Society/Culture Why I blame Islam for the fact it's raining today.... part 2

[Chief]

Reminder: This isn't the Israel/Hamas thread. Go to the Israel/Hamas thread if you want to talk about that. Thanks.

Mid East - Israel declare war after Hamas attack II

Part I: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/israel-declare-war-after-hamas-attack.1371828/page-47#post-81443295 Thread Rules: Alright. I recognise that this is a fraught topic for any number of you posting here. Some of you will have family in Israel or Palestine. Some of you will have...

www.bigfooty.com

Thread rules update:

From this point if you're going to make a connection between Islam and the crime rate, you need to demonstrate causation in your post. If you do not, I'm going to infract you for the inherent racism in the position you're taking.

 

[Malifice]

I'm aware of all that. There's no current Muslim threat I can think of.

What would it take before we got a 'Muslim threat' in Australia (bearing in mind the Constitution expressly prohibits making laws regarding religion):

Section 116 of the Constitution provides:

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

How many Muslims would it take?

Bear in mind the Christians couldn't pull it off notwithstanding they had a majority.

 

[evolved2]

What would it take before we got a 'Muslim threat' in Australia (bearing in mind the Constitution expressly prohibits making laws regarding religion):



How many Muslims would it take?

Bear in mind the Christians couldn't pull it off notwithstanding they had a majority.

I consider ScoMo and Abbott examples of Christian threats. Religious interference in politics is generally done by stealth.

 

[Malifice]

Religious interference in politics is generally done by stealth.

Fred Nile was literally an ordained minister and member of the 'Christian Democrat' party.

Christian parties don't hide from the fact they're Christian mate.

What I'm saying (and relevant to the thread) is 'How are the Muslims going to take over and impose Sharia law on us'?

If the answer is (and it is) 'They cant barring getting to an overwhelming majority, and somehow suspending the Constitution, and that's self-evidently so farfetched, as to have no actual chance of happening' then why is it something we're even arguing about?

Most Muslims I know accept the fact that Australia is a secular nation and are more than happy to assimilate just fine.

It's a strawman, like much of what you've expressed 'concern' about. Child marriage is already unlawful here (and in Europe), 'honor killings' have no religious justification in Islam at all (so are completely unrelated to the thread, which is about Islam), and there is no evidence 'Muslims' (on account of Islamic teachings) pose anyone in Australia or Europe a greater risk of 'rape' than any other religious group (with the possible exception of Catholic priests, but that's a different story).

With respect to 'crime' in refugee communities, you've already conceded that this factor is due to poverty, and not due to some 'teaching of Islam imploring believers to commit crime' that I am unaware of.

Do you actually have anything critical of Islam (the religion itself)? Such as Sunni Islam's Salafi/ Wahabbi fundamentalist interpretation and it contributing to jihadi terrorist flogs? Or the Talibans interpretations of the Quran it claims allows its poor treatment of women?

Or are you just going to keep making sweeping racist claims against Arabs?

 

[evolved2]

Fred Nile was literally an ordained minister and member of the 'Christian Democrat' party.

Christian parties don't hide from the fact they're Christian mate.

What I'm saying (and relevant to the thread) is 'How are the Muslims going to take over and impose Sharia law on us'?

If the answer is (and it is) 'They cant barring getting to an overwhelming majority, and somehow suspending the Constitution, and that's self-evidently so farfetched, as to have no actual chance of happening' then why is it something we're even arguing about?

Most Muslims I know accept the fact that Australia is a secular nation and are more than happy to assimilate just fine.

It's a strawman, like much of what you've expressed 'concern' about. Child marriage is already unlawful here (and in Europe), 'honor killings' have no religious justification in Islam at all (so are completely unrelated to the thread, which is about Islam), and there is no evidence 'Muslims' (on account of Islamic teachings) pose anyone in Australia or Europe a greater risk of 'rape' than any other religious group (with the possible exception of Catholic priests, but that's a different story).

With respect to 'crime' in refugee communities, you've already conceded that this factor is due to poverty, and not due to some 'teaching of Islam imploring believers to commit crime' that I am unaware of.

Do you actually have anything critical of Islam (the religion itself)? Such as Sunni Islam's Salafi/ Wahabbi fundamentalist interpretation and it contributing to jihadi terrorist flogs? Or the Talibans interpretations of the Quran it claims allows its poor treatment of women?

Or are you just going to keep making sweeping racist claims against Arabs?

You've combined claims from at least 2, maybe more, posters and thrown them all at me. Look back at who posted what.

