Bad news for Buddha & travellers in general

[Buddha]

Spot on, but no real need for the whataboutery.
The deeds of some in the western churches are much publicised.
Ireland being the prime example.
Much of this is historical while the organised abuse of young girls by men of Pakistani origin is current.

It's not really whataboutery because my point is the same as Jo's. Namely the problem is not with Islam but with some men.

Some men abuse women and/or children. They don't do it because their religion tells them it is right to do so. Indeed, some of the men who abuse children and/or women have no religion at all.

 

[Buddha]

Very similar, actually, to how some people are anti-social and leave a load of mess for other people to clear up.

This is true of some travellers and some non-travellers. The problem isn't with travellers per se, it is with people who are anti-social and who leave a mess for others to clear up.

Many travellers and many non-travellers are not anti-social and refrain from leaving a bloody great mess wherever they go.

 

[Jerryattrick]

*TRIGGER WARNING - PLEASE DO NOT READ THE FOLLOWING POST IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU MAY BE OFFENDED*

I hope the "hated enemy" comment isn't leveled at me? I don't hate or dislike Muslims. I know a lot, some of which are friend of mine. It's the religion that I dislike. The religion that says that you can do what you like with a non believer. This is why 20+ just-happen-to-be's adult men will have sex with a 14 year old girl. They are not paedophiles or believe that they are doing something wrong. It is a different culture, and life is very different for women in the jhtb countries that they are from. The people responsible for the fate of the girls and young women that were abused in these northern towns on an industrial scale weren't the jhtb "taxi drivers", it is the people that turned a blind eye to what was happening and/or have allowed an intolerant, racist and abusive religion to grow in the UK (other religions can also be intolerant, racist and abusive)

The only motive I have is protection of women and girls. Things I see personally, and things that I read about that I'm not happy with. I'm not personally affected though, neither are you or the other posters on the board.

I have said before and I do mean it. I will call out similar issues from other religions or races if they occur.

There is nothing wrong with raising an issue if someone believes it to be true.
The issues around the northern grooming gangs and cover up needs to be out in the open and those covering it up need to feel the force of the law. This includes the media.

The point was that some people only raise concerns when the perpetrators are muslim. If they are the only ones doing similar crime then fair enough.

A bit like knife crime where the media and most politicians turn a blind eye. Maybe thats whataboutery so better not discuss that lol.

 

[jogills]

I think what shocked most rational people was how oganised it was and how the authorities who were employed to protect such girls ignored what was under their nose.
There have since been dozens of convictions of organised abuse by that section of that community.
It’s widely accepted that abuse of young girls happens. In these cases, it was the systematic organisation that shocked, and still continues to do so.

It's always shocking, or should be. Child abuse within the boarding school system, in religous establishments and in sports clubs has been endemic for years and was often organised and persistent, it was routinely covered up for many years. I can assure you that young girls in care and just leaving care have been the target of men of all races, religions and persuasions for generations with many of them pressed into a life of prostitution, crime and suffering. That activity has been criminally organised and ignored for a long time. We are getting better but slowly.

Read how Anne Cryer was trying to draw attention to this problem over 20 years ago. No one cared because the girls were considered marginal and blamed for their exploitation. The politics came later when some decided it was a race issue.

 

[jogills]

Spot on, but no real need for the whataboutery.
The deeds of some in the western churches are much publicised.
Ireland being the prime example.
Much of this is historical while the organised abuse of young girls by men of Pakistani origin is current.

Ampleforth College currently not allowed to admit new pupils and in special measures regarding their safeguarding. Historic is the oldest excuse in the book and every generation uses it. Do you think non Pakistani men have stopped abusing? Vulnerable and available children get abused it's that simple and railing against nasty people won't stop it. We need to defend children, look after them properly, give them voice and confidence.

 

[ThreeSixes]

Vulnerable and available children get abused it's that simple and railing against nasty people won't stop it. We need to defend children, look after them properly, give
them voice and confidence.

I'm VERY uncomfortable reading this. Saying we need to look after children and give them voice and confidence implies in my eyes that you think the children are complicit in the abuse?. I hope that's not what you are saying.

What do you mean by "voice and confidence". We know that these girls aren't dragged into bed kicking and screaming, but some are barely out of their teens.

 

[Buddha]

I'm VERY uncomfortable reading this. Saying we need to look after children and give them voice and confidence implies in my eyes that you think the children are complicit in the abuse?. I hope that's not what you are saying.

What do you mean by "voice and confidence". We know that these girls aren't dragged into bed kicking and screaming, but some are barely out of their teens.

I doubt very much that Jo is suggesting that the children are complicit in their abuse.

But I won't speak for him.

 

[valenciagill]

but some are barely out of their teens

Or barely into their teens. Or even younger in some cases.

 

[jokerman]

I still think it's worth making a distinction between organized religions with monopolists and exclusivist claims, especially backed by political power, and those which don't make such claims. It's right to have mosques here. It's right to have cathedrals in Saudi. I also think it's worth making a distinction between corruption in an organized religion -even systemic corruption- and an organized religion which sanctions what we would regard as wicked actions eg treat non-believers how you like. They've all done it at times, but some are more in the limelight now.

