con't

Pape’s hypothesis is utter nonsense. Please explain the Sunni suicide bombers blowing up shia Iraqis. How does that fit in? The vast majority of casualties in Iraq are caused by this sectarian hatred. How does it explain the large numbers of middle class Syrian boys who came to Iraq to kill themselves? Or the Egyptian and Saudi bombers who killed 3000 people on 9/11?

Pape makes a number of mistakes including substituting western notions of piety to rule out the role of Islam in these attacks. This is a grave mistake and completely misunderstands the nature of Islamic extremism. He neglects the fact that Islam has recruited in prisons because to rape and kill in the name of Allah is truly the work of god. He ignores the strong pull of redemptive violence and the ability to assist your loved one’s from the afterlife for those who have strayed from the path.

Pericles and CJ.

The fact that Islamic fundamentalists have had some of their requests knocked back is not to the point. You suggested that the requests themselves were somehow bogus. They were not and they are part of a much broader attempt to recast our society in a manner more acceptable to muslim’s. This is the very antithesis of integration. As big mal has noted, as muslim minorities increase their representation more pressure is brought to bear to make civil life more Islamic. This is borne out in Britain and more openly in France where they have significant muslim communities. There have been calls for an introduction of sharia law and for Muslim holidays to become British national holidays. British flags are no longer flown in many places as muslims are said to be offended by St Georges cross and its links to the crusaders. Chris Doyle, director of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British said that it was now time for England to find a new flag and a patron saint who is “not associated with our bloody past and one we can all identify with.”

Not convinced, Paul.L

>>The fact that Islamic fundamentalists have had some of their requests knocked back is not to the point.<<

It is very much to the point.

If I approached State Rail and asked them to build a railway station nearer my house, which would be the more important fact to emerge? The fact I had made the request, or their refusal to bend to my personal whim?

>>You suggested that the requests themselves were somehow bogus. They were not and they are part of a much broader attempt to recast our society in a manner more acceptable to muslim’s.<<

No-one remotely suggested that the requests were bogus. They appear to be entirely genuine.

The part we disagree on is whether this is an "attempt to recast our society", or merely an expression of personal preference.

You see conspiracy, I see - at least in the case of the lecture times - a perfectly valid request, closely akin to asking if the canteen could serve vegetarian food.

I have no knowledge of the detail of the Muslim taxi drivers in Minneapolis, but it smells like a beat-up. However, one point that I did miss last time around was Boaz's attempt to bring Minnesota to Melbourne:

>>-Muslim TAXI drivers denying passage to Blind and Booze carrying on "religious freedom" grounds. (Minnesota/Minneapolis and some in Melbourne)<<

I forgot to ask him to provide a link to the Melbourne incident. It is probably too late now as he seems to have rather quickly moved on, but just in case, here goes.

Boaz, is the reference to Melbourne just another of your fabrications, or does it have any substance?

CJ Morgan, Your amendment is hardly “slight”, but that doesn’t discredit it.

The expanded wording means you agree with my proposition, doesn’t it? But you think the same caution should apply to Christianity as well as Islam.

I can think of at least three observations to make, which suggest that Islam should be a priority:

i) Islam seems to be opposed to democracy. Christianity seems not to be. The idea of a Christian theocracy is remote, even though there are doubtless some Christians who are keen on it. Islamic theocracies exist, and more are sought.

ii) There’s a higher proportion of Muslim literalists than Christian or Jewish. This is partly due to the perceived pedigree of the scriptures. The Koran was delivered over 10-20 years to one man, the New Testament over about 100 years to about a dozen people, the Old Testament over about 2000 years to a much higher number. These are approximations, but they have an influence on the degree of freedom to interpret, speculate, and even simply learn about these different scriptures.

iii) Then, of course, there is simply the widespread strife which is unavoidably associated with Islam.

While it’s hard for me to regard Christianity as a threat, I also don’t like any religious people trying to induce the Apocalypse, as I think that’s highly presumptuous of them (as well as dangerous, of course). I know some Christians are into this. And I don’t buy creationism, any more than I buy literalism in any field of literature or endeavour.

If we’re really going to expand the proposition to capture all dangerous ideologies, I see no reason to limit it to religious or theistic ideologies. After reading the posts of some of the socialists online, I find them pretty alarming and not very inclined to listen or reason. I say the same about some atheists. It’s just that neither socialists nor atheists have a lot of influence at present, so they cannot be regarded as an immediate threat.

Pax,

I think this is more on the mark

'"In view of the global experience with secular humanism, and assuming that Australians cannot be guaranteed to remain immune from the worst aspects of secular humanism indefinitely, it makes sense to be cautious about the possibility of a virulent, aggressive, imperialistic strain of secular humanism occurring in Australia." Children, the elderly and the unborn are not safe.

Paul.L: "The fact that Islamic fundamentalists have had some of their requests knocked back is not to the point"

Firstly, who says they were "Islamic fundamentalists"? As an atheist, I wouldn't regard a request for allowances for prayer time from any religionist as fundamentalist - rather, in the context of a secular institution I would regard any request for religious consideration as irrelevant and therefore unworthy of approval. Nothing to do with fundamentalism, everything to do with rationalism.

"You suggested that the requests themselves were somehow bogus"

No I didn't. They were undoubtedly genuine, but that doesn't in itself confer a good enough argument.

We have more to be worried about in the insidious Christianisation of many of our State institutions.

goodthief: "If we’re really going to expand the proposition to capture all dangerous ideologies, I see no reason to limit it to religious or theistic ideologies"

In which case it is, of course, a nonsense. You can't ban ideologies (among which I include religions) - they either take off and succeed amongst the populace or they don't. Of course, there's often a lot of breast beating and bloodshed along the way.

Which is of course why none of them deserve special dispensations from the State.

CJ.. I left ? :) I rather think that when I depart for a while its like a breath of fresh air for but now I know... YOU MISS ME! (sniff)....

Throwing stones at you in other threads? I throw them at you in ALL threads.. and why? Well..in this case, you fail to see any important difference between Christianity and Islam, and you lump all religions in to the "Danger" basket. You could have done a bit of homework, and discovered that the New Testament has no concept of an earthly Christian 'State' and that immediately would have unblinded you from at least one bit of bias. You could have qualified your amended statement with "Though clearly Islam, being a 'State' as much as a religion is by far more dangerous" ..then you would have had 'balance'.

So, until you DO attain a level of balance in your posts, you need more metaphorical rocks thrown at you to wake you up. (as does Peril)

*sigh* Pericles.. yes.. MEL-BOURNE.. in VIC-TORIA in AUS-TRALIA
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,20544457-2,00.html?from=rss

GoodThief... CJ has been working too hard, (setting up timetables) and he cannot actually grasp such a fundamental idea as 'difference between religion' so.. lets just wish him well and a good rest.. maybe after the trauma of Easter, his mind will begin functioning again :)