‘Muslim Patrol’ vigilantes forcing ‘people to stop drinking and women to cover up’ in London

[deleted01]

In some jurisdictions, verbally intimidating people is assault.

Yes, here as well. Assault occurs when the victim perceives themselves to be in immediate personal unlawful danger, and includes verbal intimidation.

I think this is ridiculous, and horrible. I kind of agree with the idea that if you really don't like the way the people in a country live, then relocation is probably the best option for you. Attempting to intimidate and harass people on the streets is not only illegal, but unfair to the people being victimised. We do observe the customs of a different country if we go there, so the least we should expect is the same courtesy. Both sides of this need to pack it the fuck in and leave each other alone.

[Inigima]

Surely harassment is against the law in Britain? Obviously this is unacceptable; the tools to deal with it are already in place.

[Castel]

Christ. One of the things I hate most about this story is that the "nationalists" have something to point their finger at and use as validation.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Castel,

That's why I posted the link I posted. This isn't a "Muslim" problem. It's a jerks who like to yell and intimidate people problem.

[Sci-2]

Sorry Scot but to some extent it's a problem that relates to cultural views of women that are tied to Islam. Same with India's problem with women being tied to Hinduism.

Doesn't mean Islam or Hinduism must be sexist, but I don't see how one gets around the fact that traditions & beliefs surrounding both faiths are problematic.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sci,

Then perhaps we should call it a patriarchially dominated faith problem?

[Sci-2]

Oh, I personally think it takes secularism and science to push against sexism prevalent intertwined with just about every major religion I can think of.

eta: But to be clear I'm not saying religion is intrinsically evil, and it does women in these faiths to push them to evolve. I just think you need secularism to push from the outside as well.

[Castel]

Castel,

That's why I posted the link I posted. This isn't a "Muslim" problem. It's a jerks who like to yell and intimidate people problem.

Regardless, they're probably stuck half-way between glee and righteous outrage right now.

Oh, I personally think it takes secularism and science to push against sexism prevalent intertwined with just about every major religion I can think of.

Yeah,without some sort of outside push due to secularism or changing mores would anything ever change? It seems to me that religions aren't that good at reform, especially when it contradicts the word of God.

[Sci-2]

I think the other thing is religious tolerance. When you have choices you see more reform. I suspect this is the case with lower castes converting out of Hinduism.

[Howdyphillip]

I would like to chime in that there are a myriad of things that happen here in the United States that I vehemently disagree with and would like to change There are some laws on the books that I have no problem denouncing even publicly.

If anyone tells me because I don't like how things are run here that I should move, I would retort that they can place the spot where their maxilla and mandible converge and place it on my kosher tookus.

That being said, These guys should be arrested and charged as they are breaking the law. They have every right to say what they want to be law in their neighborhood, but absolutely no right to enforce anything.

[Sci-2]

If anyone tells me because I don't like how things are run here that I should move, I would retort that they can place the spot where their maxilla and mandible converge and place it on my kosher tookus.

I don't think anyone is making the argument that their opinion is why they should move, rather it is their vigilantism that is the problem.

[straits]

Idiots being idiots. Stop teh presses. This is assault, and should be dealt with as such.

Yeah,without some sort of outside push due to secularism or changing mores would anything ever change? It seems to me that religions aren't that good at reform, especially when it contradicts the word of God.

There is a bit of a problem with what these guys are doing, in that it is hard to convince them that it's wrong. They believe that they are doing this for a greater good rather than a selfish cause (unlike most assaults, which are mainly random), and this is how they justify it to themselves.

I don't see it becoming a trend though.

[The Anti-Targ]

In a lot of places being drunk in public is illegal. Also drinking in public is outlawed in some parts of cities (in whole cities too). In other places in the world neighbourhoods get a significant say in whether (or how many) premises get alcohol licenses. So I have no problem with Muslims strenuously advocating for a reduced presence of alcohol in their neighbourhoods, via legal means.

Happily reducing the presence of alcohol in their areas will reduce or eliminate the other things that offend.

I'm sure if the upper-class neighbourhoods saw a lot of yobbish, drunken behaviour the authorities would be quickly called in to move them along.

