Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs

[Wilikon]

Solicitors told how to draw up Sharia-style wills penalising widows and non-believers

Islamic law is to be effectively enshrined in the British legal system for the first time under guidelines for solicitors on drawing up “Sharia compliant” wills.

Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills that deny women an equal share of inheritances and exclude unbelievers altogether.

The documents, which would be recognised by Britain’s courts, will also prevent children born out of wedlock – and even those who have been adopted – from being counted as legitimate heirs.

Anyone married in a church, or in a civil ceremony, could be excluded from succession under Sharia principles, which recognise only Muslim weddings for inheritance purposes.

Nicholas Fluck, president of The Law Society, said the guidance would promote “good practice” in applying Islamic principles in the British legal system.

Some lawyers, however, described the guidance as “astonishing”, while campaigners warned it represented a major step on the road to a “parallel legal system” for Britain’s Muslim communities.

Baroness Cox, a cross-bench peer leading a Parliamentary campaign to protect women from religiously sanctioned discrimination, including from unofficial Sharia courts in Britain, said it was a “deeply disturbing” development and pledged to raise it with ministers.

“This violates everything that we stand for,” she said. “It would make the Suffragettes turn in their graves.”
The guidance, quietly published this month and distributed to solicitors in England and Wales, details how wills should be drafted to fit Islamic traditions while being valid under British law.

It suggests deleting or amending standard legal terms and even words such as “children” to ensure that those deemed “illegitimate” are denied any claim over the inheritance.

It recommends that some wills include a declaration of faith in Allah which would be drafted at a local mosque, and hands responsibility for drawing up some papers to Sharia courts.

The guidance goes on to suggest that Sharia principles could potentially overrule British practices in some disputes, giving examples of areas that would need to be tested in English courts.

Currently, Sharia principles are not formally addressed by or included in Britain’s laws.

However, a network of Sharia courts has grown up in Islamic communities to deal with disputes between Muslim families.
A few are officially recognised tribunals, operating under the Arbitration Act.

They have powers to set contracts between parties, mainly in commercial disputes, but also to deal with issues such as domestic violence, family disputes and inheritance battles.

But many more unofficial Sharia courts are also in operation.

Parliament has been told of a significant network of more informal Sharia tribunals and “councils”, often based in mosques, dealing with religious divorces and even child custody matters in line with religious teaching.

They offer “mediation” rather than adjudication, although some hearings are laid out like courts with religious scholars or legal experts sitting in a manner more akin to judges than counsellors.

One study estimated that there were now around 85 Sharia bodies operating in Britain. But the new Law Society guidance represents the first time that an official legal body has recognised the legitimacy of some Sharia principles.

It opens the way for non-Muslim lawyers in High Street firms to offer Sharia will drafting services. The document sets out crucial differences between Sharia inheritance laws and Western traditions.

It explains how, in Islamic custom, inheritances are divided among a set list of heirs determined by ties of kinship rather than named individuals. It acknowledges the possibility of people having multiple marriages.

“The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir of the same class,” the guidance says. “Non-Muslims may not inherit at all, and only Muslim marriages are recognised.

Similarly, a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir, as the entitlement depends on a valid Muslim marriage existing at the date of death. This means you should amend or delete some standard will clauses.”

It advises lawyers to draft special exclusions from the Wills Act 1837, which allows gifts to pass to the children of an heir who has died, because this is not recognised in Islamic law.

Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said: “This guidance marks a further stage in the British legal establishment’s undermining of democratically determined human rights-compliant law in favour of religious law from another era and another culture. British equality law is more comprehensive in scope and remedies than any elsewhere in the world. Instead of protecting it, The Law Society seems determined to sacrifice the progress made in the last 500 years.”

Lady Cox said: “Everyone has freedom to make their own will and everyone has freedom to let those wills reflect their religious beliefs. But to have an organisation such as The Law Society seeming to promote or encourage a policy which is inherently gender discriminatory in a way which will have very serious implications for women and possibly for children is a matter of deep concern.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10716844/Islamic-law-is-adopted-by-British-legal-chiefs.html


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UK's Capitulation?

[1715252101]

1715252101

[LostDutchman]

Solicitors told how to draw up Sharia-style wills penalising widows and non-believers

Islamic law is to be effectively enshrined in the British legal system for the first time under guidelines for solicitors on drawing up “Sharia compliant” wills.

Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills that deny women an equal share of inheritances and exclude unbelievers altogether.

The documents, which would be recognised by Britain’s courts, will also prevent children born out of wedlock – and even those who have been adopted – from being counted as legitimate heirs.

Anyone married in a church, or in a civil ceremony, could be excluded from succession under Sharia principles, which recognise only Muslim weddings for inheritance purposes.

Nicholas Fluck, president of The Law Society, said the guidance would promote “good practice” in applying Islamic principles in the British legal system.

Some lawyers, however, described the guidance as “astonishing”, while campaigners warned it represented a major step on the road to a “parallel legal system” for Britain’s Muslim communities.

Baroness Cox, a cross-bench peer leading a Parliamentary campaign to protect women from religiously sanctioned discrimination, including from unofficial Sharia courts in Britain, said it was a “deeply disturbing” development and pledged to raise it with ministers.

“This violates everything that we stand for,” she said. “It would make the Suffragettes turn in their graves.”
The guidance, quietly published this month and distributed to solicitors in England and Wales, details how wills should be drafted to fit Islamic traditions while being valid under British law.

It suggests deleting or amending standard legal terms and even words such as “children” to ensure that those deemed “illegitimate” are denied any claim over the inheritance.

It recommends that some wills include a declaration of faith in Allah which would be drafted at a local mosque, and hands responsibility for drawing up some papers to Sharia courts.

The guidance goes on to suggest that Sharia principles could potentially overrule British practices in some disputes, giving examples of areas that would need to be tested in English courts.

Currently, Sharia principles are not formally addressed by or included in Britain’s laws.

However, a network of Sharia courts has grown up in Islamic communities to deal with disputes between Muslim families.
A few are officially recognised tribunals, operating under the Arbitration Act.

They have powers to set contracts between parties, mainly in commercial disputes, but also to deal with issues such as domestic violence, family disputes and inheritance battles.

But many more unofficial Sharia courts are also in operation.

Parliament has been told of a significant network of more informal Sharia tribunals and “councils”, often based in mosques, dealing with religious divorces and even child custody matters in line with religious teaching.

They offer “mediation” rather than adjudication, although some hearings are laid out like courts with religious scholars or legal experts sitting in a manner more akin to judges than counsellors.

One study estimated that there were now around 85 Sharia bodies operating in Britain. But the new Law Society guidance represents the first time that an official legal body has recognised the legitimacy of some Sharia principles.

It opens the way for non-Muslim lawyers in High Street firms to offer Sharia will drafting services. The document sets out crucial differences between Sharia inheritance laws and Western traditions.

It explains how, in Islamic custom, inheritances are divided among a set list of heirs determined by ties of kinship rather than named individuals. It acknowledges the possibility of people having multiple marriages.

“The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir of the same class,” the guidance says. “Non-Muslims may not inherit at all, and only Muslim marriages are recognised.

Similarly, a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir, as the entitlement depends on a valid Muslim marriage existing at the date of death. This means you should amend or delete some standard will clauses.”

It advises lawyers to draft special exclusions from the Wills Act 1837, which allows gifts to pass to the children of an heir who has died, because this is not recognised in Islamic law.

Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said: “This guidance marks a further stage in the British legal establishment’s undermining of democratically determined human rights-compliant law in favour of religious law from another era and another culture. British equality law is more comprehensive in scope and remedies than any elsewhere in the world. Instead of protecting it, The Law Society seems determined to sacrifice the progress made in the last 500 years.”

Lady Cox said: “Everyone has freedom to make their own will and everyone has freedom to let those wills reflect their religious beliefs. But to have an organisation such as The Law Society seeming to promote or encourage a policy which is inherently gender discriminatory in a way which will have very serious implications for women and possibly for children is a matter of deep concern.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10716844/Islamic-law-is-adopted-by-British-legal-chiefs.html


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UK's Capitulation?

Caught this earlier.

Unbelieveable.

My $.02.

[Bonam]

As far as I understand, aren't people already allowed to designate whoever they want as their beneficiary in their will? Seems like the tools are there already for someone to designate that all their assets be inherited by a male heir, or not inherited by an "unbeliever".

That being said, it's absurd that religious legal terminology and precedents should be getting incorporated into the UK's legal system.

[Wilikon]

As far as I understand, aren't people already allowed to designate whoever they want as their beneficiary in their will? Seems like the tools are there already for someone to designate that all their assets be inherited by a male heir, or not inherited by an "unbeliever".

That being said, it's absurd that religious legal terminology and precedents should be getting incorporated into the UK's legal system.

You may be right. If I write my daughter is half of a human being compared to her brother regarding my wealth, then this shall be the law of the land.
I did not know the tools for discrimination of any kind were legally binding thanks to a simple will.

I learn something new everyday.

[murraypaul]

Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs

No it isn't.
This title is completely wrong.
No law has been changed, all that has happened is that advice has been given on how to write wills within the current laws.