 

[Malifice]

You've combined claims from at least 2, maybe more, posters and thrown them all at me. Look back at who posted what.

Ok I apologize.

I'm simply asking that we stay on track with criticism of the Islamic religion (shit they actually doctrinally believe to be true) and not take potshots at Arab people generally (most Muslims are Asian, not Arab with over 1 billion in South and SE Asia alone), or frame arguments in 'we need to stop the Muslims from taking over the country and imposing their laws on us'?

 

[evolved2]

Ok I apologize.

Apology accepted.

I'm simply asking that we stay on track with criticism of the Islamic religion (s**t they actually doctrinally believe to be true) and not take potshots at Arab people generally (most Muslims are Asian, not Arab with over 1 billion in South and SE Asia alone), or frame arguments in 'we need to stop the Muslims from taking over the country and imposing their laws on us'?

While I don't think I've done any of that, I'm happy to be pulled up on it if I do.

I'm an anti-theist who opposes all organised religion.

 

[Malifice]

I'm an anti-theist who opposes all organised religion.

As am I, but I stop short of opposing them.

They give people succor and comfort. And provide a sense of community. Even if it is all one giant lie.

People can believe in what they want to. As long as it doesnt harm others, Im all for it.

It's where it harms others (Salafi jihadism, the Talibans treatment of women) that I speak up.

 

[JackOutback]

Fred Nile was literally an ordained minister and member of the 'Christian Democrat' party.

Christian parties don't hide from the fact they're Christian mate.

What I'm saying (and relevant to the thread) is 'How are the Muslims going to take over and impose Sharia law on us'?

If the answer is (and it is) 'They cant barring getting to an overwhelming majority, and somehow suspending the Constitution, and that's self-evidently so farfetched, as to have no actual chance of happening' then why is it something we're even arguing about?

Most Muslims I know accept the fact that Australia is a secular nation and are more than happy to assimilate just fine.

It's a strawman, like much of what you've expressed 'concern' about. Child marriage is already unlawful here (and in Europe), 'honor killings' have no religious justification in Islam at all (so are completely unrelated to the thread, which is about Islam), and there is no evidence 'Muslims' (on account of Islamic teachings) pose anyone in Australia or Europe a greater risk of 'rape' than any other religious group (with the possible exception of Catholic priests, but that's a different story).

With respect to 'crime' in refugee communities, you've already conceded that this factor is due to poverty, and not due to some 'teaching of Islam imploring believers to commit crime' that I am unaware of.

Do you actually have anything critical of Islam (the religion itself)? Such as Sunni Islam's Salafi/ Wahabbi fundamentalist interpretation and it contributing to jihadi terrorist flogs? Or the Talibans interpretations of the Quran it claims allows its poor treatment of women?

Or are you just going to keep making sweeping racist claims against Arabs?

 

[South of the Yarra]

Err, oblivious to Merkel throwing open the EU borders since 2017?

Turkey also has big issues with it also.



If you get a job at a company you're expected to embrace their work culture.

People who don't generally get moved on pretty quickly.

It has nothing to do with them losing their personal and cultural identity, which you seem to be completely misunderstanding.

Is that standard PHON stuff, whatever the * that even means?

Is it 'irrational' to expect a guest in your house to abide by your rules?

Oh the irony

 

[evolved2]

JFC. I thought you were reasonably intelligent. Guess not.

 

[bzparkes]

That's not true.

Here is a breakdown by major area of origin of the 72.4 million migrants residing in Europe (out of a population of 742 million) at mid-2013, based on the United Nations report Trends in International Migrant Stock: The 2013 Revision:

Area of origin	Number of immigrants to Europe (millions)	Percentage of total number of immigrants to Europe
Africa​	8.9	12
Asia​	18.6	27
Europe​	37.8	52
Latin America and the Caribbean​	4.5	6
Northern America​	0.9	1
Oceania​	0.3	0.4
Various​	1.3	2
TOTAL​	72.4	100

And dont forget that a significant number of European countries were already Islamic (Turkey for starters).

Show me the stats from 2017 onwards, which is what I've been talking about this entire time, as that was when the EU policy changes in regards to this.

They wont.

How the * do you think 3 percent of the population are going to outnumber the other 97 percent in 30 years?

30+ years. Compare birth rates of Muslims to native Europeans in Europe. Muslim birth rates are 52% higher than their native European counterparts.

Sure, it may take longer than 30 years but they'll get there eventually.

