One Law for All: report from the February 11th protest in London

February 15, 2012 — xanthippa
(My apologies – embedding decided not to work in this post, though I have no idea why, it’s not like I haven’t done it in several other posts just today…)
Following is an email I received from Maryam Namazie of One Law For All, reporting on the event and supplying some excellent links.  Congratulations on a successful event – and thank you to each and every person who participated and/or helped spread the word:  this is one fight we must not back down from!!!
One Law for All held a successful rally in defence of free expression on Saturday 11 February 2012 opposite the Houses of Parliament. Hundreds braved the cold weather to join the rally at Old Palace Yard.
The rally followed several incidents in London recently where freedom of expression was curtailed in favour of fear of causing offence. In one incident, a talk on sharia law by One Law for All’s Anne Marie Waters was cancelled following threats of violence. Rhys Morgan was told by his school to remove a picture of Jesus and Mo from his Facebook page – a picture he had used in solidarity with the University College London Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society who had been asked by their student union to remove the same image. Both UCL and the London School of Economics have since passed draconian motions which will further restrict religious criticism or satire at their schools.
Speakers at the rally included A C Grayling, Nick Cohen, Caroline Cox, Gita Sahgal, Keith Porteous Wood, and Rhys Morgan.
The event was sponsored by the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science UK and featured Richard Dawkins who told the crowd to ‘stop being so damn respectful’ and that without freedom of speech, society would be a ‘scientific, technological, moral dark age’.
Maryam Namazie of One Law for All closed the rally by remembering those, around the world, who are fighting for freedom of expression, often at cost of their lives.
Actions to mark the occassion were also held in other cities, including Germany, Portugal and South Africa. Some highlights included a solidarity rally in Warsaw, Poland: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqRBW7zGflk&fb_source=message, a fundraising dinner for One Law for All in Melbourne, Australia and the start of a campaign by Women’s Initiative for Citizenship and Universal Rights in France to denounce discrimination faced by women due to the application of unfair laws in France.
The Free Expression Day of Action was endorsed by hundreds of people and organisations: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/endorsements-for-11-february-day-of-action-for-free-expression/.
As a follow up to the day, One Law for All has initiated a campaign in defence of 23 year old writer, Hamza Kashgari, who faces execution in Saudi Arabia for tweeting about Mohammad, Islam’s prophet. To support the campaign, click here: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/freedom-for-saudi-writer-hamza-kashgari/.
NOTES:
2. To donate to the work of One Law for All, please either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/donate/. We need regular support and also for supporters to commit to giving at least £5-10 a month via direct debit. You can find out more about how to join the 100Club here: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/donate/.
3. If you shop online, please do so via the Easy Fundraising website: http://www.easyfundraising.org.uk/register-supporter/?char=40474. It won’t cost you anything extra but can help raise much needed funds for One Law for All.
4. For more information, contact:
Maryam Namazie
Anne Marie Waters
Spokespersons
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Posted in freedoms, politics, religion. Tags: , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Jason Kenney defunds ‘Palestine House’

February 15, 2012 — xanthippa

OK – the credit for this one goes to BCF! 

He did all the investigative journalism,  the documentation and he exerted the political pressure necessary for the Minister to be able to do his job!

Well done, BCF!!!

Of course, in a just world, these would be criminal charges – not just a simple de-funding.  But, as ‘they’ say, Harper is an incrementalist – and this is a first tiny little baby step in the right direction.

Posted in politics, religion. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Thunderf00t: The BEST emotional PORN

February 14, 2012 — xanthippa

He is right, of course!

In a similar vein…

People often justify ‘religion’ by saying that ‘it brings people comfort’.  Quite aside from the validity of the justification, I am begining to doubt the truth of the statement.

Let me explain…

Many of my friends are religious – and yes, they do claim that their religious beliefs bring them ‘comfort’ and make them ‘feel better’.  Not being religious myself, I have simply accepted this assertion at face value.  While I never bought in to the claim that it is ‘good’ to promote/accept things simply because they make you ‘feel good’, I had never questioned the assertion itself.

