religious freedom

The UN responsible for changing New Zealand’s immigration policy

A politically correct opinion piece on Islamic immigration to New Zealand in The Dominion Post got lots of comments. Interestingly despite the politically correct stance taken by the writer the majority of commenters disagreed with what he said. It made me realise that Whaleoil readers are not the only New Zealanders who can see what folly it is to import a culture, religion and political ideology so at odds with everything we hold dear. We are not the only New Zealanders who have observed what happens in other Western countries when they import an ideology that thinks homosexuals should be killed, that women are second class and that want to spread their laws and values to New Zealand rather than assimilate to our laws and values.

The article interested me because it inadvertently explained that we had a sensible immigration policy until the United Nations put pressure on our government. Believe it or not, our governments all had sensible immigration policies until the United Nations opened New Zealand up to Muslim immigration.

…Discrimination on the basis of ethnicity and religion characterised New Zealand’s immigration and refugee policy until the late 1980s. The country wanted British immigrants. Small numbers of refugees from the Middle East began arriving in New Zealand from the late 1970s, comprising people of Baha’i and Christian backgrounds.

Read more »

Blasphemy laws are the foundation of an authoritarian state

Pakistani Christian villagers march during a protest against the country’s strict blasphemy laws against Islam. Getty images

Pakistan is a Muslim country and when they introduced blasphemy laws they said they were created to protect people’s religious beliefs but the laws resulted in public death sentences. Naive Canada is being led down the same garden path by a leader known more for his boyish good looks than his common sense. He has introduced motions against “Islamophobia” that are not legally binding but Muslim extremists are already agitating for them to become laws.

A resolution, M-103, seeking to condemn so-called “Islamophobia,” was introduced a few weeks ago in the peaceful country of Canada by Liberal Party MP Iqra Khalid in the House of Commons, sparking a controversy.

A similar motion, labelled M-37, was later tabled in the Ontario provincial legislature by MPP Nathalie Des Rosiers on February 23, 2017, and was passed by the provincial parliament.

M-37, like its predecessor, demanded that lawmakers condemn “all forms of Islamophobia” and reaffirm “support for government efforts, through the Anti-Racism Directorate, to address and prevent systemic racism across government policy, programs and services”…

There are, of course, no comparable motions against “Judeophobia” or “Christianophobia”.

Read more »

Alabama discriminate against non-Muslim women who wear head scarves

Screen Shot 2016-09-04 at 1.08.41 PM

Yvonne Allen in a photograph included in the lawsuit filed against officials in Lee County, Ala. (American Civil Liberties Union)

Now I may not like all the concessions the West give to followers of Islam but I always assumed that at least the West would be consistent. If they upheld the religious freedom of a Muslim woman to wear a Hijab at work then, of course, they would not object to a Sikh wearing a turban because fair is fair right? Wrong. In Alabama, Muslim women get preferential treatment. There is one law for non-Muslim women and another law for Muslim women.

From the complaint in Allen v. English:

Plaintiff Yvonne Allen is a devout Christian woman who covers her hair with a headscarf as part of her religious practice. In December 2015, Ms. Allen sought to renew her driver license at the Lee County driver license office, where officials demanded that she remove her head covering to be photographed. When Ms. Allen explained her religious beliefs, the County officials responded with a remarkable claim: They admitted that there was a religious accommodation available for head coverings, but contended that it applied only to Muslims.

Read more »

It is the beginning of the end for French Women’s freedom

The Burkini ban is over before it could even start.The French have already surrendered to Sharia law. Once again the democratic laws of equality and freedom of religion have been twisted and used by the followers of anti-democratic and anti-women Sharia law to their advantage. Within a decade it will be a lone French woman bravely wearing a bikini on a French beach. She will stand out, surrounded by burkini clad non-Muslim and Muslim women alike. She will feel the pressure to conform and hostile Muslim male eyes will be upon her. “Slut” they will call out, ” Prostitute!” “She is asking to be raped,” they will say amongst themselves, ” she is being provocative,” they will whisper and the lone French woman will feel the fear and wonder when it all went so horribly wrong for France.

Image: thelibertarianrepublic

Image: thelibertarianrepublic

Read more »

There is discrimination and then there are those who refuse to do the job

no_workplace_discrimination

I do not support discrimination. As an employee I expect to be selected because I have the best skill set for the job. My sex and race should have nothing to do with my selection. There are of course some exceptions to that as if I am pregnant and the job involves working with chemicals a sensible employer would not select me for my protection and would explain that to me. Also if the job was for a male clothes model obviously as a female I am not suited to the position. The same applies to my race. If I am an actor and the role is for an African American I am not suitable for the job obviously.

When it comes to religion the same common sense should apply but unfortunately groups with deep pockets like CAIR have been giving employers a very hard time. Employers should not be punished for expecting their employees to do their job.

If I am hired to lift heavy packages all day I cannot refuse because I am a woman and they are too heavy.If I cannot lift them then I am unsuitable for the job. If I am a Christian and think prostitution is morally wrong then I am obviously not suitable to be a receptionist in a massage parlour. This is clearly common sense yet Muslim employees are taking their employers to court on a regular basis because they don’t want to do aspects of their job or to adhere to work safety standards that are a requirement of the position.

Read more »

Let’s defend the rights of ALL women together.

I am sure that Liberals and Conservatives alike will agree with the statement that..

Segregation is an immoral concept designed to force one group of people into a separate, subordinate existence.

