http://www.islamonline.org/English/N...rticle04.shtml
Well, what do you guys think? I see this as one step closer to Eurabia. What's your opinion?
Printable View
http://www.islamonline.org/English/N...rticle04.shtml
Well, what do you guys think? I see this as one step closer to Eurabia. What's your opinion?
Nothing new. Denmark also has a paragraph (§) about blasphemy and a racism paragraph. people have been convicted for both. that's why it is not called unlimited freedom of speech, but freedom of speech within the framework of the legislation. You are simply not allowed to say _whatever_ you want, I believe the same is true in USA, for example insulting the president or threating anyone. Illegal - does it conflict with FoS, I do not think so.
Exactly that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin
I have come up with the question right now : Being Europeans or Americans or Canadian etc. do you think unawareness of Islam in your societies before 9/11 disaster has any contribution into this "booming , flashing and burning" relations between ? Or am I wrong about the unawareness part ?
Same here in Germany - the laws existed for a long time and ahev nothing to do with "Eurabia" or IslamQuote:
Originally Posted by Sjakihata
Yup. Untill 9/11 those that now so religiously defend 'freedom of speech' would prosecute you for saying anything bad about islamic culture and immigration in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine
Not really. Looking at the recent history of "Islamic" terrorism (please don't take offense, because i know that this is done by ass holes and not people of true faith, disclaimer ended) many took notice of the booming, flashing, and burning long before 911. Look, again no offense, but Islam and Western society has many differences. And at that point so does many other Faiths with Western thought, but their is indeed a larger gap between Islam and the West.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine
I don't like this law. I think its the endorcement of a religion which a secular society, such as most European countries, should not do. With the European lack of testicular fortitude, it will be only a matter time before radical elements of Islam will gain a strong footing within the European theater.
What is relevent is that Norway had an old law from the 1930's that outlawed blasphemy, but was never used since the war. This is a clear signal that criticising, let alone ridiculing a religion in Norwaywill be very difficult from now on. Worldly convictions such as mine may of course be ridiculed, as always. Obviously this law only protects superst... religious sensitivities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sjakihata
Shame on Norway's parliament. :no:
Wow AdrianII, you are catching up on this game pretty fast, now can I as an anti-immigration barbarian please feel sorry for myselve?Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
No, because you hate immigrants and promote irrational views bordering on fascism. That is inexcusable. Wash your mouth, put on a decent shirt with no racist slogans on it, and we may do business if you keep behaving.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Thought so.. :no:
Adrian, do you reckon that will apply to valid criticism too?Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
Like the association of "honour killings" with Islamic immigrant groups; rampant homophia within said groups; calls for destruction of western society by elements within these groups etc.?
Nice to see censorship being done for a productive reason this time. As opposed to censoring thoughts about "homosexuality" - which is usually the case when censorship comes up - at least this time the censorship is for a good cause. For that reason for the sake of providing some balance to the censorship madness which has already been happening elsewhere, I say thumbs up to this new censorship. :2thumbsup:
You guys shouldn't worry about the western countries, and the (atheist) europeans living in them. You should worry about the muslims. Eventually things will go out of hand and these people will suffer the consequances, such deportation. Oil will run out in the middle east and these people will be have to go back to even more poverty.
