NationStates Jolt Archive

All what's needed is users and postings.

There's still a virtual user base: the 'old' users and even 'new' users of the NSG new forum.

Interesting postings would attract people, not only NSG people, but also 'virgin' people.

However, I've a question: Are there still active mods here?

not NS mods, no.

not NS mods, no.

Yeah, I know about the NS mods, but others?

And how active are they?

So are you both banned at the moment?

So are you both banned at the moment?

Banned? When? Where?

So are you both banned at the moment?

DoS.

Also hi, haven't seen you in ages.

Anyone knows an e-mail address of the owner of this forum?

Bottom right - contact us.

HK, I have a better idea, why don't you fuck off, learn some English, get an education, then come back. Or just stay away. Either is good.

HK, I have a better idea, why don't you fuck off, learn some English, get an education, then come back. Or just stay away. Either is good.

When I see your face, I'm proud about my ass.

When I see your face, I'm proud about my ass.

See that's very amusing, as you're an overweight male in his 50s who pretends he is a woman, and attempts to do this by posting badly photoshopped pictures of ugly women. So yeah, slightly ironic coming from you.

See that's very amusing, as you're an overweight male in his 50s who pretends he is a woman, and attempts to do this by posting badly photoshopped pictures of ugly woman. So yeah, slightly ironic coming from you.

That could make sense. But I’m still proud about my overweight 50 year old ass when I see your face.

Oh, and btw and it's women, not woman.

But I’m still proud about my overweight 50 year old ass when I see your face.

Seeing as you've never seen my face, you can fuck right off.

Seeing as you've never seen my face, you can fuck right off.

We all know you're fucking ugly, miss Adunabar.

Hey, does the immigration police know you hang a lot around here?

Miss?

We all know you're fucking ugly, miss Adunabar.

Hey, does the immigration police know you hang a lot around here?

Well you've already guessed my sex wrong, which shows you're just as clueless about my appearance as you are about everything else.

pg baby

Well you've already guessed my sex wrong, which shows you're just as clueless about my appearance as you are about everything else.

You're constantly screaming and acting hysterical. And you do cry a lot.

So you are a woman. An ugly woman, but still a woman.

You're constantly screaming and acting hysterical. And you do cry a lot.

So you are a woman. An ugly woman, but still a woman.

With misogynist attitudes like that, I guess you don't hate Islam for its values, but rather because immigration means there are more SUPER DUPER SCARY BROWN PEOPLE around your area who talk funny and everything.

Has your ban ended yet? I think the other NSG really needs some more poorly argued copy-paste Muslim panic.

It is sadly ironic that despite declining numbers, what this forum needs most is not more people, but rather a purge of the chronically idiotic.

With misogynist attitudes like that, I guess you don't hate Islam for its values, but rather because immigration means there are more SUPER DUPER SCARY BROWN PEOPLE around your area who talk funny and everything.

Has your ban ended yet? I think the other NSG really needs some more poorly argued copy-paste Muslim panic.

It is sadly ironic that despite declining numbers, what this forum needs most is not more people, but rather a purge of the chronically idiotic.

I don't hate Islam for its values. I don't hate Islam. I don't hate immigrants.

But I don't like certain parts of Islam. Do you like all of it?

And I don't like uncontrolled mass immigration. Do you like all of it?

I don't hate Islam for its values. I don't hate Islam. I don't hate immigrants.
You most certainly do, you xenophobic bigot. It is clear from your posts that you hate immigrants, hate muslims, and hate women too. Your hatred of women is made obvious by the fact that you don't trust them to make decisions for themselves and use the term "Woman" as a pejorative.

Anything different must be bad, I guess...

You are scum, of the uneducated kind, and it's clear that either NSG forum will only be improved by your absence.

I don't hate Islam for its values. I don't hate Islam. I don't hate immigrants.

But I don't like certain parts of Islam. Do you like all of it?

And I don't like uncontrolled mass immigration. Do you like all of it?

I don't like certain parts of pretty much every religion. In fact, there are very few organizations, belief-systems, or concepts that I like unreservedly.

Not liking "all of it" doesn't explain the constant stream of piss-poor copy/paste anti-Islam and anti-immigration shite you regularly excrete over the forum.

But do you know what would explain this behaviour? An obsessional hatred of Islam and immigrants, along with a complete inability to argue the points yourself.

Try again.

I figured this forum was just for people waiting out a ban.......

You most certainly do, you xenophobic bigot. It is clear from your posts that you hate immigrants, hate muslims, and hate women too. Your hatred of women is made obvious by the fact that you don't trust them to make decisions for themselves and use the term "Woman" as a pejorative.

Anything different must be bad, I guess...

You are scum, of the uneducated kind, and it's clear that either NSG forum will only be improved by your absence.

Show me where I hate Muslims, immigrants or women. :)

I don't like certain parts of pretty much every religion. In fact, there are very few organizations, belief-systems, or concepts that I like unreservedly.

Not liking "all of it" doesn't explain the constant stream of piss-poor copy/paste anti-Islam and anti-immigration shite you regularly excrete over the forum.

But do you know what would explain this behaviour? An obsessional hatred of Islam and immigrants, along with a complete inability to argue the points yourself.

Try again.

So, you don't like some aspects of uncontrolled mass immigration and Islam. But when I do that then I'm a xenophobe? :)

I figured this forum was just for people waiting out a ban.......

I agree. And I feel this is sad.

The 'new' forum isn't like this was.

So, you don't like some aspects of uncontrolled mass immigration and Islam. But when I do that then I'm a xenophobe? :)

I made it very clear what the distinction is which provides evidence that out of the two of us only one, you, is xenophobic.

Are you really that fucking stupid that you don't get it?

I suspect that you're deliberately ignoring it since you have no answer.

Let me restate for you.

The difference is, you do practically nothing else but copy-paste spam about Muslims. Someone who simply "didn't like all of it", would not harp on about the same topic again and again, since, quite obviously, there's a whole bunch of things the average person doesn't like entirely.

The fact that by far the most common topic you post is anti-Muslim and anti-immigration panic articles suggests that you don't simply have some reservations about Islam and immigration, but that you're a hateful bigot.

It is sadly ironic that despite declining numbers, what this forum needs most is not more people, but rather a purge of the chronically idiotic.

Bye then.

I made it very clear what the distinction is which provides evidence that out of the two of us only one, you, is xenophobic.

Are you really that fucking stupid that you don't get it?

I suspect that you're deliberately ignoring it since you have no answer.

Let me restate for you.

The difference is, you do practically nothing else but copy-paste spam about Muslims. Someone who simply "didn't like all of it", would not harp on about the same topic again and again, since, quite obviously, there's a whole bunch of things the average person doesn't like entirely.

The fact that by far the most common topic you post is anti-Muslim and anti-immigration panic articles suggests that you don't simply have some reservations about Islam and immigration, but that you're a hateful bigot.

Consider yourself as a liar.

I created maybe 10 threads containing critique on Islam or Muslims.

I created over 250 threads...

But we are going off topic, let us create a topic about this issue. Maybe you'll understand better who I am. :)

Consider yourself as a liar.

I created maybe 10 threads containing critique on Islam or Muslims.

I created over 250 threads...

But we are going off topic, let us create a topic about this issue. Maybe you'll understand better who I am. :)

Actually, you created 0 threads with your own critique on Islam or Muslims. Instead you copied and pasted them all from other sites and hid behind other people's worlds, unable to argue your case yourself.

Those other threads? Your contributions have hardly been impressive there either.

No thanks. I don't think we need a thread to discover the 'truth' about you.

A lazy, intellectually bankrupt bigot unwilling to admit who he really is, who has never once managed to convincingly defend a single point he's made.

Please, just leave. No one wants you here. The Nationstates forums are for political discussion, not for gibbering idiots without a village to pester.

Actually, you created 0 threads with your own critique on Islam or Muslims. Instead you copied and pasted them all from other sites and hid behind other people's worlds, unable to argue your case yourself.

Those other threads? Your contributions have hardly been impressive there either.

No thanks. I don't think we need a thread to discover the 'truth' about you.

A lazy, intellectually bankrupt bigot unwilling to admit who he really is, who has never once managed to convincingly defend a single point he's made.

Please, just leave. No one wants you here. The Nationstates forums are for political discussion, not for gibbering idiots without a village to pester.

Again a lie. By instance, I created this one:

Islam of the Veil.

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=12196&start=0&hilit=Islam+of+the+veil

So do you have other arguments as lies and weak flames?

Show me where I hate Muslims, immigrants or women. :)

Sure, no problem.

Click this link (http://www.nationstates.net), go to the forum, and search for any posts made by Hairless Kitten 2.

It's there, in plain sight. To speed things up, let me suggest you go straight to any thread about veils, where you'll find a certain someone suggesting that women are unable to think for themselves, that immigrants are evil, and admitting intolerance towards muslims in general.

You're not worth my time, so I won't do the search for you.

Sure, no problem.

Click this link (http://www.nationstates.net), go to the forum, and search for any posts made by Hairless Kitten 2.

It's there, in plain sight. To speed things up, let me suggest you go straight to any thread about veils, where you'll find a certain someone suggesting that women are unable to think for themselves, that immigrants are evil, and admitting intolerance towards muslims in general.

You're not worth my time, so I won't do the search for you.

The one that is making a statement, does have to provide the proof.

Since you are not able to provide the proof, your argument has no value.

Add this with your 2 previous lies in this thread alone and we all know what kind of sick creature you are... :)

Add this with your 2 previous lies in this thread alone and we all know what kind of sick creature you are... :)


See, I find it funny when you of all people call someone else sick. It's so ironic it's practically made out of rust.

Miss?
It might be a put-down.

I figured this forum was just for people waiting out a ban.......
I have never had a ban.

Actually, you created 0 threads with your own critique on Islam or Muslims. Instead you copied and pasted them all from other sites and hid behind other people's worlds, unable to argue your case yourself.

Those other threads? Your contributions have hardly been impressive there either.

No thanks. I don't think we need a thread to discover the 'truth' about you.

