2 of 2
2
Britain: R.I.P. 
Posted: 05 July 2008 09:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  299
Joined  2007-06-20
A Voice of Sanity - 05 July 2008 07:46 AM

However the root of all of this, including the frantic posturing of the Xtian ‘evangelicals’, is that religion is a dying force. Faced with this, the religion of ‘submission’ has become extremely violent but will die out none the less.

Yes, Muslims do perceive (perhaps only subconsciously) that their religion is in trouble.  Islam had a pretty good run.  Within just a single century after Muhammad, Islam had conquered more of the world than the Roman Empire at its height.  But over time, they lost much of what they once had.  Today, more and more people around the world are embracing western values, listening to western music, wearing blue jeans, etc.  And yes, many (most?) Muslims want to go back to their glory days.  And if Islam is like a dying animal, it must be remembered that an animal that is afraid for its life is at its most dangerous.  It will take out anyone who gets in its way.  Using suicide bombers would appear to be reserved for those who are losing and have nothing left to try.  I would imagine this is similar to the Japanese Kamikazee pilots of WWII.  They knew they were losing the war.  It was their last ditch effort.  But a suicidal animal or enemy is the most dangerous.  Unfortunately, too many people reject the danger that radical Islam poses to the world.  Some do it out of fear-based denial, some do it for political reasons, others are just too busy with their bread and circuses.  But that danger is there.  And once this suicidal enemy gets their hands on some nukes, that danger will be driven home to western civilization. 

A Voice of Sanity - 05 July 2008 07:46 AM

So will all of the other religions. What you are witnessing is not a revival of religions but their death throes.

Here, I disagree.  Religion will not go away.  It will change and evolve over time.  But there appears to be something innate in human beings to want to believe.  Granted, not everyone, but most people have this desire.  That belief may manifest itself with belief in the supernatural or it may go a more logical route via a form of a secular philosophy, but since all humans from all over the world, from time immemorial have had religions, it appears to be a trait that will be around for quite some time.  I even contend, with not too much tongue in cheek, that the current Obamamania sweeping the political left is a form of religion.  They will deny it.  But it has all the elements.  Hopefully it won’t last.  But new religions will spring up all the time.  Most die out quickly, others take hold and last centuries.  But even the centuries-old ones change eventually.  They could (and perhaps have) changed enough to be classified as a whole new religion.  Yes folks, transitional religions just like transitional fossils!  grin If nothing else proves evolution, it is religion! 

A Voice of Sanity - 05 July 2008 07:46 AM

Britain should treat Islam the way a big dog treats a small dog - with amused indifference, no matter how hard it yaps. I suspect that Britain will do fine - as it has for a long time. I am not so sanguine about the USA and its current rejection of intelligence and knowledge. I have the feeling that it is circling the drain.

They should treat it that way, yes.  But they don’t.  They cave in and appease, appease, appease.  Like Churchill said, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last.” And that is exactly what Britain is currently doing.  Had Britain taken its current attitude toward Islamic fascists towards Hitler and his fascists, they would all be speaking German today.  There are, apparently, areas in Britain that are “no-go areas” for non-Muslims.  Britain and many nations in Europe do not have the “melting pot” mentality that the United States has - although the U.S. is, unfortunately, moving away from that in the name of “diversity,” a dangerous place to go, in my opinion.  But because the United States is a nation of immigrants, its Muslim population has not felt nearly as isolated and rejected as in other countries.  In the United States, people are much more likely to integrate into the society as a whole.  This is not the case in Britain.  The “hyphenation” of people by their country of birth (or the continent of long-dead ancestors!), or their religion drives people apart instead of bringing them together.  Such rejection and isolation is the perfect breeding ground for the “home-grown” terror that has already struck the U.K several times.

[ Edited: 05 July 2008 09:44 AM by Rocinante ]
 Signature 

“Submission? That’s a bit of a problem!”
--Leonidas in 300

“This day we rescue a world from mysticism and tyranny, and usher in a future brighter than anything we could imagine.”
-- Dilios in 300

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 July 2008 09:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1058
Joined  2006-12-20
A Voice of Sanity - 05 July 2008 07:46 AM


As for the cartoons about Mohammed, the problem is not too many cartoons and jokes, the problem is too few. Create a million cartoons and let the silly buggers wear themselves out whining.

Yep.

Britain should treat Islam the way a big dog treats a small dog - with amused indifference, no matter how hard it yaps. I suspect that Britain will do fine

We’ll do fine as long as we treat people with respect and allow them to do what they want within the law and as long as too much religious and racial hatred isn’t stirred up.

Papers like the Daily Mail are quite happy to do the stirring, in order to increase their circulation.

