Appeals court upholds woman's refusal to work to make Mecca trip

So now we got to subsidize their miserable hate journey too?

All I can say is ....

God Bless America...

you are going to need it.

Hmm. This could set a precedent that could benefit all religions: without prejudice or job loss, at will, Christians can take pilgrimages to the Holy Land or to Santiago de Compastelo or go on retreats, Jews to the Western Wall, Hindus to India, and so on. It appears that the appeals court hasn't thought this through...

epg

Good point

Actually, I think this could be a good strategy for destroying this nonsense. Whenever Muslims seek special rules and exemptions for themselves, every other faith group should demand the same. And why shouldnt they? If Islam is going to receive special exemptions and treatment why shouldnt Christians Jews or Hindus demand similar things?

When this occurs, a line will have to be drawn. I feel that we are coming to a point when these issues are going to have to be considered. The next ten years will settle everything, the entire direction of the West. Europe is stirring too, Theo Van Gogh has begun to wake them up.

Traps to Avoid

I don't think it is a good idea to institutionalize a religious privilege for religious duties. Religions that imposed the highest number of mandatory duties would get the highest number of exemptions. This is the wrong road to travel down.

Before the Framers adopted the present constitutional scheme, they considered and rejected two alternatives. First, they rejected a federally recognized official religion. This was a very lively issue as the colonists had just left Britain which had an official State Church. Second, they rejected the idea of giving official recognition and status to a variety of religious bodies WITH the proviso that each religious body be treated equally by the government. They wisely rejected this alternative also because of the endless opportunity for religious bodies to argue among themselves about who got what from the government and whether those shares were equal.

Although I am a Christian, I do not want special privileges for religions. The current constitutional theory holds that an individual enjoys freedom of religion WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF CIVIL LAW. For instance, even if ritual slaughter of an animal is considered a religious rite in your religion, if it breaks the animal cruelty laws, it is illegal.

Please think carefully about what you propose, the Islamists have studied our culture and our laws and our constitution and they are very, very good at maniupulating them for their benefit. This is a game for the thoughtful against the very, very sly.

Two Ways of Getting On With Life: Arabs vs. Non-arabs

Essentially, every human being whether the realizes it or not is confronted with a choice of how he choose to get on in life. How does he obtain the things he needs to live. A straightforward person acquires a skill, provides services or goods to others and lives on his own earnings. Another route is to get someone else to do the work, the actual creation. On an individual basis, this is the criminals choice. Non-criminals work, criminals steal the benefit of the work.

Cultures can do the same thing. Arabic Bedouins developed the skill of living in an incredibly harsh environment that no one else wanted to live it. No one crosses the Arabian peninsula for fun, they did it in medieval times only because of the rewards of trade. Desert caravans had to carry their own security to defend themselves against marauders. There was no law and order in the desert. The Bedouins lived for centuries preying on caravans or providing PROTECTION for caravans from their own cousins.

The Arab world isn't that good at creating its own wealth, in fact, it is abymally poor at that, but, it is very, very good at divesting someone else from their hard earned wealth.
The Islamic empire grew by conquering highly developed civilizations which had lost the power to defend themselves. The door to the candy store was open. So it is now.

Pray that the EU constitution is defeated today. There are rumblings that various governments will try to find a way to adopt the EU constitution without a vote of their people. Europe is very, very sick. I am glad I am not young. I fear the isolation of America and the diminishment of truly freedom loving peoples.

We need to bring Winston Churchill home, he was half American, I don't think he would approve of current Britain.

'We need to bring Winston Churchill home, he was half American, I don't think he would approve of current Britain.'

Get you hands off - he's ours!

First we had Taxi drivers who wanted to pray instead of working, and were ticked off that they weren't allowed to do so, without getting fined.

Now we have the next step.
Praying instead of working, and being payed for it too.

Tell me again why americans pay taxes?

This could set a precedent that could benefit all religions: without prejudice or job loss, at will, Christians can take pilgrimages to the Holy Land or to Santiago de Compastelo or go on retreats, Jews to the Western Wall

Hey! I'm very fortunate, being a 15 minute ride away from the Western Wall.

