.Orger
Birmingham Play
What does everyone think about Behzti in Birmingham being cancelled due to the Sikh community rioting.
Perhaps this is not very PC, but i suspect that if the riot was not instigated by an ethnic minority, all rioters would at least have been lifted by the police and charged in the courts.
We are expected to respect their beliefs however it would appear that they have no tolerance for others.
I was brought up to believe that "when in Rome....."
Totally agree, but watch out - the PC brigade on here are coming to get you
I have no problem with people from different ethnic cultures living here, but they should be required to adapt as much as possible to our way of life, and certainly not vice versa as seems to be the case.
Well, to start with I think it was cancelled due to some members of the Sikh community rioting and not the Sikh community as a whole.Originally Posted by tip top
I do think that it is awful that a few protestors have managed to get what they want through violence. That's not a good example to set.
However, those whose reaction to this was to cry 'freedom of speech' have, to my mind, failed to grasp the ramifications of that 'freedom'. Sure, we have the legal entitlement to speak our minds without fear of persecution. But with that entitlement comes responsibility.
I heard a spokesman for the play on the radio yesterday saying that it was a work of fiction and was not intended as anything more than a work of fiction. I'm left wondering if 'freedom of speech' was really intended to allow us to cause deep insult to people in the name of 'entertainment'.
Really? Do you remember this?
An estimated 10,000 protestors. Bottles and fireworks thrown at the police. Sixteen members of the public were hurt. One police officer was injured. Were the cells of London's police stations brimming with protestors that night? No, they were not. In fact, only eleven people were arrested.
It seems to me that the police dealt with the riot in Birmingham in the same way as they deal with every other riot.
Now, since we've heard what you suspect, here's what I suspect. I suspect that had the rioters been Christians we would not automatically assume that they represented the entire Christian community and, though still disagreeing with them, I suspect that we would have felt a little more sympathy for their position. I suspect that this is because we live in a predominantly Christian society where even if we don't follow the Christian faith its teachings are quietly drummed into us throughout our lives. I suspect that if you had as full an understanding of Sikhism as you do Christianity your post would have been very different.
Sorry. Who are you talking about here when you say their: Sikhs or the rioters?
I was brought up to believe in tolerance…
Have you ever been abroad? If so, where did you go?
Define 'our way of life'.
.Orger
jjc - appologies for not being as eloquent or tolerant as you.
My grievance is that this and other issues including the Pro-Hunt "protests" seem to indicate that we are bowing down to mob rule. Surely this is not the way to behave in a democracy??
p.s. Ttravelling abroad??? I have been to Inverness once. When I could not find the duty free shop I decided not to go back
I was responding to tip top's comments and not directly at this particular case. It was a general remark on the way things are going in this country at the moment. It is almost at the stage where we are adopting their cultures at the expense of our own. And no, I am NOT racist before you start going down that road. I do object however to immigrants arriving in this country and trying to tell us how things should be done at school etc. etc. How often do you hear about rows at schools because somebody won't wear the school uniform because they have to wear their own national costume? That type of thing is happening all the time.
Stand back and wait for political correctness police to slap my wrist.........
1K.Orger
No one is a political correctness policeman however we have to be specific. I think if a school adopts a uniform then it should be flexible to allow peple to adapt it to their faith. headscarves, trousers whatever should all be accomodated. This isnt being PC its being flexible and tolerant.
If people dont approve of something then they have the right to protest. they should demonstrate and they should be allowed to demonstrate. Violence is not acceptable. It was interesting to note that previous nights had deminstrations that have been peaceful and i would like to know what changed to make this a violent and angry demonstration.
There are demonstrations all through the year - a few in Wick this year too - We may not share the beliefs of those demonstrating in Birmingham and may even think they are wrong about this particular play but we surely cant deny them the right to demonstrate simply cos they it is based on their communities beliefs.
I think that the more tolerant and open our society is the better. Variety and diversity is what gives us a better life experience if you ask me.
The demos in Wick were slightly different though!
Accepted.
'Mob rule' is the backbone of our governmental system. Every four years (or so) we elect people to Parliament. The 'mob' with the biggest presence 'rules' until the next election.
However, I take your point. I agree that violent demonstration has no place in a democratic society and it is saddening that this play was cancelled due to such demonstration.
I am a little confused by something though. If your concern is simply with a general indication that 'we are bowing to mob rule' and if that includes the pro-hunt demonstrators, why did you feel the need to make this particular thread about the ethnicity of the rioters in Birmingham? Surely that is irrelevant to the point you were trying to make?
1K.Orger
Let me see "When in Rome...."
If I recall British law was changed to allow Sikhs not wear a crash helmet when riding a motorcycle because wearing a turban was deemed to be an integral part of their religion.
Also a Sikh boy was allowed to carry a ceremonial dagger while he was in school,... yes because it is to do with his religion.
