Gay rights, Women’s rights: Sir Ronald Sanders and President Obama did not speak the truth

UK Muslim Acid Attacks

One huge omission reduced the President’s message to soggy Pablum

by Jason

I was surprised by the lack of honesty in Ronald Sander’s new article published at Bajan Reporter. President Obama: The Man Unveiled is Sir Ronald’s assessment of the President’s Inauguration speech and a tribute to Obama’s focus upon gay and women’s rights.

The lack of honesty by both Obama and Sir Ronald is the truth that both deliberately ignored: the greatest threat to Gay/Lesbian and Women’s rights today stems from the followers of one religion: Islam.

2013: Muslim vigilante gangs patrol London streets

London: Muslim gay hate poster

London: Muslim gay hate poster

In the UK we’ve recently seen an increase in groups of young Muslim males enforcing Islamic standards upon citizens on British streets. Women with ‘immoral clothing‘ are targeted as are pedestrians carrying or drinking alcohol. The horrific Muslim acid attack on a young Victoria Secret shop girl mirrors similar attacks throughout Europe as a core of Muslims use violence to impose their beliefs upon others.

Can lynchings of gays and lesbians be far behind the acid attacks?

Hanging is the usual method of taking care of gays throughout the Middle East and Persia – although in Afghanistan they prefer to throw gays from tall buildings.

And in the midst of the ongoing Islamic-motivated violence against human rights, conspicuously absent is any kind of movement within Islam to stop those who use violence to impose Muslim beliefs and standards upon others. The Muslim patrols are a sign of things to come.

Over 90% of honour murders worldwide are performed by members of one religion: Islam. The Koran instructs men to discipline their wives with beatings. That is the instruction of Islam’s most holy scriptures.

“Against the reality of historical and current events concerning human rights for gays, lesbians and women, both Obama and Sanders are cowards who did not speak the truth.”

President Obama was silent on the role of Islam in using violence against gays, lesbians and women. Sir Ronald Sanders was equally silent.

He is the first President to identify discrimination against homosexuals and lesbians as an infringement of their rights and a wrong that cries out for correction. “Our journey is not complete”, he declared. “until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law, for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal, as well”.

Sir Ronald Sanders at The Bajan Reporter

45 Comments

Filed under Human Rights, Religion

45 responses to “Gay rights, Women’s rights: Sir Ronald Sanders and President Obama did not speak the truth

  1. Numbers

    coming to an island near you where numbers of Muslims reach about 5%

  2. WSD

    Good article BFP!

  3. Well Well

    I really think this muslim\Islamic dictator wannabes take things too far and should not get offended if they are all eventually nuked, giving us all a break from their ignorant ideology.

  4. A policy holder

    Indeed a ‘provocative’ article, Rex, and one that I am going to share with friends. Thankfully, the situation is not akin to that here in Sydney and, hopefully, it will never be.
    I do believe in the right to self-expression but reject strongly the perceived ‘right’ to practise ‘exclusiveness’. Focusing on characteristics that divide rather than unite are, in my opinion, counter productive and to create enclaves where indigenes are made to feel foreigners in their own homeland is manifestly wrong.
    AN ARTICLE WELL WORTH READING. DJ

    From: wrecks01@xtra.co.nz
    To: ottatella@hotmail.com
    Subject: Article in today’s “Telegraph”
    Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 11:19:29 +1300