The law is fine in theory but this bothers me:
There is nothing wrong with a little general mocking. Under this law Dave Allen would have spent much of his adult life in jail. (He was an Irish Comic who made a lot of fun of the Catholic Church, very funny too)Quote:
and clearly prohibits despising others or lampooning religions in any form of expression, including the use of photographs
If it is inexcusable they should stop giving me excuses. I don't hate them mind you, I hate the politicians that screw everything up because they feel that good intentions are a quality of it's own. I am a child of the seventies mia muca.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
The future will tell. I don't think calls for terrorism, honour killings or violence against homosexuals will be judged more lightly in Norway. On the other hand, I do think it will become more difficult to address the endemic homophobia and misoginy in much of Islam (and in Catholicism and other religions which are also protected by this law).Quote:
Originally Posted by Taffy_is_a_Taff
I think we need to file Socialism as a religion from now on. The moment some imam or bishop says anything 'offensive' about Karl Marx or Proudhon, slam! :laugh4:
Well, there you have it. 'Oh, but this is nothing new!' they say. You bet it is. It is not the end of free speech, not by a long stretch. It is not even the beginning of the end of free speech. But it is the beginning of a tenacious and at times very tedious and irritating rearguard fight. The first victims of this trend are independent Muslims, ex-Muslims, half-Muslims and 'cultural Muslims' in Europe, some of whom have fled the theocratic hell-holes of the Islamic world only to see the same fanatic idiots popping up on their doorstep in Berlin, London or Verona. I know a few of them. They have a good mind to set fire to mosques, I tell you. Which they won't do, because they are civilised (and because they are my friends for a reason, haha).Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall
Not the proper Islam?? Why label the followers who are violent as "not proper" Muslims? The Quran preaches many times that unbelievers should die and that True Muslims are should not even talk to them! Far more focuses on killing than it does on being nice to small animals for example.
What about "not PC Islam" or "not modern Islam", or "Islam as we wished it was"?
There apears to be no "new testament" in the new bible to explain away the other parts. The Quran tell Muslims straight from God's mouth that killing carte blanche is allowed.
~:smoking:
Source please.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Al this stuff is just small but vocal religious groups (muzzas and xtos), political extremists (fascists and xenophobes) and the media getting together for a big circle jerk.
The rest of us just get on with our lives.
Ach, I must muster my merry band of men to make our opposition to this apology clear... Freedom of Speech! Freedom of Speech!
Linky I recommend clicking on "Intolerance"Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
The quran.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Good source that. Nice one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Malcolm
Pretty much sticks it to all the books.
Quote:
Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
so do you think norway will be the first islamic europeans? or are you just gonna let in the turks.:laugh4:
any way i need to ask is there a single muslim country out there that does have free speech?
mabey norway should do to the muslims what China did. nice chinese muslims, quite oppressed, never bother anyone...
My point was that this sort of law does not help the Muslim immagrants assimulate into thier new countries, it only segregates them more. I believe this will only assist the more radical elements of Islam be shielded from criticism and survalience. All over cartoons, amazing.:no:
Laws banning blasphemy are about the stupidest things I could possibly think of (and I think of a lot of stupid things), so I say the following in protest of any of these proposed or existing laws:
Jesus was a wimp, Mohammed was a diddler, Buddha was a fat bastard, Confuscious didn't know what the hell he was talking about, and Yahweh is a mean, spiteful old bugger.
And one other thing: if Muslims want us to be more sympathetic to their feelings, maybe they should stop referring to the rest of the world as "infidels."
This is not blasphemy, in the sense that you would be convicted for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
What a ridiculous law. Aside from the freedom of speech issue, how can you ban blasphemy in general? I'm fairly sure that most religions believe things that other religions find blasphemous. Are we going to find Christians prosecuted for blasphemy against Islam by preaching that Jesus was the son of God, or vice versa?
About the Koran, there's a special exemption for Christians and Jews, we're not Infidels because we worship Allah.
Perhaps not convicted, but if I hung that on a sign in the front of my house it would probably be enough to eventually get me murdered...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sjakihata
Yes, a few of my good friends are Muslims. However, unlike Turkey (my favorite muslim nation, has some of the best food at least) et cetera, they do not constitute even a considerable percentage of the population and no special legislation should exist to honor them. That goes against equality, there should be NO special laws for different religions and all, laws and crap should be universal. I didn't read the article yet, but I suggest all Europeans pack up and move to Taiwan.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine
That explains your post... :shifty:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser of Arabia
Anything pretty much goes over here. Not quite sure how you got the impression that 'insulting the president' is a crime over here. Our jails would be bursting at the seams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sjakihata
Read over the article. Nothing really interesting. Let's get a debate on illegal immigration or racial profiling going, that'd be fun (and firey)
Apologizing is a two-way street, and it's nice to see a few private muslims expressing their sorrow at what's going on.
