Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
That's why he's saying it should be banned - just like the word ******
This should be pinned as the 2nd post in the thread/
Oxford University Press bans use of pig, sausage or pork-related words to avoid offending Muslims
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
That's why he's saying it should be banned - just like the word ******
This should be pinned as the 2nd post in the thread/
Very few people "hate" Jews. The problem is Judaism and Israel seem to have been mixed and confused, largely by Israel and pro Israel supporters.
That means now when you voice your distaste for what Israel is doing in the Middle East it is construed as anti Jew, rather than what it generally is, which is distaste for Israeli foreign and internal policy, especially when related to Palestinians.
The same distaste would be seen if any other supposed western nation were doing the same thing.
Freedom of speech though innit.
This does seem to be a stupidly overblown reaction to recent events though on the part of Oxford Uni Press.
Agreed I hate likud, its partner parties and their actions but have zero problem with the existence of Israel.
Integrate, Netanyahu wants the Jews to all come "home".
Jewish people with the support of the state drive Palestinians of their own land.
The assault on the boat in international waters was probably a war crime.
Israel ignores international law and continues to build on occupied land.
Israel has used civilians as human shields.
They are as bad, if not worse than the people they say they are defending themselves against.
Israel engaged in a policy of only allowing an amount of food into Gaza that would provide the bare minimum to keep them alive.
Last edited:
I think you'll find most of the Palestinians were there before Israel was created... When farms passed down through several generations of Palestinians are torn up and replaced with Israeli settlements it kinda shows who was there first and who are the interlopers...
PS. Remember, not all Palestinians are muslim (there is a significant proportion of Christians there as well), just like not all Israelis are Jewish (although Netanyahu appears to be wanting to change that with the new "Jewish bill of rights").
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Where did I claim I was speaking with authority?
Nor did I claim the scriptures explicitly said "God hates pigs" but was referring to the general notion that even an image or mention of one is "offensive" to some religious people.
There is a difference between "I don't eat pork" and "I don't eat pork and find anything even remotely related to pigs personally offensive", the latter seemingly being the narrative the OUP are putting forward.
Please explain why some religious people go beyond not eating pork, to boycotting any product with any relation to pigs at all if they don't believe their God hates the animal?
I do - its forbidden to eat it - doesn't say anything about handling it, looking at it etc. None of the scriptures do!
My post was in response to estebanrays question - what religion thinks of pigs.
I quite frankly don't agree with the whole idea of not being able to mention pigs. The only problem is with eating them and just like most of us don't object to people being vegetarians - we shouldn't object to what people want to eat. That's their own business.
But to ban the word pig - thats just pathetic.
What utter nonsense. Banning that lot (apart from towelheads) would turn this forum into a police state.
This
Jews and Muslims aren't supposed to eat pork, it doesn't mean their kids can't read say pepper the pig - that would be retarded.
Yes but the list you posted was BS, complete and utter BS.
They shouldn't though, Peppa Pig is supremely retarded.
This forum is infested with some narrow minded people. First thing they see on the news and they jump to retarded conclusions.
First of all most muslims that are educated will not be 'offended' by pigs as some suggest here, they just don't eat it. How is that to understand? People cry about free speech and yet cannot respect someone else's beliefs/opinion.
Those that say they should go home if they don't like it here and all that nonesense. Some have been here for generations, pick up a book and read about why these people are here.
What about those white British muslims? Should they go home too?
Same subject everyday with the same people talking out of their backsides.
First of all most muslims that are educated will not be 'offended' by pigs as some suggest here, they just don't eat it. How is that to understand? People cry about free speech and yet cannot respect someone else's beliefs/opinion.
Those that say they should go home if they don't like it here and all that nonesense. Some have been here for generations, pick up a book and read about why these people are here.
What about those white British muslims? Should they go home too?
Same subject everyday with the same people talking out of their backsides.
I never said you did, I said you were. With the two options you gave, you implied it had to be one of them.Where did I claim I was speaking with authority?
That isn't a general notion. Some people might be offended, but not enough to say it's a general notion.
Sure there is, but there isn't any evidence to suggest they did that due to complaints. It seems they did it of their own volition.
Because they're thick and don't understand the belief system they profess to be a part of, and hold on such high esteem.
This forum is infested with some narrow minded people. First thing they see on the news and they jump to retarded conclusions.
First of all most muslims that are educated will not be 'offended' by pigs as some suggest here, they just don't eat it. How is that to understand? People cry about free speech and yet cannot respect someone else's beliefs/opinion.
Those that say they should go home if they don't like it here and all that nonesense. Some have been here for generations, pick up a book and read about why these people are here.
What about those white British muslims? Should they go home too?
Same subject everyday with the same people talking out of their backsides.
Agreed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Everything you said though actually backs up what I was implying in my point B. That being is was probably sound advise when the Torah/Koran were written but is no longer relevant.
As dangerous as you think pigs are, the most common causes food poisoning are...
1) Campylobacter - Mostly undercooked poultry and burgers and shellfish.
2) Salmonella - Raws eggs/poultry
3) E coli - Undercooked meat in general
4) Listeria - Cheese
So you're far more likely to get ill from eating beef/chicken than you are from pork.
Further more, rice is probably one of the worst food stuffs for food poisoning. It can generate bacteria resistant to heat and is pretty volatile. Yet it is a staple food of many Muslims countries.
So we go back to my rationale point, should people follow food rules based on knowledge that was relevant thousands of years ago or by current knowledge tells us?