Muslim vote (the group, not people generally)

No @Humdingerydoo that is not right. We need to discuss Islam without people saying it is like the Jews in the 1930s which is a ridiculous comparison. People are worried as there are Muslims (obviously not all) that try and impose their view on society with the threat of violence see Salman Rushdie protests and Batley teacher in hiding. Also there are not many Muslim majority countries where other religions have equality. These and other issues should be discussed freely without people being worried about being arrested for "Islamaphobia" which it is feared Labour will introduce as a crime.

I'm pretty sure there's plenty of daily talk about the hatred Hindus are at the receiving end of on a daily basis in certain countries. You're just seeing it all from a very Western-centric point of view, which is fair enough. But let's not pretend that all Hindus are perfectly free from hounding and persecution everywhere in the world. I'm sure there will be a word for it in those countries.

It's ok to question specific aspects of a religion. It's not ok to question the religions right to exist in this country or to make blanket statements about the religion. Just be respectful.

I also don't think it should be a hate crime to criticise aspects of a religion. I'm also pretty confident it's not a majority of Muslims in this country who are calling for that though. If it was, then I'd see the problem.

All religions are problematic. Islam just gets more attention because it's a comparatively large minority. That's exactly what happened with Jews in Europe in the 1930s - they were a large minority so became the ultimate scapegoat.

"I am not sure what point you're really trying to make, but I don't think it really matters what the name is for the hatred of people of a certain religion. For example, an anti-Semite doesn't mean "someone against Semites" (although a lot of anti-Semites do like to occasionally pretend that's what it actually means 😅 They enjoy minimising anti-semitism). So it being called Islamophobia is a bit meaningless. It's just the name it was given. Similar to homophobia or xenophobia. Not all words mean what they "should"

It does matter whether criticism of a religion is now going to be defined as hatred. It matters because there is an emphasis on Islam. I asked, why do Hindus not shout about Hindu hate, why don't Sikhs or Christians. Why isn't there any words coined for it and profusely used on an every day occurrence? It's because people have genuine concerns about Islam not just in this country but in many societies across the world.

To question Islam will now become a hate crime. Soon blasphemy. We already seen how not questioning the men who groomed those girls ended. All institutions were too scared to call it out because they didn't want to be accused of islaphobia. But let's just play silly games with words and not deal with it.

Are people not aware that the whole basis of our justice system was formed originally on broad Christian principles and the 10 commandments?
If you remove all of it, then what is truth? Who gets to say what right and wrong is? Where’s the yard arm? Is it a feeling? What if one person feels differently from another about what is right and wrong? Who gets to decide?
You only have to look at the Scottish hate crime bill to see how unworkable it becomes. And the net result of that lovely piece of legislation is to stir up more hatred and division, rather than unite.

I am not sure what point you're really trying to make, but I don't think it really matters what the name is for the hatred of people of a certain religion. For example, an anti-Semite doesn't mean "someone against Semites" (although a lot of anti-Semites do like to occasionally pretend that's what it actually means 😅 They enjoy minimising anti-semitism). So it being called Islamophobia is a bit meaningless. It's just the name it was given. Similar to homophobia or xenophobia. Not all words mean what they "should" mean.

The mind boggles. It’s Buddhism that terrifies me…

Why isn't there any Hindu phobia, Sikhphobia or any other phobia? Just Islamophobia.

Today it's hate speach tomorrow it will be blasphemy laws.

Interesting that the panel member with the more extreme views (the one who spoke first) is a convert. I wonder if he remained a Muslim?

This is old but a good watch to see the variety of opinions being cultivated.

Young Muslims discuss the idea of a Caliphate, what it means to them, and whether they’d welcome it here. m.youtube.com/watch?v=kXHg9AY6M2k

Mostly moderate but two men with views that directly contradict our democracy. Most people are indeed peaceful, but there is a motivated minority who want something very different for our country.

See: 2:40, 6:00, 7:28

I asked what would happen next for the second version, ie all X do Y. That would be hate speech and criminalised?

The case example I think not a problem, the stats I’m surprised at that being shut down, they are just figures and can be disputed if not standing up. I mean someone on a recent thread was quoting a book with culturally aligned stats - can that be published?

Challenging someone is not the same as a crime, so clarity on what actually happens or is illegal is important

If you don't think it would be a problem, why ask what happens next? Hate speech is illegal. Violent crime is illegal.

And you must be aware that people genuinely believe that Muslim men are more likely to commit grooming offences, even though the available data does not support that belief.

So, while it is not illegal to repeat that mistaken belief, it should always be challenged and it should certainly not be perpetuated in the media.

Someone saying 'Muslim men are all groomers' would imo be committing hate speech. I don't see an issue with acknowledging that. It's no different to any other ethnic or religious slur.

It’s a question, I assumed it wouldn’t be a problem but your come on! reaction is odd.

You also didn’t say what would happen for the second?

Actually I’m not sure of your distinction here, mentioning a case is ok but are stats problematic?

Oh come on, @EasternStandard !

If someone references a case where a group of people have been found guilty of X crime, that is not a problem.

If people say 'all people belonging to the same ethnic group as the people who committed X crime', that is a problem.

Especially since the data on grooming and ethnicity is dated, very poor quality, incomplete and not actually indicative of anything that can safely be used.

What is the suggestion on what happens next?

To use one of your examples say a person refers to a case where abuse has occurred, or grooming or stats on any of those for a group of people

Versus a person saying all X do this or Y do that which is incorrect

Is the suggestion that the first is ok? And what happens with the second?

Well, all major faiths are guilty of spreading their creed by oppression. It's how organised religion works and I have no issue with anyone saying it about any faith.

The last bit though, about Muslims being sex groomers, inherently violent and incapable of living in a pluralistic society - yep, that sounds pretty damn bigoted to me and no, people shouldn't be tarring an entire religious community with the same brush. If it's wrong to spread antisemitic tropes (and it is), and if it's wrong to claim Catholics are all child abusers (and it is), then it is also wrong to say these things about Islam.

It includes not saying that Islam was spread by the sword or subjugation of minority groups under their rule

Hmm that is not quite what the APPG document linked to says. It says:

Using the symbols and images associated with classic Islamophobia (e.g. Muhammed being a paedophile, claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword or subjugating minority groups under their rule) to characterize Muslims as being ‘sex groomers’, inherently violent or incapable of living harmoniously in plural societies.

I don't know why I am bothering, though. It will make no difference.

You’re spot on. I think we should be incredibly concerned that if/when Labour get into power they will introduce this as a hate crime. No one, nor group should ever be exempt from criticism.

Its the same people popping up every time - often getting deleted but they just keep trying.

I find advanced search is coming in very handy these days...

Labour's win in the West Midlands would suggest that KS does not need the votes of every single Muslim in the UK. Therefore they certainly wouldn't need the support of a tiny fringe group. So much scaremongering on this thread.

The votes of whom? The votes of a tiny lobby group like this one will make no difference.

I mean - KS needs the votes so he’ll probably agree to it… I don’t think he has a choice now. So. Ummmm - yes. Get ready for the spiritual leaders to tell us how to vote. Waiting on the Pope myself here….

Time for Labour to remember who they stand for. They stand for every working person of whatever background. They need to focus on common values we can all agree on. Giving in to minority interest groups on issues that are detrimental to the wider society is not protecting the poor and those in need of help. It's just
Creating divisions.

It is the faux naive threads that are the worst.

The group @Noicant is talking about has fewer than 3k followers on Twitter and hardly anyone had heard of it until today.

I reckon Count Binface has more political clout.