Intimidating and threatening stuff is only going to increase the inter-cultural conflict and tension, so I don't think the Muslim community's tactics are wise or beneficial.

[Robin Of House Hill]

In Los Angeles, there was once a Memphis style barbecue restaurant, called, "The Pig"...in the middle of an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood. There were no protests, no shouting, no threats, no violence. The restaurant ultimately closed, because it wasn't in a terribly convenient location and most of the "locals" didn't eat there. The point is that I am sure that many of the residents found it offensive, but they didn't behave like idiots.

[Merentha]

Yeah,without some sort of outside push due to secularism or changing mores would anything ever change? It seems to me that religions aren't that good at reform, especially when it contradicts the word of God.

The word of god is whatever the proponents of the faith want it to be, and certain elements of religions are very good at reform. Thing is, like any large institution, it is rarely in the interests of the institution to change the status quo.

[mcbigski]

The point is that I am sure that many of the residents found it offensive, but they didn't behave like idiots.

Did they actually find it offensive? My understanding is that keeping kosher is part of a Jew's covenant with God, but the goyim can eat whatever we like. It's not really analagous to Muslims objecting to pork/alcohol/western fashion since Judaism is non proseltysing, wheras, my understanding is that Muslims have a duty to spread Islam. And it's a short step from there to 'nonbelievers shouldn't eat pork/drink alcohol/display muffin tops'. I suspect that's why one tradition tends to be more tolerant than the other on what nonbelievers do. And consequently why one tends to 'act like idiots' more often.

[Sci-2]

Religions that demand others conform are more likely to take up violence than those that do not. I suspect having a Hell in the faith might be correlate to acts of violence/harassment, perhaps even serve as a contributing factor.

[Robin Of House Hill]

So, the desire to spread one's belief in a deity one cannot prove exists and the fear of some imaginary punishment for not adhering to that deity's demands, leads to irrational, bellicose acts. The American Psychiatric Association should look into this, at once.

[Sci-2]

Well it isn't necessarily the case. Note the number of Christian conservatives that nonviolently oppose gay marriage.

[Castel]

Did they actually find it offensive? My understanding is that keeping kosher is part of a Jew's covenant with God, but the goyim can eat whatever we like. It's not really analagous to Muslims objecting to pork/alcohol/western fashion since Judaism is non proseltysing, wheras, my understanding is that Muslims have a duty to spread Islam. And it's a short step from there to 'nonbelievers shouldn't eat pork/drink alcohol/display muffin tops'. I suspect that's why one tradition tends to be more tolerant than the other on what nonbelievers do. And consequently why one tends to 'act like idiots' more often.

Do they? Well, maybe they do but I don't recall anything saying that you should force your message on people.Quite the opposite. I'm pretty sure that Mohammed wasn't for forcing the Christians or other non-believers to change (though he had issues with the Jews) but that might have been a political move as he was more or less retconning their religion.

But a lot of that comes from stuff I read as a child and they were all by Islamic scholars so *shrugs* pinch of salt.

EDIT2: A quick google search tells me that the non-religious are allowed to drink alcohol and eat pork,but not to display it, so they have some basis for this.

The word of god is whatever the proponents of the faith want it to be, and certain elements of religions are very good at reform. Thing is, like any large institution, it is rarely in the interests of the institution to change the status quo.

Not really. For Christians,maybe. Islam however keeps pounding it in that the Qur'an is God's word. You can't just write things off by saying: "this verse was before Mohammed came so it doesn't apply". That doesn't mean that the normal doublethink doesn't happen, it has to for anyone living in a pluralist society, ime it doesn't have the same explicit arguments and outs that I see liberal Christians use so effectively.

edit: If major reform comes I'd love to see how it would be justified.

Religions that demand others conform are more likely to take up violence than those that do not. I suspect having a Hell in the faith might be correlate to acts of violence/harassment, perhaps even serve as a contributing factor.

Honestly I'm surprised that more religious people aren't like this. Hell + Great Adversary and moral dualism + Eternal punishment= this should be the default state. Unless you ignore the teachings of your good book of course.