[Bonam]

You may be right. If I write my daughter is half of a human being compared to her brother regarding my wealth, then this shall be the law of the land.
I did not know the tools for discrimination of any kind were legally binding thanks to a simple will.

You wouldn't write your daughter is half of a human being.

But if you wrote in your will that your son inherits 67% of your estate and your daughter inherits 33% of your estate, that is already allowable and your prerogative under current laws. There is no law stating that you must split your estate, or a portion thereof, equally among your children or other heirs.

[ahmed_bodi]

there is nothing wrong in this. all this does is allow people to leave what is leave out favoritism and give to who what is in their rights. Unlike with british law. Such as. if someone is related by blood ties to someone then by Islamic law they deserve to have some of that persons assets after death. and cant be denied it. However if that relationship is broken then there is nothing to give. All thats being said there is within the british law while also within islamic teachings. nothing more nothing less

[murraypaul]

there is nothing wrong in this. all this does is allow people to leave what is leave out favoritism and give to who what is in their rights. Unlike with british law.

What 'british law' exactly is it that you think prevents this?
All that has happened is that guidance has been issued on how to write wills following British Law. It hasn't changed the law at all.

[ahmed_bodi]

u took it out of context read again. British law allows people to say what everyone gets and what they can't by following both islamic law too. people do actually get what they deserve

[cryptasm]

Yeah lay off the Faux News mate, can imagine all the islamophobes foaming at mouth at this non-story.

[murraypaul]

To be fair, the deliberately misleading headline is directly from the Torygraph.

[Wilikon]

Oh Willy you're at it again... Is there nothing you enjoy more than posting hysterical headlines out of context?

TLDR:

- It is legal in many countries, including the UK to specify exactly who gets your money when you die

- Many muslim citizens wish to distribute their money according to sharia law

- Sharia 'law' has no legal standing whatsoever in the UK legal system, despite near-continuous assertions by paranoid right-wingers that "the muslamics" will be sneaking it through Parliament any day now.

- A professional association of lawyers (which also has no legal standing in the UK) has recently issued guidance to help lawyers write wills of this kind when clients ask for it.

All that being said, I would condemn people who choose to discriminate against their female relatives based on their backward religion.

Oh my dear Doggy,
I do enjoy your reactions to my threads for sure, as nothing in the world forces you to read and react to them. For the time you take to do this, away from your busy life I am grateful. But out of context? Nope. I usually copy paste an article that get my attention and, maybe I would add a personal reaction separated with a -------------from the original article.

Obviously you may have issues with the author of an article as I post articles I like AND articles I hate.

[bryant.coleman]

Good step. Around 20% of the British schoolchildren are Muslim, and it will go up to 50% in 2050. So this step is welcome. 

[Wilikon]

Oh my dear Doggy,
I do enjoy your reactions to my threads for sure, as nothing in the world forces you to read and react to them. For the time you take to do this, away from your busy life I am grateful. But out of context? Nope. I usually copy paste an article that get my attention and, maybe I would add a personal reaction separated with a -------------from the original article.

Obviously you may have issues with the author of an article as I post articles I like AND articles I hate.

Don't worry, I enjoy it.

But fair point, "out of context" isn't the right phrase to use. The author of the piece intended for the headline and opening statements to be misleading, and you are aiding/abetting by uncritically reposting it. And your '-----' response was to ask whether 'the UK' is capitulating to a terrorist attack by allowing private citizens to write wills.

No matter how insane my posts may be for some, we are all bitcoin lovers (excluding the NSA spooks and bankster pawns here on this forum). That is, after all, the real Big Picture 

[supernovax]

I believe the controversy is that Sharia is the opposite of where the modern world wants to be and we are humouring those who wish to abide by it rather than ridiculing them. No?

[5flags]

OP is idiotic.

Sharia law, like all religious doctrines is ridiculous, but either you accept religion exists or you don't. The power to draw up a Shariah compliant will is already granted under UK probate law. This is guidance on how to do it.

This isn't about enshrining Islamic law, this is about catering for the needs of a diverse society. We allow Muslims to be married by Imams, is this a parallel legal system? We have halal food - a parallel system? Islamic compliant financial institutions - a parallel system?

Even Israel, which has some of the worst anti-Muslim racism in the world, has state funded Sharia law courts and actually enforces parts of Shariah law.

And guess what - Bitcoin is very close to being Shariah compliant, and is actually more Sharia compliant than paper money. OMG - it's an Islamic conspiracy!!

I repeat: OP is idiotic.

[bryant.coleman]

And guess what - Bitcoin is very close to being Shariah compliant, and is actually more Sharia compliant than paper money. OMG - it's an Islamic conspiracy!!

What sort of BS is this? Bitcoin is Shariah compilant? Perhaps Satoshi Nakamoto did a honors in Islamic theology before creating the Bitcoin. Just keep religion out of Bitcoin. 

[5flags]

What sort of BS is this? Bitcoin is Shariah compilant? Perhaps Satoshi Nakamoto did a honors in Islamic theology before creating the Bitcoin. Just keep religion out of Bitcoin. 

Just pointing out the idiocy in the OP.

[Wilikon]

OP is idiotic.

Sharia law, like all religious doctrines is ridiculous, but either you accept religion exists or you don't. The power to draw up a Shariah compliant will is already granted under UK probate law. This is guidance on how to do it.

This isn't about enshrining Islamic law, this is about catering for the needs of a diverse society. We allow Muslims to be married by Imams, is this a parallel legal system? We have halal food - a parallel system? Islamic compliant financial institutions - a parallel system?

Even Israel, which has some of the worst anti-Muslim racism in the world, has state funded Sharia law courts and actually enforces parts of Shariah law.

And guess what - Bitcoin is very close to being Shariah compliant, and is actually more Sharia compliant than paper money. OMG - it's an Islamic conspiracy!!

I repeat: OP is idiotic.

Yes, OP is idiotic. The article posted is not

[Wilikon]

What sort of BS is this? Bitcoin is Shariah compilant? Perhaps Satoshi Nakamoto did a honors in Islamic theology before creating the Bitcoin. Just keep religion out of Bitcoin. 

Just pointing out the idiocy in the OP.

Bitcoin is not sharia compliant. Everybody knows that. 

[5flags]

Yes, OP is idiotic. The article posted is not

The article is idiotic. The power to create Shariah compliant wills is already there in English probate law. This was guidance on how to do it.

[sana8410]

Yes, I appreciate that. islamic law is good and perfect law in the world. i like  follow this law. but world is didn't follow this law. am so sad.

[hilariousandco]

Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs

No it isn't.
This title is completely wrong.
No law has been changed, all that has happened is that advice has been given on how to write wills within the current laws.

Yup, typical fear-mongering from the anti-Islamic crowd omg muslims are taking over with their muslamic ray guns blah blah blah.

[5flags]

+1 for muslamic ray guns

Please don't. I still feel the need to apologise for that idiot whenever I see that video.

[hilariousandco]

+1 for muslamic ray guns

Please don't. I still feel the need to apologise for that idiot whenever I see that video.

Apologise to who and for what?

[5flags]

Apologise to who and for what?

I feel the need to apologise to Muslims everywhere, on behalf of the British people, for the EDL.

I'm assuming you have seen the video? If not, search for Muslamic Ray Guns on YouTube.

[Wilikon]

How can Math be Sharia Laws compliant, laws based on a religious belief?

[Wilikon]

If I surveyed the population of mathematicians, I would find a disproportionately high number of people who were attracted to difficult intellectual problems.
If I surveyed the population of nurses, I would find a disproportionately high number of people who were attracted to caring for their fellow humans.
If I surveyed the population of garderners, I would find a disproportionately high number of people who wanted to work outside.
If I surveyed the population of people who trully believe bitcoin being sharia laws compliant, I would find a disproportionately high number of people who wanted to call the OP's post idiotic

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=579899.msg6336233#msg6336233

[hilariousandco]

Apologise to who and for what?

I feel the need to apologise to Muslims everywhere, on behalf of the British people, for the EDL.

I'm assuming you have seen the video? If not, search for Muslamic Ray Guns on YouTube.

Of course I've seen it. Why else would I reference it, but why do you feel the need to apologise for the beliefs of morons. What does it have to do with you?

[5flags]

How can Math be Sharia Laws compliant, laws based on a religious belief?

http://dailyanarchist.com/2013/01/30/is-bitcoin-sharia-compliant/

It comes down to Islamic definitions of what money is. It turns out that Bitcoin is more aligned with Islamic notions of money than fiat.

Edit: Now you can post that "Satoshi adopts Islamic Law" and post scary videos. Muppet.

[Wilikon]

How can Math be Sharia Laws compliant, laws based on a religious belief?

http://dailyanarchist.com/2013/01/30/is-bitcoin-sharia-compliant/

It comes down to Islamic definitions of what money is. It turns out that Bitcoin is more aligned with Islamic notions of money than fiat.

Edit: Now you can post that "Satoshi adopts Islamic Law" and post scary videos. Muppet.

