Clarets sign Muslim Athlete Charter

[daveisaclaret]

I’ll no doubt get flamed for this but I think to actively participate in a religion(any religion) that inherently excludes or discriminates against certain groups/individuals based on their identity or non-belief is problematic and warrants scrutiny.

If someone isn't prejudiced against the LGBTQ+ or Atheist community, for instance, I find it challenging to reconcile how they can align with a belief system that, in doctrine, “condemns homosexuality/ non-believers to eternal punishment."

Maybe I’m overthinking it, but that’s essentially what people are endorsing - I don’t see why we should have to be tolerant to intolerance.

I just don't think that's fair. I agree with any and all criticism of Islam but you have to consider cultural implications and the fact most Muslims are raised Muslim before making sweeping judgements about all of them. Unless a Muslim is openly or clearly homophobic it isn't fair to judge him as such because of his religion no matter how nasty some of the religion is or how unpleasant other fellow Muslims may be.

There are plenty of Muslims who reject homophobia. You might think that doesn't make sense (fairly) but their faith is their own business.

[CoolClaret]

I just don't think that's fair. I agree with any and all criticism of Islam but you have to consider cultural implications and the fact most Muslims are raised Muslim before making sweeping judgements about all of them. Unless a Muslim is openly or clearly homophobic it isn't fair to judge him as such because of his religion no matter how nasty some of the religion is or how unpleasant other fellow Muslims may be.

There are plenty of Muslims who reject homophobia. You might think that doesn't make sense (fairly) but their faith is their own business.

Well that’s where we differ then - btw I didn’t specifically mention Muslims/Islam it applies to any and all… Christianity in America has far too much influence in politics, just recently impacting millions of women’s liberty based on a planned, strategic ploy to fill their Supreme Court with justices that would overturn Roe vs Wade…


If people still identify and are practicing members of any religion/belief that has discriminatory doctrine then that to me deserves criticism.

If they’re non practicing then I don’t really know why they identify as a member of said religion.

For sure peoples faith is their own business but when it’s intertwined in public/work then it ceases being a personal thing.

We like to tip toe around this sort of stuff but we’re doing it from the luxury of a pretty free country.

When you let bad ideas run unchecked then it never ends well.

[Jellybean]

I just don't think that's fair. I agree with any and all criticism of Islam but you have to consider cultural implications and the fact most Muslims are raised Muslim before making sweeping judgements about all of them. Unless a Muslim is openly or clearly homophobic it isn't fair to judge him as such because of his religion no matter how nasty some of the religion is or how unpleasant other fellow Muslims may be.

There are plenty of Muslims who reject homophobia. You might think that doesn't make sense (fairly) but their faith is their own business.

Their faith should not be their own business when it comes to misogyny and the oppression of women, why are so many of you prepared to gloss over this in the name of equality for Muslims.

[daveisaclaret]

If they are misogynists or homophobes, they should be treated exactly as they would if they weren't religious.

Making the assumption that they are either of those things because they identify as Muslim is just an assumption.

[CoolClaret]

Their faith should not be their own business when it comes to misogyny and the oppression of women, why are so many of you prepared to gloss over this in the name of equality for Muslims.

The exact same thing has happened in the US with the Conservatives always claiming to be oppressed by ‘the left’ then seemingly overnight take away the rights of millions of women (and ultimately men, they’re coming for all contraception next).

We didn’t get to where we are in humanity by letting terrible oppressive ideas go unchecked so we don’t upset a few people.

Bad ideas and ideologies need challenging 100% of the time all the time.

Hiding behind religion as an excuse to partake in discriminatory practices is such bullshit.

[CoolClaret]

If they are misogynists or homophobes, they should be treated exactly as they would if they weren't religious.

Making the assumption that they are either of those things because they identify as Muslim is just an assumption.

Not making that assumption though mate. I made the point of questioning why they still would when the faith/practice is inherently exclusionary/oppressive.

[daveisaclaret]

Not making that assumption though mate. I made the point of questioning why they still would when the faith/practice is inherently exclusionary/oppressive.

