Do You Talk To The Television?
ChatterBank1 min ago
Should Ch4 Have Used This Woman In A Hijab
to front the news of the Nice massacre?
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by trt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
> don't you think it would have also been inappropriate for a white German to announce the bombing of a British town on British radio
Yep, I would then and (practically speaking) I would now. But I covered this one earlier. We were at war with Germany. The US was at war with Japan.
Fatima Manji is a Moslem, not a terrorist. Now, unless you are saying we are at war with Moslems, what precisely is wrong with her reading the news dressed as a Moslem?
Yep, I would then and (practically speaking) I would now. But I covered this one earlier. We were at war with Germany. The US was at war with Japan.
Fatima Manji is a Moslem, not a terrorist. Now, unless you are saying we are at war with Moslems, what precisely is wrong with her reading the news dressed as a Moslem?
andy-hughes
/// Surely we should lead by example, and accept the cultural practises involved in entering a mosque, in the expectation that western cultural practices can similarly be understood. ///
Yes that is only polite and be expected, but first it is up to them seeing that most are guests of this country.
Why should it be up to us to change our ways and the traditions of thousands of years, so as to accommodate a religion that is alien to our way of life.
/// Surely we should lead by example, and accept the cultural practises involved in entering a mosque, in the expectation that western cultural practices can similarly be understood. ///
Yes that is only polite and be expected, but first it is up to them seeing that most are guests of this country.
Why should it be up to us to change our ways and the traditions of thousands of years, so as to accommodate a religion that is alien to our way of life.
I've not yet commented on this thread thus far but for what it's worth, loathe though I am I agree with McKenzie.
Given that airline staff aren't allowed to wear a simple crucifix(can't recall the exact details but it's out there) it was certainly insensitive to use this woman(with her religion very much on show) to report such a story, but I'd expect nothing less from CH 4, who always seek to inflame at every opportunity.
Given that airline staff aren't allowed to wear a simple crucifix(can't recall the exact details but it's out there) it was certainly insensitive to use this woman(with her religion very much on show) to report such a story, but I'd expect nothing less from CH 4, who always seek to inflame at every opportunity.
AOG - //andy-hughes
/// Surely we should lead by example, and accept the cultural practises involved in entering a mosque, in the expectation that western cultural practices can similarly be understood. ///
Yes that is only polite and be expected, but first it is up to them seeing that most are guests of this country. //
I am not sure 'guests' is the term I would use - there are hundreds of thousands of second and third generation Muslims who are British-born, they are hardly 'guests'.
// Why should it be up to us to change our ways and the traditions of thousands of years, so as to accommodate a religion that is alien to our way of life. //
I don't think it is!
I really believe that this notion that Muslims are out to subjugate the UK is a media scare-mongering scenario with little, if any, basis in fact.
I derive all my news content from the media - as everyone does, but I always bear in mind that they have an eye on circulation or viewing figures.
I would not deny that the influx of migrants is a seriously worrying issue, but it worries me in practical terms, such as unsustainable strains on education and health - it does not worry me because I believe there is a takeover either being plotted, or in place.
I think it is very easy to go along with dark mutterings - because that is human nature. in the '60's it was the Russians we had to be scared, of 'reds under the bed' - now it is Islam.
But honestly - life goes on, apart from isolated incidents of violence, which should always be measured against their real objectives - not those dressed up to make the perpetrators feel better about what they do , or the media to have a convenient label to hang the story on.
/// Surely we should lead by example, and accept the cultural practises involved in entering a mosque, in the expectation that western cultural practices can similarly be understood. ///
Yes that is only polite and be expected, but first it is up to them seeing that most are guests of this country. //
I am not sure 'guests' is the term I would use - there are hundreds of thousands of second and third generation Muslims who are British-born, they are hardly 'guests'.
// Why should it be up to us to change our ways and the traditions of thousands of years, so as to accommodate a religion that is alien to our way of life. //
I don't think it is!
I really believe that this notion that Muslims are out to subjugate the UK is a media scare-mongering scenario with little, if any, basis in fact.
I derive all my news content from the media - as everyone does, but I always bear in mind that they have an eye on circulation or viewing figures.