A Muslim schoolgirl girl has taken her school to court because the school will not let her wear the jilbab as the school has a strict uniform code. The school has 79% Muslim pupils and makes provision/leeway for the wearing of certain religion related garments, however, the jilbab is not on the list. The girl and her parents MUST have known the dress code when she first attended the school so why on earth should the school change. Guess who is representing her Cherie Booth (Blair)QC, not a cheap act to hire I am sure. She wants to wear it because it is practicing her religion.
I could give many other examples.
Integration, what integration?? There are certain members of every ethnic minority and religious group who try to push the boundaries to the limit and beyond, wanting laws changed, extra concessions in this and that, just to suit themselves.
This latest Sikh play fiasco is getting towards the last straw. The Sikh community were involved in build up to the play being performed, statements were read out before the show explaining the Sikh community's objections to the play. They were allowed to protest peacefully outside; it was not a peaceful demonstration that got out of hand...they invaded the theatre and caused thousands of pounds of damage. It sends out the message that if you want your own way be violent.
Maybe Enoch Powells "Rivers of Blood" speech was more a metaphor, because nearly every day you hear stories of increasing racial and religious tension. I fear for the future because if you say anything against ethnic minorities you are instantly branded a racist so I, a 51 year old, white male am gradually becoming the minority (voice) in my own country.
WAKE UP, my rant is finished!!
Brokencross - excellent post. I think that's what I was trying to say
It is reaching the point where being a white heterosexual male is a major disadvantage in life
Okay, you didn't bother to explain what you believe 'our way of life' is. Perhaps you can answer this. What, specifically, is it that we are losing in our culture? What are you having to surrender?
All the time? Really? I've only heard of one case; that of Shabina Begum. It's an ongoing case that has been dragging on for some time and as such has received a fair bit of media attention – but it's still only one case.
1K.Orger
So whats new about that?It is reaching the point where being a white heterosexual male is a major disadvantage in life
Being a man has ALWAYS been a disadvantage
1K.Orger
On the news last night i thought it said that there had been demonstrations outside the theatre al the nights of the play and these had been peaceful on every other night. I am sure the police are looking at what happened to turn the saturday night demonstration into a violent one. Violence is never aceptable but surely for what has been a series of peaceful demonstrations where, as you say, the community was involved prior to the run up to the play being performed seems a worth more investigation.
So you consider wearing a crash helmet to be part of your ethnic identity? Interesting.
Here's something else you might find interesting. Wearing of motorcycle helmets became mandatory in 1973. It was only three years later, in 1976, that legislation was introduced exempting Sikhs from this requirement.
So, it took you just three years to integrate mandatory wearing of motorcycle helmets into your ethnic identity. Damn, that's fast.
That's true. Can't argue with that… except that this was in QUEBEC.
It's true. She did take her school to court. She lost. The reason the case is back in the media spotlight is that her appeal opened on Monday.
I wonder, does her school allow the wearing of a Crucifix or a Kipot?
Well if you're going to go as far afield as Quebec, I'm sure you can.
That's true. Take the recent example of the Mental Capacity Bill. The infamous letter from the Lord Chancellor that won over many of the rebel MPs was not addressed to any of those MPs but, instead, was addressed to the Archbishop of Cardiff. It's crazy how these religious groups get involved in politics.
Next you'll be telling me there's a religion that is automatically granted twenty-six seats in the House of Lords…
That's right, some of them did… the others were part of a peaceful demonstration that got out of hand.
And nobody here has contested that fact.
Don't. You're 51. The future is quite safe in my hands.
I'd heard a report [can't remember where, but I'm looking] that the peaceful demonstration became violent after a group of 'westernised' Sikh youths arrived via a local drinking establishment. I don't know if this is true or not. It doesn't excuse the violence. Just thought I'd throw it into the pot.
jjc - read the post by brokencross - it's got three examples. There are more, many more reported regularly but I can't quote them specifically.
I can see where you are coming from though so this is a pointless discussion. We are not going to agree on it.
Indeed it does. If you read my second-last post you'll find my responses to those examples.
Quebec...
I gave up on your post because it was so disjointed, dissecting everything bit by bit. Bad reading.
Basically what brokencross has said is dead right. You can pick away at the details all you like but the main points are spot on.
Makes sense to me. Perhaps if I spell everything out phonetically for you?
You're right, I was simply nit-picking… that a Sikh boy in Quebec was allowed to take a ceremonial dagger to his school is entirely relevant to a discussion of multiculturalism in the UK. Likewise, Sikhs being exempt from a requirement to wear motorcycle helmets is a perfect example of the erosion of British culture.
I note, by the way, that you have still not given a response to my request for specific details of what it is you consider you are losing from your culture. You are quite adamant that your culture is being eroded so I'm sure you have specifics readily at hand…
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks