Proxy.
When Andrew Jakubowicz runs out of things to say, annoys enough people or basically has a better offer he'll go over to the Right Wing, start tubthumping for the Settler Movement and become rampantly Islamophobic.
David Horowitz did it, now he criticises the PC Fascists which his generation and he personally were responsible for creating and backs sites like the Mossad run Jihadwatch.
It's a funny old world.
Don't be fooled into thinking Islam is a problem here, it's one of those issues, like the Holocaust where taking a position is not necessary, whichever side you choose results in your energy being sapped and your opinion being under someone else's control.
Always ask, "WHAT"S IN THIS FOR ME?" don't think about what you can gain by becoming a Pro Victim Leftist or a Pro Israel Respectable conservative only what you stand to lose.
No to Islam, No to Israel.
No platform, No comment.

Jay of Melbourne: << So does anyone agree with me? >>

Apparently not much - unless you count sockpuppet trolls.

There is just a grain of truth in what Proxy says:

"This is not to say that we should elevate all their values over ours.
For example, when they claim their ideology as justification for harming us, we should reject their proposition as absurd. We must make a principled stand somewhere. To admit to what they say would undermine the validity of our own ideology."

If he means that our values include respect for all humans, male and female, attention to equal rights, and freedom to do whatever we wish provided everybody else has the same freedom (i.e. not to do to others what we would not like them to do to us), then he might have a point. Not all sets of values are equal, just as not all 'cultures' are equal (cf. Nazi culture, Stalinist culture, the culture of the Catholic church of the Middle Ages, i.e. up to about 1970). So if our sets of values are not as good as those of some other group, these differences have to be teased out.

And vice versa.

Sit back and enjoy it, CJ.

Joe

@Joe.Finally!
Here everyone read this:
http://www.integralworld.net/beck2.html
There is a new way of looking at these issues, unfortunately people aren't going to be able to make billions from it straight away so like the electric car it's being ignored.
As they say "Cometh the time, cometh the thinking"

Loudmouth if you were genuinely concerned about sexism and gender apartheid, not to mention equal rights, you would take umbrage at Australia's Constitution, an Act to which women were forbidden to speak, of a parliament from which women were forbidden to attend, which created men's legislatures in which women participate until a majority decides they should be removed forthwith and all women refused a vote.

But you don't; you give every indication of support for this brazen excursion into sexism and gender apartheid, albeit in a moderate incarnation but sexism and gender apartheid nonetheless, not the sexism and gender apartheid of your imagination, the real thing, which is the primary instrument of governance in Australia today.

A majority of the world’s democracies have a women's caucus to offer advice yet there has never been an outcry these caucuses are sexist or constitute gender apartheid. A women's legislature converts advice to authority.
Both women and men have a right to an opinion about any law including all the laws of your imaginary agenda yet only men have the final say over what should be law in Australia's parliament, if necessary by removing women altogether, that's the law.

A person with a mere rudimentary knowledge of social analysis, or of the english language for that matter, would know sexism and gender apartheid imply disadvantage to a sex or gender.
Neither women nor men are disadvantaged when distinguished with governance conducted by their agreement; it's actually called equality. Your assertions otherwise are disingenuous, inflammatory, poorly thought out and a nonsense.
What is it about governance conducted by agreement between women's and men's legislatures and committees you don't get? Does genuine equality with women perhaps assail your manhood? it shouldn't, if you're anything like the overwhelming majority of Australian men you're much too much of a man for that.

I admire your singularity, whistler.