It’s an age thing

Over on what has become ‘the dark snide’, the omnipresent anti-Islamic element continue to propagate their tedium. I have to support their right to do so and am not obliged to read any of it. However, there is an occasional post that raises some ‘real issues’ and, in this case, some amusing responses. In all honesty I have to say that I find it necessary to curtail my emotional reactions, which are engaged by such posts, before I can engage in a rational reaction. The post in question is 67% of Britons want the burqa banned by riteway.

This post reminded me of an article that I read (February 2008) in Comment is Free by Daniel Davies with the title ‘Don’t get your niqab in a twist Part2’.

The UK passed the Human Rights Act in 1998, and that even if this act were to be repealed we would still be subject to the European Convention on Human Rights. So even if SheikhBakrir Bakri were to be elected Prime Minister in 2010 and to pass the Sharia (Implementation of) Act 2011, then it would still have to be consistent with the ECHR. The first person to be sentenced to be stoned to death for adultery would appeal, the Sharia Act would be found to be in breach of the Human Rights Act 1998, and the law would fall apart. Or if the SheikhBakriar Bakri MP were to have the wit to repeal the HRA first, they would appeal directly to the European Court of Human Rights which would find the Sharia Act in breach of the ECHR, and the House of Lords would therefore rule that the Sharia Act was invalid. That’s the way constitutional law works in the UK these days.

So more realistically, whatever system of institutionalised sharia the Rt Rev Rowan is anticipating, we know that it’s going to have to be one that is compatible with European human rights law, particularly with regard to not discriminating between individuals on grounds of sex, race, religion or lack thereof or sexual orientation.

Nevertheless, European countries are introducing laws that ‘effectively ban the niqab and the burqa’. While I may muse over how a niqab or burqa wearer gets through customs, I remain unaffected by such things. I am more offended by men in vests and seeing three generations of ‘slut walkers’, and the person in front of me in the queue ordering bloody cappuccinos. But that’s an age thing.

What really got my attention was the leader ‘67% of Britons want the burqa banned’. Are we to take it that this is sufficient reason for imposing a similar ban in the UK? What about the 33% whom we may assume either don’t want the ban or are indifferent? A current bête noire of mine is the notion of democracy in the UK, in which the ‘supremacy of parliament’ allowes successive political administrations to erode those democratic rights that ‘we think we have’ (The ultimate protector of our rights, the monarch, has been singularly mute on this, as have her predecessors).  So I find myself revisiting one my own old posts Democracy – Do we really have it? (It’s an age thing).

Author: Peter

Web researcher

22 thoughts on “It’s an age thing”

  1. Hi Peter.

    I must say, the idea of handing over decision making to our elected representatives does seem like a bad idea sometimes. it is, however, infinitely better than rule by “bloggers” or a selective sample of those polled!

    I think discussions on the “dark snide” can be amusing occasionally. You may well be capable of responding rationally, but the majority who take part in such discussions are not so reliable. They are obviously on a crusade to alert us to the dangers of Islam, and uncontrolled immigration. I don’t doubt their sincerity, but I do question their tactics and their avoidance of serious discussion on the subject.

    I’ve given up trying to counter their views about Sharia Courts in the UK . They simply ignore inconvenient facts and prefer to continue with the hysterical headlines. Daniel Davies did rightly point out in the thread that they have Sharia Courts in Israel, and they also exist in India.

    Yes, all in all very tedious as you say.

  2. Nice link PB,

    It reminds me exactly why I shall never return to that stinking cackhole brimming with racist scum.

    On your point, if 67% of the voting public ask for something in a serious and unbiased poll then surely it should come to pass.

    However, I do not remember being asked my opinion on the matter and I will bet a pound to a pinch of bull guano that a very large slice of the country weren’t asked either. How can anyone claim 67% of all Britons want the ban, if they only ask 100 or so people? Even when the lying gubmint assumes popularity, it has to publish the turnout figures and acknowledge the number of folk who could’nt be arsed to register a preference.

  3. Furry.

    Welcome back!

    A”serious and unbiased poll” would probably be a referendum. This could happen, but there is no constitutional right to have one on any issue, and our government can also ignore the result, if they so choose!

  4. Hello Araminta & Ferret – If we are to have referendum then what percentage of the registered voters must be ‘polled’ and what percentage share of the votes cast is required for the result to have effect. It’s the rule by a ‘simple majority’ that I’m opposed to.

