SinghSuperStud

iTrader: (2)

Wurzel,

the play is not based on any specific events or at any specific temple so no, we don't need to "stop and think that this has actually gone on at this temple" !

Jai

TelBoy

What i'm saying, is that in a lot of people's opinion, fine - be a religious minority in the UK, but practice it in a British, self-depreciating way if you're living here, the way we have done for many centuries. Most Brits don't WANT to bend over backwards to accomodate religious minorities' sensitivities. There are countries better suited to more hardline approaches to religion.

Jap2Scrap

I think this actually sums it up. Do you, as a Sikh, not think we non-Sikhs can assume it's fictional as it's not based on any true events? That's certainly the implication from some of the quotes from the incident about the perception of Sikhs given by the play.

Credit us with some intelligence please.

SinghSuperStud

iTrader: (2)

Telboy,

nobody is asking anybody to bend over backwards, but to simply rewrite the offending scenes, they could still have the same words, meanings but just be set elsewhere. If that's bending over backwards then but it's not a massive ask of the writer is it ? Compromise maybe, bending over backwards - I think not

Jai

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

I don't need to wake up, it is all you dogooders that need to wake up and realise that religion is the biggest cause of violence and war in the world. I don't give 2 ****s about religion I was told I was catholic by my parents

Also if you bothered to read stuff you would realise that I am not populating your tiny island because I am not on your tiny island.

TelBoy

But as has been said before, Jai, isn't that pandering to what YOU believe the British public "ought" to be allowed to watch? If they don't like it, there won't be bums on seats, simple. No?

mad_dr

Group-buy on tickets to this show anyone?

<runs and hides>

the moose

I get offended by many things, among them the fact that religious groups seem to think they have the absolute last word when it comes to morality. The late Mary Whitehouse and her ilk get me really, really upset, because I want to be able to see what I choose, not what someone thinks I should see.

So when a group says that they're offended, my honest response is to raise two fingers to them, in the politest of ways. This applies regardless of religious persuasion, btw; they're all self-delusional in my book, so why they think their deranged ramblings should be listened to is beyond me.

SinghSuperStud

iTrader: (2)

Moose,

from your post it seems like you don't give a sh*t if you cause upset ? Nobody is self-delusional and there are no deranged ramblings coming from any corner. As a citizen of this country I feel I have the right to voice my opinion, in the sameway others have the right to freedom of speech, right to view what they want.

I don't wish for anybody to have imposed cencorship, just want to get the point across and make people realise that just because it's not important in their point of view, it is to others. I'm not asking for the play to be stopped, just the offending scenes changed - as I said before, it's compromise.

Tidgy

The final word should be, every person in this world, and alien being (not leaving anyone out am i??? lmao) gets offended at one point or another, all i'll say is deal with it, if a play offends you, this is an easy answer, don't go and see it, no one is forcing you too!!!!

besides its the act itself that offends not the play!!!!! so y should people protest and start riots (ok didn't quite go that far) over a play when they just go "o thats terrible" when it happens for real!!!!!

get back to the real world people.

and freedom of speach means nothing when people start being censored

the moose

No, I don't care if I cause offence - you have a perfect right to express your opinion, as do I. When people start to get violent, however, then it's no longer a matter of opinion, now is it?

And when I can't see what I want to, because it doesn't conform to your beliefs, then that's certainly censorship, something I want no part of in this country.

ajm

It sets a precedent that it is acceptable to demand that films, plays... anything really are changed simply because someone doesn't like a particular aspect of it.

If its acceptable for the Sikh's to demand something is changed then can I demand that Jeff Goldblum is editted out of all the Jurassic Park movies?

You are now thinking I'm being flippant. The reason? Because you think your views are more important than mine as you have attached "religion" as a reason for your views.

I'm not religious so I can't cite religion as a reason for my views, so does that mean your views should always override mine?

Tidgy

edit geoff goldblum out of jurrasic park?

idea of a genious!!!! lmao

SinghSuperStud

iTrader: (2)

Ajm,

your views are of equal importance to mine, I'm not disputing that.

I fully understand where you're coming from.

However, without being rude my view of the play is similar to that of 80/90% of the 600,000 Sikhs in the UK. I think as the play is written about SIkhs, with Sikhs and by Sikhs - logically, Sikhs have every right to voice their opinion.

I think what hurts the most for the protesters is the fact that their views were ignored previously, before the play was staged as there were initial talks before anything was actually shown between the Rep and elected members of SIkh bodies. The writer and the Rep knew that their play would cause upset, to the point that they even handed out leaflets detailing that it's going to be offensive if you are Sikh !!!!