    In a provactive personal piece, Jane Kelly explains how immigration has changed where she lives
    “WHEN you go swimming, it’s much healthier to keep your whole body completely covered, you know.” The Muslim lady behind the counter in my local pharmacy has recently started giving me advice like this. It’s kindly meant and I’m always glad to hear her views because she is one of the few people in west London where I live who talks to me.
    The streets around Acton, which has been my home since 1996, have taken on a new identity. Most of the shops are now owned by Muslims and even the fish and chip shop and Indian takeaway are Halal. It seems that almost overnight it’s changed from Acton Vale into Acton Veil.
    Of the 8.17 million people in London, one million are Muslim, with the majority of them young families. That is not, in reality, a great number. But because so many Muslims increasingly insist on emphasising their separateness, it feels as if they have taken over; my female neighbours flap past in full niqab, some so heavily veiled that I can’t see their eyes. I’ve made an effort to communicate by smiling deliberately at the ones I thought I was seeing out and about regularly, but this didn’t lead to conversation because they never look me in the face.
    I recently went to the plainly named “Curtain Shop” and asked if they would put some up for me. Inside were a lot of elderly Muslim men. I was told that they don’t do that kind of work, and was back on the pavement within a few moments. I felt sure I had suffered discrimination and was bewildered as I had been there previously when the Muslim owners had been very friendly. Things have changed. I am living in a place where I am a stranger.
    I was brought up in a village in Staffordshire, and although I have been in London for a quarter of a century I have kept the habit of chatting to shopkeepers and neighbours, despite it not being the done thing in metropolitan life. Nowadays, though, most of the tills in my local shops are manned by young Muslim men who mutter into their mobiles as they are serving. They have no interest in talking to me and rarely meet my gaze. I find this situation dismal. I miss banter, the hail fellow, well met chat about the weather, or what was on TV last night.
    More worryingly, I feel that public spaces are becoming contested. One food store has recently installed a sign banning alcohol on the premises. Fair enough. But it also says: “No alcohol allowed on the streets near this shop.” I am no fan of street drinking, and rowdy behaviour and loutish individuals are an aspect of modern British ‘‘culture’’ I hate. But I feel uneasy that this shopkeeper wants to control the streets outside his shop. I asked him what he meant by his notice but he just smiled at me wistfully.
    Perhaps he and his fellow Muslims want to turn the area into another Tower Hamlets, the east London borough where “suggestive” advertising is banned and last year a woman was refused a job in a pharmacy because she wasn’t veiled.
    On the other hand, maybe I should be grateful. At least in Acton there is just a sign in a shop. Since the start of the year there have been several reports from around London of a more aggressive approach. Television news footage last week showed incidents filmed on a mobile phone on a Saturday night, in the borough of Waltham Forest, of men shouting “This is a Muslim area” at white Britons.
    The video commentary stated: “From women walking the street dressed like complete naked animals with no self-respect, to drunk people carrying alcohol, we try our best to capture and forbid it all.”
    Another scene showed hooded youths forcing a man to drop his can of lager, telling him they were the “Muslim patrol” and that alcohol is a “forbidden evil”. The gang then approached a group of white girls enjoying a good night out, telling them to “forbid themselves from dressing like this and exposing themselves outside the mosque”.
    Worse, though, is film footage from last week, thought to have been taken in Commercial Street, Whitechapel, which showed members of a group who also called themselves a “Muslim patrol” harassing a man who appeared to be wearing make-up, calling him a “bloody fag”. In the video posted on YouTube last week, the passer-by is told he is “walking through a Muslim area dressed like a fag” and ordered to get out. Last Thursday, police were reported to have arrested five “vigilantes” suspected of homophobic abuse.
    There are, of course, other Europeans in my area who may share my feelings but I’m not able to talk to them easily about this situation as they are mostly immigrants, too. At Christmas I spoke to an elderly white woman about the lack of parsnips in the local greengrocer, but she turned out to have no English and I was left grumbling to myself.
    Poles have settled in Ealing since the Second World War and are well assimilated, but since 2004 about 370,000 east Europeans have arrived in London. Almost half the populations of nearby Ealing and Hammersmith were born outside the UK. Not surprisingly, at my bus stop I rarely hear English spoken. I realise that we can’t return to the time when buses were mainly occupied by white ladies in their best hats and gloves going shopping, but I do feel nostalgic for the days when a journey on public transport didn’t leave me feeling as if I have only just arrived in a strange country myself.
    There are other “cultural differences” that bother me, too. Over the past year I have been involved in rescuing a dog that was kept in a freezing shed for months. The owners spoke no English. A Somali neighbour kept a dog that he told me he was training to fight, before it was stolen by other dog fighters. I have tried to re-home several cats owned by a family who refuse to neuter their animals, because of their religion.
    In the Nineties, when I arrived, this part of Acton was a traditional working-class area. Now there is no trace of any kind of community – that word so cherished by the Left. Instead it has been transformed into a giant transit camp and is home to no one. The scale of immigration over recent years has created communities throughout London that never need to – or want to – interact with outsiders.
    It wasn’t always the case: since the 1890s thousands of Jewish, Irish, Afro-Caribbean, Asian and Chinese workers, among others, have arrived in the capital, often displacing the indigenous population. Yes, there was hateful overt racism and discrimination, I’m not denying that. But, over time, I believe we settled down into a happy mix of incorporation and shared aspiration, with disparate peoples walking the same pavements but returning to very different homes – something the Americans call “sundown segregation”.
    But now, despite the wishful thinking of multiculturalists, wilful segregation by immigrants is increasingly echoed by the white population – the rate of white flight from our cities is soaring. According to the Office for National Statistics, 600,000 white Britons have left London in the past 10 years. The latest census data shows the breakdown in telling detail: some London boroughs have lost a quarter of their population of white, British people. The number in Redbridge, north London, for example, has fallen by 40,844 (to 96,253) in this period, while the total population has risen by more than 40,335 to 278,970. It isn’t only London boroughs. The market town of Wokingham in Berkshire has lost nearly 5 per cent of its white British population.
    I suspect that many white people in London and the Home Counties now move house on the basis of ethnicity, especially if they have children. Estate agents don’t advertise this self-segregation, of course. Instead there are polite codes for that kind of thing, such as the mention of “a good school”, which I believe is code for “mainly white English”. Not surprising when you learn that nearly one million pupils do not have English as a first language.
    I, too, have decided to leave my area, following in the footsteps of so many of my neighbours. I don’t really want to go. I worked long and hard to get to London, to find a good job and buy a home and I’d like to stay here. But I’m a stranger on these streets and all the “good” areas, with safe streets, nice housing and pleasant cafés, are beyond my reach. I see London turning into a place almost exclusively for poor immigrants and the very rich.
    It’s sad that I am moving not for a positive reason, but to escape something. I wonder whether I’ll tell the truth, if I’m asked. I can’t pretend that I’m worried about local schools, so perhaps I’ll say it’s for the chance of a conversation over the garden fence. But really I no longer need an excuse: mass immigration is making reluctant racists of us all.
    Jane Kelly is consulting editor of the ‘Salisbury Indeed a ‘provocative’ article, Rex, and one that I am going to share with friends. Thankfully, the situation is not akin to that here in Sydney and, hopefully, it will never be.
    I do believe in the right to self-expression but reject strongly the perceived ‘right’ to practise ‘exclusiveness’. Focusing on characteristics that divide rather than unite are, in my opinion, counter productive and to create enclaves where indigenes are made to feel foreigners in their own homeland is manifestly wrong.
    AN ARTICLE WELL WORTH READING. DJ