So anyone who would not believe in what you believe exactly, in that case a religion giving its blessing to a bunch of codes... is an idiotic muppet?
Wouldn't that type mindset be making a lot of Bitcoin and Anarchists idiotic muppets too? 

[5flags]

So anyone who would not believe in what you believe exactly, in that case a religion giving its blessing to a bunch of codes... is an idiotic muppet?

Do you get your straw men off Amazon? Or do you buy wholesale?

Anyone who would post an anti-Islamic article from the Torygraph which replaces "guidance issued on using existing legislation to cater for British Muslims" with "Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs", punctuating it with a photo of a blood soaked Michael Adebolajo and the text "UK's Capitulation?" is most definitely, a muppet. And that's being slightly disrespectful to muppets.
 

[Dogtanian]

So anyone who would not believe in what you believe exactly, in that case a religion giving its blessing to a bunch of codes... is an idiotic muppet?

Do you get your straw men off Amazon? Or do you buy wholesale?

LOL nearly squirted. I'm going to use that.

[5flags]

LOL nearly squirted. I'm going to use that.

MIT License. Attribution required.

[Wilikon]

So anyone who would not believe in what you believe exactly, in that case a religion giving its blessing to a bunch of codes... is an idiotic muppet?

Do you get your straw men off Amazon? Or do you buy wholesale?

Anyone who would post an anti-Islamic article from the Torygraph which replaces "guidance issued on using existing legislation to cater for British Muslims" with "Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs", punctuating it with a photo of a blood soaked Michael Adebolajo and the text "UK's Capitulation?" is most definitely, a muppet. And that's being slightly disrespectful to muppets.
 

Not answering a muppet's question about how it would be important for a "Professional Anarchist" like yourself to fight for the right of bitcoin to be sharia's compliant is not in itself proof of being an Amazon Prime super user?

Anarchism
[...]
Anarchism is generally defined as the political philosophy which holds the state to be immoral, or alternatively as opposing authority in the conduct of human relations. Proponents of anarchism (known as "anarchists") advocate stateless societies based on what sometimes is defined like non-hierarchical organizations, and in another times is defined like voluntary associations.

Sharia
[...]
Sharia deals with many topics addressed by secular law, including crime, politics, and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, hygiene, diet, prayer, everyday etiquette and fasting. Though interpretations of sharia vary between cultures, in its strictest and most historically coherent definition it is considered the infallible law of God—as opposed to the human interpretation of the laws (fiqh).However, historically, much of Sharia has been implemented in its strictest understanding.

Bitcoin
[...]
The bitcoin system is not controlled by a single entity, like a central bank, which has led the US Treasury to call bitcoin a decentralized currency


Why would anyone, muppet or otherwise care what bitcoin should be sharia law compliant or not? Is Allah Satoshi Nakamoto?
In a decentralized system, where should I point my prayer rug toward? Can a bitcoin wallet become infidel? 

I liked that amazon strawman joke. DJ PHATWA was in da House! 

[5flags]

Not answering a muppet's question about how it would be important for a "Professional Anarchist" like yourself to fight for the right of bitcoin to be sharia's compliant is not in itself proof of being an Amazon Prime super user?

So...I'm guessing you get them wholesale then.

If you're happy with racism, if you're happy being an Islamophobe, nothing I can say will change that. I was just pointing out that if it's perfectly acceptable to write "legal chiefs adopt Islamic law" when some existing law happens to be compatible with Shariah, then it is just as acceptable (or in my mind, stupid) to say "Satoshi adopts Islamic law" when Bitcoin also happens to be compatible with Shariah.

[Wilikon]

Not answering a muppet's question about how it would be important for a "Professional Anarchist" like yourself to fight for the right of bitcoin to be sharia's compliant is not in itself proof of being an Amazon Prime super user?

So...I'm guessing you get them wholesale then.

If you're happy with racism, if you're happy being an Islamophobe, nothing I can say will change that. I was just pointing out that if it's perfectly acceptable to write "legal chiefs adopt Islamic law" when some existing law happens to be compatible with Shariah, then it is just as acceptable (or in my mind, stupid) to say "Satoshi adopts Islamic law" when Bitcoin also happens to be compatible with Shariah.

Being a Muslim is not "belonging to a race". Don't you know that? My Muslim brother can have blue eyes, dark skin, red hair, fair skin, just like my Christian brother or my Buddhist brother. How can I be a racist in that case?

If I see Catholics and Protestants killing each other, going to war with each other, bombing each other, saying what I witness is madness and insane would define me as a racist and a "christianophobe"?

Can a sharia law bitcoin compliant be pro gay marriage? I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. The great thing about bitcoin is I cannot stop somebody else to use his bitcoins to fight me and my belief. What would happen if bitcoin was to become sharia law compliant? Would you change the code to block wallets that support causes that would not be compatible with your belief system? How can you be a "professional anarchist" and believe bitcoin needs to be sharia compliant at the same time? It is incompatible and everyone reading this thread understands this. I want to understand. You are of course free to call me all the names in the world if you cannot explains that obvious paradox.

So far you've used the islamophobic strawman, the racist strawman... What else are you going to use against me? I can share my amazon stock with you if necessary as I get them wholesale

[LostDutchman]

Has no one figured out that all religions are bad?

My $.02.

[bryant.coleman]

Has no one figured out that all religions are bad?

The British politicians think otherwise. And they have a solid reason too. Islam is the fastest growing religion in England. And it is considered to be one of the factors behind the possible secession of Scotland.

[LostDutchman]

Has no one figured out that all religions are bad?

The British politicians think otherwise. And they have a solid reason too. Islam is the fastest growing religion in England. And it is considered to be one of the factors behind the possible secession of Scotland.

Maybe the descendants of my Scot ancestors are smart people, eh, what?

My $.02.

[5flags]

How can you be a "professional anarchist" and believe bitcoin needs to be sharia compliant at the same time?

Seriously, does your head even parse what you write before you hit "post"? Or do you honestly believe that's what I wrote?

[ahmedjadoon]

As far as I understand, aren't people already allowed to designate whoever they want as their beneficiary in their will? Seems like the tools are there already for someone to designate that all their assets be inherited by a male heir, or not inherited by an "unbeliever".

That being said, it's absurd that religious legal terminology and precedents should be getting incorporated into the UK's legal system.

You may be right. If I write my daughter is half of a human being compared to her brother regarding my wealth, then this shall be the law of the land.
I did not know the tools for discrimination of any kind were legally binding thanks to a simple will.

I learn something new everyday.

She is no half of human being.But in Islamic Society it is responsibility of male to look after all his family financial needs.Females just have to look after children.So man inherit double that of a woman.

[Wilikon]

As far as I understand, aren't people already allowed to designate whoever they want as their beneficiary in their will? Seems like the tools are there already for someone to designate that all their assets be inherited by a male heir, or not inherited by an "unbeliever".

That being said, it's absurd that religious legal terminology and precedents should be getting incorporated into the UK's legal system.

You may be right. If I write my daughter is half of a human being compared to her brother regarding my wealth, then this shall be the law of the land.
I did not know the tools for discrimination of any kind were legally binding thanks to a simple will.

I learn something new everyday.

She is no half of human being.But in Islamic Society it is responsibility of male to look after all his family financial needs.Females just have to look after children.So man inherit double that of a woman.

Even though I do not agree with it I kinda maybe sightly relatively understand the logic behind it, men, versus women in transfer of money (did I say i don't really get it but...) presented by you.

The part I truly don't understand is why this belief regarding the transfer of belongings also is the law regarding being a witness? I could be wrong but in SOME (maybe not all) islamist countries, the testimony of a woman is half as valid as the testimony of a men, when both were witness of the same case (crime, hit and run, etc, etc). I could be wrong and that could simply be an internet urban legend of course... Hopefully you will educate me on that subject.

That is another thing about bitcoin not being halal compliant, nor christian laws compliant, nor kosher compliant. Because we want bitcoin to be truly universal everyone can do what they please with their belief system, but some so called professional anarchist on this thread would love of having this NOT to be the case 

[Wilikon]

That is another thing about bitcoin not being halal compliant, nor christian laws compliant, nor kosher compliant.

By the sound of it, bitcoin is halal. You don't need to change it to make it so, it just is, like vegetables or bricks. What do you propose doing in order to specifically make bitcoin haram, and why bother?

I am not. It is a short thread. You'll see who would want that change by scrolling back... up.

[practicaldreamer]

It is considered to be one of the factors behind the possible secession of Scotland.

This is bollocks. If anything the Scots are more accepting of immigration and multiculturalism than the English,

Yes, agreed. The vote for independence has nothing to do with immigrants/multiculturalism. Scotland has a long and proud history of assimilating many different ethnic groups - as diverse as the Irish, the Italians , South East Asians, as well as the English (who on their own form 10% of the Scottish population).
    There has been some problems (Catholics/Protestants for e.g.) - but this has nothing to do with the independence debate.


   The SNP has nothing in common with the BNP, for example - other than the unfortunate similarity in name.

[Wilikon]

What do you propose doing in order to make bitcoin haram?

I am not. It is a short thread. You'll see who would want that change by scrolling back... up.