Muslims are not affecting your current way of life, nor do they pose a threat of changing it.

I've not once claimed they do.

So what should be done about this 'Muslim menace' you're arguing exists?

Nothing? Or should we enact special laws to 'stop the problem'?

As I've said multiple times, my comments aren't in relation to Australia, just a general observation about the state of Europe currently.

Funnily enough, it's the same group of people who generally complain about things such as how the English drew up borders in the ME prior to the formation of Israel and how forcing a migrant population on the local population there was a terrible thing, who are generally supportive of accepting these millions of refugees into Europe.

I'm not saying you're one of those but it's a very curious position to hold.

What needs to be done about it? Clearly better vetting of these people for starters. They also need to do what I recall Australia doing(presume they still do) when I was younger and placing them into regional hubs instead of letting them settle into cities.

Having said that, don't sneak them into small towns in the middle of the night, as they're doing in Ireland.

I read it a couple of months ago(can't find the article) that the Netherlands(I think, country near there anyway) has been doing exactly this and has had far more success integrating these people into the communities and way of life.

Not saying they can't settle into cities eventually but I recall having migrant refugee families when I was doing years 11-12 saying they had to spend 3 years living in rural towns around the country before they were given the choice to move into cities.

It does a far better job of integrating them into the local community, as well as providing local communities with a much-needed labour force when many of the local kids move to the cities themselves.

It's a far better scenario than putting them up with thousands of other refugees from their own country in cities and giving them welfare money, then being surprised when they fail to integrate and don't look for work.

 

[Number37]

So it's an Arab thing then?

Strange, because apparently it's forbidden in the Q'uran, yet the countries where it's most prevalent are predominantly ones where Islam is the dominant religion, India being the notable exception.

Honour killings have been around since long before religion.
Basic intelligence would tell you that therefore, honour killings are not religious.

1 woman a week is killed in Australia by their partner/former partner.
The dominant religion in Australia is no religion.
By your stupid logic we should blame DV deaths on Atheism.

 

[Number37]

The factors are well understood.

I'm happy to remove all elements of religion from parliament. Which parts of the constitution do you view as potentially being responsible for radicalising Muslims?

All religions are irrational. The Abrahamic religions tend to be particularly nefarious and incompatible with modern values of tolerance towards others, LGBT rights, and acceptance of science.

We see the results of allowing Abrahamic religion driving governance in the US through banning abortion and attempting to get creationism into science classrooms.

In the same way that Christianity should be fought and controlled, Islam should be too.

Why should we allow religious people control over our lives? It's fine when believers keep their religion to themselves, but we know that's not the goal.

What does any of that have to do with what I said?
Nada!

 

[bzparkes]

Honour killings have been around since long before religion.
Basic intelligence would tell you that therefore, honour killings are not religious.

1 woman a week is killed in Australia by their partner/former partner.
The dominant religion in Australia is no religion.
By your stupid logic we should blame DV deaths on Atheism.

Look, it's clear you don't know what you're even on about otherwise you'd know that honour killings across the Arab world carry a significantly reduced prison sentence than someone murdering their female family member here in Australia.

Quit it with your stupid whataboutism.

 

[Number37]

Look, it's clear you don't know what you're even on about otherwise you'd know that honour killings across the Arab world carry a significantly reduced prison sentence than someone murdering their female family member here in Australia.

Quit it with your stupid whataboutism.

Domestic violence murders are just honour killings with a different name.

So we are equally barbaric as dem muslims.
Ozi Ozi Ozi.

 

[bzparkes]

Domestic violence murders are just honour killings with a different name.

So we are equally barbaric as dem muslims.
Ozi Ozi Ozi.

Are you really this stupid?

Let me give you a little hint, because you appear to be badly struggling:

How long would you get if you murdered a family member in Australia in the name of 'honour'?

 

[sr36]

Funnily enough, it's the same group of people who generally complain about things such as how the English drew up borders in the ME prior to the formation of Israel and how forcing a migrant population on the local population there was a terrible thing, who are generally supportive of accepting these millions of refugees into Europe.

I'm not saying you're one of those but it's a very curious position to hold.

It's not a curious position at all -unless you liken granting asylum to refugees with granting governance of a nation and its inhabitants to refugees.

 

[bzparkes]

It's not a curious position at all -unless you liken granting asylum to refugees with granting governance of a nation and its inhabitants to refugees.

Forcing a group of of immigrants onto a local population, when said local population doesn't want it, isn't something you can pick and choose to support.

