Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    Are you okay? Nowhere did I even use the word racism or base my argument on it, so I have no idea why you're accusing me of lacking knowledge on what racism is.

    The comparison is valid. People are outraged in the LGBT scenario but couldn't care less when it's Muslims facing discrimination. It's even more pathetic when they try to defend their bias. Let's say the bakery refused to bake a cake for a vegetarian. Would you also defend the bakery and say it's different to the LGBT scenario because being a vegetarian is a choice and being gay isn't?
    Aren't most cakes vegetarian?

    And no, it is not valid as I have pointed out above, there is a very key difference. One which you still fail to appreciate.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zeus007)
    I'm sure they made these kind of excuses to the fascism back in the Hitler days of the Nazi's discriminating against Jewish people. If you want to be a discriminating bigot i want you to know that this is 2016 and people will not accept it.

    You want Muslims to integrate into western societies yet you berate all of them and compare them to rapists and murderers. The only thing you're doing is cycling hate, this is how them ISIS extremists brainwash people to join terrorist groups. "Look how they hate us and you side with them, join us".

    Stop with the division and hate. You're NOT helping anyone.
    So you are saying we should succumb to blackmail? Don't dare speak up or else someone will blow themselves up.

    That's a really weak argument. One that alevelstresss has been spouting for some time now.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Mosques are generally for the Muslim community only

    Restaurants, regardless of whether or not they're 'private property', are for serving food and are for anyone who respects the restaurant's rules.

    And now they're banning Muslims, which is not only a part of the problem, but also plays right into the terrorists' hands.
    So why are Muslims allowed to discriminate and restaurants aren't?

    So much hypocrisy from the Islamopologist PC brigade.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    You need to know his background before you can decide whether it's acceptable for him to refuse to serve Muslims?
    Yes. If a relative or friend of his was murdered or badly injured by an Islamist I would think it fairly understandable he might have a bit of a problem with serving Muslims, don't you?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Islam is an ideology which people choose to follow. Homosexuality is genetic and can't be changed.
    Last I checked "the gay gene" was a theory.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    Aren't most cakes vegetarian?

    And no, it is not valid as I have pointed out above, there is a very key difference. One which you still fail to appreciate.
    ?????? They refused to serve the vegetarian because they object to vegetarianism. What has the nature of the cake got to do with this? What of another example where a Labour supporting baker refuses to serve a conservative supporter? Would you defend this?

    Why does that 'key difference' make it acceptable to discriminate against Muslims?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Mosques are generally for the Muslim community only

    Restaurants, regardless of whether or not they're 'private property', are for serving food and are for anyone who respects the restaurant's rules.

    And now they're banning Muslims, which is not only a part of the problem, but also plays right into the terrorists' hands.
    What about if it's a gay Muslim couple who want to get married?

    It's silly to say that discrimination against gay people receives so much more outrage than that against Muslims, firstly without any evidence to prove this and secondly, with regard to the fact that mosques and churches can refuse to marry same-sex couples and everyone seems fine with this.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    ?????? They refused to serve the vegetarian because they object to vegetarianism. What has the nature of the cake got to do with this? What of another example where a Labour supporting baker refuses to serve a conservative supporter? Would you defend this?

    Why does that 'key difference' make it acceptable to discriminate against Muslims?
    Yes, I would.

    Because one is a choice the other is not.

    Let me ask you something, would you be ok with someone being forced to serve neo Nazis?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexLawrence1453)
    OK, do you not think that using the term bigot as a method of dismissal is harmful to constructive discussion? If you don't agree with someone, you don't dismiss them, shame them and invalidate them. You first attempt to understand their position, then explain why you disagree with parts of it. If you want to actually change someone's mind, being a mindless zombie regurgitating buzzwords isn't going to convince anyone.
    But there is no rational basis for his actions. Even if it was true that all Muslims were terrorists why would denying them service solve anything. Due to the irrationality of the decision we can only conclude an externality is at play: in short, that he is an Islamophobic bigot.

    If you think that's jumping the gun, can you advance any other explanation at all for his actions?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    The funny thing is though that this guy says he lost his friend in the Paris attacks. So what we're seeing here is a guy getting angry and acting irrationally for fairly understandable reasons. It's not particularly surprising that people who's friends or family have been killed in Islamic terrorist attacks are going to feel a lot of anger and malice towards Islam and Muslims, even if it is irrational and misdirected.
    labeling a person as an Islamophobe makes about as much sense as throwing around labels such as Islamofascist, Kuffarophobe etc

    neither is a useful contribution to a serious discussion
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iEthan)
    So that gives someone the right to treat their fellow human as unequal? Ok then. SMH.
    In fairness people have been doing that since the dawn of time and there is no reason to think people wont until the crack of doom.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    So you are saying we should succumb to blackmail? Don't dare speak up or else someone will blow themselves up.

    That's a really weak argument. One that alevelstresss has been spouting for some time now.
    I agree that that is a weak argument but what exactly did this man speak up against lol?

    Nothing, he was just being a discriminatory *******.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    But there is no rational basis for his actions. Even if it was true that all Muslims were terrorists why would denying them service solve anything. Due to the irrationality of the decision we can only conclude an externality is at play: in short, that he is an Islamophobic bigot.

    If you think that's jumping the gun, can you advance any other explanation at all for his actions?
    Yes there is. Saying "I do not want to serve people adhering to an ideology that has caused so much grief" is a very rational decision.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    What about if it's a gay Muslim couple who want to get married?