Organized religions are important to those who value the social dimension of expressing their faith and, perhaps more importantly, for the ritual they provide. I'm a heart hopes, reason says no (and reason doesn't automatically trump hope) type. If I went back to that sort of worshipping, it would be to the Catholic Church -not because of some great realization- but because those are the rituals I grew up with and feel right. Anything else would be daft. I still fire off a Hail Mary for my mother when I go past a Catholic Church. It would mean something to her, so it means something to me. As you say though, when it gets to hurting each other over doctrine, I think that may make God (SHAE)* more unhappy than anything else.

The ones I can't get my head around are the "Militant Buddhists" in Burma and Sri Lanka. I mean WTF? It must be a Saint Augustine thing-let me achieve Nirvana, but not yet, until I've killed all these Muslims and Hindus.

* Should He Actually Exist (my equivalent of PBUH).

 

[Jerryattrick]

I still think it's worth making a distinction between organized religions with monopolists and exclusivist claims, especially backed by political power, and those which don't make such claims. It's right to have mosques here. It's right to have cathedrals in Saudi. I also think it's worth making a distinction between corruption in an organized religion -even systemic corruption- and an organized religion which sanctions what we would regard as wicked actions eg treat non-believers how you like. They've all done it at times, but some are more in the limelight now.

Organized religions are important to those who value the social dimension of expressing their faith and, perhaps more importantly, for the ritual they provide. I'm a heart hopes, reason says no (and reason doesn't automatically trump hope) type. If I went back to that sort of worshipping, it would be to the Catholic Church -not because of some great realization- but because those are the rituals I grew up with and feel right. Anything else would be daft. I still fire off a Hail Mary for my mother when I go past a Catholic Church. It would mean something to her, so it means something to me. As you say though, when it gets to hurting each other over doctrine, I think that may make God (SHAE)* more unhappy than anything else.

The ones I can't get my head around are the "Militant Buddhists" in Burma and Sri Lanka. I mean WTF? It must be a Saint Augustine thing-let me achieve Nirvana, but not yet, until I've killed all these Muslims and Hindus.

* Should He Actually Exist (my equivalent of PBUH).

Could not agree with you more on the militant Bhuddhists lol. Proves the point that most of those under organised religion do not understand the core of it.

examples - where Christians do not follow the gospels but dig back into the old testament or revelations to justify bad behaviour.
- where muslims do not follow the koran but something added to it
- where jews follow added on interpretations
- too much to cover on hindus lol

 

[Jerryattrick]

Very similar, actually, to how some people are anti-social and leave a load of mess for other people to clear up.

This is true of some travellers and some non-travellers. The problem isn't with travellers per se, it is with people who are anti-social and who leave a mess for others to clear up.

Many travellers and many non-travellers are not anti-social and refrain from leaving a bloody great mess wherever they go.

Nearly everything we are discussing is about the disrespect for and seeing as inferior people in 'bad' positions or positions that we cannot imagine whether it be children in care or the homeless.

Only a tramp was lazarus sad fate
He who lay down at the rich mans gate

He begged for the crumbs from the rich man to eat
He was only a tramp found dead on the street.

He was some mothers darling, he was some mothers son
Once he was fair and once he was young

And some mother rocked him, her darling to sleep
But they left him to die like a tramp on the street.

 

[Jerryattrick]

I'm VERY uncomfortable reading this. Saying we need to look after children and give them voice and confidence implies in my eyes that you think the children are complicit in the abuse?. I hope that's not what you are saying.

What do you mean by "voice and confidence". We know that these girls aren't dragged into bed kicking and screaming, but some are barely out of their teens.

This should be simple.

Our children were being abused, many departments of authority turned a blind eye or were too f lazy to do anything. Politicians from both parties did nothing, Labour even censured an MP for speaking up.
Why is this not under a formal enquiry where the enablers at all levels take their punishment and actual lessons can be learned.

 

[valenciagill]

This should be simple.

Our children were being abused, many departments of authority turned a blind eye or were too f lazy to do anything. Politicians from both parties did nothing, Labour even censured an MP for speaking up.
Why is this not under a formal enquiry where the enablers at all levels take their punishment and actual lessons can be learned.

Our children are still being abused , or do you think it has suddenly stopped ?
100% agree with you on an enquiry, but I can't see it occurring. The Govt appears paralyzed when it comes to who they might offend , and the civil disturbance that might follow.
What is the answer ? We only need to look at what's happening in France , with 5 police officers/workers murdered in the last 12 months.Can you imagine that in the UK ?
Where the un-electable Marie La Pen continues to surge in the polls. Where top military folk are issuing warnings of civil war.
Whichever political persuasion we are from , can we not all agree there's a serious problem brewing , whether close to home or anywhere in Europe ?

