Woman 'beheaded' in North London

[scottish]

Do you have any evidence to persuade me otherwise?

I don't see an issue with arranged marriages. It has 0 effect on your life so why should you feel the need to poke your nose into other peoples business and religion to find fault with it?

I'm sure if a poll existed for Christians having zero tolerance towards homosexuality the figures would be about the same. Then outside of Christians groups the 'no religion' people will also have quite a few people who have zero tolerance towards homosexuality. It's not isolated to one religion.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I think it's pretty obvious that there is more than one Christian couple in the whole of the UK that doesn't agree with homosexuality. It's also pretty obvious that every single Muslim doesn't have a 'zero tolerance' policy on homosexuality.

Who said either?

I'm making the case, using polling, showing that out of British muslims nearly all have a overwhelming zero tolerance approach to homosexuality... which is not true for Christianity. Whilst Christians will be more likely to object to homosexuality than say non-believers, it's also true to say that Christianity in Britain is much much much much much more accepting than Islam in the UK.

Now, do you dispute this and pretend they're still as bad as one another or what?

In my books, they're both as bad as each other.

Really?

And quite frankly, I think you'll find more Christians in the UK against homosexuality than Muslims in the UK against homosexuality

Because there's more Christians....

I thought you did a maths degree? Surely you can understand ratios?

- - - Updated - - -

Do you have any evidence to persuade me otherwise?

I don't see an issue with arranged marriages. It has 0 effect on your life so why should you feel the need to poke your nose into other peoples business and religion to find fault with it?

Because I care about the rights of women in my country, that's why.

I'm sure if a poll existed for Christians having zero tolerance towards homosexuality the figures would be about the same. Then outside of Christians groups the 'no religion' people will also have quite a few people who have zero tolerance towards homosexuality. It's not isolated to one religion.

Wrong actually.

http://www.brin.ac.uk/figures/attitu...ds-gay-rights/
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpu...s-in-2011.aspx

I could have told you that without even looking at a poll because it's so damned obvious.

Or you can read a comparison of the polling of Christian vs Muslims attitudes of homosexuality via here: http://4freedoms.com/group/maps/foru...g-muslims-with which contrasts numerous polls on the subject.

[scottish]

The poll you've given me shows the people who answered this question;

'About sexual relation between two adults of the same sex. Do you think it is always wrong, almost always wrong, wrong only sometimes or not wrong at all?

37.4% of Anglican, 41.2% of Catholic, 47% of other Christian, 20.5% of No Religion stated 'always wrong' or 'almost always wrong'


A poll of British Muslims suggests that almost half say they are proud of the country’s stance on gay rights.

According to the research by think-tank Demos, 47 per cent of Muslims agreed with the statement: “I am proud of how Britain treats gay people.”

This figure was slightly higher than the average and just higher than the 46.5 per cent of Christians who agreed with the statement.

[Kardan]

Also, just reading up on the 'zero tolerance on homosexuality from British Muslims', that poll says that only 70% of British Muslims consider religion an active part of their life, so I guess that adds to my 'There are more active Christians than active Muslims' statement from earlier.

- - - Updated - - -

Probably also worth noting that that poll was carried out by the organisation that said Romney would win the US election the night before it was held

[-:Undertaker:-]

The poll you've given me shows the people who answered this question;

'About sexual relation between two adults of the same sex. Do you think it is always wrong, almost always wrong, wrong only sometimes or not wrong at all?

37.4% of Anglican, 41.2% of Catholic, 47% of other Christian, 20.5% of No Religion stated 'always wrong' or 'almost always wrong'


A poll of British Muslims suggests that almost half say they are proud of the country’s stance on gay rights.

According to the research by think-tank Demos, 47 per cent of Muslims agreed with the statement: “I am proud of how Britain treats gay people.”

This figure was slightly higher than the average and just higher than the 46.5 per cent of Christians who agreed with the statement.

That poll which you cite from Demos (and I would like to see the data on that seeing as it is a political thinktank which isn't a member of the British Polling Council as far as I am aware, and apparently according to the blogsphere that poll included a sample of mainly non-muslims Britons) seems to be completely out of step with all the other polling taken on the subject, including respected pollsters such as Gallup and Ipsos Mori.

Even the Guardian published it: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/m...-homosexuality

All I am saying with all this polling to you is that you and others do Islam and moderate muslims who are trying to reform the faith from within no favours by pretending that Islam has the same problems as Christianity. Because that simply isn't true.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, just reading up on the 'zero tolerance on homosexuality from British Muslims', that poll says that only 70% of British Muslims consider religion an active part of their life, so I guess that adds to my 'There are more active Christians than active Muslims' statement from earlier.

