Class doesn't equal classy

One of the things you can describe Britain as is as a nation of animal lovers. This makes me proud, especially coming from a minority background who generally do not care for the welfare of animals, to put it mildly. Walking friend's dogs even when they were puppies, I noticed the ethnic divisions between those who hated dogs and those who adored them (British). Generally speaking, those from a South Asian background and East African background react in the following ways, say things like 'I don't do dogs fam' or have a look of absolute terror in their eyes, or simply run away, there was even a time where a mother started throwing stones at the sight of a friend's pug (pictured below). Children are not naturally scared of animals, they generally love them, it is their parents' prejudices from back home which influences their prejudices, where there are stray and dangerous animals, then when these kids grow up they end up feeling the same as their parents. God love em but parents can also be stupid sometimes.

On a different note, in Islam we are meant to treat all animals well, the Prophet (saw) would even take ants out of harms way and in one Hadith (stories) a woman's sins are forgiven because she gave a thirsty dog water from a well. The animals we slaughter are free range, and are meant to be treated well. They also have a quick, relatively painless death through severing a jugular vein. Muslims are seen as 'hating' dogs but that is simply not the case, or it is not meant to be. Dogs have only been domesticated in recent years and so were previously unhygienic and unsuitable to keep as pets. The last time I checked all animal and human saliva and excretion were impure and unhygienic so how the perception of dogs came from simply being unclean to almost evil is beyond me. In any case, just because it is not advisable to keep certain animals for matters of convenience and hygiene this does not mean it is ok to hate an animal. This was the jist of my rant at my own dad a few weeks ago when my sister and I mentioned the cute German Shepherd puppy next door, to which my dad retorted that it looked like 'a black pig'. Speaking of pigs, they are not detested either, they are simply not permissible to eat because of their digestive nature i.e. eating their own faeces and anything they can get their trotters on. This is mentioned in the holy books of Judaism, Islam and Christianity.

But even in 'indigenous' Britain there appears to be a division when it comes to fox hunting. When the bill to ban fox hunting was going through, it was the most debated bill of that entire year, consuming hundreds of hours of parliamentary time, and I thought the French parliament was bad... In the Metro last week, there were those defending fox hunting, the theme which I can pick out amongst the drivel is that in rural areas especially, fox are pests... Poor poor rich people... a Parliament filled with toffs should probably mean the amount of time spent debating the issue should come as no surprise. I wonder what fox hunting defenders think of Spanish and Portuguese bull fighting where the animal is repeatedly stabbed, as opposed to getting torn to shreds alive by a pack of dogs, both for the sport and amusement of the real beasts; elitist humans.

 

Notorious Tory boy asked me if I was for or against.
Me: 'to be honest I don't know much about the subject but as a general principle I'm against the lynching of and unnecessary cruelty towards animals'.

TB: 'did you know that when the government banned fox hunting there had to be so many beagles put down because they (rich land owners) then had no use for them.'

Dazed and confused I said 'nobody forced beagle owners to put them down.'

TB: 'they had to because those dogs were specifically bred and trained for hunting.'

So not only did these fox hunters indulge in this blood sport but they also did not want the hassle of keeping beagles alive if they were no longer useful for this game! Thus proving that 'class' doesn't equal class.

An excerpt from a piece about fox hunting
Due to frequent hunting, the fox population has significantly dropped. Hunting is nowadays confined to merely chasing the animals to holes in the ground. On the other hand, in early times the earth was blocked up overnight to prevent the foxes from escaping into the ground. They were chased for hours so that they die in extreme stress and fatigue. If at all they escape, they gradually die of heart-lung bleeding, brain injury or pneumonia. Once they are dug out from the ground, instead of shooting them, men throw them to the waiting-dogs to tear them alive. Sometimes they are killed simply by bopping their heads with spade. 


See also http://anbarrockny.blogspot.com/

Is being a lefty compatible with believing in God?

I consider myself a die-hard lefty but it's come to my attention that so many people on 'my side' do not believe in God, not only that but religion is openly despised. In my view if you are truly liberal you accept people's differences, and as long as it is not immoral or affecting your life why should anyone take it upon themselves to revel in shitting on other people's beliefs? It would not be socially acceptable to deride someone's race or creed yet it is deemed OK to be intolerant toward faith. Right-wing Christians admittedly make it much too easy to take the piss out of them, but people of faith are believe it or not, sometimes sane and educated. Stereotyping and generalising is something I thought was the domain of right-wingers.

