Sunny Hundal website



  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sunny Hundal
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • The world is a funny place


    by Sunny
    15th April, 2006 at 6:47 pm    

    To generalise about people and races is a bad idea most of the time, even in tightly described circumstances. Here are four such examples:

    The normally docile South Indians, specially in the ‘silicon valley of India’ city of Bangalore, have been rioting so much on Thursday that eight people have died including one policeman. Why? Err, because the film start/ local demi-god Rajkumar died. Of natural causes. Software companies and UK based call centres estimate damages of $40 million. File under: wtf??.

    In Iran, from where all we hear nuclear technology, mystic Sufism is on the rise. Given traditional hostility to this branch of Islam, the country seems to be more religious tolerant than China.

    Eerie, from Aqoul, recently wrote an enlightening article on Brazilian waxing and Feminism. I quote:

    The reason I chose to discuss bikini waxing is that it turns the traditional “conservative Muslim vs. liberal Westerner” paradigm on its head. Muslim women have no hangups about full pubic waxing, but the practice was positively scandalous for North American women up until a few years ago…

    And finally to Canada where racial stereotypes of crime were completely flipped in a recent poll [via SM].

    Of those in the poll who held ethnic groups most responsible, 56 per cent specifically identified “Indian/East Indian” and 45 per cent listed “Asian/Oriental,” the newspaper reported March 16.

    By comparison, five per cent of the same group singled out “Caucasian/white” and only one per cent were worried about “Afro-American/Black,” “Middle Eastern/Arabs/Muslims” and “Italians.” [IndoLink]


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Culture,Religion,South Asia






    98 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs


    1. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 15th April, 2006 at 7:34 pm  

      Oh yeah that Rajkumar-riots thingy was darn stupid.

      The normally docile South Indians

      You bet, Tamil Nadu has reputation for political “activists” commiting suicides incase their “leader” loses an election.

    2. Bikhair — on 15th April, 2006 at 9:46 pm  

      Pickled Poopers,

      I have always been confused as to why Middle Eastern women are thought to be particularly hairy when, culturally and religiously, for those who dont know, it is a Sunnah to remove the pubic hair, i.e. underarms, genital, for both men and women. Both women and men are forbidden to remove the hair from the eye brow, but women absolutely must remove it from the face.

    3. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 15th April, 2006 at 10:15 pm  

      Yeah as if we care.

    4. NorahJones — on 15th April, 2006 at 10:31 pm  

      What? Must remove it from their faces? But your eyebrows are on your face… I got told I’d go to hell when I started on my eyebrows.

      How’d they do it before immac Bikhair? Arsenic?

    5. El Cid — on 15th April, 2006 at 10:47 pm  

      The stereotype that has always made me laugh is of the refined, mild-mannered, stiff upper lip, dispassionate, loves to queue English person. You should file that under wtf too.

    6. Kiran — on 15th April, 2006 at 10:51 pm  

      hey! i think the reason people think that Middle Eastern women are hairy is because they are always covered and people just assume it’s coz they are hairy!!!

      The reason men and women remove pubic hair is for a number of reasons, they think it’s clean and you’d be shocked but some people do it so as to have great sex!!!

    7. NorahJones — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:08 pm  

      Kiran, I had heard that…

    8. Kiran — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:11 pm  

      it is true, i thought it was just a myth but it isn’t. I guess thats the reason majority of the muslim women tend to wax their pubic hair before thay get married.

    9. foxy — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:29 pm  

      norah dude have you never heard of “threading”

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threading_%28epilation%29

      it’s the original “epilator”

    10. Old Pickler — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:52 pm  

      the reason majority of the muslim women tend to wax their pubic hair before thay get married

      Since Islam allows girls to be “married” at nine, this isn’t much of an issue.

