Yes, but lets make sure its an all inclusive genocide. Like I said, can't play favorites.

You can do whatever you want if you have the force to back it up.

Woohoo!

 

starts entering the nuclear missile launch codes

If you think like that Hades then noone would be able to wear anything around the neck.

 

... Although those Eminem necklaces really are an abomination to nature.

Not just me but everyone.  I don't think its just me who is annoyed by people who show off religious fetishes that scream "LOOK AT ME!  I BELEVE IN GOD/ALLAH/VISHNU/BOB SAGET!" But then again it might just be me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you have a problem with someone wearing a cross, then that's a sad statement on your part. But what you fail to realize is there are millions of people who aren't offended by seeing a cross or star of David or a headscarf. If you can't allow yourself to tolerate simple forms of expression like that, then that is what we call bigotry.

 

It's the wrong attitude.  If you can't put up with other faiths, then you have a problem.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

A problem that you can solve with genocide!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Please, don't make jokes like that, cause it's really not funny.

Edited January 30, 200619 yr by Mothman

Not just me but everyone.  I don't think its just me who is annoyed by people who show off religious fetishes that scream "LOOK AT ME!  I BELEVE IN GOD/ALLAH/VISHNU/BOB SAGET!" But then again it might just be me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you have a problem with someone wearing a cross, then that's a sad statement on your part. But what you fail to realize is there are millions of people who aren't offended by seeing a cross or star of David or a headscarf. If you can't allow yourself to tolerate simple forms of expression like that, then that is what we call bigotry.

 

It's the wrong attitude.  If you can't put up with other faiths, then you have a problem.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

A problem that you can solve with genocide!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Please, don't make jokes like that, cause it's really not funny.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Now that depends who you are I'm afraid. You're not supreme ruler of comedy and opinion you know.

No, but I'm an advocate of respect. Genocide is not something one should joke about. But if you find jokes like that funny...

Edited January 30, 200619 yr by Mothman

Genocide is not something one should joke about.

 

Who said I was joking?

Hey, I am jsut saying leave the religious stuff at home and I don't discriminate by saying Christian stuff is okay, but no Islam material, or Jewish Star is fine but crosses have to go. I treat all religions equally.

Religion has no place in public.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It does it restrict your freedom, why should you force people not to wear certain things?

Genocide is not something one should joke about.

 

Who said I was joking?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

...

Edited January 30, 200619 yr by Mothman

"

I'm sure y'all deserved it.  After all, it's not like Muslims, or any other group of folks for that matter, ever decide to get offended and hate a country without a reason.  They hate the USA because the US asked to be hated.  Therefore, I'm sure Denmark asked to be hated too!

 

:D

 

Oh, the irony!

 

/end joking sarcasm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you mean you should be able to come into a thread started by Lucius (who seems to have been in contact with you before..) and write something which isn't funny or clever or insightful, only half-assed "irony"? You need to read the forum rules about trolling and stop acting all surprised and innocent when he "attacks you personally".

 

On topic: I really hope the danish government won't break from the economic pressure the boycott will bring. I recently read that 16 billion danish crowns is at stake and a lot of Denmark's biggest companies wants the danish government to apologize.

 

I understand the hatred towards a nation that bombed your country to bits and invaded you, but I can not understand the hatred against a nation with a crappy sense of humour.

 

 

Edit: Crappy spelling.

Edited January 30, 200619 yr by mkreku

It does it restrict your freedom, why should you force people not to wear certain things?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If thuis Denmark supermarket is going to fire a Muslim for wearing a religious item then they better fire EVERYONE who wears religious icons on their person. Personally I don't care what people wear but stil maintain religion is a private affair but if you gioing to ban one you ban them all.

This is dumb. A company has a uniform and everyone's okay with that. So what's the difference between forcing somebody to wear something and forcing someone not to wear something?

 

Edit: That's a rhetorical question

Edited January 30, 200619 yr by Moose

A place of business has a dress code and I have no problems with that. Public image is very important to a business, but also fairplay. You can't just fire Muslims for wearing a Islam religious item and let a Christian who wears a cross on a necklace. That is discrimination and bigotry.

If thuis Denmark supermarket is going to fire a Muslim for wearing a religious item then they better fire EVERYONE who wears religious icons on their person.  Personally I don't care what people wear but stil maintain religion is a private affair but if you gioing to ban one you ban them all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They are going to fire her for non-compliance with dress code, not wearing religious item.

Then all religious items should be a part of the non-compliance dresscode then. Can't say only Islamic shaws and viels and allow yamaks or crosses.

Edited January 30, 200619 yr by Judge Hades

A place of business has a dress code and I have no problems with that.  Public image is very important to a business, but also fairplay.  You can't just fire Muslims for wearing a Islam religious item and let a Christian who wears a cross on a necklace. That is discrimination and bigotry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You can put a cross under your shirt, it doesn't violate any reasonable dress code.

Then all religious items should be a part of the non-compliance dresscode then.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can't see the logic here. It is not the fact that the item is religious that violates the dress code.

It is still a religious item. I don't care if it is hidden or not. To disallow one and allow another is discrimiation.

I can't see the logic here. It is not the fact that the item is religious that violates the dress code.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yet you cannot simply disregard its religious significance.

Disallowing an item that doesn't fit a standard is not discrimination, banning all religious items is.

But creating a standard that purposely eliminates items belong to one religion while not on others is.

But creating a standard that purposely eliminates items belong to one religion while not on others is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Aha. Purposely. But it is not the case. If the standard is lawful, it doesn't specifically target the religion, but rather aims for a specific image with no religion in mind. It is just bad luck of having some items to fit the description of inappropriate dress.