You accused them of hypocrisy because a different Muslim is a homophobe.

That question is reasonable, but the answer is invariably going to be complicated, different for most people and something we're never going to find out.

[Benson]

If they are misogynists or homophobes, they should be treated exactly as they would if they weren't religious.

Making the assumption that they are either of those things because they identify as Muslim is just an assumption.

An educated assumption.

[CoolClaret]

You accused them of hypocrisy because a different Muslim is a homophobe.

That question is reasonable, but the answer is invariably going to be complicated, different for most people and something we're never going to find out.

No, that’s not why I accused ‘them’ of hypocrisy.

I stated that it’s hypocritical to have one campaign that promotes the inclusivity of the lgbtq community one minute then the next promoting a campaign about an ideology that is actively discrimatory to the lgbtq community.

I just pointed out the Idrissa Gueye issue to illustrate what a charade it has all become in football.

Just let football be football.

[daveisaclaret]

No, that’s not why I accused ‘them’ of hypocrisy.

I stated that it’s hypocritical to have one campaign that promotes the inclusivity of the lgbtq community one minute then the next promoting a campaign about an ideology that is actively discrimatory to the lgbtq community.

I just pointed out the Idrissa Gueye issue to illustrate what a charade it has all become in football.

Just let football be football.

The campaign is not promoting an ideology, it's supporting a group which faces discrimination. It's not asking people to recite hadith or practice taqwa, it's just an affirmation that Muslims should be welcome at the football club.

Just let football be football is an absolutely facile statement. Are you also opposed to the kick it out campaign?

[CoolClaret]

The campaign is not promoting an ideology, it's supporting a group which faces discrimination. It's not asking people to recite hadith or practice taqwa, it's just an affirmation that Muslims should be welcome at the football club.

Just let football be football is an absolutely facile statement. Are you also opposed to the kick it out campaign?

Why are you trying to point score on semantics and play gotcha? It’s really boring.

Again i’m in disagreement, you can dress it up however you want, but ultimately it’s still platforming an oppressive ideology - the details of the charter as stated on the first page “ Muslim athletes will be given space to express their views on their faith without judgement” - why? Why would any rational person think that is a positive?

I don’t see kick it out as political in all honesty. I’m just getting really bored (as I guess many are) with the direction that football is going in - similar to how NNN summarised on the previous page.

[Benson]

Hinduism
Buddhism
Judaism
Sikhism
Shinto
Zoroastrianism
Taoism
Jainism
Baháʼí Faith
Confucianism
Methodism
Lutheranism
Pentecostalism
Protestantism
Anglicanism
Baptist religion
Catholicism
Presbyterianism
Chinese folk religion
Seventh-Day Adventist Church
Rastafarian
athlete charter all to follow in due course.

[daveisaclaret]

Why are you trying to point score on semantics and play gotcha? It’s really boring.

Again i’m in disagreement, you can dress it up however you want, but ultimately it’s still platforming an oppressive ideology - the details of the charter as stated on the first page “ Muslim athletes will be given space to express their views on their faith without judgement” - why? Why would any rational person think that is a positive?

I don’t see kick it out as political in all honesty. I’m just getting really bored (as I guess many are) with the direction that football is going in - similar to how NNN summarised on the previous page.

I'm not trying to play gotcha, I'm just pointing out you're saying a lot of things that aren't fair or true. You are for some reason assuming that offering our Muslim players to express their views is going to have awful consequences and that if they do say something unpleasant this charter is going to protect them.

It's crazy to be bored of the direction that football is going in because of something which will have zero effect on your engagement with the sport and you will probably never hear about ever again.

[CoolClaret]

I'm not trying to play gotcha, I'm just pointing out you're saying a lot of things that aren't fair or true. You are for some reason assuming that offering our Muslim players to express their views is going to have awful consequences and that if they do say something unpleasant this charter is going to protect them.

It's crazy to be bored of the direction that football is going in because of something which will have zero effect on your engagement with the sport and you will probably never hear about ever again.

