Swimmers are told to wear burkinis

Originally posted by Rockpuck
When I was in vegas the one day I went to the pool.... no joke... someone pooped in the pool.

How does that happen?

There were plenty of French people around.. I suspected one of them.

How is this ok to write this kind of garbage on these board?
I suppose it's the same kind of etnophobia that spark all these intolerant and sensionalist headlines.

People just love to hate. That's why these kind of thread seems to multiply.

Hey there a new thread on these ARUBS! Let's get in there and spew some venom!

And yeah, I'm french. And I find this kind of rent offensive.
Would you ahve said something like :
''There were plenty of black people around... I suspected one of them''?
I guess not.

reply to post by ClearMindedKansan


The deal is that this is Britain not some Middle Eastern country like Iraq or Iran!!!!!!!!!!!

I do not want to wake up one day in some BS muslim world....... no thanks!!

[edit on 17-8-2009 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist]

Originally posted by ashnomadonte
reply to post by St Vaast

 

T&C won't let me post the entire article so I am sorry for that still why should they have separate times? It is ridiculous.

Those are the typical sheeple responses we see all the time from a once proud and tough people in the UK, now being conditioned to accept that they are perpetually giving up more of their rights and freedoms every day.

Pitiful ...

reply to post by neformore


The fact that those exists anger me more. It does not justify adding more (only 24 hours in a day after all.)


This should be a rallying call to Stop all that nonsense.


Where I live, public pools and areas are open with no special treatment to anyone, besides the mandatory handicap availability for obvious reasons. However, we have the YMCA and other things to organize privately for groups.

How does it make sense to do that on public places. Public implies all. They might as well be called special interest pools and places. That's what you're telling me they are.

Nonsense to me.

Nice. I criticise your position and rather than actually answer you clip away my reasoning and call me a troll. Although I find it hard to believe you were being genuine, I'll set this so you won't think ill of me.

Let me answer your post first:

1. "What a silly comparison." Why? Objectively they're identical. Two groups of people with specific requirements.

You said my argument is base on "imposing a religious belief in the public sector". From the country's point of view, they are both subjects requesting an allotted time to cater to them. Why should the council view these differently?

2. Explain how I am trolling. If you can't be objective, you become prejudice. Is this statement not logical? If I believe 1 to be true, then you fulfil this statement's logic. Your argument is prejudice and your only reasoning so far is that religion is different. How is it?

3. "Keep your religious beliefs private, please." Do you think I'm Muslim? If so, I'm at a loss as to why you would. Is it because I'm defending a perfectly valid use of a public pool? I'd be arguing the same for nearly any other group.

Now, perhaps you'd be so kind to answer those and then these:

1. You twisted my words about keeping religious beliefs private, so I corrected you. Oher people have said that Muslim countries aren't part of the "civilised world", yet they want to reply tit for tat. How does that make us better or "civilised"?

2. The "civilised world" exhibits and reveres tolerance and acceptance. Not helping minority groups to practice their beliefs, if legal, contradicts this. How are we "civilised" if we don't meet our own standards?

3. Muslims pay taxes if they live in the UK and are thus part of the public. We provide public funds for a range of pursuits, religious and secular. Why shouldn't we provide 5% of the pool's time for this pursuit, particularly in an area with a significant Muslim population?

Perhaps, you could answer these rather than resorting to calling someone a troll because they expose your hypocrisy and prejudice.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Under the rules, swimmers – including non-Muslims – are barred from entering the pool in normal swimming attire.

Instead they are told that they must comply with the "modest" code of dress required by Islamic custom, with women covered from the neck to the ankles and men, who swim separately, covered from the navel to the knees.

That's really all I needed to see but I did read the whole article. For those saying you don't 'have to swim' during that time frame really isn't the point.

I really feel for the British. No they don't have to swim but they do have to wear Islamic-approved swimwear if they decide to swim during that time. It turns into the British being told 'just don't swim' if you don't like the customs when it should be the other way around.

The Muslims are being told you shouldn't have to bend to the customs of the land but the British are told they have to bend to the Islamic customs during that time. Something is wrong here methinks.

What it should be, is the British should be allowed to swim in their regular swim attire and the Muslims can wear their Islamic-approved swimwear if they choose. All together. Whoever has the problem with that is the one who needs to leave the pool- not require British to wear Islamic swimming gear if they want to utilize public pools during certain hours.

The First Amendment to the United States Consitution

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

There are Americans here arguing against the first amendmemt of the US constitution

Admittedly, the UK is not Britain, but the double standards on display are astonishing.

So, whats it going to be, live and let live, in the spirit of the constitution, or do you choose to be particularly anti/un-american, and claim that these people have no rights to do what they wish in a free society?

If its the former, then you stand by the foundation of your country, and I salute you.

If its the latter....well...I'd suggest there are other motives at play.

Originally posted by ClearMindedKansan
i will never get why people get so worked up over nothing. So what, a pool has decided to set aside a 1.5hour block during the day for for people who wish to swim without seeing a bunch of flesh around them. This hurts people how?