Some people call themselves socialists because they believe in the philosophy that advocates government controlled economy, at almost complete odds with those who favour unregulated capitalism (apart from when the corporations need saving of course, then it's state to the rescue!). The theory of socialism comes from books yet one would not call a socialist 'retarded' or whatever otherwise abuse people level at people of religion.

Some would say Islam is close to socialism, in that the government should be responsible for the well-being of its people, to make sure everyone has an entitlement. Islam does not discourage enterprise and business in contrast to the Biblical quote which is 'it is easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God'. It however always emphasises social responsibility in economic terms by laying out that everyone pay 2.5% of their salary, after expenses and living costs, to charity. If everyone in the world did just this no-one would be hungry this Christmas, or any day for that matter. This is a minimum percentage and most go beyond this recommendation ALTRUISTICALLY, especially in Ramadan which serves as a yearly reminder to think of others. Monetarily the banning of interest in Islam (and the Bible) makes economic sense, it means that every man, woman and child does not have to be ENSLAVED by this so-called FREE market. The more money you have, means the more interest you deserve to get? And when you are in overdraft you get kicked in the teeth and interest deducted from your already low funds? This is perverse.

Ramadan, even something as simple and universal as fasting has been contested by others in my life yet most religions practice this. It would be amazing if people thought about people other than themselves and their immediate circle EVERY SINGLE DAY, but the fact is they DO NOT and Ramadan is just a practical way of reminding people of others who are less fortunate. It is merely 30 days out of 365 in which from dawn to dusk we experience a REAL EMPATHY for those who do not have the means to eventually break their 'fast' at will, and not a momentary and useless 'awww how sad'. Although it is a mere taste (for want of a better word) of how the starving feel, not being able to simply have a snack whenever you like makes you more disciplined, makes you think of things other than your next meal and more aware of how you behave. This discipline you experience is intended to affect how you then live the rest of your year/life. If you can constantly improve your sense of discipline and empathy you will NEVER BE ENSLAVED by things that are bad for you and waste your time. It has also been medically proven that fasting serves as a detox and is not punishing on health, even for those who are professional athletes.

People bemoan religionists but as long as someone has a moral code who gives a shit about what someone believes in their heart? If you want someone to agree with everything you believe in, you may as well be a fascist. A book that is holy is of course not the be all and end all of one's moral code or education it is just part of it, just like so many elements in life and sources make you the person you are. EDUCATION is at the forefront of Islam, and no holy book says you should only read that book yet education is not as yet a human right in man-made law. Furthermore, saying a book of morals is not necessary is like saying man-made laws should not be in common law or within statute because everyone knows what the law is anyway.

I don't know one single person that does good things solely for a 'reward' in the afterlife consciously or not, this is an arrogant assumption made by arrogant people. Then again, there are psychologists who say that no-one does good deeds TRULY altruistically because they want recognition, hence most charitable donations are not anonymous. Either way, this disproves any theory that only religionists do good deeds for reward like a dog would. There are various way in which people as a whole can be persuaded to do good, for many, doing good for good's sake is enough, but if this were enough there would be no need for laws, for jails and for any criminal reprimand. Like it or not, some lack a moral compass for various reasons so must be persuaded to not commit wrongs out of fear of punishment by God or law, whether it is murder and rape or tax evasion or benefit fraud. Out of 600 verses in the Qur'an, detailing of punishments make up ten sentences. Punishment (hell/imprisonment specifically) is a last resort in the case of God or law. All the while, forgiveness and redemption is always available for those who truly regret any wrong they have done in the case of God and not law.

The books of the Abrahamic religions speak of VIOLENCE and WAR because they are stories of what happened in those times, and yet to think that today in 2011 that we are above that same violence and war is to live in LA LA LAND. In the UK, in a little over a decade we have instigated and participated in wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya and profiteer from the weapons we sell to repressive governments. The US are the same, but have also dabbled in cowardly drone focused violence in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. We may not kill many of own like other governments do but we send our soldiers to war which does not involving defending our land, honour or people. The three things in which Islam say war is deemed necessary in self-defence. War is not pretty, most of the times counter-productive but 100% can be summed up by Prophet Muhammad who said 'War is deceit'. Yet MAN insists on violence and going to war; self-professed religious devotees, secularists and non-believers, it is unfortunately an inevitable part of life which holy and non-holy books must deal with if they deal in reality as well as spirituality. There are many man-made disasters, if not war, politicians override scientifically proven concerns for the environment of our planet because nobody wants to sacrifice a tiny part of their economies. This is nothing to do with religion or God but the stupidity of MAN.