What the hell, that SAQ website :dizzy2:
Way to go on partial translations and butchery of the quran there. It does sound like a humourus take on the religious books though.
So if you have a thought system that tacks on the term religion it gets the following benefits:
1) It is not allowed to be made fun of.
2) It is not allowed to be critically examined.
3) It can call blasphemy on another thought system that opposes its beliefs and does not have the political clout or does not have the religion appendage.
4) It can be racist or homophobic or criminal or murderous but that is okay because it has the religion tag.
5) It also gets tax exemptions.
All of the above have been seen one time or another when religous groups have been treated with a special reverance above and beyond other groups.
Is evolution taught in Norwegian schools? Are innocent religious children subjected to this?
OMG OHNOES TEH EVOLUTIONZ! lol I win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
I'm going to start a religion.
:2thumbsup:
it'll be beautiful:laugh4:
except if you disagree with me...
:skull:
Why don't the European nations just make a laws that will prevents people from making public statements and publications which may contain elements that would provoke or promote religious and racial intolerance?:idea2: It would be sensible then introducing religious law of any specific group.:shame:
so that would be banning all but the most mundane speech then...Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaLurker
The same here, and as far as I know all Latin America.:idea2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
Tried that in the UK, didn't work, Blair lost by one vote, his.Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaLurker
You should have leeway when talking about religion because unlike race you are dealing with an intangible belief system and you should be able to question other's beliefs.
If we did, we would have to ban all religions first. Capice?Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaLurker
no way, it is my right to chose my beliefs (and burn if i must) and to mock each and every god for the fun of it:idea2: .
You don't have the right to mock people for the fun of it but you do have the right to question something seriously.
Doesn't Britain still have a blasmaphy law?
Which is clearly used a lot...
The basics of Islamic laws are not much different from other religious laws. They give instructions on how to live and protects the powerstructure within the religion itself.
Europe are trying to find a compromise to co-exist with Islam, US don't. The right solution is somewhere in the middle. It is hard to compromise with Islam as well as it's impossible to confront it and win without genocide.
The laws on blasmephy is merely a small unimportant part of the whole discussion. There are many other issues that are more important and less easy. In the end, I believe that Europe will be accomodating a new more secular version of Islam which will benefit Europeans as well as muslims....
Have you ever visited the US?Quote:
Originally Posted by bmolsson
You know, of all this, I find it hilariously ironic that my Muslim friend seems to be absolutely unaware of the "crisis" in Europe-Middle East relations due to the cute cartoons from the best cookiemakers of the world and malicious will on the Danish Imams' (read: arseholes and basically traitors) part. I had tried to probe in a little bit to check and perhaps raise his awareness, but had to be careful not to insult Islam in the process and unnecessarily breach the friendship. Therefore, he, I believe, remains unaware that his religion, according to the far-righters of the world, is about to engulf Europe.
But hey, this is America. We don't care about anyone else; sometimes this can be good.
He has the right to attain and maintain anything he desires so long as he can.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall
I read you, Brother Molsson, and I share your hope. Although I think the word genocide is unnecessarily heavy in the context. And the U.S. is getting a bit of a bad rap in your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmolsson
What Americans don't realise is that until the 1990's Islam was not a political rallying-point for immigrants in Europe. I remember the organisations of immigrants in the 1970's and 1980's -- they were all purely political, divided between left and right, and focused on their nation of origin. They didn't look to Mecca, and there was nothing resembling the elusive Internet-Islam that inspires young western Muslims to radicalise these days.
Only in the 1990's Islam began to be heavily politicised because of the islamist 'victories' in Iran and Sudan, the preaching of the Egyptian Brotherhood and the Pakistani Mawdudi-followers, the global network of well-financed Saudi Wahhabi madrassas, the outside financing of Hamas that gradually 'islamicised' the Palestinian cause, etcetera.
