Paris ban on Muslim street prayers comes into effect - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Lankist;32339938]An unenforceable law is the most easily abused law. You can start massive witch-hunts with it. We in America had laws against witch craft during the 1600's. Could we enforce them? No. Did that stop the Puritans from burning innocent women at the stake? Fuck no.[/QUOTE] You're right, but the fact remains that it isn't. There are no 'witch-hunts' for gay people, are you aware that 75% of the country are non-nationals? Do you really think that would be the case if there were raids to seek out gay people? Or anything like that at all? My former school coordinator happened to be gay (He retired last year); that doesn't mean he's going to get arrested for it.

[QUOTE=Lankist;32339969]The entire basis of your society, and it's bigoted.[/QUOTE] Jesus Christ shut up you bigot.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32339902]I'm not justifying any homophobia for having gay friends. My point is that they are happy in Qatar and do not face any ridicule for their sexual orientation whatsoever.[/QUOTE] I'm not talking about your gay friends. I don't give a shit if they're happy. I'm talking about bullshit legislation. That's what this thread is about, is a piece of bullshit legislation. I am against this french legislation for the exact same reasons I'm against your bullshit legislation. Traffic is not more important than rights. Comfort is not more important than rights. Tradition is not more important than rights.

Bearing in mind that Qatar is situated in a part of the world where open signs of homosexuality probably carry the death penalty or at least jail time I think recieving a verbal warning not to do it in public is reasonable. You need to remember that Qatar is a country founded on Muslim beliefs, yes I agree that segregation and punishment for things like being gay is wrong but given the circumstances I think things could be a whole lot worse.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340014]You're right, but the fact remains that it isn't. There are no 'witch-hunts' for gay people, are you aware that 75% of the country are non-nationals? Do you really think that would be the case if there were raids to seek out gay people? Or anything like that at all? My former school coordinator happened to be gay (He retired last year); that doesn't mean he's going to get arrested for it.[/QUOTE] I don't care if there are, I'm talking about the laws. If there can be a witch hunt, you have a serious problem. You can't have a law like that and say it will never be a problem. [editline]17th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=RainbowStalin;32340045]You need to remember that Qatar is a country founded on Muslim beliefs, yes I agree that segregation and punishment for things like being gay is wrong but given the circumstances I think things could be a whole lot worse.[/QUOTE] Less prejudiced is still prejudiced.

[QUOTE=Lankist;32340033]That's what this thread is about, is a piece of bullshit legislation. I am against this french legislation for the exact same reasons I'm against your bullshit legislation. Traffic is not more important than rights.[/QUOTE] It's like talking to a stoner after a lobotomy.

[QUOTE=Lankist;32339969]You have a law, a piece of legislation, that forbids homosexual conduct. And you have laws that don't just have to do with sodomy. Any sort of intimate relations between two people of the same sex are illegal. I don't care whether or not you enforce it. That is a god damn law. The entire basis of your society, and it's bigoted. [editline]17th September 2011[/editline] Yeah because the ones who don't accept it are in prison. Don't pull this populism bullshit again. I'm pretty sure Qatar is not a populist, direct democracy. That sort of argument only works when you've actually tallied the votes, not by just saying "oh everyone's accepted it." with only one or two people's words to your credit.[/QUOTE] I agree, the law is fucked up. But that law is clearly not the entire basis of my society if it's not enforced. I would love for it to be written out because the last time it was really 'enforced' was way before any of this development came our way. Also, this PDA stuff is cultural in every way. It's not like if you make out with a girl, you'd better be on the look out for police. People walking by will look at you shocked and offended, because its out of line culturally and vulgar to them. You won't get cuffs slapped on you if a police officer saw you making out with a girl, but usually only asked to stop and they'll explain why (Qatari culture expects this blablabla).

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340119]I agree, the law is fucked up. But that law is clearly not the entire basis of my society if it's not enforced. I would love for it to be written out because the last time it was really 'enforced' was way before any of this development came our way. Also, this PDA stuff is cultural in every way. It's not like if you make out with a girl, you'd better be on the look out for police. People walking by will look at you shocked and offended, because its out of line culturally and vulgar to them. You won't get cuffs slapped on you if a police officer saw you making out with a girl, but usually only asked to stop and they'll explain why (Qatari culture expects this blablabla).[/QUOTE] So then do you agree with the French law on the pragmatic basis that Muslims are not as important as traffic congestion? And the fact that, though it is WORDED as though it is all about the traffic congestion, it was only brought forth by anti-muslim protestation on behalf of far-right groups? Because that law doesn't seem all that different from a "no macking here" law. Are Muslim's rights less important than the morning commute? Is it acceptable to have a law targeted specifically at Muslims, worded in such a way that Muslims are the only people who could ever be convicted of such a crime?

[QUOTE=Charybdis;32339860]threads like this are doomed for people to take things too far and spin off into almost irrelevant shit pretty pathetic wasting your time arguing with strangers on the internet non-stop for over 24 hours[/QUOTE] I disagree entirely. Merely observing arguments like these has taught me many things about liberty, the law, politics, etc.