    From: wrecks01@xtra.co.nz
    To: ottatella@hotmail.com
    Subject: Article in today’s “Telegraph”
    Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 11:19:29 +1300

    In a provactive personal piece, Jane Kelly explains how immigration has changed where she lives
    “WHEN you go swimming, it’s much healthier to keep your whole body completely covered, you know.” The Muslim lady behind the counter in my local pharmacy has recently started giving me advice like this. It’s kindly meant and I’m always glad to hear her views because she is one of the few people in west London where I live who talks to me.
    The streets around Acton, which has been my home since 1996, have taken on a new identity. Most of the shops are now owned by Muslims and even the fish and chip shop and Indian takeaway are Halal. It seems that almost overnight it’s changed from Acton Vale into Acton Veil.
    Of the 8.17 million people in London, one million are Muslim, with the majority of them young families. That is not, in reality, a great number. But because so many Muslims increasingly insist on emphasising their separateness, it feels as if they have taken over; my female neighbours flap past in full niqab, some so heavily veiled that I can’t see their eyes. I’ve made an effort to communicate by smiling deliberately at the ones I thought I was seeing out and about regularly, but this didn’t lead to conversation because they never look me in the face.
    I recently went to the plainly named “Curtain Shop” and asked if they would put some up for me. Inside were a lot of elderly Muslim men. I was told that they don’t do that kind of work, and was back on the pavement within a few moments. I felt sure I had suffered discrimination and was bewildered as I had been there previously when the Muslim owners had been very friendly. Things have changed. I am living in a place where I am a stranger.
    I was brought up in a village in Staffordshire, and although I have been in London for a quarter of a century I have kept the habit of chatting to shopkeepers and neighbours, despite it not being the done thing in metropolitan life. Nowadays, though, most of the tills in my local shops are manned by young Muslim men who mutter into their mobiles as they are serving. They have no interest in talking to me and rarely meet my gaze. I find this situation dismal. I miss banter, the hail fellow, well met chat about the weather, or what was on TV last night.
    More worryingly, I feel that public spaces are becoming contested. One food store has recently installed a sign banning alcohol on the premises. Fair enough. But it also says: “No alcohol allowed on the streets near this shop.” I am no fan of street drinking, and rowdy behaviour and loutish individuals are an aspect of modern British ‘‘culture’’ I hate. But I feel uneasy that this shopkeeper wants to control the streets outside his shop. I asked him what he meant by his notice but he just smiled at me wistfully.
    Perhaps he and his fellow Muslims want to turn the area into another Tower Hamlets, the east London borough where “suggestive” advertising is banned and last year a woman was refused a job in a pharmacy because she wasn’t veiled.
    On the other hand, maybe I should be grateful. At least in Acton there is just a sign in a shop. Since the start of the year there have been several reports from around London of a more aggressive approach. Television news footage last week showed incidents filmed on a mobile phone on a Saturday night, in the borough of Waltham Forest, of men shouting “This is a Muslim area” at white Britons.
    The video commentary stated: “From women walking the street dressed like complete naked animals with no self-respect, to drunk people carrying alcohol, we try our best to capture and forbid it all.”
    Another scene showed hooded youths forcing a man to drop his can of lager, telling him they were the “Muslim patrol” and that alcohol is a “forbidden evil”. The gang then approached a group of white girls enjoying a good night out, telling them to “forbid themselves from dressing like this and exposing themselves outside the mosque”.
    Worse, though, is film footage from last week, thought to have been taken in Commercial Street, Whitechapel, which showed members of a group who also called themselves a “Muslim patrol” harassing a man who appeared to be wearing make-up, calling him a “bloody fag”. In the video posted on YouTube last week, the passer-by is told he is “walking through a Muslim area dressed like a fag” and ordered to get out. Last Thursday, police were reported to have arrested five “vigilantes” suspected of homophobic abuse.
    There are, of course, other Europeans in my area who may share my feelings but I’m not able to talk to them easily about this situation as they are mostly immigrants, too. At Christmas I spoke to an elderly white woman about the lack of parsnips in the local greengrocer, but she turned out to have no English and I was left grumbling to myself.
    Poles have settled in Ealing since the Second World War and are well assimilated, but since 2004 about 370,000 east Europeans have arrived in London. Almost half the populations of nearby Ealing and Hammersmith were born outside the UK. Not surprisingly, at my bus stop I rarely hear English spoken. I realise that we can’t return to the time when buses were mainly occupied by white ladies in their best hats and gloves going shopping, but I do feel nostalgic for the days when a journey on public transport didn’t leave me feeling as if I have only just arrived in a strange country myself.
    There are other “cultural differences” that bother me, too. Over the past year I have been involved in rescuing a dog that was kept in a freezing shed for months. The owners spoke no English. A Somali neighbour kept a dog that he told me he was training to fight, before it was stolen by other dog fighters. I have tried to re-home several cats owned by a family who refuse to neuter their animals, because of their religion.
    In the Nineties, when I arrived, this part of Acton was a traditional working-class area. Now there is no trace of any kind of community – that word so cherished by the Left. Instead it has been transformed into a giant transit camp and is home to no one. The scale of immigration over recent years has created communities throughout London that never need to – or want to – interact with outsiders.
    It wasn’t always the case: since the 1890s thousands of Jewish, Irish, Afro-Caribbean, Asian and Chinese workers, among others, have arrived in the capital, often displacing the indigenous population. Yes, there was hateful overt racism and discrimination, I’m not denying that. But, over time, I believe we settled down into a happy mix of incorporation and shared aspiration, with disparate peoples walking the same pavements but returning to very different homes – something the Americans call “sundown segregation”.
    But now, despite the wishful thinking of multiculturalists, wilful segregation by immigrants is increasingly echoed by the white population – the rate of white flight from our cities is soaring. According to the Office for National Statistics, 600,000 white Britons have left London in the past 10 years. The latest census data shows the breakdown in telling detail: some London boroughs have lost a quarter of their population of white, British people. The number in Redbridge, north London, for example, has fallen by 40,844 (to 96,253) in this period, while the total population has risen by more than 40,335 to 278,970. It isn’t only London boroughs. The market town of Wokingham in Berkshire has lost nearly 5 per cent of its white British population.
    I suspect that many white people in London and the Home Counties now move house on the basis of ethnicity, especially if they have children. Estate agents don’t advertise this self-segregation, of course. Instead there are polite codes for that kind of thing, such as the mention of “a good school”, which I believe is code for “mainly white English”. Not surprising when you learn that nearly one million pupils do not have English as a first language.
    I, too, have decided to leave my area, following in the footsteps of so many of my neighbours. I don’t really want to go. I worked long and hard to get to London, to find a good job and buy a home and I’d like to stay here. But I’m a stranger on these streets and all the “good” areas, with safe streets, nice housing and pleasant cafés, are beyond my reach. I see London turning into a place almost exclusively for poor immigrants and the very rich.
    It’s sad that I am moving not for a positive reason, but to escape something. I wonder whether I’ll tell the truth, if I’m asked. I can’t pretend that I’m worried about local schools, so perhaps I’ll say it’s for the chance of a conversation over the garden fence. But really I no longer need an excuse: mass immigration is making reluctant racists of us all.
    Jane Kelly is consulting editor of the ‘Salisbury Review’

    In a recent article in the Daily Telegraph is a disturbing article on the behavior of Islam youth in London and other major UK cities

  5. Mark Fenty

    I would continue to repudiate that the unpardonable behavior of some who address themselves as Muslims. I think that a lot of their behavior is an affront to the principles of common human decency. But, in saying that, it would be wrong for me to collectively blame Islam for the inexcusable of as few. So I try not to advance an absolute in any given situation. Now, our modern social discourse is now centered on Islam and its treatment of woman and gays. But, I was surprise to read not to long ago that in America, back in the colonial times, if you were founded to be gay, you were tied between two horses that were made to run. Need I explain any further, I’m sure you have gotten the idea?

  6. Konkieman

    To be blunt, Ronand Saunders and a host of others like him can be grouped under one term: Useful Idiots.

    These idiots are the same ones that loved the the Soviet system during the cold war.. They have no bearing on reality. They continue to enjoy freedom of the press due to the US milarity might, otherwise there columns would now be written in Russian.

    Deal with extremist likewise and eradicate them like cockroaches from the face of the planet.

  7. PBUH and I do mean P

    Mr. Fenty is doing the willful blindness tap dance when he blames “some who address themselves as Muslims.”

    The root cause of the values that produce acid attacks, wife beatings, and thousands of murders in the name of Allah is the Qur’an. Unlike the Bible that has gone through languages and translations and can be viewed by Christians with faith, yet with an understanding that it was written for the culture of the time, the Qur’an was delivered perfect in the perfect language. It is as authoritative and as immutable as it was when first presented.

    Therein lies the unsolvable problem. The Qur’an teaches that women are possessions, that slavery is divinely authorised and that violence is not only authorised but directed by Allah to impose his will on infidels.

    Of the truths in this article the most acidic is this: “And in the midst of the ongoing Islamic-motivated violence against human rights, conspicuously absent is any kind of movement within Islam to stop those who use violence to impose Muslim beliefs and standards upon others.”

    Mr. Fenty’s writings show that he is an intelligent person, but he is not allowing himself to see the truth: what is happening in the world today would not be possible without the widespread tacit support of the majority Muslims. They remain silent and smile at Mr. Fenty when he defends the indefensible.

  8. Moon dog

    Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

  9. Eastern Gap

    The Prophet (Piss be upon him) said:

    “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him” (Bukhari 9.84.57)

  10. Dessalines

    @ BFP
    Religion is the greatest threat to our civilization, not just to LBGT rights. All three Abrahamic religions, Judaism, and it’s step children Christianity and Islam are dangerous. Cherry picking isolated violent incidents and blaming a single religion is pointless. And to label the perpetrator in this case as Muslim is misleading since the authorities in Britain have not caught the perpetrator. Anyone can wear a niqab.
    If you think Christianity holds a higher moral standard just look at US politics where evangelicals are supporting carnival barkers to positions of power where rape is being insidiously redefined to deny women (all women) the choice of aborting the baby.
    Another Christian fundamentalist politician introduced a bill in New Mexico which would require rape victims to carry their babies to term so the ‘fetus’ can be used as evidence failing which the victim would serve up to 3 years in prison.
    Then there Scott Roeder whose defense in court after being convicted of killing abortion provider Dr. George Tiller in Kansas was “I did kill him. It was not a murder, If you were to obey the higher power of God himself, you would acquit me”. This is the USA not some 3rd world dictatorship under sharia law.
    In Judaism, there are tens of thousands of delusional Russian Jewish immigrants in Israel who are hell bent on derailing any peace process by insisting on building and living on settlements in the West Bank because ‘god willed the land to them’.

