The one you called an idiot doesn't appreciate Pat's humour.
It's in the eye of the beholder, and you don't like the kind of humour that is insulting to you.
I still dont know what "humour" you are referring to, and I dont remember any insults coming my way.
You trust someone else's judgement better than your own?
Sometimes, yes. Do you trust some text from a book that was written long after JC had died, and think that is better than your own, its a fairytale - and many better ones have been written.
I'm not a great speaker either but I will form my own opinion.
No you wont, your opinion would be affected by your brainwashing.
Freedom of thought: anyone can have their own thoughts. No one is harmed, insulted or damaged by thought of another human.
Unless you "think" that you have freedom of thought, but your brainwashing has its roots so deep in your psyche that you really dont have the freedom of thought.
I think freedom of speech should have certain ground rules like respect.
I respect your religion about as much as I do the choice of your PC components - and no more than that - religion does not require more than the bare minimum of respect.
But once I threw them overboard, you asked if I were drunk and suggested I edited the crap out next morning.
All of a sudden, you didn't seem to like freedom of speech that much anymore.
I was just trying to be civil, otherwise anyone who reads that post will just assume that you had hit the bottle, so I gave you the option to remove that post, and for me to remove the quote of your post so that people dont think that you were just being silly (or drunk) - I was doing it for your benefit not mine.
And yes freedom of speech has not suddenly been dropped by me, we are both speaking (typing/reading) freely.
Freedom of identity: shall I just kick this one in? The word burqa has already been mentioned, you can fill in the gap.
If someone choses to cover their entire face from everyone but their husband (those poor children are included), and they are not hideously ugly, or muslim, or brought up by muslims, or married to a muslim then yes. Otherwise no, they dont have an identity, they have had an identity stamped upon them.
So, it's funny if other people get ridiculed, but it's not funny if you are ridiculed?
Ridicule me, you can, its called freedom of speech (within the rules of the forum of course).
Ofcourse the issue is not if it's funny or not. The real issue is respect, and what lack of it does to one's feelings.
Religion does not deserve any special level of respect, I respect dogs who are busting to take a crap, but hold it in until they get to the forest before releasing the crap, more than I do religion - at least the dog is smart.
Thats a very relaxed answer. Actually its not an answer at all.
Culture rubs off on eachother. The muslims who are in parliament here, the writers, stand up comedians, the more intellectual part came here for a reason. Some have been oppressed and actually welcome Western culture. Most of them practice Islam in a very modest way.
And I respect them for keeping their religion to themselves, but if (when) they try to change more laws that discriminate against others then they will lose every scrap of respect I have for them currently.
In order to change law to (or shift it towards) Sharia law, they would have to be quite religious.
There are two things worth mentioning: muslim population here is only 5%, so even if all these were very strict practitioners, they will never get a majority to push legislation. [Shock fact: in UK, muslims form 2.7% of total population]
And two: the muslims in parliament push integration and are actively looking for solutions in order to get this done.
By these two (I suspect there are more) it's simply not possible for muslims to impose Sharia law here, nor do they want to.
Shock Fact: You are very wrong.
Sharia law is here in the UK right now, and what it covers (divorce, and low level home issues) is fully backed by UK law. What that means is that during a divorce for example a womans worth is half that of the man.
That is wrong, and that is being imposed upon muslim women, and it is now totally legal in the UK.
Freedom of religion is a basic right in most, if not all Western countries. Discrimination based on one's religion is prohibited in most, if not all Western countries.
It's not a law of the last decade or so, just to not offend muslims.
There is now very little difference between freedom of speech, and freedom of speech when talking about religion. Simply put, laws have been tweaked and nudged so that the freedom of speech is now worth less when talking about religion. And I belive that freedom of speech is worth significantly more than freedom of religion (which I dont disagree with). Also there is a large difference between discrimination against a religion vs freedom of religion.
My dislike of people covering their faces in public has nothing to do with religion, simply because muslim women who are forced to cover their faces in public do so because of the threat of violence, and because they have been brainwashed - covering a woman totally is not in the Quran anywhere, therefore it has nothing to do with Islam, therefore anyone can say anything they want about it.
But why cant I stand up and say that Islam is an intollerant hate-filled religion who's very words dictate to the followers of that sick book that they must kill all homosexuals, and jews, and must either convert, enslave or kill everyone all infidels (everyone else). Its true, but some people are trying to change the laws in some countries so that you cant say that.
You can preach hate, but you cant preach against hate - what a load of bullshit. The simple message of Fitna was for Muslims to remove all of those messages of hate and violence in Quran, and practice the religion that is left in the book - not the one that tells its followers to kill people by the million (it will be a much shorter book, likewise if you did the same to the bible, but it wouldnt be filled full of hate).
Free speech is the only non-violent answer to violence, and some people dont want you to even have that.
That was the word I was looking for a few posts back.
Wilders was suggesting "tea towel taxes" (damn, it even alliterates in English).
Would potato sack be less offensive, bedsheet perhaps.? But that is beside the point, you havent mentioned those hate mongering twats who have tried to hide behind man-made textile cloth designed in various patterns and colours to suit their taste, whilst threatening millions with mass murder. What about those sick people, does it make taht all OK because I used the phrase "tea towel".?????
Supporting a football team to show allegiance to a country? Really...
It is one of the numerous signs of alliegance, and that is undeniable (also swap the word football for anything else that is competetive and pitted against other nations).
On Top Gear, the 3 were looking for a single British Leyland car that was built properly. They couldn't really find one. They must simply hate where they live, but rumours don't suggest they are moving to Italy.
An interesting point with a few flaws, note they werent testing Rolls Royce cars. And they would even be able to compare it to a Fiat of the same age as they would be an orange pile of rust on the ground by now. So do they really hate where they live, I dont think so, and I do believe that your point does not prove anything except that British Leyland made some really crap cars.
Do you expect all immigrants to like marmite too?
You must have missed the advertising campaign. I expect aussies to hate Marmite and love Vegimite, and vice versa (for all of those persons who dont land in the hate camp). It could be used as a symbol of loyalty for both contries, thanks for pointing that out
In the end, or let's say in 50 years time, how do you see England?
With a smaller land mass, with an even higher population, and even older population, and %15+ muslim population, with all of the loss of freedoms and morality that will be likely to ensue.
I can think of 1 more freedom to your holy trinity: freedom to live where you want. Maybe this is a utopia, maybe you don't agree that it is a freedom everyone should have.
I think that it is a ridiculous idea, that has been poorly thought out, otherwise a lot of people would simply move in with the Pope in his huge palace.
The question much more important than "how can we hold on to the culture we have" (which, again, has been dynamic throughout our history, in every country) is:
"how do we go about living with eachother".
There is only one way, slow, careful integration without changing where you now live to be the same as where you came from. Its the people who are moving to a new place that have to change, not the people who already live there, not the rules, laws, freedoms, and customs that need to change.
Again I will say that I have no problem with people coming here to live, work, and breed, but they need to become more like us, and fit into what already exists rather than the other way round.
If I went to Saudi Arabia, and I was female I would expect to have to cover myself all of the time (protection against rape, stoning and murder), I expect that someone who comes here from saudi arabia fits in to our society (not likely to be raped, and stoned to death for not covering herself up), but some dont, and I find it offensive that they think our country is as vile and disgusting as theirs - if they didnt they would not be covering themselves - they would look normal, and be treated as normal - but they are simply excluding themselves from society.