Login |
New User
Books
Read the 1st Chapter!
The Greatest Show On Earth: The Evidence For Evolution
The God Delusion
Over 1.5 million copies sold
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mount Improbable
by Richard Dawkins
Print
Young, British Muslims 'getting more radical'
by Graeme Wilson, Telegraph
Reposted from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/29/nmuslims29.xml
A bleak picture of a generation of young British Muslims radicalised by anti-Western views and misplaced multicultural policies is shown in a survey published today.
The study found disturbing evidence of young Muslims adopting more fundamentalist beliefs on key social and political issues than their parents or grandparents.
Forty per cent of Muslims between the ages of 16 and 24 said they would prefer to live under sharia law in Britain, a legal system based on the teachings of the Koran. The figure among over-55s, in contrast, was only 17 per cent.
In some countries, people found guilty under sharia law face penalties such as beheading, stoning, the severing of a hand or being lashed.
The study, by the Right-wing think-tank Policy Exchange, also found a significant minority who expressed backing for Islamic terrorism.
One in eight young Muslims said they admired groups such as al-Qa'eda that "are prepared to fight the West".
Turning to issues of faith, 36 per cent of the young people questioned said they believed that a Muslim who converts to another religion should be "punished by death." Among the over 55s, the figure is only 19 per cent.
Three out of four young Muslims would prefer Muslim women to "choose to wear the veil or hijab," compared to only a quarter of over-55s.
Support was also strong for Islamic schools, according to the Populus survey of 1,000 people commissioned by Policy Exchange.
Forty per cent of younger Muslims said they would want their children to attend an Islamic school, compared to only 20 per cent of over-55s.
Britain's foreign policies were a key issue among the Muslim population as a whole, with 58 per cent arguing that many of the world's problems are "a result of arrogant Western attitudes". However, knowledge of foreign affairs was sketchy, with only one in five knowing that Mahmoud Abbas was the Palestinian president.
The findings emerged as David Cameron, the Conservative leader, criticised the Government for trying to "bully" immigrant communities into feeling British by telling them to run up the Union flag in their gardens or spy on their children.
But in a speech today, Mr Cameron will warn the Muslim community that it cannot use the "screen of cultural sensitivity" to deny women their rights.
The Policy Exchange report, Living Together Apart: British Muslims and the Paradox of Multiculturalism — says there is strong evidence of a "growing religiosity" among young Muslims, with an increasing minority firmly rejecting Western life.
Munira Mirza, the broadcaster and one of the authors of the report, argued that multicultural policies pursued by the Government had succeeded in making things worse, rather than better.
She said: "The emergence of a strong Muslim identity in Britain is, in part, a result of multi-cultural policies implemented since the 1980s which have emphasised difference at the expense of shared national identity and divided people along ethnic, religious and cultural lines.
"There is clearly a conflict within British Islam between a moderate majority that accepts the norms of British democracy and a growing minority that does not."
The report also raises questions about the scale of the problems created by Islamophobia, with 84 per cent of those questioned saying they believed they had been "treated fairly" in Britain.
There was also criticism of the decision by some councils to ban Christian symbols in case they offended Muslims or other communities.
Three quarters said it was wrong for a council to have banned an advert for a Christmas carol service.
Shahid Malik, the Muslim Labour MP for Dewsbury, said: "This report makes very disturbing reading and it vindicates the concern many of us have that we're not doing enough to confront this issue."
Baroness Uddin, the Muslim peer, said: "Unlike their parents, our young people feel that this is their country and are saying why are we being told we do not belong here.
"There is also a problem of a lack of opportunities. Some people have been brutalised by their experiences with the police and this war on terror."
In his speech in Birmingham today, Mr Cameron will criticise "simplistic" attempts at community cohesion, such as Gordon Brown's call for people to put up the Union flag.
But he will also challenge elements of the Muslim community for denying women access to work, education, politics and even to mosques.
In a move that will please the Tory Right, Mr Cameron will warn that urgent action must be taken to get a grip of an immigration system that is out of control.
"It's the same whether it's the white grandmother worried about groups of asylum seekers or an unemployed Sikh youngster who sees eastern Europeans filling all the jobs.
"The Government needs to be in control of the situation. We can only live together if there is proper integration.
"And you can't have proper integration if people are coming into Britain at a faster rate than we can cope with."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/29/nmuslims29.xml
A bleak picture of a generation of young British Muslims radicalised by anti-Western views and misplaced multicultural policies is shown in a survey published today.The study found disturbing evidence of young Muslims adopting more fundamentalist beliefs on key social and political issues than their parents or grandparents.
Forty per cent of Muslims between the ages of 16 and 24 said they would prefer to live under sharia law in Britain, a legal system based on the teachings of the Koran. The figure among over-55s, in contrast, was only 17 per cent.
In some countries, people found guilty under sharia law face penalties such as beheading, stoning, the severing of a hand or being lashed.
The study, by the Right-wing think-tank Policy Exchange, also found a significant minority who expressed backing for Islamic terrorism.
One in eight young Muslims said they admired groups such as al-Qa'eda that "are prepared to fight the West".
Turning to issues of faith, 36 per cent of the young people questioned said they believed that a Muslim who converts to another religion should be "punished by death." Among the over 55s, the figure is only 19 per cent.
Three out of four young Muslims would prefer Muslim women to "choose to wear the veil or hijab," compared to only a quarter of over-55s.
Support was also strong for Islamic schools, according to the Populus survey of 1,000 people commissioned by Policy Exchange.