    11. El Cid — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:55 pm  

      Hmmm. I think dark haired caucasians are hairier generally. This is not posited as a fact but I think the anecdotal evidence is pretty compelling. That doesn’t necessarily mean mature Greek, Turkish, Arab, Persian, Pakistani, Spanish women have a greater tash ratio than say Nordics, Han Chinese or Ghanians. Maybe it just shows up more. But… maybe I’ll stop. I think the hole I’ve dug is big enough as it is.

    12. El Cid — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:56 pm  

      I was trying to be funny OP. That’s just mean and nasty.

    13. Old Pickler — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:58 pm  

      Not half as mean and nasty as “marrying” a nine year old girl.

    14. El Cid — on 15th April, 2006 at 11:59 pm  

      Bet you have a tash

    15. Old Pickler — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:02 am  

      Nope. But even if I did, would it make “marrying” a nine year old girl OK?

    16. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:05 am  

      See, she does have a tash!

    17. Old Pickler — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:08 am  

      I’ve probably got more balls than you, that’s for sure.

    18. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:10 am  

      A man in a woman’s body huh? What you got Spaghetti Western handlebars, a Magnum, a pencil thin Clarke Gabel or little whiskers at the edge of your mouth?

    19. Old Pickler — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:13 am  

      I’ve just been to see Transamerica, so I’m totally confused. A woman pretending to be a man who was changing into a woman. Good film, weird stuff.

      A man in a woman’s body? Isn’t that how things are normally done?

    20. Bikhair — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:14 am  

      Old Pickler,

      “I’ve probably got more balls than you, that’s for sure.”

      Men dont like women with balls. Not even figuratively. Thats the problem with fats and fugelies, when they think they are being strong they just come off annoying and even uglier than they really are.

    21. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:14 am  

      “Smooth as a baby’s arse” — those Gillette Mach 3s with the extra strip are good, aren’t they?

    22. Old Pickler — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:19 am  

      My man likes my balls. And they are only figurative.

      Bikhair - you’re just meeting the wrong kind of man. Muslim men are insecure, that’s why they need to keep women down. My bloke is Jewish - they’re the best.

    23. foxy — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:44 am  

      wasup with OP… I bet she was shagged by a moooslem… and was never the same again, i’m right innit?

    24. Don — on 16th April, 2006 at 12:51 am  

      ‘the refined, mild-mannered, stiff upper lip, dispassionate, loves to queue English person’

      Umm, that would be me. Actually.

      But i find it hard to come to terms with a creator of the universe who also has opinions about personal grooming.

    25. Sunny — on 16th April, 2006 at 3:50 am  

      OP - as usual you’ve come here to add nothing of use or intellect. Except this is not a place where we tolerate trolls. Bye!

    26. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 9:50 am  

      Do you wear a bowler hat too Don and have cream teas at about 5? Yes, I’ve heard you people exist. I have a friend who’s a bit “Remains of the Day.” But it’s not a typical representation of the English — not even the middle class these dayz. Still, the “brand” sells in Japan and China and even Middle East. So we might as well keep up the pretence a bit longer.

      Regarding personal grooming, couldn’t agree more. It’s a a bit creepy, innit? Leave unto Caeser that which is Caeser’s.

    27. Sajini — on 16th April, 2006 at 3:20 pm  

      The Canadian survey, heh. Must be due to those Sri Lankan gangs causing havoc in Scarborough.

      After all, we are the darkest people there.

    28. Bikhair — on 16th April, 2006 at 4:31 pm  

      Old Pickler,

      “Bikhair - you’re just meeting the wrong kind of man. Muslim men are insecure, that’s why they need to keep women down. My bloke is Jewish - they’re the best. ”

      Actually dear, I am a married woman to a Muslim man. What does he have to be insecure about? He knows his role and I know mine. Your bloke is Jewish. That makes sense. Since we are being stereotypical let me guess that you are an overbearing loud mouth and he is weak.

    29. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 5:01 pm  

      I would rather a women with balls than a dalek

    30. Old Pickler — on 16th April, 2006 at 7:04 pm  

      Twaddle, Bikhair.