Until, that is…

A friend of mine got hit by a truck while riding her motorcycle.  She was really lucky – not only did she survive, thanks to medical advances, she did not loose the leg that was so badly injured in the crash.

This friend also happens to be deeply Catholic.

One day, her (then very pregnant) daughter and I visited her in the hospital.  My friend had already had one surgery to screw the bones of her leg back together, but was still waiting for more surgeries, including the one that would use a skin graft to try to close some of the biggest wounds.  (Sorry to go into this much detail – it goes to ‘state of mind’…  My friend was hurting, afraid, and had almost died in a crash before her first grandchild was to be born.)

While we were putting on a brave pretense of lighearted banter to relieve my friend’s discomfort, a volunteer had come into her room.  This woman offered to pray with us – which my friend and her daughter gladly accepted.  At the end of the prayer, whe did some sort of a blessing and handed each of them a consecrated host.   Both my friend and her daughter said they were greatly comforted, we thanked the woman, and she left.

The thing is – I don’t think that it did make them feel better!

No, I am not accusing them of lying – I think they truly believed they ‘felt better’.  But their behaviour betrayed their actual state of mind.

Both their demeanours changed – for the worse.  Instead of talking about how lucky my friend was, that she survived the crash, she was tearful, saying things like that since her soul has been cleansed, it would be OK for her to die now…which brought hysterical crying from her daughter, and then it spiralled downwards from there.

They were certainly not ‘feeling better’!

There was a disconnect between how they believed religion made them feel and how it actually did make them feel.  Sure, it can make some people feel better at some times – but, we need to treat self-reporting in this area in the same way as we treat self-reporting in other fields…with a very healthy dose of skepticism.

By constantly focusing the mind on physical death and ‘fear of God’, ‘religion’ brings terror, not comfort, to the people who fall for it.  And they don’t even realize it themselves…

Thunderf00t compares ‘religion’ to ‘spiritual masturbation’ – and I can certainly understand his point.  But, having thought about it, I am wondering if it would not be more accurate to see ‘religion’ as ‘picking on a spiritual scab’:  it is hard to stop doing it, even when you know it is bad for you!

Posted in atheism, religion. Tags: , , , . Leave a Comment »

Tarek Fatah discusses the Burka

January 26, 2012 — xanthippa

I have a fundamental problem with giving the government – any government – the right to regulate clothing.  From public nudity to the burqa – I am not owned by anyone else and therefore, I do not accept anyone else’s authority to dictate what I do or do not wear.

Having said this, I do agree with Mr. Fatah on just about all the important points:  private businesses must retain the right to assert dress codes on their property, even if it is open to the public.  In other words, ‘No shoes, No shirt, No face – No service’ must be at the discretion of the private business or individual (this would include taxis and private transportation firms as well as real property).

In addition, I also agree with Mr. Fatah that the government has the right – I would assert the responsibility – to ensure that people in publicly owned spaces, buildings and receiving publicly operated services (like, say, public transport) reveal their faces for ready identification, much as the Quebec government has asserted.

Perhaps some people think that this is ‘splitting hairs’, that ‘banning the burqa’ and ‘demanding facial visibility while on public property’ are the same thing.

I would beg to disagree:  they may have the same effect in the sense that a person who wishes to partake in our society must show their face to do so.  However, they are very different things because they are rooted in different principles.  (And, contrary to popular belief, that does mean something.)

The banning of a particular piece or style of clothing sets up the precedent that the government has the right to tell us how to dress.  I don’t happen to think it does.  If my neighbour decides to start walking their dog in the buff, that is their own business – I might snigger or gossip, but I certainly do not have the right to demand they ‘cover up’, so I cannot delegate that right to my elected members of parliament:  hence, the government does not have the right to tell us what to wear.

(Yes, I know, as shown in the above link, the Ontario courts of appeal have just recently upheld laws against public nudity:  and I disagree with their belief they have the jurisdiction to rule on this subject.)