Forty per cent of younger Muslims said they would want their children to attend an Islamic school, compared to only 20 per cent of over-55s.
Britain's foreign policies were a key issue among the Muslim population as a whole, with 58 per cent arguing that many of the world's problems are "a result of arrogant Western attitudes". However, knowledge of foreign affairs was sketchy, with only one in five knowing that Mahmoud Abbas was the Palestinian president.
The findings emerged as David Cameron, the Conservative leader, criticised the Government for trying to "bully" immigrant communities into feeling British by telling them to run up the Union flag in their gardens or spy on their children.
But in a speech today, Mr Cameron will warn the Muslim community that it cannot use the "screen of cultural sensitivity" to deny women their rights.
The Policy Exchange report, Living Together Apart: British Muslims and the Paradox of Multiculturalism — says there is strong evidence of a "growing religiosity" among young Muslims, with an increasing minority firmly rejecting Western life.
Munira Mirza, the broadcaster and one of the authors of the report, argued that multicultural policies pursued by the Government had succeeded in making things worse, rather than better.
She said: "The emergence of a strong Muslim identity in Britain is, in part, a result of multi-cultural policies implemented since the 1980s which have emphasised difference at the expense of shared national identity and divided people along ethnic, religious and cultural lines.
"There is clearly a conflict within British Islam between a moderate majority that accepts the norms of British democracy and a growing minority that does not."
The report also raises questions about the scale of the problems created by Islamophobia, with 84 per cent of those questioned saying they believed they had been "treated fairly" in Britain.
There was also criticism of the decision by some councils to ban Christian symbols in case they offended Muslims or other communities.
Three quarters said it was wrong for a council to have banned an advert for a Christmas carol service.
Shahid Malik, the Muslim Labour MP for Dewsbury, said: "This report makes very disturbing reading and it vindicates the concern many of us have that we're not doing enough to confront this issue."
Baroness Uddin, the Muslim peer, said: "Unlike their parents, our young people feel that this is their country and are saying why are we being told we do not belong here.
"There is also a problem of a lack of opportunities. Some people have been brutalised by their experiences with the police and this war on terror."
In his speech in Birmingham today, Mr Cameron will criticise "simplistic" attempts at community cohesion, such as Gordon Brown's call for people to put up the Union flag.
But he will also challenge elements of the Muslim community for denying women access to work, education, politics and even to mosques.
In a move that will please the Tory Right, Mr Cameron will warn that urgent action must be taken to get a grip of an immigration system that is out of control.
"It's the same whether it's the white grandmother worried about groups of asylum seekers or an unemployed Sikh youngster who sees eastern Europeans filling all the jobs.
"The Government needs to be in control of the situation. We can only live together if there is proper integration.
"And you can't have proper integration if people are coming into Britain at a faster rate than we can cope with."
Comments 1 - 50 of 64 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #19610 by Janus on January 28, 2007 at 10:57 pm
How regressive and oppressive does a belief system have to be in order to warrant draconian measures by our governments? Other Comments by Janus
3. Comment #19611 by Reg on January 28, 2007 at 11:11 pm
Turning to issues of faith, 36 per cent of the young people questioned said they believed that a Muslim who converts to another religion should be "punished by death." Among the over 55s, the figure is only 19 per cent. The sad indication of the further acceptability of this insanity is the use by Graeme Wilson of the word "only". Other Comments by Reg
4. Comment #19614 by Kimpatsu on January 28, 2007 at 11:26 pm
Do you think the word "advertisement" could be removed from the above post, please...? Other Comments by Kimpatsu
5. Comment #19615 by Boogie on January 28, 2007 at 11:27 pm
"Turning to issues of faith, 36 per cent of the young people questioned said they believed that a Muslim who converts to another religion should be "punished by death."": This is a sickness of mind that really needs to be addressed, and I can't think of a better way than to teach the young that religion is a delusion. Did you ever hear an atheist say: "you should be killed if you believe what I don't believe"? Other Comments by Boogie
6. Comment #19616 by Jez on January 28, 2007 at 11:28 pm
Do you want to see or understand what it means to be stoned to death?I haven't watched the video, I didn't get past the cruelty of the explanation (what happens in stoning) of what it involves and don't like voyeur aspect of watching someone die.
But please, even if you don't intend to watch the video, take the time to learn about this practice.
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/stoning.htm
This is a site I found from a link for 'Athiest help and resources' btw.
Other Comments by Jez
7. Comment #19621 by -TheCodeCrack- on January 29, 2007 at 12:25 am
every western country hates the day in which we willfuly aloud those nutters it to our countries.Mosques have to stop being built right now. no buts. If that happens and it causes immeidate violence, well, better now then in 20 years. I don't want my kids to confront this logic bomb when it's bigger.
And muslim immigration should be banned in western countries iummediately, no buts.
and the rest booted out.
problem solved in 3 years.
Other Comments by -TheCodeCrack-
8. Comment #19624 by Jez on January 29, 2007 at 12:53 am
Ouch, I am sorry you feel this way. Interchange 'muslim' for any other belief system.3 years is nothing, remember that.
