Second university sounds alarm over segregation at Muslim student events

43

A Second university in a matter of weeks has launched an investigation into claims that Muslim students are enforcing segregation between men and women at public events.


Leicester University voiced concern after photographs emerged showing hand-written signs directing male and female students to sit in separate sections at a public talk on the existence of God organised by the university’s Islamic Society.

The meeting was addressed by Hamza Tzortzis, an Islamic speaker who tours university campuses, who was at the centre of controversy over segregation at University College London (UCL) last month.

UCL announced that it was banning his organisation, the Islamic Education & Research Academy (IERA), from its campus after a debate he was addressing descended into farce over the issue of segregation.

The latest row erupted after photographs were published on the internet showing sheets of A4 paper attached to a door reading “brothers” and “sisters” with arrows pointing in opposite directions at the entrance to the event in Leicester.

A separate notice on the website of the University of Leicester Islamic Society (ULISoc), makes clear that while its meetings are open to the public it has a policy of “segregated seating for brothers and sisters at all co-attended events”.

Written By: John Bingham
continue to source article at telegraph.co.uk

43 COMMENTS

  1. How can anyone say with a straight face that they do this because this is what women want? Why not say that if men want to sit by themselves they can? You clearly understand the problem then. You know who’s being told what to do.

    • In reply to #2 by Sean_W:

      How can anyone say with a straight face that they do this because this is what women want? Why not say that if men want to sit by themselves they can? You clearly understand the problem then. You know who’s being told what to do.

      Actually, some Muslim women would likely claim that they feel more “comfortable” sitting with only other woman, but they are equally bigoted. The women are at least half the problem if they freely indulge in this nonsense without challenging it. The men are pigs if they are enforcing it, but the women are weak and stupid and deserving of just as much of my disrespect because they don’t think beyond their own comfort.

      • In reply to #7 by ShesTheBeth:
        Actually, some Muslim women would likely claim that they feel more “comfortable” sitting with only other woman, but they are equally bigoted. The women are at least half the problem if they freely indulge in this nonsense without challenging it. The men are pigs if they are enforcing it, but the women are weak and stupid and deserving of just as much of my disrespect because they don’t think beyond their own comfort.

        If some Muslim women choose to sit apart from Muslim men, are they really bigoted, weak and stupid, or are they being incredibly sensible?

        • In reply to #10 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee:

          In reply to #7 by ShesTheBeth:
          Actually, some Muslim women would likely claim that they feel more “comfortable” sitting with only other woman, but they are equally bigoted. The women are at least half the problem if they freely indulge in this nonsense without challenging it. The men are pigs if they are enforcing it, but the women are weak and stupid and deserving of just as much of my disrespect because they don’t think beyond their own comfort.

          If some Muslim women choose to sit apart from Muslim men, are they really bigoted, weak and stupid, or are they being incredibly sensible?

          It’s the classic behavior of abuse victims, abuse yourself so your abuser won’t do something worse to you.

        • In reply to #10 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee:

          In reply to #7 by ShesTheBeth:
          Actually, some Muslim women would likely claim that they feel more “comfortable” sitting with only other woman, but they are equally bigoted. The women are at least half the problem if they freely indulge in this nonsense without challenging it. The men are pigs if they are enforcing it, but the women are weak and stupid and deserving of just as much of my disrespect because they don’t think beyond their own comfort.

          If some Muslim women choose to sit apart from Muslim men, are they really bigoted, weak and stupid, or are they being incredibly sensible?

          I agree with most of what you said but I’m skeptical of this claim (which you almost always hear from Muslim men) that there are all these women who want to be segregated. And I think its wrong to put the blame for this on Muslim women, that is blame the victim.

          I’ve known a few women from places like Iran and India and all of them, even the ones who remained very traditional and religious, were more than happy to do without traditions like arranged marriages and segregated seating. I’m sure you could find a few women who would support segregation just as I’m sure you could have found a few blacks in the US South or South Africa who would have said that they favored being segregated but the desire of a few people to remain second class citizens doesn’t outweigh the rights of the majority.

        • In reply to #10 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee:

          In reply to #7 by ShesTheBeth: Actually, some Muslim women would likely claim that they feel more “comfortable” sitting with only other woman, but they are equally bigoted. The women are at least half the problem if they freely indulge in this nonsense without challenging it. The men are pigs if they are enforcing it, but the women are weak and stupid and deserving of just as much of my disrespect because they don’t think beyond their own comfort.

