Do you remember Pope Benedict's discussion at the obscure university in Germany when he reiterated a historical conversation. And the violent reactions it caused.

Benedict dug up an obscure 14th-century dialogue between a long-forgotten Byzantine Christian emperor, Manuel II Paleologus, and a Persian scholar, about the concept of violence in Islam.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”[3] The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably (σὺν λόγω) is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...".[4]
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html
http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1897119,00.html
http://www.religionnews.com/2014/09/10/regensburg-redux-pope-benedict-xvi-right-islam-analysis/

Constance,
It's my contention that this "soulless secularism" is anything but secular and that the Brahmin caste (you call them the Latte set) are trying to govern using their own peculiar belief system or theology, often called "political correctness" or "moral relativism".
Concepts such as equality and human rights are based on beliefs, not science, science only shows us difference and inequality, nature doesn't do equality. Leaving biology to one side the attitudes, worldview and customs which mark out the different ethnic groups and nations are enduring and seemingly irreversible even among assimilated third and fourth generation communities so the idea that a melting pot is possible at all let alone of benefit to the majority is nothing but an article of faith.
The academies and schools of thought of the Brahmin castes are also producing young people who are as dogmatic, fanatical and intolerant as the graduates of a Madrassa, this article sums it up:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9376232/free-speech-is-so-last-century-todays-students-want-the-right-to-be-comfortable/

Jay,

I don’t know why you insist on calling them Brahmin Caste. They ain’t Hindu and are nowhere near religious.

Did you get it from Trotsky?

“Trotskyism uses the term caste rather than class, because it sees the Soviet Union as a degenerated workers' state, not a new class society. “

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmin Brahmin (also called Brahmana) is a varna in Vedic Hinduism and also a caste of people who are members of it. Members are subdivided into numerous communities known as gotras. They are traditionally priests, artists, teachers and technicians.

It is not the priests, artists, teachers or technicians as I think they are all being undermined. Gosh, they are against priests and anyone who is a free thinker. Why can’t you accept it as just plain old Elitisism. Which include firstly, lawyers, journalists, bureaucrats and their lackies who have been indoctrinated - who use the unspoken ruse of emotional blackmail of moral relativism and political correctness. They are only concerned with themselves and their own social status.

Political correctness after all is a Communist ploy or party trick.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
“The term “politically correct” was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.”

Cont....

….Cont

Therefore in the Western world we now have Beaujolais Bolsheviks, Chardonnay Socialists etc who have become the Elitists.

I have previously named some certain females on this forum, Stepford sisters or wives. These people are like robots and always predictable. The supposedly university educated. They’ve been brainwashed by the Marxist academics and are totally intolerant of free thought. I find them very scary.

Yes, they are not much different to the Islamic Madrassas.

Then you have the irony that this extreme Secularism has become a religion in itself.

I beg to differ with you calling them Brahmins as I consider seeing these so called progressives/liberals/elitists have Communist roots, it is these very zealots of Secularism/Atheism who are creating great injustices to society. Communism after all was all about Atheism and took a staunch anti-religion, especially Catholic stance. And there still seems to be a lot of anti Catholicism about. Why is Abbott so hated and ridiculed? Is it his religion? People go all juvenile about him and take to nasty personal attacking. The diehard Labor supporters act like it’s a footy game.

I have said all this before on the forum.

Gee, Constance for a good Christian you're sure adept at spitting venom in all directions.

What part of Christ's message do you most admire?

(Just wondering:)

Constance,

"I have previously named some certain females on this forum, Stepford sisters or wives. These people are like robots and always predictable. The supposedly university educated. They’ve been brainwashed by the Marxist academics and are totally intolerant of free thought. I find them very scary."

Wonderful!...and (if I may make the observation)....always predictable.

After you've regaled us with the bits of Christ's message you find most inspiring - perhaps you'll wax more fulsomely on why you consider your rancid rants to be an example of "free thought".

Look forward to it : )