A lazy, intellectually bankrupt bigot unwilling to admit who he really is, who has never once managed to convincingly defend a single point he's made.

Please, just leave. No one wants you here. The Nationstates forums are for political discussion, not for gibbering idiots without a village to pester.
So, maybe I should go away as well? I don't want to because I don't have to. I am not a child anymore.

Sure, no problem.

Click this link (http://www.nationstates.net), go to the forum, and search for any posts made by Hairless Kitten 2.

It's there, in plain sight. To speed things up, let me suggest you go straight to any thread about veils, where you'll find a certain someone suggesting that women are unable to think for themselves, that immigrants are evil, and admitting intolerance towards muslims in general.

You're not worth my time, so I won't do the search for you.
Don't talk to the Sysphinx or however you spell that (almost) hairless breed of cat. HK is not worth talking to, being a known troll.

The one that is making a statement, does have to provide the proof.

Since you are not able to provide the proof, your argument has no value.
Yeah, since this is an active debate forum and all, and since we're debating how big an asshole you really are...

I know what you are, and you know it too. Just look at your own posts - like where you refuse to believe that I've met any young muslim males because I said I haven't met anyone who would pressure muslim women into wearing veils and being submissive to men.

Add this with your 2 previous lies in this thread alone and we all know what kind of sick creature you are... :)
They are only uncomfortable truths, I'm afraid. Be careful when you look into the mirror.

And if I'm a "sick creature" for pointing out your moronic bigotry and tasteless xenophobia, why, it's a badge I'll wear proudly.

Don't talk to the Sysphinx or however you spell that (almost) hairless breed of cat. HK is not worth talking to, being a known troll.

You are, in fact, very right indeed. And well behaved.

I have said my piece, and I'll let HK stew in his own filth under the bridge.

They are only uncomfortable truths, I'm afraid. Be careful when you look into the mirror.

And if I'm a "sick creature" for pointing out your moronic bigotry and tasteless xenophobia, why, it's a badge I'll wear proudly.

I really am in love with you.

Show me where I hate Muslims, immigrants or women. :)

You're not even a good troll. It's only a couple posts earlier when you insult women and use woman as an insult.

You what is almost universally true of the xenophobes. They're weak. Most of them only confront immigrants if they're bigger or outnumbered or hidden on the internet. Most of them don't have the balls to admit they're actually xenophobic. Instead, like you, they cower and lie every time someone calls them out on their beliefs.

Look, maybe you think you make excellent points in your threads. It's fair to say that you might think that. But you know, we know, everyone knows, that you're obsessively hateful toward women, Islam and immigrants. Seriously, why be so weak as to be unable to admit it?

What are you afraid of? It's not like we're gonna come to your house and kick your ass. Shoot your load. No one's gonna cry rape.

I really am in love with you.

How romantic. :)

You're not even a good troll. It's only a couple posts earlier when you insult women and use woman as an insult.

You what is almost universally true of the xenophobes. They're weak. Most of them only confront immigrants if they're bigger or outnumbered or hidden on the internet. Most of them don't have the balls to admit they're actually xenophobic. Instead, like you, they cower and lie every time someone calls them out on their beliefs.

Look, maybe you think you make excellent points in your threads. It's fair to say that you might think that. But you know, we know, everyone knows, that you're obsessively hateful toward women, Islam and immigrants. Seriously, why be so weak as to be unable to admit it?

What are you afraid of? It's not like we're gonna come to your house and kick your ass. Shoot your load. No one's gonna cry rape.

Why should I admit that I'm something I am not?

Labelling people is so easy and is also a matter of context.

People that have critique on women repression in the world of Christianity are considered as liberal and progressive.

People that have critique on women repression in the world of Islam are considered as xenophobe and Islamophobe. :)

People that have critique on women repression in the world of Islam are considered as xenophobe and Islamophobe. :)

No, people like you who want to repress women by restricting the clothing choices they feel their religion necessitates are considered to be xenophobic and Islamophobic.

The people who argue about your idiocy would just as soon argue against the laws in those countries which require women to submit to such things.

No, people like you who want to repress women by restricting the clothing choices they feel their religion necessitates are considered to be xenophobic and Islamophobic.

The people who argue about your idiocy would just as soon argue against the laws in those countries which require women to submit to such things.

It is such a matter of idiocy that it's actual law in Belgium, Germany, France, Spain, Turkey, Tunisia and so many other countries. At least we don't cut hands, aren't we? :) If you come to here, adapt to our standards. I'll promise that I'll do the same when I come to your place. It's hilarious and nice to see that people like to link veiled women with women freedom.

Why should I admit that I'm something I am not?

Labelling people is so easy and is also a matter of context.

People that have critique on women repression in the world of Christianity are considered as liberal and progressive.

People that have critique on women repression in the world of Islam are considered as xenophobe and Islamophobe. :)

Right, dude, totally believable. It doesn't give you away when you're slinging around mysogyny while claiming you don't hate women. I mean, we both know you're doing it. And you're just pretending you aren't.

So there are only two explanations. You're seriously brain-damaged. Or you're lying. I'm thinking it's the latter, but if you want to argue that your not aware that you're saying hateful things about women, I'll accept that just realize that you're are that brain-damaged.

You can have it any way you like, but I'm not sure why you think it's fun to convince everyone you have some sort of disability.

Right, dude, totally believable. It doesn't give you away when you're slinging around mysogyny while claiming you don't hate women. I mean, we both know you're doing it. And you're just pretending you aren't.

So there are only two explanations. You're seriously brain-damaged. Or you're lying. I'm thinking it's the latter, but if you want to argue that your not aware that you're saying hateful things about women, I'll accept that just realize that you're are that brain-damaged.

You can have it any way you like, but I'm not sure why you think it's fun to convince everyone you have some sort of disability.

Who's having a disorder?

Doctors, psychiatrists or neurologists, etc. don't do diagnoses over the internet and certainly not by using a few postings. It's not empirical.

So your are not a doctor, a psychiatrist or a neurologist.
However, you're still doing diagnoses while you're not qualified.
Thus you pretend you are someone else.

You pretend you're a doctor, a psychiatrist or a neurologist and there's more...you're doing diagnoses over the internet just by using a few postings!

So who's having a disorder?

WAHAHAHA! :)

Who's having a disorder?

Doctors, psychiatrists or neurologists, etc. don't do diagnoses over the internet and certainly not by using a few postings. It's not empirical.

So your are not a doctor, a psychiatrist or a neurologist.
However, you're still doing diagnoses while you're not qualified.
Thus you pretend you are someone else.

You pretend you're a doctor, a psychiatrist or a neurologist and there's more...you're doing diagnoses over the internet just by using a few postings!

So who's having a disorder?

WAHAHAHA! :)

As I said, I'm willing to believe it's not brain-damage and that you can actually form thoughts and sentences and are just taking the piss, but you're claiming it can't be that you're full of shit, so it has to be the former. There really are no other options. And close you're gown. No one wants to see your sorry ass.

As I said, I'm willing to believe it's not brain-damage and that you can actually form thoughts and sentences and are just taking the piss, but you're claiming it can't be that you're full of shit, so it has to be the former. There really are no other options. And close you're gown. No one wants to see your sorry ass.

Maybe you should get a life, instead of moaning about la HK.

So there are only two explanations. You're seriously brain-damaged. Or you're lying. I'm thinking it's the latter, but if you want to argue that your not aware that you're saying hateful things about women, I'll accept that just realize that you're are that brain-damaged.

I think "stupid" just about covers it, really.

Not stupid enough to be brain-damaged, not really smart enough to lie properly. The kind of small-minded, mean-spirited person who mainly manifests himself in your life by being the guy who goes to great lengths to cut in front of you in the queue at the supermarket, or who tailgates and leans on his horn in traffic and has a "How's my driving? Call 1-800-EAT-SHIT" sticker on the back of his car. The kind of person who thinks everyone claiming to have an IQ over 100 is lying because how can you possibly get more than 100% on a test? The moderately obstructive office worker who doesn't know anything, nobody told him anything, and he doesn't know anyone who does know anything. I'm sure we all have to interact with thousands of them on a daily basis.

Also, hai thar NSG.

It is sadly ironic that despite declining numbers, what this forum needs most is not more people, but rather a purge of the chronically idiotic.

How do you propose we do that? I suspect we'll tire of relentless mocking well before they tire of being mocked, and I'm not sure there are many other viable means. Reasonable discussion definitely won't work, and there aren't any mods to ban them either.

I think "stupid" just about covers it, really.

Not stupid enough to be brain-damaged, not really smart enough to lie properly. The kind of small-minded, mean-spirited person who mainly manifests himself in your life by being the guy who goes to great lengths to cut in front of you in the queue at the supermarket, or who tailgates and leans on his horn in traffic and has a "How's my driving? Call 1-800-EAT-SHIT" sticker on the back of his car. The kind of person who thinks everyone claiming to have an IQ over 100 is lying because how can you possibly get more than 100% on a test? The moderately obstructive office worker who doesn't know anything, nobody told him anything, and he doesn't know anyone who does know anything. I'm sure we all have to interact with thousands of them on a daily basis.

Also, hai thar NSG.

It's indeed very smart to create a profile from people you don't know, you didn't meet or you didn't talk with.

About your supermarket queue, I'm the person that looks at the amount of people in the queue and the amount of goods in their baskets. This will determine which queue I will take. Usually, if not always, I will leave the supermarket earlier than you.

The kind of person who thinks everyone claiming to have an IQ over 100 is lying because how can you possibly get more than 100% on a test? .

loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool, too funny.

About your supermarket queue, I'm the person that looks at the amount of people in the queue and the amount of goods in their baskets. This will determine which queue I will take. Usually, if not always, I will leave the supermarket earlier than you.

You must be so proud of your talnt.

It is such a matter of idiocy that it's actual law in Belgium, Germany, France, Spain, Turkey, Tunisia and so many other countries.

Yes, which means that those countries are acting a lot like the countries they say they are better than.

