Radical/Muslim protests, Shop owners told they face 40 lashes if they continue selling 'evil' alcoho - Polidicks

[QUOTE=shakadamus;43210416]I didn't think alcohol was banned for Muslims, I thought it was you weren't allowed to enter a Mosque intoxicated and because they're required to pray so often (something like 5 times a day I think) if you did get pissed you wouldn't have enough time to sober up.[/QUOTE] Alcohol holds no value in Islamic states and it is forbidden for Muslims to develop or produce any alcohol and also drinking alcohol is considered against the teachings of mohammad because of statements in the quran and other muslim holy books. Alcohol such as wine is considered ḥarām which means "Unlawful". The reason why some Muslims drink alcohol e.g. in turkey, is because turkey is not an islamic state (It's secular) and islam moderates partake in alcohol as it is not forbidden by their laws.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43210578]Can we stop posting sensationalism meant to breed xenophobia[/QUOTE] The xenophobia is upon us, its too late. Now we have to think about what we are seeing and act accordingly.

[QUOTE=Freakie;43210324]Wasn't religion a major cause of The Troubles? Although on topic, do ALL branches of Islam prohibit alcohol and the likes?[/QUOTE] Most of the mainstream branches do.

[QUOTE=Jamie1992GSC;43210538]Doesn't make it any less stupid.[/QUOTE] Sadly, this is what you get when you get immigrants who follow a religion that still holds onto traditions\quotes that date back to the middle ages. The people who western society, dub as muslim extremists are actually true followers of islam as they follow each word. I suppose the christian equivalent would be the Spanish inquisition, burning people for witchcraft or putting someone on a rack since they didn't believe in god. But Christianity for the most part is civilized and adapted (In the 1st world - some African Christians in Africa still burn people for witchcraft)

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210582]Alcohol holds no value in Islamic states and it is forbidden for Muslims to develop or produce any alcohol and also drinking alcohol is considered against the teachings of mohammad because of statements in the quran and other muslim holy books. Alcohol such as wine is considered ḥarām which means "Unlawful". The reason why some Muslims drink alcohol e.g. in turkey, is because turkey is not an islamic state (It's secular) and islam moderates partake in alcohol as it is not forbidden by their laws.[/QUOTE] If that is the case. Why is it imposed upon a middle eastern individual whom may not be of strict teachings of Quran and religion himself, or herself. Besides selling is entirely different from consumption. They have no right to tell another human being how to live their life, at-least within reason, as long as they abide by law. Religion and it's teachings are NOT law. And should never be imposed into the same category. (As much as it sometimes seems people of religious belief deem it so) Telling a man he cannot sell alcohol because of your personal belief and teachings just because he doesn't abide by it is wrong, and entirely immoral. It's no different to Christians who are in the news preaching against gay people. Protesting against a individual or a small business that runs entirely from ethics that are not tied to a religion is merely shit stirring. And it's crap like this, that needs to stop.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43210578]Can we stop posting sensationalism meant to breed xenophobia[/QUOTE] Only when you stop complaining all the time.

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210609]Sadly, this is what you get when you get immigrants who follow a religion that still holds onto traditions\quotes that date back to the middle ages. The people who western society, dub as muslim extremists are actually true followers of islam as they follow each word. I suppose the christian equivalent would be the Spanish inquisition, burning people for witchcraft or putting someone on a rack since they didn't believe in god. But Christianity for the most part is civilized and adapted (In the 1st world - some African Christians in Africa still burn people for witchcraft)[/QUOTE] I've no problem with religion. I personally am Atheist. Most religious people do not intervene and impose their beliefs on another, however it is when, in example of this situation. That they deem it fair to do such a thing like this, simply because of scriptures, or teachings that it starts to irk me. This is one of those moments. And in all honesty, it pisses me off to no end.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43210578]Can we stop posting sensationalism meant to breed xenophobia[/QUOTE] Yes, let's call anything that goes against human rights by Islam or a "minority" group, xenophobia, that way we can brand them racists and the human rights abuse can continue! Great idea!

There was something that happened not so long ago, with a couple of idiots harassing people for drinking in what they called "a Muslim district" (note: this was in the middle of London). What followed was the local religious leader quoting from the Quran how things were done in one of the original Islamic cities, which can be summarised as "alcohol is forbidden if you're a Muslim, but you can't expect those who aren't Muslims to live by the rules of our religion". The point the priest was making was that in an Islamic state the rule was to tolerate those of different beliefs; therefore, trying to impose ones beliefs on others [I]while in a secular state where Islam is a minority[/I] is really, really dumb.

