Islamism in Europe.

[Remiel]

I'm an atheist. I don't give a rat's rear about your silly Bible.

Not my Bible, History's.

[Remiel]

Is your point that Islam has not gone through a bloody,yet historically necessary,struggle like the Protestant Reformation??

If so,I agree...

But that cannot be brought on by us.It has to happen internally,from sane Muslims who don't want to have the crazies speaking for them...

The Reformation was merely one way for change to happen. I mean, can your point to a historical figure or event that triggered what we might call the " Counter Reformation " ; the many Protestants who have become crazier and more dogmatic than the Catholics?

Edited July 31, 2011 by Remiel

[Jack Weber]

The Reformation was merely one way for change to happen. I mean, can your point to a historical figure or event that triggered what we might call the " Counter Reformation " ; the many Protestants who have become crazier and more dogmatic than the Catholics?

I would argue that many Protestant sects have become the most Laodacean of all Christian denominations...

Historical figures of the Protestant Reformation??

Martin Luther...John Calvin (Jean Cauvin)...John Knox...

You'll note that while initially very bloody,(and still in a few areas)over time the Protestant influence on The Vatican was genarally calming and the relationship between most Catholics and Protestants is basically to agree to disagree...

Edited July 31, 2011 by Jack Weber

[Remiel]

I would argue that many Protestant sects have become the most Laodacean of all Christian denominations...

Historical figures of the Protestant Reformation??

Martin Luther...John Calvin (Jean Cauvin)...John Knox...

You'll note that while initially very bloody,(and still in a few areas)over time the Protestant influence on The Vatican was genarally calming and the relationship between most Catholics and Protestants is basically to agree to disagree...

I cannot say I quite understand te Laodacean reference.

[Bob]

Yes, but that is only half the argument.

We have two holy books: The New Testament, and the Koran (whatever spelling you fancy).

As much as it can be argued that the Koran says, " Conquer the infidels, " the New Testament can be argued to say, " Stop killing one another " . Bob and DogOnPorch argue that it is necessarily the case that Muslims all want to " Conquer the infidel, " yet I argue that Christians were better at that than the Muslims ever were, despite the fact that the New Testament says the complete opposite. Thusly, I argue that there premise is flawed: the politics of the faithful is not at the mercy of their religion.

See, you're doing it again - you're suggesting that I and DogOnPorch are slandering all Muslims and suggested that they are all sleeper cells that are associated with a future Islamic takeover. You need to stop blurring the lines between Islamism and all Muslims. They are not one in the same. When we discuss the doctrine of Islamism, we are NOT stating that all self-describing Muslims are adherents to this political/religious ideology. This is not mere semantics, as when you mischaracterize our statements in this way you are effectively creating a strawman argument that detracts from the conversation, compelling me to respond with posts like this where I need to say something along the lines of, "No, that's not what I meant!".

[Shwa]

For those who actually want to see grasp the breadth of this threat, and who know the left-wing media tends to avoid these stories in the interests of political correctness.

Meh, they aren't doing a very good job if their goal is to take over Europe:

Islam in Europe

Map

And likely most of them are productive citizens, cool with their digs and not out take over anyone. Probably generating quite a bit of tax revenue too.

Edited July 31, 2011 by Shwa

[Remiel]

See, you're doing it again - you're suggesting that I and DogOnPorch are slandering all Muslims and suggested that they are all sleeper cells that are associated with a future Islamic takeover. You need to stop blurring the lines between Islamism and all Muslims. They are not one in the same. When we discuss the doctrine of Islamism, we are NOT stating that all self-describing Muslims are adherents to this political/religious ideology. This is not mere semantics, as when you mischaracterize our statements in this way you are effectively creating a strawman argument that detracts from the conversation, compelling me to respond with posts like this where I need to say something along the lines of, "No, that's not what I meant!".

DogOnPorch should stop referencing battles that happened hundreds of years ago as if they are any more relevant than the historical hatred between the English and the French, for his part, if he wants me to think him reasonable.

And if you do not mean to slander all European Muslims, you should stop grafting Islamist politics onto all Muslim culture.

[DogOnPorch]

DogOnPorch should stop referencing battles that happened hundreds of years ago as if they are any more relevant than the historical hatred between the English and the French, for his part, if he wants me to think him reasonable.

And if you do not mean to slander all European Muslims, you should stop grafting Islamist politics onto all Muslim culture.

Islam = Submission.

[Remiel]

Islam = Submission.

Christianity = Love.

[DogOnPorch]

Christianity = Love.

That's not what Christianity means while Islam literally means "submission". Submission to a desert warlord with a hankerin' for wee girls and lopped-off heads.

[Remiel]

That's not what Christianity means while Islam literally means "submission". Submission to a desert warlord with a hankerin' for wee girls and lopped-off heads.

If names are everything, then England is the Land of the Angles.

[DogOnPorch]

If names are everything, then England is the Land of the Angles.

Angles, Saxsons and Jutes. But, no matter, it won't detract from the fact that Islam means submission to a murderous child molestor.

[Remiel]

See, you're doing it again - you're suggesting that I and DogOnPorch are slandering all Muslims and suggested that they are all sleeper cells that are associated with a future Islamic takeover.

Should I instead suggest that DogOnPorch is slandering all Muslims by implying they are all pedeophiles at heart?

[DogOnPorch]

Should I instead suggest that DogOnPorch is slandering all Muslims by implying they are all pedeophiles at heart?