Other Comments by Jez
9. Comment #19631 by JimC on January 29, 2007 at 1:46 am
TheCodeCrack goes too far. If there was a way of deporting only the young firebrands who reject the West (in which case they should want to go to Saudi Arabia or the like!), and allowing moderate muslims who are prepared to accept pluralism to stay, I would say go for it. But this would be very difficult. Perhaps a 3rd generation will move away from their fundamentalist parents. Other Comments by JimC
10. Comment #19633 by Pantore on January 29, 2007 at 2:39 am
So this Gordon Brown guy wants Britain to be a flag waving society, like the Americans?Lol
Other Comments by Pantore
11. Comment #19634 by David James on January 29, 2007 at 3:13 am
The Code Crack goes WAY too far JimC. This is seriously nasty talk. Pull yourself together Codecrack and don't embarrass us here. I HATE religious belief and especially any aggressive or hateful variety but the type of fantasty you're engaging in here is ridiculous. You are talking about ripping innocent people (deluded yes, but still innocent) out of their homes. I have a Muslim friend. I HATE the fact that she has these ludicrous beliefs but it would not be right or helpful to engage in the kind of fascist activity you're talking about. This is not the way forward you fool. GROW UP.Other Comments by David James
12. Comment #19639 by -TheCodeCrack- on January 29, 2007 at 3:58 am
David james"This is not the way forward you fool. GROW UP."
Insulting me personally in your attempt to discredit my opinion is a mark of low intellect.
So stop embarrasing us here!
I stand with my opinion, mosques should no longer be built, Muslims band from immigrating to oz.
Someone said the same should apply for all religions, well I agree, but I prioritise and they are at the top of my list.
Your attitude will continue the present problems with Islam, but the future of any western country with your attitude (how do we get rid of islam do you believe?), Islam will get worse and worse in countires with your attitude.
My attitude will be better for our future in this western country.
ps - It's not racist to band muslims or mosques, mulsims are not a race! so drop the usual come backs.
Other Comments by -TheCodeCrack-
13. Comment #19641 by mmurray on January 29, 2007 at 4:11 am
"Forty per cent of Muslims between the ages of 16 and 24 said they would prefer to live under sharia law in Britain, a legal system based on the teachings of the Koran. The figure among over-55s, in contrast, was only 17 per cent."It would be interesting to see what the response would be if, instead of just saying `sharia law' you detailed some of the consequences of this such as cutting off the hands of shop lifters, stoning to death women who commit adultery etc. Would they say yes to that ?
As to the `throw 'em out response' while I sympathise it is not going to solve the problem. Moreover it is a very dangerous path to go down when they are citizens of the country they are living in. What are you going to say to `if you don't like the church of england being the official church of the UK you can go somewhere else' or `Australia is a christian nation - if you don't like it go and live somewhere atheist'.
Michael
Other Comments by mmurray
14. Comment #19646 by David James on January 29, 2007 at 4:33 am
CodeCrack,I didn't MERELY insult you personally (although I did DO that) I also tried to raise your awareness about exactly what it is you're condoning: The forcable expulsion from their homes of some very nice, peaceful citizens, men women and CHILDREN, who are our friends and colleagues. I agree they are deluded and it upsets me greatly, but your notion is a vicious and impractical fantasy. I say "Grow up" because anyone with an ounce of maturity can see that what you propose is not going to happen and if it did it would be a mess. Can we seriously imagine a world where, when we go into work tomorrow we are told that 'that nice Kumar in Personelle' won't be coming in tomorrow because he's being shipped off to Pakistan aginst his will. And anyone who think we can solve a problem like this in 3 years is seriously immature.
And while I follow your logic to some degree I am deeply concerned about where it leads. This would effectively turn the Middle East into a ghetto. And a GHETTO WITH GUNS AND BOMBS. What's your Final Solution Codecrack?
Other Comments by David James
15. Comment #19647 by Logicel on January 29, 2007 at 4:46 am
Surveys are highly suspect--much useless slag surfaces along with some precious nuggets of usable information. The horrendous atrocities commited in Islam's name certainly explains the anger and determination revealed in TheCodeCrack's opinion. He asks how can one be rid of Islam? The answer obviously is with great difficulty. Banning the building of mosques and the ending of immigration of muslims to Australia is too blunt and crude of a solution to work, like slapping a puny bandaid on a gaping wound, and it is also reminiscent of the American shock and awe nonsense in Iraq which apparently also had sounded so surgical and straighforward to Rumsfeld.
Australia will not suddenly become enveloped in a selective information bubble by closing the physical borders of Australia--which of course in itself is impossible, just ask the American border patrol regarding illegal Mexican immigration--in order to stem the tide of violence committed in Islam's name. Banning mosques is not going to prevent interested parties in worshipping together via Web communities or plotting to carry out terroist attacks via Web connected terror cells.
All faith believers, including Muslims, are human beings. Treat them as such. Work at keeping all faiths out of the public sphere, and expose children to all faiths as well as non-faith when they are growing up. This fight will take time, courage, determination, wisdom, patience, guts, decisive action, and a deep sense and appreciation of the power of human reason and rationality when it is given a chance to flourish. Any citizen breaking its country's law regardless of their faith will be prosecuted. We need to work to keep our laws relevant to the preservation of our way of life.
Other Comments by Logicel
16. Comment #19648 by DavidMcC on January 29, 2007 at 4:48 am
CodeCrack, while I wouldn't have been as blunt as David James, I am inclined to agree with him, that even attempting to carry out a mass deportation is a VERY bad idea, which doesn't solve the real problems. In this case, the real problem is Britain's military support to GW Bush in the ME, not ethnic minorities who happen to be muslim, and some of whom are incensed by what is going on there. Other Comments by DavidMcC
17. Comment #19652 by Lord Asriel on January 29, 2007 at 5:36 am
I agree with the posters opposing TheCodeCrack.In addition the problem with your 'solution', TheCodeCrack, is that it is discriminatory but the discrimination is not made on the basis of what you want to fight (i.e. extremism, irrational believes, etc.). Let alone the problem of proportionality of such a measure. It would not be dignified and be in contradiction with basic human rights.
