What time is it? Muslim time!

[Mabs]

So why didn't you call them sand coons, or dune ******s - like you put in that spoiler tag earlier. Like you said, their are degrees of abuse - there's acceptable ridicule and there's unacceptable ridicule. Clearly where one draws a line is a point of debate, which is obviously what we're doing now.

And I don't think it's the same regardless of what sort of abuse you give - yes these "Muslim scientists" are clearly batshit crazy, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable to say anything. Honestly I think it speaks volumes about you as a person that "raghead fuckwits" is where you went.

Your post above seems to suggest that there's no such thing as racist abuse, as long as the person deserves it, it's all good. In my opinion this is totally untrue and just in case you get misled by what I'm saying - I'm not concerned about the people you're insulting being offended, they're moron's and deserve to be offended, but when you spout racist abuse you're potentially offending a great deal of people who've done nothing to you whatsoever.

lets not go down the SN line, already got infracted for that
but that was the point, there is a scale to it, its not an on/off
and as for the type of abuse. calling someone a "black bastard"* cos they are black isnt ok, if they are a bastard, then its descriptive. and if he happens to be being an arse and is black, then are you using it cos its offensive, or racist, or covers both to get more effect ?
where im going with that is, racism for racism sake is one thing, being abusive towards someone who deserves it, and if it happens to have a racist undertone isnt as bad.
as i said earlier i have serious personal issues with people in the middle east, so im always twisted further over on them than anyone else, but thats me

* its an example im not being nasty about black people dont kill me pls!

 

[Bahumat]

 

[nath]

where im going with that is, racism for racism sake is one thing, being abusive towards someone who deserves it, and if it happens to have a racist undertone isnt as bad.

I disagree - racism is racism. If someone's being a fuckwit and you're abusive to them, fine. If someone's being a fuckwit and your abuse has a racist tint, you're a racist.

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

tbh in my experience, "they" are far more racist than "us"

 

[Mabs]

I disagree - racism is racism. If someone's being a fuckwit and you're abusive to them, fine. If someone's being a fuckwit and your abuse has a racist tint, you're a racist.

thats your perogative

oh and for the record i am a "racist". im white, im UK based, ive lived abroad.
if you ask the BNP im just "proud" of my national heritage. if you ask other people you get a different answer.
one mans terrorist, etc

 

[TdC]

be proud to be british. fuck the rest

tbh in my experience, "they" are far more racist than "us"

 

[nath]

thats your perogative

oh and for the record i am a "racist". im white, im UK based, ive lived abroad.
if you ask the BNP im just "proud" of my national heritage. if you ask other people you get a different answer.
one mans terrorist, etc

But we're not talking about pride in your national heritage - there's nowt wrong with that. We're talking about racist abuse, I don't think there's wiggle room there.

 

[Chronictank]

lets not go down the SN line, already got infracted for that
but that was the point, there is a scale to it, its not an on/off
and as for the type of abuse. calling someone a "black bastard"* cos they are black isnt ok, if they are a bastard, then its descriptive. and if he happens to be being an arse and is black, then are you using it cos its offensive, or racist, or covers both to get more effect ?

that was kind of my point when we got past the misunderstanding, there was no reference to the dressing habits of the person in question as there was no real reference to anyone in particular at all other than they were muslim

A better simily for the above would be if the afro carribian council made a comment you disagree with, you wouldnt call them n***** fuckwits would you?

I dont see the relevance of national pride in any of this

edit: dammit nath beat me to it

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

maybe its a yorkshire thing Mabs, we got a BNP member on our local council.....

 

[Mabs]

But we're not talking about pride in your national heritage - there's nowt wrong with that. We're talking about racist abuse, I don't think there's wiggle room there.

and thats was my whole point

one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter..

how you see something, depends on where you are standing

 

[Mabs]

that was kind of my point when we got past the misunderstanding, there was no reference to the dressing habits of the person in question as there was no real reference to anyone in particular at all other than they were muslim

A better simily for the above would be if the afro carribian council made a comment you disagree with, you wouldnt call them n***** fuckwits would you?

