Conversation:

This is happening in the city I live in, and I'm not happy about it:

http://mancunion.com/2013/02/18/homosexuals-would-be-killed-in-ideal-world-says-speaker-at-society-event/


Manchester is one of the most welcoming places I've ever lived. I've often waxed lyrical about this to anyone who can't get out of listening range quick enough. And yet at a student union hosted event, this happened. I shan't try to describe or surmise it, but please do read it.

I'm not surprised that it happened to be honest, these things will occasionally crop up. But what surprises, and annoys me is the reaction by the student union. If you look at what's been posted by different people over time, the main problem that they've had with it is that the public meeting was "secretly recorded".

That's right. Not the fact that those talking were advocating stoning to death of gay people, but that someone at the student newspaper had the wherewithal to record the meeting.

Let's just go over that again, a journalist recorded a public meeting they attended so that they could make sure their notes were accurate, and when they published the recording because they were concerned about the views raised by a student union backed society, the journalist was the one being rounded on, not the person inciting hate and violence.

I'm very annoyed, angry, and quite upset by this. And I think I may well be over-reacting. So I ask you all, is this right? Should they be investigated and probably punished for their journalism. Or do you think they did the right thing?

Of course the journalist did the right thing by reporting it. Mind you, it might have done the rest of us a disservice by driving those attitudes underground (again).


>>I'm very annoyed, angry, and quite upset by this. And I think I may well be over-reacting.<<
well, the only thing worth a comment there, is the word very. Had you said incandescent or very very very, I might agree with overreaction but, as it is, I won't seek to force medication upon you.

Mind you, presumably the protestants are known so they can be watched out for...

This is why I hate people on the left apologising for Islamists. Yes, racism is bad. No, Muslims shouldn't be made into hate figures.

But should the lunatic fringe get a free pass just because you're making a stand against racism? It's ridiculous.

What makes it worse, is it was a meeting about empowering women, and women's rights.

The group in question have been forced to disband, and the student union are now quickly saying they don't support that view point, which considering Manchester was the first city in Europe to have a Gay Village is pretty shrewd of them. However, they're still pointing fingers of blame at the student journalist for the manner in which they recorded the meeting to report on it.

Wow, that got me surprisingly angry. I was heavily involved in the Manchester University LGBT group when I was a student there and there was always a low-level antagonism between the LGBT and the Islamic Society: they kept on putting forward candidates for election to LGBT offices, we'd try and block each others room bookings etc, but never something of this magnitude.

The group should be banned, plain and simple. The student union in my day took similar action for far less severe examples: the Sun and Star were banned from university shops because of their gay-baiting at the time, the military was banned until equal service was allowed. The reaction of the group, attempting to deflect by blaming the journalist, proves how scummy they are.

Pastey's right: Manchester's an incredibly welcoming city, especially for LGBT folk. I'll never forget my first night out on Canal Street and feeling so inconspicuous for the first time in my life. Stuff like this is very much the exception.

I heard about this through someone I know who's campaign for normal Muslims, the majority that want to get on with their lives with tolerance, equality and harmony. I think she was more annoyed than I was.

I really hope the SU see sense here, else they're going to have a lot of trouble.

If the journalist got the facts straight, then he/she did a fine job, and deserves no flak for doing it. Blaming the press for accurate reporting is the sort of tactic to expect from would-be despots.

Their problem with it was he recorded the meeting on his phone (I think) secretly.

I personally applaud him for this.

As do I. A recording is a great way of getting everything right.

As long as a report is truthful there is no issue.As for it being recorded it was a public meeting so too bad.If someone's phone had been hacked or their computer hacked it would be a different matter but in a public meeting I've never heard it was illegal to record it.

Well done that journalist.Hope they get to work for a decent newspaper when they go out into the larger world.

> We are deeply concerned with the covert filming of a student event within the Union.

You what? It was a public meeting. I don't get it.

TRiG.

HI

Canal Street - you stick out more if you seem straight there...loved the look on a work mates face when a 6 and a half foot tall TV walked past us along there!

From the link

"Speaker at a Students’ Union affili­ated society workshop said that homosexuals would be executed in an ideal Islamic state, describing the practice of two men kissing as an “atrocity." .... When the debate moved onto the subject of the supposed negative effect of homosexuals on society, the chair declared that homosexuality “does not lead to social cohesion,” citing their in­ability to “pro-create” as evidence."

Not clear whether this was a debate rather than a pronouncement. It seems to have been a hypothetical discussion about the "Ideal Islamic State" ... in which case it would have to be consistent with the Quran and the Hadiths. If the Quran and Hadiths do require the death sentence for homosexuality - then I presume the "ideal islamic state" would require homosexuals to receive the death sentence.

Of course one would need to define what is meant by "ideal" and what is meant by an "islamic state". Britain is not an islamic state and hence I presume the debate to be hypothetical or relevant to "islamic states" in the middle east etc.

As long as the reporting was accurate and explained the context then I wouldn't have thought there should be a problem.

>> it might have done the rest of us a disservice by driving those attitudes underground (again).<<

Surely the attitudes could be discovered by reading 1400 year old literature - assuming an ideal islamic society has to be be consistent with that literature.

You can't really simpley derive a religion from its holy books. There's a whole swathe of cultural context. So no, Islam cannot be "discovered" merely by reading the Quran and related hadiths.

TRiG.

In an ideal world all societies in the university would be required, as a condition of recognition, to sign up to a charter of values, those values to include equality and human rights etc.

Obviously there could be certain exceptions - it would be reasonable to allow the Jewish society to restrict membership to actual Jews, say. But it would NOT be reasonable to allow ANY group to discriminate on race, gender, sexuality, age, area of study, nationality, etc., or to harass, intimidate or publicly insult those who differ from them in opinions or practice.

And if the religious groups find they can't sign up to that - good. It's 2013. As far as I'm concerned they can either get with the programme or they can f*&^ off. Catholics, say - argue the toss about abortion if you must, that is a legitimate political discussion, so long as you acknowledge the existing law. But as far as persecuting gays is concerned - give it up. You've lost.

No university should be allowing the use of its facilities, even for free, to groups that can't sign up to charters like that. And yes, it will drive the bigots underground. Which is where they belong.

>>And yes, it will drive the bigots underground. Which is where they belong.<< : Hoo

No - let's have 'em up in the open, in the fresh air, where they can be coped (or dealt) with.

Bigots are like moles. If you let them go underground, they'll keep popping up and ruining your lawn. But if you lure them out into the open, you can brain them with a spade.

For this metaphor, the spade is "reason" or something.