DEm ah do like nothing going on like dat in Pakistan and elsewhere.

how they don't protest when them terrorists blow up mosques and people in the ME?

bunch ah hypocrites

are those people on the stamps feeling each other batty

I did not hear them say too much when the mufti buggered a bunch of little boys in their school.

RiffRaff posted:

are those people on the stamps feeling each other batty

YUh Rass wicked, Amral should Ban yuh Rass.

skeldon_man posted:

I did not hear them say too much when the mufti buggered a bunch of little boys in their school.

What happened to that case?

Mitwah posted:

skeldon_man posted:

I did not hear them say too much when the mufti buggered a bunch of little boys in their school.

What happened to that case?

Not sure. Seems like a lot of stuff was happening. Someone from the DPP was related to the molester.

RiffRaff posted:

are those people on the stamps feeling each other batty

nah, is Tom, Dick and Harry feeling up she batty

RiffRaff posted:

how they don't protest when them terrorists blow up mosques and people in the ME?

bunch ah hypocrites

My thoughts also as I read this; {“As for CIOG, on behalf of the Muslim Community of Guyana, we utterly and completely denounce such an outrageous action that serves to promote a way of life that is detrimentally opposed to our beliefs and culture,” the religious organisation said in a statement.}

That is one of the reasons people don't take Muslims seriously.

Afghanistan worst them old men after boys and it Acceptable in the Culture.  Any way if people want to waste time thinking of nonsense that is their business.

Nehru posted:

DEm ah do like nothing going on like dat in Pakistan and elsewhere.

This is about Guyana; what has Pakistan have to do with the question ?

Prashad posted:

Afghanistan worst them old men after boys and it Acceptable in the Culture.  Any way if people want to waste time thinking of nonsense that is their business.

This is about Guyana; what has Afghanistan have to do with the question ?

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE MUFTI DUDE? Does anyone know? It seems to have been pushed under the rug. Maybe the PNC police burned the jacket "fuh wan lill raise".

Whatever happen to Johhny B Liard?

Time "short list" person of the year 2015.

Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, who as leader of ISIS has inspired followers to both fight in his self-declared caliphate of Iraq and Syria, and also stage attacks in countries like Tunisia and France.

Why this man who would have been Time person of the year is not a subject of protest for Muslims?

Another reason why people don't take Muslim seriously, is because they see no wrong in their criminal brothers who worship the same faith. 

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

skeldon_man posted:

I did not hear them say too much when the mufti buggered a bunch of little boys in their school.

Cobra posted:

Time "short list" person of the year 2015.

Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, who as leader of ISIS has inspired followers to both fight in his self-declared caliphate of Iraq and Syria, and also stage attacks in countries like Tunisia and France.

Why this man who would have been Time person of the year is not a subject of protest for Muslims?

Another reason why people don't take Muslim seriously, is because they see no wrong in their criminal brothers who worship the same faith. 

 

Al Baghdadi has been chastised and completely rejected by hundreds of thousands of scholars, community leaders, imams etc. in mosques and other institutions all around the world; open your eyes and clean your ears ! At any rate, since when does one become responsible or answerable for the action(s) of another ? Are you accountable for the actions of your friends, brothers or associates ? 

Prashad posted:

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

Who are 'they' that don't address the rape ..... ? That is a problem for Afghans to deal with; nobody else ! There is a word that describes assignment of blame or responsibility to one for the action(s) of another or others ....... it is bigotry ! 

Keffer posted:

Prashad posted:

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

Who are 'they' that don't address the rape ..... ? That is a problem for Afghans to deal with; nobody else ! There is a word that describes assignment of blame or responsibility to one for the action(s) of another or others ....... it is bigotry ! 

This is Muslims stepping on t heir own petard. CIOG Guyana notes...."outrageous action that serves to promote a way of life that is detrimentally opposed to our beliefs and culture" referencing directly the ummah al islam having no tolerance for the LGBT community. Afghanistan is part of the Ummah

But the  UN is a  collective ofglobal states representing modernity as global culture and that  includes the LGBT community. This is another reliance on parochial beliefs and believing it should be universal and expressing contempt that it is not.

