Well firstly, ethnicity is defined socially and culturally, not biologically. People within ethnic groups may share genes, but they also share them with individuals outside of that ethnic group, which makes it a meaningless correlation.

You'd have to have a 'very broad definition' of a particular ethnicity to have value (for example it is true that certain Norwegian males carry a gene that increases the risk of collapsed lungs, but its also true that is not specific to people only from Norway, but anyone, male, who has any kind of genetic material in their make up from Norwegians (so that's all of Europe by the 1200. Then those decendents also colonized most of the world, and spread genetic material where ever they went. A large number of Scandinavians emigrated to Australia and New Zealand and US.

Now that Norwegian anectode is applicable to every country. No matter how much people might claim to be 'racially pure' they're talking out their ass on a genetic basis. Those factions in Rwanda, were ethnically diverse, but in no way genetically diverse.

Edited by jamiemartin721 (06 Oct 2015 9.58am)

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

The following is a serious question.

How do Muslims feel about Allah taking a 6yr old bride, how do they feel about the fact women are treated as 2nd class citizens, a religion that says a man can beat his wife, a religion that says a woman can only inherit half of a what a male relative can. A religion that says a woman's word is not worth the same as a man when in legal dispute?
I understand this is a 1200 yr old book (koran), but it hasn't been altered once, so do they pick and choose what they adhere to? Do they change their views when they become parents of girls? Do they feel that Islam and politics needs to be separated in Islamic countries?

Like every other religion then. Christianity has its fair share on loony tunes stuff and thankfully people tend to just ignore that now or claim it was only relevant at the time. It has changed very gradually though and without overwhemlimg hostility to it in the process.

This finger pointing 'what do muslims think' in a place where there don't even appear to be any muslims isn't actually looking or answers, or commonality.

Edited by oldcodger (06 Oct 2015 8.39pm)

I find what-abouty arguments silly.

I actually debated these points with a Muslim colleague once. He was a diehard believer but liberal enough not to take offence at the line of questioning.

He genuinely believed that forcing a woman to cover up showed that Islam had more respect for women than western countries who allowed them to get their tits out on tele. I argued the difference being we give them the choice, which he dismissed saying we objectify them where as they respect their modesty.

He also said that the fact that Mohammed walked into the desert illiterate and walked back out some years later having written the Koran is undeniable truth that God exists. I asked how and he repeated his words slowly like I had missed the point.

I asked about heaven and hell, which was interesting. Basically, atheists are at the front of Allah's queue for hell, because we believe in nothing and Jews, Christians and Muslims will all go to heaven, which surprised me.

I mentioned that someone's religion of choice is normally something that's been indoctrinated into them from a young age, how can such an almighty device being be so short sighted that he would punish a child raised by atheists who died young? He shrugged his shoulders at that.

Then we got on to the Universe, Aliens and the ending of the TV show "Lost".

All this is one blokes take and we were smoking a joint at the time, but it was interesting none the less.

Edited by JL85 (06 Oct 2015 10.55pm)

I don't think Allah took a 6 year old bride, I think that was Mohammed. Common practice back then in the Middle East. I'd be wary of anyone who considered it acceptable now, or in any way justified. Thinking about it, people in the UK around the dark ages and later were married off young in the nobility.

The issue with women, I tend to think both western society and the middle east, tend to treat women as second class citizens. Yes, in the UK you have more choice say 'to get your tits out on TV', but its still very much a case that women are 'objectified' and the degree to 'which its a choice' is questionable. If you want a career in acting and media, then certainly those FHM photo shoots are a choice, but its largely a very loaded one (i.e. as an actress your career is very dependent on attractiveness).

There is a reason why Kathy Burke has never been approached to do flashy action movie blockbusters, despite being an fantastic actress.

We place a great emphasis on 'freedom', and rightly so, but we don't necessarily see the pressure that gets levied in influencing choice. We spend a lot of money 'influencing choice'.

Of course in a lot of Islamic countries, that demand of modesty is also used to objectify woman and control them, its hard to see Saudi Arabia as anything other than a regime that objectifies women as possessions of men, and oppresses them excessively.

Arguably I'd say on reflection, women have more choice here of course, which includes the right to obey Muslim rules or not. Maybe the difference here of course is that you can be objectified for your own benefit or gain. I wouldn't regard the UK as seeing women as the equal of men.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]