Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

mattyrm wrote:Dont put anymore stuff like that on MGS, it causes a burning fire to blaze in my heart that only 15 pints can quench.

Wait I thought you had 15 pints for breakfast?

whatwhat wrote:
That's a fairly ignorant view of the muslim community to my mind. most muslims I know are easy to talk to, don't burn poppies and prefer to talk to me about cricket and football than their religion which they keep to themselves. The most they do to expose their religion is order a j20 when the rest of us are ordering pints. You're judging the majority by a minority. TBH your viewpoint sounds like it's coming from a person whose main knowledge of British Muslims comes from BBC News rather than any actual contact with them.

I have a friend who's father is from Pakistan and identifies himself as a 'lapsed muslim' as he drinks like a fish and enjoys a very active social calendar, I regularly socialised with muslim colleagues at work for years... I have spent the last 5(ish) years living in an area of Bristol with a very high percentage of muslim residents, of them, predominantly Somalian.

What my friend and I have agreed upon, is that whilst it is a fact that the violent and aggressive protesting/poppy burning types are a minority, they are on the increase and mostly made from the younger muslims. The trending of the muslim population does seem to be moving into a more aggressive stance and isolating rather than integrating.

Also we agree upon the continued oppression of women within the various muslim nationality minorities within the UK. It exists and whilst you may have gone with a muslim girl to the pub and she had a j2o, there will be many who are not permitted that indulgence by family and or spouse.

By saying 'most muslims I know', you already show that these are not radical muslims, these are people happy to even enter a pub or be around people who drink alcohol, so you are talking from your experience of a proportion of the demographic.

What we have also discussed is that whilst a great many are not out on the streets demonstrating and calling for the downfall of the west and so on, the vast majority do not openly condemn those groups either, as to be seen to do so would be siding with the outsider rather than your brother.

And so the radicalism and hatred are allowed to flourish due to the unwillingness of the moderate amongst the islamic community to speak out. This causes the whole to trend further and further into the extremism.

Indeed, if he drinks isn't a Muslim.

I have a mate who isn't a Muslim either, his parents are though. Does that make you one? Just because your parents decided you should be one?

He supports my local team, drinks, and fell out with his parents because he refused an arranged marriage. All British people who go "oh yeah my Muslim mate is sound" are deluding yourselves into thinking that the son or daughter of a Muslim will always be a Muslim. This is not correct.

Now, my non Muslim son of Muslim mate, he always tells me ridiculous stories about his "conspiracy theory, Bush blew up the twin towers Jew menace" parents believe some crazy stuff.

They ARE Muslim.

You find me a 5 prayers a day, strict orthodox Muslim who is fully accepting of equality for all, who loves to be pals with us infidels, who doesn't hate Jews and gays and beer swigging white boys and scantily clad women, and you have found a very rare man indeed.

Seriously, these "lapsed Muslims"?

They ain't frigging Muslims.

mattyrm wrote:

Ketara wrote:

No.

It's a xenophobic reaction to a culture attempting to maintain some of their own values in a legal and non-binding way.

Really? Really?!

I suggest you read accounts of actual British Muslim women.

Honestly, i genuinely cannot believe how so many otherwise intelligent people are able to be hoodwinked so easily by the Muslim community simply because they have been conditioned by the left leaning PC establishment that any form of criticism at all of Islam is "xenophobic racism"

Seriously, it disturbs me.

Here, if even the Guardian can criticize Muslim practices, can you left leaning PC apologists not even bring yourself to let out a tiny amount of discontent?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jul/25/female-circumcision-children-british-law

Left leaning apologist? Hoodwinked?

Please remove your crass projections about me from your mind. I'm actually a fairly right wing sort of person. Believe it or not, I'm Jewish, not particularly pro-arab, and have had relatives killed by missiles in Israel.

So don't tell me I've been 'conditioned' just because I disagree with you on something. It's insulting.

What I tend to find is that for every 'left leaning apologist', there's a person screaming about how the muslims are out to get us all, and how they're being 'oppressed' because they bravely dare to voice their 'un-PC' views. It's rubbish, and just places you on the opposing end of the spectrum, making you as narrow minded as the PC ones you wail about. It's how the BNP gets its votes.