I dont see the relevance of national pride in any of this

edit: dammit nath beat me to it

nah but i might call them a ..</banned>

depends entirely on how i was feeling at the time, what they had done, what the weather was like, etc

 

[Chronictank]

and thats was my whole point

one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter..

how you see something, depends on where you are standing

i really dont see the link between ethnic slurs and nationalism

 

[Mabs]

maybe its a yorkshire thing Mabs, we got a BNP member on our local council.....

from everything i know about them, bad luck

 

[nath]

and thats was my whole point

one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter..

how you see something, depends on where you are standing

But that's MY point - I don't agree that it is down to perspective. Racism is racism. End of story.

Whether you think racism is acceptable in certain circumstances - I guess that could be argued, but that's a different issue.

 

[Mabs]

watch out guys, Godwin approaches! Someone is going to mention Hitler before long!

I WIN !

i really dont see the link between ethnic slurs and nationalism

a downtrodden , unloved, abused race of people
-or-
subhumans we need to kill to make more living space for us

ring any bells ?

and that is an extreme example, but its valid

 

[Chronictank]

I WIN !
a downtrodden , unloved, abused race of people
-or-
subhumans we need to kill to make more living space for us

ring any bells ?

and that is an extreme example, but its valid

Surely thats a seperate topic to whether using ethnic slurs is wrong, regardless of context?

 

[Mabs]

Surely thats a seperate topic to whether using ethnic slurs is wrong, regardless of context?

i really dont see the link between ethnic slurs and nationalism

was replying to that and making a slightly heavy handed point

 

[Cadiva]

I dont disagree at all, however i do find it absurd that you think it is ok to use ethnic slurs regardless of context

edit:

You clearly missed the point, and didnt read the follow on posts
I didnt claim he was a racist at any point in this thread

And I didn't say you did, yet you brought the Klan into your argument with Mabs which is a racist organisation not a religious one.

 

[tris-]

let's burn crosses and execute people who dont share our views

i think thats different to insulting a religion!

words are words. if someone makes a choice and has it mocked, and their feelings are hurt, theyve got problems.

 

[Mabs]

But that's MY point - I don't agree that it is down to perspective. Racism is racism. End of story.

Whether you think racism is acceptable in certain circumstances - I guess that could be argued, but that's a different issue.

which is a fair point, HOWEVER, -EVERYTHING- is based on perspective to some degree imo

 

[Mabs]

anyway, i invoked Godwins Law so i lose automatically

also im going now, hf posting

 

[Furr]

Its only considered racism because it tends to be one particular ethnic group in this country that make up the bulk of the Muslim population. If you don't agree or are frankly disgusted by aspects of a religions doctrine that followers run their laws, customs and lifestyle by I would surmount that it be perfectly acceptable to criticise it.

Every once in a while you get the report of Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Christians erm Jedi's making a fuss over one thing or another, and out of them the only terrorists with a religious affiliation who have blown something up has been Christians blowing up other Christians with the IRA, and even then the link was tentative and not the main issue in the campaign.

But with Islam who are the largest minority religion in the UK and many other EU states it also happens to be the religion that time and again has shown itself to be incapable and unwilling to integrate or in a reverse of roles understand that they have to be tolerant of western society. But its not just western society it has trouble with, it seems to be in conflict with every society, religion and country in the world that it is present and itself. The only countries where it seems to be relatively peaceful are country's where the population is homogeneous, the religion type is homogeneous and there's a non democratic regime in charge that uses force, strict laws and police state tactics to control how the people live, women have no rights, beheading and limb loss is a common punishment and there are no freedoms. Even then the country has the odd bombing or is a terrorist training ground.

We should be tolerant why exactly?

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

gotta love google ads

"date muslim women"

 

[Dukat]

Its only considered racism because it tends to be one particular ethnic group in this country that make up the bulk of the Muslim population. If you don't agree or are frankly disgusted by aspects of a religions doctrine that followers run their laws, customs and lifestyle by I would surmount that it be perfectly acceptable to criticise it.