It is  speaking of the culture of modernity that CIOG as Muslims refuse to accept. Well I say screw them. Gay people, etc  are part of this world and they are our brothers, sisters,  friends and indeed family and muslin faith does not take precedence here. These stamps represent our new awakening that human rights are not hierarchical. The UN declares that for us.

Stormborn posted:

Keffer posted:

Prashad posted:

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

Who are 'they' that don't address the rape ..... ? That is a problem for Afghans to deal with; nobody else ! There is a word that describes assignment of blame or responsibility to one for the action(s) of another or others ....... it is bigotry ! 

This is Muslims stepping on t heir own petard. CIOG Guyana notes...."outrageous action that serves to promote a way of life that is detrimentally opposed to our beliefs and culture" referencing directly the ummah al islam having no tolerance for the LGBT community. Afghanistan is part of the Ummah

But the  UN is a  collective ofglobal states representing modernity as global culture and that  includes the LGBT community. This is another reliance on parochial beliefs and believing it should be universal and expressing contempt that it is not.

It is  speaking of the culture of modernity that CIOG as Muslims refuse to accept. Well I say screw them. Gay people, etc  are part of this world and they are our brothers, sisters,  friends and indeed family and muslin faith does not take precedence here. These stamps represent our new awakening that human rights are not hierarchical. The UN declares that for us.

Right on Storm.

Stormborn posted:

Keffer posted:

Prashad posted:

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

Who are 'they' that don't address the rape ..... ? That is a problem for Afghans to deal with; nobody else ! There is a word that describes assignment of blame or responsibility to one for the action(s) of another or others ....... it is bigotry ! 

This is Muslims stepping on t heir own petard. CIOG Guyana notes...."outrageous action that serves to promote a way of life that is detrimentally opposed to our beliefs and culture" referencing directly the ummah al islam having no tolerance for the LGBT community. Afghanistan is part of the Ummah

But the  UN is a  collective ofglobal states representing modernity as global culture and that  includes the LGBT community. This is another reliance on parochial beliefs and believing it should be universal and expressing contempt that it is not.

It is  speaking of the culture of modernity that CIOG as Muslims refuse to accept. Well I say screw them. Gay people, etc  are part of this world and they are our brothers, sisters,  friends and indeed family and muslin faith does not take precedence here. These stamps represent our new awakening that human rights are not hierarchical. The UN declares that for us.

You are completely free to disagree with the opinions expressed by others; that but that does not extinguish their right(s) to differ. The UN has nothing to do with modernity; where did you get that BS from ? Its role and function with respect to world affairs are premised on the principle of democracy; however, the reality is significantly and substantially different because a handful of nations have 'veto' powers which allow them to act with impunity at the peril of other less affluent countries. 

Keffer posted:

Stormborn posted:

Keffer posted:

Prashad posted:

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

Who are 'they' that don't address the rape ..... ? That is a problem for Afghans to deal with; nobody else ! There is a word that describes assignment of blame or responsibility to one for the action(s) of another or others ....... it is bigotry ! 

This is Muslims stepping on t heir own petard. CIOG Guyana notes...."outrageous action that serves to promote a way of life that is detrimentally opposed to our beliefs and culture" referencing directly the ummah al islam having no tolerance for the LGBT community. Afghanistan is part of the Ummah

But the  UN is a  collective ofglobal states representing modernity as global culture and that  includes the LGBT community. This is another reliance on parochial beliefs and believing it should be universal and expressing contempt that it is not.

It is  speaking of the culture of modernity that CIOG as Muslims refuse to accept. Well I say screw them. Gay people, etc  are part of this world and they are our brothers, sisters,  friends and indeed family and muslin faith does not take precedence here. These stamps represent our new awakening that human rights are not hierarchical. The UN declares that for us.

