# Muslim immigrants in Europe: A major issue?



## JLanguage

I would like to ask all the members here who live in European countries with large immigrant Muslim populations, what is the situation is over there? Are a lot of your countrymen divided over the issue? Do you foresee it to be a major problem in the future? Are the Muslim immigrants treated fairly? And basically stuff like that. I'm very interested in this as we discussed this in my geography class.

Thanks,
-Jonathan.

EDIT: I posted this in the wrong forum. Can a mod please move this to Cultural Issues?


----------



## Benjy

your wish is my command


----------



## cristóbal

Jonathan, I'm not sure that here in Spain the problem has anything to do with them being Muslim, but more that there are lot that are illegal (from Morocco and Latin America).  The Spaniards could tell you more about that though, of course.  I'm just a temporary resident in their country.  But I haven't seen any cultural clashing between Christians and Muslims, if that's what you wondering about.  Like I said, the big problem is the same one that the US has... illegal immigrants crossing the Strait of Gibraltar.  This becomes a European Union problem when in reality, once these illegals reach Spain, they can then diffuse throughout any of the Schengen States.  For example, an illegal who crosses the strait at Gibraltar and makes it into Spain undetected then has easy access to Berlin, Rome, Paris, etc. because it's basically the same as travelling between states in the US... that is, there's nothing to stop you.


----------



## LV4-26

JLanguage said:
			
		

> Are a lot of your countrymen divided over the issue?


Yes, they are.
Those who object to Muslim immigration do it on two different bases

1. As a pretex for racism along the lines of *QUOTE* "see ? they don't have the same religion as we have, so they think different, they have a different culture, they have a totally different way of life, so we'll never be able to get along well together, (so I would never let my daughter marry a muslim..)"*UNQUOTE*

2. "amalgame" (french word which means something like "deliberate confusion")
*QUOTE* "Islam means fundamentalism and fundamentalism means terrorism" *UNQUOTE*

Now, among those who think the above, you've got two categories : those who say it and those who conceal it because they knwow it might be shocking.

As for proportions, I couldn't tell.

Of course, you also have the problem of illegal immigration (as cristobal suggested) which is a different issue.


----------



## Benjy

but i think that some of these "fears" are generated by real problems. extreme example: montbeliard. you have almost one half of the towns population parked in one estate called la ptite hollande. almost the entire population is emmigrants from muslim countries. the fact that the communties are so segregated has given rise to a lot of distrust and social tension.. between both groups. kids on street corners with nothing to do at night etc etc. not a healthy situation.



			
				LV4-26 said:
			
		

> Yes, they are.
> Those who object to Muslim immigration do it on two different bases
> 
> 1. As a pretex for racism along the lines of *QUOTE* "see ? they don't have the same religion as we have, so they think different, they have a different culture, they have a totally different way of life, so we'll never be able to get along well together, (so I would never let my daughter marry a muslim..)"*UNQUOTE*
> 
> 2. "amalgame" (french word which means something like "deliberate confusion")
> *QUOTE* "Islam means fundamentalism and fundamentalism means terrorism" *UNQUOTE*
> 
> Now, among those who think the above, you've got two categories : those who say it and those who conceal it because they knwow it might be shocking.
> 
> As for proportions, I couldn't tell.
> 
> Of course, you also have the problem of illegal immigration (as cristobal suggested) which is a different issue.


----------



## LV4-26

Yes you're right, Benjy.

But the point is that the first argument I've mentionned is often used by people who live in the countryside and have never met a muslim in their whole life and never will.
And in the case you mention, I think the problems do not stem from immigration in the strict sense but from the way the people are gathered according to religious and/or ethnic belonging.
(would you use the expression "dwelling policy" in English for politique du logement?)