The simple fact is that if you are prepared to grant the right to arbitration to Jewish people, you must also be prepared to grant this right to Muslim people. And any other ethnic group or religion who wants it. Otherwise it IS xenophobic discrimination. You are willingly classing people who exercise their freedom of belief as second class citizens, by denying them rights that are granted to other legitimate citizens. There is no middle ground here. Either everyone has it, or nobody has it. Otherwise it is discrimination of the most crass kind.

It's not denying there is a societal problem with the radicalisation of young muslims, and indeed even with their integration into society. However, would you solve this by denying them their fundamental human rights? Do you honestly think that by making them inferior citizens to everyone else by making certain things illegal for muslims is going to de-radicalize them? That intolerance on our part will beget tolerance on theirs?

I'm neither left-leaning, nor conditioned. I'm just fully aware of how precarious human rights are, and how fast they can be taken away. And once you start removing rights from one ethnic group, how long is it before that precedent is applied to another? Its the top of a very slippery slope, and one I would not go down.

The only motivation one can have for removing rights from a specific race or ethnic group of people is one of xenophobic hatred of the basest level. I would like to think that such a thing would be below people raised in a free and democratic society, but too often am I proved wrong. Thankfully though, most of society agrees with me, and that's why we don't have pogroms here in England anymore.

Ketara wrote:

No.

It's a xenophobic reaction to a culture attempting to maintain some of their own values in a legal and non-binding way.

So don't tell me I've been 'conditioned' just because I disagree with you on something. It's insulting.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:By saying 'most muslims I know', you already show that these are not radical muslims, these are people happy to even enter a pub or be around people who drink alcohol, so you are talking from your experience of a proportion of the demographic.

Sorry but that's just dumb. 'You all seem to be alright but thats because I haven't met the bad ones yet' isn't good logic. You can't judge people by anything but your own experiences of them, that's all I'm doing. It's not as if I've only met one or two muslims in my life time, much like yourself and the jewish couple, I've met hundreds of them. I play in a cricket with them. I have lived with them. Your idea that they are all turning to radicalism has no grounds and contrary to what you just said there are plenty who speak out against those that do.

mattyrm wrote:You find me a 5 prayers a day, strict orthodox Muslim who is fully accepting of equality for all, who loves to be pals with us infidels, who doesn't hate Jews and gays and beer swigging white boys and scantily clad women, and you have found a very rare man indeed

I could tell you about quite a few actually. But then you wouldn't believe that what with being a biggot and all.

People who disagree with Sharia courts (for clearly and glaringly obvious reasons) are being Xenophobic.

Yes. if that is the only court they disagree with.

Courts as a whole are unfair. Money talks, so does fame. Ethic background plays a part as well.

That said religion has no place in the court house.

Ok Ketara, you have been posting here for ages, and I was never under the impression that you were a radical PC type in general, however lets get down to brass tacks here.

Is it wrong of me to take that view of you when you state as above?

That people who disagree with Sharia courts (for clearly and glaringly obvious reasons) are being Xenophobic?

Xenophobic:- A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.

I would say that to tell people of a specific ethnic group that they may not arbitrate between themselves IS xenophobic. The only reasons I have heard so far are that there are some concerns that women may be oppressed by the system, however, as I have already addressed that issue, and do not believe it valid, xenophobia is the only conclusion I have left to reach. You say these reasons are 'clear and glaringly obvious' as to why muslims must be treated as second class citizens in this regard, but I have yet to hear a single well laid out, rational, and justified argument as to why removing rights from a specific ethnic group is necessary for the good of the nation.

People dont disagree with Sharia courts because they are Xenophobic, and stating that is far more insulting then me thinking you are being a bit PC. They disagree with them because they are fething unfair!

Really? Even though they aren't legally binding?

As for xenophobia, I'm not using it as an insult. Rather a description. I'm not trying to play the racist card here (it annoys me when the aforementioned PC types do that). But the argument against sharia courts for arbitration so far seems to be, 'They don't want to all be 100% British citizens! They want their own beliefs to play a part in how they are judged, and that is thoroughly un-British, against integration, and....uhhhh....could be potentially bad for women!'.

This desire to not fully integrate, and retain some of their own culture seems to be the main repellant here. As such, I would say wanting to force them to integrate more comes as a result of xenophobia. That is to say, fear or contempt of that which is foreign (or un-british).