          If some Muslim women choose to sit apart from Muslim men, are they really bigoted, weak and stupid, or are they being incredibly sensible?

          Sensible I’d say for NOT sitting near the Muslim organisers, tho we’d have to assume there would be non Muslim men there, and sane, less immature Muslim men as well. Which does bring them back to bigoted, weak, stupid women behaving in an unacceptable way – (tho that is far from just a Muslim women thing).

          It’s hard to see why that sort of bigotry is allowed in public places. Imagine if the event were segregated by race. The University would be up in arms and certainly wouldn’t accept ‘some racists choose to sit apart’ as an excuse. So why excuse these womens sexism? It is just as unacceptable.

          If they wish to remain segregated than they already have private institutions that allow that sort of narrow minded bigotry. They’re called mosques. If those particular Muslims (men and women) are so immature that they cannot mingle with members of the opposite sex without issue then they can carry out all their talks and meetings in private mosques until they grow up enough to take their place in the normal world.

      • In reply to #7 by ShesTheBeth:

        Actually, some Muslim women would likely claim that they feel more “comfortable” sitting with only other woman

        They’ve got a point. What female would want to sit with a gang of Muslim men?

  2. A separate notice on the website of the University of Leicester Islamic Society (ULISoc), makes clear that while its meetings are open to the public it has a policy of “segregated seating for brothers and sisters at all co-attended events”.

    Then the answer is very simple, NO meetings of that society can take place on university premises or indeed any public premises and must, instead, take place in mosques. Problem solved.

    Segregation is not part of healthy society – if they wish to preserve the most unhealthy part of their religion it must be on their own private, religious premises. But not in the public domain at all!!!!

  3. So they’re not enforcing segregation, they are being helpful with their signs so that people can auto-segregate if they want to?
    I guess it would be islamaphobic to suggest that that is bollox?

  4. Hamza Tzortzis, an Islamic speaker who tours university campuses

    If he is determined to speak to students in universities, could I suggest he talks to select gatherings in psychology departments as part of their coursework!

  5. Mr Tzortzis claims, albeit in a somewhat clunky fashion, that “It is down to a bit of misunderstanding about the way Islam is perceived.”

    No, the perception of Islam is entirely correct, it’s Islam itself that poses the problem.

    The misunderstanding is on the part of individuals such as Mr Hamza Tzortzis who “perceive” that they can throw their weight around under the aegis of religion.

    You’re at liberty to do and believe as you please in the privacy of your own home sir, but in the public arena the maxim “When in Rome do as Rome does.” applies.

    Mr Tzortzis appears to enjoy being the centre of attention. Well, he certainly commands my full attention.

    I’m not one who is afraid to offend religion. Although it offends me in my deeps, and I hold out no hope of it ceasing to do so, I don’t whinge about it.

  6. With only half a tongue in cheek, perhaps it is possible to reconsider the liberalism of the organizers of the UCL event reported 3/10/13: they did provide a specific seating section for couples.

    It seems odd that the story doesn’t mention the identity of the non-Muslim debater and what if any comments he/she made, if any. Everyone involved must have been aware of the earlier brouhaha.Wondering if this will become a pattern of intentionally provocative and polarizing events?

  7. To echo atheistengineer, the problem is simple to solve with a simple agreement. If Mr. Tzortzis wants to hold IERA events in academic institutions, no segregation – not even the suggestion or ‘facilitation’ of it – is permitted. In return, academics must promise not to hold any events involving intelligent discussion in a mosque.

    • In reply to #14 by KrustyG:

      To echo atheistengineer, the problem is simple to solve with a simple agreement. If Mr. Tzortzis wants to hold IERA events in academic institutions, no segregation – not even the suggestion or ‘facilitation’ of it – is permitted. In return, academics must promise not to hold any events involving intelligent discussion in a mosque.

      I’ll triple that sentiment. As Atheistengineer explained, this is not new and unique territory for a pluralistic society to workout. There is already a protocol for this, and Sharia-centrists are attempting to redefine society.

