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.

Albatross wrote:Religion sure seems like a lot of fun. All that getting offended by innocuous things....


...There's other stuff, right?

Pedophillia, holy wars, guilt, compounds, mysogeny, homophobia, persecution, multiple wives, snakes, speaking in tongues, jihad, etc., etc.

pretty much any flavor of crazy you desire...

Manchu wrote:

dogma wrote:

Manchu wrote:CUA need not be accommodating to Muslim students using its infrastructure for Muslim worship and/or devotions and there is no reason that it should be.

Well, there are reasons, they just aren't necessary ones.

Yes, sorry, that's more accurate.

There are reasons to do that as well, especially from an institutional perspective.

The Muslim students will have the last laugh when all the Catholics get sent to hell and have their bowels tormented as the Qu'ran dictates.

olympia wrote:The Muslim students will have the last laugh when all the Catholics get sent to hell and have their bowels tormented as the Qu'ran dictates.

Or the Jews will...

Or it will all work out and the important thing is we're talking about this life and not the next.

Damn it I get so confused.

Okay, so I missed the part about the scumbag lawyer making trouble on their behalf, my bad. But you have to admit, if they continue to out-reproduce Europeans, in fifty years, Europe will be just another bunch of poor Muslim countries under Sharia law and the few hereditary Europeans left will be forced out. Then they will tear down the Vatican and replace it with a Mosque, and y'know who will be their next target? Yeah...

Fortunately that isn't going to happen. Read this week's The Economist on population trends.

ineptus astartes wrote:Oh gawd. you're kidding.


but. link?


although, I could claim that saying pentagrams are evil is offensive, thee is one on every house here, its a sign of wealth in Nepal.

Hitler also stole our Swastika ( a 'swastik' is a symbol for 'peace and prosperity') flipped it around and turned it into a sign of evil.

Isn't a pentagram an ancient symbol for the Pythagorean theorem or something?

warpcrafter wrote:Okay, so I missed the part about the scumbag lawyer making trouble on their behalf, my bad. But you have to admit, if they continue to out-reproduce Europeans, in fifty years, Europe will be just another bunch of poor Muslim countries under Sharia law and the few hereditary Europeans left will be forced out. Then they will tear down the Vatican and replace it with a Mosque, and y'know who will be their next target? Yeah...

Islam had a healthy stronghold on the Iberian from the early 8C to the late 15C if/when political correctness loses out to survival Europe can forcibly expel the Muslims should they desire.

warpcrafter wrote:Okay, so I missed the part about the scumbag lawyer making trouble on their behalf, my bad. But you have to admit, if they continue to out-reproduce Europeans, in fifty years, Europe will be just another bunch of poor Muslim countries under Sharia law and the few hereditary Europeans left will be forced out. Then they will tear down the Vatican and replace it with a Mosque, and y'know who will be their next target? Yeah...

A well reasoned argument, that is completely free from prejudice.

dogma wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:Okay, so I missed the part about the scumbag lawyer making trouble on their behalf, my bad. But you have to admit, if they continue to out-reproduce Europeans, in fifty years, Europe will be just another bunch of poor Muslim countries under Sharia law and the few hereditary Europeans left will be forced out. Then they will tear down the Vatican and replace it with a Mosque, and y'know who will be their next target? Yeah...

A well reasoned argument, that is completely free from prejudice.

He was joking, right?

AustonT wrote:Sho is boss. 4 pages ago in the original post a linked article said that the only one making these claims is a well known lawyer and the school had received no complaints.

And no one is really talking about the lawyer. That discussion folded into talking about Muslims being offended by crosses, which isn't even close to what the article is about, and if Muslim students can make requests for a space void of Catholic symbols. Besides, the Lawyer isn't just talking about Catholic symbols, he's also interested in why there is no Muslim student association. Apparently the school has the position that they don't want one (but a Jewish student association is okay with the school, at least according to the lawyers claim, which is a somewhat dicey position to hold).