Why do you not condemn a murderous child molestor?

[Remiel]

Why do you not condemn a murderous child molestor?

I am skeptical of the idea that it would have been common practice to consummate marriages with children who had not yet bled. And if I were to obsess over the abhorrent moral standards of everyone in the medieval age (such as considering the onset of puberty adulthood), I could probably keept busy for a lifetime.

What I want to know is why you spend all your time thinking about some pervent in the desert screwing a little girl. Seems like the obsession of a sick mind...

[DogOnPorch]

I am skeptical of the idea that it would have been common practice to consummate marriages with children who had not yet bled. And if I were to obsess over the abhorrent moral standards of everyone in the medieval age (such as considering the onset of puberty adulthood), I could probably keept busy for a lifetime.

What I want to know is why you spend all your time thinking about some pervent in the desert screwing a little girl. Seems like the obsession of a sick mind...

I'm not Muslim.

[Remiel]

I'm not Muslim.

You mistake my meaning. Muslims spend all their time thinking about a guy who was a child molester. What I asked was why you spent all your time picturing the molestation.

[Bob]

And if you do not mean to slander all European Muslims, you should stop grafting Islamist politics onto all Muslim culture.

But I haven't done that. What I've done is state that Islamism isn't particularly fringe in Muslim culture. I cannot give you some precise percentage, as these thing are inherently complex, nuanced, and somewhat subjective. I don't sweep the threat of Islamism under the rug, but I also don't blur the lines between Islamism and all Muslims.

[Remiel]

But I haven't done that. What I've done is state that Islamism isn't particularly fringe in Muslim culture. I cannot give you some precise percentage, as these thing are inherently complex, nuanced, and somewhat subjective. I don't sweep the threat of Islamism under the rug, but I also don't blur the lines between Islamism and all Muslims.

Then how can you agree with Breivik's rhetoric? His writing seems to be compatible with the belief that even " good " immigrants are a " threat " to Europe, and that it does not matter whether you only like " good " Muslims if you believe in multiculturalism, you are still a traitor.

[DogOnPorch]

You mistake my meaning. Muslims spend all their time thinking about a guy who was a child molester. What I asked was why you spent all your time picturing the molestation.

If you see nothing wrong with it, so be it.

[Remiel]

If you see nothing wrong with it, so be it.

What I see is a single crest in a sea of wrong.

[DogOnPorch]

What I see is a single crest in a sea of wrong.

Can't call a spade a spade, eh? It figures.

If Islam was the wacko cult up the road, you'd be bringing your family, I'm suuuure...NOT. But, since it is a "major religion" it must be good. We must respect tyranny, stupidity, homophobia and misogyny to name a few.

Pardon my Arabic but I say F**k that.

[Bob]

Then how can you agree with Breivik's rhetoric? His writing seems to be compatible with the belief that even " good " immigrants are a " threat " to Europe, and that it does not matter whether you only like " good " Muslims if you believe in multiculturalism, you are still a traitor.

That's not what he says. He accepts immigration in the context of appropriate integration/assimilation. He doesn't subscribe to conventional multiculturalism (neither do I, in the European context), and supports a more assertive position on CULTURE. If you're going to move here, ASSIMILATE and INTEGRATE. Otherwise, you threaten our culture - especially when the cultural differences you're bringing with you are antithetical to fundamental values - democracy, pluralism, and individual freedoms and liberties. Islamism is at odds with these values, and Islamism is growing in Europe concurrently with Islamic immigration. Who'da thunk it?

Perhaps the rhetoric of traitor is aggressive, but I agree that advocates of contemporary multiculturalism ARE advancing and perpetuating failed policies that are permitting Islamisation to continue to occur, which goes hand-in-hand with social and cultural suicide. Go move to Saudi Arabia (or any other Muslim-majority state) and tell me how much freedom you have to preserve your own way of life.

[Remiel]

Can't call a spade a spade, eh? It figures.

If Islam was the wacko cult up the road, you'd be bringing your family, I'm suuuure...NOT. But, since it is a "major religion" it must be good. We must respect tyranny, stupidity, homophobia and misogyny to name a few.

Pardon my Arabic but I say F**k that.

Since you cannot read you must have missed the part where I called him a child molester earlier.

[Remiel]

http://books.google.com/books?id=Bzd1ytm7nvoC&pg=PR2&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

Page 12:

Child sexual abuse was simply not acknowledged prior to the late 1800s. While it would be reassuring to believe that child sexual abuse did not exist, it of course did. It was simply not labelled as such. Indeed, child secual abuse has been documented throughought history, with Biblibal references to child sexual abuse (Rush, 1980), and more extensive records of abuse in the Roman and Greek civilizations (Gray-Fow, 1987). Even in colonial America, records suggest that child abuse, including child sexual abuse, is widespread (deMause, 1988). DeMause, in The History of Childhood, a classic analysis of childhoods in previous historical eras states:

The history of childhood is a nightmare from which we have only begun to awaken. The further back in history one goes, the lower the level of childcare, and the more likely children are to be abandoned, beaten, terroized, and sexually abused. (p. 1)

This statement certainly suggests that sexual abuse is not a recent phenomenon - only its recognition.

Your continuous harping on this point is no different that the constant attention paid to the crimes of Israel - technically correct, but completely bereft of any context whatsoever, and entirely out of proportion with the wider phenomenon of criminality. Bad shit happened everywhere and all the time in history, and the history books are very selective about which bad shit they reported.