Every once in a while you get the report of Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Christians erm Jedi's making a fuss over one thing or another, and out of them the only terrorists with a religious affiliation who have blown something up has been Christians blowing up other Christians with the IRA, and even then the link was tentative and not the main issue in the campaign.

But with Islam who are the largest minority religion in the UK and many other EU states it also happens to be the religion that time and again has shown itself to be incapable and unwilling to integrate or in a reverse of roles understand that they have to be tolerant of western society. But its not just western society it has trouble with, it seems to be in conflict with every society, religion and country in the world that it is present and itself. The only countries where it seems to be relatively peaceful are country's where the population is homogeneous, the religion type is homogeneous and there's a non democratic regime in charge that uses force, strict laws and police state tactics to control how the people live, women have no rights, beheading and limb loss is a common punishment and there are no freedoms. Even then the country has the odd bombing or is a terrorist training ground.

We should be tolerant why exactly?

Well said that man!

 

[nath]

Its only considered racism because it tends to be one particular ethnic group in this country that make up the bulk of the Muslim population. If you don't agree or are frankly disgusted by aspects of a religions doctrine that followers run their laws, customs and lifestyle by I would surmount that it be perfectly acceptable to criticise it.

Every once in a while you get the report of Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Christians erm Jedi's making a fuss over one thing or another, and out of them the only terrorists with a religious affiliation who have blown something up has been Christians blowing up other Christians with the IRA, and even then the link was tentative and not the main issue in the campaign.

But with Islam who are the largest minority religion in the UK and many other EU states it also happens to be the religion that time and again has shown itself to be incapable and unwilling to integrate or in a reverse of roles understand that they have to be tolerant of western society. But its not just western society it has trouble with, it seems to be in conflict with every society, religion and country in the world that it is present and itself. The only countries where it seems to be relatively peaceful are country's where the population is homogeneous, the religion type is homogeneous and there's a non democratic regime in charge that uses force, strict laws and police state tactics to control how the people live, women have no rights, beheading and limb loss is a common punishment and there are no freedoms. Even then the country has the odd bombing or is a terrorist training ground.

We should be tolerant why exactly?

On the whole, I agree with that. However, and apologies for going on about it, but none of this justifies the use of the term "raghead fuckwits". I see nothing wrong with criticising a religion, and in fact it strikes me that that's just what you've done. However you did so in a way that doesn't resort to petty name calling.

 

[Chilly]

bloody hell

 

[old.user4556]

I think I'm going to bow out of this thread now.

 

[Tom]

My sister is a Muslim and wears all the garb. Shes as white as a Debenhams white dinner plate.

Is it racist to call her a raghead fuckwit? Not that I think she is.

Personally I think the term is a bit out of order. Just because someone wears linen on their head doesn't make them a fuckwit, and not all fuckwits wear linen on their heads - the 7th July bombers certainly didn't did they?

There are nutters in every country and every religion. Its not fair to label them all as fuckwits.

 

[old.user4556]

Indeed Tom, here are some examples of fuckwits without linen on their heads.

 

[rynnor]

I'm pretty sure the human brain is hardwired for racism/cliques.

It makes evolutionary sense to favour those in your community (most probably genetically related) and regard those outside it with hostility.

This happens at every level of human society - you even see the same impulses at work in temporary social groupings - look at opposing groups of football fans for example.

Its odd that we have demonised certain types of racism (white on black for example) and yet its something natural to humans - people have stopped using the forbidden terms for example but you cant do anything for the sub-conscious levels.

Its a bit like asking straight guys not to get turned on by hot naked chicks

I think it would be healthier if we demonised it less but acknowledged it as a universal barrier between all peoples and moved onto ways to diffuse it and push people out of their natural tendencies to cling to like.

If we dont we end up with segregation as is becoming common throughout the uk - isnt it just as bad to send your kids to a racially homogenous school as to shout n***er?