You absolutely are because you keep misrepresenting my posts despite me correcting numerous times and even specifically mentioning that my overriding point wasn’t solely focused at Islam/Muslims in general and that we should be moving away at creating safe spaces for any oppressive ideology.

For your last point- no, I disagree. I think many people share similar views on the direction of football.

[daveisaclaret]

You absolutely are because you keep misrepresenting my posts despite me correcting numerous times and even specifically mentioning that my overriding point wasn’t solely focused at Islam/Muslims in general and that we should be moving away at creating safe spaces for any oppressive ideology.

For your last point- no, I disagree. I think many people share similar views on the direction of football.

A lot of people who share similar views on the direction of football are bigots. I'm not saying you are, as I read your posts on here and you're clearly not, but that's the long and short of it.

[Jellybean]

There we go, bigot bingo. Shoot him down and give him one of the most reprehensible labels to stop him posting, all because he thinks differently and is challenging the ridiculously blinkered rhetoric

[daveisaclaret]

I've literally posted that he's not a bigot?

[Jellybean]

The use of the word is sufficient to close down someone's argument

[CoolClaret]

A lot of people who share similar views on the direction of football are bigots. I'm not saying you are, as I read your posts on here and you're clearly not, but that's the long and short of it.

Hmm… bit of a shady post this mate.

Some of your retorts to me itt are clearly attempting to try and put me into a corner (re Islam despite me mentioning any and all oppressive belief systems) and this one you’re loosely trying to associate me/my views with bigots.

That’s very poor of you in all honesty.

[daveisaclaret]

Hmm… bit of a shady post this mate.

Some of your retorts to me itt are clearly attempting to try and put me into a corner (re Islam despite me mentioning any and all oppressive belief systems) and this one you’re loosely trying to associate me/my views with bigots.

That’s very poor of you in all honesty.

It's true unfortunately - some of them have posted in this thread. I agree with you generally about belief systems but ultimately when you're opposing inclusivity you do find yourself in some unpleasant company. I don't think that makes your position any less valid or discredits you personally, but it is a sensible framework to view the position in.

[Rowls]

It's true unfortunately - some of them have posted in this thread. I agree with you generally about belief systems but ultimately when you're opposing inclusivity you do find yourself in some unpleasant company. I don't think that makes your position any less valid or discredits you personally, but it is a sensible framework to view the position in.

All this talk of implying people are "bigots" without naming names or explaining *why* you suppose they are "bigots" is weak and cowardly. It needs to stop.

If somebody has posted something bigoted or unfair then say so explicitly and explain your thinking.

The people who aren't supportive of this charter have explained, with various degrees of articulation, *why* they do not support it.

So far, I don't think anybody has had a good stab at explaining *why* they think this is smart move by the club or why it is even necessary? The door is open for somebody to do so and it would be a welcome contribution.

[RMutt]

I wonder if this is all getting a bit over thought. Is the initiative not about accepting that players might need an area to pray and time to do it? Also perhaps taking in to consideration players’ needs around Ramadan with regard to food and drink when they may be fasting and so on?

[martin_p]

If that's the main thing you disagree on I'd suggest you need to reorder your priorities. Of everything about any religion that is by far the least objectionable IMO.

No, I meant it’s the main tenet of every religion.

[Middle-agedClaret]

Religion, dogs, Matt Le Tissier….is there any subject which won’t lead to bickering and point scoring on UTC?
No need to be so hostile and aggressive.
We can disagree with our the need for rancour.
iMHO, of course.

[TheFamilyCat]

I wonder if this is all getting a bit over thought. Is the initiative not about accepting that players might need an area to pray and time to do it? Also perhaps taking in to consideration players’ needs around Ramadan with regard to food and drink when they may be fasting and so on?

Yes, but why isn't there a Christian Athletes Charter so clubs show some leniency when players overdo the chocolate at Easter?

[Rowls]

Yes, but why isn't there a Christian Athletes Charter so clubs show some leniency when players overdo the chocolate at Easter?