  8. I would like to know more about the Lawrence Krauss debate issues over segregation.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSwJuOPG4FI

    I just watched this recently and haven’t looked up the back-story. At one point with questions from the audience, a woman condemns Krauss for imposing his anti-segregationist values on them. Krauss points out people are free not to attend and nothing is being forced on anyone. It is an interesting illustration of religious-thinking and strategic-victimhood: Not allowing them to segregate secular space is intolerant.

  9. I don’t agree that these women are stupid or weak. There is no shortage of hejab wearing, well educated Muslim women (the ones attending the ridiculous event described above) who have been told that total segregation of the sexes is the only correct and acceptable way for society to function and have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Many of the countries with Muslim majorities are actually turning out more female college graduates than males at this time. We are not dealing with a lack of IQ points here.

    Weak is another description that doesn’t ring true when applied to these women. I’ve met very few of them who I would consider to be weak in any way. They are capable of substantial pugnacity and assertiveness and I will say that in their own domains, they can be a formidable force when they take the notion to do so.

    When will Muslim women finally get around to taking the bull by the horns and making real changes in their societies that move them toward equal rights? That’s the million dollar question.

    Most Muslim women have been raised to believe that when compared to all other religions and societies, Islam is the paragon of respect for women. This, they say, is due to the example that was set for them by their Prophet Mo who was only a man (no magic powers), but who was of course, the most superior man that ever walked the face of the earth. What will surely follow is an explanation of how Mo always married his women to keep things respectable (None of that tawdry spontaneous sex for Mr. Perfect) and SHELTERED and SEPARATED them from all the other men of that society who were apparently sexual predators – not like Mo.

    What is the key point here that needs to be communicated to these women is that although women in the West are still dealing with certain problems in our society that are having a negative effect on us, we are at least moving forward on many fronts and slowly and surely, we have seen a significant cumulative result in our favor. What we did NOT say is, “We’re weak and vulnerable and we need to be hidden away and guarded by our men from those other men who want to look at our bodies and engage in lascivious thoughts and maybe rape us” It’s exactly the opposite! Let’s get out there and get educated, get jobs, earn money that we have control over, move up the ladder in positions where we can make changes in the legal system to promote equality in society for everyone. Let’s be Lawyers and Judges who hold men responsible for their own bad behavior against us when they cross the legal line in the sand. Let’s write books and write and publish articles that present challenges to the status quo. Let’s belong to consciousness raising groups that provide psychological support for what can be dangerous ideas. Let’s raise our daughters to demand fairness and respect from men. Let’s raise our sons to treat women as their equals in our society.

    This is the blueprint for progressive reform. None of this is happening in Muslim society. The Muslim Spring has had the opposite effect at this point. Women are being driven back into their homes in fear of the violence on their streets and in their Governments.

    While there is very little we can do to help Muslim women in their countries of origin, I hope the powers that be in our Universities have a zero tolerance policy regarding segregation on their own property. Clear explanation should be give in a public way to all that in a Western Democracy, separate but equal is never equal at all and if continued, will only result in certain groups existing in social isolation from each other which will absolutely exacerbate the very behaviors that it sought to avoid in the first place.

    • In reply to #18 by LaurieB:

      I don’t agree that these women are stupid or weak. There is no shortage of hejab wearing, well educated Muslim women (the ones attending the ridiculous event described above) who have been told that total segregation of the sexes is the only correct and acceptable way for society to function and have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Many of the countries with Muslim majorities are actually turning out more female college graduates than males at this time. We are not dealing with a lack of IQ points here.

      That is quite an interesting point.
      There were quite a few hejab wearing students at the graduation ceremony, from the same university course as my daughter.

      When will Muslim women finally get around to taking the bull by the horns and making real changes in their societies that move them toward equal rights? That’s the million dollar question.

      It will be interesting to see what they do on returning home.

      What is the key point here that needs to be communicated to these women is that although women in the West are still dealing with certain problems in our society that are having a negative effect on us, we are at least moving forward on many fronts and slowly and surely, we have seen a significant cumulative result in our favor. What we did NOT say is, “We’re weak and vulnerable and we need to be hidden away and guarded by our men from those other men who want to look at our bodies and engage in lascivious thoughts and maybe rape us” It’s exactly the opposite! Let’s get out there and get educated, get jobs, earn money that we have control over, move up the ladder in positions where we can make changes in the legal system to promote equality in society for everyone. Let’s be Lawyers and Judges who hold men responsible for their own bad behavior against us when they cross the legal line in the sand. Let’s write books and write and publish articles that present challenges to the status quo.