At least we don't cut hands, aren't we? :)

"Oh, we don't do the worst things, so surely we're perfect!" So, if a country doesn't cut off anyone's hands, but it does tell women how to dress, it can be just as good as a bunch of European countries!

If you come to here, adapt to our standards. I'll promise that I'll do the same when I come to your place.

Ok, just don't pretend that your country is enlightened or that it values personal freedom.

It's hilarious and nice to see that people like to link veiled women with women freedom.

What do you call it when a woman cannot choose how to dress and the government decides instead?

Oh yeah, you like to pretend that women are fragile little creatures who must be protected from our own decisions, because we won't make good ones. Clearly, the government should do that for us....

Yes, which means that those countries are acting a lot like the countries they say they are better than.



"Oh, we don't do the worst things, so surely we're perfect!" So, if a country doesn't cut off anyone's hands, but it does tell women how to dress, it can be just as good as a bunch of European countries!



Ok, just don't pretend that your country is enlightened or that it values personal freedom.



What do you call it when a woman cannot choose how to dress and the government decides instead?

Oh yeah, you like to pretend that women are fragile little creatures who must be protected from our own decisions, because we won't make good ones. Clearly, the government should do that for us....

Yes, our government should do that for us. Since a little minority doesn't have the dignity to understand that when you are representing our government that you have to drop your religious clothes.

And if you can't, you can always work for a company that's allowing religious expressions or you can leave the country to a 'much better' place.

Yes, our government should do that for us.

So you admit that you believe women are incapable of making good decisions for themselves, and must instead have the government do it for them?

Since a little minority doesn't have the dignity to understand that when you are representing our government that you have to drop your religious clothes.

Does your country make workers dress as scantily as possible to work for it? If not, it hasn't made everyone drop their "religious clothes". Islam is hardly the only religion that requires modest dress. What about wedding rings? Are government workers allowed to wear them? What about someone whose religion requires them to cut their hair short? Will you force them to grow it out long before they can work for the government? If the opposite is true, and they are not supposed to cut their hair, will you make them cut it to work for the government?

Meanwhile, don't pretend it is just government workers who aren't allowed to dress as they please in these countries.

So you admit that you believe women are incapable of making good decisions for themselves, and must instead have the government do it for them?



Does your country make workers dress as scantily as possible to work for it? If not, it hasn't made everyone drop their "religious clothes". Islam is hardly the only religion that requires modest dress. What about wedding rings? Are government workers allowed to wear them? What about someone whose religion requires them to cut their hair short? Will you force them to grow it out long before they can work for the government? If the opposite is true, and they are not supposed to cut their hair, will you make them cut it to work for the government?

Meanwhile, don't pretend it is just government workers who aren't allowed to dress as they please in these countries.

Sure. You're one of those guys who like to be served by a government clerk in a Nazi costume, no? Or would you like police officers in a KKK clan suit?

Sure. You're one of those guys who like to be served by a government clerk in a Nazi costume, no? Or would you like police officers in a KKK clan suit?

No, I wouldn't be ok with either of those things because they show a clear bias against certain citizens. A Jewish, black, or gay citizen could never expect to be treated fairly by such persons.

But I would have no problem being served by a government clerk who had her hair covered, just as I would have no problem being served by a clerk in a long skirt or by a clerk wearing a wedding ring.

Now, answer my questions. Do you think a person who had a religious wedding should be forced to remove his wedding ring in order to work for the government? Do you think a person who believes God does not want him to grow his hair out should be made to do so in order to work for the government? Do you think a person who believes he should not cut his hair should be made to do so in order to work for the government? Do you think a woman whose standard of modesty mandates that she must cover her knees should be forced to uncover them in order to work for the government?

If there were mods here, I bet this thread would be or get locked

Yes, our government should [make decisions] for [women].

Then maybe your government should decide you should stop posting here, since you are obviously quite incapable of deciding for yourself.

Then maybe your government should decide you should stop posting here, since you are obviously quite incapable of deciding for yourself.

I smell straw man flesh. Yes, it is straw man.

If there were mods here, I bet this thread would be or get locked

Fortunately, there aren't. That's probably part of the reason we still post here, in fact.

Fortunately, there aren't. That's probably part of the reason we still post here, in fact.
There are people here who were banned over there. Is that what you mean?

I smell straw man flesh. Yes, it is straw man.

Then please tell how forbidding women from wearing veils is not making a (clothing) decision for them?

Then please tell how forbidding women from wearing veils is not making a (clothing) decision for them?

Can you go naked all the time? At work, at school, etc...

No, you can't.

It seems that your society is making clothing decisions for you too.

If it is law in a country, which it is in several countries, that you can't wear a veil while doing a government task, then you adjust yourself to that law or you don't start working for the government.

I like it that my government people are neutral, in deeds and appearance. Maybe you don't. But that is having limits too. Suppose you're gay. Would you like police officers walking around with badges 'I hate fags'? No, you wouldn't.

But hey, it's only a clothing decision, no?

Personally, I don't think it's wise to express your worldview all the time: it's making a society more angry and nervous. However, everyone can do what he or she wants in his or her own private time (between the borders of the law), that's including making people angry.

If you go out working, you are always limitted in your freedom. Some companies demand a suit and tie, other jobs demand an uniform, most companies if not all do not allow smoking weed at the office, etc...

But of course, you'll find ALWAYS people that don't agree and feel they are above the local rules, laws & habits.

If you are not able to adjust you to some basic requirments that are connected with some society, ask yourself if you really belong to that society. If not, maybe you have to search your luck and joy into another society.

Can you go naked all the time? At work, at school, etc...

Now who's burning straw men?

Hk, it's someone's choice if they wanna wear a veil - not yours.

Hk, it's someone's choice if they wanna wear a veil - not yours.

I don't have the power to ask anything in my society.

But my government is. However I support the idea that government people shouldn't wear any religious signs.

With misogynist attitudes like that, I guess you don't hate Islam for its values, but rather because immigration means there are more SUPER DUPER SCARY BROWN PEOPLE around your area who talk funny and everything.

Has your ban ended yet? I think the other NSG really needs some more poorly argued copy-paste Muslim panic.

It is sadly ironic that despite declining numbers, what this forum needs most is not more people, but rather a purge of the chronically idiotic.

i'm fine with super duper scary brown people who don't explode when they reach their programmed site... why are they running away from their homelands if everything is hunky dory?

i'm fine with super duper scary brown people who don't explode when they reach their programmed site... why are they running away from their homelands if everything is hunky dory?
everyone is brown-skinned according to science

I don't have the power to ask anything in my society.

But my government is. However I support the idea that government people shouldn't wear any religious signs.

Well, I support religious freedom.

Well, I support religious freedom.

Not in government, surely?

Personally, I don't think it's wise to express your worldview all the time: it's making a society more angry and nervous.

Find me any person who dresses himself, and does not express any worldview whatsoever in doing so. I'll wait.

I don't have the power to ask anything in my society.

But my government is. However I support the idea that government people shouldn't wear any religious signs.

By your definition of "religious signs", you've got a lot more banning to do. You still haven't answered whether or not you think people should be required to remove wedding bands and come to work scantily clad if their religion requires modesty. Should men or women whose religion does not permit them to cut their hair be forced to shave their heads in order to work for the government? How are any of these "religious signs" inherently less of a problem than the particular one you've got a stick up your butt about?

Find me any person who dresses himself, and does not express any worldview whatsoever in doing so. I'll wait.



By your definition of "religious signs", you've got a lot more banning to do. You still haven't answered whether or not you think people should be required to remove wedding bands and come to work scantily clad if their religion requires modesty. Should men or women whose religion does not permit them to cut their hair be forced to shave their heads in order to work for the government? How are any of these "religious signs" inherently less of a problem than the particular one you've got a stick up your butt about?

depends on the type of job they are doing...

why would you wear a wedding band if you're a mechanic, or a machine operator? do you like losing fingers? do you want your hair caught in the chuck of a lathe and have your face ground into hamburger? guess we should discriminate against people who won't take proper safety precautions because of their religious beliefs...

If there were mods here, I bet this thread would be or get locked
If there were mods here, I can promise it'd be locked if not deleted and there'd be tons o' warnings handed out to pretty much everybody in the thread. ;)

But there's not, so it can't be, and obviously nobody's around to enforce anything.:D

But geez, if this is what an unmoderated NSG would turn into, I'll just keep taking the pounding that is moderating the active forum! :p

It's not that different than a moderated forum. The sniping on NSG may be using politer words, but the vitriol is all the same.

It's good, we don't have to censor what we say (not that I ever really did, hence why I'm here and not there)

It's good, we don't have to censor what we say (not that I ever really did, hence why I'm here and not there)

I left the 'official' NS forum, partly due the supersized censorship.

I know that some moderators are teachers, but they don't understand that a forum isn't the usual kindergarten area.

depends on the type of job they are doing...

I believe we were talking about government work. So, do you think the following should all be required to work for the government:

- Don't wear a wedding band, wedding necklace, or any other signs of being married if you had a religious wedding or have any religious views regarding marriage.
- If your religion requires you not to cut your hair, you must shave your head.
- If your religion requires you to keep your hair short, you must grow it long.
- If your religion requires modest dress, you must dress scantily (to the point that you do not feel modest).
- If your religion requires you to wear homemade clothing, you must wear store-bought clothing.

why would you wear a wedding band if you're a mechanic, or a machine operator? do you like losing fingers? do you want your hair caught in the chuck of a lathe and have your face ground into hamburger? guess we should discriminate against people who won't take proper safety precautions because of their religious beliefs...

Safety precautions are a little different than, "I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT!!! WAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!" If abiding by a given set of religious views would make someone unsafe on the job (particularly if they would be making others unsafe as well), they shouldn't take that job.

I believe we were talking about government work. So, do you think the following should all be required to work for the government:

- Don't wear a wedding band, wedding necklace, or any other signs of being married if you had a religious wedding or have any religious views regarding marriage.
- If your religion requires you not to cut your hair, you must shave your head.
- If your religion requires you to keep your hair short, you must grow it long.
- If your religion requires modest dress, you must dress scantily (to the point that you do not feel modest).
- If your religion requires you to wear homemade clothing, you must wear store-bought clothing.