It is also fundamentally in contradiction with important values (which for me are related to atheism) which are in my opinion often trashed by religious zealots (e.g. Freedom of speech, freedom of belief, individualism).
I am not sure if your radical 'suggestion' is a serious idea of yours or if it is just intended to provoke. If the former is the case I agree that it is immature.
P.S.: Besides the problem of how the question was asked, polls usually reflect an opinion at a specific moment in time. The results might be very different in six months from here. Do we get them back, then?
P.P.S.: Freedom of belief does not mean freedom from having your belief challenged. Just to avoid misunderstandings here... :-)
Typos edited
Other Comments by Lord Asriel
18. Comment #19654 by Luthien on January 29, 2007 at 5:45 am
TheCodeCrack, as many here have said, that will just make the problem worse.I think the issue here is "faith schools", they are the institutions we should be banning.
Other Comments by Luthien
19. Comment #19657 by anon on January 29, 2007 at 6:01 am
I can only hope that all these youths who want sharia implemented in the UK and apostates murdered don't truly understand what they are saying, and that it's just a product of ignorance and mindless clan loyalty.Are youths today so desperate for a sense of identity that they'll surrender their minds to the most passionate one that comes along? We really, really, REALLY need to start teaching critical thinking skills in school.
Other Comments by anon
20. Comment #19658 by -TheCodeCrack- on January 29, 2007 at 6:02 am
Nope, I was 100% serious.Stop Muslim Immigration to Australia immediately. If there is a violent demonstration on the streets by Muslims, you KNOW you have done the right thing, for the very fact that they are willing to kill to get people of there religion in the country means the problem required urgent attention, no putting it off.
If you ban Muslim immgration, and they get violent, I say there numbers are low and better now then in 50 years.
My strategy is crude, But this is survival! Being a push over gets you killed. not standing up to a problem, not standing up strongly, will cause more problems in the future.
I believe the people on here who oppose my stratedgy are meerly not tackling the issue and allowing it to grow.
why you'se argue on here against me, guess what, the problem is growing as this article suggests.
How do you'se than plan on stopping it now? My stratedgy would work in a couple of years (in faith no outside presence interfeers)
Other Comments by -TheCodeCrack-
21. Comment #19659 by padster1976 on January 29, 2007 at 6:03 am
Of all the nuances and complications, all I need to remember is that Sharia law does somewhat favour males so i wonder what ratio of female/ male make up the 40% that want sharia law.The option must be given to them - if they want sharia law, there are country's that follow it. Ergo, go there.
Simple.
No, it really is. I'm part of a minority. True, I look like a local and I've lived long enough to 'talk the talk' as well so I do not experience the same degree of bigotry as someone whom may have skin of a darker hue.
However, If I wanted to live in the way that my parents lived, I would go to that country rather than try to change this country. Something about when in Rome...?
I like the way they use their free speech and right to expression - that wouldn't be allowed under the law they wish.
Right on guys - you go for it!!
Other Comments by padster1976
22. Comment #19665 by MouthAlmighty on January 29, 2007 at 6:52 am
Stop Muslim Immigration to Australia immediately. If there is a violent demonstration on the streets by Muslims, you KNOW you have done the right thing, for the very fact that they are willing to kill to get people of there religion in the country means the problem required urgent attention, no putting it off.
Typical! You build yourself a "clear thinking oasis" and some tosser comes along and takes a dump in the drinking water!
Maybe we should have him banned from the site - if he complains then, "you KNOW you have done the right thing."
Fuckwit!
Other Comments by MouthAlmighty
23. Comment #19666 by David James on January 29, 2007 at 6:59 am
Thanks so much for that.Haven't had a good laugh all day.
(Note to self: Don't take it all so seriously)
Thanks MouthAlmighty.
Other Comments by David James
24. Comment #19671 by Cholmonedeley on January 29, 2007 at 7:37 am
-TheCodeCrack- llustrates what I feel is the only problem with atheism: get rid of god without getting rid of the State, and the State becomes your god. So if the Statists on this board could answer me one question...Why is it alright for the government to engage in the violence involved in banning faith schools or ejecting millions of people from a geographic area, but it is not okay for people to engage in violence in the name of their religion?
If you're going to embrace violence as a means towards an end, you may as well respect principled violence, n'est-ce pas?
Other Comments by Cholmonedeley
25. Comment #19675 by MouthAlmighty on January 29, 2007 at 7:49 am
I won't disagree with you Cholmonedeley - but aside from TheToadsCrack do you think anyone on here is really advocating disbelief by force? Other Comments by MouthAlmighty
26. Comment #19676 by Janus on January 29, 2007 at 7:58 am
Why is it alright for the government to engage in the violence involved in banning faith schools or ejecting millions of people from a geographic area, but it is not okay for people to engage in violence in the name of their religion?
Why is it all right to knock a guy out when he's brandishing a knife at you?
In both cases, because it's pre-emptive self-defense. You'd have to be an idiot to stand there and do nothing.
The majority of Muslims aren't just deluded. My aunt who believes in astrology and homeopathy is deluded. My (extremely liberal) Catholic grandmother is deluded. Most Muslims are deluded AND dangerous; perhaps not as individuals (except for extremists), but certainly as a large group.