      They were graduating with UK university post-graduate LPC (Legal Professional Course) law degrees, ( to add to their earlier LLB law degrees) – before returning to their homelands.

      This is the blueprint for progressive reform. None of this is happening in Muslim society. The Muslim Spring has had the opposite effect at this point. Women are being driven back into their homes in fear of the violence on their streets and in their Governments.

      While there is very little we can do to help Muslim women in their countries of origin, I hope the powers that be in our Universities have a zero tolerance policy regarding segregation on their own property.

      We can set an example for others to see.
      The Muslim students probably learnt a lot, just from being in a class socialising with my daughter, who while at school, partook in student exchange visits with students from Germany and Japan.
      After her first law degree she did an International Business Diploma in New York, during a gap year, while working for a Wall Street Law firm, before returning to England to do her post-graduate LPC degree.

    • I’ve been reading a bit on male aggression toward females in primates (humans included) and came across an article that noted that (at least in this particular population of wild chimps) “females were observed to initiate periovulatory copulations most frequently with males that were most aggressive toward them.” The authors argued that this was important because female-initiated periovulatory copulations have traditionally been used as a proxy for female preference. It assumes that females approach males out of “unconstrained preference,” when in reality this behavior could more likely be a reflection of females preference for avoidance of violent future encounters than a preference for “bad boys.” It’s a result of what the researchers call “conditioning aggression,” which is simply brute force in non-human primates, but is much more elaborate and involved in humans (physical + economic + political + religious). So I agree with you that it is not simply a matter of victim-blaming. I think we have to be careful when talking about a woman’s “preference” for “self-segregation,” when it could more easily be a matter of “self-preservation.”

      In reply to #18 by LaurieB:

      I don’t agree that these women are stupid or weak. There is no shortage of hejab wearing, well educated Muslim women (the ones attending the ridiculous event described above) who have been told that total segregation of the sexes is the only correct and acceptable way for society to function and have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Many of the countries with Muslim majorities are actually turning out more female college graduates than males at this time. We are not dealing with a lack of IQ points here.
      … Most Muslim women have been raised to believe that when compared to all other religions and societies, Islam is the paragon of respect for women. This, they say, is due to the example that was set for them by their Prophet Mo who was only a man (no magic powers), but who was of course, the most superior man that ever walked the face of the earth. What will surely follow is an explanation of how Mo always married his women to keep things respectable (None of that tawdry spontaneous sex for Mr. Perfect) and SHELTERED and SEPARATED them from all the other men of that society who were apparently sexual predators – not like Mo.

      • In reply to #38 by therbert03:

        I’ve been reading a bit on male aggression toward females in primates (humans included) and came across an article that noted that (at least in this particular population of wild chimps) “females were observed to initiate periovulatory copulations most frequently with males that were most aggressive toward them.” The authors argued that this was important because female-initiated periovulatory copulations have traditionally been used as a proxy for female preference. It assumes that females approach males out of “unconstrained preference,” when in reality this behavior could more likely be a reflection of females preference for avoidance of violent future encounters than a preference for “bad boys.” It’s a result of what the researchers call “conditioning aggression,” which is simply brute force in non-human primates, but is much more elaborate and involved in humans (physical + economic + political + religious). So I agree with you that it is not simply a matter of victim-blaming. I think we have to be careful when talking about a woman’s “preference” for “self-segregation,” when it could more easily be a matter of “self-preservation.”In reply to #18 by LaurieB:I don’t agree that these women are stupid or weak. There is no shortage of hejab wearing, well educated Muslim women (the ones attending the ridiculous event described above) who have been told that total segregation of the sexes is the only correct and acceptable way for society to function and have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Many of the countries with Muslim majorities are actually turning out more female college graduates than males at this time. We are not dealing with a lack of IQ points here. … Most Muslim women have been raised to believe that when compared to all other religions and societies, Islam is the paragon of respect for women. This, they say, is due to the example that was set for them by their Prophet Mo who was only a man (no magic powers), but who was of course, the most superior man that ever walked the face of the earth. What will surely follow is an explanation of how Mo always married his women to keep things respectable (None of that tawdry spontaneous sex for Mr. Perfect) and SHELTERED and SEPARATED them from all the other men of that society who were apparently sexual predators – not like Mo.