Are the thousands and thousands of people involved in the "One law for all" campaign Xenophobic?

I do not know this campaign? Elaboration please?

Oh and of course regarding the rest of your post, I agree with much of what you said, If it isnt glaringly obvious by now, i have a distaste for almost all Religious pracitices, and Jewish customs would get no special treatment in that respect either.

That's fine. If your view is that arbitration by people according to their religious beliefs should be illegal, then that's your own belief, and I respect that. The Law should be painted with a broad brush, or not at all in my eyes. My point was simply to distinguish that according a certain privilige to one group of citizens, and not to another, is blatant discrimination, and in this case, seems to be motivated by xenophobia.

Xenophobia suggests a fear of race. I think what's being described here is potential Theophobia, which I might be suffering from. But then it's a bit like arachnophobia, in certain cases it can be justified as a logical fear.


I'll let these gents show my fear for the United Kingdom.

Should I post loads of vids of the Westboro Baptist Church and co, and explain that's why we should start discriminating against christians?

Come on MGS, you can do better than that.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Xenophobia suggests a fear of race. I think what's being described here is potential Theophobia, which I might be suffering from. But then it's a bit like arachnophobia, in certain cases it can be justified as a logical fear.

Well you certainly seem to be assigning all this fear to a particular race.

Yeah its the exact same with me mate, It is also commonly refered to as racism, but how it is racism? You get white Muslims.

Im not racist, im Religiousist. I think you can follow your Religion, but it should have absolutely ZERO influence on public policy. Science and common sense CAN show us the way forward and determine human values. And yes, Ive read The Moral Landscape.

I know that Islam is a grave threat to Europe. I know it from what I believe is a coldly logical perspective.

The Islamic Empire preserved the knowledge of the Greeks. Theocratic imbeciles rose to power and the Muslim world fell into a dark age it has never rose from, being eclipsed by their European counterparts. And I am pretty sure that they (Muslims) are currently going through the enlightenment. Look at all the unrest in the world. Many many young Muslims know how we live, and they want a piece of the pie. But we need to sort our fething lives out if we dont want it all to go to gak, we need to ensure we dont allow the censorship to carry on, we need to be vocal with our criticisms. And Ketara is basically living proof of what we are doing wrong. If we make people believe that any and all criticism of Islam is Xenophobia and bigotry, we are going to wind up in some serious gak.


Im of the opinion that in 50 years time (if we dont get wiped out by the lunatics in the meantime) Islam will have gone the same way as Christianity. It will be far less influential in the lives of most people than it did in years gone by. America is waking up too, Scientific rationalism and Secularism is on the rise, people are getting more information than ever before, and logic is replacing superstition.

I hope so anyway, but I think many young muslims are waking up to the facts, and that is that you can respect your traditions and Religion and culture without dogmatically following an ancient desert scribbling to the letter and acting like a tit because of it.

Its a new enlightenment. We had one, why shouldnt they?

mattyrm wrote: Ketara is basically living proof of what we are doing wrong. If we make people believe that any and all criticism of Islam is Xenophobia and bigotry, we are going to wind up in some serious gak.

I don't believe criticism of islam is xenophobia and bigotry.

I do believe recommending we strip away fundamental rights from a specific ethnic group for no as of yet adequately explained reason is xenophobia though.

Frazzled wrote:Who gives a about a thousand years ago? This is now. 2011, its the new black.

It was merely a statement of something I found funny. Not an argument for or against. The time stream has a habit of taking things and turning them on their head if you give it a century or two to work its magic, which is always entertaining.

Ketara wrote:Should I post loads of vids of the Westboro Baptist Church and co, and explain that's why we should start discriminating against christians?

Come on MGS, you can do better than that.

I don't know I think he's on to something, look at all these videos. Practising Muslims talking up killing and violence and what not.

Snoop is a Muslim?!

I really didnt know that..

I knew Cube was...

"momma made me breakfast with no hog"

Look at this muslim he bites peoples ears off. proof that the no good muslim race is nothing but bad news!




Automatically Appended Next Post:
and more muslim hate...

Ketara wrote:Should I post loads of vids of the Westboro Baptist Church and co, and explain that's why we should start discriminating against christians?

