Muslim paedo escapes jail saying he did not know 13 was underage

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Damien

This guy's upbringing is not indicative of all Muslims. It may highlight a problem in the culture of young Asian men and and woman but if we are going to examine that we must do so in way that doesn't make sweeping generalisations of an entire faith or race.

I'm a bit confused now.
is this explaining why the word Muslim was took out the title?

because he is not representative of all Muslims?

That's like saying that if a Christian did something we should take out the word Christian so people don't get the wrong idea?

[thenry]

Originally Posted by martyh

That was the judges view ,he said that the Islam Faith (if taught correctly)does teach that so he didn't(the judge) buy into the idea that Adil didn't know it was wrong in his faith if not the law.

then why this outcome? where did you get those quotes from btw?

Originally Posted by martyh

I agree that Adil is cherry picking aspects of his faith but that does not negate the fact that the Islam faith as a whole ,and for that matter most faiths i know of,teach that women are second class people .It is those teachings that allow people like Adil to do what they do because "my faith says i can" .So i stand by my conviction that there is a very real problem with most Muslims in this country and the way that they interpret Islam

I totally agree.

Originally Posted by Gary L

I'm a bit confused now.
is this explaining why the word Muslim was took out the title?

because he is not representative of all Muslims?

That's like saying that if a Christian did something we should take out the word Christian so people don't get the wrong idea?

like this thread

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...ia-eweida.html

or the Christian B&B thread

[Gary L]

I reckon that if you think about it. there's a possibility that there's only 1 true Muslim in the world. all the others do something that discounts them as a true Muslim. leaving just that 1 true Muslim.

Same can be said about all religions.

---------- Post added at 18:00 ---------- Previous post was at 17:56 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

like this thread

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...ia-eweida.html

or the Christian B&B thread

This is it.

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...se-appeal.html

Does that mean that those particular Christians are representative of all Christians when it comes to gays?

No.
at least I don't think so.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I reckon that if you think about it. there's a possibility that there's only 1 true Muslim in the world. all the others do something that discounts them as a true Muslim. leaving just that 1 true Muslim.

Same can be said about all religions.

---------- Post added at 18:00 ---------- Previous post was at 17:56 ----------



This is it.

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...se-appeal.html

Does that mean that those particular Christians are representative of all Christians when it comes to gays?

No.
at least I don't think so.

Have you noticed how there is so much debate in the news that is religion based and it all tends to be BAD.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Have you noticed how there is so much debate in the news that is religion based and it all tends to be BAD.

Another subject. but yes. religion is evil.

Originally Posted by thenry

then why this outcome? where did you get those quotes from btw?

.

The one quote i used was from the first link that popped up but it is basically the same as the one from the mail

Describing Rashid, the judge said: ‘He’s had an unusual education, certainly in terms of the sexual education provided. Comparing women to lollipops is a very curious way of teaching young men about sex.’



But he said that Rashid knew what he was doing was wrong.


‘It was made clear to you at the school you attended that having sexual relations with a woman before marriage was contrary to the precepts of Islam,’ he said.

As for the outcome ,i fear that the same reluctance to address 'Muslim issues' (for want of a better phrase) that occurred in Rochdale was present in the court

[thenry]

ah i read the mails links that just proves hes a fake known by the Judge

Originally Posted by martyh

That was the judges view ,he said that the Islam Faith (if taught correctly)does teach that so he didn't(the judge) buy into the idea that Adil didn't know it was wrong in his faith if not the law .I agree that Adil is cherry picking aspects of his faith but that does not negate the fact that the Islam faith as a whole ,and for that matter most faiths i know of,teach that women are second class people .It is those teachings that allow people like Adil to do what they do because "my faith says i can" .So i stand by my conviction that there is a very real problem with most Muslims in this country and the way that they interpret Islam

Most Muslims is again awfully broad and hard to back up. Then again so is the definition of treatment of women since its arguable if society as a whole is truly equal when it comes to sexism.

You have to distinguish between members of a faith. You cannot label 1.6 billion people based on the actions of a minority who attract a disproportionate amount of attention. There are Christians in America who famously protest the funerals of solders, or children or pretty much anyone else. The fact they're Christian does matter as it's from their faith they have found such hatred. However that doesn't impact at all on all the other Christians. They're in no way responsible for their actions and we can learn nothing about all these peoples' character from those protesters. Also there has only recently been the scandal of Child Abuse in the Catholic Church! Yet most rational people wouldn't use it to claim that it is representative of 'most Christians.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Damien

You have to distinguish between members of a faith. You cannot label 1.6 billion people based on the actions of a minority who attract a disproportionate amount of attention. There are Christians in America who famously protest the funerals of solders, or children or pretty much anyone else. The fact they're Christian does matter as it's from their faith they have found such hatred. However that doesn't impact at all on all the other Christians. They're in no way responsible for their actions and we can learn nothing about all these peoples' character from those protesters. Also there has only recently been the scandal of Child Abuse in the Catholic Church! Yet most rational people wouldn't use it to claim that it is representative of 'most Christians.