In any event, I fail to see the violence involved in banning faith schools. If there is violence, it will come from our dear Muslim friends. The same goes for putting a halt to Muslim immigration. How any atheist who even remotely agrees with what Dawkins and Harris are saying can disagree with the implementation of these two measures, I can't understand.
Deportation is another thing entirely, and frankly I wouldn't support it even if it wasn't ethically troubling, simply because it's not practical. I would perhaps offer an incentive for Muslims to go back to their countries of origin, and focus on integrating those who will stay into our countries. The banning of faith schools would be a step in the right direction to accomplish that goal, that's for sure.
Other Comments by Janus
27. Comment #19678 by dermor on January 29, 2007 at 8:09 am
Ok, Janus- 1: Muslim people, however misguided they may be- as all religious people are in their belief, are not brandishing a knife at society any more than "The Irish" were during the worst of the troubles in England.
2: Any atheist who even remotely agrees with what Dawkins and Harris are saying would by extension reject any person of any faith entering the UK, not simply Muslims.
3: I am an atheist, and agree almost to the point of being an acolyte of Dawkins, but to suggest banning faith schools or immigration is in any way a solution simply ignores history.
Other Comments by dermor
28. Comment #19681 by MouthAlmighty on January 29, 2007 at 8:33 am
Most Muslims are deluded AND dangerous
Janus - since I'm one of those atheists you can't understand - please explain.
Other Comments by MouthAlmighty
29. Comment #19682 by Janus on January 29, 2007 at 8:35 am
1: Muslim people, however misguided they may be- as all religious people are in their belief, are not brandishing a knife at society any more than "The Irish" were during the worst of the troubles in England.
- Muslim values are incompatible with Western humanistic values. Have you read the above article at all? Even if the percentages are grossly exagerated, it's clear that Muslims present a greater danger than any other ideological group, religious or not.
- The Muslim reproduction rate is two to three times greater than that of other citizens. And of course, the vast majority of children born of Muslim parents will grow up to be Muslim themselves, with no apparent decrease of religious fervor and fundamentalism (and a great increase, if the article is to be trusted). It won't take that many decades for this annoying minority to become a powerful force outnumbering any other single religious or non-religious group, especially with the decline of Christianity in Europe.
These are two things that could never have been said about the Irish.
2: Any atheist who even remotely agrees with what Dawkins and Harris are saying would by extension reject any person of any faith entering the UK, not simply Muslims.
Nonsense. A big part of Harris' message in particular is that WHAT religious people believe matters, that not all religions are equally foolish or equally dangerous. If you ignore a few religions with so few believers that they're utterly insignificant, Islam is by far the most oppressive, regressive, violent religion of them all.
3: I am an atheist, and agree almost to the point of being an acolyte of Dawkins, but to suggest banning faith schools or immigration is in any way a solution simply ignores history.
Banning faith schools would force Muslim parents to send their children to culturally and religiously diverse schools. That alone makes the banning of faith schools worth it. Of course, it would also give children an opportunity to spend some time in a place where they're not being indoctrinated into believing loads of blatantly false rubbish.
As for halting Muslim immigration, how is this not a good (partial) solution? The ascendency of Islam in Europe is inevitable, if things stay as they are. It seems obvious to me that the first thing to do is to stop the influx before worrying about how to deal with those we're already stuck with.
Other Comments by Janus
30. Comment #19683 by Janus on January 29, 2007 at 8:42 am
Janus - since I'm one of those atheists you can't understand - please explain.
What is there to explain? I'm sure you know what most Muslims believe, you know what's written in the Qur'an. Unlike Christianity, Islam hasn't gone through the Enlightenment. The percentage of 'fundamentalist' Muslims is much greater in Islam than that of fundamentalist Christians in Christianity.
Given that most Muslims live (or lived until recently, or were brought up by parents who recently lived) in theocracies, or virtual theocracies, it's obvious that their values will be as far as they can possibly be from those traditionally upheld in secular democracies where freedom of action, freedom of belief, and freedom of speech are of utmost importance.
Other Comments by Janus
31. Comment #19684 by Lionel A on January 29, 2007 at 8:49 am
anon and #19657Teaching critical thinking in schools is a good idea, and TheCodeCrack should be one of the first in the classes, however this will not be easy until the concepts of evolution and science are fully understood and why these are so fundamentally different to the teachings of all 'past their sell-by-date' religions.
TheCodeCrack
So let me see, you would like to see pogroms initiated against Muslims in your neck of the woods. Now the experience of Israel v the Palestinians tells us what exactly?
Other Comments by Lionel A
32. Comment #19685 by Mango on January 29, 2007 at 8:55 am
Closing places of worship will be meaningless unless those who worshiped at them did it themselves willingly because they have become rational atheists. Otherwise, there will only be violent backlash and deep-seated resentment.Religious schools, however, are a little different and the gov't forcing all children to attend secular schools will surely do much to integrate theist children (esp. Muslims) and perhaps soften their militancy.
Other Comments by Mango
33. Comment #19687 by jeff_n on January 29, 2007 at 9:28 am
Mango says:
Religious schools, however, are a little different and the gov't forcing all children to attend secular schools will surely do much to integrate theist children (esp. Muslims) and perhaps soften their militancy.
I'm not sure that's true. When I was at a mixed state school, the kids of muslim parents were often isolated and bullied and verbally abused. No doubt they only felt they "belonged" to anything at all when they attended Islamic classes in the evenings. Maybe their radicalism actually originated in state school playgrounds.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of faith schools either, but if Catholic schools are anything to go by, they might actually work in our favour. A lot of people who went to Catholic schools remember more about the cruelty of nuns (etc.) than anything else, and they notice the complete mismatch between "the world as presented by the church" and the world they actually live in. Many of these people grow up to despise Catholicism. So, perhaps muslim schools in a secular society might actually be helpful.