    31. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 7:06 pm  

      Except ones with taches

    32. Old Pickler — on 16th April, 2006 at 7:06 pm  

      El Cid - I’m not quite sure what you mean, but it sounds funny.

      Bikhair, to expand on my comment - I am an overbearing loudmouth and so is he. We just overbear each other. It’s a bit of a turn on.

    33. Sunny — on 16th April, 2006 at 7:40 pm  

      Can we please try and stick to the topic instead of lame one-liner personal digs?

    34. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 7:43 pm  

      i shall retire then

    35. Sunny — on 16th April, 2006 at 7:55 pm  

      Happy b’day btw :)

    36. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 7:56 pm  

      not yet. April 25. but thanks.

    37. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 16th April, 2006 at 8:44 pm  

      Hey gramps, nice flme warring. I once had a Muslim gf but *never* got close to discovering whether she was hairy or not.

    38. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 9:05 pm  

      not sure kiss chase in the playground counts

    39. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 16th April, 2006 at 9:16 pm  

      Oh boy El you forgot your medication!

    40. El Cid — on 16th April, 2006 at 9:20 pm  

      I’m here all week (im def going now)

    41. sonia — on 16th April, 2006 at 11:18 pm  

      ignoring all the nonsense..
      great post Sunny. just shows doesn’t it ..its all relative!

    42. douglas — on 17th April, 2006 at 2:21 am  

      Sunny,

      Quite where are you coming from on this thread? And why do you want to shut OP up?

      She was, in her own inimitable way, making a point about womens rights. Which, I think, she sees as trumphing any religious rights. And that, I agree with.

      Explain, please, why her viewpoint is unacceptable here?

    43. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 3:22 am  

      I deleted some of her comments about Mohammed being a paedophile and related crassness.

      If she wants to make feminism related comments, fine. Great. But if she can’t help puncuate that with gutter-level digs that will only attract reprisal attacks, then I don’t want it.

    44. Bikhair — on 17th April, 2006 at 6:19 am  

      Sunny,

      I missed my oppurtunity to backslap OP? darn!

    45. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 11:19 am  

      Standing up for women’s rights in her own inimitable way — More like using feminism as a cover for her chavist racism.

    46. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 11:34 am  

      It isn’t racist to criticise abuses of women’s rights in a religion, especially a religion which explicitly denies racial barriers. Nor is it “gutter level”.

    47. Siddhartha Sinatra — on 17th April, 2006 at 11:38 am  

      Explain, please, why her viewpoint is unacceptable here?

      Strange why Sunny should have to apologise for dealing with the antics of a troll who attempts to hijack the thread and spews the usual anti-Islam shite. Surely there are other (harry’s) places where she can do that with impunity - all in the name of “feminism”?

    48. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 12:16 pm  

      OP: This thread was a light-hearted reexamination of racial stereotypes in light of recent events. You made a gratuitous ungrinded axe attack on a more than a billion people on this planet who would describe themselves as moslem. It was nasty, mean and the product of a deeply poisoned mind.

      Sonia: I will defend my right to endulge in a little nonsense until the day I die. You should have been there.

    49. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 12:31 pm  

      Not on the people, on the ideology. Those who follow that particular bit of the ideology hardly deserve respect, now do they.

    50. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 1:35 pm  

      It had no place in this discussion. You are an ignorant racist, a nasty piece of work, and a dishonest facist. Have the balls and the genuine intellect to to face up to it.

    51. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 2:10 pm  

      No, I’m not dishonest. I say exactly what I think. Islam is not a race. I don’t like it. End of.

    52. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 2:18 pm  

      I don’t really like either Judaism or Islam. They are not my cup of tea. But I don’t feel a need to attack Jews or Moslems for the beliefs. Ya get me bearded lady? You are dishonest because you are a racist of the first fucking order and use feminism disingenously to cover up your tracks.

    53. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 2:27 pm  

      You still haven’t explained how it is racist to attack a belief system that is followed by people of all different races.