So what you're saying then, is that there's no reason why the word Muslim has to be excluded from the title?

Originally Posted by Damien

Most Muslims is again awfully broad and hard to back up. Then again so is the definition of treatment of women since its arguable if society as a whole is truly equal when it comes to sexism.

You have to distinguish between members of a faith. You cannot label 1.6 billion people based on the actions of a minority who attract a disproportionate amount of attention. There are Christians in America who famously protest the funerals of solders, or children or pretty much anyone else. The fact they're Christian does matter as it's from their faith they have found such hatred. However that doesn't impact at all on all the other Christians. They're in no way responsible for their actions and we can learn nothing about all these peoples' character from those protesters. Also there has only recently been the scandal of Child Abuse in the Catholic Church! Yet most rational people wouldn't use it to claim that it is representative of 'most Christians.

What i'm getting at is that All Muslims are taught via the Koran that women are not equal (i actually believe the correct terminology is "equal but not the same").Islamic education in this country perpetuates that idea because it's in the Koran with no repercussions from mainstream society even though any state school or Christian school teaching that would be shut down so why is that allowed to continue ?as a direct result of that teaching Adil and his like take that basic Islamic teaching to the extreme with results we have seen in this thread and in Rochdale .So i think saying "Some Muslims" is about right because most if not all are taught that women are not equal to men .Fair enough some Muslims treat women worse than others but the basic idea that women are not equal is prevalent in all Muslims

Originally Posted by martyh

What i'm getting at is that All Muslims are taught via the Koran that women are not equal (i actually believe the correct terminology is "equal but not the same").Islamic education in this country perpetuates that idea because it's in the Koran with no repercussions from mainstream society even though any state school or Christian school teaching that would be shut down so why is that allowed to continue ?as a direct result of that teaching Adil and his like take that basic Islamic teaching to the extreme with results we have seen in this thread and in Rochdale .So i think saying "Some Muslims" is about right because most if not all are taught that women are not equal to men .Fair enough some Muslims treat women worse than others but the basic idea that women are not equal is prevalent in all Muslims

Well let's be careful because I don't think any of us here are Islamic Scholars or even have read the Quran. I do know that often with these religious texts you can selectively quote and interpret from it to make whatever case you want. According to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam, it's rather a complex topic. It states that women are equal, but one must serve the other, but that only applies to marriage.

It's not as simple that the religion teaches that woman are second class citizens. As with most religious texts you can use it to make either case.

Also you didn't say some Muslims, you said most Muslims. You also agreed with a poster that Muslims want to take over the world when 'we're all dead'.

Women are not equal is prevalent in all Muslims? Well in some respects the same could be said of Christians. After all let's look at the problem with woman bishops. What about society in general? Where it's not easy for women to reach the higher reaches of our society and where they're often judged more on appearances than on merit. Women who get leered at on the street or whistled at. I think women in society can be explored a lot more and it's not a Muslim problem alone.

There is a problem in some Asian communities, predominately Islamic ones, when it comes to women as the Rochdale case showed (this case shows nothing other than one child abuser). However this doesn't represent Muslims as a whole any more than child abuse in the Catholic Church represents Catholics.

---------- Post added at 19:02 ---------- Previous post was at 18:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

So what you're saying then, is that there's no reason why the word Muslim has to be excluded from the title?

This seems to have happened when we had that merge issue a couple of pages ago, it wasn't editorialised. Changing back now.

[Hom3r]

Personally theres no excuse, hang the bloody lot of them.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Damien

This seems to have happened when we had that merge issue a couple of pages ago, it wasn't editorialised. Changing back now.

Thanks, Damien.
can you just change the first know to not, now?

[thenry]

I've read the Quran but I couldn't tell you much in detail. Either I don't remember or not much was mentioned. It was iirc women should be covered and all, shouldn't travel alone, stuff like that basically in a nutshell keeping women under the thumb. Real backwards and no compromise such as women being able to be indepentant etc. It does say heaven lays at the feet of your mother so what does that say? I don't know tbh.