I also think the best way to stop kids taking drugs is to make it compulsory. :o)
Other Comments by jeff_n
34. Comment #19689 by CF1 on January 29, 2007 at 9:46 am
What I'd like to know is: Where is the outcry and rejection of these lunatics from the non-radical muslims? They just seem to be silently allowing their so-called "peaceful religion" to be hi-jacked.pfft
Other Comments by CF1
35. Comment #19693 by MouthAlmighty on January 29, 2007 at 10:12 am
Given that most Muslims live (or lived until recently, or were brought up by parents who recently lived) in theocracies, or virtual theocracies, it's obvious that their values will be as far as they can possibly be from those traditionally upheld in secular democracies where freedom of action, freedom of belief, and freedom of speech are of utmost importance.
Janus - I don't dispute the morally repugnant literal reading of the Qur'an or theocracies that follow it, but there is nothing obvious about the assumption that immigrants will even have, let alone demonstrate opposing values to the extent that they constitute a danger. There is no evidence here of the threat posed by "most" of these people. You're simply making it clear that you strongly oppose Muslim doctrine and that you are fearful of its literal implications and therefore fearful of its followers. In short, there's nothing here to justify the kinds of measures you're advocating.
You're also painting all Muslims as literalists and failing to give credit to the seemingly limitless human capacity for comfortably sustaining internally contradictory 'truths' in order to live an externally functional life. Yes it's self-deluding and yes it gives rise to all sorts of ridiculous faulty logic and I'd be the first to support any sincere campaign to educate our way out of it, such as reaching a democratically agreed consensus on the flawed 'faith school' policy, or the kind of comparative religious curriculum proposed by Dennett. But lamentable as it may be, such thinking doesn't necessarily give rise to dangerously twisted characters - at least not "most" of the time and certainly not with sufficient frequency to warrant forced closure of places of worship and immigration controls based on which holy book you prefer to read.
As for the article at the head of this discussion - if you see anything here that backs up your fears then you need to first think seriously about the politics of identity and the failed experiment of multiculturalism in the UK. When your government loses the ability and confidence to communicate with the nation as a unified nation and instead resorts to a programme of 'multicultural initiatives' via unelected 'community leaders' formulating policy according to 'community concerns' - then the end result is that communities gain a tangible amount of political clout. It is therefore in the interests (and only to be expected) of individuals to identify strongly with their community. For young Muslims in the UK they've earned a significant amount of political capital from a government desperate to garner sympathy and support from domestic Muslims for a shitty foreign policy. Identifying strongly with that community means participating in the rhetoric upon which the community earned its political capital; fighting the fights associated with that community and if you can rub the older generation up the wrong way in the process - all the better! The political capital earned by the moderate parents for being 'victims' is being spent by their nominally empowered offspring.
IMO the kind of opinion reported in this survey is more accurately viewed as rhetoric. Readers of the Daily Mail will no doubt love it, but let's not forget that these are 16 - 24 year olds. How many of us in our late 30s early 40s even remember what we felt strongly about at that age let alone still feel that way? Most importantly ask yourself this - how likely are these youngsters to grow up and find a secure personal identity in tune with the tolerant secular society in which they live whilst people are calling from pogroms and deportations based simply on the religion of their parents?
Other Comments by MouthAlmighty
36. Comment #19698 by chance on January 29, 2007 at 10:37 am
It's a thorny problem. I can't really agree with TheCodeCrack's solution, but we have to face the fact that it's going to get worse before (if) it gets better. The crux of the problem is that they hate us, often mindlessly, and are willing to do things we aren't. So while I am secure in our respect for freedom and privacy, that does handcuff us in a way. We will bend over backwards to preserve their freedoms, while they use them to commit atrocities.I find myself becoming more depressed, because I don't really see a way to avoid a world war without drastic measures. At the current rate, Islam will overrun Europe, and at some point that will erupt into war. The U.S. will be drawn into it as well, and presumably Canada. Who knows what China will do, but they're sure to be grinning ear to ear as the rest of the world destroys itself. That's not even mentioning India and Pakistan...
Maybe I'm just in a pessimistic mood, but it's a bleak picture.
Other Comments by chance
37. Comment #19699 by Jez on January 29, 2007 at 10:40 am
Wow Janus, you seem to feel really threatened by Muslims. I think that comment about 'Muslim reproduction rate' can easily be changed to read 'Catholic reproduction rate'. Have we (UK citizens) been overun by Irish/Catholics?I think the fact behind the fiction is that education, more than anything else, is the biggest factor behind how many children people tend to have.
If you are a spokesperson for 'western Humanistic values' then I am glad I am not a Humanist.
I don't think we need to ban faith schools either, we only need to change the way faith is forced on to children in schools.
Other Comments by Jez
38. Comment #19700 by Cholmonedeley on January 29, 2007 at 10:45 am
Re: Janus #26"Why is it all right to knock a guy out when he's brandishing a knife at you?"
Because he is aggressing against me physically. But how does an ideology equate to a direct physical threat?
"The majority of Muslims aren't just deluded. My aunt who believes in astrology and homeopathy is deluded. My (extremely liberal) Catholic grandmother is deluded. Most Muslims are deluded AND dangerous; perhaps not as individuals (except for extremists), but certainly as a large group."