Due to these developments, we are now looking at an interesting 'grid' so to speak. The columns are Europe and the Islamic world, the rows are secularism and islamism.
In Europe, the first row consists of radical or pietistic Muslim immigrants who allow themselves to be inspired by outside forces from the Middle East and Asia. The second row consists of (ex-)Muslim immigrants who want to live in a secular society and who respect democracy (and who stand up for it as well). Among the latter we find the largest Turkish islamic organisation in The Netherlands, the leader of which, Hari Karacaer, has recently stated that Islamic culture is totally primitive and has a five-hundred year backlog of social and intellectual development to catch up on.
In the Islamic world the division is the same, although the circumstances and political shades are widely divergent of course.
The fascinating thing about this grid is that while the pious Muslims in Europe are looking to the Middle East and Asia for inspiration, the secularist groups in the Islamic world are looking to Europe for inspiration. So the apparent 'closing of ranks' in East and West, symbolised by the idiotic row over a cartoon, is concealing a very real 'breaking of ranks' among Muslims in East and West.
A German journalist wrote an interesting piece last week in which he stated that the anti-European sentiment that is now being orchestrated by Middle-Eastern governments reflects their fear of being gradually infiltrated and undermined by this democratic European Islam which is imported by returnig migrants and exchange students, books, newspapers, media images, cultural intermingling (yes, think of Haifa or Natacha Atlas), etcetera.
The hundred dollar question for me is whether Islam has the force to reform itself, or the capacity to be reformed by these outside forces. I think the answer is that no, it has no inner drive or capacity to reform, but yes, it can be reformed under outside influence and the pressure of circumstance. European political and cultural intervention are mainly fulfilling the former role at the moment, they provide the impetus for islamic reform both in Europe and in the Islamic world. The U.S. is fulfilling the latter role of putting pressure on islamic leaders and countries and providing some stark choices and coercive circumstances for them.
But Europe is certainly the main intellectual battleground in this fight, and it will be a while before this battle is won.
I do not believe that you can force reformation upon a religion. You may influence its financial backers politically, but a religion itself must be reformed from within. Otherwise what is the point?
As it is now it is just no use, dialogue with islam is like talking sense to your woman; we don't think alike and that is why we can't communicate. In Europe you can mock the believes, but not the person, and with muslims it is the other way around. It just goes in circles.
I understand, and I don't want to give the impression this is all clear-cut and simple to me. But I have been influenced by reading Sadik al-Azm, a modern Syrian philosopher who was one of the few Muslim thinkers to oppose the Rushdie hysteria at the time. In an essay called Islam and secularisation (not available on the Web as far as I know) he states that Islam has gone through many religious and political changes under the influence of circumstance and outside pressure. And this from the earliest days on. The 'simple', egalitarian early Islam was not suited to its own expansion, which lead to the conquest of huge empires that had to be run on complex principles and required a hereditary caliphate. Islam adapted very fast to those new circumstances and teh hereditary caliphate lasted till Ataturk put an end to it. In the same way it went through considerable changes after the Napoleanic occupation of Egypt, and again at the end of the nineteenth century under the influence of colonialism and imperisliam. The doctrine always says NO to any change, but daily practice always says YES and doctrine follows reality, according to Sadik al-Azm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyspy
So doctrine is not the engine for change, but it can be geared to change by outside forces. Migration is a powerful force in today's world. Hence my views above. I am open to suggestion though.
Here is a US academic paper on Islamic Reformation:
http://www.cesnur.org/2004/waco_mcdaniel.htm
The author seems to be saying: "Don't hold your breath waiting for the secularization of Islam."
So, is there anything any non-Muslim can do to bring on the liberalisation of Islam, or must it be internal - a Martin Luther moment?