EDIT: Honestly, the lawyer isn't even really relevant. If the question is "Do Muslim students have a right to a space devoid of Catholic symbols at a private Catholic institution," that a complaint was filed by some random third party isn't even pertinent to the question at all unless we're trying to figure out what ax he's trying to grind.

None of which is at all connected to people somehow reading and replying to my posts while completely missing what I'm saying.

Manchu wrote:To be fair, people who accused Muslims students of being foolish for accepting a place at a Catholic university and then complaining about there being a crucifix on a wall in every room suitable for prayer are right. That is foolish.

If that was the actual issue, as I made clear in the very first post I made before the article was posted for accessibility, yes it is foolish. Except that isn't what happened and I've somehow become trapped between trying to talk about what's actually going on and what people in the thread are babbling about *brain hurts*

AustonT wrote:
Islam had a healthy stronghold on the Iberian from the early 8C to the late 15C if/when political correctness loses out to survival Europe can forcibly expel the Muslims should they desire.

Whut?

You're really citing the political situation from 500+ years ago as precedent that has any bearing on the one that exists today?

LordofHats wrote:EDIT: Honestly, the lawyer isn't even really relevant. If the question is "Do Muslim students have a right to a space devoid of Catholic symbols at a private Catholic institution," that a complaint was filed by some random third party isn't even pertinent to the question at all unless we're trying to figure out what ax he's trying to grind.

and that is the question to which I have tried to answer. From what I've seen of the public and protected instiutions code. The answer is no, if the question is one of religious freedom the answer is still no, if the question is should it even be asked, again no. There is nothing to compel the CUA to provide them with a space to pray in except the goodness of thier heart.

AustonT wrote:and that is the question to which I have tried to answer. From what I've seen of the public and protected instiutions code. The answer is no, if the question is one of religious freedom the answer is still no,

Legality and morality don't go hand in hand. That said, I think that these two questions are straight forward. The first more so than the second. The second is debatable but that one will always boil down to "why are you at a Catholic school in the first place" assuming we agree they have a moral right to such a space.

EDIT: Then again, that brings up a similar issue in the context of secular schools. The more I think about it the more I don't like the implications.

if the question is should it even be asked, again no.

I think that's a position with no leg to stand on. Asking a question is simply asking a question. Surely even a Catholic school doesn't have a moral objection to students, no matter what their religion, asking for something. This is more a matter of whether or not what is being asked is reasonable or not, and if it is reasonable to refuse/accept. I obviously don't find this request unreasonable. What they're asking for is done all over the country in numerous schools, including non-secular ones. They have nothing to lose in asking (I hope) and I can't see how it's an insult or inconsiderate to ask. It's just a question.

There is nothing to compel the CUA to provide them with a space to pray in except the goodness of thier heart.

Assuming they have to be compelled. Assume maybe the school just never considered it. Running a university isn't an easy job. Things get forgotten. There's no harm in asking in such a case. The school might just go "oh" and give the space out of the "goodness of their hearts" or maybe they just want their students to be pleased or feel a moral responsibility to serve the needs of the student body.

This obviously isn't the case at CUA, but there's no desire apparently from the students to compel the school to do anything. Should a student make such a request it's not really compulsion until they sue. The school is make a choice. Do or do not.

LordofHats wrote:

Frazzled wrote:DOn't be daft. Of course it is. ITS A CATHOLIC SCHOOL.

Daft? Pot meet kettle?

A catholic school doesn't need a cross in every room. I'm a Christian and I'm the one saying this XD How did that happen? Has the world ended while I'm not looking

The basilica issue is much more absurd, but simply asking for a room isn't stupid in anyway.

thats not how it ends, only how it starts.

If you watch Islam for any length of time you will see a pattern, want concession, then another one, then another, ad mauseam with little reciprocation.

First its no crosses in a room, then it no crosses in most rooms, or one room for a Moslem prayer room, or both.

