3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

You need to get informed. Maybe a word with a father that was forced to stone his poor terrified child to death because she was raped. I saw a video of one of these. The child was buried up to her thighs in the sand and the father was made to do it with fist sized stones as she screamed daddy. It was not a fast ending to put it mildly. What a religion.

Christian Crusades were much the same until they started burning women as witches because they did not conform. That does not excuse such stone-age practices as stoning, lashing / caning (including Singapore), cutting off hands or arms for theft aso. I would argue capital punishment is also a stone age practice.

3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

 Uninformed westerners are the biggest threat as they allow the religious movement to gain hold and then introduce their vile customs "democratically". How many years until London officially is under sharia law? 20? 50? 

Only time will tell about London and the rest of Europe, we won't be around. Whatever happens, this will not be forced upon them. It will come about by majority rule. I also think sharia law will likely evolve and modernise. Do our laws work any better? All religions are bullsh*t. Some kids figure that out early, others never do. But I give people the freedom to be brainless.

3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I saw a video of one of these. The child was buried up to her thighs in the sand and the father was made to do it with fist sized stones as she screamed daddy. It was not a fast ending to put it mildly.

 

Good grief.

 

I do hope you got trauma counseling after watching that sicko trash?

On 12/13/2025 at 2:49 PM, koolkarl said:

Go further and ban them from immigrating to Austria and every other western country.

You bigot. This is racist, saying ban all Muslim.

If you don't mean Muslims, I'll apologize.

 

 

4 hours ago, koolkarl said:

Certainly includes you.

I was born in England. I'm not Muslim.

 

21 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

 

Imagine the conversation in  classroom. The female teacher is wearing a headscarf. She might be muslim, or she might be Orthodox Jew. The child is a muslim child. At the weekends, and when out with her parents, she wears a headscarf. But when she goes to school, she has to leave it off. She asks the teacher why she wears a headscarf. Whether Jewish or Muslim, its a similar story, related to modesty. The teacher might explain that in other countries, the little girl can wear the headscarf if she wants, but in Austria, she doesn't have that freedom, because the government believes her parents' beliefs are wrong. The little girl asks why her classmate, little Rohit, is allowed to wear that turban. The teacher doesn't really have an answer for that. People who are adherants to that religion have been associated with terrorist outrages (Air India over the Atlantic etc). She asks why Adam is allowed to wear his skullcap. Again, the reasoning isn't clear. Adam is forever complaining about his skull cap, it keeps falling off, and other kids take the piss out of him over it. She starts thinking the government doesn't treat people all equally.

 

The girl goes home thinking her parents' values are wrong, because the government says so. She decides to start smoking behind the bikesheds. He parents now have no moral standing, why should she take any notice of them, because the government tells her they are wrong.

If it's the case (not sure), then kippas, turbans etc... should also be banned!

55 minutes ago, candide said:

If it's the case (not sure), then kippas, turbans etc... should also be banned!

 

But that's the point. If the reporting is correct, its legislation that targets one particular religion, one particular gender. But what right does the state have in how parents raise their children? Ban home schooling next? Another example of the political circle, where the so-called "far right" starts mimicing the so-called far left in the objectives, and vice versa.

 

Children don't have freedom of choice, because they are children. If they have freedom of choice, then they should be able to smoke, drink, fool around, all the stuff that adults do. When proud parents take that baby to be christianed, are they imposing their choices on the child. Should christianing ceremonies be banned for under 14s. Circumcision? That could be banned outright, but not because of some religious objection.

 

The ban isn't on headscarves per se. Its a ban specifically at scarves worn "in the Islamic tradition". Headscarves worn for other reasons are absolutely fine. Expect lots of 13 year old Austrian girls to suddenly have bad hair days.

 

The law voted on is twisted. The law should be giving the freedom to the child, when they are of an age to make a choice, to remove that scarf, turban, crucifix, without fear of punishment, admonishment etc. And that extends to any choice of a legal activity. ie a 15 year old saves up to get a full sleeve tatoo. Parents  cannot ground them for doing so. In most countries, parents cannot physically beat their children, but they can incarcerate their children without due process, and for arbitrary reasons ("go to your room", "my house, my rules" etc). The same politicians voting on this no doubt all think that children shouldn't have the choice of gender reassignment, to have sex, to smoke, to drink, to sniff glue, to go out on dates with strange young men, to run around a swimming pool, to dive in head first in the shallow end, to get a BB gun for Christmas, to hurt the puppy, to spit at other children, to swear like a Trooper. 

 

 

1 hour ago, JimCM said:

I was born in England. I'm not Muslim.

 

 

Yeah, its like people assuming Riclag is English, when he's actually portraying all the behaviours and attitudes of a dumb Redneck, returning froma Cross Burning, on his way to a Lynchin'.

 

I get it. The I am Sparticus scene was a Hollywood invention in reaction to the MaCarthyite era.

 

 

8 hours ago, cdemundo said:

Presbyterian?

 

Jewish. She is from a particular sect that wears Burkas.

Multiple troll posts removed

 

@Roadsternut rule 9. You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages. You will respect other members and post in a civil manner. Personal attacks, insults or hate speech posted on the forum or sent by private message are not allowed.
 
10. You will not post troll messages. Trolling is the act of purposefully antagonizing forum members by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other members into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

This is a good good thing and welcome very much which is long overdue. If you won't conform to a countries laws and rules live elsewhere .

On 12/12/2025 at 6:17 AM, georgegeorgia said:

Oh disgusting 

What a racist prejudice Country!!!.

 

 

3 hours ago, OldmanJ said:

This is a good good thing and welcome very much which is long overdue. If you won't conform to a countries laws and rules live elsewhere .

hip hip hooray for assimilation

17 hours ago, JimCM said:

I was born in England. I'm not Muslim.

 

Sure.  Then why the muslim flag? And your comments are always pro muslim.