A definition of God is not a human concocted, and in particular, Western concocted idea of a superhero, who saves people from evil, that is meant to be our job. But we are obviously shit at it and are looking for someone to blame. It would be nice if one single thing was responsible for all evil in humanity i.e. religion, but sorry that is not the case.

We in the Western world like to think we are free, yes we have more freedoms relative to other countries, but we are certainly more subservient to the will of our governments so how are we superior to the 'chains' of religion? Furthermore, is worshipping a deity worse than worshipping money?

Take something from each ideology and think for yourselves, don't demonise one, especially if you know little about it. Question everything and try to piece books and stories together from its CONTEXT and decide what might be as fair and just as life can be made for EVERYONE. Stop dwelling on the faults in all ideologies. Instead, be aware of them and harness their strengths. Extremes of belief, philosophy, thought or ideology have ever and always did little to serve the needs of mankind other than to create chaos, whether that be from religion or atheism or whateverism. All people need to start being more open-minded and stop being so far up their own arses and take their unholy crusade elsewhere.        

I have come to the conclusion that being a lefty is compatible with believing in God, what is not compatible with being a lefty is stereotyping, bullying, mocking, ignorance and generally being intolerant.

See also http://anbarrockny.blogspot.com/ 

Two sure fire table conversation killers - religion and politics

I know these are the two topics that you MUST avoid at a dinner party for fear of the designated black sheep label but hey, these are the two most important topics in my lil ol heart and this ain't no freakin dinner party. It's strange that we all have a sense of spirituality and faith no matter how shallow some may seem on the surface, pondering questions like 'Why are we here?' Yet religion is SUCH a taboo subject especially in Britain. Even fiery me very rarely talks about religion and that's still only with people who I'd trust with my life, and even then it's only at a surface level. In a society which is so liberated and free you're made to feel so uncomfortable and even foolish when speaking on something which permeates your every fibre, your body and soul; what you believe in.

Atheists or people who just plainly hate religion may think that people have always needed a comfort to bring them to terms with the hardships of life so we made up this concept of God or a higher spiritual being. That the main three monotheist religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are following the words of a book that was written by a bunch of men who thought that they were something special. That religions were just formed from cultures and their practices. That religions were made to brainwash people.

The latter has been said in front of me with no respect to my beliefs, my family and my intelligence. I theoretically retorted (when actually I just left the place immediately) with the fact that, fair enough if you think that these words were written by man but you believe newspapers today like The Sun like they were the word of God. If you don't believe in a supposed divine message that has the same principles coming from different countries centuries apart then you should also not believe everything written by so-called journalists who work for dodgy billionaires. Even if faiths were created to brainwash or guide people, they all preach doing good deeds and living your life in a humble peaceful way so what's actually wrong with that?

Religion is the main cause of wars and killing people they would reply. I would say Hitler was an atheist and was responsible for exterminating how many millions of Jews? Not to mention how many millions have been imprisoned, tortured and killed in the name of Communism (Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar, the Soviet Union, China etc), a rejection of religion and God for the sake of the community and state, which is really just some old dictator. In modern times, segments of the secular West have gone to war in countries thousands of miles away from them in an apparent attempt to 'liberate' them killing thousands in the process, quite any oxymoron but that's another rant altogether. Clearly, people of faith and people without faith both cause insurmountable pain and suffering. To conclude, shit happens. And the last time I checked religion hasn't been the common denominator.


The Sun, Daily Mail et al 21st century line of argument against religion is; 'Look at the child abusing priests' and 'Bin Laden and all the other Islamic extremists'. Clearly you cannot expect even two next-door neighbours to act in unison  so why would you expect that from millions or billions of people from the same religion. Plus, if we believers were so brainwashed wouldn't every single one of us act homogeneously? Aaaah the governments of the world would love that!

 I'll save politiking for the next time...

See also http://raraproductions.blogspot.com/ & http://anbarrockny.blogspot.com/