Ratios, ratios, ratios.

Probably also worth noting that that poll was carried out by the organisation that said Romney would win the US election the night before it was held

Gallup is one of the world's most respected pollsters, in such a tight race that is to be expected. Margin of error is 3%-/+ usually.

[Kardan]

So how come every other major polling company had Obama winning?

[scottish]

Obama won by 3.9% didn't he, so the +/-3% is off by 0.9%

[Hannah]

To make this easy on the eyes, I'll remove quoting unless necessary - but will reply.

@scottish on the front of the Burka vs. hoodies and crash helmets, etc. it is considered that these items should be removed for security reasons as so that if a crime was to occur involving this person, they can be identified - how can you identify anyone by their eyes alone? So while it may be religion, the Burka removes all definitive features of any one person wearing it which as a consequence makes them increasingly hard to prosecute without true identification.

Of course I don't believe that they should be stripped of any of their religions, just that we should not have things banned for a reason of safety, while they can continue to cover their identity because people are too scared to step on politically correct toes.

It was only recently revealed that the guy who committed the beheading was a converted Muslim, that was initially hidden though hinted at thanks to their 'is not terrorist activity'.

I have no issue with the fact that we host several ethnicities and cultures, in fact if people are to come over here and work better than those originating from here then why shouldn't they be here? They're doing us a favour. As I stated before, the thing I have an issue with is what is stated above. Why does their religion exempt them from rules that are in place to protect the community?

Last year, a young male suspected of terrorist activity disguised himself in a Burka and escaped the police who came to arrest him. Of course, they couldn't find him because all he had on show was his eyes - and it would certainly be rude and unacceptable to ask all of the people in Burkas to remove it so they could stop a terrorist from attacking!

@Kardan so your statistics of

Muslims: 2,660,116
Christians: 3,777,585

though unlikely, are still based on statistics given three years ago.

Also, Hijabs - nothing is really mentioned regarding them because while they are still covering the female, they are not covering everything but their eyes and therefore are not stopping any identification. It isn't the Hijab causing an issue - it's losing the face of each and everyone of them who is covering themselves entirely.

[scottish]

To make this easy on the eyes, I'll remove quoting unless necessary - but will reply.

@scottish on the front of the Burka vs. hoodies and crash helmets, etc. it is considered that these items should be removed for security reasons as so that if a crime was to occur involving this person, they can be identified - how can you identify anyone by their eyes alone? So while it may be religion, the Burka removes all definitive features of any one person wearing it which as a consequence makes them increasingly hard to prosecute without true identification.

Of course I don't believe that they should be stripped of any of their religions, just that we should not have things banned for a reason of safety, while they can continue to cover their identity because people are too scared to step on politically correct toes.

It was only recently revealed that the guy who committed the beheading was a converted Muslim, that was initially hidden though hinted at thanks to their 'is not terrorist activity'.

I have no issue with the fact that we host several ethnicities and cultures, in fact if people are to come over here and work better than those originating from here then why shouldn't they be here? They're doing us a favour. As I stated before, the thing I have an issue with is what is stated above. Why does their religion exempt them from rules that are in place to protect the community?

Last year, a young male suspected of terrorist activity disguised himself in a Burka and escaped the police who came to arrest him. Of course, they couldn't find him because all he had on show was his eyes - and it would certainly be rude and unacceptable to ask all of the people in Burkas to remove it so they could stop a terrorist from attacking!

@Kardan so your statistics of

though unlikely, are still based on statistics given three years ago.

Also, Hijabs - nothing is really mentioned regarding them because while they are still covering the female, they are not covering everything but their eyes and therefore are not stopping any identification. It isn't the Hijab causing an issue - it's losing the face of each and everyone of them who is covering themselves entirely.

There's a MASSIVE difference between going into a bank with a crash helmet on and going in with a religious piece of clothing on.

It was never hidden? They never knew the suspects name, let alone religious background at the time of saying it wasn't a religiously motivated beheading. and it still isn't, the fact he's muslim means nothing, the fact he's mentally ill means everything. He didn't follow his religion as it stated he gambled and done various other things that are strictly against it.

If Christians had a religious belief of wearing something over their head, that would be perfectly acceptable, however due to it being a religion that's 'came here' then it's suddenly not?

[Kyle]

How many crimes have Been committed so far by unidentified individuals wearing burkas I wonder


~~from phone