Find me a home (now focusing on biblical Israel & the talmud)

[HoreTore]

Okay I might be wrong.

But post a link as a prove please.
Because as far as I recall many people are Agnostic and not pure Atheists and there is a clear difference. I find it hard to belive that more then 10% are real Atheists in any of the european countries.

Whatever. The point was not religious, more specifically, not christian. There is a clear difference between agnosticism and atheism, but there's a clear difference between being agnostic or atheist and being religious too.

And I don't have any linkys, sorry, I read my news the proper way; from a newspaper. None of this newfangled "interwebs" nonsense for me!

[Fixiwee]

Whatever. The point was not religious, more specifically, not christian. There is a clear difference between agnosticism and atheism, but there's a clear difference between being agnostic or atheist and being religious too.

Okay. But the argument was that this state of religiousness is enabling the growth of muslim minorities.
And I don't see a connection here.

And I don't have any linkys, sorry, I read my news the proper way; from a newspaper. None of this newfangled "interwebs" nonsense for me!

Well then I simply wont belive you, my good sir.

[HoreTore]

Okay. But the argument was that this state of religiousness is enabling the growth of muslim minorities.

I wouldn't worry about that. Forget all the whining, there are still no more than 80.000 muslims in this country(pop:4,8 mill). I think it'll be quite some time before they're running the show....

The real problem, is that when people hear "immigrant", they immediately think "muslim". Even worse when it's "non-western immigrant". Of course forgetting the fact that christian eastern europe(including Russia), communist china and other eastern asian states, hindu india, christian south america and largely christian africa are all included in the term "non-western"...

[LittleGrizzly]

Sorry what I meant was the drift from christianity to atheism (or agnostic) means that in comparison to the major religious group (christianity) muslim grows quickly... quicker than the influx of muslim immigrants and birth of muslim children

And this drift from christianity is likely to continue... meaning predictions of muslims being the major group aren't all that meaningful when you consider that the christian group combined with atheists and agnostics shall still be larger..

Unless your afriad of atheists and agnosts as well as muslims..

Personally i don't see the threat, sure a portion of them have some unfavourable views but they are a minority among thier own in our countrys as well as thier own being a minority this makes them pretty unthreatening...

Also the whole british sharia law thing is overblown, they only use iot if both parties agree and then it still has to fall within british law perfectly reasonable... and im fairly sure its something we have done for other faiths also..

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Also the whole british sharia law thing is overblown, they only use iot if both parties agree and then it still has to fall within british law perfectly reasonable... and im fairly sure its something we have done for other faiths also..

The point is that it isn't reasonable, it isn't overblown. Not only has Sharia actually been introduced, but about the problems with it...let's just say so much for caring about women's rights from [certain viewpoints in the political spectrum that are on the other side of my own]...

[Meneldil]

Sharia law in a secular country should be no means be allowed. It's a shame for UK, period.

You would have guessed they would have learnt their lesson after offering shelter to all the muslim terrorist plaguing europe ten years ago, but it looks like no

[Banquo's Ghost]

Sharia law in a secular country should be no means be allowed. It's a shame for UK, period.

You would have guessed they would have learnt their lesson after offering shelter to all the muslim terrorist plaguing europe ten years ago, but it looks like no

Firstly, the United Kingdom is not a secular country. The head of state is also the head of the Church of England, and bishops sit in the legislature (House of Lords).

Second, we addressed EMFM's point last year in a long thread. The Sharia tribunals deal with parties that both agree to the arbitration and there have been exactly similar tribunals for the Jewish faith for many years.

I'm interested to know why there hasn't been a equivalent wave of outrage and pessimism at the recent brazen attempt by the Roman Catholics to subvert the fabric of state, by insidiously persuading the Prime Minister to overturn the Act of Settlement and thus allow papists to marry into the monarchy without affecting their right of succession. And they have terrorists, not to mention they breed faster and there's increasing numbers of 'em.

Now that's an alien religion's power grab.

[Yoyoma1910]

Firstly, the United Kingdom is not a secular country. The head of state is also the head of the Church of England, and bishops sit in the legislature (House of Lords).

Second, we addressed EMFM's point last year in a long thread. The Sharia tribunals deal with parties that both agree to the arbitration and there have been exactly similar tribunals for the Jewish faith for many years.

I'm interested to know why there hasn't been a equivalent wave of outrage and pessimism at the recent brazen attempt by the Roman Catholics to subvert the fabric of state, by insidiously persuading the Prime Minister to overturn the Act of Settlement and thus allow papists to marry into the monarchy without affecting their right of succession. And they have terrorists, not to mention they breed faster and there's increasing numbers of 'em.

Now that's an alien religion's power grab.

Yes, uh... I'll have the cake please.