    How is it that these cases are never highlighted on this blog?

  11. Mark Fenty

    @Dessaline
    Friend you’re beginning to sound more like your mentor Friedrich Nietzsche the mad philosopher. Nietzsche had espoused the philosophy that religion is the single most threat to human civilization. But, of course, evidence now points to the fact that Nietzsche was suffering from mental illness. Nonethemless, I’m quite sure that Nietzsche is now in Hell, playing chess with his beer buddy the Devil.

  12. Mark Fenty

    @ Dessalines
    I believe that the single most threat to human civilization, is the belief that Judaism, Islamism, and Christendom is a threat to human civilization.

  13. Dessalines

    @ Mark Fenty

    Since you are current with your philosophy you should also know what they say about ad hominem arguments.

  14. Mark Fenty

    @ Dessalines
    It is important that we distinguish between those instruments who prosecutes the Christian -Creed for the wrong reasons, and the authenticity of the Christian -Religion in itself. In other words, it is not right to use as an example, those instruments who has besmeared the character of Christianity, to collectively vitiate the Christian -Religion as a whole.

  15. Dessalines

    @ Mark Fenty

    You have the luxury to believe that religion is a vehicle for moral prescription and a ticket to the afterlife – you live in a ‘western society’ where humanists have wrested political power from the ‘church’ and outlawed slavery, championed equal rights for women and freedom of speech is guaranteed by law.
    Some people are not that lucky and have to live out their lives in the West Bank or Gaza in Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Iran or even Uganda where public policy is underwritten by belief in a religious ideology.
    You obviously think that a young woman to be shot to death at close range after being raped (Afghanistan) is not a threat to civilization, or it’s ok for an author to be marked to death for writing a book (Iran) and women to be flogged publicly for being in the presence of a man who is not a relative(Saudi Arabia) or gays to be imprisoned for their life style (Uganda).
    Well I’ve never read Nietzsche but one does not have to be mad to see a disturbing pattern here that is only getting worse.

  16. Dessalines

    @ Mark Fenty

    Quote “it is not right to use as an example, those instruments who has besmeared the character of Christianity, to collectively vitiate the Christian -Religion as a whole”.
    I agree 200%.
    However one must always look at the root cause of the problem which is faith. Belief in something without evidence i.e the suspension of reason which is the central pillar of religion. We are taught as children not to question our church doctrine and elders without question/thinking. Herein lies the danger – when you combine unquestioning faith with poverty, lack of education and fear of eternal damnation you wind up with the pedophile scandal (Catholic Church), Jim Jones Peoples Temple (Guyana) David Karesh (Waco Texas) and the long list of money grubbing faith healers like Benny King and Peter Popoff.
    I agree that Christianity is not as fanatical (if we exclude the Westboro Baptists) as other sects hammered here on BFP. But you have to live under a rock not to acknowledge the political rise of the Christian evangelicals in political life especially in the USA.
    The million dollar question is – why would followers of Jesus need political power in the first place and what will they do with it when (not if) they hold it?

  17. Mark Fenty

    @ Dessalines
    I understand quite conspicuously what you’re endeavoring to convey here, but you’re utilizing the Judea Christian brand of Morality, to condemn the Religious and Cultural practices of the Eastern -Civilization. I’ll bet you, if you had been conditioned under Eastern Cultural, and moral ethos, you would have a totally different perspective of the Eastern way of life.

  18. Mark Fenty

    Dessalines, your definition of Right and Wrong is predicated upon the Judea Christian Ethics. You cannot use one standard of moral judgment to castigate the other, the Eastern Civilization operates on a totally different set of moral values.

  19. Dessalines

    @ Mark Fenty

    Judea Christianity is an eastern religious and cultural custom adopted by our European colonizers. We are christian nations by geopolitical default. And yes I agree if I were born in Saudia Arabia I would be worshipping Allah but my main point is in respect to religion Sungu is no better than Lungu.

  20. Mark Fenty

    @ Dessalines
    I’m cognizant of the historical forces that has shaped Christianity in the America’s. But, I’m talking about the predominant religious values which defines the Eastern and Western cultures in our present time.

  21. The girl’s name is Naomi Oni, she had an acid attack but no one knows who did it or why… To claim this is an Islamic attack or to imply she’s LGBT is equally reprehensible and I thought BFP would know better? If you google her name and look u stories at BBC or The Voice, they all say the same thing, no one knows why and there is no indication of her sexual preferences either – poor taste BFP! Really scraping the barrel this time!

  22. willful blindness

    “when niqab-wearing attacker threw acid in her face as she walked home from shop”

    What part of niqab-wearing attacker did you miss Ian or maybe it was just an unknown immaculate acid attack?