Its worse in the UK, while the majority of the pandering stopped with the change of government the damage had mostly been done. One supply teacher I know told me of how one example school that because multi faith is now. The government formally made the school (a state school) multi faith, that much sounds fair and logical. However now the moslem students pay attention to teaching on Islam then get very disruptive during any other faith teaching, en masse. They say quite openly that they don't want to hear about any other faith, and clearly don't want anyone else to either. Any attempt to teach non-Islamic religious studies is met with protest and disruption irregardless of whether other kids want to listen. This is by no means isolated, kids are easy to radicalise, if one or two hardline non cooperate Islamic families bring their kids up to think of Islam as a dominant force that does not share a cultural milieu with others then the rest of the Moslem kids will end up following suit because noone in their community says otherwise, especially in inner city schools.

Time and again I see the same thing happening, multi faith is not reciprocated by Moslems, in fact hardliners think multi faith is a sign of western weakness and how it is wide open to a 'stronger' religion like Islam. While such activism is still a minority occurance, its a much larger minority than many are prepared to admit and more tellingly the majority does little to counter the protest. In Christian, Jewish and Oriental relgious cultures the majority criticise reign in the fanatics, and educate their own kids agaisnt fanaticism (by and large) wheras there is very little criticism of hardline Islam by moderate Moslems and little of that trickles into the schools.

@LordofHats
Forgive me I'm not going to use quotes.
The second question of the religious compulsion to provide a space.
I contend that Muslim students by accepting admission to the Catholic University of America agree to abide by it's student code and mission statement. Both clearly indicate that the Universities primary goal is to promote Catholic traditions and education. By accepting those rules these Muslims have indicated they are aware that the institution promotes one and only one faith. To invoke the protections of for the free exercise of religion to force the University to remove it's icons would force the GOVERNMENT to enact prohibition against the University. The students having no reasonable expectation to practice thier religion at the CUA, cannot hold that thier religious freedoms are being restricted. The CUA on the other hand can, having established thier institution openly on religious principles. That's my argument against any students of any other faith attempting to receive a space free of catholic articles.
As for ASKING for one, there's certainly no harm done. But a quick skin of the student code makes it clear that as thier practices are not in keeping with the catholic tradition they shouldn't expect any answer but no.

AustonT wrote: To invoke the protections of for the free exercise of religion to force the University to remove it's icons would force the GOVERNMENT to enact prohibition against the University.

Or revoke their funding of it, should such funding exist.

AustonT wrote: I contend that Muslim students by accepting admission to the Catholic University of America agree to abide by it's student code and mission statement.

That doesn't mean they can't take action to try to get the school to change the student code and mission statement. As American citizens, we presumably agree to obey the laws of the United States of America. That doesn't mean we can't protest or petition for reform in or out of courts etc.

The students having no reasonable expectation to practice thier religion at the CUA, cannot hold that thier religious freedoms are being restricted.

Sure they can. And their freedom is in a way being restricted. The issue is that they have, presumably, agreed to it. But that doesn't mean they can't request changes be made. Another possibility though is finding nearby space that is not the property of the campus which may or may not be possible.

The CUA on the other hand can, having established thier institution openly on religious principles. That's my argument against any students of any other faith attempting to receive a space free of catholic articles

I'd contend both parties may take action to pursue their own interests, the school board just has the added benefit of being the final authority baring interference from outside parties. I find no issue with Muslim students making their requests apparent and the school responding no. It's not my preference, but the school is private and ultimately I see no reason for them to change their mind unless they start losing money and I doubt they'll lose much over this.

LordofHats wrote:
Sure they can. And their freedom is in a way being restricted. The issue is that they have, presumably, agreed to it. But that doesn't mean they can't request changes be made. Another possibility though is finding nearby space that is not the property of the campus which may or may not be possible.

Or praying in front of the main chapel.

But then confrontation is sort of my thing, and probably not well suited to ending this diplomatically.

The students having no reasonable expectation to practice thier religion at the CUA, cannot hold that thier religious freedoms are being restricted.


Sure they can. And their freedom is in a way being restricted. The issue is that they have, presumably, agreed to it. But that doesn't mean they can't request changes be made. Another possibility though is finding nearby space that is not the property of the campus which may or may not be possible.