So when was the last time a muslim brandished a knife at you? Do you have to avoid them on the streets, lest you be attacked?
"In any event, I fail to see the violence involved in banning faith schools. If there is violence, it will come from our dear Muslim friends."
And if someone tries to keep their faith school open, what will happen then? The police will come to shut it down, and if they try to defend their property, they will be physically assaulted. If they are fined, and refuse to pay the fine, the police will come to kidnap them and take them to one of the hot-beds of anal rape known as modern prisons, and if they try to defend themselves, they will be physically assaulted. This is how government works: violence. And if you think it isn't, see what happens when you don't pay your taxes.
"The same goes for putting a halt to Muslim immigration. How any atheist who even remotely agrees with what Dawkins and Harris are saying can disagree with the implementation of these two measures, I can't understand."
I think the faith mindset is dangerous, but I don't think that expanding a government's power in order to suppress a certain ideology is any kind of productive answer, because:
a) it is immoral
b) any power you give to a government to do for you, it can use to do to you. So if in the future, the halls of power decide that atheists are too rebellious...
"I would perhaps offer an incentive for Muslims to go back to their countries of origin, and focus on integrating those who will stay into our countries. The banning of faith schools would be a step in the right direction to accomplish that goal, that's for sure."
Will this incentive come out of your pocket, or the government's treasury? If the latter, why do I have to be forced to pay to support your plan?
And I'm not sure banning anything would be a step in the right direction. Given the nature of government, it will surely work to aggravate the situation, leading of course to the further acquisition of power by the government.
Other Comments by Cholmonedeley
39. Comment #19704 by savroD on January 29, 2007 at 10:58 am
Folks;What we've got to do is to get those who claim to be moderates to stand up to their own extremists. I've said this before and I'll say it again. These guys who think they are in the middle, between us atheists and the fundamentalists, have allowed their religions to be consumed by these fascists. THEY are going to have to take their own crappy religions back. On our side, I have no moral issues with exterminating those who choose to even threaten us with violence. Actually, surely evolution has not ended. I have no problems with Huxley's savage reservation from Brave New World, for the fundamentalists. There they will be safe, and can be managed more effectively by those of us whp prefer to move on with the most important business we face; and that is, to insure human survivability.
Other Comments by savroD
40. Comment #19705 by Cholmonedeley on January 29, 2007 at 11:04 am
savroD said:I have no moral issues with exterminating those who choose to even threaten us with violence.
I have no problems with Huxley's savage reservation from Brave New World, for the fundamentalists.
So since you advocate removing my freedom in order to meet the vague moral good of "ensuring human survivability," is it O.K. for me to kill you? I mean, since you're basically advocating fascism, it should be alright for me to murder you, correct?
Other Comments by Cholmonedeley
41. Comment #19706 by chance on January 29, 2007 at 11:05 am
"Janus - I don't dispute the morally repugnant literal reading of the Qur'an or theocracies that follow it, but there is nothing obvious about the assumption tha"t immigrants will even have, let alone demonstrate opposing values to the extent that they constitute a danger. There is no evidence here of the threat posed by "most" of these people. You're simply making it clear that you strongly oppose Muslim doctrine and that you are fearful of its literal implications and therefore fearful of its followers. In short, there's nothing here to justify the kinds of measures you're advocating.You're also painting all Muslims as literalists and failing to give credit to the seemingly limitless human capacity for comfortably sustaining internally contradictory 'truths' in order to live an externally functional life. Yes it's self-deluding and yes it gives rise to all sorts of ridiculous faulty logic and I'd be the first to support any sincere campaign to educate our way out of it, such as reaching a democratically agreed consensus on the flawed 'faith school' policy, or the kind of comparative religious curriculum proposed by Dennett. But lamentable as it may be, such thinking doesn't necessarily give rise to dangerously twisted characters - at least not "most" of the time and certainly not with sufficient frequency to warrant forced closure of places of worship and immigration controls based on which holy book you prefer to read."
I'm not sure who's painting who as anything. All Muslims are certainly not literalists. And even less are violent. But there is also a significantly large population who are both fundamentalist and violent. Far too large to ignore. And from everything we know, that group is getting larger, no doubt largely in part due to the U.S.'s invasion of Iraq. I just can't think of a better way to stir up anti-western sentiment and send previously rational people flocking to a radical Islamist banner. Ugh.
"As for the article at the head of this discussion - if you see anything here that backs up your fears then you need to first think seriously about the politics of identity and the failed experiment of multiculturalism in the UK. When your government loses the ability and confidence to communicate with the nation as a unified nation and instead resorts to a programme of 'multicultural initiatives' via unelected 'community leaders' formulating policy according to 'community concerns' - then the end result is that communities gain a tangible amount of political clout. It is therefore in the interests (and only to be expected) of individuals to identify strongly with their community. For young Muslims in the UK they've earned a significant amount of political capital from a government desperate to garner sympathy and support from domestic Muslims for a shitty foreign policy. Identifying strongly with that community means participating in the rhetoric upon which the community earned its political capital; fighting the fights associated with that community and if you can rub the older generation up the wrong way in the process - all the better! The political capital earned by the moderate parents for being 'victims' is being spent by their nominally empowered offspring."
You had me on this until the end. I just don't see the "rub the older generation up the wrong way" connection. It's just so completely anectdotal and non-fact based that... well, sorry. I just can't agree with that without something backing it up. You led up that with a very nice account of how communities can ban together and gain clout in a government that is losing its ability to keep the nation unified. Then you just sort of jumped somewhere else.