[QUOTE=Askaris;43210696]There was something that happened not so long ago, with a couple of idiots harassing people for drinking in what they called "a Muslim district" (note: this was in the middle of London). What followed was the local religious leader quoting from the Quran how things were done in one of the original Islamic cities, which can be summarised as "alcohol is forbidden if you're a Muslim, but you can't expect those who aren't Muslims to live by the rules of our religion". The point the priest was making was that in an Islamic state the rule was to tolerate those of different beliefs; therefore, trying to impose ones beliefs on others [I]while in a secular state where Islam is a minority[/I] is really, really dumb.[/QUOTE] A tad askew from point, and I'll probably recieve hate from this post. But is it just me, or is Islam slowly becoming more prevalent in the United Kingdom? IE to me it seems it won't remain a minority for long, especially if the government don't put their damn foot down.

sprinkle the crowds with beer!

[QUOTE=GreenLeaf;43210718]sprinkle the crowds with beer![/QUOTE] and pork sausages! Those with cheese mixed into the mince. yum.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;43210302]People are too soft now days to say No, it might hurt someone's feelings[/QUOTE] yeah man that's why we've got EDL rallies, gradually tightening and largely ineffective immigration laws, and half the country acting overly conservative and constantly spouting exactly the same things you are to justify their crazy Daily Mail racism. nope, nobody has the [I][B]BALLS[/B][/I] to say "NO" anymore in case the PC Police gets wind of it! truly, it was better in the old days, where you could casually throw racial slurs at people and nobody gave a damn (except the people being insulted but they didn't matter)! (hint: you're not unique in thinking this, least of all in England) [QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210677]Yes, let's call anything that goes against human rights by Islam or a "minority" group, xenophobia, that way we can brand them racists and the human rights abuse can continue! Great idea![/QUOTE] hey didn't our government want to repeal the human rights act a while ago so that they could deport anyone they didn't like, particularly refugees from countries that themselves suffer from human rights abuses? sure would suck if that in itself counted as human rights abuse! [editline]17th December[/editline] "we need to stop these Islamic human rights abuses by simultaneously subjecting people to them and doing them ourselves"

[QUOTE=Askaris;43210696]There was something that happened not so long ago, with a couple of idiots harassing people for drinking in what they called "a Muslim district" (note: this was in the middle of London). What followed was the local religious leader quoting from the Quran how things were done in one of the original Islamic cities, which can be summarised as "alcohol is forbidden if you're a Muslim, but you can't expect those who aren't Muslims to live by the rules of our religion". The point the priest was making was that in an Islamic state the rule was to tolerate those of different beliefs; therefore, trying to impose ones beliefs on others [I]while in a secular state where Islam is a minority[/I] is really, really dumb.[/QUOTE] This still takes place, although it's not just in London but in other places with major muslim populations. Especially around mosques as muslims regard such area's as holy ground and consider bringing things like cigarettes, alcohol or even dressing inappropriately in such area's as sinful and since most muslim immigrants support Sharia law which makes such things illegal in Islamic countries that have sharia law . Although the mainstream media will not report such incidents of violence\aggression, which is why you won't hear about it as it can incite "racial hatred" towards muslims.

[QUOTE=Cone;43210742]yeah man that's why we've got EDL rallies, gradually tightening and largely ineffective immigration laws, and half the country acting overly conservative and constantly spouting exactly the same things you are to justify their crazy Daily Mail racism. nope, nobody has the [I][B]BALLS[/B][/I] to say "NO" anymore in case the PC Police gets wind of it! truly, it was better in the old days, where you could casually throw racial slurs at people and nobody gave a damn (except the people being insulted but they didn't matter)! (hint: you're not unique in thinking this, least of all in England) hey didn't our government want to repeal the human rights act a while ago so that they could deport anyone they didn't like, particularly refugees from countries that themselves suffer from human rights abuses? sure would suck if that in itself counted as human rights abuse![/QUOTE] I think it was less about who they liked, and more about bringing some form of intervention to those who cause havoc, and incite such acts which are detrimental to country and it's people. I doubt it was just so the government could fling their metaphorical weight around to fuck with people. If that was the case, they'd of done it anyway. They been doing it to the English citizens for years as it is. I think they just wanted extra security in the ideal of being able to deal a swift blow to people who incite and partake in acts, such as the one described in the OP.