Safety precautions are a little different than, "I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT!!! WAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!" If abiding by a given set of religious views would make someone unsafe on the job (particularly if they would be making others unsafe as well), they shouldn't take that job.
yeah who wants to die or get hurt on the job?

I believe we were talking about government work. So, do you think the following should all be required to work for the government:

- Don't wear a wedding band, wedding necklace, or any other signs of being married if you had a religious wedding or have any religious views regarding marriage.
- If your religion requires you not to cut your hair, you must shave your head.
- If your religion requires you to keep your hair short, you must grow it long.
- If your religion requires modest dress, you must dress scantily (to the point that you do not feel modest).
- If your religion requires you to wear homemade clothing, you must wear store-bought clothing.



Safety precautions are a little different than, "I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT!!! WAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!" If abiding by a given set of religious views would make someone unsafe on the job (particularly if they would be making others unsafe as well), they shouldn't take that job.

i don't think you should allow your religion to interfer with your interaction in society. why should we make exemptions in government for people who are practicing a religion? hi, we want you to follow these rules while you work here... are you capable of following these rules?

It's not that different than a moderated forum. The sniping on NSG may be using politer words, but the vitriol is all the same.

This is true.

I'm honestly not sure which one I prefer. Not that this one's expected to last much longer anyway, so pretty soon there wouldn't be a choice.

I suppose if more of the interesting people from old NSG were here, I'd prefer this place.

This is true.

I'm honestly not sure which one I prefer. Not that this one's expected to last much longer anyway, so pretty soon there wouldn't be a choice.

I suppose if more of the interesting people from old NSG were here, I'd prefer this place.

Like?

This is true.

I'm honestly not sure which one I prefer. Not that this one's expected to last much longer anyway, so pretty soon there wouldn't be a choice.

I suppose if more of the interesting people from old NSG were here, I'd prefer this place.
who is interesting?

Bye then.

You've no room to talk CI.

This is true.

I'm honestly not sure which one I prefer. Not that this one's expected to last much longer anyway, so pretty soon there wouldn't be a choice.

I suppose if more of the interesting people from old NSG were here, I'd prefer this place.

1. This place is still online.
2. I know from a secret source, that they will not close this forum shortly.
3. Why don't you telegram & e-mail those interesting people to tell them the Jolt bar is open again. There's even a bonus: no fucking kindergarten mods around here! :)

You've no room to talk CI.

Oh, the claws are coming out! FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT etc

You've no room to talk CI.

I meant me, dumb arse. I the stupid were purged I would go, but you clearly ail at reading comprohension.

I the stupid were purged I would go, but you clearly ail at reading comprohension.


This is possibly the most ironic sentence I've ever read. So ironic, in fact, that I reckon you're trolling.

:eek: Never. I wouldn't troll a fly.

I will not give you a SUCK MY COCK PUNISHMENT because you're fucking ugly.


This trolling's all well and good but Ardchoille's a woman, so you might wish to adjust your character accordingly.

i don't think you should allow your religion to interfer with your interaction in society.

Define "interfere". When I choose not to wear a short skirt, because I don't see it as modest dress, is that interfering with my interaction in society?

why should we make exemptions in government for people who are practicing a religion?

Who said anything about exemptions? HK said that someone should not be able to demonstrate any worldview (particularly a religious one) while working for the government. I listed a number of things about someone's appearance that might be due to their religion. My question was whether or not we should target these things as being against the rules because they are an expression of religion.

So, tell me, do you think the following should be forced if one wants to work for the government:
- Don't wear a wedding band, wedding necklace, or any other signs of being married if you had a religious wedding or have any religious views regarding marriage.
- If your religion requires you not to cut your hair, you must shave your head.
- If your religion requires you to keep your hair short, you must grow it long.
- If your religion requires modest dress, you must dress scantily (to the point that you do not feel modest).
- If your religion requires you to wear homemade clothing, you must wear store-bought clothing.

hi, we want you to follow these rules while you work here... are you capable of following these rules?

That is important in job-seeking. But that doesn't mean that intelligent people can't criticize stupid rules.

maybe that's why we got uniforms for people to wear...

technically, i'm probably an anarchy proponent... we got too many silly rules as it is now.

Define "interfere". When I choose not to wear a short skirt, because I don't see it as modest dress, is that interfering with my interaction in society?



Who said anything about exemptions? HK said that someone should not be able to demonstrate any worldview (particularly a religious one) while working for the government. I listed a number of things about someone's appearance that might be due to their religion. My question was whether or not we should target these things as being against the rules because they are an expression of religion.

So, tell me, do you think the following should be forced if one wants to work for the government:
- Don't wear a wedding band, wedding necklace, or any other signs of being married if you had a religious wedding or have any religious views regarding marriage.
- If your religion requires you not to cut your hair, you must shave your head.
- If your religion requires you to keep your hair short, you must grow it long.
- If your religion requires modest dress, you must dress scantily (to the point that you do not feel modest).
- If your religion requires you to wear homemade clothing, you must wear store-bought clothing.



That is important in job-seeking. But that doesn't mean that intelligent people can't criticize stupid rules.

Dempublicents1,

It’s nice to make a caricature of the issue, but it doesn’t solve anything.
It’s all that nice, happy, lovely and it’s amusing to hear saloon socialists defend tolerance according the Islam, those same saloon socialists were also on the frontline when they despised the Christians, just a few decades ago.

Suppose you are a Chelsea fan and for some reason you opted to change your favourite team, by instance you want to become a fan of Liverpool.

When you enter Anfield, don’t expect that you still can wear your blue/white outfit when you want to support Liverpool. Don’t expect that the other Liverpool fans have to be tolerant against your piggish ‘feeling different’ and certainly don’t expect that all other Liverpool fans should wear a blue/white plumage later. However, in the private setting of your own home, you can wear your blue and white costume while supporting The Reds.

YOU are the one that left another culture, YOU are the one that’s entering a new culture. So the burden is on you. If you leave your old club, you also leave a part of that culture. And sure you will face difficulties: some uses in the new club will look weird and uncomfortable. Some could even cause an existential crisis. But that’s life! Every country, every culture, even every subculture is having rules, habits & uses. And they could be very different to what your are used to.

If you leave your country, you are also leaving a part of your culture. And if you can’t leave that culture, why do you want to leave the country that’s correlated with that culture?

Why should we give up our identity to make it easier for immigrants?

Immigration isn’t easy and isn’t fit for everyone. I know about what I’m talking: I’m an immigrant in this country. I left my home land over 20 years ago because I felt that my new country could offer more. I didn’t try to change the rules & habits of my new country, it was me that had to conform to the new situation aka new culture.
I felt that happy here, that I asked for the Belgian nationality and after a while I received that status.
Present times, there’s not much ‘old culture’ inside me.

You can wonder why a significant share of people in Belgium have a dislike for Muslims.

But those same Muslims don't conform to our way of life. They want by instance to wear veils all the time, not only in their private setting, but also when they are working for the government or they want to wear it at the public school because they have shit on a separation of religion & state. We feel that such veils are discriminating women. It even doesn't matter if we are right or wrong: it's our feeling, it's our culture, it's you the stranger that has to work hard to be accepted.

But there are other reasons as well. Take criminality. Do you accept it as normal that our jails are loaded over 50% with people with a Muslim origin while they count less than 10% of the entire Belgian population? I don't think that's normal and it's unacceptable too. And this situation isn't specific to Belgium but works for most parts of Europe. People don't like criminals. Period.

Or take the recent issue in Switzerland, the minaret stuff. The Swiss decided democratically to live in a Switzerland that looks and feels like Switzerland. And of course according the saloon socialist all over Europe, those Swiss made a dumb choice. They are silent that their own government isn’t giving that choice to its people. We just have to accept like it is. Nowhere decided the Swiss people that Islam is outlawed now or they didn't vote to get rid of the mosques.

I'll tell you this: I don't like countless of laws & ruling, however I accept them and obey them. If I would not then I'm putting myself outside the society.

The question is now:

Will the Muslims in Switzerland put themselves outside their society or work together with the other Swiss on a future Switzerland of tomorrow?

It’s nice to make a caricature of the issue, but it doesn’t solve anything.

It's not a caricature. I'm going by what you said you believed - that someone who works for the government should not be expressing any worldview, particularly a religious one. If you'd like to admit now that you're just bigoted against a particular group who wants to wear something specific, go right on ahead.

Suppose you are a Chelsea fan and for some reason you opted to change your favourite team, by instance you want to become a fan of Liverpool.

When you enter Anfield, don’t expect that you still can wear your blue/white outfit when you want to support Liverpool. Don’t expect that the other Liverpool fans have to be tolerant against your piggish ‘feeling different’ and certainly don’t expect that all other Liverpool fans should wear a blue/white plumage later. However, in the private setting of your own home, you can wear your blue and white costume while supporting The Reds.

....seriously? You're going to say that it's ok to treat someone like shit because they wear different colors than you?

YOU are the one that left another culture, YOU are the one that’s entering a new culture. So the burden is on you.

Sure, if the culture you're entering is intolerant and bigoted.

Why should we give up our identity to make it easier for immigrants?

Why are you so insecure that you think allowing immigrants (or even people who were born and raised in your country who choose to dress in a way you don't personally like) to dress as they please is giving up your own identity. Why is your identity so dependent on controlling others?

You can wonder why a significant share of people in Belgium have a dislike for Muslims.

I don't have to wonder. I know. It's because they are bigots.

But those same Muslims don't conform to our way of life. They want by instance to wear veils all the time, not only in their private setting, but also when they are working for the government or they want to wear it at the public school because they have shit on a separation of religion & state. We feel that such veils are discriminating women. It even doesn't matter if we are right or wrong: it's our feeling, it's our culture, it's you the stranger that has to work hard to be accepted.

