dhimmitude in UK......Or why "PC" is going to kill us all one day.....

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hillbilly

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2003
Messages
3,165
Location
Iowa
http://finance.news.com.au/story/0,10166,17019370-31037,00.html



Piggy banks banned on Muslim fears
From: Agence France-Presse
October 24, 2005

BRITISH banks are banning piggy banks because they may offend some Muslims.

Halifax and NatWest banks have led the move to scrap the time-honoured symbol of saving from being given to children or used in their advertising, the Daily Express/Daily Star group reported today.
Muslims do not eat pork, as Islamic culture deems the pig to be an impure animal.

Salim Mulla, secretary of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, backed the bank move.

"This is a sensitive issue and I think the banks are simply being courteous to their customers," he said.

However, the move brought accusations of political correctness gone mad from critics.

"The next thing we will be banning Christmas trees and cribs and the logical result of that process is a bland uniformity," the Dean of Blackburn, Reverend Christopher Armstrong, said.
"We should learn to celebrate our difference, not be fearful of them."

Khalid Mahmoud, the Labour MP for a Birmingham seat and one of four Muslim MPs in Britain, also criticised the piggy-bank ban.

"We live in a multicultural society and the traditions and symbols of one community should not be obliterated just to accommodate another," Mr Mahmoud said.

"I doubt many Muslims would be seriously offended by piggy banks."
 
"I doubt many Muslims would be seriously offended by piggy banks."
Click to expand...
Right on! Those who cry most about racism (atleast here) are not the "victims", but more likely white, middle class, usually members of the Swedish Green Party, the Leftist Party, or the Social Democrats. Go figure. Someone got terribly upset about Astrid Lindgren books! Why? Well, she uses a word thats deemed not-PC...They openly call the books racist! :banghead:
 
Unarmed shooter said:
Right on! Those who cry most about racism (atleast here) are not the "victims", but more likely white, middle class, usually members of the Swedish Green Party, the Leftist Party, or the Social Democrats. Go figure. Someone got terribly upset about Astrid Lindgren books! Why? Well, she uses a word thats deemed not-PC...They openly call the books racist! :banghead:
Click to expand...
we have those same self-loathing white people here as well.:confused:
 
Oleg Volk said:
And which word did Lindgren use!? I liked her books, though I didn't find all of them available in English.
Click to expand...
"Neger".(negro). Used in the books about Pippi Longstocking. The Center Against Racism reacted, and made a biiiiiig fool out of themselves (again, they had done it previously this year). Thing is, it has never been used in a derogatory manner, as far as I know.
 
Soothing the muslim masses

Guess they will have to get rid of all the actual pigs from the country too. Think how traumatized they would be if they had to drive by a hog farm. Or go into a grocery store that sold (gasp) bangers. Or see a pig on TV. Or have to actually share the island with some one that is an infidel. Come on all you sensitive Brits, just get out and let the true ones have the place. They deserve it. If you don't stand up for yourselves, you don't deserve it.
 
Muslims do not eat pork, as Islamic culture deems the pig to be an impure animal.
Click to expand...
So what does eating pork have to do with dropping coins in a ceramic pig? Did they think about this at all?
BRITISH banks are banning piggy banks because they may offend some Muslims.
Click to expand...
This is the thing that annoys me to no end. Maybe, just maybe if someone is actually offended, you could let them tell you so before doing something this ludicrous! I wonder how many non-Muslims they've offended with this move.

Rick
 
The use of technically accurate descriptive words, that have existed for decades or centuries, should not constitute racism, ethnicism, or "hate" in any sense. Caucasian, Negro, Hispanic, Asian, etc., should never be construed as offensive. Alternative words, such as "whitey", "******", "spic", "chink", etc., that were devised as derogatory words, have no purpose other than stirring up hate and dissention. People that use these alternative words to refer to people they disagree with, are appealing to the most base instincts of human emotion and thoughtlessness.

To deliberately use the race/ethnic ploy in an argument is to admit that there is no valid reason or logic to support the position of the user, and the threat of violence that is implied by the use of this method is morally indefensible.

The typical use of the race argument, is that a racist accuses a non-racist of speaking racist thoughts or performing racist actions. The use of racism to promote 'Victimization and Entitlement' proposals is rampant in society today. That is how we came up with race/ethnic based quotas for hiring and admission to schools. The "victims" claim superior rights on the basis of something that has nothing to do with actual damages they have incurred, and damages that have not been caused by the people having rights displaced. These "Affirmative Action" methods are nothing less than reverse discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity. The concept of "reparations" for past wrongs is also being used to promote race/ethnicity as a superior basis for rights; people that suffered no direct harm are expecting people that have done no harm to them to provide them entitlements and a free ride through life, because of something that happened to their Great-Great-Great-Grandparents.

Discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity is not a moral and ethical action, regardless of its legality; it does not matter whether the discrimination is for one group, or against one group, it displaces the use of merit in determining an outcome.

I do not believe we should pass laws that give special consideration to any group on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion (or lack of religion), sexual orientation, etc.

To deprive anyone of their culture because of someone else's culture is discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity. Let each culture respect the other culture, unless there is a direct threat of violence between the cultures, in which case the cultures should be voluntarily separated, but maintain equal rights relative to other cultures. If violence is used in an attempt to gain superiority of rights, I believe that defense of self and family (even community) is a duty of each individual.

I don't expect people to force me to worship in their prescribed manner, and I don't expect to force anyone else to worship in the manner I do. Whether someone worships at a church, a temple, a mosque, a synagogue, or a house should be their choice, without threat of violence. I don't expect to be forced to wear certain types of clothing, nor I to force others to wear my clothing type. I don't expect the choice of foods to be forced on anyone either, and that shouldn't affect the right to produce and market (advertise) foods in a free society.

Those that use the race/ethnic discrimination factor, deserve to be ostracized by the rest of society, because they deliberately invoke violence as a way to achieve their goals.
 
they can ban all the piggy banks and all the impure animals they want

me...

Pass the pork chops with a side of bottom dwelling scaleless fish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
PC madness
Replies
7
Views
707
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top