----------



## Benjy

ahh ok  i totally agree.. its not so much the culture barrier but the fact that there is no mixing. its a tough call. maybe je vais me faire taxer de xenophobe but i think people feel more comfortable with people from their own country and who share their outlook on life.. so they tend to group. which is fine, just as long as it doesnt get out of hand. there han't been enough "integration". you just have oil floating on water at the moment. its the same thing in england. large industrial cities in the north have attracted large enthic communities that havent integrated very well with population at large. and of course recent world events have done nothing sof the situation 

(poltique du logement = housing policy si je me gourre pas )


----------



## LV4-26

I think it might be a probem of _number_ rather than anything else. I mean the feeling of being a minority, or even the only "alien" in a group (regardless of the category of group, not necessarily ethnic or religious). It's exactly the same as when you join a group of people you've never met before and they've known each other for a very long time and they've had time to build up their own habits, their own language, their own private jokes. You feel uneasy (I do, anyway). So being a minority does make you feel uneasy. You can be a minority in a foreign country and feel uneasy. But you can be a minority in your own country, as in the example you mentionned and you feel as much uneasy. It is not a matter of morals or anything, I'm not saying it is right or wrong, it's just that we're only human beings and the human animal is "shy" and likes to be at ease.

Am I saying the opposite of what I'd said first ? Or maybe you've waken up the part of myself that was in agreement with you ?



			
				Benjy said:
			
		

> maybe je vais me faire taxer de xenophobe


Pas de danger. (de ma part, en tous cas)
And by the way, I think it is :
*traiter* de xénophobe and
taxer de *xénophobie*


----------



## valerie

JLanguage said:
			
		

> who live in European countries with large *immigrant Muslim populations*,




I would like to mention that France has the largest number of muslim inhabitants in Europe, and that most of them are not immigrants. Immigration from Magreb has been really high in the 50's and 60's, so most immigrants have settled in France 40 or 50 years ago. The sons (and daughters) of these families are not immigrants, they are French born in France, with a muslim tradition and a mixed culture. Now begin to emerge new leaders with such a background, and I hope they will be able to enhance politics so that integration is  done better

Yes, there are racism problems, especially due to the ghettos around big cities, but I analyse that more as a social problem: A lot of people leaving in these places are poor and without jobs. 

Another problem is the antagonism between the jewish comunity and the muslims, exacerbated these last years by the conflict between palistinians and Israel, the attacks against jewish institutions or cementeries in France, all the mediatisation of a supposed muslim international organisation*, and the overreactions on both sides.

* This mediatisation was of course consequence of the Al Quaida terrorism attacks. Such international organisations do exist, but this does not mean that all muslims put their 'religious' or 'tradition' belonging before their french belonging. One of the clever thing the former interior minister Sarkozy has done (and I really am not a supporter of him) is give more strengh to the muslim institutions in France, and insist on the training in France of future imams, so that they do not need to be financed and trained in.. lets say Arabia Saudi, and can develop their own politics.

Edit: Sarkozy has been minister of interior affairs, not prime minister as I stated before. I have corrected the post


----------



## valerie

As for Spain, I feel it is a much more homogeneous country than France, from an ethnical point of view (please Catalan and Basques, do not lynch me). Spain has been converted very recently to an immigration country, having long been an emigration country. So there are mixed feelings. People remember that emigration situtation, and perhaps understand more the immigrant situation. On the other side, black or arab faces are more rare, and as such more shocking to a lot of people. (That is the first comparison people travelling to London or Paris do).

There has been a lot of immigration these last years, but all immigration was illegal, as even people working could not get residence authorisation. Now at least, all these immigrants (not only muslims, there are also a lot from Latin America) can get residence and work permits.


----------



## Fernando

As Valerie has pointed out the inmigration problem in Spain is quite new to us. From 1850-1950 Spain has been an emigration country. People went to underpopulated South America and Central Europe (namely, France, Germany and Switz). In 1970-80 many Spaniards in South America or Europe had returned as a consequence of the relative growth in Spain. Most of them worked abroad just to earn some money and then returned.

We were an homogeneous society (taking into acoount that every Spaniard is a mixture of moors, iberians, romans,...). On a side I doubt that any catalan or basque would lynch you, no matter how nationalist they are. Only the worst Basque nationalists would think theirs is a 'race' problem. We had a minor inmigrant population from Marocco and our major problem were gypsies, I think.

From 1995, say, a bunch(1) of inmigrants arrived, as a consequence of Spanish growth. Nowadays, 8% of population (roughly 3 m people) are legal inmigrants + 1 m illegal. 

The feelings of native spaniards are mixed:

- Most Spaniards like to think they are not racists, in comparison with other european peoples. I am not so sure that is true, but we are now in a nice situation to check it.

- The people and the government favours the inmigration of Hispanic Americans (despective, "sudacas") instead of people from Magreb (despective, "moros"), since we think that, because of language, religion and tradition they are more easily integrables (?). That is basically true. Nevertheless, the large national communities (equatorians, 0.5 m people) tend to group together. They are concentrated in Madrid area and Andalusia.

- While most of them, as Velerie has said, are illegal ones, there have not been a strong expelling policy (the main evidence is the arrival of roughly 0.5 m people a year). The PP (right) government and PSOE (left) government have coverted most of inmigrants in legal through several "procesos de regularización". They are suppossed to be extraordinaries process but PP thinks that the major one that is performing now the PSOE would send the message that no matter how you enter in Spain you will eventually became a legal resident, and that hordes of foreigners are to enter in Spain.

- Most Spaniards think the economic effect of inmigration is positive since they are occupying the low-paid works that no Spaniard would accept and that they are guaranteing the pension policy (Spain is the country in Europe with lowest newborn rate (?)).

- On the bad side, the inmigration has boasted the crime rates, specially murders (Colombians), mafia-related crimes (Russians), islamic terrorism and petty crimes (romanians).

- Luckily, there is no anti-inmigrant party and no party consider inmigration policy as the core political problem in Spain. In some places, we have seen some unrest with inmigrants, as in El Ejido (Andalusia). From time to time there is 

- It is important to notice that inmigrants (no matter if they are illegal or not) have the right to education and public health. So many Spaniards consider they are attacking our little (by European standards) welfare state. Many pay private schools to avoid their children to share classes with classmates from other countries that barely know spanish. It is a matter to be argued if this is or not racism.

- Legal inmigrants from Hispanic countries and EU countries are entitled to ask for Spanish nationality. So, most of the inmigrants will become full-right Spaniards in a decade.

Edit: What a speech, isn't it?

(1) I don't know if this is despective. If so, it is unintended


----------



## LV4-26

My own ancestors immigrated to (or rather, invaded) France some 1,500 years ago. They were called "les Francs", I think


----------



## Silvia

JLanguage said:
			
		

> I would like to ask all the members here who live in European countries with large immigrant Muslim populations, what is the situation is over there? Are a lot of your countrymen divided over the issue? Do you foresee it to be a major problem in the future? Are the Muslim immigrants treated fairly?


 I live in Italy and in one of its main cities, where immigration is massive. Yes, people have different views on the matter. Illegal immigration is far bigger than legal immigration, thus you can imagine what the problems are. But let's focus on Muslims, as you are asking about them only. 

I don't think Italians have problems with Muslims in general, racism exists, unfortunately I know racist people and I often argue with them. But racism is not specifically against a religion, it often is about the color of the skin.

One of the complaints I often hear is that we welcome everyone with open arms and are usually very understanding with most people, while they are not treating us that way. If Europeans go to a Muslim country, they have to comply with their rules, traditions, religion, which are very strict. On the other hand, when Muslisms come to Europe they don't comply with anything, thus the difficulty about integration. There's no will to integrate with the society they live in. Basically, we live in democratic countries, where we are very careful not to go against other people's beliefs and traditions. Foreign workers have the same rights and same pays as Italians do, even when we're talking of submerged work. Another complaint I heard and that comes to mind is that Muslisms claim for spaces for big audiences to pray together, they claim the right to have mosques, which is often perceived as annoying, especially for those living nearby the mosque. Also, they obtained areas in cemeteries. Cemeteries are propriety of a town, they're town's territory, and totally areligious. You can rent and in some cases buy a place there, and you can choose the ceremony you like, or no ceremony at all, according to your preferences, therefore the only reason to have a dedicated area for Muslisms is not to mix with the rest of people.
Many Muslisms live together in small apartments, say from 6 to 10 people in a one or two-room apartment and seem not to have problems about that. Many men have at least two wives living together under the same roof and a number of children.

I'm not able to tell if this will become a major issue in the future.

I think Muslisms are treated fairly in my country.


----------



## Axl

In the northern and Midland cities of England (Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Sheffield, Bradford, etc) I would say that it is a problem of ineffable significance.
Race riots occur usually every year. The tension in schools is particularly great, and instances of racial violence are common. *Purely in my own experience*, which includes six years at the multi-ethnic school, this violence is usually precipitated by Muslims themselves. It is also important to note that racial violence is just that - racial. In my experience, and that of many I know, it is not motivated by religious strife. The language of those who indluge in such violence and invective is rarely, if ever, of a religous nature. Though religion can often a provide justification.

If I might generalise for a moment. I would offer a conservative estimate that between 60-75% of northern English white urban citizens are racist. However, I would say that only 5% of this group voice such opinions or allow them to affect the way that they treat Muslims. I would also say that the various quota systems that operate mean that minority groups often receive preferential treatment to natives. In addition, the prevailing mores and laws of our society mean that racism, where voiced, is immediately quashed.

I think it is also important to note that such issues are two-way. An often neglected fact is that racism works both ways. For instance (and I am purely playing the Devil's Advocate) it is quite legitimate and accepted for Asian men to form an *Asian Businessmens' Club*.  If a native Englishman were to forum an *Anglo-Saxon Businessmens' Club* then it would be outlawed and deemed racist. I do not mean to diverge from the topic. I think this is a fundamental reason behind such racism in society. People feel that minority groups receive preferential treatment.

A common argument that one hears is that the Englishman has been free since the Glorious Revolution of 1688. This does not mean enfranchised. He has been free to express himself in any way that does not endanger the State or national security. Even though there were always opinions that were controversial, one still had the right to express them. For example, when Chalrs Bradlaugh, the atheist MP and Republican, refused to take the oath before God and to the Queen before taking his place in Parlaiment, William Gladstone, staunch Christian and Monarchist, still took Bradlaugh's side. His main argument was that it was the right of every freeborn Englishman to speak his mind without been persecuted for it. This particular instance ran things very close, because Bradlaugh's views were seen to jeopardise the State and Christianity - which remained inextricably tied to the State. But even in spite of this, Bradlaugh, as a free-born Englishman, was, eventually, allowed to take his seat.

Another far more commonly utilised argument, particularly among the working classes, can be presented crudely as thus: _*QUOTE"*_*They didn't want us ruling their countries or staying in their countries (i.e. imperial rule), so why should we put up with them in ours?"UNQUOTE*

Once again, it appears that I have divulged, but I means to show another justification for people's racism. They believe that as free-born Englishmen they should be able to speak their minds, as Bradlaugh did, without having a gag placed around their mouths by laws or mores. The second argument is self-explanatory.

I am not saying that I in any sense agree with such lines of reasoning, but I can, unlike some who are blinded by cant and mores, see both sides of the coin. I think racism is wrong. Many of my closest mates at school were Muslim, Hindu and black. But many of my mates were also fervent racists. The racists got on perfectly well with the Muslim and black lads most of the time, and they only voiced their racism behind closed doors and in the presence of solely white boys and girls. Once again, I can see both sides of the coin.
It annoys me, now I'm at university with an essentially southern middle-class and rural (or small town) intake that such people immediately claim that the views of inner-city racists are made out of pure ignorance. While such views may be abhorrent and while they may been foreign to modern sensibilites and mores, they are not made in ignorance. They are made by people who experience the day-to-day realities or city life. They are made by indepedant thinkers - and this is something that these people are often not credited with being. If anything, I would say that those who abide by and adhere to the mores of society are the one's who form their opinions in ignorance - having never experienced realities.

As to your question, are people divided. YES. Very crudely, racism, up until about ten years ago, was a working-class, an upper-middle class and an upper-class phenonomen - the latter two often a product of an educational system that institutionalised racism to mould British men to the needs of Empire. And the latter two are also numerically insignificant.
The newspapers, journals, television channels, political parties etc. are controlled, once again to be very crude, by middle-class *l*iberals.