      Using the f-word doesn’t make your point any more effectively. Nor does making gratuitous and inaccurate personal remarks.

      On a matter more closely related to the original topic, the implication seemed to be that “Brazillian” waxing was somehow liberal or even liberating and that Muslim women were in some mysterious way more liberated because they did it first. This is ludicrous. This revolting practice makes women look like pre-pubescent girls. It says a lot for the perverted pathology of the women who do it and the men who want them to.

    54. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 2:55 pm  

      You still haven’t explained how it is racist to attack a belief system that is followed by people of all different races.

      Please stop using that silly chestnut to justify your bigotry. It might work at other places, but it doesn’t here. I’d get rid of someone going around saying ‘bastard Christians’ or ‘fucking Jews’ too.

    55. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 3:24 pm  

      I haven’t said “b*stard” or “f*ing” Muslims.

      I just don’t understand why it is bigotry to attack a belief system, much of which conflicts with current values of tolerance, equality and human rights.

      I realise that the example of Brazillian waxing was meant as a bit of a joke, but I just don’t see the funny side, or, if there is not meant to be one, why Muslim women’s eagerness to embrace this particular practice represents a kind of liberation.

      Is botox liberation? Annoxexic dieting? Foot binding?

    56. Don — on 17th April, 2006 at 3:28 pm  

      The trouble with the anti-islam = racist argument is that the well has been poisoned by both sides. On the one hand, idiots like Yvonne Ridley announcing that to question or criticise her belief system is racist because ‘my religion is my race’, and on the other hand old style BNP racists cynically using it as a synonym for ‘paki’.

      The argument that Islam is inherently mysoginistic is one that can be made, as can the argument that all revealed, prescriptive/proscriptive religions are ultimately authoritarian and repressive, until reined in by courageous and sustained dissent. But for that argument to be taken seriously it has to be made seriously and OP has consistently chosen to be a provocateur with a questionable agenda rather than engage in real debate.

      To see the argument made properly;

      http://lark.phoblacht.net/AM04040610g.html

    57. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 3:36 pm  

      Ah-hah — a puritanical streak to boot! How very liberal.
      Bikhair — who is on a different planet as far I am concerned — was merely keen to assert that beneath her ludicrous tent there was a sensual, sex-hungry woman. Me, I’d let that pass. I’d rather not go there.
      But you think it’s ok to rebut her by gratuitously also seeking to offend anyone who might call themselves Moslem and implying they are all paedos.
      The minimum age for a girl to marry in Jewish law is 12. A girl can technically also be married at the age of 14 in New York State. Moreoever, in some cultures that have zero Islamic influence, pre-pubescent girls are given to older men in marriage in order to cement economic ties between families or sold into prostitution to generate income for the family. In Britain’s permissive society, meanwhile, we are keen to ensure kids get a sexual education at an early age and have access to condoms, abortions, etc.
      Me, I lost my virginity when I was 13 — to an 18 year old American.
      And yet you want to single out Islam for special treatment by denying that it is a very broad church and that British moslems adhere to the laws of land as much as anyone else.
      You are not simply attacking a belief system, you are seeking to offend a very large group of people because of their religion. And you know you are too.
      Anyway, time to prepare the BBQ.

    58. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 3:41 pm  

      why Muslim women’s eagerness to embrace this particular practice represents a kind of liberation.

      Read the piece OP. You’re less about actually debating your position than simply throwing out one-liners which are merely troll-like. And then you defend yourself with “but Muslims aren’t a race!?!?!?!?”. It’s the inherent bigotry that annoys me, not your fervent feminism.

    59. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 3:42 pm  

      Still nobody has explained why it is racist to attack Islam.

      The minimum age for a girl to marry in Jewish law is 12. A girl can technically also be married at the age of 14 in New York State

      Jews follow the law of the land. I don’t know what the minimum age is in Israel, the only Jewish state, but I bet it’s 16.