I read the thread. 5flags is arguing that bitcoin is halal:

It turns out that Bitcoin is more aligned with Islamic notions of money than fiat.

You are arguing that it shouldn't be halal (i.e. that it should be haram):

That is another thing about bitcoin not being halal compliant...

What changes do you want to make to make sure it is not halal? (and for what strange reason do you want this?)

Not stating bitcoin is or is not halal or haram or kosher or pure... is the "changes" I want to make, i.e., zero changes at all.... But I understand your position. We need to remind some folks around here it is safe to use it as it is halal and sharia law compliant. Folks will feel safer to use a bunch of codes to buy their condoms online, but only after the blessing from their spiritual leader, praying with their hands hovering an unplugged Linksys 54G router...

Makes perfect sense

[bryant.coleman]

Folks will feel safer to use a bunch of codes to buy their condoms online, but only after the blessing from their spiritual leader, praying with their hands hovering an unplugged Linksys 54G router...

Check this:

The Fatwa Against Women Touching Bananas and Other Stupid Islamic Orders

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/10/the-fatwa-against-women-touching-bananas-and-other-stupid-islamic-orders.html

“If women wish to eat these food items, a third party, preferably a male related to them such as their a father or husband, should cut the items into small pieces and serve,” the cleric supposedly dictated.

[master-P]

Folks will feel safer to use a bunch of codes to buy their condoms online, but only after the blessing from their spiritual leader, praying with their hands hovering an unplugged Linksys 54G router...

Check this:

The Fatwa Against Women Touching Bananas and Other Stupid Islamic Orders

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/10/the-fatwa-against-women-touching-bananas-and-other-stupid-islamic-orders.html

“If women wish to eat these food items, a third party, preferably a male related to them such as their a father or husband, should cut the items into small pieces and serve,” the cleric supposedly dictated.

That story is fake.

[Sithara007]

The place where I live, only around 10% of the population is Muslim. Yet, most of the restaurants serve only Halal meat. I find this very irritating, that our rights are being trampled in favor of a vocal minority.

[tins]

The place where I live, only around 10% of the population is Muslim. Yet, most of the restaurants serve only Halal meat. I find this very irritating, that our rights are being trampled in favor of a vocal minority.

Is it illegal for the restaurants to serve other meats? Or, is it legal and with their freedom, they choose not to?

[bryant.coleman]

Is it illegal for the restaurants to serve other meats? Or, is it legal and with their freedom, they choose not to?

Legality might not be an issue. Muslims will boycott the restaurant if it serves non-Halal meat. No restaurant owner want to lose a segment which is more than 10% of the population.

[master-P]

The place where I live, only around 10% of the population is Muslim. Yet, most of the restaurants serve only Halal meat. I find this very irritating, that our rights are being trampled in favor of a vocal minority.

How exactly does a restaurant catering to certain people constitute a trampling of your rights? Businesses are free to cater to whatever demographic they wish. I'm sure you can find restaurants that cater to you and your ilk, and if not then hey, there's a great business idea for you. I'm sure many people in the middle east aren't too happy having the 'American dream' exported to them via the greatest arsenal of weaponry mankind has ever seen. The western world has murdered and denied the most basic human rights to countless people in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere and you're irritated that a few restaurants in your area choose to serve halal meat because it's good for their business? Gee, I wonder how those people who had their entire lives destroyed by the defenders of 'freedom and liberty' must feel compared to your major dilemma...

Who cares right? It's not like they're humans or anything, just savages living in the stone age, much like the aboriginals and blacks of yesteryear.

[hilariousandco]

The place where I live, only around 10% of the population is Muslim. Yet, most of the restaurants serve only Halal meat. I find this very irritating, that our rights are being trampled in favor of a vocal minority.

Hahahaha. Typical anti-Muslim crap. There's a simple solution to your problem: Don't eat there. Restaurants or businesses can sell whatever they want. I'd love to know how your rights are being trampled on here? You have a right not to take your custom there and they have a right to serve halal meat.

[bryant.coleman]

Hahahaha. Typical anti-Muslim crap. There's a simple solution to your problem: Don't eat there. Restaurants or businesses can sell whatever they want. I'd love to know how your rights are being trampled on here? You have a right not to take your custom there and they have a right to serve halal meat.

I disagree with that. If 10% of the population has the right to have halal meat, then the remaining 90% of the population also has the right to have non-Halal meat. The problem is that the latter part is avoided or ignored.

[hilariousandco]

Hahahaha. Typical anti-Muslim crap. There's a simple solution to your problem: Don't eat there. Restaurants or businesses can sell whatever they want. I'd love to know how your rights are being trampled on here? You have a right not to take your custom there and they have a right to serve halal meat.

I disagree with that. If 10% of the population has the right to have halal meat, then the remaining 90% of the population also has the right to have non-Halal meat. The problem is that the latter part is avoided or ignored.

I don't get your logic. They do have the right. They have the right to go and get it and not eat at Halal restaurants. Hardly anybody cares about eating Halal meat anyway unless you're an anti-Islamist.

[bryant.coleman]

Hardly anybody cares about eating Halal meat anyway unless you're an anti-Islamist.

What sort of logic this is? I don't want to eat Halal because that type of meat is produced after slaughtering the animals painfully. And how does not liking Halal meat going to make me an anti-Islamist?

[hilariousandco]

Hardly anybody cares about eating Halal meat anyway unless you're an anti-Islamist.

What sort of logic this is? I don't want to eat Halal because that type of meat is produced after slaughtering the animals painfully. And how does not liking Halal meat going to make me an anti-Islamist?

Then don't eat it. Nobody is forcing you to. You can't complain that restaurants are serving halal meat when it shouldn't even concern you as it's your choice and decision to go and eat there. And a bolt gun to the head before having your throat slit is still painful, but that's a different discussion. And it doesn't necessarily make you an anti-Islamist, but most people who complain about it like the guy who brought it up above just tend to have problems with Muslims or Islam and use anything they can to complain or criticise them.

[LostDutchman]

Hahahaha. Typical anti-Muslim crap. There's a simple solution to your problem: Don't eat there. Restaurants or businesses can sell whatever they want. I'd love to know how your rights are being trampled on here? You have a right not to take your custom there and they have a right to serve halal meat.

I disagree with that. If 10% of the population has the right to have halal meat, then the remaining 90% of the population also has the right to have non-Halal meat. The problem is that the latter part is avoided or ignored.

100% correct!

Thank you for your kind and insightful post!

MY $.02.

[ahmed_bodi]

Hardly anybody cares about eating Halal meat anyway unless you're an anti-Islamist.

What sort of logic this is? I don't want to eat Halal because that type of meat is produced after slaughtering the animals painfully. And how does not liking Halal meat going to make me an anti-Islamist?

Where do you get that idea? Animals are killed with a clean, extremely sharp blade to ensure they are killed instantly and painlessly

[hilariousandco]

Hardly anybody cares about eating Halal meat anyway unless you're an anti-Islamist.

What sort of logic this is? I don't want to eat Halal because that type of meat is produced after slaughtering the animals painfully. And how does not liking Halal meat going to make me an anti-Islamist?

Where do you get that idea? Animals are killed with a clean, extremely sharp blade to ensure they are killed instantly and painlessly

No animal is killed instantly or painlessly by having their throat slit or being bolt gunned prior to that. There are ways of doing it more 'cleanly' and minimising pain but no method of slaughter is painless.

[ahmed_bodi]

okay, as painlessly as possible then.

[hilariousandco]

okay, as painlessly as possible then.

Haha, hard to say which is the most painless method, but I think it might actually be the bolt-gun as it apparently stuns/incapacitates the animal first, but it's not foolproof and can sometimes fail, but I imagine neither options are very pleasant for the animal involved.

[ahmed_bodi]

okay, as painlessly as possible then.

Haha, hard to say which is the most painless method, but I think it might actually be the bolt-gun as it apparently stuns/incapacitates the animal first, but it's not foolproof and can sometimes fail, but I imagine neither options are very pleasant for the animal involved.

very true +1

[Wilikon]

Fast food giant Subway has removed ham and bacon from almost 200 outlets, and switched to halal meat alternatives in an attempt to please its Muslim customers.

It has confirmed turkey ham and turkey rashers will be used instead in 185 of its stores, where all the meat will now be prepared according to halal rules.

The chain, which has around 1,500 outlets across the UK, explained its decision by saying it had to balance animal welfare concerns with ‘the views of religious communities’.

Traditional halal slaughter sees animals have their throats slit before bleeding to death. But Subway stressed that the meat served in its sandwiches would come from animals that have been stunned first, a practice that aims to reduce any suffering.

In Arabic the word halal means ‘permitted’ or ‘lawful’ and defines anything that is allowed or lawful according to the Qur’an.

It is often used to indicate food – particularly meat – has been prepared in accordance with Muslim principles and techniques.

Muslims are forbidden from eating any non-halal food and meat from pigs and Subway said customers can identify those stores selling halal food by the special ‘All meats are Halal’ sign, which must be displayed in participating branches.

In the halal-only branches ham and bacon has been substituted for turkey ham and rashers.

Many animal charities condemn halal slaughter as being cruel to animals.