You are completely free to disagree with the opinions expressed by others; that but that does not extinguish their right(s) to differ. The UN has nothing to do with modernity; where did you get that BS from ? Its role and function with respect to world affairs are premised on the principle of democracy; however, the reality is significantly and substantially different because a handful of nations have 'veto' powers which allow them to act with impunity at the peril of other less affluent countries. 

Debates are always about competing views and theirs is in the middle of the 13th century and not relevant for us. The UN is about modernity. ITs component structure is nation states; modernity. Its consociational structure is about consensus of views based on the concept of universalism; modernity. It's idea about pooling resources to check states that are contrary is creed is about universal ideas of good and bad not grounded in religion but reason; univeralsism.

The states with veto power is indeed not democratic. However these are powerful state who would care little to join a consortium of states without their interests being conserved. The school of thought with respect to this affords them veto authority so they do not take their ball and go home but stay and dialog and agree in unanimity as a group. It is not democratic but it is the necessary check to over reach that would intrude into their sphere and that keep the system functioning.

Now all of this has nothing to do with a religious group trying to drop insular views on others. The consensus is that all, born into the community of humans on the planet are possessed with specific rights. These define us. It means no one is allowed to selectively decide which human has authority over another because they do not like what they do. Everyone has a right to do whatever they do providing it does not infringe the others to do the same. Muslims do not have the right to infringe on the rights of others to their privacy because their religion prohibits something. They have no such right.

Stormborn posted:

Keffer posted:

Stormborn posted:

Keffer posted:

Prashad posted:

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

Who are 'they' that don't address the rape ..... ? That is a problem for Afghans to deal with; nobody else ! There is a word that describes assignment of blame or responsibility to one for the action(s) of another or others ....... it is bigotry ! 

This is Muslims stepping on t heir own petard. CIOG Guyana notes...."outrageous action that serves to promote a way of life that is detrimentally opposed to our beliefs and culture" referencing directly the ummah al islam having no tolerance for the LGBT community. Afghanistan is part of the Ummah

But the  UN is a  collective ofglobal states representing modernity as global culture and that  includes the LGBT community. This is another reliance on parochial beliefs and believing it should be universal and expressing contempt that it is not.

It is  speaking of the culture of modernity that CIOG as Muslims refuse to accept. Well I say screw them. Gay people, etc  are part of this world and they are our brothers, sisters,  friends and indeed family and muslin faith does not take precedence here. These stamps represent our new awakening that human rights are not hierarchical. The UN declares that for us.

You are completely free to disagree with the opinions expressed by others; that but that does not extinguish their right(s) to differ. The UN has nothing to do with modernity; where did you get that BS from ? Its role and function with respect to world affairs are premised on the principle of democracy; however, the reality is significantly and substantially different because a handful of nations have 'veto' powers which allow them to act with impunity at the peril of other less affluent countries. 

Debates are always about competing views and theirs is in the middle of the 13th century and not relevant for us. The UN is about modernity. ITs component structure is nation states; modernity. Its consociational structure is about consensus of views based on the concept of universalism; modernity. It's idea about pooling resources to check states that are contrary is creed is about universal ideas of good and bad not grounded in religion but reason; univeralsism.

The states with veto power is indeed not democratic. However these are powerful state who would care little to join a consortium of states without their interests being conserved. The school of thought with respect to this affords them veto authority so they do not take their ball and go home but stay and dialog and agree in unanimity as a group. It is not democratic but it is the necessary check to over reach that would intrude into their sphere and that keep the system functioning.

Now all of this has nothing to do with a religious group trying to drop insular views on others. The consensus is that all, born into the community of humans on the planet are possessed with specific rights. These define us. It means no one is allowed to selectively decide which human has authority over another because they do not like what they do. Everyone has a right to do whatever they do providing it does not infringe the others to do the same. Muslims do not have the right to infringe on the rights of others to their privacy because their religion prohibits something. They have no such right.