Come on MGS, you can do better than that.

I find their fascism equally repellent, however there are only four or five people in the WBC though, not the thousands we see on marches in the UK calling for the beheading of a cartoonist or author. The vast majority of Christians are very verbal on disagreeing with the WBC stance.

Most Christians in the UK seem to be more interested in being overly optimistic and cheerful, have coffee morning bring and buy sales for funds for the church roof or want to wave a tambourine around their heads. They seem to, for the vast majority, be very clear on doing the nice bits that Christ talked about. Fine, keep the noise down, don't try to convert me too much (I know you're obligated to try a bit...) and we'll get on fine.

When certain amongst them do the nasty bits, there are lots of other Christians ready to chastised those ones and remind them of the other bits of the bible that don't correspond to the nasty bit being used for particular agenda.

When these mosques are being radicalised, when the marches down the streets call for bloodshed and spout hatred and bile against the nation within whom those people live and towards the rest of it's citizens who they expect to then tolerate this, it is simply too much.

Why are the modest muslims not railing against this behaviour? Why do we not see counter protests from muslims calling for peace and integration? What actions are the modests taking within muslim communities to curtail the runaway train of extremism?

Very little it seems.

And again, coming back to the point I raised some time ago, we still then, after being confronted with the open vitriol and hatred and violence, are confronted with that other side to muslim faith, the denigration of women. Official figures put the number of women killed through honour killings at a dozen a year. That's a dozen women killed via 'sanctioned' means within their religion by their own families. Women are still forced to leave education, forced to remain at home, forced to marry without consent.

These practises are no longer tolerated within the greater community but seem to hit the blind spot for human rights groups in the UK because of the fear of criticising them leading to allegations of racism.

whatwhat wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Xenophobia suggests a fear of race. I think what's being described here is potential Theophobia, which I might be suffering from. But then it's a bit like arachnophobia, in certain cases it can be justified as a logical fear.

Well you certainly seem to be assigning all this fear to a particular race.

Which race is that? I don't like the Islamic religion's current treatment of women and it's open violent rhetoric and protests or it's seeking to overthrow and replace the current system with it's own theocracy.

I have been with Unite Against Fascism on marches and in collision against the National Front in open hostility because I absolutely believe in the rights and freedoms of people regardless of their skin colour, heritage or cultural beliefs. I have always believed in the rights of individuals to enjoy freedom to have their own faith and belief.
But the more I have seen of Islam, the more I have become convinced that it's hard line is nothing more than fascism masquerading as a religion and that it is as much an enemy of the freedoms I believe in as Nazism was.

As a member of the liberal left, I actually find this guy's comments ring very true for me.

Ugh.. yeah, Zidane nutted him because he said "son of a French Algerian Terrorist whore"

If that super honest Italian chap said it, then it must be true.

And I dont wish to point it out, but individuals are not in most of MGS videos, because individuals arent scary.

Thousands of the bastards chasing the coppers, thats kinda scary. And its clearly indictive of a problem, no matter how many photos you post in an attempt to cheapen his point.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

whatwhat wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Xenophobia suggests a fear of race. I think what's being described here is potential Theophobia, which I might be suffering from. But then it's a bit like arachnophobia, in certain cases it can be justified as a logical fear.

Well you certainly seem to be assigning all this fear to a particular race.

Which race is that?

Religion then. Xenophobia isn't just limited to race.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:Ugh.. yeah, Zidane nutted him because he said "son of a French Algerian Terrorist whore"

If that super honest Italian chap said it, then it must be true.

And I dont wish to point it out, but individuals are not in most of MGS videos, because individuals arent scary.

Thousands of the bastards chasing the coppers, thats kinda scary. And its clearly indictive of a problem, no matter how many photos you post in an attempt to cheapen his point.

Yeah man I know.




Look thousands of them! And they are mocking you Mattyrm. They're calling your mother a whore.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Ketara wrote:Should I post loads of vids of the Westboro Baptist Church and co, and explain that's why we should start discriminating against christians?

Come on MGS, you can do better than that.

I find their fascism equally repellent, however there are only four or five people in the WBC though, not the thousands we see on marches in the UK calling for the beheading of a cartoonist or author. The vast majority of Christians are very verbal on disagreeing with the WBC stance.