[QUOTE=Jamie1992GSC;43210769]I think it was less about who they liked, and more about bringing some form of intervention to those who cause havoc, and incite such acts which are detrimental to country and it's people. I doubt it was just so the government could fling their metaphorical weight around to fuck with people. If that was the case, they'd of done it anyway. They been doing it to the English citizens for years as it is. I think they just wanted extra security in the ideal of being able to deal a swift blow to people who incite and partake in acts, such as the one described in the OP.[/QUOTE] yeah but the thing is, if you start deporting people to countries with a history of human rights abuse, then you're actively facilitating that abuse. it doesn't matter what the deportee did, if the country you want to send him to has a history of torture or performing extrajudicial executions, it's blatantly a human rights abuse in itself to facilitate that. i think what needs to be made clear is that the problem with deporting someone to that kind of country isn't just that you're deporting people - it's that you're putting them in a situation where they have a considerable risk of having their human rights violated, so that you're practically violating them yourself by letting it happen. the UN doesn't like that, and with good reason. i think that if any of you actually cared about human rights abuses, you would immediately know why trying to repeal the Human Rights Act is wrong.

This article was written to evoke a "grr fuckin muslims" response from the conservative public because its easy to blame your problems on foreigners. Its fearmongering bullshit.

[QUOTE=Cone;43210846]yeah but the thing is, if you start deporting people to countries with a history of human rights abuse, then you're actively facilitating that abuse. it doesn't matter what the deportee did, if the country you want to send him to has a history of torture or performing extrajudicial executions, it's blatantly a human rights abuse in itself to facilitate that. i think what needs to be made clear is that the problem with deporting someone to that kind of country isn't just that you're deporting people - it's that you're putting them in a situation where they have a considerable risk of having their human rights violated, so that you're practically violating them yourself by letting it happen. the UN doesn't like that, and with good reason. i think that if any of you actually cared about human rights abuses, you would immediately know why trying to repeal the Human Rights Act is wrong.[/QUOTE] It still doesn't bypass the fact that they are in this country now, and are impeding upon other peoples rights and abusing other individuals on their life and choices based upon their own beliefs and teachings in like, based around the principle of religion. So what is the alternative towards exporting those individuals. We are forced to endure such antics because we are too scared to deport them back to a country where their own government is just as hopeless at stopping such acts themselves?

[QUOTE=Cone;43210846]yeah but the thing is, if you start deporting people to countries with a history of human rights abuse, then you're actively facilitating that abuse. it doesn't matter what the deportee did, if the country you want to send him to has a history of torture or performing extrajudicial executions, it's blatantly a human rights abuse in itself to facilitate that. i think what needs to be made clear is that the problem with deporting someone to that kind of country isn't just that you're deporting people - it's that you're putting them in a situation where they have a considerable risk of having their human rights violated, so that you're practically violating them yourself by letting it happen. the UN doesn't like that, and with good reason. i think that if any of you actually cared about human rights abuses, you would immediately know why trying to repeal the Human Rights Act is wrong.[/QUOTE] Your correct however, if that's the case then what should happen, is they should be deported to the country nearest to their home country that does not have human rights abuse issues so they can claim asylum there. The problem is, these "asylum seekers" that are from the middle east, Africa etc that come to the uk are doing it to take advantage of our countries benefits, they have no right to be here. If your being oppressed, you don't go half way across the world to escape oppression when there is a country nearby without said human rights abuse issues. We are and have been too soft on asylum seekers, foreign criminals and illegal immigrants, it's costing the UK millions (if not billions) of pounds because most cases are not genuine (Alot of them discard their passports\documents so they cannot be deported), they are just looking for a way to live in the UK without going through the process of becoming a citizen and want hand-outs as the UK is well known for it's welfare and healthcare systems.

[QUOTE=Jamie1992GSC;43210706]A tad askew from point, and I'll probably recieve hate from this post. But is it just me, or is Islam slowly becoming more prevalent in the United Kingdom? IE to me it seems it won't remain a minority for long, especially if the government don't put their damn foot down.[/QUOTE] [quote]results from the United Kingdom Census 2011 suggesting that by 2011 the total Muslim population had reached 2.7 million, [B]4.8% of the total population[/B][/quote] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_Kingdom[/url] Whooa better put that foot down before it's too late mate!!

[QUOTE=demoguy08;43210915][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_Kingdom[/url] Whooa better put that foot down before it's too late mate!![/QUOTE] Islam. Not Muslim. Islam. You should probably read before you post.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43210875]This article was written to evoke a "grr fuckin muslims" response from the conservative public because its easy to blame your problems on foreigners. Its fearmongering bullshit.[/QUOTE] I dunno man, maybe it was written because people were threatening to give other people 40 lashes for selling alcohol.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43210875]This article was written to evoke a "grr fuckin muslims" response from the conservative public because its easy to blame your problems on foreigners. Its fearmongering bullshit.[/QUOTE] And by putting yourself beside the rabid conservotards fighting the radical muslim provocateurs, youre just creating one more front in the fight. So who is the bigger idiot?