Because if we give the government the power to rule over what we may or may not wear, the chador is not far off….just wait for the demographics to change a little bit.  No – we’d be much safer clearly setting the precedent that governments have no jurisdiction whatsoever over what we wear and how we wear it when we are on our own time, as private citizens.

However…

Governments do have a responsibility to deliver citizen and resident services safely and effectively.  This cannot be done if the citizens receiving/delivering the services are not readily identifiable.  Therefore, I recognize the governments’ right to demand that faces be visible for the purposes of receiving/delivering public services (and driving, voting, and so on).

In addition, governments have taken upon themselves the responsibility to deliver services without discrimination, especially without discrimination to disabled individuals.  Many people with hearing impairments partially or fully read lips in order to understand what is being said to them.  It is therefore essential that hearing disabled citizens, whether receiving or providing a government service, must be able to read the lips of all those around them – which is also a valid reason for accommodating the ‘uncovered face in public places’ policy.

So, rather than expanding government powers to cover clothing, we should use already existing laws made in order to have an inclusive society to achieve this end.

To me, there is a huge difference between the two approaches, because, after all, the means define the end!

Posted in politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , . 3 Comments »

One Law For All: ‘Hold this date – 11 February 2012: A Day to Defend Free Expression’

January 19, 2012 — xanthippa

One Law for All is calling for a rally in defence of free expression and the right to criticise religion on 11 February 2012 in central London from 2-4pm.

We are also calling for simultaneous events and acts in defence of free expression on 11 February in countries world-wide.

The call follows an increased number of attacks on free expression in the UK, including a 17 year old being forced to remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon or face expulsion from his Sixth Form College and demands by the UCL Union that the Atheist society remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon from its Facebook page. It also follows threats of violence, police being called, and the cancellation of a meeting at Queen Mary College where One Law for All spokesperson Anne Marie Waters was to deliver a speech on Sharia. Saying ‘Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?’, an Islamist website called for the disruption of the meeting. Two days later at the same college, though, the Islamic Society held a meeting on traditional Islam with a speaker who has called for the death of apostates, those who mock Islam, and secularist Muslims.

Whilst none of this is new, recent events reveal an increased confidence of Islamists to censor free expression publicly, particularly given the support received from universities and other bodies in the name of false tolerance, cultural sensitivity and respect.

The right to criticise religion, however, is a fundamental right that is crucial to many, including Muslims.

Clearly, the time has come to take a firm and uncompromising stand for free expression and against all forms of threats and censorship.

11 February is our chance to take that stand.

You need to be there.

Enough is enough.

NOTES:

Contact us for more information or with details of actions or events being organised outside of London:
Maryam Namazie
Anne Marie Waters
Spokespersons
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com
www.onelawforall.org.uk

To help with the costs of the rally and donate to the crucial work of One Law for All, please either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal.

The One Law for All Campaign was launched on 10 December 2008, International Human Rights Day, to call on the UK Government to recognise that Sharia and religious courts are arbitrary and discriminatory against women and children in particular and that citizenship and human rights are non-negotiable. To join the campaign, sign our petition here.

Posted in freedoms, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , . 5 Comments »

Tommy Robinson tells details of how he was attacked by Islamists – again

January 3, 2012 — xanthippa
Posted in corruption, freedoms, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

“A Black Day for Austria”

December 26, 2011 — xanthippa

Do you remember the case of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, the Austrian woman who had the courage to speak truth about Islam?

Her criminal conviction for disrespecting Islam had just been upheld…

Europeans are increasingly legislating dhimmitude!

Where will this end?

Posted in corruption, freedoms, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

ThunderF00t: Futurama logically PROVES God has no free will!

December 17, 2011 — xanthippa

 

Posted in atheism, philosophy, religion. Tags: , , , , . 2 Comments »

Christopher Hitches: 1947-2011

December 16, 2011 — xanthippa

What a bigger-than-life figure!

Love him or hate him, he certainly had an impact.