Here is a trend that is developing. Lower-middle and middle-class kids and young adults are becoming increasingly racist in their outlook. I have experienced this personally. Young blue-eyed boys, who seem to be the most genial and gentle fellows imaginable, actually harbour a deep racism which they only voice when they feel that they in no danger in doing so. The trend is particularly prominent, though, among girls.

Such views are already gaining a foothold in the press. When they do so, such views will have an official mouthpiece. What is politically correct to say will undergo a change as a result. Even though the racists may have been in a majority prior to this conjected change, they were not part of the upper-ten thousand. When people who sympathise with such views begin to gain a foothold in the upper ten-thousand, there will be problems.

I think that the issue will come to a head, in the north of the country at any rate, within the next ten to fifteen years. This may seem pessimistic. But everyone who has experienced first-hand the race riots in Leeds or Bradford or Manchester (particularly Burnley) tends to agree. There are too many undercurrents of mounting tensions over a wide social base for it not to.

Nobody can predict the result.

But if something is not done to ease these tensions, we will see an attempted alleviation from beneath and supported from above. Many will jump on the bandwagon if they see that that it seems to be rolling towards the destination that they want it to. The English people are not known for outbreaks of mob violence, but there have been instances over time (1688 and 1832 for example). In both instances, the masses and the classes combined to attempt to inflict defeat on a minority (Crown/aristocracy) who they deemed to be constricting the freedom of Englishmen.
I for one would hate to think that any Englishmen will ever have to do so.

Axl.

P.S. I sent this to a Muslim friend of mine by email for his comments before I posted it, just to make sure it causes no offence - because it is certainly *not* meant to. I am just trying to shed light on an often neglected aspect of this dangerous problem. I have tried merely to express opinions that, like it or lump it, are held. To neglect them would be to obstruct the path to a peaceful solution.
BTW, my Muslim friends broadly agrees, though he thinks it may be characteristically over-dramatic in its prognostications. But he doesn't deny the facts. He also asks me to mention that he finds that minority groups are not always united and that instances of minority-minority racism are, in his experience, quite common. And that anti-Irish sentiments are also very common among all British citizens.

Just my (and his) two cents...


----------



## Agattau

C’mon, don’t be so politically correct! Playing the victim, are we?  

Although I agree with some of what you said - which might not have been of much significance for people abroad - it is to me, and I thank you. 
You feel the Englishman is loosing his freedom of expression… freedom of what?! - Freedom to hurl random racial abuse at anybody who looks different? Freedom to harass people in minority groups? I think you’re not considering other people freedoms as well. Personally I would not only see these people charged with criminal offences but I’d see them kicked out of the country altogether.

I’ve found the majority of these people are usually the victims of State Benefit; they’ve born in families already in State Benefit and once they come of age they’ll start draw benefits themselves, and the cycle continues. I see it all the time: teenager girls with already two kids so that they can get their own council flats, child benefits, etc… pushing the pram around in their designer clothes depending entirely on State Benefit. Can you blame them? I can’t.
But families with 8 young kids each, drawing over £40,000 a year in State Benefit with both able parents, but none of them work, can’t work, won’t work, thinking because they’re born in the country somehow people own to them or they own the country… when in reality they own nothing, not even the shoes they walk in! And the rest of us have to pay for their keep. Anyway I’m going way off topic here. 

I would like to say a couple of thing on the topic. I’m a bit ignorant about religions, a part from the Catholicism; in fact before coming to England I didn’t even know who a Muslim was; therefore my views are limited by the Medias and general experiences in London. Also I’d like to say that these are only my rather ignorant individual views, and NOT to be mistaken for an attack or to pave the way for it (and I’m not saying it for being politically correct, it’s the truth).

Having said that, out of all religions Muslim (Islam?) is the one I like the least, with Jews coming up close second – all these peace loving bs they claim Islam is - I don’t buy it, or I don’t see it; the way they treat women in general, or themselves in general, the way of life… seem we used to live like that 1500 years ago! Did we not?!
For example, both Muslims _and_ Jews, AFAIK, only eat meat of animals that have been killed in a certain way, i.e. – animals being hanged upside down alive having their throats cut and left to bleed to death. I have no words to describe what I think about that… I’m absolutely outraged, and there’s nothing I can do about it. This is where I struggle believing in religions or God in general.