        On reflection I’d have to agree with LaurieB that there are a lot of very strong Muslim women, the ones I’ve known have all valued education highly and gone into jobs that have given them real economic freedoms. And agree that they do see their religion as showing respect for them. I’ve had many state the hijab is a symbol of equality meaning they are seen for what they say rather than how they look. For an atheist woman they do represent a connundrum in that they are members of a religion whose members often oppress women yet they are often the real strong role models for women – valuing education, getting good jobs etc.

        The women at this event would not be the oppressed real segregated women. They really wouldn’t be allowed out. So I disagree about choosing violent, oppressive men. Most females abhor them. I would say this was more politicised Muslims – men and women. I suspect these women weren’t volunteering to be segregated for reasons of oppression but to make some kind of worrying political anti West statement. It is far more complicatd than it appears on the surface. I’d love to know their backgrounds and I’d bet very few would have come from segregated nasty backgrounds.

        • In reply to #39 by atheistengineer:

          The women at this event would not be the oppressed real segregated women. They really wouldn’t be allowed out. So I disagree about choosing violent, oppressive men. Most females abhor them. I would say this was more politicised Muslims – men and women. I suspect these women weren’t volunteering to be segregated for reasons of oppression but to make some kind of worrying political anti West statement. It is far more complicatd than it appears on the surface. I’d love to know their backgrounds and I’d bet very few would have come from segregated nasty backgrounds.

          I agree. It is indeed worrying.

  10. Today 17th April,there is an interesting article in the Glasgow Herald regarding faith schools. It is by Robbie dunwoodie and concerns A. C. Grayling speaking in the Scottish Government Parliament building in Hollyrood. Apparently each morning there is a slot entitled ‘time for reflection’ (god slot).Given the chance to use this slot A. C. Grayling has called his speech (no god slot). His speech received a large audience and appreciation, and was reported in the Herald. Unfortunately I do not have the pc know-how to put in a ‘link’ to the article.That’s best I can do.

    • Hi, OLDMIKEY. I just submitted the article you mentioned – it’s awaiting approval and should be published soon, I hope.

      In reply to #19 by OLDMIKEY:

      Today 17th April,there is an interesting article in the Glasgow Herald regarding faith schools. It is by Robbie dunwoodie and concerns A. C. Grayling speaking in the Scottish Government Parliament building in Hollyrood. Apparently each morning there is a slot entitled ‘time for reflection’ (god slot).Given the chance to use this slot A. C. Grayling has called his speech (no god slot). His speech received a large audience and appreciation, and was reported in the Herald. Unfortunately I do not have the pc know-how to put in a ‘link’ to the article.That’s best I can do.

    • In reply to #19 by OLDMIKEY:

      Today 17th April,there is an interesting article in the Glasgow Herald regarding faith schools. It is by Robbie dunwoodie and concerns A. C. Grayling speaking in the Scottish Government Parliament building in Hollyrood. Apparently each morning there is a slot entitled ‘time for reflection’ (god slot).Given the chance to use this slot A. C. Grayling has called his speech (no god slot). His speech received a large audience and appreciation, and was reported in the Herald. Unfortunately I do not have the pc know-how to put in a ‘link’ to the article.That’s best I can do.

      Thanks for alerting us to this speech. It may on You Tube or able to be located somewhere via Google. Whenever A.C.Grayling speaks, it’s worth hearing. Sounds like a good thing to do during the God Slot, given the waning interest in religion, especially with the young. It could become a window of opportunity for various non-religious philosophies to say their piece. All in all, a productive use of the time allocation.

  11. Needless to say I hate Islam probably more than any other religion, because of what a minority of its supporters get up to. 9 / 11, London’s 7 /7, Bali, Madrid, Danish cartoons and so on. I’ll wait to see what the view is about the Boston Marathon bombs.

    Having said that, I will say that my gym in London, has a separate area off the main gym reserved for females who chose to use it. They don’t have to. There is no such area for men. It always struck me as unfair that men don’t have the same choice to exercise single sex as the females. We all pay the same money. Of course, I am the first to admit that human females are vastly superior to males. They live longer, and they can give birth to babies. A female human with a baby must be worth twice a man. Maybe they need that extra space in my gym?