[QUOTE=Lankist;32340049]I don't care if there are, I'm talking about the laws. If there can be a witch hunt, you have a serious problem. You can't have a law like that and say it will never be a problem.[/QUOTE] Yeah, difference is your argument is dumb because we're not in the 1600s so 'witch hunts' or any act of murder/harassment is illegal as it would be anywhere else. Even if it is against gay people. 'BUT ITS ILLEGAL TO BE GAY' - no one really cares anymore; gay people don't hide their sexuality because of this law and no ones saying anything to them. you can't assume what a place is like until you've been there,

[QUOTE=Lankist;32340049]I don't care if there are, I'm talking about the laws. If there can be a witch hunt, you have a serious problem. You can't have a law like that and say it will never be a problem.[/QUOTE] That's right, if it were even possible for police to be able to bust into your house and arrest you for having sex with a person of the same sex, that is horrid.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340181]Yeah, difference is your argument is dumb because we're not in the 1600s so 'witch hunts' or any act of murder/harassment is illegal as it would be anywhere else. Even if it is against gay people. 'BUT ITS ILLEGAL TO BE GAY' - no one really cares anymore; gay people don't hide their sexuality because of this law and no ones saying anything to them. you can't assume what a place is like until you've been there,[/QUOTE] So when are you going to get rid of the law, then? [editline]17th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Megafanx13;32340202]That's right, if it were even possible for police to be able to bust into your house and arrest you for having sex with a person of the same sex, that is horrid.[/QUOTE] The issue is that government has the power and potential for abuse. Simply because they have not abused it today does not make it okay. Leave that law there, it WILL get abused. Inevitably, and more than once.

[QUOTE=Lankist;32340136]So then do you agree with the French law on the pragmatic basis that Muslims are not as important as traffic congestion? And the fact that, though it is WORDED as though it is all about the traffic congestion, it was only brought forth by anti-muslim protestation on behalf of far-right groups? Because that law doesn't seem all that different from a "no macking here" law.[/QUOTE] I disagree with the anti-muslim protests, obviously. But in a case like this, we're in a situation where Friday prayers have to be held in a group, and when there aren't enough mosques to satisfy a threshold of Muslims they're forced to pray in open area (streets). Mosques are the preferred place of worship, the streets are what they have to resort to. Muslims have to pray in a clean, quiet place - but if said place isn't available they have to do what they can. If more mosques are built, then they will freely choose to go there. The traffic being clogged is no longer an issue and everybody wins. The article might be biased towards an ignorant point of view but the course of action taken by the French government took both parties in mind and was a good decision for both. This can be taken the wrong way, surely but it shouldn't cause any real inconvenience for anyone.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340266]I disagree with the anti-muslim protests, obviously. But in a case like this, we're in a situation where Friday prayers have to be held in a group, and when there aren't enough mosques to satisfy a threshold of Muslims they're forced to pray in open area (streets). Mosques are the preferred place of worship, the streets are what they have to resort to. Muslims have to pray in a clean, quiet place - but if said place isn't available they have to do what they can. If more mosques are built, then they will freely choose to go there. The traffic being clogged is no longer an issue and everybody wins. The article might be biased towards an ignorant point of view but the course of action taken by the French government took both parties in mind and was a good decision for both. This can be taken the wrong way, surely but it shouldn't cause any real inconvenience for anyone.[/QUOTE] So, uh, can the homosexuals get married?

I hate to be discriminatory, but I'm glad that people are cracking down on Muslims.

[QUOTE=Chezhead;32340311]I hate to be discriminatory, but I'm glad that people are craking down on Muslims.[/QUOTE] Why?

I really don't see how anyone could sincerely argue against Lankist at this point. It's getting pretty silly now.

becuz they r terrurists i bet Also before you use the argument that same sex marriage being banned in Qatar is a sign of their prejudice against gay people don't forgot that its still banned in the majority of the US states. Frankly it being banned in Qatar doesn't surprise me but I would have thought that a big Western country like America would have started the process of opening up to things like homosexuality.

[QUOTE=Lankist;32340205]So when are you going to get rid of the law, then? [editline]17th September 2011[/editline] The issue is that government has the power and potential for abuse. Simply because they have not abused it today does not make it okay. Leave that law there, it WILL get abused. Inevitably, and more than once.[/QUOTE] Qatars a small place and word always gets around. The law has not been enforced since the mid 90s. I have no idea on when the government will scrap the law but it can be agreed that they might as well. By the time the world cup gets here I'm sure the entire judicial system is going to get a massive change to accomodate the population essentially doubling with people who think differenlty.