(too late… must get some sleep…)

Looking forward when mankind will be able live without the directions of religions

…please keep it clean, keep civil

______________________
Argument, again, is the death of conversation, if carried on in a spirit of hostility: but discussion is a pleasant and profitable thing, where you advance and defend your opinions as far as you can, and admit the truth of what is objected against them with equal impartiality. 
—_On the Conversation of Authors_, 1826


----------



## Cath.S.

> we used to live like that 1500 years ago! Did we not?!


I really can't relate that us and them thing. We are human beings, our DNA has not evolved for tens of thousands of years - today's mankind is not more worthy of respect than your average caveman was - some say less worthy, I do.

To answer the main question, I live on an estate in France and lots of my neighbours are Muslims from different countries, women with scarves on their heads, men with big moustaches who don't drink alcohol and imo look much less degenerate than populations who do. Their teenage kids behave like... teenage kids, I don't need to describe this condition as we've all been there.

I don't feel they're invaders, the Earth belongs to all living beings, I have lived myself on a land that was not the one where I was born and my grandparents were themselves Armenian immigrants.

I'm not a religious person, but a man called Jesus purportedly said "love thy neighbor", which sounds to me like excellent advice.

To people who want to start a religious war I do declare: count me out!


----------



## cuchuflete

Hello Agattau,

As you state that you know little about religion, but are quick to condemn practicioners of religions you know little about, I suggest you do a little research into the origins of Halal and Kosher practices for butchering animals. I knew nothing about these, but quickly found this: http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:ew5Ak0gpuWAJ:www.meatami.com/content/presscenter/factsheets_Infokits/FactSheetReligiousSlaughter.pdf++%22kosher+slaughter%22&hl=en%20target=nw


> This method of slaughter              reduces the blood pressure in the brain to zero immediately so that              the animal loses consciousness in a few seconds and dies in less              than a minute.


 http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/Kosher_Why.htm#Foreword

It might help you restrain your tendency to jump to conclusions while in a fact-free condition.

You may or may not know that those practices were designed to protect the health of the consumers of the meat, and also to provide the quickest and least painful death possible for the animal.  Should the practices be updated? Certainly yes, and in fact this is happening.  

Enjoy your reading,

Cuchuflete


----------



## Benjy

with all due respect i don't think you know what you are talking about when it comes to english people loosing "rights" to ethnic minorites. christmas has been cancelled in some towns because of fear of causing offence. english taxi drivers have been banned form putting english flags in thier cars during sports events, but everyone else can. the rediculous thing is its the white middle class liberals in governement that seems to be championing causes that don't exist. unforntunately most people dont see it that way and assume that it's the ethnic communities which demande such "concessions"
=[



			
				Agattau said:
			
		

> C’mon, don’t be so politically correct! Playing the victim, are we?
> 
> Although I agree with some of what you said - which might not have been of much significance for people abroad - it is to me, and I thank you.
> You feel the Englishman is loosing his freedom of expression… freedom of what?! - Freedom to hurl random racial abuse at anybody who looks different? Freedom to harass people in minority groups? I think you’re not considering other people freedoms as well. Personally I would not only see these people charged with criminal offences but I’d see them kicked out of the country altogether.
> 
> I’ve found the majority of these people are usually the victims of State Benefit; they’ve born in families already in State Benefit and once they come of age they’ll start draw benefits themselves, and the cycle continues. I see it all the time: teenager girls with already two kids so that they can get their own council flats, child benefits, etc… pushing the pram around in their designer clothes depending entirely on State Benefit. Can you blame them? I can’t.
> But families with 8 young kids each, drawing over £40,000 a year in State Benefit with both able parents, but none of them work, can’t work, won’t work, thinking because they’re born in the country somehow people own to them or they own the country… when in reality they own nothing, not even the shoes they walk in! And the rest of us have to pay for their keep. Anyway I’m going way off topic here.
> 
> I would like to say a couple of thing on the topic. I’m a bit ignorant about religions, a part from the Catholicism; in fact before coming to England I didn’t even know who a Muslim was; therefore my views are limited by the Medias and general experiences in London. Also I’d like to say that these are only my rather ignorant individual views, and NOT to be mistaken for an attack or to pave the way for it (and I’m not saying it for being politically correct, it’s the truth).
> 
> Having said that, out of all religions Muslim (Islam?) is the one I like the least, with Jews coming up close second – all these peace loving bs they claim Islam is - I don’t buy it, or I don’t see it; the way they treat women in general, or themselves in general, the way of life… seem we used to live like that 1500 years ago! Did we not?!
> For example, both Muslims _and_ Jews, AFAIK, only eat meat of animals that have been killed in a certain way, i.e. – animals being hanged upside down alive having their throats cut and left to bleed to death. I have no words to describe what I think about that… I’m absolutely outraged, and there’s nothing I can do about it. This is where I struggle believing in religions or God in general.
> 
> (too late… must get some sleep…)
> 
> Looking forward when mankind will be able live without the directions of religions
> 
> …please keep it clean, keep civil
> 
> ______________________
> Argument, again, is the death of conversation, if carried on in a spirit of hostility: but discussion is a pleasant and profitable thing, where you advance and defend your opinions as far as you can, and admit the truth of what is objected against them with equal impartiality.
> —_On the Conversation of Authors_, 1826