I would not deny that the influx of migrants is a seriously worrying issue, but it worries me in practical terms, such as unsustainable strains on education and health - it does not worry me because I believe there is a takeover either being plotted, or in place.
I think it is very easy to go along with dark mutterings - because that is human nature. in the '60's it was the Russians we had to be scared, of 'reds under the bed' - now it is Islam.
But honestly - life goes on, apart from isolated incidents of violence, which should always be measured against their real objectives - not those dressed up to make the perpetrators feel better about what they do , or the media to have a convenient label to hang the story on.
> airline staff aren't allowed to wear a simple crucifix
See https:/
See https:/
Chilldoubt - //Given that airline staff aren't allowed to wear a simple crucifix(can't recall the exact details but it's out there) it was certainly insensitive to use this woman(with her religion very much on show) to report such a story, but I'd expect nothing less from CH 4, who always seek to inflame at every opportunity. //
I seriously doubt that anyone would draw a comparison of a connection between the BA debacle, and this situation.
But to argue that one follows the other simply means that you are compounding one lot of religious intolerance by sanctioning another.
Trying to make a journalist abandon her chosen attire because of a news item content is religious intolerance - BUT - so was stopping a cabin crew from wearing a discreet crucifix.
Two wrongs do not make a right!
I seriously doubt that anyone would draw a comparison of a connection between the BA debacle, and this situation.
But to argue that one follows the other simply means that you are compounding one lot of religious intolerance by sanctioning another.
Trying to make a journalist abandon her chosen attire because of a news item content is religious intolerance - BUT - so was stopping a cabin crew from wearing a discreet crucifix.
Two wrongs do not make a right!
This thread has become very boring - just an excuse to vent hatred. As has already been said (posters will know who you are).
//She is British woman employed as a news presenter//
//Fatima has worked for Channel 4 News for over four years and presented other topics//
//Thanks for posting a Sun link, it is ages since I have seen the paper, and it is good to e reminded just how bad it is.
Obviously this woman's religion has nothing to do her presenting skills and there is no reason she should not be on the show//
So thankful to hear a few voices of reason.
//She is British woman employed as a news presenter//
//Fatima has worked for Channel 4 News for over four years and presented other topics//
//Thanks for posting a Sun link, it is ages since I have seen the paper, and it is good to e reminded just how bad it is.
Obviously this woman's religion has nothing to do her presenting skills and there is no reason she should not be on the show//
So thankful to hear a few voices of reason.
Mr McKenzie's column is printed on a Friday it seems, so he has carried on - with a 'What have I said???' position!
As though he didn't know his comments would cause outage among even vaguely tolerant individuals!
Yeah, right.
Next week, buy your copy to be advised by Mr McKenzie that women should be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen!!!
As though he didn't know his comments would cause outage among even vaguely tolerant individuals!
Yeah, right.
Next week, buy your copy to be advised by Mr McKenzie that women should be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen!!!
It wasn't just a debacle Andy, it took 7 years and 3 other people had similar cases that failed(thanks to Ellipsis for the link):
Equally significant in the court's complex ruling, however, was its determination that three other Christian applicants – Lilian Ladele, 52, a local authority registrar who lives in London, Shirley Chaplin, 57, a nurse from Exeter, and Gary McFarlane, 51, a Bristol marriage counsellor – who also claimed they had suffered religious discrimination, should lose their appeals.
----------
Odd that the nurse lost her appeal yet Doctor's where I work are often attired similarly to the newsreader, though I don't know the specifics of her case.
As I've said though, Ch 4 often look to inflame. Just look at some of alternative Xmas messages.
Equally significant in the court's complex ruling, however, was its determination that three other Christian applicants – Lilian Ladele, 52, a local authority registrar who lives in London, Shirley Chaplin, 57, a nurse from Exeter, and Gary McFarlane, 51, a Bristol marriage counsellor – who also claimed they had suffered religious discrimination, should lose their appeals.
----------
Odd that the nurse lost her appeal yet Doctor's where I work are often attired similarly to the newsreader, though I don't know the specifics of her case.
As I've said though, Ch 4 often look to inflame. Just look at some of alternative Xmas messages.
"Fatima Manji is a Moslem, not a terrorist. Now, unless you are saying we are at war with Moslems, what precisely is wrong with her reading the news dressed as a Moslem?".