    It's silly to say that discrimination against gay people receives so much more outrage than that against Muslims, firstly without any evidence to prove this and secondly, with regard to the fact that mosques and churches can refuse to marry same-sex couples and everyone seems fine with this.
    Homosexuality is not a religion, Islam is - and its so much more than that. Plus, there are generally no physical features or clothing styles which allow for gay people to be discriminated on when they aren't with their community or with a partner. Muslims are discriminated against generally because of skin colour or clothing, the former of which is plain racism.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by markova21)
    If this man was truly racist and an Islamophobe he would have banned all Muslims from his premises years ago. We don't know his background. He might have lost a relative or friend in Nice that day, or somewhere else where there was a terrorist attack. He seems to be reacting in an emotional way,as he said, to recent terrorist attacks in France. It affects people differently. I'm sure if there is never another terrorist attack in France again then in time his opinions will become moderate again. It's human nature to lash out and pick someone to blame when terrible things happen. My grandmother and her generation hated all Germans for many years after WW2 had ended. But eventually people are able to put things behind them and move on. Again, if he has never in the past banned Muslims then he isn't truly racist. Or else it would have been there always.
    But that's really stupid. Surely it should have been clear to your grandmother that, even if all Germans could be blamed for the Nazi atrocities, it wasn't some mystical essential component of German nationality which made the Nazis possible, but mainly the political situation at the time, which could have happened anywhere else. That makes hating Germans irrational. Same with Islam.

    Irrationality should never be legitimised by the inaction of government and regulators. It's human nature to be tribalistic and irrational about things like this: and therefore it's the duty of the various civic institutions we have built up to disallow these feelings from decision-making. That's literally what civilisation is for.

    But thanks for the only insightful post on the thread though that isn't trying to use the story to push a political opinion.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    Yes there is. Saying "I do not want to serve people adhering to an ideology that has caused so much grief" is a very rational decision.
    No, it's an understandable decision, based on what we know about that famously irrational thing, human nature. Terror attacks are vanishingly unlikely to kill you, but they inspire fear. Muslims are vanishingly unlikely to be terrorists, but they look and behave differently to the majority, and thus inspire hatred.

    The decision is certainly not rational: the only rational action would be if his refusal to serve Muslims somehow helped stop terrorism. (If anything, that kind of exclusion from the local community is very likely to encourage radicalisation!)

    This kind of knee-jerk fear reaction is the kind of thing that brings down civilisations and snuffs out values such as freedom very rapidly. ISIS et al may yet succeed with people like you and this shopkeeper on their side, so easily manipulable and so easy to make afraid.

    We know right-wingers are more ruled by fear, by rhetoric and by their other emotions than left-wingers, so I certainly don't blame you or the shopkeeper for having the feelings you have, despite the fact that all of the statistics and evidence around this issue go against you. What shocks me is the lack of self-awareness and the pig-headed refusal to recognise that your capricious, easily aroused emotions might not be a sensible basis on which to found Western civilisation.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spatial_Void)
    I agree that that is a weak argument but what exactly did this man speak up against lol?

    Nothing, he was just being an discriminatory *******.
    Discriminate from the dictionary:

    to treat a person or particular group of people differently, especially in aworse way from the way in which you treat other people, because of their skincolour, sex, sexuality, etc.
    Do note that:

    a) It does not mention religion
    b) All the things it does mention are things you cannot choose

    Religion is nothing more than ideology and should not be free from criticism or discrimination.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Betelgeuse-)
    My understanding is that France is not the USA
    My understanding was that most democracies banned discrimination. If France isn't a democracy anymore, then might as well say it loud and clear so that they can be taken out of organisations for which the criteria is to be democratic such as the EU and the G20. Obviously, that would also mean they loose all the privilege that comes with being part of these.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    No, it's an understandable decision, based on what we know about that famously irrational thing, human nature. Terror attacks are vanishingly unlikely to kill you, but they inspire fear. Muslims are vanishingly unlikely to be terrorists, but they look and behave differently to the majority, and thus inspire hatred.

    The decision is certainly not rational: the only rational action would be if his refusal to serve Muslims somehow helped stop terrorism. (If anything, that kind of exclusion from the local community is very likely to encourage radicalisation!)

    This kind of knee-jerk fear reaction is the kind of thing that brings down civilisations and snuffs out values such as freedom very rapidly. ISIS et al may yet succeed with people like you and this shopkeeper on their side, so easily manipulable and so easy to make afraid.
    Rational means based on logic.

    Looking at Muslims makes me feel upset. I don't want to feel upset. I will not serve Muslims.

    You are pointing to the fact that the first sentence is irrational. But that is irrelevant. He cannot change how he feels. And based on his feelings, the rational choice is to not serve Muslims. Note that I was lazy so just wrote Muslims, when in reality I should write women in hijabs because they represent the oppressive nature of the Islamic ideology.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    And how does a Muslim look? Asian a la the biggest Muslim country in the world? Or black? Or white? Or yellow? Or brown?

    And how does he need to know what is in their mind? He told someone clearly showing off this ideology that they are not welcome.

    What would the outcry be like if a Nazi with a Swastika had been denied service?
    That's exactly what I was saying! :facepalm:It's that Muslims come in all shapes and forms (and colours), but that, if this restaurant owner decided to ban Muslims, that means he's got a clear idea of how a Muslim looks. Whether his idea is right or wrong is another matter. He may well be banning christian Arabs or Hindu Indians because to him they look Muslim.
    Like I said before, since I doubt he will be asking every person coming to his restaurant if they're Muslim or not, the only thing he can base his decision on is how they look!

    You clearly have lost the plot by comparing a normal practicing Muslim to a Nazi. I am not going down the route of explaining to you the difference between a normal practicing Muslim and an extremist (or terrorist). [The second being the what you could compare to a Nazi].
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.