Most Christians in the UK seem to be more interested in being overly optimistic and cheerful, have coffee morning bring and buy sales for funds for the church roof or want to wave a tambourine around their heads. They seem to, for the vast majority, be very clear on doing the nice bits that Christ talked about. Fine, keep the noise down, don't try to convert me too much (I know you're obligated to try a bit...) and we'll get on fine.

When certain amongst them do the nasty bits, there are lots of other Christians ready to chastised those ones and remind them of the other bits of the bible that don't correspond to the nasty bit being used for particular agenda.

When these mosques are being radicalised, when the marches down the streets call for bloodshed and spout hatred and bile against the nation within whom those people live and towards the rest of it's citizens who they expect to then tolerate this, it is simply too much.

Why are the modest muslims not railing against this behaviour? Why do we not see counter protests from muslims calling for peace and integration? What actions are the modests taking within muslim communities to curtail the runaway train of extremism?

Very little it seems.

And again, coming back to the point I raised some time ago, we still then, after being confronted with the open vitriol and hatred and violence, are confronted with that other side to muslim faith, the denigration of women. Official figures put the number of women killed through honour killings at a dozen a year. That's a dozen women killed via 'sanctioned' means within their religion by their own families. Women are still forced to leave education, forced to remain at home, forced to marry without consent.

These practises are no longer tolerated within the greater community but seem to hit the blind spot for human rights groups in the UK because of the fear of criticising them leading to allegations of racism.

MGS, I never said xenophobia or racism was a bad thing.

As said, you believe Islam is a front for facism and repression of people. Surely it would be okay by western morals to be opposed(or racist towards) to such a thing?
Racism isn't the dirty word the PC brigade have tried to turn it into(at least, not in my context).

However, what it ultimately comes down to is this. Do you believe facists should be given less than their more democratic counterparts? Do you believe that removing the rights of an entire ethnic group and discriminating against them is a feasible way of removing their intolerance, and conditioning them to think like you?

By removing their ability to arbitrate between themselves, whilst allowing others to retain it, is xenophobic, pure and simple. This sin't to say you don't have reason for that xenophobia, or even that xenophobia is a bad thing! I'm not judging here. I'm just dealing with this particular situation, not the widespread across the country one of integration. As I said in my first response to you, any misogny that might stem out of these courts, however limited, is a symptom of a problem, not a cause. Attacking the symptom in a way such as stripping them of their rights, is, in my book, undemocratic, against the values this country stands for, and just as alien and repressive as those you're trying to remove.

'I may disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.'

whatwhat wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

whatwhat wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Xenophobia suggests a fear of race. I think what's being described here is potential Theophobia, which I might be suffering from. But then it's a bit like arachnophobia, in certain cases it can be justified as a logical fear.

Well you certainly seem to be assigning all this fear to a particular race.

Which race is that?

Religion then. Xenophobia isn't just limited to race.

It's theophobia if in the context of religion and I remind you again, what I am against is that religion.

If that's agreed, then happily, I am happy to be understood to have a problem with the current behaviour of islam within the contexts of subjugation of women, willingness to engage in violence and the aggressive need or compulsion to assimilate via any means, other cultures or religions.

Because I happen to like women, homosexuals, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Pagans, Atheists, Agnostics, the physically disabled and a whole range of other people listed as undesirables by Islam and wish them to live in a nation where they are treated as equal citizens with the chance to be valued voices at the table. I would like to like muslims, I cannot abide by their belief system however whilst it supports subjugation where I support equality and mutual respect.

If people wish to join the nation to contribute and bring their culture and wisdom to be shared then everything possible should be done to make them welcome.

I will not discriminate on any ground other than the need of the other person to discriminate.

whatwhat wrote:
Look thousands of them! And they are mocking you Mattyrm. They're calling your mother a whore.

Ill butcher the dogs!!

Ketara wrote:

MGS, I never said xenophobia or racism was a bad thing.

I do, people who prejudice based on skin colour or perceived heritage are bastards.

Ketara wrote:
As said, you believe Islam is a front for facism and repression of people. Surely it would be okay by western morals to be opposed(or racist towards) to such a thing?
Racism isn't the dirty word the PC brigade have tried to turn it into(at least, not in my context).