 

[Jerryattrick]

Our children are still being abused , or do you think it has suddenly stopped ?
100% agree with you on an enquiry, but I can't see it occurring. The Govt appears paralyzed when it comes to who they might offend , and the civil disturbance that might follow.
What is the answer ? We only need to look at what's happening in France , with 5 police officers/workers murdered in the last 12 months.Can you imagine that in the UK ?
Where the un-electable Marie La Pen continues to surge in the polls. Where top military folk are issuing warnings of civil war.
Whichever political persuasion we are from , can we not all agree there's a serious problem brewing , whether close to home or anywhere in Europe ?

of course its not stopped but the excuse is always 'cannot discuss ongoing cases' so lets not, lets get on and sort the system out and take action against anyone who did not do their job.
Then we need to look at why these girls were and still are vulnerable when in care and sort that out.
Sadly until the media see it as something to latch onto for advertising or clicks then it wont happen.

 

[ThreeSixes]

Then we need to look at why these girls were and still are vulnerable when in care and sort that out.
Sadly until the media see it as something to latch onto for advertising or clicks then it wont happen.

Yes, there shouldn't be young girls that are "consentually" having sex with 30+ adult Asian men, but this shouldn't be a question of cutting off the supply. The reason I have never had sex with a child isn't lack of access, it is because I don't think it is right.

 

[Jerryattrick]

Yes, there shouldn't be young girls that are "consentually" having sex with 30+ adult Asian men, but this shouldn't be a question of cutting off the supply. The reason I have never had sex with a child isn't lack of access, it is because I don't think it is right.

Nothing to do with cutting off supply as an answer to it. It has though exposed an issue with our care system and vulnerable adults.

 

[Gills 58]

I think what shocked most rational people was how oganised it was and how the authorities who were employed to protect such girls ignored what was under their nose.
There have since been dozens of convictions of organised abuse by that section of that community.
It’s widely accepted that abuse of young girls happens. In these cases, it was the systematic organisation that shocked, and still continues to do so.

Yep. For systematic organisation I give you the Catholic Church. An organistation that 3x6 didn't equate with the so called Muslim ring last I knew. He may have publicly accepted it and denounced them in the same terms by now. I gave up waiting about a year ago and pressed the ignore button.

 

[Gills 58]

It's always shocking, or should be. Child abuse within the boarding school system, in religous establishments and in sports clubs has been endemic for years and was often organised and persistent, it was routinely covered up for many years. I can assure you that young girls in care and just leaving care have been the target of men of all races, religions and persuasions for generations with many of them pressed into a life of prostitution, crime and suffering. That activity has been criminally organised and ignored for a long time. We are getting better but slowly.

Read how Anne Cryer was trying to draw attention to this problem over 20 years ago. No one cared because the girls were considered marginal and blamed for their exploitation. The politics came later when some decided it was a race issue.

Excellent.

 

[ThreeSixes]

Yep. For systematic organisation I give you the Catholic Church. An organistation that 3x6 didn't equate with the so called Muslim ring last I knew. He may have publicly accepted it and denounced them in the same terms by now. I gave up waiting about a year ago and pressed the ignore button.

Sadly he won't see this but I am aware that Catholics abuse children too (in their case I believe that they can do what they want, as long as they repent their sins??). That was a long time ago, though, on a much smaller scale (in this country at least), and the Catholic church has made efforts to stop the abuse, but it is similar all the same.

The problem is that there are 2 different arguments to defend the individuals. Firstly, it has nothing to do with religion and they are only just-happen-to-be's that happen to have access to vulnerable children, and the second argument (often from the same people!) is that other religions also do the same!?!

 

[Buddha]

Sadly he won't see this but I am aware that Catholics abuse children too (in their case I believe that they can do what they want, as long as they repent their sins??). That was a long time ago, though, on a much smaller scale (in this country at least), and the Catholic church has made efforts to stop the abuse, but it is similar all the same.

The problem is that there are 2 different arguments to defend the individuals. Firstly, it has nothing to do with religion and they are only just-happen-to-be's that happen to have access to vulnerable children, and the second argument (often from the same people!) is that other religions also do the same!?!

This just goes round and round and round, like an American stuck on the magic roundabout!

Why can't you understand this, 3x6, it really is very simple.

We all agree with you that what happened in Rotherham was truly sickening. We all agree that child abuse is a heinous crime. Innocent and vulnerable young people having their innocence taken from them and their lives all but destroyed. There is no argument about any of that.

Where there seems to be disagreement is the point about who is responsible for the child abuse.

On the one hand we have you and val, both of you repeatedly blaming it all on Islam.

What others have been trying to explain is that:
1. The majority of Muslim men are not child abusers.
2. Islam is not the only religion that has adherents who are child abusers.
and
3. Child abusers are not always adherents to any particular religion, sometimes they are secular.

Think about the abuse of young boys at football clubs. There have been several shocking revelations about this in the past couple of years. It wasn't anything to do with Islam. It wasn't anything to do with religion whatsoever. It was more to with opportunity.

Your position that Islam is to blame is crazy. It would be like saying that football is to blame for the child abusing football coaches!

Why can't we just agree all agree that child abuse is very wrong, and that wherever it is happening it must be stop. Those who carry out the abuse must be severely punished. More importantly, they must never be given the opportunity to carry out their abuse. Our children must be kept safe from these monsters.