Deborah Gyapong: Another example of creeping Sharia?

Another example of creeping Sharia?

From the United Kingdom, a Catholic mom objects to school trip forcing daughter to visit a mosque. h/t Atlas Shrugs:

Miss Davies said: “I objected to Amy being made to dress like a Muslim girl, the original letter from the school gave a dress code for the visit, including long skirts, leggings or tights and covering up her head.

“She's been brought up in the Catholic faith and religion. Amy is not a Muslim and shouldn’t be told to dress like one.”

Miss Davies handed in a letter setting out reasons why she wouldn't be attending and the school asked if it was a problem with payment.

She said: “I asked them not to patronise me, it's £3 to cover the cost of the bus.”

Despite requesting that any further communication about the proposed Year 9 trip, part of the students’ religious education class, be conducted strictly between her and Mr Lee, Miss Davies was upset to hear that Amy had been pulled out of her lessons and told the mosque excursion was ‘compulsory’.


Why is a Catholic school ordering this? Which reminds me of an excellent interview I read yesterday that Frontpagemag.com did with Christine Williams, a national talk show host with Canada's Crossroad's Television Network. She said (my bolds, because they explain why a Catholic school would court Islam in the wrong way):


Take my country of origin for example: Trinidad was a model country of a predominantly Christian, Muslim and Hindu population living peaceably together, even celebrating each others’ holy days. That was until the beginnings of aggressive Islamism in the late 80s. Abu Bakr, the leader of the Jamaat al Muslimeen, a Muslim group in Trinidad, had long-standing links with Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi. Under the leadership of Abu Bakr, the group staged an attempted coup d’état in 1990. Since then, radical Islam is on the radar in a once very peaceful country.

Through the combined forces of political correctness and multiculturalism — Canada is now struggling with what reasonable accommodation means as conservative Muslims push for special rights according to their customs: to wear the niqab, have segregated swimming sessions, and even segregated living communities. The most dangerous aspect has been the effort to curb free speech as we saw with the Human Rights Commission shakedowns of Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn and Macleans Magazine.

FP: What concerns you about multiculturalism in Canada?

Williams: Multiculturalism is a loophole which threatens our national security and rich heritage. Under the Multicultural Act, all cultures are deemed equal, including those that subjugate women. This clashes with our cultural mores. Yes, we are a country of many cultures, but equality, human rights and democracy are important to us and enshrined in our constitutions. The promotion of multiculturalism and sensitivity toward visible minorities has become a power tool of special interest groups.

Is racism alive and well in our culture? It certainly is and obviously needs to be fought against. It is insidious and appears in both subtle and overt forms. But rather than tackle it directly, some groups have chosen to target free speech instead. So when Mark Steyn reports about Radical Islam in Macleans Magazine, he and the publication get dragged to the Human Rights Commission because special interest groups cry that the report is promoting racism. We need to get serious about fighting both racism and Radical Islam, not fighting the truth. Free speech in the West has been an issue raised repeatedly by the O.I.C as a human rights issue, calling on the U.N. to adopt an International resolution to counter Islamophobia. Islamists wanting to push their global agenda against the ‘infidels’ know how to manipulate the multicultural loophole very cleverly. We have to stand up to them and their agenda.

FP: You have talked quite a bit about “choice” in this discussion. Free choice is obviously something that matters to you a lot and it is an issue that concerned you, and that you have thought about, since your youth. The radical Left and radical Islam do not allow choice. I think it is no surprise that you never became a leftist or an apologist for Islamism, for this reason (among others). Can you talk a bit about this?

Williams: Choice is power, period. It determines what you become. On a practical level, carefully thought out choices usually produces favorable results. However, if life deals unexpected blows, you can stand on something intangible, yet deeper: integrity, personal self worth and dignity. You emerge with an honored sense of self that no one can take from you. For a culture to offer no choice to women, it is an unconscionable, horrifying amputation of a woman’s human value. How anyone in our culture can undermine this is mystifying. But this is totally what the radical Left and radical Islam support doing.

FP: What concerns you the most about the radical Left’s alliance with radical Islam and the inroads that unholy alliance is making in our free societies? What do you think is the best thing concerned citizens can do to stand up to what the radical Left and Islamists are trying to perpetrate?

Williams: I see it as being about two things: courting the Muslim vote and lack of knowledge about the various branches of Islam. The radical Left has sucked up to leaders in the Islamic community without screening who they are. This is actually a derogatory display of how they see all Muslims, virtually dumping all Muslims who appear integrated in the same pile. They can’t be bothered to do their homework, so it’s an embarrassing expose of their own ignorance and how Islamists can use this ignorance against Western civilization. The leftist elite is largely unable to differentiate between subtle radical agendas and the goals of honest moderate Muslims, which inadvertently leads to the unholiest of alliances because of their burning lust for the Muslim vote, particularly in multicultural Canada. Concerned citizens need to understand their personal value in protecting the hard work of our founding fathers for the sake of the future generations and let their voices be heard by politicians.

|

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

« Home