The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum

It was an example.

I think it's an example that can be ruled out.

... Really? You're sure he wasn't a Muslim? How on earth do you know?

 

About this particular individual? Haven't the faintest. But in terms of being representative of the Muslim religion, the situation described in no way met the orthopraxic  strictures of prayer for Muslims in general. Therefore it fails as an 'example'.

Lived religion is not homogenous. People do religion in infinite ways. There is very little orthopraxy policing. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lived_religion

I have no idea why you want to bend the narrative so as to make the person causing annoyance a member of the Muslim religion. All I'm responding to is the unlikelihood of it being so.
It makes no difference to me in regard to the example, it's still someone being annoying - I have no preconceived idea of what flavour of religion ( if indeed it was a prayer) would cause someone to behave in that way. Other people can imagine this person as they choose.

And I don't understand why you're reacting so badly to my example. I'm not trying to bend anything.

Fine, here's another example. If you fly to Israel at the right time, you will see dozens of men in skull caps praying. Loudly. In the centre of the terminal, or at the gate. I've seen it on many occasions. They also pray at the back of the plane, loudly, if they can find a minyan (ten men). They do it loudly in the hope that others will join in. It's a religious duty. And it has to be done at very specific times.

Your reaction to their religious practice is not the only thing that matters. And that's my point, with my failed attempt to use examples. Religion is just as important to people in these situations as your peace and quiet is to you. And what happens when Western ideas of religion being only for the private sphere meet majority world ideas of religion being public is... this thread.

Note that I haven't said what my view is, nor will I. I'm simply representing the people whose position isn't being shared in this Western discourse.

I find it interesting that you ascribe a 'Western' view in these days when so many countries are multi-cultural.  But if you want to go with that then I would suggest there are many different behaviors in different cultures that I would find annoying,distasteful or even abhorrent. That doesn't make my views wrong. Someone doesn't get a free pass by claiming "that's how we do it where I come from". That kind of justification could be applied to just about any sort of behavior that annoys other people. Since people tend to live in social groups, there are generally tacit agreements as to what constitutes behaviors which particular groups find acceptable and can live comfortably with. Exceptions are often given lee way as that is also part of the social contract: to accept differences without excluding the person so acting within reason.

An example of someone acting egregiously within the established social contract was given and an opinion on the behavior was asked for. It is the most likely  that people will react based on what they find acceptable within their social sphere.
And there is nothing wrong or 'off' with that. I would add that ideas of acceptable social behavior evolve all the time and this is especially true with the increasing mixture of cultures we are seeing in the world today. Initial reactions to change can be positive or negative . And some changes will never be 'comfortable' with people who are used to certain codes of behavior.
To use your example, if groups of people in a different culture behave in a certain way it may be acceptable to those living within that culture but totally alien to people in other cultures. Asking people to just automatically accept something heretofore unknown and also annoying to them is, I think, unreasonable.
That being said, someone being annoying for any reason to the larger number of people who have to co-exist with them is still just that - annoying. It's not a judgement value on them as a person or what they believe in: it's a reaction to their *behavior* in the greater group. And this is true for everybody .
We understand that people have a right to express themselves freely .That means that both positive and negative responses to other people's expressions is also acceptable.
Because something is held as 'religious' does not exclude it from this. Fred Phelp's minions are a prime example of this. They have a right to their expression of their beliefs, I have a right to my negative reaction to it. Just because they hold their beliefs (and their shouting of them in public) to be religious doesn't make their expressions of their beliefs beyond the pale of my judgement or that I feel I shouldn't object because, after all, it's 'religion' which can be expressed in so many ways.

The lack of knowledge about this person is exactly why I originally chose C, because as I don't know anything about the person praying, there's no way for me to make a value judgement on their actions.

I don't see why know of the person is really needed to decide that some action is rude or annoying. The gentleman in question could have been doing it because someone was holding a gun to his back and was going to shoot him if he didn't. That would certainly make what he did justified, but it would still be rude/annoying. Sometimes one has good reason do something even though it is going to be seen as rude and/or annoying, but no matter how excellent the reason it is still going to be seen as rude/annoying.

Because, as far as I know, no one is able to close their ears. We generally can control what we see, by closing our eyes or looking away, but we cannot choose not to hear.

I note that several people have mentioned that the perceived rudeness of a noise is much greater in a subway car (a confined space) than on a subway platform, where it is more possible to move out of earshot.

Yes, that would be my problem too. I'm very sensitive to noise, even more so in the morning, and someone being noisy where I can't move away is much worse than somesome holding hands when I can just not look. In fact, I'd be less bothered if they were having sex as long as they do it quietly.

Muslim religious law states that prayer must take place five times a day. The first time is an hour before sunrise. He wasn't praying at that time for his own amusement.

One of the problems here is a complete ignorance of Islam, as far as I can see.

I deliberately left out the religion, to make this more abstract, but I'm fairly certain the guy was Jewish.