large chunk of muslims had not integrated well.

 

[جوري]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

If God intended us to integrate he'd have created just one race, heck even one being with one gender!

 

[tango92]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

 

[Futuwwa]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

*snip*

Source: http://my.telegraph.co.uk/danielpycock/danpycock/956/what-do-british-muslims-think-of-the-uk/"

Not quite so integrated there,are they?

Learn the difference between integration and assimilation.

Attitudes like yours only further alienate Western Muslims. Why should anyone of us bother to try to "integrate" when you keep moving the goalposts? It's obvious that you won't be satisfied until we have renounced Islam completely.

 

[Musaafirah]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

What's wrong with all the various communities just getting on at least without the media feeling the need to hype out every situation.
Anyway, the news people must have been having a slow day to try and bring the whole integration issue back on the table and open for angry replies.. I mean look at the replies that were written in response to the original article!

 

[M.I.A.]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

Learn the difference between integration and assimilation.

Attitudes like yours only further alienate Western Muslims. Why should anyone of us bother to try to "integrate" when you keep moving the goalposts? It's obvious that you won't be satisfied until we have renounced Islam completely.

i think it works both ways. in the city where i live there are distinctly jewish areas.

orthodox jews dressing as such.
living as such and trading as such.

they are not mentioned in every other news article and media story.

and yet they run the world? its not a conspiracy. its just not the type of attention they pander to.

and any of you think they getting less grief than muslims are well.. what do you think about jews?

anyway hope you get what integration is about. its about keeping under the radar of people with soapboxes and spare time.. politicians in this case.

its also about taking responsibility within the failings of the muslim community so people have less ammo against you or just living tit for tat.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

Personally I'd settle for a bump in the stats presented above towards less hate, less endorsement of violence and death, less calls for censorship, and less calls for denying rights to specific groups (ie, homosexuals). We really don't have that problem with Canadian muslims (here muslims are more on the receiving end of such attitudes - which is something we hope to fix), so I was surprised to see those stats for British ones. Maybe the stats themselves are wrong? Or maybe not, as I have seen some similar attitudes on this forum (but it is by no means the norm here).

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: "Muslims are well-integrated in Britain – but no one seems to believe it"

at the risk of being banned-pls. don't share your boudoir narrative on the forum!

I was referring to early proto-humans prior to language. But now I see you have a dirtier mind than I'd have thought of you.