They've only been allowed a single serving of Christmas plum duff since 1999.

[ClaretInLeeds]

Well it didn’t take long for someone to post how eager they are for “it” to appear….

How very predictable. It’s always the same people too….

[bfccrazy]

Yes, but why isn't there a Christian Athletes Charter so clubs show some leniency when players overdo the chocolate at Easter?

Absolutely nothing stopping anybody starting up a Christian Athletes Charter - go for it.

[evensteadiereddie]

CAC.
Seems about right.

[Robbie_painter]

How very predictable. It’s always the same people too….

Yes and it’s you,predictably

[LordBob]

Read anything by Peter Townsend (not the musician) then decide if this is a good thing.

[Greenmile]

Read anything by Peter Townsend (not the musician) then decide if this is a good thing.

Who?

[Corky]

Peter Townsend was a sociologist who co-founded the Child Poverty Action Group in 1965. He also wrote about understanding Islam. Try looking him up.

[Nori1958]

Peter Townsend was a sociologist who co-founded the Child Poverty Action Group in 1965. He also wrote about understanding Islam. Try looking him up.

Wooooosssssshhhhhh

[Foshiznik]

Horrific the amount of posters on this thread throwing out accusations, misinterpretations and uneducated gammon-esque bigotry.

The charter was produced to support the ever growing amount of footballers in the Premier League. By signing the charter a club agrees to provide a place of worship within the facilities, respect and support players who are fasting, provide halal food when feeding the players and providing non-alcoholic alternatives when providing players with alcohol.

Those questioning why we haven't signed a Christian charter... what extra support do Christians need that aren't already in place? The answer is nothing, hence why the charter isn't required. It isn't astrophysics if you just read up on the topic before making offensively charged comments.

[ClaretAndJew]

Sorry, this was a thread about Burnley signing up to use finely woven cotton in their shirts from this season.

[Sproggy]

Horrific the amount of posters on this thread throwing out accusations, misinterpretations and uneducated gammon-esque bigotry.

The charter was produced to support the ever growing amount of footballers in the Premier League. By signing the charter a club agrees to provide a place of worship within the facilities, respect and support players who are fasting, provide halal food when feeding the players and providing non-alcoholic alternatives when providing players with alcohol.

Those questioning why we haven't signed a Christian charter... what extra support do Christians need that aren't already in place? The answer is nothing, hence why the charter isn't required. It isn't astrophysics if you just read up on the topic before making offensively charged comments.

I'd be a bit surprised if the club wasn't already providing everything required by this charter to their multi-million pound assets. I can't imagine there's a bloke in the kitchens this morning unable to prep lunch becasue he's been blindsided by the fact that some of the players require halal meat.

An easy one for the club. "No" isn't a great look and "Yes" probably means not a huge amount to actually do.

[Foshiznik]

I'd be a bit surprised if the club wasn't already providing everything required by this charter to their multi-million pound assets. I can't imagine there's a bloke in the kitchens this morning unable to prep lunch becasue he's been blindsided by the fact that some of the players require halal meat.

An easy one for the club. "No" isn't a great look and "Yes" probably means not a huge amount to actually do.

Exactly. It's all about the optics. Nothing but a easy thing to sign. I don't know why so many are against it given this fact.

[Rowls]

Exactly. It's all about the optics. Nothing but a easy thing to sign. I don't know why so many are against it given this fact.

Here I can agree with your reasoning. I'd be confident the word "optics" was used in a meeting to agree signing up.

Agree also that it is easy for them to do so. It doesn't necessarily make it right. In fact, it shows that the club have taken "the easy option".

As for your prior ranting about "gammons", the fact that people like yourself are happy to use racialized language to make a point rather than debating with reason is one reason why this debate still needs to be made.

There should be no place for disparaging racial language or slurs.

Why people excuse the use of "gammon" is beyond me. It's appalling.

[Foshiznik]

Here I can agree with your reasoning. I'd be confident the word "optics" was used in a meeting to agree signing up.