**looks outside and does not see Muslims burning cars, rioting, burning down buildings, etc**Quote:
Originally Posted by bmolsson
**looks at CNN and sees Muslims burning cars, rioting, burning down buildings in Europe**
Interesting. Does co-existing with Muslims means "burning cars, rioting, burning down buildings" because if it is then we must not be co-existing with the Muslims here in the States as well as our tolerant European friends.:laugh4:
Dave, this might be something of a shock, but CNN isn't a reflection af all Europe... :fainting:
~:smoking:
No, my point was that bmolsson made the statement that the US has not found a way to co-exist with Islam unlike Europe which is making the attempt yo comprimise. Well the US isn't having the riots and burnings that Europe is having and you can find that on CNN, BBC, or where ever the hell you want to look for your news. Smoke that.~:smoking:Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
And that is why you see burning cars here in soon to become Eurabia. European leaders never miss a chance to suck up on our muslim communities, madness if you ask me. The last thing you should do when dealing with violent cultures is showing weakness but our leaders are just civil servants that like to play politician. When the shit hits the fan they just look away and continue to pretend they disagree, and afterwards those that so fiercily debated unimportant details smoke a few cigars in the salon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave
Errm..No. The US actually treats its muslims much better than European nations and is more compromising. While their image has taken a hit with the invasions and deaths, Abu Ghraib, and other scandals, muslims and Islam IN the US are much better off and much better tolerated than in Europe.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmolsson
Muslims in the US are generally well to do, and have much lower crime rates than the average of the US, while muslims in Europe are largely poor, confined in ghettos, victims of institutionalized racism to a degree, and have higher rates of crime. The American populace also has a much more favorable opinion of Islam and Muslims than the Europeans do.
Say what you want about the US government, policy, media, etc... they all suck, but the American people are still some of the nicest you'll find on the planet...
It's obvious that religion is exempt from criticism from its practitioners. And they want to include non-practitioners as well. :no: :skull:
1) Including the Flying Spaghetti Monster? :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.islamonline.org/English/News/2006-02/15/article04.shtml
2) Religion X has a set of arbitrary and questionable rules that cannot be changed EVER. That's degenerate.
WE don't want to follow these baseless rules! It's called Freedom of Expression!!
Pointless arguing. The latinos are treated much better in Europe than in the US. It's related to the size of the community. I don't know how large is the latinos community in the US, but I'd say larger than 10%, just like there's more than 10% muslims inhabitants in France.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenk Roink
Ask the ghetto-ised black and latinos if they think white americans are that nice. I'm fairly sure their answer will be 'they're racist, they treat us like shit'. Ask the european ghetto-ised arab/turks, and they'll likely have the same feeling.
Another point is that the American culture is quite open to religions, while most europeans think that religion is either a, a waste of time or b, a total crap. We've been fighting our way until the achievement of a secularized state, and we see people who think their (foreign) religion is more important than everything else. Obviously, these 2 points of view can't get along.
That sums it up. And another aspect is that in most Muslim countries the U.S. is hated outright and has an image much worse than the European image. Hence '9/11' and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
We can discuss these issues. Or we can descend to the Dev Dave level of going 'Your cars are burning! No, your Twin Towers are burning! Nja nja nananjaa!'
I know what I prefer. :mellow:
Muslims are either the second largest religious group in America, or are in the passing lane of Jews...Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
My "pointless arguing" was against the notion the Europe is somehow more welcoming to Muslims and Islam than America. It is not. And I'm talking about certain countries in particular, others like Spain, are quite tolerant of their muslim minorities.
But I digress...or is it you? :huh:
Yep, you hit the nail on the head with that one...Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
Oh poop... :sad: I bolded and italicized that word for nothing... :no:Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
That sums up nothing. In America anyone's welcome who generates some money. The entire country was made of immigrants, so we don't suffer from the same cultural and ethnic vanity you all do.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
There's nothing multicultural about America. We have one culture, which is work hard and make money. Anyone may feel free to apply. Comparing the two groups is silly. Latinos are integrating the same slow way the Italians did way back when. They're not trying to rewrite our Constitution, either.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...24ABD29218.htm
There are about 5 million Muslims in the United States, nearly half of whom are African American Muslims, in other words: Muslims who were born and raised in the U.S. and fully imbibed its culture. Between 17 and 30 percent of American Muslims are only recent converts to the faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenk Roink
Immigration from Muslim countries to the U.S. has long been restricted. Until the 1980's the trickle of Muslim immigrants who made it through were on average much higher educated than Muslim immigrants in Europe because that was the main immigration requirement since Johnson scrapped the country of origin quotas.