[QUOTE=Chezhead;32340311]I hate to be discriminatory, but I'm glad that people are cracking down on Muslims.[/QUOTE] Protip: If you hate being discriminatory, don't do it.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32340285]So, uh, can the homosexuals get married?[/QUOTE] Nope. [editline]17th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Megafanx13;32340202]That's right, if it were even possible for police to be able to bust into your house and arrest you for having sex with a person of the same sex, that is horrid.[/QUOTE] My point was that it is impossible! [editline]17th September 2011[/editline] I'm not arguing against Lankist, I agree with his attitude towards this kind of stuff but I'm just saying that it's really not so terrible. There is room for improvement, lots of it; but we're not living in a police-state citizen oppressing 3rd world country. That's all.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340343]Nope.[/quote] OK, well [I]there's[/I] a big, glaring problem with that law. [QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340343]My point was that it is impossible![/QUOTE] And that's just not true. If the law's still there, then it can and will be enforced. That's the point of a law. And this isn't some crazy one from the 1400s that says something like "you have to tip your hat to a pregnant woman on a Thursday" and you can just ignore; this is a proper, freedom infringing, godawful law.

[QUOTE=Hellduck;32340426]OK, well [I]there's[/I] a big, glaring problem with that law. And that's just not true. If the law's still there, then it can and will be enforced. That's the point of a law. And this isn't some crazy one from the 1400s that says you have to tip your hat to a pregnant woman on a Thursday; this is a proper, freedom infringing, godawful law.[/QUOTE] It can be, but it isn't. Because it's a constitutional monarchy there is definitely a lot of risk and thats what people are scared of; but Qatars king is actually a pretty cool dude. If there was anything really wrong with the country's abuse of hate-laws, 75% of the population wouldn't have immigrated there to make a living.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340333]Qatars a small place and word always gets around. The law has not been enforced since the mid 90s. I have no idea on when the government will scrap the law but it can be agreed that they might as well. By the time the world cup gets here I'm sure the entire judicial system is going to get a massive change to accomodate the population essentially doubling with people who think differenlty.[/QUOTE] The government won't scrap the law until people open and publicly stand up to it. We used to have sodomy laws in the US. They weren't enforced in the 1950s, but they were still used as a justification to abuse homosexuals. Then in the 60's, at one of our most progressive and tolerant points in history, we got rid of them after heavy protestation. It was a lot harder for our federal government to get rid of 50 individual state-level sodomy laws at once than it would be for your national government to get rid of a national law. You can't get rid of it until you stand up to it. Saying just because it's unenforced means it's okay is short-sighted and stupid. In ten years your level of tolerance won't be the same. When you undergo a religious revival, it will be enforced again. And you will have lost your one opportunity to change the law in a climate accepting of change, or at least judging by your words one that would be accepting of change. There is more controversy in the States over homosexuality right now than there was in the 50's or 60's. But they cannot be abused by sodomy laws because we took the opportunity to rid ourselves of them when we had the chance.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340343]Nope.[/QUOTE] And you're telling me gays aren't discriminated against?

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340463]It can be, but it isn't. Because it's a constitutional monarchy there is definitely a lot of risk and thats what people are scared of; but Qatars king is actually a pretty cool dude. If there was anything really wrong with the country's abuse of hate-laws, 75% of the population wouldn't have immigrated there to make a living.[/QUOTE] And what happens when your king dies, and the next king is a lot more strict in his enforcement of religious tradition? What will your country be like in thirty years from now? What are all of the possibilities? And what laws will your new king have at his disposal? You are thinking entirely in the present. That is irresponsible.

[QUOTE=Lankist;32340469]The government won't scrap the law until people open and publicly stand up to it. We used to have sodomy laws in the US. They weren't enforced in the 1950s, but they were still used as a justification to abuse homosexuals. Then in the 60's, at one of our most progressive and tolerant points in history, we got rid of them after heavy protestation. It was a lot harder for our federal government to get rid of 50 individual state-level sodomy laws at once than it would be for your national government to get rid of a national law. You can't get rid of it until you stand up to it. Saying just because it's unenforced means it's okay is short-sighted and stupid. In ten years your level of tolerance won't be the same. When you undergo a religious revival, it will be enforced again.[/QUOTE] The establishment of this gives me hope. [url]http://www.nhrc-qa.org/en/default.aspx[/url]

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340463]It can be, but it isn't.[/QUOTE] That's not the point. It [I]can[/I] be, and [I]that's[/I] the issue.

Why are you all so shocked Gay marriage is illegal in a muslim country when its only legal in about 10 US states.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;32340549]The establishment of this gives me hope. [url]http://www.nhrc-qa.org/en/default.aspx[/url][/QUOTE] They aren't going to get anywhere if most of the country is as complacent about the existence of unjust laws as you are. [editline]17th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=RainbowStalin;32340554]Why are you all so shocked Gay marriage is illegal in a muslim country when its only legal in about 10 US states.[/QUOTE] Good news is right now there's quite a lot of debate over constitutional justification for federally recognized gay marriage due to the 14th amendment "life, liberty and property" clause. Hopefully, as long as people keep taking the case to the Supreme Court, it will get recognized. But *only* if people keep fighting for it. Nothing will change if people act so complacent.