So, next year I want a winter weekend in Miami, for a change.

It wasn't just a pilgrimage, she was planning to visit her son in Egypt as well. And if she had been unemployed prior to the first term of this job (the extension of which she turned down)how could she afford the trip?

I have just done a quick google for travel agents for Hadj 2006. Prices not yet available, but will include instruction in how to perform Hadj, Indian food, one sacrificial animal, accomodation based on 4 people sharing, but will NOT include transport to Jeddah airport from home or inland from Jeddah. Visa application and taxes to be dealt with separately. List of deceased from last years Hadj available on request. (I'm not making that up, honest)

It is not a cheap expedition. You don't hitch hike your way across the USA to Mecca. Neither is it quite the same as a walk to Walsingham or Canterbury. These days the bus is preferable although I have seen the last half mile to Walsingham done barefoot, I had to be careful not to run him down, it was a very narrow lane.

Another misguided Judge. Has this woman ever thought about making her trip to Bigotville on her vacation?

Or at another time in her fabulous Islamic existence?

The court ordered the commission to reconsider its ruling in light of the First Amendment, which protects freedom of religion...

And only the Muslims will take this First Amendment and use it for all its worth. Abuse it even. Yep, my religion is protected, even if it screws the taxpayer, my fellow employees, employer, customers, screw you all. I get to do what my religion dictates regardless. I doubt the people who wrote the First Amendment ever dreamed it would be abused in this way. If they had thought of Muslims at the time, it would have been worded differently, I'm sure.

Since non-Muslims are forbidden to go to Mecca, how does the First Amendment protect the rights of a religious bigot?

Meanwhile, I'll get some planned 'pilgrimage' plotted in case I'm ever on unemployment insurance... which is damnably hard to finesse when your self-employed, but I'll do my best to finagle it somehow.

Maybe a month-long visit to the tomb of Charles Martel?

Dear Interested:

Would Winston approve of the current state of Britain? Would Winston approve of an Islamic member of the House of Lords? Would Winston approve of a minaret at Cambridge? Would Winston approve of Charles marrying a divorced woman?
Would Winston approve of the denigration of Britain's contribution to world history and culture called "multi-culturalism." Would Winston cower before Muslims? I think not.

Winston's mother was American and I believe he was made an American citizen by the U.S. Congress after WWII as an honor. Bring'im home.

Athena - no he wouldn't but he wouldn't approve of the multiculturalist moonbattery in America either like the case that's the subject of this thread.

If you seriously think Churchill's American listen to his speeches. He's British and he's staying put.

You could just as sensibly say bring Kennedy 'back' to Ireland!

Athena - no he wouldn't but he wouldn't approve of the multiculturalist moonbattery in America either like the case that's the subject of this thread.

If you seriously think Churchill's American listen to his speeches. He's British and he's staying put.

You could just as sensibly say bring Kennedy 'back' to Ireland!

The court ordered the commission to reconsider its ruling in light of the First Amendment, which protects freedom of religion...

Indeed the First amendment protects freedom of religion. However the commission was not infringing on this person's religious rights. Moreover, the amendment does not encourage the state to subsidise a religion.

Get used to all such frivolous litigation, as well as active dawa in schools, universities and prisons. Get used to American born jihadis turned out from subsidised madrasas, waging the jihad in America and the West in general. This is going to go on till Judgement day, as the muslim is obliged to jihad, as the salvation of his soul is at stake. The only safe airplane to travel on will be the ones where the majority of passengers are muslim, and so on.

The tragedy is that this will go on and on, and eventually we will begin to accept it as the norm. All the while our freedoms will be slowly and inexorably whittled down, till we have no collective memory of what real Freedom (which one had come to accept as natural as breathing), was about.

It is a high price to pay.

Most of you know of Churchill's opinion on muslims and islam.

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men."

How true. Islam means submission ie slavery.

Churchill if alive today, would never have allowed in the millions of muslims into Britain. He would also have been quite clear on this to the US.