I think in a situation such as this, common sense should prevail and I think we would all agree that they should all meet in the middle on common ground.

We can all debate/argue on here till we're blue in the face but I think in the interests of Scoobynet harmony we should draw a line under this before it gets too heated and things are said that can't be taken back. Neither you or myself are going to make any differences in any direction so without sounding like a spectator let's just watch and see what develops

Jai

blueone

This debate is so ironic it hurts. A community 'leader' was on Newsnight last night and was implying that non Sikhs would not be able to tell that all Sikhs are not like how one character in a play was portrayed. ROFLOL
I perceieve that the Lions are being led a merry dance by someone who seeks to gain power by their position in this community. People should ask what are the motives and educational level (irrespective of the ethnicity) of the instigators of the protests.
The people moaning about this Play really are assimilating into British culture quite nicely. Remember most of the population of the UK is so limited in their rational ability to evaluate for themselves, that they need people to take the lead for them and show them the light. Religion use to do this in different cultures and has been replaced by the Media in western society, give it a few hundred years and hopefuly these people will pass the responsibilty for the evaluation of information onto someone else who wants to exploit them for some reason. LOL
In reality I say get rid of people in a position of responsibility due to supposed social or economic superiority! A Meritocracy is the answer to all the people who hijack a cause for their own gain.
People governed by people and not politicians or religeous leaders is what is needed in the World.
Want to remove poverty and war from the World? then strive for a Meritocracy.

gsm1

I'll elaborate later because I'm not on my own PC but it's about common sense.

I'm hearing stuff about the protestors insulting the intelligence of the viewer and also "now everyone thinks Sikhs are violent". So which is it?

How many of the posters here who were spouting on about how Abu hamza should be locked up are now banging on about no censorship and freedom of speech when it suits them? There is no such thing as absolute freedom of speech, never has been.

Btw, I don't agree with the violence and those people should be charged.

TelBoy

This sentence was sarcastic, right?

TelBoy

The similarity, is that Abu Hamza was spouting anti-Western vitriol. Most Brits see the Sikh protest as a proxy (with an "r") anti-Western protest, if we're being brutally honest.

Brendan Hughes

I thought it was spot on. Newspaper with highest circulation - the Sun.

imi

Jeff Goldblum....editted....Why? Explain?

ajm

Because he is so offensively annoying that he makes my teeth itch!

imi

AGREE

Suresh

Jai,

Personally, I have always found my Sikh friends to be the most likeable and noble of people. On this particular issue their community is just plain wrong to turn to violent protest as a means of forcing their views on the majority.

Provided that the play in question did not break the laws of the land then it should have been allowed to continue - just as the protesters should be allowed to have their **peaceful** protest outside the theatre or wherever they wish, provided it is legal.

Unless the law is changed to make any form of blasphemy against any religion illegal, then the religiously devout minority will just have to accept it as the will of the majority, or if they really feel strongly, lobby their MPs to get the law changed. Life unfortunately is not always fair...

Suresh,
<flame suit on>

FrenchBoy

Jai,

most of us on here would defend to the death your 'right' to be offended also your right to voice your opinion on the matter and even peacefully protest about it. What you fail to see is that we find it unnacceptable that you 'demand' that the play be changed (and however politely and eloquently you put it that is precisely what you are doing). Of course you can ask the author to change it but if they refuse then you have to accept that and respect their wishes. Is your religion so insecure and precious that it can't withstand a little blasphemy?

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

It was not the Sikh community who turned violent, just a few individuals who do not speak for nor represent the vast majority of Sikhs.

Bob

TelBoy

On what do you base that assumption, Bob?

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

Well, if it was the vast majority, then the riots would be massive. There are a fair few Sikhs

There was only a handful of people who were causing trouble.

I'm Sikh also and in touch with the community.

Bob

TelBoy

Fair enough. From what i saw from the comfort of my armchair, it was a mob handed protest. It just doesn't feel right to see a violent protest in the UK outside a mosque about religious sensitivity. It's not the country i grew up in.

Jap2Scrap

OOer.. I was actually having a laugh mate. Just thought I'd best have a pop at someone other than the poor Sikh guy for a change. I'm certainly no do-gooder, religious people who can't seem to worship from within and have to push their beliefs on others are the lowest in my opinion.

unclebuck

Everything is censored. Never more so than now. The British people are fed on lies.

The fools who put this play on had no idea of the issues they were dealing with, clearly. Now it's bitten them on the ar*e they come out with some lame 'freedom of speech' argument to try to defend their position. Stupidity upon stupidity IMO.

UB