Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

In the Interests of Equality

I think that there are those in Islam who have deliberately misquoted or misinterpreted the Great Bead Jiggler's ramblings and presented it as "The Pope says Islam is evil" to their uneducated and unwashed minions in order to stir up trouble and strife.

Then there's the likes of the Pakistani government minister saying things like "Those who say Islam is not a peaceful religion invite violence" or summat like that. Has that bloke had an irony bypass?

To defend your religion against allegations of violence by shooting nuns and blowing up churches seems ever so slightly contradictory don't you think?
 
There is something taught on MBA courses called "Equity Theory" basically one of the biggest sources of discontent in companies is when people do not feel that they all live by the same rules. This also applies in the wider world...I think that is where a lot of anger comes from in the UK and indeed in the liberal west, we have seen it with reaction to an English Parliament, EU members not sticking to the rules when the UK does and percieved inequities and licence given to excuse behaiuours seen in recent protests.

There you go that was the whole point of the thread!
 
Maxi_77 said:
<SNIP>

I would suggest that any one who acts in a way which suggests that life of some other group is in some way less valuable than his own is himself less than human.

<SNIP>

Peter

So what has happened here? Was the Pope's address so complex in meaning, that the person in the street could not understand it and it was therefore assumed he was belittling Islam?
 
imom1406 said:
I can criticise the Christian or Jewish faiths without some Christian or Jewish nut believing i can be killed for what i say.....and before anyone says "in the old days you'd be a heretic" yes i know, but i don't live in the Old Days, supposedly i live in an enlightened age!?!

There are extremists who would kill you were you to make statements they considered offensive on their patch, though they do not appear to typically target Muslims, but again we are talking about the real extremists here.
 
imom1406 said:
There is something taught on MBA courses called "Equity Theory" basically one of the biggest sources of discontent in companies is when people do not feel that they all live by the same rules. This also applies in the wider world...I think that is where a lot of anger comes from in the UK and indeed in the liberal west, we have seen it with reaction to an English Parliament, EU members not sticking to the rules when the UK does and percieved inequities and licence given to excuse behaiuours seen in recent protests.

There you go that was the whole point of the thread!

Equity theory is fine and I support the concept, but to work it has to bring both sides together and that almost always means compromise.

Yes there are angry people in the West, but there are also a lot of angry Muslims, and I suspect you telling that they should buck up and conform to our model of life will just make them evem more angry. Dialogue and reconciliation may bring a solution where they can see our point of view in a less hostile way, and perhaps we can also see their point of view in a way that makes us less angry to.


At the moment you seem to be on the very slippery moral high ground.

Peter
 
Maxi_77 said:
imom1406 said:
There is something taught on MBA courses called "Equity Theory" basically one of the biggest sources of discontent in companies is when people do not feel that they all live by the same rules. This also applies in the wider world...I think that is where a lot of anger comes from in the UK and indeed in the liberal west, we have seen it with reaction to an English Parliament, EU members not sticking to the rules when the UK does and percieved inequities and licence given to excuse behaiuours seen in recent protests.

There you go that was the whole point of the thread!

Equity theory is fine and I support the concept, but to work it has to bring both sides together and that almost always means compromise.

Yes there are angry people in the West, but there are also a lot of angry Muslims, and I suspect you telling that they should buck up and conform to our model of life will just make them evem more angry. Dialogue and reconciliation may bring a solution where they can see our point of view in a less hostile way, and perhaps we can also see their point of view in a way that makes us less angry to.


At the moment you seem to be on the very slippery moral high ground.

Peter

Thought i'd keep you company!
 
If my slippery high ground as you like to call it, is that all religions and beliefs are allowed to be practiced in peace without fear of persecution, and that freedom of speech is maintained without fear of violence..then fine i'll take the high ground.


So are you saying that the above are not sensible aims and humane practice and you think we should adopt a unilateral liberal attitude and allow violence to go unchallenged or criticised?

Yes i believe we have to put our own house in order as there is a lot wrong with attitudes to differences of all types Racial , Religous lifestyle etc.