Traditionally in halal abattoirs the throats of the animals are cut while they are fully conscious – an act many campaigners say is inhumane and needlessly cruel.

In non-halal abattoirs, livestock are stunned before killing to prevent any unnecessary suffering.

Some halal butchers also practise pre-stunning, though it is not permitted by some Islamic scholars.

In Britain, killing an animal without prior stunning is illegal, but the law gives special exemption to Muslim and Jewish meat producers on the grounds of religion.

http://muslimvillage.com/2014/05/03/52945/uk-subway-ditches-pork-and-goes-halal-due-to-strong-demand-from-muslims/

[bryant.coleman]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims. This will open a can of worms. Next the Hindus will demand to ban beef. After that the Yazidis will demand to ban lettuce.. this will never stop.

[hilariousandco]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims. This will open a can of worms. Next the Hindus will demand to ban beef. After that the Yazidis will demand to ban lettuce.. this will never stop.

Listen to what you're saying. It's not going to happen where 95% of the population is unable to eat pork. You're just being ridiculous. Subway as a company is free to make whatever business decisions it wants and it's probably not even due to 'demmands' from muslims. Maybe the Muslim demand for halal meat though. They've removed the products from 200 out of the 1500 restaurants in the UK and probably just from ones that are in areas that have a high Muslim population. It doesn't effect you in the slightest.

[Wilikon]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims. This will open a can of worms. Next the Hindus will demand to ban beef. After that the Yazidis will demand to ban lettuce.. this will never stop.

Listen to what you're saying. It's not going to happen where 95% of the population is unable to eat pork. You're just being ridiculous. Subway as a company is free to make whatever business decisions it wants and it's probably not even due to 'demmands' from muslims. Maybe the Muslim demand for halal meat though. They've removed the products from 200 out of the 1500 restaurants in the UK and probably just from ones that are in areas that have a high Muslim population. It doesn't effect you in the slightest.

At least we know now which is the most painless method of killing an animal... 

[hilariousandco]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims. This will open a can of worms. Next the Hindus will demand to ban beef. After that the Yazidis will demand to ban lettuce.. this will never stop.

Listen to what you're saying. It's not going to happen where 95% of the population is unable to eat pork. You're just being ridiculous. Subway as a company is free to make whatever business decisions it wants and it's probably not even due to 'demmands' from muslims. Maybe the Muslim demand for halal meat though. They've removed the products from 200 out of the 1500 restaurants in the UK and probably just from ones that are in areas that have a high Muslim population. It doesn't effect you in the slightest.

At least we know now which is the most painless method of killing an animal... 

I think the most painless method would be not to kill it, or put it to sleep first, but that's probably not cost effective. But that's irrelevant, people really don't care about the pain an animal may or may not suffer, they just want a petty excuse to criticise Muslims / Halal butchery.

[Wilikon]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims. This will open a can of worms. Next the Hindus will demand to ban beef. After that the Yazidis will demand to ban lettuce.. this will never stop.

Listen to what you're saying. It's not going to happen where 95% of the population is unable to eat pork. You're just being ridiculous. Subway as a company is free to make whatever business decisions it wants and it's probably not even due to 'demmands' from muslims. Maybe the Muslim demand for halal meat though. They've removed the products from 200 out of the 1500 restaurants in the UK and probably just from ones that are in areas that have a high Muslim population. It doesn't effect you in the slightest.

At least we know now which is the most painless method of killing an animal... 

I think the most painless method would be not to kill it, or put it to sleep first, but that's probably not cost effective. But that's irrelevant, people really don't care about the pain an animal may or may not suffer, they just want a petty excuse to criticise Muslims / Halal butchery.

You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose.

So any petty excuses to criticize Muslim should be forbidden?

[LostDutchman]

"You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose"

Primitive Bronze Age superstitions which have no place in the modern world.

My $.02.

.

[Wilikon]

"You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose"

Primitive Bronze Age superstitions which have no place in the modern world.

My $.02.

.

It is not superstition, or only happening during the Bronze Age. At least you would do it with pigs for example. You grab it, have it up side down. Have a nice big bucket under the animal. All that time the pig would be screaming. Slash it's throat. The pig screams even more and you get all the blood in the bucket. After that you are ready for delicious blood pudding, fried blood, etc
You always need to let the animal bleed, no matter the animal.

[LostDutchman]

"You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose"

Primitive Bronze Age superstitions which have no place in the modern world.

My $.02.

.

It is not superstition, or only happening during the Bronze Age. At least you would do it with pigs for example. You grab it, have it up side down. Have a nice big bucket under the animal. All that time the pig would be screaming. Slash it's throat. The pig screams even more and you get all the blood in the bucket. After that you are ready for delicious blood pudding, fried blood, etc
You always need to let the animal bleed, no matter the animal.

Pardon me but you are nuttier than nine fruitcakes.

My $.02.

[Wilikon]

"You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose"

Primitive Bronze Age superstitions which have no place in the modern world.

My $.02.

.

It is not superstition, or only happening during the Bronze Age. At least you would do it with pigs for example. You grab it, have it up side down. Have a nice big bucket under the animal. All that time the pig would be screaming. Slash it's throat. The pig screams even more and you get all the blood in the bucket. After that you are ready for delicious blood pudding, fried blood, etc
You always need to let the animal bleed, no matter the animal.

Pardon me but you are nuttier than nine fruitcakes.

My $.02.

You maybe right about that. But the taste is all that counts to me. I don't really care how the sausage is made
https://i.imgur.com/w5z6HXE.jpg

[bryant.coleman]

It is not superstition, or only happening during the Bronze Age. At least you would do it with pigs for example. You grab it, have it up side down. Have a nice big bucket under the animal. All that time the pig would be screaming. Slash it's throat. The pig screams even more and you get all the blood in the bucket. After that you are ready for delicious blood pudding, fried blood, etc
You always need to let the animal bleed, no matter the animal.

Yuck! I don't know how people can eat dishes such as Black pudding and Blood sausage. If someone actually watches how these dished are being prepared, I bet he will never eat them. There is an even more disgusting dish from China, called blood tofu.

[LostDutchman]

"You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose"

Primitive Bronze Age superstitions which have no place in the modern world.

My $.02.

.

It is not superstition, or only happening during the Bronze Age. At least you would do it with pigs for example. You grab it, have it up side down. Have a nice big bucket under the animal. All that time the pig would be screaming. Slash it's throat. The pig screams even more and you get all the blood in the bucket. After that you are ready for delicious blood pudding, fried blood, etc
You always need to let the animal bleed, no matter the animal.

Pardon me but you are nuttier than nine fruitcakes.

My $.02.

You maybe right about that. But the taste is all that counts to me. I don't really care how the sausage is made
https://i.imgur.com/w5z6HXE.jpg

Just curious, are you a Muslim?

Just asking.

My $.02.

[hilariousandco]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims. This will open a can of worms. Next the Hindus will demand to ban beef. After that the Yazidis will demand to ban lettuce.. this will never stop.

Listen to what you're saying. It's not going to happen where 95% of the population is unable to eat pork. You're just being ridiculous. Subway as a company is free to make whatever business decisions it wants and it's probably not even due to 'demmands' from muslims. Maybe the Muslim demand for halal meat though. They've removed the products from 200 out of the 1500 restaurants in the UK and probably just from ones that are in areas that have a high Muslim population. It doesn't effect you in the slightest.

At least we know now which is the most painless method of killing an animal...  

I think the most painless method would be not to kill it, or put it to sleep first, but that's probably not cost effective. But that's irrelevant, people really don't care about the pain an animal may or may not suffer, they just want a petty excuse to criticise Muslims / Halal butchery.

You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose.

So any petty excuses to criticize Muslim should be forbidden?

The bolt gun method would seem to contradict this way. And no criticism should be 'forbidden', and you are free to criticise all you want, just as I am free to criticise the petty arguments of the people who attack Islam in such a way, especially when we all know what their true intent is.

[freedomno1]

For some reason the first time I read the title I thought it was a cooking thread
Read as Islamic law is adopted by British legal chefs
Then thought well I guess they are cooking Halal now and it must be a new trend
Then read the actual post and then a few posts and saw ah suggested lol

[Wilikon]

"You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose"

Primitive Bronze Age superstitions which have no place in the modern world.

My $.02.

.

It is not superstition, or only happening during the Bronze Age. At least you would do it with pigs for example. You grab it, have it up side down. Have a nice big bucket under the animal. All that time the pig would be screaming. Slash it's throat. The pig screams even more and you get all the blood in the bucket. After that you are ready for delicious blood pudding, fried blood, etc
You always need to let the animal bleed, no matter the animal.

Pardon me but you are nuttier than nine fruitcakes.

My $.02.

You maybe right about that. But the taste is all that counts to me. I don't really care how the sausage is made
https://i.imgur.com/w5z6HXE.jpg

Just curious, are you a Muslim?

Just asking.

My $.02.

I am not. I like my bacon too much.