In other words, your culture is intolerant. If you'd just admitted that from the start, this conversation would have been much shorter.

But there are other reasons as well. Take criminality. Do you accept it as normal that our jails are loaded over 50% with people with a Muslim origin while they count less than 10% of the entire Belgian population? I don't think that's normal and it's unacceptable too. And this situation isn't specific to Belgium but works for most parts of Europe. People don't like criminals. Period.

I doubt it has anything at all to do with Islam. Jails in my country have a disproportionate number of black people. It isn't because being black makes you a criminal. It's a combination of prejudice against black people, making them more likely to go to jail for certain crimes and the fact that, statistically, they tend to be poor, and poor people are more likely to commit certain crimes.

Or take the recent issue in Switzerland, the minaret stuff. The Swiss decided democratically to live in a Switzerland that looks and feels like Switzerland. And of course according the saloon socialist all over Europe, those Swiss made a dumb choice. They are silent that their own government isn’t giving that choice to its people. We just have to accept like it is. Nowhere decided the Swiss people that Islam is outlawed now or they didn't vote to get rid of the mosques.

No, they just voted to invade the lives of private citizens by keeping them from building the structures that they want. And what reason did they give? Bigotry against and fear of Islam.

I'll tell you this: I don't like countless of laws & ruling, however I accept them and obey them. If I would not then I'm putting myself outside the society.

Obeying and even accepting a law doesn't mean you cannot criticize it.

The question is now:

Will the Muslims in Switzerland put themselves outside their society or work together with the other Swiss on a future Switzerland of tomorrow?

Will the non-Muslims in Switzerland work together with the Muslims in Switzerland? If not, it isn't the Muslims who have put themselves outside their society. It is the bigots in Switzerland who have chosen to put them there.

If the Swiss want assimilation, rather than integration, that makes them xenophobic, plain and simple. If they want integration, that's a two-way street.

It's not a caricature. I'm going by what you said you believed - that someone who works for the government should not be expressing any worldview, particularly a religious one. If you'd like to admit now that you're just bigoted against a particular group who wants to wear something specific, go right on ahead.


It's ridiculous to assume that people can't express anymore they are married with some one by a ring. But in your system a government clerk can wear a 'I hate niggas' badge?
Beside, wedding rings are a part of our culture and doesn't conflict with neutrality. I never heard about a case where maried people are boycotting unmaried ones (or vice versa) while they are performing a government task.

At such, I don't see a problem for wearing veils while doing a government job in a Muslim country. That veil is part of their culture, so...



....seriously? You're going to say that it's ok to treat someone like shit because they wear different colors than you?


Indeed. At least in the context of a football stadium it really is. The fans of a football club form a subculture with specific rules & 'laws'. You can say 'fuck them' and wear your blue/white outfit at Anfield but then you will cause a lot of problems. That's how THAT culture is working. You can find it dumb & silly (and in a way it is) and it can conflict with everything inside you, but that are the rules of that culture. It doesn't matter if you like them or not or if they are wrong or good.



Sure, if the culture you're entering is intolerant and bigoted.


Do you know one culture that's 100% tolerant? Intolerance is not good, being entire tolerant isn't any better. I don't have a black/white posture on this issue.


Why are you so insecure that you think allowing immigrants (or even people who were born and raised in your country who choose to dress in a way you don't personally like) to dress as they please is giving up your own identity. Why is your identity so dependent on controlling others?


The recent history of our countries is different. We had a hard fight to kick out the Christian church out the government system. Do you really expect that we now will make room for another religion? We opted for a secular state, that's the way it is today.

I don't mind that people wear veils, but I don't want them see wearing it while doing a government task. It would conflict the separation of church & state. And a part of government wouldn't be neutral anymore. It has to be neutral in deeds and appearance.

If we would accept it then our secular identity would be in danger.



I don't have to wonder. I know. It's because they are bigots.


By this line you're revealing yourself as a bigot. A bigot with prejudices and a lack of knowledge regarding the structure of the political views of the Belgians.

A significant share of the Belgians are adoring and accepting the multicultural valhalla. An minor part is having extreme right winged ideas about this issue. The majority are, like me, something in the middle.



In other words, your culture is intolerant. If you'd just admitted that from the start, this conversation would have been much shorter.


More bigotery and straw man techniques...

If it was that bad here, why do we count such a big group foreigners? Most of these people have here much more freedom, safety & privileges as compared to the country of their origin. They can build religion temples, express their religion, eat ritual prepared food and do have a voice. They certainly use their voice and they don't have to be afraid to be locked in jail or something for having critique on anything and that's including the government.


I doubt it has anything at all to do with Islam. Jails in my country have a disproportionate number of black people. It isn't because being black makes you a criminal. It's a combination of prejudice against black people, making them more likely to go to jail for certain crimes and the fact that, statistically, they tend to be poor, and poor people are more likely to commit certain crimes.


I don't know enough about the situation of the blacks in USA (I assume you are from that country). But I can tell you about the situation here.

It would be dumb to assume that if you're a Muslim then you have to be a criminal.

I don't think that prejudice among police officers is working here. Of course some are racist bastards, but most of the policemen and women just do their job properly. The very minor part that's showing racist or xenophobe behaviour is filtered out rather easy. They have all kind of checks to bust them.

The reason why so many Muslim men are in jail is just because they comit more crimes. Plain and simple.

Poverty is an issue among Muslims, but doesn't explain everything since other groups (including autochthon people) count poor people too. By instance the Chassidic Jews (about 20,000 people in Antwerp) count a lot of poor people but it's rare to find one in jail.

One of the other reasons is probably the socio-cultural structure. If the parents aren't able to speak Dutch, how can they assess the decline in school results of their children by instance?

Also the approach of Belgian police is compared to Turkish and Moroccan police rather soft: by instance they don't use exaggerated violence. They don't (and can't) put away people for days in a jail. The result is that they feel that our police are pussies with no authority.

That doesn't mean we should install a more repressive police force, because that would interfere with the rest of the society.

Anyway, the reasons why Muslims in Belgium commit a lot more crimes as others aren't easy to define.

Some say that according the Qur'an, Muslims are allowed to comit crimes against non-Muslims. From a religious point of view, they aren't doing anything wrong. I didn't read the entire Qur'an, so I don't know if it is true. However I know some Muslims that say aloud that definition.

I already have read big parts of the Qur'an and the Hadith and whatever they say, they are wrong since the Qur'an is also specifying that Muslims should obbey local laws.

I don't think that the Islam religion is responsible for the crime rates. At least not for a significant part.



No, they just voted to invade the lives of private citizens by keeping them from building the structures that they want. And what reason did they give? Bigotry against and fear of Islam.


You're wrong. The Muslims still can build mosques. They only don't want to see the minarets. Fear? That's speculation. It's also possible that they noticed how a big mess we created with too much multiculturalism in the rest of Europe. Maybe those Swiss say: "Ok, it's all nice, but here's the line"


Obeying and even accepting a law doesn't mean you cannot criticize it.


Indeed. No one said that they can't have critique. I can assure you that the veil, the minarets in Switzerland and other Muslim related topics are part of the daily news in newspapers. And they do show the opinion of both sides.

Take my favourite newspaper (De Standaard) and look about what they are talking today:

* Sharia court in Spain
* Spotting Muslims for the sport
* The Minarets



Will the non-Muslims in Switzerland work together with the Muslims in Switzerland? If not, it isn't the Muslims who have put themselves outside their society. It is the bigots in Switzerland who have chosen to put them there.

If the Swiss want assimilation, rather than integration, that makes them xenophobic, plain and simple. If they want integration, that's a two-way street.

No one knows 100% for sure why the Swiss voted against the minarets, that's including you.

I don't believe in assimilation, I even don't believe in soft-forced integration. Unless it are the immigrants itself who seek for integration or even assimilation.
But I don't believe it can work when some pressure is used.

I have my life in Antwerp in a small corridor between the area of the Chassidic Jews and the Turkish community. Both have another approach.

The Chassidic have their own schools, swimming pools, cultural centres etc. They don't want to integrate in the rest of the society and that's their own choice. They really want to keep their culture and mix it with the Belgian one to a strict minimum. It's rather rare to see a Chassidic Jew in the old city. And I have to say, both personally and the community in its whole don't have problems with them.

The Turkish have another approach: they want to keep their culture too, but really want to take part in the rest of the society. The result are frictions on both sides of the society.

It's ridiculous to assume that people can't express anymore they are married with some one by a ring.

Why? It carries just as much, if not more, religious significance for many people than a headscarf.

But in your system a government clerk can wear a 'I hate niggas' badge?

Nope. And I've explained why many, many times.

Beside, wedding rings are a part of our culture and doesn't conflict with neutrality.

Like I said, they often express just as much, if not more, religious belief than a headscarf. So if they are "neutral", your opposition to a headscarf has nothing to do with expressing one's religion and everything to do with expressing an "unapproved" religion.

Indeed. At least in the context of a football stadium it really is. The fans of a football club form a subculture with specific rules & 'laws'. You can say 'fuck them' and wear your blue/white outfit at Anfield but then you will cause a lot of problems.

If you are just sitting there, dressed as you choose and supporting your team, and someone begins to harass or otherwise mistreat you, they are the ones who are causing problems. They are completely and totally responsible for their own actions.

Do you know one culture that's 100% tolerant?

No, but I expect cultures that claim to be tolerant to at least try.

The recent history of our countries is different. We had a hard fight to kick out the Christian church out the government system. Do you really expect that we now will make room for another religion? We opted for a secular state, that's the way it is today.

Secular != discriminating against certain religions. No one is asking you to allow religion to make rules in your government.

I don't mind that people wear veils, but I don't want them see wearing it while doing a government task. It would conflict the separation of church & state. And a part of government wouldn't be neutral anymore. It has to be neutral in deeds and appearance.

And now we're back to this nonsense, which has already been contradicted by the fact that you are quite alright with people expressing their religion through their appearance in government jobs. You have also made it clear, more than once, that you would not allow dress that is different but not religiously affiliated.