----------



## Silvia

Benjy said:
			
		

> christmas has been cancelled in some towns because of fear of causing offence. english taxi drivers have been banned form putting english flags in thier cars during sports events, but everyone else can. the rediculous thing is its the white middle class liberals in governement that seems to be championing causes that don't exist. unforntunately most people dont see it that way and assume that it's the ethnic communities which demande such "concessions"
> =[


 Does all that make sense?


----------



## Auryn

Agattau said:
			
		

> Do you have any prove of what you are talking about? I live in England, and never heard of such a thing. I did a quick search but could find nothing of what you are talking about… are you sure they’re not just “rumors”?
> I find it really hard to believe that Christmas was not celebrated in some towns because of fear of causing offence. Offence to who?! So families who normally celebrate Christmas didn’t at all because of these, right? That is ridiculous! IMO



No, Benjy's totally right. I remember the "Christmas is cancelled" story. A council simply decided that there would be no Christmas decorations in town, just in case it offended non-Christians. 

Only recently taxi drivers were banned from flying the English flag on April 23,* St George's Day, *the patron saint of England! Whereas the whole of Britain turns green every year on St Patrick's Day, patron saint of Ireland.

I personally know a librarian who had to take off the library wall a poster advertising a Christmas carol concert, after a _white_ library manager said it might offend ethnic minorities. The story made the local paper, complete with interviews of baffled Asian locals wondering what the fuss was all about.

There are many, many stories like that. Read this for instance:

_London's Southwark Council decided to ban the display of the Union Jack on all council buildings during this summer's Jubilee and World Cup. It feared that such a display of Britishness would alienate Southwark's large ethnic minority population. 

Commenting on the decision, Conservative MP Gerald Howarth said: "Banning flags implies ethnic minorities are disloyal to the Crown, which to the vast majority would be quite insulting."_ (from http://www.student.city.ac.uk/~rc391/jubbly/feud/feud_pw.html)

 EDIT: a Muslim's opinion: http://www.muslimprofessionals.org.uk/forums/archive/index.php/t-948.html


----------



## DDT

lsp said:
			
		

> Agattau, I'm saddened to read your posts.



I have to say in a certain way I am not. Just because of the fact that his posts do reflect what I named in another thread. The current Italian gouvernment (someone is likely to support it, isn't it?) did take clear RACIST positions - which made me feel ashamed to be Italian - on more than one occasion. I already happened to deplore about a growing lack of culture in my country and I do hope that such terribly out-of-time posts might induce those who read to wake up to reality (I have the feeling most people didn't even notice that Italy is taking such a dangerous turn for the worse)

DDT


----------



## Silvia

DDT, I don't share such pessimistic views luckily


----------



## DDT

Silvia said:
			
		

> DDT, I don't share such pessimistic views luckily



That might be because you're conditionated by the general censorship which prevents you from being informed about certain facts going on in Italy...

I am no pessimist, just having a look from outside...  

DDT


----------