  12. Mosques have completely separate rooms for men and women.
    When I visited mosques I was told to avoid even glancing at the women going in via a separate entrance.
    It is a bit odd, as a gay male, being told by religious fanatics, to focus my attention on the handsome males.

  13. Choirs are segregated. In sports there is segregation, often male players and female cheerleaders. Washrooms and change rooms are segregated. Health classes and PE classes in school are segregated. Private schools are often only for one sex. Summer camps are usually segregated. School clubs such as chess and science are usually male only, perhaps not officially.

    I suspect Muslims would be just as horrified at breaking their arbitrary segregation rules as we are.

    • In reply to #25 by Roedy:

      Choirs are segregated. In sports there is segregation, often male players and female cheerleaders. Washrooms and change rooms are segregated. Health classes and PE classes in school are segregated. Private schools are often only for one sex. Summer camps are usually segregated. School clubs such as chess and science are usually male only, perhaps not officially.

      I suspect Muslims would be just as horrified at breaking their arbitrary segregation rules as we are.

      Choirs – it’s about vocal range, not genital construction.

      Cheerleaders – male cheerleaders are becoming more common.

      Washrooms/changerooms – I’ll give you that one, but unisex toilets are becoming more commonplace.

      Health/PE classes – don’t need to be.

      Private schools – there is much research on whether boys and girls learn better when separated, but I’m not convinced either way yet.

      Summer camps – don’t need to be.

      School clubs – “geek girls” are a relatively new phenomenon, so I expect that the “geek” clubs like chess and science will see more and more female membership.

      There’s a difference between “arbitrary” and “enforced under threat”.

    • In reply to #25 by Roedy:

      Choirs are segregated. In sports there is segregation, often male players and female cheerleaders. Washrooms and change rooms are segregated… I suspect Muslims would be just as horrified at breaking their arbitrary segregation rules as we are.

      I wouldn’t be all that horrified if male and female cheer leaders wanted to mingle. And none of the rest would matter much to me either although most of the women I know would be horrified if the sexes had to share public bathrooms. But not so much out of modesty as repulsion over what slobs most of us guys are.

  14. The moron who organized the segregation show at UCL is back again in the business of provoking. Although this individual is already well known in academic circles due to his nonsense, the university officials don’t want to know that this guy is a provocateur. Either the academic authorities are stupid, or they are following a policy of appeasement; if this is so, pretty soon this guy will be demanding to ban women from universities and forbid the studies on Darwin and others; eventually he will demand the closure of the university and the installation of a madrasa on the premises. His organization ought to be banned until they learn civilized manners and learn that a centre of learning is not a mosque. Islamic Education & Research Academy (IERA)? the words EDUCATION and RESEARCH become a mockery when used with the word ISLAMIC.

  15. This is very simple. If you believe in equality you should be against segregated seating.

    The excuse given that ‘oh, we only put the signs on the doors for people who want to sit with their own gender’ is absolutely pathetic and an obvious excuse to cover their willingness to divide the genders.

    Firstly, if people go into the auditorium and see signs which direct the men and women towards different sections of the auditorium obviously they’re going assume that it’s compulsory.

    Secondly, if indeed the seating arrangement was optional then those who would have wanted to sit amongst their own gender would be amongst the opposite gender anyway. The only way the seating would be divided by gender is at such an even is if, people were unaware that they were allowed to sit were they want or if everyone at the event wanted segregation, which brings me on to my last point.

    Why should anyone cater for those who want segregation anyway?

  16. This vile hateful troublemaker wants segregation. I want segregation too. Him and his ilk segregated to a departure lounge at the closest international airport with a one way ticket out of the uk.

    • In reply to #34 by dess:

      We’re screwed, we will be outbred. I hope I’m wrong, but the demographics are not looking good.

      Don’t worry about it, Atheist seem to be converting belivers in to atheists faster than they can breed them.

      • In reply to #37 by old-toy-boy:

        In reply to #34 by dess:

        We’re screwed, we will be outbred. I hope I’m wrong, but the demographics are not looking good.

        Don’t worry about it, Atheist seem to be converting belivers in to atheists faster than they can breed them.

        Thta sounds encouraging- but is there and hard evidence for this?

  17. And sooner or later there will be no signs on the doors, as all the females will be forbidden from attending schools at all, and will be instead obligated to stay at home and only leave when escorted by a male relative, covered of course from head to toe in a black sheet.

Leave a Reply