Neither I nor anyone else has suggested that Ms Manji is a terrorist, Ellipsis. The issue is the symbolism, not Ms Manji's character or personal belief.
War? Well, war against the unbelieving world is a fundamental Islamic tenet:
Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle..."
Islam divides the world in two: the Dar al-Islam where people live under Divine Law (the Sharia) , and the Dar al-Harb (the house of war) where people live under man-made laws (like democracies).
Jihad is struggle (not necessarily violent) to make the unbelieving world submit to the Divine Law. You will be sufficiently aware of history to know that Islam has been waging war against the unbelievers since its very beginning.
The illegitimacy of "man-made law" in Islamic teaching is one of the biggest differences between Islam and, say, Christianity which enjoins its followers to "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's" and "...l be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.".
That's the reason why Christians living in non-Christian countries will be good citizens in as far as they are true to their faith, and why Muslims living in non-Muslim countries will frequently be a nuisance in as far as they are true to theirs.
Neither I nor anyone else has suggested that Ms Manji is a terrorist, Ellipsis. The issue is the symbolism, not Ms Manji's character or personal belief.
War? Well, war against the unbelieving world is a fundamental Islamic tenet:
Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle..."
Islam divides the world in two: the Dar al-Islam where people live under Divine Law (the Sharia) , and the Dar al-Harb (the house of war) where people live under man-made laws (like democracies).
Jihad is struggle (not necessarily violent) to make the unbelieving world submit to the Divine Law. You will be sufficiently aware of history to know that Islam has been waging war against the unbelievers since its very beginning.
The illegitimacy of "man-made law" in Islamic teaching is one of the biggest differences between Islam and, say, Christianity which enjoins its followers to "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's" and "...l be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.".
That's the reason why Christians living in non-Christian countries will be good citizens in as far as they are true to their faith, and why Muslims living in non-Muslim countries will frequently be a nuisance in as far as they are true to theirs.
ChillDoubt, the nurse had religious rights, but they didn't trump health and safety issues - see http://
The same article also says "The other two were Gary McFarlane, 51 - a marriage counsellor fired after saying he might object to giving sex therapy advice to gay couples - and Islington Council registrar Lillian Ladele, who was disciplined after she refused to conduct same-sex civil partnership ceremonies."
Again, it's a clash of rights.
The same article also says "The other two were Gary McFarlane, 51 - a marriage counsellor fired after saying he might object to giving sex therapy advice to gay couples - and Islington Council registrar Lillian Ladele, who was disciplined after she refused to conduct same-sex civil partnership ceremonies."
Again, it's a clash of rights.
v_e> Neither I nor anyone else has suggested that Ms Manji is a terrorist, Ellipsis. The issue is the symbolism
Symbolism that she is a Muslim. Back to "she shouldn't have worn the hijab". See my comment at 12:45, reposted below.
--------------------------
v_e> I think she shouldn't have worn the hijab, Ellipsis.
I'd say the arguments around her wearing / not wearing the hijab are exhausted several hundred posts ago. I can't add any more.
To recap, in not wearing it, she'd be showing that she agreed with you that it was a sign of being a terrorist or sympathiser, which clearly she doesn't. Nor does her employer C4 News, who branded thoughts like this "arguably tantamount to inciting religious hatred" - no doubt because it seeks to equate Moslem and terrorist.
Symbolism that she is a Muslim. Back to "she shouldn't have worn the hijab". See my comment at 12:45, reposted below.
--------------------------
v_e> I think she shouldn't have worn the hijab, Ellipsis.
I'd say the arguments around her wearing / not wearing the hijab are exhausted several hundred posts ago. I can't add any more.
To recap, in not wearing it, she'd be showing that she agreed with you that it was a sign of being a terrorist or sympathiser, which clearly she doesn't. Nor does her employer C4 News, who branded thoughts like this "arguably tantamount to inciting religious hatred" - no doubt because it seeks to equate Moslem and terrorist.
"the nurse had religious rights, but they didn't trump health and safety issues ".
Not in all cases, Ellipsis:
http://
Not in all cases, Ellipsis:
http://
Latest Posts
Crosswords1 min ago
News5 mins ago
News6 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
News10 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.