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210677]Yes, let's call anything that goes against human rights by Islam or a "minority" group, xenophobia, that way we can brand them racists and the human rights abuse can continue! Great idea![/QUOTE] He's right though, that's pretty much the sole purpose of this article. It was a small protest (about 60) and the article fails to mention that the local mosque condemned the protest. Most Muslims don't give two fucks if you want to have a drink and the issue is that people equate loud fringes with the quiet majority

[QUOTE=Jamie1992GSC;43210937]Islam. Not Muslim. Islam. You should probably read before you post.[/QUOTE] Are you fucking serious [quote]A Muslim, sometimes spelled Moslem,[1] is an adherent of Islam.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Sprockethead;43210961]And by putting yourself beside the rabid conservotards fighting the radical muslim provocateurs, youre just creating one more front in the fight. So who is the bigger idiot?[/QUOTE] So you can't actually come with an opposing argument or point out the issue. Because you're creating "another front in the fight" Alright.

If you dont like it dont drink it, it's that simple. Fucking extremist fucks.

[QUOTE=Jamie1992GSC;43210903]It still doesn't bypass the fact that they are in this country now, and are impeding upon other peoples rights and abusing other individuals on their life and choices based upon their own beliefs and teachings in like, based around the principle of religion. So what is the alternative towards exporting those individuals. We are forced to endure such antics because we are too scared to deport them back to a country where their own government is just as hopeless at stopping such acts themselves?[/QUOTE] i think the way that you're phrasing this question is kind of loaded. it's not "is there any alternative to committing human rights abuses," it's "is there any alternative to LITERALLY ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT?" the fact that this is even a question is ridiculous. if you really need me to tell you this, then no, the answer is [I]not[/I] to hand people over to despotic regimes and professional torturers, i'm glad you asked. human rights violations are NEVER an option, no matter what. this is not a question in any sense of the word, and the fact that this country phrases it as one while also holding ourselves so high above everyone else is, frankly, giving me a headache.

[QUOTE=Doozle;43210992]He's right though, that's pretty much the sole purpose of this article. It was a small protest (about 60) and the article fails to mention that the local mosque condemned the protest. Most Muslims don't give two fucks if you want to have a drink and the issue is that people equate loud fringes with the quiet majority[/QUOTE] You are generalizing Muslims as one entity. These "60" are true followers of islam, we call them extremists but they are just following the word of Allah, what muhammad wrote in the Qu'ran and the Hadith by enacting sharia law. "Most muslims" - Where do you get this evidence? If they don't agree with these extremists, then they are moderate followers of islam, although the only way to get statstical facts on if "most muslims" disagree with these extremists, is to see if they support sharia law, since it's sharia law these followers of islam are trying to enforce. In regards to the mosque not supporting their actions, of course they would not declare that they support it. If Christians that visit a church, go around near a church and start saying that they will burn people at the stake for witchcraft, would you really declare support for this group? The answer is most likely no.

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210907]Your correct however, if that's the case then what should happen, is they should be deported to the country nearest to their home country that does not have human rights abuse issues so they can claim asylum there. The problem is, these "asylum seekers" that are from the middle east, Africa etc that come to the uk are doing it to take advantage of our countries benefits, they have no right to be here. If your being oppressed, you don't go half way across the world to escape oppression when there is a country nearby without said human rights abuse issues. We are and have been too soft on asylum seekers, foreign criminals and illegal immigrants, it's costing the UK millions (if not billions) of pounds because most cases are not genuine (Alot of them discard their passports\documents so they cannot be deported), they are just looking for a way to live in the UK without going through the process of becoming a citizen and want hand-outs as the UK is well known for it's welfare and healthcare systems.[/QUOTE] if we don't have to deal with people from oppressed countries, why were they trying to repeal the Human Rights Act in the first place? clearly it is an issue that the government feels must be fixed, or else they wouldn't have tried that. and "a country nearby without said human rights abuse issues" is not a guaranteed thing, least of all in the crazed theocratic badlands you seem to think the Middle East is. also, if people find breaking into the country easier than going through the process of becoming a legal citizen, that's probably a sign that your system for letting people into the country sucks eggs. seriously, hopping a border illegally is not an easy thing to do. you need connections for that, and there's no guarantee that you won't get caught as soon as you enter. and unless you're trying to tell me that all immigrants are doing this just to be evil and nasty, there's probably a damn good reason they find this the simpler solution. [editline]17th December[/editline] [QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43211044]You are generalizing Muslims as one entity. These "60" are true followers of islam, we call them extremists but they are just following the word of Allah, what muhammad wrote in the Qu'ran and the Hadith by enacting sharia law.[/QUOTE] [I](every religion is like this. surprise.)[/I]