Remember folks, Deny Ignorance.

Right, deny ignorance ...

Today it is 1.5 hours for the muslims. How long before it is you that only gets the 1.5 hours to dress how you see fit at the pool? Of course by then and with your attitude, your wife and daughters will probably already have been "assimilated" and all further resistance will be futile.



[edit on 8/17/2009 by centurion1211]

englands future ?
agree to convert to islam (the islamic republic of england)
stop islam from dismantaling english society bit by bit.
over throw the political correct anti british government.
ban islam in the uk.
this is just another small step to islamify england, any attempt to stop this eu agenda will result in being labeled fascist/racist/islamophobe/xenophobe.
the future for britain as we know it is bleak.
the failed multiculture experiment will iether result in a caliphate type take over or a civil war, its just a matter of time.
i think civil war will be the likley result of this creeping islamification.

This post is a seething morass of diatribe.

Anyhow, back on topic. I'm a Brit. I'll have a punt at this one.

The fact that someone is middle eastern, or a muslim or whatever, isn't the problem. Colour, race, belief, none of it matters.

What does matter, is that yet again, religion has browbeaten its' way into a public set of institutions where it doesn't belong. Religion is simply irrelevant, it should not be given consideration in any form of public or private decision making.

The question we should be asking is - "Why do organisations in the UK get FORCED to take into account completely irrelevant and harmful beliefs (religion in general) or risk legal action?"

I know why. Because all of the powerful people in the UK (in government and beyond) who use religion as a tool to gain undue privilege, and power, would have their main crutch permanently removed if religion was deemed irrelevant. So the power brokers of all faiths, defend the idea that all religions alleged 'rights' have to be taken into account. It's a closed shop, and they're all in it for themselves. Kind of a Mafia style operation.

The sooner we stop talking about religion, stop taking it into consideration, the better the world will be. It's fine to be religious, just sod off and don't do it in my face.

The Para.

reply to post by neformore


Your point about the first amendment is unclear.

Are you arguing that the muslims should be allowed their own time it the pool, or that they shouldn't be?

Why can't the muslims just show up at the pool dressed however they want and leave the rest of the people to dress however they want?



I mean really

reply to post by ModernAcademia


ModernAcademia,

You are going to need some practice here or find people who do not know much history.

So tell me, what does the large majority of taxpayer money go towards now?
Wars, Lobbying, Murder, Genocide, propping up puppet govts, torture etc..

But build a pool for a specific community? OH NOOOOOO

This is also a historical perspective of the Muslim natons. Some of us do know some history.

Built a pool for a specific community...a religious community...but not for other religions?? The others swim in the general mix and match??

Very wise and sage. Is this seperation of church and state. Mixing religion and state???

So politicians care about their voters now?
lol... seriously?????

Your preaching to the choir here now. Politicians care about the religion of politics. An occult concealed religion.

Does christianity demand tolerance from themselves but gives out alot?

USA is already on the other side of extremism which you have hate for.
How can you condemn one but not the other?


You guys are really making a big deal out of nothing.
Nobody if forcing you to swin at specific hours.

Do not assume for the purposes of your politic that I am a hater. Hate has become a default setting for many people to delude themselves that they have the automatic moral ethical high ground. They think that by labeling or using the word "hate" that they somehow play through unquestioned, unchallanged or with the moral ethical high ground.

Hate, Racist, Bigot, Sexist, Nazi, Hitler all fall under this onus and both political parties here in this country will deceive the public by using or misusing these words. They are part of a deliberate guilt technique or default to put people on the defensive while someone attempts to play through on the moral ethical high ground. Such drama techniques eventually become obvious once one is trained to spot them.

Guilt and drama politics does not work on me.

The USA is made up of individuals who all have opinions and views. A dissenting view does not automatically make one a "hater." This is become very popular to label others thus for cheap political drama purposes. It is intolerance. Thinking peoples know this. Some individuals and thinkers actually put Ligiht on it as well.

as to this...

Nobody if forcing you to swin at specific hours.

No one but the religion of these people is forcing them to swim or not swim in the public pool. Do not attempt by logic and reason to put this onus on others. It will only be seen by thinking peoples to be bogus....unless you are successful in foisting on others drama or guilt politics.

Guilt politics and drama techiques do not work on me.

No problem with them practicing their religion or beliefs as long as they do not conflict with the customs and laws of the host country. But do not transfer the blame and guilt onto the public paying for the pool while others default through on exclusivity while not allowing others exclusivity or they are racists, haters or whatever other onus one tries by logic and reason to put onto the host peoples.

It is poor politic once Light is put upon it. It can only succeed by guilt conditioning and default/drama techniques.

My sympathys go out to many of the British peoples. They are loosing thier country and customs by way of thier own elected government.
They now have a government which no longer represents the British sense of fairness or custom...but is selective for the purpose of that which is not British...but of the world...and the world system.

Thanks,
Orangetom









[edit on 17-8-2009 by orangetom1999]