And if you didn't bring enough, I suppose I'll have to go with the chicken.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Second, we addressed EMFM's point last year in a long thread. The Sharia tribunals deal with parties that both agree to the arbitration and there have been exactly similar tribunals for the Jewish faith for many years.

No, you did not address it. Two things were not:

A) The Jewish faith is not quite the same. For example, find me this in the Jewish faith: "GOD decrees a will for the benefit of your children; the male gets twice the share of the female." [4:11]
B) Discrimination against women, as pointed out above, leaves the result that women can be forced into this court instead of a secular court, in some or even many cases with disastrous consequences on their finances, family, or personal lives.

I'm interested to know why there hasn't been a equivalent wave of outrage and pessimism at the recent brazen attempt by the Roman Catholics to subvert the fabric of state, by insidiously persuading the Prime Minister to overturn the Act of Settlement and thus allow papists to marry into the monarchy without affecting their right of succession. And they have terrorists, not to mention they breed faster and there's increasing numbers of 'em.

A) We have terrorists?
B) Many Catholics, including myself and a priest who writes for the National Post, are against the move for various reasons.

[Incongruous]

Firstly, the United Kingdom is not a secular country. The head of state is also the head of the Church of England, and bishops sit in the legislature (House of Lords).

Second, we addressed EMFM's point last year in a long thread. The Sharia tribunals deal with parties that both agree to the arbitration and there have been exactly similar tribunals for the Jewish faith for many years.

I'm interested to know why there hasn't been a equivalent wave of outrage and pessimism at the recent brazen attempt by the Roman Catholics to subvert the fabric of state, by insidiously persuading the Prime Minister to overturn the Act of Settlement and thus allow papists to marry into the monarchy without affecting their right of succession. And they have terrorists, not to mention they breed faster and there's increasing numbers of 'em.

Now that's an alien religion's power grab.

Although I can see the worry about female Muslims being coerced into these tribunals by their male family memebers, and thus cheated out of their parents inheritnence. I do not see that as the driving force behind this dissaproval of the courts, rather I reckon it to be tribalism, the waving of women's right (in general) is nothing more than a stick for certain sectors of society to dash about, in the hope of stiring anti-muslim sentiment.

This of coarse does not dissavow the genuine fear that some women are going to get a bad turn of it in these courts. What should happen, though I doubt it will, is a very open and very public discourse on the Muslim faith and its role, if there is one, in Britain. Muslims must be able to acceot this scrutiny in order to assuage the widespread dislike and fear of thier community. But likewise those who appose them must be able to stop frothing at the mouth for a while and certain news outlets must stop printing sensationalist pap.

If this was allowed to happen, then we may be able to judge these courts with a more informed view?

Oh and BTW, I am so pleased that the one tru and universal Church has reclaimed England, once again may we all take communion togther whilst listening to the mass in Latin and giving a large tithe of national wealth yearly to the Holy See.

[Meneldil]

Firstly, the United Kingdom is not a secular country. The head of state is also the head of the Church of England, and bishops sit in the legislature (House of Lords).

Right, if we are to follow this line of thinking, France and Turkey are the only two european secular countries. Now, despite not being secular countries, most western european states kind of stated that civil law > religious law.
If you personnally think that it's okay to accept Sharia law in a democratic, progressive, liberal country, well then, let's agree to disagree ;)

Thanks for pointing out my error though, I too often tend to think that secularism is widely spread.

Second, we addressed EMFM's point last year in a long thread. The Sharia tribunals deal with parties that both agree to the arbitration and there have been exactly similar tribunals for the Jewish faith for many years.

I'm interested to know why there hasn't been a equivalent wave of outrage and pessimism at the recent brazen attempt by the Roman Catholics to subvert the fabric of state, by insidiously persuading the Prime Minister to overturn the Act of Settlement and thus allow papists to marry into the monarchy without affecting their right of succession. And they have terrorists, not to mention they breed faster and there's increasing numbers of 'em.

I don't really care about what religion we're talking about. People can practice their damn religion in private. Letting them use some outdated fairy tale book to make their own law should be a big no.

Oh, and cut the Royal family members' heads, or send them into exile. Monarchy ought to disappear with religion. Primogenitur is, as Tribesman pointed out, nothing but crap.

[InsaneApache]

The point is that it isn't reasonable, it isn't overblown. Not only has Sharia actually been introduced, but about the problems with it...let's just say so much for caring about women's rights from [certain viewpoints in the political spectrum that are on the other side of my own]...

Louis nailed it for the hypocritical left last year. Race/Religion trumps gender everytime.

We should all be ashamed at this.

[LittleGrizzly]

Not only has Sharia actually been introduced, but about the problems with it...let's just say so much for caring about women's rights from

They still have to wrok within British Law, British law doesn't allow discrimination...