- This topic has 33 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Grasshopper I don’t think I could manage a full bong at my age, can I settle on half?
As for the Sharia what-not if people want to live in a country governed by Sharia law then they have every right to do so. Sudan, Somalia, Egypt all spring to mind as likely candidates of countries where the resounding success of the Sharia system can be experienced for this who want to try it out.
As I understand it, there is scope within existing law for certain matters to be settled under Sharia law, Jewish law, or Klingon law for that matter, providing that both parties are in agreement. That is a pretty flexible arrangement already.
What astonishes me is the complete lack of media savvy from such a senior figure. Does he seriously think this will lead to an interesting, intelligent and informed debate on nationality, religion and identity? Of course it won’t. As we speak, hacks from the tattier papers will be scouring the land for a senior Muslim, an MP, a judge, anyone who agrees with some aspects of what the Archbishop will saying, splash their comments across the front page and then off we go – two or three days of screaming headlines, rabid phone-ins and moral panic. The fact that almost no-one agrees with the Archbishop won’t stop the Mail, the Express or the BNP fanning the flames and having a jolly good time.
Which is presumably the precise opposite of what the Archbishop would have wanted. Do the Church of England not have a press office?
LM – if you’re reading, this is an example of a proper discussion on a subject along the lines of your deleted post the other day.
Grass – No such thing as a free BJ, admirable quest though. Also should ‘fudheid’ be in my list of banned expletives.
On the subject at hand. If I went to any country in the world, including those under Islamic rule, I’d expect to be bound by the laws of that country, whether I agreed with them or not. Visitors or residents who’ve came to our country from abroad should thus be expected to abide by ours.
Corm, I was about to sum up my opinion on here but you have just done it. Makes my blood boil
Andrew, the etymology is as follows:
fudheid (fudd-heed) n. head which resembles a fanny (Latin: fudus fudus, meaning ‘Otters Pocket’ or ‘Flange’ or ‘Mimsy’): (Eccose Ancienne: heid, meaning ‘Head’, ‘Napper’ or ‘Scone’)
I trust this explains adequately…….and do please feel to use this as liberally as you like. It’s a sadly under-used expression.
Thanks for that explanation. Should I attempt a Scottish accent whilst using it or is that a step too far?
fudheid (fudd-heed) n. head which resembles a fanny (Latin: fudus fudus, meaning ‘Otters Pocket’ or ‘Flange’ or ‘Mimsy’): (Eccose Ancienne: heid, meaning ‘Head’, ‘Napper’ or ‘Scone’)
– class, Grassy!you could also say for the snobs among us :- "vagina head", or even "beaver dome"
Grasshopper’s colourful language has passed me by on this occasion…sorry
..to continue…
I think if it was adopted along the Jewish lines then people might feel a little less horrified and I think this is what Mr Williams was suggesting, whether that’s possible or not I wouldn’t know.
The article on Wikipedia suggests to me some leeway with interpretation is possible but wonder if the majority of muslims who support this, and most were probably born here, would find this limited Sharia acceptable and what they want, but the trouble with these people, moreso their leaders and proponents, is that give them an inch and they’ll grab a mile.
Personally, I’m in favour of nipping things in the bud before they take a dangerous foothold and as a secularist this would be no exception.
Presumably Paddy Power has a market on when Mr Williams will be resigning…?
Here’s part of what he said:
"If what we want socially is a pattern of relations in which a plurality of diverse and overlapping affiliations work for a common good, and in which groups of serious and profound conviction are not systematically faced with the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty, it seems unavoidable,"
IMO, the interesting parts are the phrases "groups of serious and profound conviction" and "state loyalty".
Does this just mean that it’s the religious people and the patriots that are causing the problem?
I’m agnostic and, if I won the lottery, I’d be off to Paris like a shot (so I could spend my afternoons at Longchamp and Auteuil etc).
So, clearly, I have no loyalty to either my "religion", my "culture" or the British state.
And, unsurprisingly, I’m a law abiding citizen.
Maybe the solution to all this is for all religions to be kept away from the state and the legal system.
Then, within that secular framework, people can do whatever is permitted by both law AND by their own values.
Simple enough, I would have thought.
Steve
Maybe the solution to all this is for all religions to be kept away from the state and the legal system.
Then, within that secular framework, people can do whatever is permitted by both law AND by their own values.
Simple enough, I would have thought.
Steve
Funnily enough Stavros, I thought that was exactly the country we were living in already.
Clearly the Archbihop thinks that this isn’t good enough, and that belief should be taken into account. But then again, he would say that, wouldn’t he.
Grass – No such thing as a free BJ, admirable quest though. Also should ‘fudheid’ be in my list of banned expletives.
Corm, your lack of faith is most disappointing. I think you may need to undergo reprogramming.
PS. "Fudheid" is not a profanity – it’s an adjective.
Maybe the solution to all this is for all religions to be kept away from the state and the legal system.
Funnily enough Stavros, I thought that was exactly the country we were living in already.
Try buying beer on a Sunday morning and see how you get on.
Steve
on a day that ‘fudheid’ is resisting calls to resign for suggesting we should embrace sharia law, one of the most popular stories on the bcc website is that of the saudi girl sentenced to 90 lashes for being gang raped and then having this sentence increased to 200 lashes and getting 6 months in jail on top for daring to appeal the sentence. for daring to represent her in her appeal her solicitor was suspended, had his licence confiscated and faces a disciplinary session
their views on gambling should see the end of racecourses in this country and the only good thing about their views on drinking is that non-smokers would be fooked as far as pubs go now too
nutters, the lot of ’em
A shameful profession
You mean the profession which exposed Watergate?
You mean the profession which exposed dodgy dossiers?
You mean the profession that exposed the thalidomide scandal?
You mean the same profession that has exposed no end of official cover ups?
I would suggest it is rather dangerous to make generalisations.
What would you advocate then Kwai Chang Caine?
Would you do away with the Fourth Estate altogether?
And if not, what measures would you introduce in order to rein them in?
Is it just the clergy that you think they shouldn’t be allowed to go for? Or should this extend to Government officials, the Monarchy, celebrities, whoever?
Or do you simply think that the Archbishop has been misquoted, and your concern is with slovenly reporting, rather than all reporting??
I’m interested, because I’m a subversive liberal pinko myself (though I’m mistaken for a right-winger more often than you’d think
).
– class, Grassy!
).- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.