[Wilikon]

For some reason the first time I read the title I thought it was a cooking thread
Read as Islamic law is adopted by British legal chefs
Then thought well I guess they are cooking Halal now and it must be a new trend
Then read the actual post and then a few posts and saw ah suggested lol

LOL. Is Subway a restaurant? Then maybe you would be right 

[Wilikon]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims. This will open a can of worms. Next the Hindus will demand to ban beef. After that the Yazidis will demand to ban lettuce.. this will never stop.

Listen to what you're saying. It's not going to happen where 95% of the population is unable to eat pork. You're just being ridiculous. Subway as a company is free to make whatever business decisions it wants and it's probably not even due to 'demmands' from muslims. Maybe the Muslim demand for halal meat though. They've removed the products from 200 out of the 1500 restaurants in the UK and probably just from ones that are in areas that have a high Muslim population. It doesn't effect you in the slightest.

At least we know now which is the most painless method of killing an animal...  

I think the most painless method would be not to kill it, or put it to sleep first, but that's probably not cost effective. But that's irrelevant, people really don't care about the pain an animal may or may not suffer, they just want a petty excuse to criticise Muslims / Halal butchery.

You need the heart to be pumping hard so the blood gets out of the animal's body faster. You need the animal to be alive and aware of its fate. To put it to sleep first would defeat that purpose.

So any petty excuses to criticize Muslim should be forbidden?

The bolt gun method would seem to contradict this way. And no criticism should be 'forbidden', and you are free to criticise all you want, just as I am free to criticise the petty arguments of the people who attack Islam in such a way, especially when we all know what their true intent is.

What I was describing was the logic behind this method, why it was maybe used in the past and kept being used until now, not just for the Bronze Age. Bolt gun or traditional islamic way of killing, both are using gravity to let the blood leave all the way as meat of any kind is not consumed with the blood still in the vessels.

[Hazir]

Halal meat is only the beginning. There will be more things later.

You know why Japan does not have any problems with Muslims?

It is because:

1. Japan is the only nation that does not give citizenship to Muslims.
2. In Japan permanent residency is not given to Muslims.
3. The Japanese government is of the opinion that Muslims are fundamentalist and even in the era of globalization, they are not willing to change their Muslim laws. (Japan changes its laws for no one, Muslim or otherwise. All must obey Japanese laws)

Maybe these laws are the reason I did not hear of any executions done by muslims on the street of Japan.

[bryant.coleman]

Halal meat is only the beginning. There will be more things later.

You know why Japan does not have any problems with Muslims?

It is because:

1. Japan is the only nation that does not give citizenship to Muslims.
2. In Japan permanent residency is not given to Muslims.
3. The Japanese government is of the opinion that Muslims are fundamentalist and even in the era of globalization, they are not willing to change their Muslim laws. (Japan changes its laws for no one, Muslim or otherwise. All must obey Japanese laws)

Maybe these laws are the reason I did not hear of any executions done by muslims on the street of Japan.

There are a lot of Muslims in Japan and Japan every year gives citizenship to thousands of Muslims. Most of them are of Pakistani and Arab origin who receive the citizenship after marrying Japanese women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Japan

According to the latest stats, there are somewhere around 100,000 and 200,000 Muslims in Japan.

[freedomno1]

For some reason the first time I read the title I thought it was a cooking thread
Read as Islamic law is adopted by British legal chefs
Then thought well I guess they are cooking Halal now and it must be a new trend
Then read the actual post and then a few posts and saw ah suggested lol

LOL. Is Subway a restaurant? Then maybe you would be right  

He-he you know the cooking world always looking for the next big thing
Going retro with halal cooking styles FTW
Also nice note does have the boycott vibe
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2616576/Subway-removes-ham-pork-nearly-200-stores-strong-demand-Muslims-eat-Halal-meat.html

[bryant.coleman]

Seems like not everyone is happy about it:

East Lancs twitter storm over 'halal' subs

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/11188480.East_Lancs_twitter_storm_over____halal____subs

FAST food giant Subway has come under fire for removing ham and bacon from outlets, and switching to halal meat alternatives at stores across the country, including East Lancashire. This week people have taken to Twitter calling for a boycott of the chain, and protests have been organised for this weekend outside outlets nationwide.

[hilariousandco]

Seems like not everyone is happy about it:

East Lancs twitter storm over 'halal' subs

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/11188480.East_Lancs_twitter_storm_over____halal____subs

FAST food giant Subway has come under fire for removing ham and bacon from outlets, and switching to halal meat alternatives at stores across the country, including East Lancashire. This week people have taken to Twitter calling for a boycott of the chain, and protests have been organised for this weekend outside outlets nationwide.

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

[bryant.coleman]

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

I don't think that people who are opposed to eating halal meat would ever again dine in any of the Subway restaurants (i.e the ones which serves non-halal items). The reputation is lost.

[hilariousandco]

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

I don't think that people who are opposed to eating halal meat would ever again dine in any of the Subway restaurants (i.e the ones which serves non-halal items). The reputation is lost.

Depends on their level of Islamaphobia or their hatred of animal cruelty. But most plebs won't really care and will just go along because they're ignorant and don't like Muslims, but they'll still probably go home and hypocritically have a kebab at the end of the day. And I don't see how Subway's reputation would be lost. Subway is a franchise and each business owner is free to serve halal or non-Halal meat just as people are free not to eat at that particular franchise.

[Wilikon]

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

I don't think that people who are opposed to eating halal meat would ever again dine in any of the Subway restaurants (i.e the ones which serves non-halal items). The reputation is lost.

Depends on their level of Islamaphobia or their hatred of animal cruelty. But most plebs won't really care and will just go along because they're ignorant and don't like Muslims, but they'll still probably go home and hypocritically have a kebab at the end of the day. And I don't see how Subway's reputation would be lost. Subway is a franchise and each business owner is free to serve halal or non-Halal meat just as people are free not to eat at that particular franchise.

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

[hilariousandco]

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

I don't think that people who are opposed to eating halal meat would ever again dine in any of the Subway restaurants (i.e the ones which serves non-halal items). The reputation is lost.

Depends on their level of Islamaphobia or their hatred of animal cruelty. But most plebs won't really care and will just go along because they're ignorant and don't like Muslims, but they'll still probably go home and hypocritically have a kebab at the end of the day. And I don't see how Subway's reputation would be lost. Subway is a franchise and each business owner is free to serve halal or non-Halal meat just as people are free not to eat at that particular franchise.

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

That's what Islamaphobes usually say. Call it whatever you want but it is usually a mix of intolerance, ignorance, xenophobia and racism, and those things definitely exist. Ignorant people just tend to have a dislike of people who practice Islam and come from the Middle East (or just look like they might do).

[bryant.coleman]

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

Welcome to the Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association, Wilikon.  

I was the first member to be awarded with the honorary title of BT Islamaphobe. You are the second. Anyone interested in joining us?

[hilariousandco]

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

Welcome to the Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association, Wilikon.  

I was the first member to be awarded with the honorary title of BT Islamaphobe. You are the second. Anyone interested in joining us?

I'm not sure if intolerance and ignorance is something you should be proud of.

[Wilikon]

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

I don't think that people who are opposed to eating halal meat would ever again dine in any of the Subway restaurants (i.e the ones which serves non-halal items). The reputation is lost.

Depends on their level of Islamaphobia or their hatred of animal cruelty. But most plebs won't really care and will just go along because they're ignorant and don't like Muslims, but they'll still probably go home and hypocritically have a kebab at the end of the day. And I don't see how Subway's reputation would be lost. Subway is a franchise and each business owner is free to serve halal or non-Halal meat just as people are free not to eat at that particular franchise.

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

That's what Islamaphobes usually say. Call it whatever you want but it is usually a mix of intolerance, ignorance, xenophobia and racism, and those things definitely exist. Ignorant people just tend to have a dislike of people who practice Islam and come from the Middle East (or just look like they might do).

Xenophobia and racism.. So now Islam is a race? Isn't ignorant to say that?

[hilariousandco]

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

I don't think that people who are opposed to eating halal meat would ever again dine in any of the Subway restaurants (i.e the ones which serves non-halal items). The reputation is lost.

Depends on their level of Islamaphobia or their hatred of animal cruelty. But most plebs won't really care and will just go along because they're ignorant and don't like Muslims, but they'll still probably go home and hypocritically have a kebab at the end of the day. And I don't see how Subway's reputation would be lost. Subway is a franchise and each business owner is free to serve halal or non-Halal meat just as people are free not to eat at that particular franchise.

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

That's what Islamaphobes usually say. Call it whatever you want but it is usually a mix of intolerance, ignorance, xenophobia and racism, and those things definitely exist. Ignorant people just tend to have a dislike of people who practice Islam and come from the Middle East (or just look like they might do).

Xenophobia and racism.. So now Islam is a race? Isn't ignorant to say that?

Where did I say it was a race? People usually dislike Islam because it's a religion adhered to by people of other races and ethnicities, specifically middle eastern and African etc, hence why it's a mixture of all those things I said. You'd be hard pressed to find someone who is anti-Islam who also wasn't a racist, whether they wanted to admit it or not.

[Wilikon]

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

Welcome to the Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association, Wilikon.  