Once in the U.S. these Muslim immigrants encountered such discrimination that they often changed their names and scrapped any practices that made them appear 'different'. It is only recently that Muslims in the U.S. make themselves heard as such, and many of their demands are similar to those of pious Muslims in Europe.
Really, the whole notion of the U.S. being more favourable to Muslim immigrants (and particularly conducive to reform of Islam) than Europe falls apart on closer inspection.
Of course these are only facts.
The first paragraph has facts in it...maybe the second, but I'll have to confirm that...Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
The rest and especially the last, who are you trying to kid...?
And remember, In Spain, after the Madrid bombings, a fatwa was released declaring Bin Laden an apostate (very hard to do in Islam), and since it was a time of war, the fatwa called for :hanged:.
I guess the show of solidarity by the people helped the Muslim organizations see that they were welcomed, and that Bin Laden wasn't fighting for the muslims...or Islam.
Just curious, why did your governments let all the morons in, then? Sounds like Fragony had it right with his description of self-righteous officiousness from your politicians.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
Forget, it, it's game, set and match. And the whole thing has nothing to do with fatwa's in Spain. Your must be mixing up your posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenk Roink
They were let in because they were needed as labourers. And they were (or are) not morons. Maybe your language reflects current American attitudes towards Latinos?Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletariat
No, I work side by side with quite a few Latinos and Muslims and I'm not a labourer. :shrug: You brought up the difference between our 'sophisticated' Muslims and the ones immigrating to your continent.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
No it's not...Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
Europeans are generally more intolerant of Muslims than Americans...
Muslims in America have better lives than in Europe...
Now, I'll break down your post...
There were around 3 million - 7 million muslims in America as of 2001. The 3 million figure coming from the Kosmin study, which is a survey aimed at finding the Jewish population of America. The 7 million figure comes from the ambassador to Pakistan, Millam.
As for the percentage of African American muslims, this ranges from less than a third (according to Yvonne Haddad and Adair Lummis who state that 2/3 of American Muslims are immigrants or direct descendants...) to 42%, as given by the American Muslim Council.
What is this BS about horrible discrimination that muslims changed their name or what not? Can you even find an anecdote?
And of course:
"Really, the whole notion of the U.S. being more favourable to Muslim immigrants (and particularly conducive to reform of Islam) than Europe falls apart on closer inspection."
This is your thesis (which you presume to be a fact). It is incorrect.
Here is a poll which compares American dislike of Latinos and Blacks, to some European dislike of people in muslim countries:
https://img471.imageshack.us/img471/6784/views9vy.gif
Heh, I could swear that some of your adjectives to describe muslims (aside from the fact that you seem to enjoy posting offensive cartoons directed at them) would reflect your attitude towards muslims...Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
To be continued...
LOL. All your numbers just confirm what I wrote. Game, set and match.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenk Roink
Just as I thought, another own goal. This 'BS' comes from your own government, Roink, just like the numbers I quoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenk Roink
Read here.
Then maybe Proletariat is not the navel of the universe after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletariat
Poverty levels of Hispanic Americans (HA), on average, are twice as high as whites. 60% of all families are headed by a female, 40% of these females don't have a high school diploma. Only about 6% of the population attend college. In terms of earnings HA average is about 60% of the white income average. HA live in segregated communities, but they are also a highly mobile group. An individual may have multiple addresses, children live with another family with a different name, 'latchkey' children are common.