  5. I’m totally in agreement, Peter. One of the main aims of a civilised democracy, I believe, is the protection of minority interests or rights against the rule of the “simple majority”.

    I’m not a fan of referenda, and you and Furry are quite right, the turnout in a General Election is pathetically low, and I would imagine the response to constant polling of any sort would be much the same.

  6. It is “The Dark Side”, as tagged, not “The Dark Snide”, thanks Peter.

    The Chariot is not a vehicle for attacking bloggers who post on MyT, nor for ridiculing their ideas or beliefs. It was set up to provide a forum where the software works, there are no trolls or stalkers, and moderation is not capricious. Please remember that. A discussion on the subject of banning the burqa is fine, but on its own merits, thanks.

    OK, now we’ve got that out of the way –

    Ferret – Obviously your holiday did nothing to improve your judgement. There is nothing racist about a desire to ban face coverings in public. Nor is there anything racist about opposing a sick and evil cult masquerading as a religion. Islam is not a race – get that firmly into your furry ears. Please moderate your language.

    Araminta – if you believe you’re going to get a free run with your nutty ideas of advocating Sharia in the UK (or Australia, come to that), forget it. You’re not.

  7. Good afternoon to you, Bearsy!

    So please do point out where I have advocated Sharia in the UK or Australia, on this site or any other!

    Sharia courts exist as a form of mediation in the UK and many other countries; it is not a separate legal system and neither will it become so, despite rumours to the contrary.

  8. Nothing wrong with Peter’s post or Furry’s opinion thereon, but I must say, Bearsy, your reaction is distinctly OTT, in my opinion.

  9. Hello Bearsy- ‘snide’ was used as a general reference the state of MyT (Counterfeit, bogus, adj; Hypocrisy; malicious gossip;n) and in that sense I consider it to be quite apropos. It most certainly was not a reference to any person and I find it somewhat tortuous to read into my post your interpretation of it. I always try to choose my words carefully in such circumstances. Nevertheless, I shall be more circumspect in future.

  10. I did not interpret, Peter – I made a clear statement, in Boadicea’s absence, of aspects of Chariot Policy of which you may not have been previously aware. Please do not read any more into my words than their immediate surface content.

  11. Hmm. Did you see a Pastafarian got permission to have his passport photo taken sporting a collander?

  12. The 33% are already wearing them!
    Most of the Northern cities are wall to wall wogs.

  13. I agree with Peter’s comments on men in vests or even worse men walking around with no vest. As for the burqua etc, I am against it in public places where security can be an issue,airports, hospitals, schools etc. To some extent shopping malls, Bluewater and Lakeside ban hoodies and people wearing crash helmets yet allow walking daleks. seems odd.
    As for the number who are against it where are they asking the question, Oxford or Mile End?

  14. Rick – “Asking the question”! Reading Cranmer again today; “The EHRC has intervened in four cases of clear discrimination against Christians, and are appealing with them in Strasbourg, arguing that ‘reasonable accommodation’ for religion or belief is needed”. Well, I’m at a loss, but then I consider the ECHR to be ‘constitutionaly undemocratic and ethically flawed‘.

    However, the content of my post was meant as a lead to my commentary on ‘democracy’, implying that there can legislation introduced by a simple majority (as in a referendum, or in this case in response a ‘straw poll’) that is not democratic.

  15. Bearsy,

    I speak as I find, and I find the dark side to be teeming with racists, bigots, bullies and illmannered delinquents with an agenda of hate. I did not see anywhere in the Chariot Charter where it states that MyT is a banned subject here.

    I look in the mirror chum and am comfortable with my ‘judgement’. You are correct however, the holiday did nothing to improve it, it being just fine the way it is thank you very much.

    I do not believe being anti islam is racist, I have said so on many occasions in the past. Please tell me where I stated otherwise?

  16. Bearsy,

    No you didn’t. You wrote “The Chariot is not a vehicle for attacking bloggers who post on MyT, nor for ridiculing their ideas or beliefs”

    Since neither I nor PB did that, why do you think you have the right to suggest that I “moderate” my perfectly acceptable IMO, language?

  17. Well said, Furry.

    No one has said anything out of order on this post, with the exception of Bearsy, he has also continued this “discussion” on a completely inaccurate post of his own.

    In my opinion he has completely misinterpreted everything we have said here.

Add your Comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s