I was the first member to be awarded with the honorary title of BT Islamaphobe. You are the second. Anyone interested in joining us?

The few muslims I know as friends will be surprised to say the least. So will be the owner of one of my favorite African food restaurant

Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association or "BIAs Club"...

[Wilikon]

Anti-Islamic plebs aren't exactly going to be happy about are they? Simple solution is to not eat there and take your custom elsewhere. I'm sure there'll be a Subway restaurant within walking distant that doesn't serve Halal anyway.

I don't think that people who are opposed to eating halal meat would ever again dine in any of the Subway restaurants (i.e the ones which serves non-halal items). The reputation is lost.

Depends on their level of Islamaphobia or their hatred of animal cruelty. But most plebs won't really care and will just go along because they're ignorant and don't like Muslims, but they'll still probably go home and hypocritically have a kebab at the end of the day. And I don't see how Subway's reputation would be lost. Subway is a franchise and each business owner is free to serve halal or non-Halal meat just as people are free not to eat at that particular franchise.

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

That's what Islamaphobes usually say. Call it whatever you want but it is usually a mix of intolerance, ignorance, xenophobia and racism, and those things definitely exist. Ignorant people just tend to have a dislike of people who practice Islam and come from the Middle East (or just look like they might do).

Xenophobia and racism.. So now Islam is a race? Isn't ignorant to say that?

Where did I say it was a race? People usually dislike Islam because it's a religion adhered to by people of other races and ethnicities, specifically middle eastern and African etc, hence why it's a mixture of all those things I said. You'd be hard pressed to find someone who is anti-Islam who also wasn't a racist, whether they wanted to admit it or not.

http://www.islamreview.com/testimonials/My_Reasons_Why_I_Quit_Islam_Forever.shtml
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/04/04/criticism-of-islam-is-not-islamophobia/
http://www.asiasentinel.com/society/doing-the-impossible-quitting-islam-in-malaysia/

All those people are anti-islam and racists then. Even dark skins non white people who quit the religion of the birth by choice? Interesting...

[hilariousandco]

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

Welcome to the Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association, Wilikon.  

I was the first member to be awarded with the honorary title of BT Islamaphobe. You are the second. Anyone interested in joining us?

The few muslims I know as friends will be surprised to say the least. So will be the owner of one of my favorite African food restaurant

Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association or "BIAs Club"...

Ah and now the classic response 'how can I be racist I've got a *insert minority here* friend and I just love their food  .

[Wilikon]

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

Welcome to the Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association, Wilikon.  

I was the first member to be awarded with the honorary title of BT Islamaphobe. You are the second. Anyone interested in joining us?

The few muslims I know as friends will be surprised to say the least. So will be the owner of one of my favorite African food restaurant

Bitcointalk Islamaphobes Association or "BIAs Club"...

Ah and now the classic response 'how can I be racist I've got a *insert minority here* friend and I just love their food  .

And your response was a classic one too...

[murraypaul]

^^^ This is exactly the problem. Muslims are not even 5% of the population in UK. Now the remaining 95% of the population is unable to eat pork due to unfair demands from Muslims.

Yes, because Subway is the only place in the UK which sells pork.
Oh, wait...

[bryant.coleman]

Yes, because Subway is the only place in the UK which sells pork.
Oh, wait...

Jews have been to the United Kingdom for the past 1,000 years or so. Pork is a taboo food for them too. Yet I don't see any of them demanding that restaurants should serve Kosher food and they should refrain from serving pork... just saying. 

Also, there are close to a million Hindus in the UK, for whom beef is a taboo food. They are also not making any demands to ban restaurants which serve beef.

[murraypaul]

Yes, because Subway is the only place in the UK which sells pork.
Oh, wait...

Jews have been to the United Kingdom for the past 1,000 years or so. Pork is a taboo food for them too. Yet I don't see any of them demanding that restaurants should serve Kosher food and they should refrain from serving pork... just saying. 

You don't think there are any kosher restaurants in the UK?

Also, there are close to a million Hindus in the UK, for whom beef is a taboo food. They are also not making any demands to ban restaurants which serve beef.

Who are making demand? From the link you posted, not Muslims:

This week people have taken to Twitter calling for a boycott of the chain, and protests have been organised for this weekend outside outlets nationwide.

But a spokeswoman for the company said the menu had not changed, and stores had been able to open as halal franchises since 2007, due to customer demand.

Turkey ham and turkey rashers are being used instead of pork products in 185 stores nationwide, where all meat is prepared according to halal rules.

Four stores in East Lancashire currently serve halal meat: Texaco Service Station in Nelson, Blackburn Beehive Service Station, the Blakey Moor store in Blackburn town centre, and Blackburn Total Garage.

In the past, police have had to intervene after right-wing groups organised protests outside KFC shops in East Lancashire when they started to serve halal meat.
[...]
A Subway spokeswoman for Subway said: “Due to the growing popularity of the Subway chain, with the diverse multicultural population across the UK and Ireland, we put a programme in place in 2007 to ensure that the population demographic is taken into account when new store openings are considered in order that we meet consumer demand in each location.

Subway thinks they can sell more sandwiches by allowing Halal franchises. That is the market at work.

From another link:

Both Stoke outlets are now serving halal-only products – the Shelton location since it opened five and a half years ago and the Tunstall store for the last few years.

They haven't suddenly 'banned' pork from 185 branches, there have been Halah branches for years, it is just that now someone has decided to publish a misleading story to stir up bigots.

[hilariousandco]

Yes, because Subway is the only place in the UK which sells pork.
Oh, wait...

Jews have been to the United Kingdom for the past 1,000 years or so. Pork is a taboo food for them too. Yet I don't see any of them demanding that restaurants should serve Kosher food and they should refrain from serving pork... just saying. 

Also, there are close to a million Hindus in the UK, for whom beef is a taboo food. They are also not making any demands to ban restaurants which serve beef.

Most Muslims aren't calling for this either and most probably don't care as the majority just won't eat at the places that do, but of course you people will seize on the small but vocal militant minority. And Subway has done this of their own volition and are free to serve whatever they want whether you or anyone else disagrees with it.

They haven't suddenly 'banned' pork from 185 branches, there have been Halah branches for years, it is just that now someone has decided to publish a misleading story to stir up bigots.

Key point.

[murraypaul]

For example, in Cambridge:

There are 12 Subway stores in the Cambridge region - seven in Cambridge itself, two at Newmarket, one at St Neots. one at Haverhill and one at Huntingdon.
Only one of the 12, the Subway branch at 301-303 Mill Road in Cambridge, has become a halal store.

Is that really a terrible thing?
People who want Halal sandwiches can now buy them. People who want pork sandwiches can but them at one of the other 6 stores in Cambridge.

[5flags]

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

The other day I saw Pamela Geller announce that there was no racism in the US. Admittedly, she is one of America's leading Islamophobes, but it was still fun to watch. Even more fun was the juxtaposition on the Daily Show:

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/5l1leo/the-amazing-racism---incredibly-not-racist-racists

I like the idea of the "incredibly not racist racists", would apply to many of the Islamophobic crowd on here.

[5flags]

I was on holiday in Yorkshire over the weekend. I popped into a very nice cafe to get some lunch. They served a variety of panini, and I asked if I could have Cheddar and chorizo. The lady was mortally offended as it was a strictly vegetarian establishment. In spite of the violation of my right to eat chorizo, I relented and went for a cheddar and Marmite panini. It was rather nice.

I suspect it was also halal. In fact much of the food we buy in our supermarkets is halal. Naturally, the Islamophobes will tell you this is "creeping Sharia".

[hilariousandco]

For example, in Cambridge:

There are 12 Subway stores in the Cambridge region - seven in Cambridge itself, two at Newmarket, one at St Neots. one at Haverhill and one at Huntingdon.
Only one of the 12, the Subway branch at 301-303 Mill Road in Cambridge, has become a halal store.

Is that really a terrible thing?
People who want Halal sandwiches can now buy them. People who want pork sandwiches can but them at one of the other 6 stores in Cambridge.

Yes because OMG MUSLAMS ARE TAKING OVER WITH DERE SYRIA LAW Y THEY GET MUR RYTES DAN US?!1!blah blah blah.

Islamophobia doesn't exist. It is a Myth...

The other day I saw Pamela Geller announce that there was no racism in the US. Admittedly, she is one of America's leading Islamophobes, but it was still fun to watch. Even more fun was the juxtaposition on the Daily Show:

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/5l1leo/the-amazing-racism---incredibly-not-racist-racists

I like the idea of the "incredibly not racist racists", would apply to many of the Islamophobic crowd on here.

Ha, thanks for that. I'm reminded of the type of people who start sentences with I'm not racist, but... then follow it up with something completely racist (or Islamaphobic (or bigoted if you think Islamaphobia doesn't exist  )).

[5flags]

And for general background and education (and poking fun at bigots):

http://www.loonwatch.com/

[hilariousandco]

I was on holiday in Yorkshire over the weekend. I popped into a very nice cafe to get some lunch. They served a variety of panini, and I asked if I could have Cheddar and chorizo. The lady was mortally offended as it was a strictly vegetarian establishment. In spite of the violation of my right to eat chorizo, I relented and went for a cheddar and Marmite panini. It was rather nice.