Racism is a dirty word. I do not like racist people.

Ketara wrote:
However, what it ultimately comes down to is this. Do you believe facists should be given less than their more democratic counterparts? Do you believe that removing the rights of an entire ethnic group and discriminating against them is a feasible way of removing their intolerance, and conditioning them to think like you?

By removing their ability to arbitrate between themselves, whilst allowing others to retain it, is xenophobic, pure and simple. This sin't to say you don't have reason for that xenophobia, or even that xenophobia is a bad thing! I'm not judging here. I'm just dealing with this particular situation, not the widespread across the country one of integration. As I said in my first response to you, any misogny that might stem out of these courts, however limited, is a symptom of a problem, not a cause. Attacking the symptom in a way such as stripping them of their rights, is, in my book, undemocratic, against the values this country stands for, and just as alien and repressive as those you're trying to remove.

'I may disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.'

Do I believe fascists should be given less chance to express the methods of their fascism within society or within their own subculture?
Yes.

"Do you believe that removing the rights of an entire ethnic group and discriminating against them is a feasible way of removing their intolerance, and conditioning them to think like you?"
No, you are using the term ethnic group, which I ascribe to people who identify themselves as belonging to a race or cultural heritage, Islam is a worldwide religion, I have as much problem with it and it's application in Indonesia as I do with it in Libya, I have no problem with an Indonesian nor a Libyan. Do you understand what I'm getting at here?
Facilitating subcultural courts that will promote misogyny and intolerance within them, under the noble ideal of being tolerant to that religion, promotes the ideals it stands for, those ideals remain at odds with the democratic process and mindset of the population of the country and should be avoided.

Islam is a cultural heritage.

Xenophobia means fear of the foreign.

Muslims being the latest foreign arrivals on British and US shores are taking the brunt of normal xenophobia, borne previously by the Irish, Italians, Jews, Catholics, Germans, Huguenots, Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis, and who knows what other ethnic groups.

The Poles came in for a fair bit of stick in the early 00s, in the UK.

Clearly the prejudice against Muslims is exacerbated by events of the past decade.

Do I believe fascists should be given less chance to express the methods of their fascism within society or within their own subculture?
Yes.

So you believe people with a differing political viewpoint to yours should have their ability to express it curbed? Interesting thing for a liberal to say....

"Do you believe that removing the rights of an entire ethnic group and discriminating against them is a feasible way of removing their intolerance, and conditioning them to think like you?"
No, you are using the term ethnic group, which I ascribe to people who identify themselves as belonging to a race or cultural heritage, Islam is a worldwide religion, I have as much problem with it and it's application in Indonesia as I do with it in Libya, I have no problem with an Indonesian nor a Libyan. Do you understand what I'm getting at here?

Okay. Let me rephrase.

"Do you believe that removing the rights of an entire group of people exercising their right to freedom of worship and discriminating against them is a feasible way of removing their intolerance, and conditioning them to think like you?"

Facilitating subcultural courts that will promote misogyny and intolerance within them, under the noble ideal of being tolerant to that religion, promotes the ideals it stands for, those ideals remain at odds with the democratic process and mindset of the population of the country and should be avoided.

You have yet to demonstrate proof as to how an arbitration system promotes misogny and intolerance.

Kilkrazy wrote:Islam is a cultural heritage.

Xenophobia means fear of the foreign.

Muslims being the latest foreign arrivals on British and US shores are taking the brunt of normal xenophobia, borne previously by the Irish, Italians, Jews, Catholics, Germans, Huguenots, Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis, and who knows what other ethnic groups.

The Poles came in for a fair bit of stick in the early 00s, in the UK.

Clearly the prejudice against Muslims is exacerbated by events of the past decade.

Do women living in Islamic communities/households enjoy the same level of personal freedom and freedom from domestic violence, proportionally, as women in non-Islamic communities/households?

I would be interested to see the figures, as the beating of your wife is condoned in the Qur'an in several sections.

It remains a crime in the UK however and therefore the religion condones criminal activity, activity that is being carried out in the UK as we speak.

This is not a racist prejudice, it is an ideological one.

Some do and others don't. That's why we see these honour killings. Liberated modern young Islamic women act in a modern, liberated way, and annoy their misogynistic fathers.