So stop pretending it's about anything else than your personal distaste for the headscarf. Because if the headscarf, as a particular standard of modesty used in some religious views that require modest dress, is a problem, all of the other things I listed should equally be problems - as they are equally expressions of one's religious views.

If we would accept it then our secular identity would be in danger.

No more danger than it is already in from all the outward signs of religion you would already allow.

By this line you're revealing yourself as a bigot. A bigot with prejudices and a lack of knowledge regarding the structure of the political views of the Belgians.

Not at all. I'm just looking at what they are doing and calling a duck a duck.

If it was that bad here, why do we count such a big group foreigners? Most of these people have here much more freedom, safety & privileges as compared to the country of their origin. They can build religion temples, express their religion, eat ritual prepared food and do have a voice. They certainly use their voice and they don't have to be afraid to be locked in jail or something for having critique on anything and that's including the government.

So you're better than some places. That somehow magically makes intolerant views tolerant?

I don't know enough about the situation of the blacks in USA (I assume you are from that country). But I can tell you about the situation here.

It would be dumb to assume that if you're a Muslim then you have to be a criminal.

Indeed. So why did you bring it up as if being Muslim made one more inclined to be a criminal and why did you spend so much of this post trying to support that idea?

I don't think that prejudice among police officers is working here. Of course some are racist bastards, but most of the policemen and women just do their job properly. The very minor part that's showing racist or xenophobe behaviour is filtered out rather easy. They have all kind of checks to bust them.

So do we. You're very naive if you think personal prejudice is completely rooted out of your governmental system (or any governmental system, for that matter).

You're wrong. The Muslims still can build mosques. They only don't want to see the minarets.

In other words, they want the mosques not to look like mosques to them.

Fear? That's speculation.

No, it's the reasoning they gave for it. They were afraid of the "Islamization" of their country and of someone imposing Shariah law (as if a particular type of architecture would somehow do that).

It's also possible that they noticed how a big mess we created with too much multiculturalism in the rest of Europe. Maybe those Swiss say: "Ok, it's all nice, but here's the line"

I haven't seen any evidence that multiculturalism has caused any messes. Bigotry and intolerance? Plenty. But not multiculturalism.

No one knows 100% for sure why the Swiss voted against the minarets, that's including you.

I know the reasons that were given for the bill.

I don't believe in assimilation, I even don't believe in soft-forced integration. Unless it are the immigrants itself who seek for integration or even assimilation.

You are arguing for assimilation - that anyone who immigrates to a new place must give up their own customs, even where those customs harm no one, in place of whatever the dominant culture in their new home is.

The Turkish have another approach: they want to keep their culture too, but really want to take part in the rest of the society. The result are frictions on both sides of the society.

Yes, how dare they want to participate in society without becoming exactly like everyone else!?!

Why? It carries just as much, if not more, religious significance for many people than a headscarf.


No, it's not and you know it. A wedding ring isn't used to degrade women or men. Besides, the Hijab is not symbol that's correlated with our culture.


Nope. And I've explained why many, many times.


Sure. The KKK is all hate and stuff, while the Islam is all peace and love. I'm wondering who killed the most, the KKK or the Islam? :)


Like I said, they often express just as much, if not more, religious belief than a headscarf. So if they are "neutral", your opposition to a headscarf has nothing to do with expressing one's religion and everything to do with expressing an "unapproved" religion.


That's your silly opinion, but not mine.


If you are just sitting there, dressed as you choose and supporting your team, and someone begins to harass or otherwise mistreat you, they are the ones who are causing problems. They are completely and totally responsible for their own actions.


You don't understand it. Wearing the right colours is part of a specific football team culture. But like some Muslims do here, you try to do change the entire culture on your own.


No, but I expect cultures that claim to be tolerant to at least try.


You live in some Alice in Wonderland. By instance, USA isn't that tolerant either. Ask what the people in the south think about Mexicans...




Secular != discriminating against certain religions. No one is asking you to allow religion to make rules in your government.


Indeed. That's why we want to close the government door for all people that wear religious symbols. Our government needs to be neutral. You aren't neutral when one is wearing a veil.



And now we're back to this nonsense, which has already been contradicted by the fact that you are quite alright with people expressing their religion through their appearance in government jobs. You have also made it clear, more than once, that you would not allow dress that is different but not religiously affiliated.

So stop pretending it's about anything else than your personal distaste for the headscarf. Because if the headscarf, as a particular standard of modesty used in some religious views that require modest dress, is a problem, all of the other things I listed should equally be problems - as they are equally expressions of one's religious views.


These are not the modesty standards in our culture. Get over it, or search a more modest society, like Saudi Arabia. We will even pay your flight ticket.



No more danger than it is already in from all the outward signs of religion you would already allow.


Explain?



Not at all. I'm just looking at what they are doing and calling a duck a duck.


Oh I call a duck a duck too and you're a bigot with a big knowledge gap.


So you're better than some places. That somehow magically makes intolerant views tolerant?



Some? Yeah right. If it was just 'some' then they wouldn't stay here. The standard of living by instance is dozen times better here as in Turkey.


Indeed. So why did you bring it up as if being Muslim made one more inclined to be a criminal and why did you spend so much of this post trying to support that idea?


To explain you how the situation here is: we do have a lot of criminality comitted by Muslims. And our jails are loaded with those assholes.

They are not criminals because they are Muslims, but you can't deny it are Muslim criminals.


So do we. You're very naive if you think personal prejudice is completely rooted out of your governmental system (or any governmental system, for that matter).


Another straw man. I never said that it is completely rooted out. I said it isn't a major problem, if policeman are showing xenophobe or racist behaviour then they will be corrected, sentenced and eventually be fired soon.

I believe that most of them are doing their job pretty well. If you can't accept that, then it's showing once more time that you know shit about the situation here.




In other words, they want the mosques not to look like mosques to them.


Another sign of your lack of knowledge. About 50% of the mosques aren't having minarets. You don't need a minaret, to be accepted as a mosque.


No, it's the reasoning they gave for it. They were afraid of the "Islamization" of their country and of someone imposing Shariah law (as if a particular type of architecture would somehow do that).


No, that's your interpretation.

If you want to know the voting reasons of an acceptable amount of people (take 4000 a 5000 people) then you need weeks and even months to decide who you will interview, conducting the interviews itself and later process and interpret the results.

In other words, you can't know and are airing bollocks again.




I haven't seen any evidence that multiculturalism has caused any messes. Bigotry and intolerance? Plenty. But not multiculturalism.


The causes of the riots of Saint Denis (Paris) were not related to bigotry or intolerance.


I know the reasons that were given for the bill.


No you don't.



You are arguing for assimilation - that anyone who immigrates to a new place must give up their own customs, even where those customs harm no one, in place of whatever the dominant culture in their new home is.


No, I'm not. Since I don't see anything wrong in the Chassidic Jews their 'style. They are not assimilating, nor integrating but their approach works: no one complains about those people, while their numbers are pretty high in this city.



Yes, how dare they want to participate in society without becoming exactly like everyone else!?!


You don't have to be exactly like everyone else. But if you want to take part INSIDE a society, you certainly have to conform yourself to the uses and habits of that society.

By instance, nudist like to be naked. But all of them keep their clothes on when they go to school, the office or the cinema. Or it's like wearing red/white and not blue/white when you to Anfield supporting The Reds.

It's a matter of respect and dignity. And if you really can't conform then do like the Chassidic Jews or go back to your so open over-tolerating society.

But you have always people that have no respect for the existing culture and think that they can do whatever they like.

And that's one of the problems that many Muslims invoke. And then they are surprised that there’s a counter reaction of the already settled people.

No, it's not and you know it. A wedding ring isn't used to degrade women or men.

It can be. In some religious views, marriage is basically a way for a man to own a woman.

Likewise, some men use the headscarf to "put women in their place", as it were. Some women just choose to wear it.

Besides, the Hijab is not symbol that's correlated with our culture.

And herein lies the real reason. It isn't your symbol, so you don't think people should be able to wear it in your government.

If that's your opinion, fine, but don't pretend it's about religion and government or anything like that. It's your own brand of xenophobia. It also explains the reason that you've said you don't think a woman should be able to wear a sari while working for the government, even though it has no particular religious significance.

Sure. The KKK is all hate and stuff, while the Islam is all peace and love. I'm wondering who killed the most, the KKK or the Islam? :)

A hateful button is hateful. A headscarf is not. It's pretty simple, actually.

That's your silly opinion, but not mine.

It's not an opinion. It's a fact. You simply want to set aside one particular religious belief and one particular way of living up to it as being bad, while allowing others.

You don't understand it. Wearing the right colours is part of a specific football team culture.

Which is irrelevant, if an individual doesn't want to do so. And if someone harasses them for that, it is entirely the fault of the harasser. THe fact that you want to give people leave to treat others like shit based on their dress is interesting, but not really supportable.

You live in some Alice in Wonderland. By instance, USA isn't that tolerant either. Ask what the people in the south think about Mexicans...

I know that many people around here are intolerant towards Mexicans. And blacks. And Muslims. And anyone else who isn't different. I call them out on it, too. And I oppose any laws designed to institutionalize that intolerance.

Indeed. That's why we want to close the government door for all people that wear religious symbols.

.....except you don't. You've made it quite clear that signs of religion that are "approved" in your culture are perfectly fine.

Our government needs to be neutral. You aren't neutral when one is wearing a veil.

You're no less neutral than someone wearing a religiously affiliated wedding ring, one who keeps one's hair short due to religion, one who keeps one's hair long due to religion, or one who dresses modestly by some other standard of modest dress due to religion.

These are not the modesty standards in our culture. Get over it, or search a more modest society, like Saudi Arabia. We will even pay your flight ticket.

In other words, you're intolerant and you want to impose standards on other people.

Explain?

I've already listed them multiple times. You would allow all sorts of symbols that are equally religious. You would allow people who hold to a different standard of modesty due to their religion to continue doing so. You would allow people who keep their hair short or long due to religion to continue doing so. You would allow people with religious views on marriage to advertise that marriage. You would allow people whose religion requires them to wear homemade clothing to do so. And so on.

