After those ridiculous posters

Good post GillT57

I still maintain that religious belief is no reason to impose or attempt to impose ones beliefs on other members of the public. If as jings says, we are to live and let live, and just let people get on with whatever they wish as part of their religious beliefs, then where does FGM come into the argument? What about child marriage? Or do you only object to Islamic practices and allow London living Orthodox Jews get on with their bigotry? And bigotry is what it is, the men on the flight were acting as if women re unclean and about to contaminate them in some way. As someone said earlier in the post, what is it about the Abrahimic religions and their fear/dislike/loathing of women? Can you imagine the uproar if a group of say white South Africans had refused to get on a flight because there were blacks near them? It would be an international incident and quite rightly too. Religion should never be allowed to be use as a cover for prejudice.

And holding up a plane in that way is an everyday occurrence? Not like being drunk, being stroppy, behaving in a threatening way....are those people also interfering with other people on religious grounds?

I thought women in Saudi weren't allowed out without a male companion?

I don't understand your post wheniwasyourage. I was simply talking about the ultra-orthodox Jewish community in this country. I thought the article was interesting. Didn't read it all mind you. Bit long!

I blame the airline for the other thing. They must have known their clientele.

Why do you not regard holding up a flight and blocking the aeroplane aisles (if that's what happened) as "interfering", jings.

Why do you not regard putting up unnecessary notices in a London street as "interfering"?

Both are interfering with the usual and totally inoffensive way of doing things that just about everyone else save a small religious group just get along with perfectly well.

Basically they want privileges (different rules from everyone else) because of their particular interpretation of their religion. If what they want affects no-one else, they can do what they like but once they start disrupting things for others any religious privilege or allowance they claim should be nil.

So, jingl, if people have religious or cultural reasons for doing things, we should always make allowances, should we? For example, telling women that they must cover their hair because it drives men wild (and this is the women's fault for having outrageously provocative hair, not the men's for being unable to control themselves), not to mention cannibalism and female genital mutilation. I think that as a society we have developed some ways of dealing with the human condition which are regarded as generally acceptable to us, and we are entitled to complain about behaviour which is contrary to those ways. This includes telling women (not men, please note) on which side of a public road in London they can walk. You just try going out without a male companion in Saudi Arabia and see how far you get. That is their way, and if you are in their country you have to abide by it, whatever you may think of it.

I may have religious reasons for saying all that, in which case you, by what appear to be your own values, cannot object.

There is a interesting item here all about the ultra-orthodox jews

They are certainly very different from the rest of the British population, but I see no reason why we should interfere.

why didn't the plane just go without him?

Because they were already on the aircraft:

''People stood in the aisles and refused to go forward," said Amit Ben-Natan, a passenger who was on board the plane.'

'Many passengers have reported that after takeoff a large portion of the travelers took to the aisles to pray which causing them to become crowded and flight attendants unable to serve drinks or distribute meals.'

And this isn't even in the philosophy forum!

Don't make this a thread about a thread.

(that was re petallus's post)

Aaaaghhh! [tears hair]

If most people have difficulty understanding a particular concept, could we say those who do understand are an elite?

Just asking

Tolerating others' beliefs, which I do, is not the same as tolerating having the consequences of those beliefs foisted into the public sphere. This is not a difficult concept to understand so it surprises me that so many people never do seem to get it.

Besides which, one cannot really respect beliefs, one can respect people who hold beliefs one doesn't respect. That's another concept people often seem to have difficulty grasping. And it still doesn't mean you have to tolerate behaviour that you wouldn't tolerate from anyone else. Beliefs and behaviour are not the same. This thread is about behaviour.

There was nothing stopping ordinary members of the public walking along that street, as far as I can tell.

I do not think that a minority can impose their views on the majority in a public place such as a London street.

If it was, as they claim, for safety reasons or that women should not be touched by men, what about ordinary members of the public who needed to walk along that street at that time.

btw, one can be religious but not understand the reasoning behind these posters displayed on a London street. They can do what they like in the privacy of the synagogue, I do not mind, but cannot impose their minority views on the rest of us.

memo to self, do not give the vicar a peck on the cheek any more.

I don't think one can realistically expect understanding from those who don't believe in any sort of religion. Tolerance of other people's beliefs, at best perhaps.

I'm giving up now. We're never gonna get anywhere!

I didn't mean you specifically! I meant, if you're going to have a go at anybody - religion or otherwise really - it's a good idea to get the whole picture. And maybe a bit of understanding wouldn't go amiss.

No-one who is oppressed by a misogynistic religion is really free. The people who choose to walk away from their religion do not, I think, belong to ultra-orthodox minority sects. I'm happy to be wrong about that but an analogy with victims of domestic abuse is running through my mind, and the difficulties they often have in effecting an escape.

BTW, jings, you said earlier that I did have to understand the roots of the religion. Make your mind up

If it's in a public place it is my business.

Re those ultra-orthodox Jews causing problems in an aeroplane, someone has sensibly suggested that they pay for two, or even three seats and then they wouldn't have a problem.

And I don't think you "need more understanding". It's none of your business.