I think you are stretching here, and not just a little bit. The CUA is in essence a church that happens to offer an education. As a Muslim could not reasonably expect to freely practice his/her religion inside of a Catholic Church, the equally can have no reasonable expectation to practice their religion in THE National University OF the Catholic Church. As any curtailment of the churches activities are a direct infringement of thief right to practice religion freely. While the Muslim(and Jew, and Protestant, etc) has made a conscious decision to receive the services and the inherent restrictions of entering an institution wholly owned by the Catholic Church.

AustonT wrote:The CUA is in essence a church that happens to offer an education.

No, it was founded as a University, and has been one for its whole existence. It is affiliated with the Church, but it is not a church. Pretending otherwise is deliberate distortion.

AustonT wrote:
As a Muslim could not reasonably expect to freely practice his/her religion inside of a Catholic Church, the equally can have no reasonable expectation to practice their religion in THE National University OF the Catholic Church.

And yet CUA admits Muslim students.

AustonT wrote:

olympia wrote:The Muslim students will have the last laugh when all the Catholics get sent to hell and have their bowels tormented as the Qu'ran dictates.

Or the Jews will...

Or the Mormons. will have the last laugh

Anyway its kind of a silly thing to think about. Its a catholic school... Not a bring your own religion and remove crosses of that school's property. Its their property they can do what ever they want with it. It is not the kid's property. It is the Universities.

whiny . You get what you pay for silly, and you are paying for a CATHOLIC education, which includes force feeding of crosses and Jesus.


I hate the modern age, a bunch of pansies IMO. Cry Cry Cry, over gak that has been and always will be the same. Why waste your breath silly fools

DIDM wrote:
I hate the modern age, a bunch of pansies IMO. Cry Cry Cry, over gak that has been and always will be the same. Why waste your breath silly fools

Indeed.

I wouldn't have trouble praying in a mosque. I find the students request odd and hold nothing against the school for refusing. I also hold nothing against the muslim students for asking.

@LordofHats, I'm pretty sure the outrage you're bemoaning is over the scenario where, after being refused a room, the muslim students sue the school. I hold that would place the students firmly on the nutters side of the equation. Fortunately everything is a lot more peachy right now at the school we're discussing than it is on this topic here on the boards.

I'm waiting for Imam Yahya Hendi to make a public statement.

A few things bother me about this.

One is muslims supposedly being offended by christian symbols when the moon and crescent that was the symbol of the ottomans and continues to be used on the flags of muslim countries and various muslim organizations/buildings/art was a christian symbol prior to them supplanting it ( and christianity took it from a pagan religion). They also revere Jesus as highly as Mohammad, so its weird that they'd be so offended by pictures of him. I get that certain hardline sects are against "idolatry", but they had to know to expect this prior to attending. Catholicism is heavy on the idols, amongst other things.

Another is the wording by the lawyer, muslim prayer is not meditation as he words it. Nor at any part in their ritual do they look up, its all about prostrating before god in the direction of mecca. I also believe their eyes are closed during this as well. There are a few rules about where to pray and such, and nowhere in my cursory knowledge of islam does it say you can't be surrounded by things that don't conform to Islam. Caveat here is that I'm not an expert on Islam, I just remember this from high school when we studied world religions, so I may have a few things wrong here. If this is legit, it says more about the religious focus and spiritual intentions of the muslims involved then it does about discrimination.

Also, this lawyer also tried to sue this same university over same-sex dormitories and called it discrimination or some such nonsense. It seems to me that this lawyer is trying to grab headlines by attacking high profile targets. Like an atheist Westburo Baptist Church.

Lastly, I have trouble seeing who truly benefits from this. If the muslims that supposedly feel discriminated get their way, it plays right into the hands of every Quran burning pastor, islamaphobic extremist in both political parties, Glenn Beck/his followers and just fuels the narrative that Islam is trying to Islamicize the west. All this does is set back the image of every muslim american.

NELS1031 wrote:They also revere Jesus as highly as Mohammad...

No, not at all. Islam acknowledges Jesus as a prophet, but he is not held in the same regard as The Prophet (Muhammad). Its sort of like how Christianity views Moses.