  23. WSD

    Mr. Bourne: BFP does not say or imply that Naomi Oni is lesbian. It is quite clear that she was attacked because she is a woman. Man, you make it up as you go along so you can argue. Nowhere does the article say she’s gay. It is clear why she was attacked and who did it.

  24. But the photo is used right under the Headline of THIS item and therefore it is natural for a reader to assume Ms Oni was attacked for being a Lesbian. As for commenter “willful blindness” please note the BBC nor the Voice used the term “Niqab” they stated “hooded” for their initial reports – since we are going on about Muslims once again Ad Nauseam, how do you explain except for Trinidad and perhaps Guyana, the majority of Islamics present in the West Indies are of a more placid nature?

  25. Well Well

    I say ban them all from covering their faces. I passed near a group f them recently and was very aware of my surroundings. What about the people who carry weapons and will not hesitate to shoot at sudden movement. Time to do something about these fanatical little hitler wannabes. Did anyne notice those freaky muslim men don’t cover their faces, only the women.

  26. Mark Fenty

    It is mind- blogging how some people use negativity in their bias attempt to defaced the image of Religion. No one has actually claimed that the vessels of religion, are without human fault and failings. We obviously have to take the human element into consideration, when we’re dealing with Religion.
    you know, there is a propensity out there in modern -culture, to condemn the collective whole,for the wrong doings of a few. We would not condemn a whole family,for the inexcusable acts of one of its member. So what makes us think,that we can get away with it with Religion?

  27. Mark Fenty

    Now, the question we’re dealing with here is a deep philosophical one,and it has troubled human -civilization from its inception. It is the question of Morality and Human -Conduct, as seen through the eyes of the various cultures on the earth. There is a persistent precivility in our western -culture ,to use a one fit all Moral -Paint Brush. To judge the cultural, moral, and religious practices of the Eastern -Cultures. Now, the question which remains unanswered is this, is there a Moral-Absolute that governs Human -Culture, or is Human-Conduct relative to its given time?

  28. Dessalines

    @ Mark Fenty

    Comparing the acts of a member of a family, or a racial group to any religion is a false analogy. Religion or the messengers of god should be held to the highest moral standards as they claim they are god’s representatives here on earth. Taking the Catholic Churches pedophile scandal we can condemn the entire church not because of the inexcusable acts of many of it’s members but the response to these acts by the church leaders which are well documented. The current pope (whose job was to ‘handle’ abuse cases) when he was cardinal Ratingzer sent out a memo advising Bishops to avoid reporting abuse cases to the authorities. They answered only to God. When does isolated incidents become a culture in an organization? When the head of that organization knowingly covers up horrific crimes against defenseless children in order to save it’s reputation.

  29. mark fenty

    Dessalines, you have made some very valuable points, and I`m afraid to say, that I can`t help but to agree with you wholeheartedly. In any instance, I do agree that there has been a lack of efficacy, on the part of the Catholic Church authories, to policed effectively, the wide spreading abuse in the church. But, as I`ve stated earlier, the lack of efficacy by the Catholic Church authories, shouldn`t be use as weapon to vitiate the collective body of Christendom. Because, when we examine the denominations such as the Seven Day Adventist, and Jahovah Witnesses we see shining examples of Christendom at work for God.

  30. philosophical drivel

    I am sure the young girl whose face was severely disfigured and suffered the pains of that attack, would love to engage in MF’s armchair discussions of human and moral misconduct.

  31. Mark Fenty

    Sir, maybe what I’m endeavoring to convey here is beyond your comprehension. Because I’m in no way insensitive to the young lady pain and suffering .It was an unconscionable that deserved our unequivocal condemnation.

  32. Mark Fenty

    Maybe you have forgotten that I’ve already excoriated the unpardonable conduct, of those pious misogynistic males, who thinks that their can use the instrument of religion to mistreat women.

  33. Well Well

    Religion has caused more wars, ethnic cleansing and whole sale death on this earth than even greed, throughout the earth’s existence.

  34. Mark Fenty

    @ Well Well

    Would you agree that the instruments of religion are responsible for what you have described above, and not the religion in itself?

  35. Dessalines

    @ Mark Fenty
    If a preacher can rape torture and murder his own 5 year old daughter after doubting her virginity, and gets to pay a small fine of 31000.00 pounds to the mother under ISLAMIC law do you not have questions about the religion itself? What more proof or incidents do you need?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-celebrity-preacher-who-raped-and-tortured-his-five-yearold-daughter-to-death-is-released-after-paying-blood-money-8480440.html

  36. Jack Bowman

    Dear BFP folks,

    An abominable thing happened to this young woman in London. The wretchedness of such awful wickedness makes the heart ache. I can only hope that the authorities catch the perpetrator, and that the vicious criminal who did this is locked away for a very long time. Wouldn’t bother me if the perp got banged around a bit, accidentally but hurtfully, on his/her way to the police station, on the way to the cells, on the way to the court. This is the kind of crime whose wickedness you can barely hold in your head.

    That said, it seems pathetic to comment on the BFP debate about it. So I’ll swallow my disgust at the crime and be pathetic.

    Very snappy debate, BFP. Probably the snappiest debate I’ve read in all these years perusing the Bajan blogosphere.

    And Mr/Ms Dessalines is surely right on every point. Excellent contributions from Dessalines. I have absolutely no idea who Dessalines is and to the best of my knowledge I’ve never met him/her.