This whole thread is about equity of treatment, not wider foreign policy..

Basically the reaction to a speach by the Pope, which did not say anything that most sane people believe , that violence has no place in religion.....so the response.....is violence...ironic eh!
 
I think the point here is that the establishment in general frowns on the incitement of religious hatred - unless it's a predominantly Islamic country. As I have said in previous posts and make no bones about repeating it - the only country that has actively banned other religions is Saudi Arabia - an ISLAMIC country. No-one has the right to use violence in the name of religion, but the point is that Islamic countries turn a blind eye, whereas western countries - in the main - condemn it.

However, I agree with the sentiments about Islamic over-reaction. Since when do non-muslims hold mass protests outside mosques and embassies when their religious leaders call us evil, satan, infidel (infidel means unbeliever - how can they say other religions don't believe in god!!). I accept it does go on in small pockets, but it is NOT organised by the pope or the arch-bishop of canterbury is it!! Don't forget Salman Rushdie who had a death sentence slapped on him by the Ayatollah - Irans spiritual leader. Think of the out-cry if the pope declared a death sentence on someone for daring to disagree with the catholic church.

As others have said, if Islam is such a peace loving, secure and morally right religion, then why do they find it so unacceptable to just simply turn the other cheek?? Instead they yet again see insult in the slightest uttered word and respond in exactly the way that they are complaining that we in the west are accusing them of.

However, before anyone accuses me of being anti-Islamic, in their defence they are only doing what the catholics did themselves in the middle ages......They've been there, done that, and they've discovered it doesn't serve their purpose.

Oh and Guy Fawkes, wasn't killed for being Catholic, but because he tried to kill King James. Religion may have been his motivation, but the fact remains that he almost certainly wouldn't have been executed if he hadn't been in "The Plot".
 
imom1406 said:
If my slippery high ground as you like to call it, is that all religions and beliefs are allowed to be practiced in peace without fear of persecution, and that freedom of speech is maintained without fear of violence..then fine i'll take the high ground.


So are you saying that the above are not sensible aims and humane practice and you think we should adopt a unilateral liberal attitude and allow violence to go unchallenged or criticised?

Yes i believe we have to put our own house in order as there is a lot wrong with attitudes to differences of all types Racial , Religous lifestyle etc.

This whole thread is about equity of treatment, not wider foreign policy..

Basically the reaction to a speach by the Pope, which did not say anything that most sane people believe , that violence has no place in religion.....so the response.....is violence...ironic eh!

My main point which you carefully ignore is that I disagree with your assertion that only Muslims show a propensity for violence to support their aims. Radical christians have killed in the past decade to support their aims and used highly intimidating tactics, just look at the abortion argument in the US, then there were the Brach Davidians. Hindus have killed in recent years in support of their religion and radical Jews have used violence to settle in Palestinian land. Then one can consider some of the political activists such as the anti globalisation groups, not the most peaceful of people on this planet.

Islam is topical today, but one must not loose sight of the whole picture, after all before 9/11 the worst terror outrage in the US was stigated by a white american christian, admitedly with strange political views.

As I said I agree with equity in these things but equity cannot be imposed.

Peter
 
Some good points about the aggressive spread of Christianity and other religions, but I think you'll find that, in the past, the organised Christian Church and followers of many other religions have used their religion in the pursuit of power. The traditional Christian Church has always been a big power broker in the West and has used religion as an excuse to gain and maintain power. This also applies to the tin pot pseudo-Christian sects such as the Davidians, and to the Moonies, Scientologists, Kabbalah etc.

If you take the original philosophy of Jesus (an anti - Roman, Jewish revolutionary may I add), it is exactly the opposite of how the Christian Church has conducted itself (and in some cases, continues to do so). Likewise, the principles of most other religions such as Buddhism, Hindu, Sikhism etc have been about tolerance.

Islam, on the other hand, has always promoted the aggressive spread of it's ideals - it is an integral part of the religion.

Consider myself served with a Fatwah! :(
 

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top