HA homes are burglarised 25 times the Anglo-Saxon rate. They are the most difficult group to involve in community policing. HA have one of the highets fertility rates on earth, housing tends to be overcrowded, trends and forecasts in population growth are due to fertility and not illegal immigration. Because of their low levels of education, bilingual education was introduced specially for them. HA are politically underrepresented at all levels of goverment. Less than 20% of them are registered to vote. American culture is replete with negative stereotypes about HA. They are portrayed as lazy, shiftless, lawless, thieving, immoral, or violent.
Sounds a lot like the 'morons' (your terminology) whom the Europeans let in from Turkey, the Middle East and Northern Africa, dont it?
Now can we cut the crap and recognise that Europe and the U.S. have similar immigration issues and that maybe, just maybe we can learn a little from each other?
Ahh, so I finally see the game you play II. Lets just look at numbers and ignore these:Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
Europeans are generally more intolerant of Muslims than Americans...
Muslims in America have better lives than in Europe...
But I'll indulge you in your flawed conclusions...
As for this:
Coudn't you just give me this part II?:Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
Interesting...Quote:
Seldom, however, did Muslims find life in America to be easy. The United States is often said to be "a nation of immigrants," a "melting pot" for all races and ethnic identities, but racial prejudice, particularly in the era before the civil rights movement of the 1960s, certainly existed.
For many years, then, the response of many Muslim immigrants was to attempt to hide their religious and ethnic identities, to change their names to make them sound more American, and to refrain from participating in practices or adopting dress that would make them appear "different" from the average citizen. Gradually, as the Muslim immigrant community became much larger, much more diversified, much better educated, and much more articulate about its own self-understanding, attempts to blend into American society have given way to more sophisticated discussions about the importance of living in America but, at the same time, retaining a sense of one's own religious culture. Part of the context for such discussions has come from the formation of Muslim communities, Sunni and Shi'ite, across rural and urban America, and in more recent years of national Islamic organizations representing religious, political, professional, and social forms of association.
Lets look at this part from the same document:
Racism was dwindling then, so I doubt that the recent muslim immigrants (by far the bulk of the current populations) faced this...Quote:
The fourth and most recent wave of Muslim immigration has come after 1965, the year President Lyndon Johnson sponsored an immigration bill that repealed the longstanding system of quotas by national origin. Under the new system, preferences went to relatives of U.S. residents and those with special occupational skills needed in the United States. The new law was a signal act in American history, making it possible for the first time since the early part of the 20th century for someone to enter the country regardless of his or her national origin. After 1965, immigration from Western Europe began to decline significantly, with a corresponding growth in the numbers of persons arriving from the Middle East and Asia. In this era more than half of the immigrants to America from these regions have been Muslim.
But please try to stay in the present II. As I've said many times before:
Europeans are generally more intolerant of Muslims than Americans...
Muslims in America have better lives than in Europe...
Think about it, immigrant muslims in Denmark have to shipped back home to be buried but dogs have their own cemetery...
In America, there are laws prohibiting discrimination in work or jobs related to race, religion, etc..., not in Denmark...
And yet the American populous tends to think more highly of Hispanics than the Germans of Turks, or French of North Africans...Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
https://img471.imageshack.us/img471/6784/views9vy.gif
And like I've stated before, these anti Muslim sentiments are smelling awfully like anti-Semetic sentiments:
In the 1930s the Danish government was sending German Jews and members of the Communist Party back to Germany if they could not make enough money to support themselves. Now with this new proposal, the same rules are coming back to hit the immigrants of today. A refugee or an immigrant who wants his wife to come to Denmark must prove to the authorities that he earns enough money to support two people, he must be over 24 years of age and must prove that he has stronger "bonds" to Denmark than the country he fled from. It is common for a family that flees for the husband to go first, and then he can get the rest of the family out later. It is clearly a cruel proposal that will let people be tortured, brutally oppressed and even left to die.
Man if the mexicans here were to riot we would see the same thing probably worse. Adrian is right the USA has its problems as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenk Roink
Ermm.. These polls were taken much before the cartoon incident, or the riots in France...Quote:
Originally Posted by strike for the south
Check Pew Global Attitudes...
I'd imagine they'd be lower now...