Of course you are wrong webby. The Catholic church was one of the greatest persecutors in human history and based on the dictatorship of popes who rules through violence and lies. Only a few hundred years ago the church supported slavery and its official position on Africans and native Americans was that they were not human and had no soul. The persecution of the Jews , the witch burning , the inquistion , the bonfire of the vanities was finally bought to Justice by Neopolian and the Vatican was only ressurected by Mousolini and so the church continued its persecution of peoples through Franco, Hitler, Mousolini and the Catholic party in Slovakia and Poland. Very few other cults could claim to have indulged in such evil as the Catholic Church , even today Rape victims in central America and Northern South America are being persecuted by oders from the vatican. The title the devils banker has certainly been earnt by the church. The Church has not even compensated those of the stolen generation that they abducted from the great hoard of loot the church greedily bled from the developing world.

Of course you are wrong West. The Catholic church gave refuge to Jews being persecuted under the newly created Lutherans. Jews and even Catholics fled to Rome for protection against the Inquisition in Spain. Yes, they got the Pope's protection. Greatest persecutors of the world and of the Church were actually heretics whever they achieved political power eg the Hussites, the Cathars, the Protestant Elizabethans and the Puritans of the UK. Catholic power is legitimate to maintain order against heretics and cults. Worst dictatorships are secualrists liek Mao, Pol Pot , Stalin and other secualr dictators.
Franco kept the romantised at the movies view of Communists at bay. Chief Rabbi of Rome Israel Zolli converted to the Catholic Faith during WWII and took Pope Pius XII's Christian name as his new name upon baptism. All Israel's founders from close of the WWII, through the late 40s and 50s and 1960s praised the Catholic Church for saving the Jews. Church never held that Africans and others had no sopul and never supported slavery but like St Paul called for equality in charity between master and slave as the Church had no power over the secualr powers. When the situation changed the Church was pleased that the secular States made the long overdue changes re: slavery.

Let us not be digressed by what the Christians did a few centuries ago, or even now. The important issue is what the Arabs and moslems do today and it is not a pleasant picture, I'm sure you all read the newspapers and/or see the the TV news. The Dark Ages sand people are an insult to Western Civilization and the rest of the worlds civilizations and besides that, they want to cut our heads off, if we don't believe as they do, or don't want to become submissive to arab/moslem/sharia law. The religion of peace is a sick joke, it really is the religion of intolerence, submission, conquest, dark ages concepts and all the other black things we can ascribe to mankind. But, Islam it is not really a religion, it is a primitive, fascist, polital system with a very primitive religious component. All you women, especially the feminists, are you ready to wear veils, hijabs and all the other oppressive outfits proscribed by the moslems ? Where is the feminist protest about the treatment of moslem women ? I hear nothing, except that you are oppressed by Western man and care nothing about the really oppressed women of the world, the poor moslem women, nobody to speak for them.

DeepDarkOpps

Why the Fuss About Sharia Law?
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=988

"Should a society lend legitimacy to a legal system whose raison d’être is the destruction of that society? Moreover, how should a society treat a legal system that obligates its faithful to use violent jihad to accomplish its goals?"

"The chorus of objectors at this point is predictable: Who says that Shari’a’s goal is world hegemony and its method violent jihad? The answer of course rests with the Shari’a authorities who have addressed this question over the past 1,200 years."

"Dow Jones & Company, the owner of the Wall Street Journal, employs Mufti Taqi Usmani, a world-renowned Shari’a authority. Sitting as one of the most esteemed members of the Dow Jones Shari’a Advisory Board, Usmani informs Dow Jones which companies are Shari’a-compliant for admission into the Dow Jones Islamic Index."

"Usmani has ruled in line with Shari’a’s 1,200 years of jurisprudence that violent jihad against the infidels in the West is an ongoing obligation. In fact, he has dedicated an entire chapter to the subject in his book 'Islam and Modernism'."

"A civil society that is not prepared to make distinctions between anti-Western theo-political legal codes and innocuous religious ones could eventually find itself engaged in a battle for its very existence."

This is the fuss Irfan.

Philosophically the definition of human puts each world as the others dystopia. Islam defines the human as a slave of a god. Secular society defines humans as intrinsically free. As we plainly see even Christians cannot fully grasp the concept of freedom. To Islam explaining freedom is akin to explaining infinite dimensions, its just not on the radar. Islam will always be offended by freedom and the concept of self responsibility as the secularist will always be offended by slavery and devotion.

Britain is a secular society , religion has no place there. It is good that the belief in god is tolerated by the British but those who belong to cults that believe in gods should show their hosts much more respect than has been given.

Afterall those who believe in god believe in heaven or paradise and so that is their only home. They are only guests on earth. To us who respect life and know we only have one short one our homes are the earth. Save sharia law to impose on god, it is not welcome where there is freedom.

Dear West
Philosophically you are half right. In Islam one is a 'slave of Allah'; secularists are not as "instrinically free" as you might think. Unlimited freedom is a nonsense and atheists and agnostics who put forward this nonsense are being anti intellectual. The atheist Habermas of Germany agrees with Pope Benedict XVI on many aspects to freedom and how freedom comes with responsibilities and necessary controls. This is because an immediate examination quickly shows that sexual licence, unbridled corporatism in the market , lack of censorship on violence, incitement to violence and so on actually curtials the freedom of responsible members of the society. the definition of human puts each world as the others dystopia.
Catholics and the denominations have actually grasped what true freedom is about. It is just that your assertions and others emanating from what has become the new secualr culture over the past 50 years simply doesn''t acknowledge objective truth and responsible freedom, restraint ( 'carrying of one cross daily as invited to do so by Chrsit so as to become worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven).
Classicism in understanding has been rejected by modern universities and theology depts reduced or eliminated. Such is the slavery of secuarlism in its denial of theology as the Queen of the sciences ( not just the empirical ones) and the denial of philosophy as being the hand maiden of the Queen. That is the fault of the secular West.

Britian is on a downhill slope of its own politically correct making. Hillaire Belloc and especially G K Chesterton foretold of Britian's decline as it has rejected the Catholic Faith long long ago.