Whose views are in the middle of the 13th century ? Get real, my friend ! I do not know where you have been but I have been to more than 45 countries; and not only for merely a few days in each place. I have seen a myriad of situations which suggest the 'modern' world has a lot of catching up to do so please do not make the mistake of treating others with condescension by adopting a holier than thou mindset. If you have you not been into any of 'the projects' in the US, please do and then come back and tell us if you still have the same viewpoint about the most 'powerful' nation on the earth. We have lots to learn from the same people who are not as 'modern' as we are but we are very slow to acknowledge that; the word that reasonably describes that is 'arrogance' ...like  Winston Churchill, who represented a nation of thieves and had the temerity to call Mohandas Gandhi a 'naked fakir'. If case you do not know; fakir means beggar. There is no such thing as 'universalism'. Those with the big gun have the big mouth .... until someone comes along to object or challenge them and then the name calling by the bullies starts in earnest; I am sure you know what I mean. I may have digressed a bit but you do know what I am getting at. Muslims have the same rights as any other social, economic or religious grouping to adopt their views on any subject, however, you will note that it is always the same 'democratic' nations who are ever so ready to berate, challenge and even attack those who dare to differ with them. I have seen no evidence or examples of Muslims infringing on the rights of others to their privacy. Like people in all other faith groups, they too have a right to their views and opinions; nobody can take that way from them. Have you been into a church or synagogue or mandir lately ? If you have not, please do.... and be sure to listen carefully.    

.   

Keffer posted:

skeldon_man posted:

I did not hear them say too much when the mufti buggered a bunch of little boys in their school.

Cobra posted:

Time "short list" person of the year 2015.

Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, who as leader of ISIS has inspired followers to both fight in his self-declared caliphate of Iraq and Syria, and also stage attacks in countries like Tunisia and France.

Why this man who would have been Time person of the year is not a subject of protest for Muslims?

Another reason why people don't take Muslim seriously, is because they see no wrong in their criminal brothers who worship the same faith. 

 

Al Baghdadi has been chastised and completely rejected by hundreds of thousands of scholars, community leaders, imams etc. in mosques and other institutions all around the world; open your eyes and clean your ears ! At any rate, since when does one become responsible or answerable for the action(s) of another ? Are you accountable for the actions of your friends, brothers or associates ? 

You have a funny way of comprehending debatable responses. The topic is about Muslims under an organization in Guyana that join with other nations to protest United Nation's stamps to show their disagreement with the message that they deemed immoral in their belief. Therefore, members will have to think out of the box and beyond Guyana to respond to bigger problems they're not addressing or care to address in the Muslim's world. 

Keffer posted:

Stormborn posted:

Keffer posted:

Stormborn posted:

Keffer posted:

Prashad posted:

How come they don't address the rape of young poor dancing boys by dirty old men in Afghanistan instead of making some noise about some stamp.

Who are 'they' that don't address the rape ..... ? That is a problem for Afghans to deal with; nobody else ! There is a word that describes assignment of blame or responsibility to one for the action(s) of another or others ....... it is bigotry ! 

This is Muslims stepping on t heir own petard. CIOG Guyana notes...."outrageous action that serves to promote a way of life that is detrimentally opposed to our beliefs and culture" referencing directly the ummah al islam having no tolerance for the LGBT community. Afghanistan is part of the Ummah

But the  UN is a  collective ofglobal states representing modernity as global culture and that  includes the LGBT community. This is another reliance on parochial beliefs and believing it should be universal and expressing contempt that it is not.

It is  speaking of the culture of modernity that CIOG as Muslims refuse to accept. Well I say screw them. Gay people, etc  are part of this world and they are our brothers, sisters,  friends and indeed family and muslin faith does not take precedence here. These stamps represent our new awakening that human rights are not hierarchical. The UN declares that for us.

You are completely free to disagree with the opinions expressed by others; that but that does not extinguish their right(s) to differ. The UN has nothing to do with modernity; where did you get that BS from ? Its role and function with respect to world affairs are premised on the principle of democracy; however, the reality is significantly and substantially different because a handful of nations have 'veto' powers which allow them to act with impunity at the peril of other less affluent countries. 