–leftfootforward.org

Where the two sides seem to diverge is who they want to protect from segregation and whose rights they want to actively fight for. The below article from 2013 makes an excellent argument for why Liberals and Conservatives alike should both be working together to defend the rights of all women.

Gender segregation uk

Gender segregation uk

Left Foot Forward has been at the forefront of the campaign against gender segregation at our Universities and rightly so. Segregation is an immoral concept designed to force one group of people into a separate, subordinate existence.

Read more »

Women’s rights versus religious freedom

barackobama-Public-Domain-1b

 

Muslims are trying to bring Sharia law into Western countries. The two below articles illustrate two different approaches to getting their foot in the door. You may think these are small events of no significance but this is how it all starts. Women’s rights have been hard fought and hard won. Modern feminists need to prevent Islam from dragging women backwards into the past and need to see through the ‘ religious freedom ‘ smoke screen. We should be championing Islamic women’s right to enjoy the same freedom we enjoy, not enabling their ‘religion’ to keep them in the dark ages.

Through the 19th century bathing costumes were geared towards modesty, especially in the case of women. As a result the majority of swimwear was long and figure-covering to avoid displaying any ‘racy’ body parts such as legs or ankles. Bathing wear was usually made from wool or flannel as they were both fairly thick fabrics and made it easy to conceal body shapes.  -http://ihe-articles.blogspot.co.nz

Through the 19th century bathing costumes were geared towards modesty, especially in the case of women. As a result the majority of swimwear was long and figure-covering to avoid displaying any ‘racy’ body parts such as legs or ankles. Bathing wear was usually made from wool or flannel as they were both fairly thick fabrics and made it easy to conceal body shapes.
-ihe-articles.blogspot.co.nz

No other religion has tried to bring their religious law into our society as Islam has.

“No, you can’t deny women their basic rights and pretend it’s about your ‘religious freedom’. If you don’t like birth control, don’t use it. Religious freedom doesn’t mean you can force others to live by your own beliefs.”

-Barack Obama

President Obama makes a very good point even though his criticism was aimed at Catholics. In contrast Obama is very supportive of Islam as you can see from these quotes.

Read more »

Know your place woman

Under the guise of culture or religion and protected by a ‘ Politically correct ” western world, many acts of discrimination are ignored and are left unchallenged. Rights that women have fought for generations to achieve, equal rights are stomped on and the overwhelming response is to do nothing. It is their culture, it is about religious freedom ( to oppress ) we must be tolerant they say.They are  being victimised for being different to us they say.

Well this Australian journalist has decided to take them on and very cleverly she has taken the victim card off them and has applied it to herself.

The MSM love a good victim.

Freelance journalist Alison Bevege. Photo: FIRST ON 7NEWS

Freelance journalist Alison Bevege. Photo: FIRST ON 7NEWS

FIRST ON 7: An Islamist group has been accused of sexual discrimination for making women sit at the back of public meetings.

The radical political party Hizb ut-Tahrir insists it is their choice, but one woman says she was told to move to the back or leave.

Freelance journalist Alison Bevege took her case to the Anti-Discrimination Board on Wednesday afternoon.

“When I walked in I was immediately directed by one of the representatives of the organisers to sit in the back half of the room,” Ms Bevege told 7News.

“I just don’t want to be told to go to the back of the room because I’m a female, who does that?”

Hizb ut-Tahrir promotes a global Islamic caliphate to govern everyone.

The group has been banned in several countries.

At the weekend, 300,000 rallied in Indonesia for their Khalifa Conference.

They also hold regular public events in western Sydney, including the one Alison attended in October last year.

Bilal Merhi leads boys as young as six in extremist chants at Hizb ut-Tahrir youth group.

“The choice was quite clear, you either sit at the back or your only other option is to leave, so I didn’t have any choice in the matter,” Ms Bevege said.

In the last six months, 7News has attended several similar events in western Sydney. Each time, we observed attendees being told “brothers to the front, sisters to the back”.

Now, their right to segregate men and women at public events is before the Anti-Discrimination Board.

This is not a story about religion, it is about discrimination.

Of course, you can do as you please in your home or your church, but if you hold a public meeting, we are all bound by the same, single set of laws.

“It’s a public event, it’s advertised, she turns up, she attends, and if, as she says, she was told to sit separately then that’s what the law says, you can’t do it,” ANU College of Law Professor Simon Rice said.

The group has claims “it was a mere request, however, it was open to her to sit anywhere she wanted.”

Hizb ut-Tahrir leader, Ismael Alwahwah, said Alison should not expect that “her view of what is right and wrong should be enforced on others”.

Ms Bevege is asking for $100,000 compensation to give to charity, and an apology.

“I’ve never seen a public event that tries to separate men and women and then say that it’s not discriminatory,” Professor Simon Rice said.

Hizb ut-Tahrir were a no show on Wednesday.

-au.news.yahoo.com

What stands out for me from this article are the words of Ismael Alwahwah. It is an illustration of the utter brilliance behind the Islamic cultural Jihad that is being waged against us. He is wanting to enforce his ideology on a woman at a public meeting but he turns it totally around and says that it is the woman who is trying to enforce her right to equality on him. This is a very common technique. I have read of a Public UK university where Islamic student leaders are wanting to enforce segregation by separating the female students from the male students and their argument is that those opposing them are denying them their religious freedom. They are trying to impose segregation/apartheid on non-muslim students by taking away their rights to gender equality but they frame themselves as the victims!