    Dessalines says, in his/her very first sentence: “Religion is the greatest threat to our civilization.” I wouldn’t say it’s the greatest threat and I would have omitted the “our”, but the general thrust of the argument is certainly irrefutable.

    As Dessalines eloquently says later: “However one must always look at the root cause of the problem which is faith. Belief in something without evidence i.e the suspension of reason which is the central pillar of religion.” Dessalines also says—graciously, since s/he is in the midst of an argument: “And yes I agree if I were born in Saudi Arabia I would be worshipping Allah …”.

    Surely these are all superb observations. Faith is a problem when it has a political agenda and when human lives are at stake. Faith can be harmless. If I spill salt, I still throw some of it over my left shoulder. I don’t walk under ladders. That’s superstition, imbued into me when I was a child, and my ridiculous superstitions threaten absolutely nobody. But people of very strong “faith”, faith with a political agenda, threaten us all. They do indeed threaten civilization, as Dessalines rightly says.

    I could add massively to Dessalines’s list of delusional Christian and Jewish wingnuts, but why should I? Dessalines has made the point. I’d add just one thing, though. Perhaps Dessalines would be worshipping Allah if s/he were born in Saudi Arabia. But if I worshipped the Catholic Jesus because I was born in Bridgetown, I can stop worshipping him completely or I can choose to worship the Baptists’ Jesus or the Seventh Day Adventists’ Jesus or convert to Judaism or become a Sikh, and NOTHING bad will happen to me.

    Well, granted, if I become a Jew my household in Barbados might be threatened by an idiot in a different bit of the Bajan blogosphere. And indeed that has happened. But generally I’m unthreatened by Jihadists or those ker-azee Episcopalians, Papists, kikes, Greek Orthodox, or anyone else. I’m threatened by religious fundamentalists, no matter which invisible guy in the sky their mothers happened to tell them to believe in.

    I don’t care about your invisible guy in the sky, no matter what name you give him. I care as much about what it says in Leviticus as I care about what it says in the Koran. The ridiculous superstitions of desert nomads in the Bronze Age aren’t more helpful than the ridiculous superstitions of desert nomads in the Iron Age. They’re about as helpful as my ridiculous superstitions about walking under ladders, which is something I don’t do because my mother told me not to do it when I was about six years old. And my ridiculous superstitions hurt NOBODY.

    But now we have this absurd situation wherein the ridiculous superstitions of Bronze-Age desert nomads are dictating who can get married to whom, and who can and can’t be (on the basis of their reproductive apparatus) “big-ups” in some ever-less important English institution whose basic precepts are based on the superstitions of Bronze-Age desert nomads.

    My general view, for what it’s worth, and doubtless it’s worth little, is this [WARNING! Deeply, deeply objectionable opinion approaching!]: human thought and human values as we know them in the west are the only thinking and values worth having. The Enlightenment was a wonder, perhaps even a “godsend” to the superstitious and dull of mind.

    The Arab world, spread over almost 300 million people in 22 countries, has yet to have its Enlightenment. But it will, in the end. That’s how history works. The impartial historian recalls, as recently as the 1970s, that people much brighter than Mark Fenty believed that Latin Americans could never have democracy because dey kulcha wouldn’t allow it. And look at us now. The gloriously democratic Kingdom of Spain is going cap in hand to its democratic former colonies, begging for investment.

    The Arabs will get there, in the end. In the meantime, do you know what’s unhelpful? What’s unhelpful is publishing a photograph of the victim of an awful crime, a truly wicked and abominable crime, and then somehow suggesting that 300 million people in 22 countries are wittingly or unwittingly responsible for it. I could send you photographs, photographs that no right-thinking journalist would publish, of what phosphorous bombs do to children and young women in Lebanon.

    All in the name of the Lord. And yes, as some complete idiot says in some other post above … The Lord, whoever he is, piss be upon him.

  37. Mark Fenty

    @ Dassalines
    I have to say this much, but it seems to me, that some people ignorantly misinterpret the Hebrew Scriptures. The Bible tells us quite clearly that Sin separate us from the love of the Almighty God. In other words, the moment we engage in a sinful acts or relationship with God is all but broken. And the only way to reestablish that relationship with God again, is to truly pour out our heart to God in true forgiveness.

    So, from the time that preacher conceived the thought in his mind to rape, torture and murder his 5 year old daughter. He had already severed his divine relationship with God. (Remember now, we’ll sin in words, thoughts, and deeds.) But, let’s face it though, rape, torture, and murder are the works of that Devil, and peace, charity, meekness, longsuffering, and forgiveness are of the works Lord.

    So with this in minds, what makes us thinks that we can attribute these egregious and despicable acts of this preacher to a loving God? Some may ask the question, why would a loving God allow a five year old girl to be rape, tortured, and murdered? And my answer to that question is this, God don’t cause bad thing to happen, he allow them to happen so that mankind can learn from them.

    So let’s not use this despicable excuse for a preacher to vivify the body of Christendom. Let’s be honest here for a minute though, not everyone with the title of preachers is a preacher. Just like not everyone with the title of politicians truly represent the interest of the masses. Jesus undoubtedly, spoke of wolves in sheep clothing; he said that not everyone who comes in my name represents the Kingdom of Heaven.