      In contrast, Muslim countries that follow sharia, eg untli recently Iran, enforce the age of 9. “Consent” in these circumstances is a joke. The more a country enforces sharia, the worse it is for women. Legalised rape.

    60. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 3:46 pm  

      I have read the piece and I just don’t see the point it is trying to make.

      Are Muslim women supposed to be more liberated than Western women because they were the first to indulge in this bizarre bit of kiddy-porn conformism?

      What is the point of that piece?

    61. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 5:44 pm  

      Moslems in Britain also follow the law of the land as much as anyone else.
      I would also suggest that you check out the marriage laws of Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Yemen, Egypt, Lebanon, Malaysia, and Indonesia, for example. For you’ll see that the minimum legal age of marriage for a female is between 15 and 21.
      You might also care to know that technically speaking, in Jewish law, a girl can be betrothed the moment she is born, and married at the age of three (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 37:1).
      Child marriages are also prevalent in Hindu Rajastan and Christain Ethiopia, despite laws to the contrary.
      You’re an eejet OP and you’re only lying to yourself.

    62. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 6:25 pm  

      As I said, countries that follow sharia have an age of 9. The countries you mention do not. Iran did.

      Child marriages happen elsewhere - so what? They are not part of Christianity. They may be part of Hinduism, I don’t know. But in any case both these religions allow separation of religion and state, something that is not allowed in Islam.

      Barbaric laws in Muslim countries generally follow the religion.

      I’d like to see a Muslim formally renounce sharia or acknowledge that Mohammed was not the perfect man for all time. Ain’t going to happen.

    63. Siddhartha Sinatra — on 17th April, 2006 at 6:32 pm  

      OP

      When will you be signing the Euston Manifesto (if you haven’t so already)?

    64. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 6:39 pm  

      And yet the vast maj of moslems don’t live under sharia law. As I said, you’re only lying to yourself, but maybe I’m crediting you with more intelligence than you deserve.
      Since you’re a self-styled feminist — what are you views on abortion? Hmmm. On second thoughts, don’t bother answering. It’ll be like taking candy from a baby.

    65. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 6:45 pm  

      No, they don’t. Which is lucky for them.

      My views on abortion? Woman’s right to choose absolutely up till 24 weeks, later if life in danger.

      Why?

    66. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 6:49 pm  

      Lol. Can anyone else see where I’m taking this?

    67. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 6:53 pm  

      Dunno - something about the abortion of female foetuses in India?

      Well if that’s your game, I’ll stick to my opinion. Over-abortion of females is a symptom not a cause of misogyny in India.

    68. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 7:10 pm  

      I’d like to see a Muslim formally renounce sharia or acknowledge that Mohammed was not the perfect man for all time. Ain’t going to happen.

      I’d like to see Bush stop dropping bombs on innocent people too OP, and maybe start polluting less so the world doesn’t tip over towards global warming too quickly. But I don’t see that happening. But I don’t harbour a hatred of Christians or white people despite Bush’s religious fervour.

      Child marriages happen elsewhere - so what? They are not part of Christianity.

      Are you sure about that?

    69. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 7:15 pm  

      Yes. Jesus didn’t rape any nine year olds. When people immitate Jesus they act kindly. If they immitate Mohammed, in a civilised country they’d be locked up.

      What has colour got to do with it? Many Christians are black. A fair few Muslims are white.

    70. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 7:25 pm  

      When people immitate Jesus they act kindly. If they immitate Mohammed, in a civilised country they’d be locked up.

      I guess that’s more indicative of your selective reading than anything else. Anyway, please feel to carry on trolling. It’s just when it’s gratuitously offensive I will delete it.

      What has colour got to do with it?

      It means a lot to those on the receiving end of the bombs.

    71. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 17th April, 2006 at 7:27 pm  

      Since this thread has gone off-topic anyways…

      YAAAY Chelsea won… did YOU hear that El Cid….. ARSEnal is down at lowly SIX #.