Agree also that it is easy for them to do so. It doesn't necessarily make it right. In fact, it shows that the club have taken "the easy option".

As for your prior ranting about "gammons", the fact that people like yourself are happy to use racialized language to make a point rather than debating with reason is one reason why this debate still needs to be made.

There should be no place for disparaging racial language or slurs.

Why people excuse the use of "gammon" is beyond me. It's appalling.

If you had actually read my post where i said "gammon" you will have seen that i provided a reasoned explanation behind why this was the right decision. Instead, as per usual you looked for something to try and start a confrontation or attempt some one upmanship. It's clear you haven't read my post or indeed the actual charter being debated so there is never going to be any reasoned debate, no matter how much you are trying to make out some whiter than white moral high ground.

[Guller Bull]

I suppose that if a club run by Mormons can sign up for a Muslim Athlete charter then that can only be a good thing from a cross working perspective.

Personally I couldn't give a crap about any religion but each to their own!

[boyyanno]

I don't think there is anything wrong with discussing the morality of airing/supporting/giving an audience too oppressive or discriminatory views regardless of religion.

I don't believe the charter is a symbol of those views so its a non starter for me- but how much easier is it to say that than start throwing out the Bigot nonsense?

[Rowls]

If you had actually read my post where i said "gammon" you will have seen that i provided a reasoned explanation behind why this was the right decision. Instead, as per usual you looked for something to try and start a confrontation or attempt some one upmanship. It's clear you haven't read my post or indeed the actual charter being debated so there is never going to be any reasoned debate, no matter how much you are trying to make out some whiter than white moral high ground.

No, I read your post. I'm disputing using racialized language is ever right. No matter the context.

If you disagree with an argument you should be able to dispute it without resorting to racial slurs.

[Foshiznik]

No, I read your post. I'm disputing using racialized language is ever right. No matter the context.

If you disagree with an argument you should be able to dispute it without resorting to racial slurs.

It’s not an argument. It’s mock rage from a particular demographic whose best argument is that there isn’t a Christian charter so there shouldn’t be a Muslim one. I explained exactly why that view is wrong but instead you decided to pick out one word and make out like I had used a word of the same ilk as the n-word. All in the name of creating confrontation.

[ClaretInLeeds]

Yes and it’s you,predictably

Only one person who's openly racist and advocates a bit of misogyny in this conversation between us both - and it's not me.

[Corky]

Wooooosssssshhhhhh

I’m afraid infantile nonsense like this doesn’t do anything for me or add anything to the discussion. But perhaps you’re not able to?

[dsr]

The specific point is that this charter says that if a Muslim makes any sort of comment about any matter pertaining to his faith, it should be accepted without judgement. It's only one point of 10 in the charter, but it's a highly dubious one. Christians do not have (nor, in most cases, do they expect) that right.

[Nori1958]

I’m afraid infantile nonsense like this doesn’t do anything for me or add anything to the discussion. But perhaps you’re not able to?

You obviously didn't see the humour in "who" comment the poster made, it did need a sense of humour to appreciate it.

[Rowls]

It’s not an argument. It’s mock rage from a particular demographic whose best argument is that there isn’t a Christian charter so there shouldn’t be a Muslim one. I explained exactly why that view is wrong but instead you decided to pick out one word and make out like I had used a word of the same ilk as the n-word. All in the name of creating confrontation.

As I said before - there's a clear difference of opinion between us.

You believe it's ok to use racial slurs if the context justifies it.

I believe it's not acceptable.

[Foshiznik]

As I said before - there's a clear difference of opinion between us.

You believe it's ok to use racial slurs if the context justifies it.

I believe it's not acceptable.

No the difference of opinion is I don't consider "gammon" to be a racial slur and you do, although i am dubious as to your intentions in taking that stance on this particular word given your reputation on this messageboard for being someone who gets a kick out of creating confrontations.

The fact that you haven't even attempted to explain why you disagree with my other points tells me that you may even agree with my opinion, but that wouldn't create the confrontation you want, so you just completely ignored it.