Do huge enclaves of of Islamic immigrants not want Sharia law for themselves? I've seen many a protest in Europe and Canada demanding such over the years. It's obviously not every Muslim that wants it but it seems to be a more common theme amongst the large groups who recently arrived as refugees.

Sure, the circumstances around the creation of Israel are obviously different, however with the constant conflict going on that that region, id kind of implies that forcing different culturally groups to live together probably isn't the smartest move.

 

[faible]

As am I, but I stop short of opposing them.

They give people succor and comfort. And provide a sense of community. Even if it is all one giant lie.

People can believe in what they want to. As long as it doesnt harm others, Im all for it.

It's where it harms others (Salafi jihadism, the Talibans treatment of women) that I speak up.

I'd say there's a difference between an athiest and an anti-thiest, anti-thiests can get pretty damn militant and irrational in their hatred of religion at times.

 

[faible]

Forcing a group of of immigrants onto a local population, when said local population doesn't want it, isn't something you can pick and choose to support.

Aboriginal Australia is right behind you here at least, just a bit more equal opportunity in who they consider to be immigrants.

 

[bzparkes]

Aboriginal Australia is right behind you here at least, just a bit more equal opportunity in who they consider to be immigrants.

Yes, I am aware and have acknowledged this numerous times in the thread.

Wish people would read through it before bringing it up for the umpteenth time.

 

[sr36]

Forcing a group of of immigrants onto a local population, when said local population doesn't want it, isn't something you can pick and choose to support.

Do huge enclaves of of Islamic immigrants not want Sharia law for themselves? I've seen many a protest in Europe and Canada demanding such over the years. It's obviously not every Muslim that wants it but it seems to be a more common theme amongst the large groups who recently arrived as refugees.

Sure, the circumstances around the creation of Israel are obviously different, however with the constant conflict going on that that region, id kind of implies that forcing different culturally groups to live together probably isn't the smartest move.

It's a really bad comparison. You're comparing multi-culturalist immigration policies with the decision to carve out a mono-cultural nation on land that was majority inhabited by a different culture. The more appropriate comparison is with European colonialism. We're basically seeing what would have occured in other European colonies in Africa and Asia if the practice was continued.

 

[faible]

Yes, I am aware and have acknowledged this numerous times in the thread.

Wish people would read through it before bringing it up for the umpteenth time.

You can't legitimately expect people to wade through pages upon pages of back and forth in order to not interpret your argument in a way that is pretty obvious.

 

[bzparkes]

It's a really bad comparison. You're comparing multi-culturalist immigration policies with the decision to carve out a mono-cultural nation on land that was majority inhabited by a different culture. The more appropriate comparison is with European colonialism. We're basically seeing what would have occured in other European colonies in Africa and Asia if the practice was continued.

I see the point that you're getting at but 2 things here that lead to that decision at the time:

1. Israel(the area, not the country that was formed in '48 obviously) is the ancestral home of the Jews.

2. There was no nation/state there for the Palestinian people who were living in the area.

Hindsight tells us it was obviously a stupid idea that should've never been implemented.


The point I'm getting at is that clearly unpopular immigration policies are being forced upon Europeans(mostly West/Nordic) and have caused a huge groundswell of support for the far-right as a consequence.

This in turn isn't a good thing, because those parties tend to be on the Russian payroll and I fear for the long-term support of the situation in Ukraine as a consequence.

Throwing open your borders to millions of undocumented migrants isn't proving to be the smart thing for Europe.

 

[sr36]

I see the point that you're getting at but 2 things here that lead to that decision at the time:

1. Israel(the area, not the country that was formed in '48 obviously) is the ancestral home of the Jews.

2. There was no nation/state there for the Palestinian people who were living in the area.

Hindsight tells us it was obviously a stupid idea that should've never been implemented.


The point I'm getting at is that clearly unpopular immigration policies are being forced upon Europeans(mostly West/Nordic) and have caused a huge groundswell of support for the far-right as a consequence.

This in turn isn't a good thing, because those parties tend to be on the Russian payroll and I fear for the long-term support of the situation in Ukraine as a consequence.

Throwing open your borders to millions of undocumented migrants isn't proving to be the smart thing for Europe.

I'm not going to go down a critique of current European immigration policy, as I really don't know enough about it other than to suggest that the nationalist voices are ignoring the globalisation of the world economy and thus it's nigh on impossible for any nation to be protected against militant dissatisfaction. I'm just pointing out the two things that you're trying to compare aren't comparable.