    72. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 7:29 pm  

      Well, I just did a bit of unselective reading, and, hey, I can’t find the bit where Mo says “turn the other cheek” or where Jesus says “slay the unbelievers”. But it’s all down to colour isn’t it?

      Wait a minute? Jesus and Mo were probably about the same colour. Neither would have looked like Boris Johnson (peace be upon him) or Darcus Howe.

      I’m rambling a bit here.

    73. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 17th April, 2006 at 7:31 pm  

      Good ole Moe… OP you really need a course on cultural relativism…

    74. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 7:41 pm  

      If you delete comment 71 I solemny swear never to mention footy on PP

    75. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 8:31 pm  

      Well, strictly speaking, that makes you evil, an advocate of genocide, in the eyes of Christianity. Of course, many people who describe themselves as Christian might in practice sympathise with your pro-abortion stance — even if a 24-week limit spits in the face of science and what we have begun to learn about early life in the womb. So why can’t we also make a similar distinction between Islam in practice and Islam in theory?

    76. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 8:32 pm  

      I guess, you always have the option of retaliating with your favoured scatter gun approach by talking of Catholic priest kiddie fiddlers or raging against the hypocrasies of an evangelist U.S. foreign policy that uses a pacifist text to justify belligerence or haranguing those who support the death penalty while purporting to believe in redemption.
      But you choose not to. How comes?

    77. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 8:41 pm  

      Let’s face it: the answer is best described as “better the devil you know than the devil you don’t”. And herein lies your xenophobia. There might be people of many colours in Christianity but it is basically still a European religion. There has never been anything other than a white Pope in almost 2,000 years. Islam, on the other hand, is both lippy and foreign — the worst possible combination.

    78. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 8:49 pm  

      hey, I can’t find the bit where Mo says “turn the other cheek” or where Jesus says “slay the unbelievers”.

      OP, see here:
      http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2006/02/what_would_prop.php

      Though I doubt you’ll change your silly views even if presented evidence to the contrary.

    79. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:11 pm  

      I’ve got a lot of respect for the Muslimwakeup site - lots of sense is talked there.

      But how mainstream are they?

      El Cid - lippy and foreign is fine. Sharia is not.

      Whatever Christians may think about abortion, Christianity draws a distinction between the religious and the secular that is absent in Islam.

    80. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:33 pm  

      But how mainstream are they?
      You asked examples of ‘turn the other cheek’, I provided it. I thought this debate was about Islam rather than how ‘mainstream’ a particular news source is.

      Christianity draws a distinction between the religious and the secular
      It does? Where and how? And would this include Catholics?

    81. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:40 pm  

      Yes. Everywhere. In the words of Jesus in the Bible (render unto Caesar) and, as you can see, now (though not always) in Christian countries, which always have secular law. Including Catholics.

      It does matter how mainstream Islam reformers are. Overall, the reactionary Islam is the mainstream and the reformist a tiny minority. If this is to change, it must be acknowledged openly, as happened in Christianity.

    82. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:40 pm  

      Keep to forgiveness (O Muhammad), and enjoin kindness, and turn away from the ignorant. (from Sunny’s link

      If i am not wrong, ignorant signifies the infidels isnt it?

    83. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:46 pm  

      I suggest you study Moorish Spain. Because it might make you realise that the struggle between different interpretations of Islam — extreme and moderate — is as old as Islam itself.

      As for the distinction between religious and secular. I wouldn’t highlight Catholics solely Sunny, although Spain is a prime example of a Christian country where the religious and secular has coexisted with some difficulty. You could also look at Cromwell’s protectorate or the growing role of religion in the present-day United States.
      Either way OP, you were out of order and blatantly wrong. If you had balls — as you claim to have — you would admit it and revise your approach. The alternative is to recognise that you are an A1 bigot.

    84. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:50 pm  

      Overall, the reactionary Islam is the mainstream and the reformist a tiny minority.
      And yet the vast majority of Moslems don’t live according to Sharia.

    85. Sunny — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:50 pm  

      El Cid - it’s like banging your head against the wall with OP. You’ll have more success drawing blood from stone.