You are picking out one particular standard of modesty and saying, "This is a religious symbol," while pretending that other standards of modesty held because of religion are not.

Oh I call a duck a duck too and you're a bigot with a big knowledge gap.

Oh boohoo! I'm being intolerant towards intolerance!

Some? Yeah right. If it was just 'some' then they wouldn't stay here. The standard of living by instance is dozen times better here as in Turkey.

Oh, so now your country is the absolute best country in the world because some people stay there. Right....

:rolleyes:

To explain you how the situation here is: we do have a lot of criminality comitted by Muslims. And our jails are loaded with those assholes.

And we have a lot of crimes committed by blacks, but I don't use that as a reason to be racist.

Another straw man. I never said that it is completely rooted out. I said it isn't a major problem, if policeman are showing xenophobe or racist behaviour then they will be corrected, sentenced and eventually be fired soon.

...which means you are naive.

I believe that most of them are doing their job pretty well. If you can't accept that, then it's showing once more time that you know shit about the situation here.

I know enough about human nature. And I don't believe your country is filled with better people than the entire rest of the world.

Another sign of your lack of knowledge. About 50% of the mosques aren't having minarets. You don't need a minaret, to be accepted as a mosque.

I didn't say you did. Reading comprehension is your friend. You should look into it.

No, that's your interpretation.

No, that is what they stated when the brought the bill forward and what they continued to state after it passed.

No, I'm not. Since I don't see anything wrong in the Chassidic Jews their 'style. They are not assimilating, nor integrating but their approach works: no one complains about those people, while their numbers are pretty high in this city.

"They can keep their own culture, as long as they don't want to interact with me!"

Yeah, k.

You don't have to be exactly like everyone else. But if you want to take part INSIDE a society, you certainly have to conform yourself to the uses and habits of that society.

In other words, "be like everyone else."

And that's one of the problems that many Muslims invoke. And then they are surprised that there’s a counter reaction of the already settled people.

Well, when a society puts itself forward as if it is a bastion of tolerance, people expect tolerance. It is surprising when they don't get it. Strange, huh?

Maybe if you advertised Belgium as an intolerant society, you wouldn't get that surprised reaction.

...

Do we need to be tolerant against the repression of Muslim males against women?
Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims which do not accept freedom of speech?
Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims that push for a gender separation in our swimming pools?
Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims who don't like the separation of church & state?
Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims who don't accept something as homosexuality as natural?
Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims that want to slaughter conscious animals?
Do we need to be tolerant that in many places (hospitals, schools, restaurants, ...) Halal food is the only choice?

I say: no. And maybe the Swiss said the same.

Do we need to be tolerant against the repression of Muslim males against women?

No, one does not need to be tolerant when one person is imposing on another person.

Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims which do not accept freedom of speech?

Depends. Are we talking about letting them say that they don't like freedom of speech or are we talking about letting them actually stop someone else from speaking? If it is the former, you cannot pretend to have freedom of speech if they cannot also speak out on their opinions. If it is the latter, then no, of course not.

Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims that push for a gender separation in our swimming pools?

Tolerant, in that you let them have their views on it? Yes.

Tolerant, in that you change your rules and make them discriminatory? No.

Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims who don't like the separation of church & state?

Again, are they just talking about it, or trying to do something about it? The former falls under freedom of speech. The latter does not.

Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims who don't accept something as homosexuality as natural?

As long as they aren't doing anything to harm homosexuals, yes. That's what freedom of speech entails.

Do we need to be tolerant against Muslims that want to slaughter conscious animals?

*shrug* I'm pretty sure the animals are unconscious almost immediately. But no, I don't think the laws regulating slaughter must necessarily allow any religious exemptions. They just can't be specifically targeted against religion.

Do we need to be tolerant that in many places (hospitals, schools, restaurants, ...) Halal food is the only choice?

You are certainly free to bitch about it to those places. They are going to do do what they have to in minimizing cost while maximizing the number of customers they can keep happy.

I say: no. And maybe the Swiss said the same.

Then you aren't tolerant. Tolerance doesn't mean "I let people do and say what they want, as long as I agree with it."

And I don't see how telling private citizens that they cannot use a specific form of architecture simply because it is associated with Islam has anything to do with any of what you listed above.

Meanwhile, I see how you conveniently - as usual - failed to answer anything I actually said.

My God is this still going? HK you're an Islamophobic bigot, which, IMO, isn't that much of a bad thing but at least have the balls to admit it.

My God is this still going? HK you're an Islamophobic bigot, which, IMO, isn't that much of a bad thing but at least have the balls to admit it.

If I was one, I would admit it. This is the internet, what would you do about it?

You're a worthless piece of shit with a penchant for sexual relations with animals, preferably sheep.

See? Nothing happened.

No, one does not need to be tolerant when one person is imposing on another person.



Depends. Are we talking about letting them say that they don't like freedom of speech or are we talking about letting them actually stop someone else from speaking? If it is the former, you cannot pretend to have freedom of speech if they cannot also speak out on their opinions. If it is the latter, then no, of course not.



Tolerant, in that you let them have their views on it? Yes.

Tolerant, in that you change your rules and make them discriminatory? No.



Again, are they just talking about it, or trying to do something about it? The former falls under freedom of speech. The latter does not.



As long as they aren't doing anything to harm homosexuals, yes. That's what freedom of speech entails.



*shrug* I'm pretty sure the animals are unconscious almost immediately. But no, I don't think the laws regulating slaughter must necessarily allow any religious exemptions. They just can't be specifically targeted against religion.



You are certainly free to bitch about it to those places. They are going to do do what they have to in minimizing cost while maximizing the number of customers they can keep happy.



Then you aren't tolerant. Tolerance doesn't mean "I let people do and say what they want, as long as I agree with it."

And I don't see how telling private citizens that they cannot use a specific form of architecture simply because it is associated with Islam has anything to do with any of what you listed above.

Meanwhile, I see how you conveniently - as usual - failed to answer anything I actually said.

Tolerant doesn't mean that you have to accept everything from another either. Not one person on this planet is accepting everything from everyone. That would mean, according your silly worldview, that we are all intolerant.

HK - please just conceade defeat. You're a bigot. We all know it - you know it - so STFU.

Tolerant doesn't mean that you have to accept everything from another either. Not one person on this planet is accepting everything from everyone. That would mean, according your silly worldview, that we are all intolerant.

In other words, "I didn't bother reading the post, and that's why I just posted a complete non sequitur in response."

In other words, "I didn't bother reading the post, and that's why I just posted a complete non sequitur in response."

No sir, you just don’t want accept that EVERY culture, even subcultures, have rules, habits & laws.

And you don’t want to accept that every newcomer has to accept those as being part of the culture you are entering.

Even if they seems pointless, stupid or even wrong. Like wearing the right colours when you enter the football stadium.

It is not on you, as a newcomer to change those rules, laws & habits. That doesn’t mean that at the right moment in a specific context you can’t talk about it.

It even doesn’t mean that you have to drop ALL of the habits & uses that are correlated with your old culture: if they doesn’t interfere with the uses of the new culture then go for it.

I’m a consultant and as part of my job I did visit hundreds of different offices. I can tell you that not 2 offices are the same: they all share a lot, but all of them have little other sets of rules too. In a way they are all forming a separate culture. If I would have your attitude, I would be fired after a few days, because I would not be able to adjust myself to the standards of the new 'culture'. Some offices demand that men wear a suit & tie. And if you don’t, you certainly will get remarks and eventually get sacked if you refuse to accommodate yourself to this ‘rule’. From a rational point of view it’s stupid: you’re not worse or better as a person when you wear the suit & tie. But it just happens that it is a ‘rule’ and if you want to take part of that office, you have to obey or leave.

If you don’t accept the rules that are connected to any culture, how will you expect that those people will accept you as one of them?

In my culture every Muslim woman can wear a veil, even if most people feel it as a tool of repression. Only we don’t accept it, when you are carrying out a government task. We feel that a government has to be neutral and you aren’t neutral in appearance when you wear a veil. If that is intolerant according you, feel free, but I don’t share your opinion.

Who are you anyway to determine which rules you have to accept and which ones not?

Suppose that one his culture cultivates cannibalism. Can he still eat humans when he enters USA of Europe? According me: no, he can’t, because it conflicts with the uses, standards & laws inside my society. It’s not important that it is accepted inside his society. When he’s here, he’s not in HIS society but into another one, with other rules, habits, uses & laws.

If he can’t miss the taste of human flesh, no one will use force to hold him here, he always can return to his OWN society and keep eating humans.

This has nothing to do with being intolerant.

HK - please just conceade defeat. You're a bigot. We all know it - you know it - so STFU.

I could recommend you some nice education, but I will not do it.

I like it that you remain a stupid twat.

Wonderful image you're projecting there, HK. Shows what a prejudiced bigot you are.

No sir, you just don’t want accept that EVERY culture, even subcultures, have rules, habits & laws.

Wrong. I just don't accept that bigots should push their rules and habits on other people through the law just because they don't happen to like the way other people like to live.

And you don’t want to accept that every newcomer has to accept those as being part of the culture you are entering.

You're right. I don't accept that. But that's because I'm not a bigot who thinks someone has to be just like me to live in my culture.

It even doesn’t mean that you have to drop ALL of the habits & uses that are correlated with your old culture: if they doesn’t interfere with the uses of the new culture then go for it.

Unless, of course, they don't interfere with anyone else, but those people still don't want you to do it...

I’m a consultant and as part of my job I did visit hundreds of different offices. I can tell you that not 2 offices are the same: they all share a lot, but all of them have little other sets of rules too. In a way they are all forming a separate culture. If I would have your attitude, I would be fired after a few days, because I would not be able to adjust myself to the standards of the new 'culture'.

There's a difference between the law and corporate rules. Try again.

If you don’t accept the rules that are connected to any culture, how will you expect that those people will accept you as one of them?

If they are bigots with stupid rules restricting your individual choices even though said choices don't affect them? You can't.

