Another one from Anj.
Anjem Choudary @anjemchoudary
MCB Spokesman says he doesn’t believe in segregation between men & women but Allah (SWT) & the Prophet said they must be e.g. in gatherings
MCB Spokesman says that wife’s don’t need to obey their husbands but Allah (SWT) says that they must [Qur’an 4:34] i.e husbands have Qawama! [Read more…]
A terrific event in London on August 6 – so all you people who are gathering for the World Humanist Congress in Oxford August 8th could go to this:
“How to Make Enemies and Alienate People – the Philosophy of Offensive and Inappropriate Language”
It’s hosted by our friend Bernard Hurley.
The growth of social media has given an unprecedented opportunity for those who wish to gratuitously offend to actually do so but it has also given an opportunity for those who wish to take offence at mere criticism to express such offence. It’s clear that someone who uses offensive language is doing more than just conveying information, but what exactly are they doing? The job of the philosopher is to clarify, rather than to prescribe and it seems to me that there is urgent need for clarification today. However there has been very little discussion about how offensive language fits into the Philosophy of Language. Drawing on some ideas of Michael Dummett, I shall make some suggestion about how such language might work.
This lecture is part of the 2014 Kant’s Cave Lecture series. As is usual at these lectures there will be plenty of time for discussion afterwards.
http://pfalondon.org/kant.html
Wednesday August 6 at 7:30 p.m.
Exmouth Arms, 1 Starcross Street, NW1 2HR London
I would go to that like a shot if it weren’t 6000 miles away. For many of you it’s just around the corner or a few stops on the tube.
More Choudary, because he’s just that good.
How about a little exegesis on a short sermon by Anjem Choudary:
Anjem Choudary @anjemchoudary
VOTING for anyone to legislate laws is an Act of SHIRK. Remember that Allah will forgive all sins except that partners be set up besides him
Spoken like a true boss-man, Mafia don, tyrant, dictator, king. The one thing that’s not forgivable is the failure to be submissive enough to The One Top Guy. Everything else – torture, murder, enslaving schoolgirls, gang-rape – is forgivable, but not bowing down to Just That One Dude is not forgivable. Why is that?
It’s the principle of the thing.
Eg-zactly.
That nonsense about Obama not wanting to call Boko Haram terrorists? It’s just another stupid right-wing talking point.
Aside from attacking Michelle Obama for publicly showing concern and lying about President Obama, one of the major spokes in the conservative effort to politicize the kidnapping of 284 schoolgirls in Nigeria has been to criticize the Obama administration for not designating Boko Haram (the group responsible for the abductions) a terrorist organization.
Why, then, is there all this video of President Obama calling Boko Haram a terrorist organization, long before the State Department changed its designation? [Read more…]
Stewart tore into Boko Haram and said that #BringBackOurGirls actually proves Twitter can be more useful than you might think at pressuring people to do something. And so in reaction to Limbaugh rolling his eyes at the hashtag activism, Stewart came up with a new hashtag for people to use: #F*ckYouRush. Stewart even contrasted the people speaking out on the girls’ behalf with “that f*cking guy” Limbaugh to show what the two sides are in this argument.
I don’t know. Some people just really should get better hobbies.
Oh, ew. Right-wing creeps have been mocking the hashtag campaign #BringBackOurGirls…right because trying to help draw attention to some two or three hundred kidnapped and enslaved schoolgirls is such great comic material.
My hashtag contribution to world affairs … pic.twitter.com/Wkb8ozYZFC [Read more…]
The Law Society is not going to withdraw its practice note on what it takes to be the correct interpretation of “Sharia succession rules.” The Lawyers’ Secular Society has a response.
The LSS had written a detailed open letter to the Law Society on 24 April 2014 with very specific questions (here). Two weeks later, on 8 May 2014, the Law Society eventually responded to that letter (here) but it failed to answer almost all of the LSS’s questions, with no explanation for this refusal. [Read more…]