I’d say ‘Rest in Peace’ – but that would offend him:  he is not ‘resting’, he is dead…and somehow, I suspect he would prefer the direct word over the euphemism.

His thought-provoking, piercing wit will be missed.

He will be remembered…

…for his unflinching honesty:

…and for his investigative work:  even Pen and Teller love him!

Posted in atheism, society. Tags: , , , , . 1 Comment »

When can raising charity money for orphans land you in a ‘re-education camp’?

December 14, 2011 — xanthippa

When you live in a land ruled by Sharia!

Zilla of the Resistance has the story.

(Check it out and have a listen to the music:  I rather like the tune I suspect is the ‘swing classic’ ‘Clementine’ done in Indonesian punk – a definite improvement over the original!)

Via:  BCF

Quite apart from this story, it is important for us, Westerners, to understand that in lands ruled by Sharia, ‘charity’ does not work the same way it does in our part of the World.

This does not mean that Muslims are not charitable people:  not at all!

And it does not mean that in countries with Muslim populations, people do not perform charitable acts for the sake of helping their fellow human beings, regardless of race or creed.  They do – and we have many stories of Muslim women helping Westerners (men, women and children) who were in Japanese prison camps during WWII!

Rather, as Sharia rules every single aspect of life of those unfortunate to live under its oppression, so it has very specific and rigid rules for ‘charity’.

Let me illustrate this with an example:  following the Tsunami a few years ago, people in Bengal (I refuse to use the new colonial name for the country) were upset that many Western charities got volunteers on the ground and started providing aid.  The Bengali fear was that these aid groups were there trying to steal their children…

Many in the West were perplexed by this:  why would the people there refuse aid, willingly provided without any strings attached?

Because right now, Bengal is under Sharia.  And Sharia strictly differentiates between ‘Muslim charities’ and ‘non-Muslim charities’.

It is forbidden, under Sharia, for Muslim charities to help non-Muslims – and for non-Muslim charities to help Muslims (though, to be honest, non-Muslim charities do face a lot of regulatory interference under Sharia and are thus prevented from being as effective in providing aid as Muslim charities are).  Therefore, when non-Muslim charities attempted to aid Muslims in Bengal, the response among the population was confusion and fear – and, ultimately, rejection of much help.  The problem was finally resolved by the non-Muslim charities simply giving the money and aid materiel to Muslim charities, who then operated on the ground…

Another ‘perplexing’ example came even more recently, during the terrible flooding in Pakistan.  Even as money poured into the county through Red Cross, there were appalling stories of whole non-Muslim families starving – even in regions where food aid was plentiful.  Again, people in ‘The West’ could not make heads-or-tails of this and many wrote these stories off as propaganda.

Not so.

The primary channel for the aid funds was The International Red Cross.

In Sharia countries, the Red Cross partners with its affiliated Islamic charity, the Red Crescent, and channels all aid through it.

In Pakistan, which is for all practical purposes governed by Sharia, the Red Crescent operates as an Islamic charity under Sharia does.  That means that Mosques are used as the centres from which the aid (from food on down) is distributed.

To most of us, this does not seem particularly odd:  Mosques serve as community centres, so they are centrally located and accessible.  Plus, they have the room to store the supplies to be distributed, so this would be a logical place to distribute aid from, right?

Plus, under Sharia, the Red Crescent is only permitted to distribute aid through a Mosque.  So, it is not just the ‘logical’ course of action, it is the only permitted course of action.  And the Red Crescent did make various statements to the effect that everyone who came to them for aid, received aid!

So, what was the problem that caused the non-Muslims to starve?

Under Sharia, a non-Muslim may not enter a Mosque!

Not being permitted to enter the place from which the aid from Western countries was being distributed, non-Muslims could either starve or convert to Islam…

I suspect there is a lot more about ‘charity under Sharia’ we just don’t know…

Posted in freedoms, opression, religion. Tags: , , , , , , , , . 1 Comment »
« Older posts
Newer posts »