Stephen

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 July 2008 01:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  299
Joined  2007-06-20
StephenLawrence - 05 July 2008 09:36 AM

It has nothing to do with English Law as far as I can see, there are no changes being advocated in English Law to accomodate Sharia law.

What I believe the judge was saying is that people can enter into contracts of their choosing, as long as the contracts don’t break English law and are not enforced by methods that break English law.

The point is this:  What is the message being sent when this judge said what he said? 

The Islamic fascists have long demanded Sharia law for the U.K. (as well as the whole planet for that matter!) as being part of their long list of demands.  In an effort to bring that about, they carried out the July 2005 London bombings murdering 56 people and injuring 700.  Then there was the 2007 Glasgow International Airport attack by more Islamic fascists.  Then along comes this judge and says, “Hey you know what?  Muslims should have their own separate Sharia law in Britain.”

The Islamic fascists see this and think, “Hey, the bombings are working!  Let’s keep up the bombings and we can get Sharia law imposed on non-Muslims in the U.K.  More bombings and we can get rid of all the Jews, Christians, Hindus, Infidels, homosexuals, etc.  More bombings and we can...” You see the point.  You don’t reward the kind of behavior the Islamic fascists have engaged in by giving into their demands.  It will only encourage more of the same behavior.

 Signature 

“Submission? That’s a bit of a problem!”
--Leonidas in 300

“This day we rescue a world from mysticism and tyranny, and usher in a future brighter than anything we could imagine.”
-- Dilios in 300

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 July 2008 01:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  669
Joined  2008-07-03
Rocinante - 05 July 2008 01:11 PM

… The Islamic fascists have long demanded Sharia law for the U.K. (as well as the whole planet for that matter!) as being part of their long list of demands.  In an effort to bring that about, they carried out the July 2005 London bombings murdering 56 people and injuring 700.  Then there was the 2007 Glasgow International Airport attack by more Islamic fascists.  Then along comes this judge and says, “Hey you know what?  Muslims should have their own separate Sharia law in Britain.”

Perhaps he meant we should stone them to death.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 July 2008 02:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  299
Joined  2007-06-20
A Voice of Sanity - 05 July 2008 01:30 PM

Perhaps he meant we should stone them to death.

Touché LOL

 Signature 

“Submission? That’s a bit of a problem!”
--Leonidas in 300

“This day we rescue a world from mysticism and tyranny, and usher in a future brighter than anything we could imagine.”
-- Dilios in 300

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2008 07:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1058
Joined  2006-12-20
Rocinante - 05 July 2008 01:11 PM

The point is this:  What is the message being sent when this judge said what he said? 

I’ll quote from another article in reply.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/04/islam.religion?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

What he helpfully laid out is that because of the provision for mediation by a third party in English civil law, there is already a degree of accommodation sharia law in our legal system. That is what the coverage in the wake of the Archbishop flushed out very helpfully.

“We went on a crash course of understanding one of the more obscure parts of the English legal system and where it abuts other forms of arbitration – Jewish religious law, canon law etc, in addition to the forms of sharia law which are now well established in the UK’s Muslim community. Sharia courts are up and running and have been for decades; no secret there, it’s just few paid much attention to them before. I tried writing about sharia 12 years ago and no one was interested.

If we don’t want such jurisdictions – and they are very very limited – to coexist with English law, then it will require losing the pretty fundamental option of mediation outside the legal system when agreed by both parties. That option would mean the state would be monopolising all arbitration on all issues in a way which many – for example, in civil cases involving marriage or business arrangements – would see as nonsensical. In short, if we don’t want sharia in this country, it will require a pretty radical reform which would stir up a lot of opposition.

Phillips also helpfully re-stated what everyone sensible agrees – that English law should trump any other type of law, if there is a conflict. Nor is anyone suggesting that sharia should be imposed on anyone who doesn’t consent to that method of arbitration. I hope that by degrees, people will come to recognise that this debate about sharia law is quite specific and very tightly circumscribed. Sharia law provisions will only cover those who chose to use its courts; it will only cover civil matters. “

This is the message being sent out, although unfortunately many will misinterpret.

Stephen

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2008 08:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2884
Joined  2007-03-02

I don’t think you understand how Sharia encompasses the lives of the Muslims.  It doesn’t stop there just because the Church of England says it does.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2008 10:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  247
Joined  2008-06-24
Rocinante - 03 July 2008 03:52 PM

It’s been nice knowing you.  You lasted a helluva long time and you did a great job fighting off the Nazi fascists last century.  Too bad you didn’t put up even half as much of a fight against the Islamic fascists of this century.  They didn’t so much defeat you, as you committed suicide by caving in to them.

Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain, says UK’s top judge


Too bad the idiotic judge didn’t see this.

I don’t get how Hitler could differentiate between Jews and Arabs since it seems to me that ethnically they’re pretty well the same.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2