For once I find myself agreeing with the Muslim Council of Britain – that organisation that claims to be representative of, ooh, lots and lots of Muslim organisations in the UK, but much of it is strings and mirrors.
However, that’s as may be. Where I agree with the MCB is when it criticises a British MP for walking out of a Muslim wedding because it segregated men from women and he wasn’t allowed to sit with his wife.
This was Jim Fitzpatrick, a government minister, who was at a wedding do at the London Muslim Centre.
“Segregation is a feature in religious, cultural and social occasions,” said a spokesman for the MCB, “and is not specific to Muslims. It is a private matter and is up to families concerned.”
Let me say right from the start, I detest Muslims’ propensity for treating women like shit. But at a private bash it’s really up to them, provided no laws are broken, no one is hurt or threatened – the usual stuff.
Were it a public meeting, then the Islamic organisers should have been told where they could stick their invitations, but it wasn’t. If he couldn’t possibly have known beforehand that this was likely to happen – and he says he’s attended a number of Muslim weddings when it hasn’t – then he should quietly obey the dictum, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” That’s basic courtesy.
gay and lesbian matters, rationalism, atheism, freethought, secularism — this is the weblog of the Pink Triangle Trust, the only gay humanist charity
Pages
▼
Saturday, 15 August 2009
2 comments:
We welcome lively and challenging comments. However, please try to stay on topic, be polite and do not use abusive, racist or sexist language, and do not incite your readers to violence or other antisocial behaviour, or your comment will be deleted. This isn't censorship: it's a case of staying within the bounds of decency and having an eye to the law, although we realise the law will be different in different countries.
We do not bar anonymous comments at the moment, but we would prefer that those commenting play fair and use their name or at least a regular nom de plume. It does show a confidence in your convictions. We know, too, that it's easy to use a false name and be effectively anonymous, but, again, we appeal to your sense of good practice. Even a wacky nom de plume is better, since at least readers will come to know that contributor and maybe remember her or his previous comments.
Blatant commercial advertising will be removed.
Comments should not be construed as necessarily the policy or opinion of the Pink Triangle Trust.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Jim Fitzpatrick did the correct thing. More people should stand up and oppose religious misogyny.
ReplyDeleteAndy I find it strange that we keep disagreeing over freedom of speech when we are both vehemently in favour of it.
ReplyDelete