Christianity and Judaism included and inculcated similar mysogynistic customs as well, and still do in backwards people's minds. As for Honor Killings being unique, how many places have or had exemptions or reductions in sentence for murdering one's spouse if you caught them in adultury? What percentage of regular Americans if you asked them 20 years ago, or 50 years ago, or even today would say they condone or understand such a killing? Same basic idea.

I think Kilkrazy nailed it before when he likened the xenophobia directed toward muslims to the xenophobia directed at other waves of immigrants in the past. A nice cafe downtown in my city has a sad painting on the wall of a young, red-headed woman in the US in the late 1800s, at the door of a shop bearing a sign saying "No Blacks, No Irish."

Obviously the political climate of the last 10-20 years has made things worse in terms of non-Muslims' perceptions of Muslims and vice-versa. Some young, dissatisfied Muslim men do stupid things and riot in the street just like young, dissatisfied men of many cultures have done for years uncounted.

Ketara wrote:

Do I believe fascists should be given less chance to express the methods of their fascism within society or within their own subculture?
Yes.

So you believe people with a differing political viewpoint to yours should have their ability to express it curbed? Interesting thing for a liberal to say....

I believe those who would threaten my liberal and social freedom of expression and identify themselves as enemies of that should be treated as enemies. I believe those of extreme political and most especially religious ideology that advocate subjugation and persecution should themselves be limited in their ability to tout such hate. I have, after many years and much soul searching, abandoned my own principal that everyone can be free to express everything and find myself far more in the 'treat everyone with respect and dignity or find yourself losing yours' mentality.

Ketara wrote:

"Do you believe that removing the rights of an entire ethnic group and discriminating against them is a feasible way of removing their intolerance, and conditioning them to think like you?"
No, you are using the term ethnic group, which I ascribe to people who identify themselves as belonging to a race or cultural heritage, Islam is a worldwide religion, I have as much problem with it and it's application in Indonesia as I do with it in Libya, I have no problem with an Indonesian nor a Libyan. Do you understand what I'm getting at here?

Okay. Let me rephrase.
"Do you believe that removing the rights of an entire group of people exercising their right to freedom of worship and discriminating against them is a feasible way of removing their intolerance, and conditioning them to think like you?"

I have never once spoken on their freedom to worship. You are ascribing a whole line of argument I've not travelled down to me.
What I am saying is that a religious group should not be granted authority to self govern within the greater auspices of the law. All should be treated fairly and equally. On that technical basis, the Jews should no more have the right to privately self govern than the Islamics, however the Jews aren't marching through the streets calling for beheadings and the subjugation of the nation's freedom to their religion under threat of violence, are they...
Why are we taking steps to stop the castration of little African girls in the UK? Because it is against our ideals of personal freedom and our repulsion against subjugation and more importantly because it's a very small group doing it... If there were as many folks castrating their little girls as there are muslims then perhaps we'd be nodding sagely at those calling it an outrage and explaining to them that they are racists for thinking it untoward. "Yeah, I go drinking with a bloke who's cut off his daughter's bits and he's a lovely guy really, you have to get to know them"... no, it's against the moral ideology of the nation. The oppression of women within the muslim community is entirely the same thing.

A Dozen murders a year in the UK on average for honour killings, those killings are carried out by the families of the victim, moreover A 2006 BBC poll for the Asian network in the UK found that one in ten of the 500 young Asians polled said that they could condone the murder of someone who dishonoured their family - that is not in keeping with the wider population's belief system. It must be altered.

If the removal of the rights to abuse another under the religion are removed, all I can think is that it is a good thing. I don't even see it as 'removal of rights' but instead 'equal treatment as a citizen of the United Kingdom' to choose your own spouse, pursue an education and career and dress as you wish to.

Ketara wrote:

Facilitating subcultural courts that will promote misogyny and intolerance within them, under the noble ideal of being tolerant to that religion, promotes the ideals it stands for, those ideals remain at odds with the democratic process and mindset of the population of the country and should be avoided.

You have yet to demonstrate proof as to how an arbitration system promotes misogny and intolerance.

It is an arbitration system built on the basis of a religion that promotes misogyny and intolerance, that's fairly simple to me.