In my culture every Muslim woman can wear a veil, even if most people feel it as a tool of repression.

....unless she wants to go to public schools with everyone else or find a job with the government (which should be the workplace freest from discrimination).

We feel that a government has to be neutral and you aren’t neutral in appearance when you wear a veil.

And, by that same logic, you aren't neutral in appearance when you wear a wedding ring (if you have a religious marriage) or when you wear a long skirt (if your religion requires modesty and that is your standard of modesty) or when you don't cut your hair (if your religion requires you to keep it long) or when you do cut your hair (if your religion requires you to keep it short).

Suppose that one his culture cultivates cannibalism. Can he still eat humans when he enters USA of Europe?

Nope. Of course, cannibalism can be shown to harm others and is thus a proper place for the law to interfere.

I could recommend you some nice education, but I will not do it.

I like it that you remain a stupid twat.

'tever, bitch - I hope you like cats, they're the only company you'll ever keep.

Wrong. I just don't accept that bigots should push their rules and habits on other people through the law just because they don't happen to like the way other people like to live.



You're right. I don't accept that. But that's because I'm not a bigot who thinks someone has to be just like me to live in my culture.



Unless, of course, they don't interfere with anyone else, but those people still don't want you to do it...



There's a difference between the law and corporate rules. Try again.



If they are bigots with stupid rules restricting your individual choices even though said choices don't affect them? You can't.



....unless she wants to go to public schools with everyone else or find a job with the government (which should be the workplace freest from discrimination).



And, by that same logic, you aren't neutral in appearance when you wear a wedding ring (if you have a religious marriage) or when you wear a long skirt (if your religion requires modesty and that is your standard of modesty) or when you don't cut your hair (if your religion requires you to keep it long) or when you do cut your hair (if your religion requires you to keep it short).



Nope. Of course, cannibalism can be shown to harm others and is thus a proper place for the law to interfere.

Actually you say:

"A newcomer has all the rights to express his identity, doesn't matter in which way and the autochthon doesn't have that right, doesn't matter in which way"

This was also the view of the lefties in my country for a long time.

We have been afraid for a long time to push our values on to foreigners. These values are too import for me to lose them.

'tever, bitch - I hope you like cats, they're the only company you'll ever keep.

I like dogs, does that count too? :)

Actually you say:

"A newcomer has all the rights to express his identity, doesn't matter in which way and the autochthon doesn't have that right, doesn't matter in which way"

No, I don't, despite your continued attempts to put words into my mouth.

I say that everyone has the right to express his identity, so long as he isn't harming or imposing on anyone else. I don't care if said person is a newcomer or if every single ancestor he can trace back to was born in the country in which he currently resides.

If a woman who was born Belgian - whose parents and grandparents and great-grandparents and were all Belgian - decided to wear a headscarf, would you suddenly decide it was ok because she's not a newcomer?

No, I don't, despite your continued attempts to put words into my mouth.

I say that everyone has the right to express his identity, so long as he isn't harming or imposing on anyone else. I don't care if said person is a newcomer or if every single ancestor he can trace back to was born in the country in which he currently resides.

If a woman who was born Belgian - whose parents and grandparents and great-grandparents and were all Belgian - decided to wear a headscarf, would you suddenly decide it was ok because she's not a newcomer?

To answer your last question that Belgian women can wear her veil, just like immigrants can do, but not when doing a government task. The rules are exactly the same for Belgians as for immigrants.

If people from different cultures each want to express their culture anytime and everywhere then you get frictions.

That's why a society installs rules & laws to lesser those frictions.

It's also a matter of context: this is a small country with a very small population. It's easier to destroy the culture and identity that's correlated with this country as compared to, by instance, destroying the identity and culture of USA.

I know, in general, Americans like easy answers and do have the tendency to see everything in easy black and white colours. But sometimes the complex solutions are the best.

Like?

Hm. Good point.

To answer your last question that Belgian women can wear her veil, just like immigrants can do, but not when doing a government task. The rules are exactly the same for Belgians as for immigrants.

.....but it's a stupid rule, and you have yet to justify it in any way other than, "But it's FOREIGN!!!"

If people from different cultures each want to express their culture anytime and everywhere then you get frictions.

Only because some people are assholes who think they have the right to control the lives of others.

It's also a matter of context: this is a small country with a very small population. It's easier to destroy the culture and identity that's correlated with this country as compared to, by instance, destroying the identity and culture of USA.

You can't really destroy any such thing. It might change over time, but that isn't the same as destroying it. Besides, unless you're all mindless automatons over there, there isn't a single culture and identity to protect or destroy. There is a group of cultures and identities that, when put altogether, make up the culture of Belgium.

I thought this forum had a DNR?

*checks the chart*

Huh. Coulda sworn.

...


Don't forget to spay and neuter your pets!

.....but it's a stupid rule, and you have yet to justify it in any way other than, "But it's FOREIGN!!!"

It's stupid because you feel it's stupid. Look, your and my country don't have the same history and context. What's acceptable in one country, isn't necessarily in another.

Let us safely state that over here they are a little allergic for mixing any religion with government tasks. We really had a hard fight, till the 50ties and 60ties to kick the Catholics out. What do you expect? That there’s now room for another religion?

People can express their religion wherever they want. Only, NOT when they are doing a government task. Tell me, why is there a need to express your religious feelings anytime, anyplace?


Only because some people are assholes who think they have the right to control the lives of others.


And Muslims aren't that way? Give me a break.


You can't really destroy any such thing. It might change over time, but that isn't the same as destroying it. Besides, unless you're all mindless automatons over there, there isn't a single culture and identity to protect or destroy. There is a group of cultures and identities that, when put altogether, make up the culture of Belgium.

Well but all those mini-cultures form together a culture with several shared basic laws, habits & uses. Examples: The position of women in our society, gay rights, the separation of church & state, etc...

These stuff isn't always compatible with the views of people from foreign cultures. But it's not WE that have to adjust to THEIR views, it are THEM, as newcomers, that have to adjust to OUR values.

Does it mean they can't express their religion and culture anymore? Of course not, as long it's not fighting with the law, it's ok.

By instance, when I was in USA in 1995 I have seen several people that carried visible a gun in a kind of holster. That's maybe a part of the culture/habit/use of some Americans in USA, but when those people are having a time here, they certainly can't do it anymore: it would upset the local people and is interfering the Belgian gun laws. Does it mean that those same Americans can't express their love for USA anymore? Of course not.

But since they left their country, they also left a part of their culture. Shit happens, that’s life.

It's stupid because you feel it's stupid.

It's stupid because it is an unnecessary and hypocritical restriction on individual liberty.

Look, your and my country don't have the same history and context. What's acceptable in one country, isn't necessarily in another.

That doesn't make it less intolerant. It just means you're making excuses for being intolerant.

Let us safely state that over here they are a little allergic for mixing any religion with government tasks.

No, you're not. If you were, you would be just as willing to keep people in government from doing any of the things I listed in my earlier post. The fact that you're not makes it clear that it has nothing to do with expressing one's religion in general and everything to do with this particular religious belief and this particular expression of it.

And Muslims aren't that way? Give me a break.

Some people in any group are assholes who want to push their beliefs on others. Are Muslims as a whole that way? No. But some of them certainly are.

These stuff isn't always compatible with the views of people from foreign cultures. But it's not WE that have to adjust to THEIR views, it are THEM, as newcomers, that have to adjust to OUR values.

In other words, you want assimilation, not integration.

...

In other words, you want assimilation, not integration.

Assimilation till a certain degree: yes. And what's wrong about that one?

I was once an immigrant here too and I certainly adjusted my behaviour a little to the standards that are working here. If I didn't, I would suffer a hard time and now I'm not.

Does it mean that I dropped everything from my old country? No, of course not. Some issues, while they are different, don't annoy people at all. And I keep the issues, that could annoy the people here, private. Or I opted to drop them completely.

If YOU are used to walk around naked inside your home, why do you assume you should have the right to go nude everywhere?

If you really can’t assimilate at all, why don’t you return to your own society? Why do you want to take part into another society, you don’t respect?

Your personal judgement isn't overruling the laws/rules/habits of any other (sub)culture.

Assimilation till a certain degree: yes. And what's wrong about that one?

I was once an immigrant here too and I certainly adjusted my behaviour a little to the standards that are working here. If I didn't, I would suffer a hard time and now I'm not.

Does it mean that I dropped everything from my old country? No, of course not. Some issues, while they are different, don't annoy people at all. And I keep the issues, that could annoy the people here, private. Or I opted to drop them completely.

If YOU are used to walk around naked inside your home, why do you assume you should have the right to go nude everywhere?

If you really can’t assimilate at all, why don’t you return to your own society? Why do you want to take part into another society, you don’t respect?

Your personal judgement isn't overruling the laws/rules/habits of any other (sub)culture.

Melting Pot: yes
"Salad Bowl": hell no

There's been so much CPR on this forum it's bringing up zombies!

Edit: & spammers!

Melting Pot: yes
"Salad Bowl": hell no

To continue the metaphor, you strike me as a "food shouldn't touch" sort.

I thought this forum had a DNR?

*checks the chart*

Huh. Coulda sworn.

...


Don't forget to spay and neuter your pets!
Who gave it that DNR?

Melting Pot: yes
"Salad Bowl": hell no
Stew is another metaphor people use.

Melting Pot: yes
"Salad Bowl": hell no

I quite like salads, actually.

But I tend to think of it as neither, really. Some people will want to change their ways to "fit in". Some people will actually like some of the customs immigrants bring and adopt those. Some will be quite happy living their own lives without any wish to fit in - and thus won't see the point of changing for the benefit of others. I don't see why any of these people should be given a hard time unless they're hurting someone else.

Hk, it's someone's choice if they wanna wear a veil - not yours.

Indeed. It's usually the choice of the male Muslims that their women should weir a veil.

Indeed. It's usually the choice of the male Muslims that their women should weir a veil.

Huh, a society that treats women like property. Totally unheard of.