I suspect it was also halal. In fact much of the food we buy in our supermarkets is halal. Naturally, the Islamophobes will tell you this is "creeping Sharia".

Did you catch that meme that spawned a while ago after Tommy Robinson tweeted this:







Etc  .

[5flags]

My favourite Islamophobia meme was actually poking fun at Islamophobes: #MuslimRage

http://www.wired.com/2012/09/muslimrage/


I think my particular favourite was:

Orders pancakes at IHOP, came with a side of bacon. #MuslimRage

— Hamza Giron (@HamzaGiron) September 17, 2012

[Wilikon]

Is Sharia Laws above any nation's laws?

1) Yes

2) No

3) Asking this very question is islamophobic and makes you a bigot (i.e. someone who is not open to gay rights)



Bitcoin Sharia Laws compliant FTW Baby!!!! 

[murraypaul]

Is Sharia Laws above any nation's laws?
1) Yes

This is the closest to correct.
Religious laws are disjoint to national laws, because there are essentially optional.
They are 'above' in the sense or covering greater area/population than any single nation's laws, and in the sense of adding on to them, but not in the sense of removing them.
People must obey the laws of the country they live in, or be punished.
Religious people may choose to obey extra religious laws, but the legal system of the country they live in has no interest in whether they do or not.
Religious rules would be a better terms than religious laws.
If you want to choose not to eat pork, go ahead.

[5flags]

Is Sharia Laws above any nation's laws?

Is Jewish law above any nation's laws? What about Christian law? Hindu law?

What does "above" mean?

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

[Wilikon]

Is Sharia Laws above any nation's laws?

Is Jewish law above any nation's laws? What about Christian law? Hindu law?

What does "above" mean?

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

So your answer is (3) 

[5flags]

So your answer is (3) 

I think your bigotry was well established before you posted. At least when Bryant voices his support for Neo-Nazism he does so using his own name.

Can you answer my questions?

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

[Wilikon]

Is Sharia Laws above any nation's laws?
1) Yes

This is the closest to correct.
Religious laws are disjoint to national laws, because there are essentially optional.
They are 'above' in the sense or covering greater area/population than any single nation's laws, and in the sense of adding on to them, but not in the sense of removing them.
People must obey the laws of the country they live in, or be punished.
Religious people may choose to obey extra religious laws, but the legal system of the country they live in has no interest in whether they do or not.
Religious rules would be a better terms than religious laws.
If you want to choose not to eat pork, go ahead.

Thank you for participating. Yes I know jews and muslims who love their pepperoni pizza.
So as long as any religious groups makes the same distinction as you did, then it is upon the pious to follow its faith in parallel to a nation's law, but never above it.

[Wilikon]

So your answer is (3) 

I think your bigotry was well established before you posted. At least when Bryant voices his support for Neo-Nazism he does so using his own name.

Can you answer my questions?

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

This is an open thread used as a vehicle to try to understand each other. The more you participate, the more I understand.

You are free to use your own name if you want

[hilariousandco]

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

This is usually it. Has Wilikon started many threads with an anti-Christian agenda? I don't really have a problem with people being intolerant of religions, just as long as they're intolerant of them all or treat them with an equal amount of disrespect  , but singling out just Islam is a little cliche, and we all know there's an agenda under the surface.

So your answer is (3)  

I think your bigotry was well established before you posted. At least when Bryant voices his support for Neo-Nazism he does so using his own name.

Where has he voiced this, and are you sure Bryant Coleman is his real name?  

[Wilikon]

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

This is usually it. Has Wilikon started many threads with an anti-Christian agenda? I don't really have a problem with people being intolerant of religions, just as long as they're intolerant of them all or treat them with an equal amount of disrespect  , but singling out just Islam is a little cliche, and we all know there's an agenda under the surface.

So your answer is (3)  

I think your bigotry was well established before you posted. At least when Bryant voices his support for Neo-Nazism he does so using his own name.

Where has he voiced this, and are you sure Bryant Coleman is his real name?  

But isn't as cliché to start a thread about Christianity too? I am just here to bring a bit of... fair and balance... 


Should bitcoin wiki allow links to christian religious services?
22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution (my thread, thank you very much)
I found a Christian I actually agree with
History of Christianity
Christian school complains 8-year-old girl isn't girly enough

[hilariousandco]

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

This is usually it. Has Wilikon started many threads with an anti-Christian agenda? I don't really have a problem with people being intolerant of religions, just as long as they're intolerant of them all or treat them with an equal amount of disrespect  , but singling out just Islam is a little cliche, and we all know there's an agenda under the surface.

So your answer is (3)  

I think your bigotry was well established before you posted. At least when Bryant voices his support for Neo-Nazism he does so using his own name.

Where has he voiced this, and are you sure Bryant Coleman is his real name?  

But isn't as cliché to start a thread about Christianity too? I am just here to bring a bit of... fair and balance... 


Should bitcoin wiki allow links to christian religious services?
22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution (my thread, thank you very much)
I found a Christian I actually agree with
History of Christianity
Christian school complains 8-year-old girl isn't girly enough

But usually there isn’t much fair and balance. And I was just using Christianity as an example, but feel free to start them about any and all religions, not just Christianity and Islam.

[Wilikon]

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

This is usually it. Has Wilikon started many threads with an anti-Christian agenda? I don't really have a problem with people being intolerant of religions, just as long as they're intolerant of them all or treat them with an equal amount of disrespect  , but singling out just Islam is a little cliche, and we all know there's an agenda under the surface.

So your answer is (3)  

I think your bigotry was well established before you posted. At least when Bryant voices his support for Neo-Nazism he does so using his own name.

Where has he voiced this, and are you sure Bryant Coleman is his real name?  

But isn't as cliché to start a thread about Christianity too? I am just here to bring a bit of... fair and balance... 


Should bitcoin wiki allow links to christian religious services?
22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution (my thread, thank you very much)
I found a Christian I actually agree with
History of Christianity
Christian school complains 8-year-old girl isn't girly enough

But usually there isn’t much fair and balance. And I was just using Christianity as an example, but feel free to start them about any and all religions, not just Christianity and Islam.

I am free to start any thread I want... as long as our Gods, the Bitcointalk Gods, the only ones that count here, allow this to be the case. But even them have to face an FBI investigation if any of us, Ohh! Devout Bitcoin believers would commit any kind of criminal acts. So technically the name "Wilikon" would not protect me as I am not behind a 1000 proxies and other VPN.

Seriously though only threads about the religions of Christianity and Islam bring the bacon, err... I meant the moolah in passionate replies 

[hilariousandco]

Does your bigotry extend to followers of any form of mysticism? Just Muslims? Just those with brown skin? Is it the beards? Their scary halal foods? Help us understand your fear so that we might help you overcome it.

This is usually it. Has Wilikon started many threads with an anti-Christian agenda? I don't really have a problem with people being intolerant of religions, just as long as they're intolerant of them all or treat them with an equal amount of disrespect  , but singling out just Islam is a little cliche, and we all know there's an agenda under the surface.

So your answer is (3)  

I think your bigotry was well established before you posted. At least when Bryant voices his support for Neo-Nazism he does so using his own name.

Where has he voiced this, and are you sure Bryant Coleman is his real name?  

But isn't as cliché to start a thread about Christianity too? I am just here to bring a bit of... fair and balance... 


Should bitcoin wiki allow links to christian religious services?
22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution (my thread, thank you very much)
I found a Christian I actually agree with
History of Christianity
Christian school complains 8-year-old girl isn't girly enough

But usually there isn’t much fair and balance. And I was just using Christianity as an example, but feel free to start them about any and all religions, not just Christianity and Islam.

I am free to start any thread I want... as long as our Gods, the Bitcointalk Gods, the only ones that count here, allow this to be the case. But even them have to face an FBI investigation if any of us, Ohh! Devout Bitcoin believers would commit any kind of criminal acts. So technically the name "Wilikon" would not protect me as I am not behind a 1000 proxies and other VPN.

Seriously though only threads about the religions of Christianity and Islam bring the bacon, err... I meant the moolah in passionate replies 

Well they're the two most popular, so it's understandable. Doubt many people would feel as passionate if you brought up Scientology or Zoroastrianism or something  .

[bryant.coleman]

Related news from Brunei:

Beverly Hills Hotel Boycotted Over Brunei's Sharia Penal Code

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/06/beverly-hills-hotel-boycott-brunei_n_5271996.html

Hollywood is responding to harsh new laws in the tiny Southeast Asia nation of Brunei by boycotting the Beverly Hills Hotel. The Motion Picture & Television Fund joined a growing list of organizations and individuals Monday refusing to do business with hotels owned by the sultan or government of Brunei. They're protesting the country's new Islamic Shariah criminal law that calls for punishing adultery, abortions and same-sex relationships with flogging and stoning.

I am with the Hollywood in this issue. 

And to know more about the Brunei Sultan, check this:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/06/how-the-sultan-of-brunei-violated-his-sharia-law-with-me.html

These laws are only applicable to the poor. The rich are not affected by it.