  38. Mark Fenty

    @Jack Bowman
    I strongly disagree with the idea that religion is the single most threat to our civilization. I do believe however, that Atheism, Secular-humanism, and existentialism are the three real threats to human civilization. I can also see that you’re a disciple of Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Jean Paul Sartre and their mentor the Devil. Nonetheless, one of my mentors the illustrious psychotherapist Carl Jung has made an irremovable imprint on my conscience with these few words. He said that, “An individual can neither be healthy or happy, until he acknowledges his reliance on a high power than that of the Ego.” You know that it’s unfortunate, that we are now living in such a time, where the spirit of psychological egoism has made it home in the psyche of men. Man has become so self- sufficient that he sees no more need for God or religion in his life. The Apostle Paul spoke of a time when men will be lovers of themselves more that God. And I’m afraid that we are now living in such a time.

  39. 195

    These things that BFP bring up make me laff………..First of all u ppl shud study Islam b4 the time that the west started calling the ppl who follow it terroist and it seems that the only religion that BFP knows about that is violent is Islam………its a very sad world we live in

  40. Mark Fenty

    @ Jack Bowman

    Mr. Bowman, with respect to the existence of God, let me say this much. Don’t believe what your eyes are telling you, all there show are limitations, look with your understanding. The argument for God’s existence has perplexed the reflective minds from the beginning of human existence. Philosophers such as: Sartre, Nietzsche, Jasper, Schopenhauer, Heidegger, and Ponty have all advanced arguments that have sought to undermine the authenticity of God. But, as we well know, the book of the bible still remains a bestseller to this day.

    Now, the argument for God’s existence centers on two fundamental philosophical premises, the Empiricist premise and the Rationalist premise. The Empiricist philosophers such as Locke, Berkeley,and Hume, believe that human knowledge can only be gained through the medium of sense experience, and this is extraneous to the idea of God. The Rationalist philosophers such as Descartes, Kant, and Spinoza believe that reason alone unaided by experience can produced truth with respect to God’s existence.

    Now we all can agree that is it impossible to validate the existence of the metaphysical God through an objectified reality. In other words, no one in our present generation has seen God with their physical eyes. And therefore, some believe that since we’re unable to see God with our human lens, then obviously he does not exist. Well, this is an argument yet to be had, because I believe and so as many others, that reason can lead us the God existence.

    I’ m well aware of the fact that the whole idea of God contradicts our human experience. The great theologians of the day formulated three such three theories that has shed a glimmer of light on the existence of God. Firstly, their advanced that argument of the Clock Maker, their argued that if there is a Clock, then obviously there has to be a Clock Maker. They took the same theory and applied to the sky. They said that if there is a sky, then obviously there has to be a designer of the sky with we obviously believe is the Almighty God. Finally,the cosmological, teleological, ontological arguments were designed to undermine Darwin’s theory of evolution.

  41. Mark Fenty

    @ Jack Bowman

    I’m quite elated to inform you that the man in the sky as you so eloquently articulates it. Is the engineer who created the heart that beats in your chest, which supplies the oxygen to your brains and enables you to give voice to your fairytale logic? Nonetheless, it would interest to hear your argument regarding Biological Evolution, and the course it took to arrive at the intellect that the human animal possessed today. Now, am i correct to conclude that you’ll advance your rather common argument of the Big Bang Theory, and the explosion that has given rise to our universe Lol. Of course, you’ll also argue that geological- evolution is a much more sustainable argument than Divine Command Theory right? . But, how about addressing question regarding our moral conduct in suspension of the Judea- Christian Morality? To often atheist much like your self has this proclivity to advance an atheistic worldview, while at the same time their masquerading behind the verisimilitudes of a Judea Christian worldview.

    Furthermore, I’m certainly not here to try to convince you of God’s integrity, believability or authenticity, because whether rightfully conceived or wrongfully interpreted, that will be determining quite soon. The time will come when we all must stand before God on judgment day, I’m quite certain of that. One day my brother all knees will genuflect, and all tongues will confess that he is the one that exercise oversight both in Heaven and on Earth. On the other hand, what we are dealing with here is two fundamentally different kinds of reality, Carnal and Spiritual. And both of these are diametrically in opposition to each other. So how then can the carnal- mind understand spiritual thing if bother are not agreeable? God tells us the in the book Isaiah that, “My thoughts are not your thoughts and my ways are not your ways.” So therefore, we must understand that the concept of God goess beyond the reach of human intellectuality. And this therefore presents a problem for us when we use our human intellect to try rationalizing the concept of God.

  42. Rastaman

    @Mark Fenty : Well said,indisputable facts.

  43. Jack Bowman

    Mr. Rastaman says, February 6, 2013 at 8:48 pm
    “@Mark Fenty : Well said,indisputable facts.”

    That made me laugh. Thanks for the smile, Rastaman.

  44. clickticktock

    Muslims gangs roaming London cities threatening sharia enforcement

    In the latest film, they can be heard saying: “Islam is here in London, Mr. David Cameron, Mr. police officer, whether you like it or not.

    “We are commanding good and forbidding evil on this Saturday night, while the police, they try to get us through the media.

    “We are coming to implement Islam upon your own necks. Muslim patrols can never be stopped.

    “Anyone who tries to stop us – anyone – we will take their alcohol, we will tell the women to cover up, and we will implement Islam upon your own necks, David Cameron.”

    Six men have now been arrested in connection with similar videos, several of which are known to have been filmed on the streets of Whitechapel.