Debates are always about competing views and theirs is in the middle of the 13th century and not relevant for us. The UN is about modernity. ITs component structure is nation states; modernity. Its consociational structure is about consensus of views based on the concept of universalism; modernity. It's idea about pooling resources to check states that are contrary is creed is about universal ideas of good and bad not grounded in religion but reason; univeralsism.

The states with veto power is indeed not democratic. However these are powerful state who would care little to join a consortium of states without their interests being conserved. The school of thought with respect to this affords them veto authority so they do not take their ball and go home but stay and dialog and agree in unanimity as a group. It is not democratic but it is the necessary check to over reach that would intrude into their sphere and that keep the system functioning.

Now all of this has nothing to do with a religious group trying to drop insular views on others. The consensus is that all, born into the community of humans on the planet are possessed with specific rights. These define us. It means no one is allowed to selectively decide which human has authority over another because they do not like what they do. Everyone has a right to do whatever they do providing it does not infringe the others to do the same. Muslims do not have the right to infringe on the rights of others to their privacy because their religion prohibits something. They have no such right.

Whose views are in the middle of the 13th century ? Get real, my friend ! I do not know where you have been but I have been to more than 45 countries; and not only for merely a few days in each place. I have seen a myriad of situations which suggest the 'modern' world has a lot of catching up to do so please do not make the mistake of treating others with condescension by adopting a holier than thou mindset. If you have you not been into any of 'the projects' in the US, please do and then come back and tell us if you still have the same viewpoint about the most 'powerful' nation on the earth. We have lots to learn from the same people who are not as 'modern' as we are but we are very slow to acknowledge that; the word that reasonably describes that is 'arrogance' ...like  Winston Churchill, who represented a nation of thieves and had the temerity to call Mohandas Gandhi a 'naked fakir'. If case you do not know; fakir means beggar. There is no such thing as 'universalism'. Those with the big gun have the big mouth .... until someone comes along to object or challenge them and then the name calling by the bullies starts in earnest; I am sure you know what I mean. I may have digressed a bit but you do know what I am getting at. Muslims have the same rights as any other social, economic or religious grouping to adopt their views on any subject, however, you will note that it is always the same 'democratic' nations who are ever so ready to berate, challenge and even attack those who dare to differ with them. I have seen no evidence or examples of Muslims infringing on the rights of others to their privacy. Like people in all other faith groups, they too have a right to their views and opinions; nobody can take that way from them. Have you been into a church or synagogue or mandir lately ? If you have not, please do.... and be sure to listen carefully.    

.   

So what if you have been to every state in the UN? I do not have to tell you where I have been to gain traction on a puerile supplication to the UN by CIOG to deny rights to individuals because of religious beliefs. That is besides the point and if you need to discuss that; create another thread and be surprised there as well.

The point here is that no religion should predicate how a person is to be treated in the world. How they behave in their faith is their business in so far it does not transgress commonsense norms or the rights of others.  We have a hundreds of religions in the world and each with varying taboos . To make sense one must reduced moral precepts to the primacy of a moral core addresses and protects  all of humanity as continuum or the UN fails to meet its core reasons for existing. That core structure is a secular  humanist position. Religious plurality cannot exist otherwise. Those who want one world religion can dream of and preach to it but not demand it relying on scripture. CIOG is off their rockers.  

The rights of all must have a common basis to be valid. It  cannot be to official interpreters of a faith or subject to the behest the whims of a few. That is the matter before us and not all of the other nonsense.

BTW i am an atheist, the worlds only natural religion. It is the largest congregation of humans and the canopy of the sky is our cathedral.We do not have to visit special temples to pay homage to gods and so inculcate the the habit of good deeds. We do that because we live in our temple and abstract the strategy for our lives in respecting the inherent rules by osmosis. No one has to tell us not to respect another. It comes naturally.