      Vikrant - An ignorant can be anyone ignorant :)

    86. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:50 pm  

      Few quesions El “Gunner” Cid

      Define:
      (a) Extremist Islam
      (b) Moderate Islam

      Are they two different philosophies. Is Koram so ambigious
      that it can be “interpreted” preversely by any old bigot?

    87. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:51 pm  

      An ignorant can be anyone ignorant :)

      Ignorant about what….

    88. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:53 pm  

      BTW has anyone of you been to area near the London eye and millenium bridge? There was some Morrocan exhibition today, some smokin Arab chicks swinging to mystic music… A must watch.

    89. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:54 pm  

      El Cid - strange name for you to adopt by the way - I’m not going to admit I’m wrong because I’m not wrong.

      Moorish Spain was not the tolerant paradise it was cracked up to be for Dhimmis. Moore to the point, this principle of Dhimmi status has not gone away. It is part and parcel of sharia law and the latter has not, unlike Christianity and Judaism, undergone a reformation.

      It is absurd to pretend that the Muslim world is as tolerant as the West. Utterly absurd. Which way does the traffic go? Are there loads of Christians fleeing to live in tolerant Islamia?

      The first step to reforming Islam is to admit there is a problem.

    90. Bonnie Prince Vickie — on 17th April, 2006 at 9:55 pm  

      And yet the vast majority of Moslems don’t live according to Sharia.

      WRONG

      Every country where Muslims are in significant numbers have some forms of institutionalised shariat (yes even India).

    91. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 10:06 pm  

      Overall, the reactionary Islam is the mainstream and the reformist a tiny minority.

      And yet the vast majority of Moslems don’t live according to Sharia.

      There is no contradiction here. Most Muslims don’t live according to sharia, but sharia, the official doctrine, has never been officially challenged and reformed. Mainstream scholars of Islam who command respect in the Islamic world, hold to hardline views. The ones that want to reform it to conform with the minimum of human rights, for example Irshad Manji, are marginal figures who face death threats.

      Of course there are many Muslims who don’t know their religion. And many, particularly men, who flout it, though they are often not so keen to grant “their” women equal licence. But that is a separate issue. It has never been acknowledged, officially, by the mainstream, that aspects of Islam need reform. And they do.

    92. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 10:08 pm  

      Who said the Muslim world was as tolerant as the west?
      By the standards of the times Moorish Spain compared very favourably with other parts of the world, regardless of religion — at least until the Almohads arrived.
      You’re all over place.

      The first step to reforming Islam is to admit there is a problem. And the best way to empower it is to demonise muslims. QED

    93. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 10:11 pm  

      Many mainstream scholars of Christianity who command respect in the Christian world also tend hold to hardline views. Not least the main man — Il Papa

    94. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 10:16 pm  

      As I said, if you’re not going to recognise that you were out of order earlier and wrong, then you should recognise that you are a bigot.

    95. El Cid — on 17th April, 2006 at 10:18 pm  

      I really hope we don’t get to a “war of civilisations” scenario, coz if I am forced to side with OP it’ll be a very sad day indeed.

    96. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 11:43 pm  

      When has the Pope ever said anything to compare with Ken’s crony “Moderate ” Sheikh Qaradawi on stoning gays, killing apostates and beating women, or women asking for rape if not clad in a tent?

      When? Anything of the kind? Ever?

    97. Siddhartha Sinatra — on 17th April, 2006 at 11:55 pm  

      Sheikh Qaradawi is the Pope of Islam? He might be Ken’s Mullah of choice but outside of that little orbit, he’s unheard of amongst Muslims. Thats a scare-monkey that David T whips out and spanks every now and then to warm up the comments ghouls.

    98. Old Pickler — on 17th April, 2006 at 11:57 pm  

      Oooer, sounds a bit rude. Apparently he’s a respected scholar of Islam.

      If not, who is? Name a respected scholar of Islam.

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.