"IMO the kind of opinion reported in this survey is more accurately viewed as rhetoric. Readers of the Daily Mail will no doubt love it, but let's not forget that these are 16 - 24 year olds. How many of us in our late 30s early 40s even remember what we felt strongly about at that age let alone still feel that way? Most importantly ask yourself this - how likely are these youngsters to grow up and find a secure personal identity in tune with the tolerant secular society in which they live whilst people are calling from pogroms and deportations based simply on the religion of their parents?"
The problem is that it won't really matter what these 16 - 24 year olds think when (if; remember, they're encouraged to be martyrs. Usually by older Muslim leaders who, for some reason, don't feel the need to die for martyrdom...) they're approaching 40. What matters is what they're doing now. And the track record just isn't good. We've got to focus on what we know now, whether or not we like it. What we know is that Islam is inherently a violent religion, and the expression of that violence has been getting worse. While there are many, many Muslims that are prefectly nice people, there is also an unfortunate number of Muslims who are not. And the scary part about this is a) these are the ones that actually closely adhere to the religious tenets of Islam and b) the number is getting larger. We can't weed these out effectively because it is unacceptable to espouse anything that will cause undue hardhsip to innocents.
So, I am still against anything like what has been voiced by TheCodeCrack or Janus. But I'm not deluding myself either. This is a problem. And it isn't magically going away.
Other Comments by chance
42. Comment #19712 by MouthAlmighty on January 29, 2007 at 12:05 pm
You had me on this until the end. I just don't see the "rub the older generation up the wrong way" connection. It's just so completely anectdotal and non-fact based that... well, sorry. I just can't agree with that without something backing it up. You led up that with a very nice account of how communities can ban together and gain clout in a government that is losing its ability to keep the nation unified. Then you just sort of jumped somewhere else.
OK - maybe I should have been more clear. I was taking the lead from the article which stressed the difference between the younger Muslim generation and their parents. One way to read the article is "young Muslims more radical than their parents" another less reactionary way is "young people more radical than their parents". I'm not pretending that radical young Muslims are no more dangerous than radical young goths or punks, but you'll agree that discovering that young people's opinions are more radical than their parents' isn't - in itself - much to get excited about.
I'm trying to be brief, but (in the UK) the political capital the younger generation are spending actually goes back to the 70s when race politics first emerged. Policy designed for 'inclusiveness' had the opposite effect because it stressed the value of idiosyncratic differences and the "rights" to uphold them. Back in the 70s a "radical Muslim" would be so called (by Muslims) because of his secular tendencies - the drive towards recognising differences rather than searching for commonalities and shared values made secular Muslims less popular because they didn't offer anything distinct in the way of identity. The sad fact is that the government is still using the same tool to fix the problem. More recently, the report into the London bombings by the 'extremism taskforce' (made up of mostly Muslim leaders), published its conclusions which suggested that the best way to combat extremism, was by recognising Muslim grievances and enabling moderate Muslim leaders to wield greater political power, better reflection of Islam in school curricula, etc.
What I'm suggesting is that taken in context, the article represents young Muslims cashing in the victim chips earned by their parents. Thanks to multicultural politics "Muslim grievance" and "Muslim identity" and "the culture of Islam" are now all official "currency". Muslim women and girls who cause controversy demanding the "right" to express their "religious heritage" even - or perhaps especially - when their parents neither agree nor demand it, are simply doing what most young women do. It just so happens that this carries considerably more weight than a miniskirt and lipstick. It's the politics and the practice of identity. IMO the survey represents just this attitude when put under direct scrutiny.
What it doesn't represent is a basis for the kind of policies that have been suggested above. The fact that people can make the straight-faced suggestion that places of worship should be closed, that Muslims should be prevented from entering the country and ideally deported or "incentivised" to leave is frankly abhorrent. Skinheads in the 70s were quite expert in creating "incentives" to leave the country. It's this kind of juvenile, reactionary rhetoric that justifies accusations of "militant atheist" and "secular extremist" and lends credence to the fact that atheism is an "intolerant ideology" as bad as any religion.
Other Comments by MouthAlmighty
43. Comment #19713 by savroD on January 29, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Cholmonedeley;To take these statements out of the context they were in is stupid.
In the first statement, I was talking about people who threaten your life, not your politics.
In the second statement, I was referring to the only logical outcome for the homo-sapien branch.
As for your digressions into some crude claim of facism and right to murder, they are without merit and should be ignored.
Other Comments by savroD
44. Comment #19715 by savroD on January 29, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Furthermore;Does anyone here feel that the survival of humanity is worthwhile? even if it is some weird branch of space traveler's, without much bone and muscle!
Other Comments by savroD
45. Comment #19716 by MouthAlmighty on January 29, 2007 at 12:26 pm
There is a much better, more balanced and detailed report on the same story here...http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6309979.stm
...which (happily for me) does a slightly better job of taking the edge of the Telegraph article :)
Other Comments by MouthAlmighty
46. Comment #19726 by pholt on January 29, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Turning to issues of faith, 36 per cent of the young people questioned said they believed that a Muslim who converts to another religion should be "punished by death." Among the over 55s, the figure is only 19 per cent.It was interesting that this didn't rate a mention in the 'more balanced' BBC report. Perhaps because it's hard to put a positive spin on it?
Other Comments by pholt
47. Comment #19728 by Cholmonedeley on January 29, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Re: savroDSorry, I didn't mean to misrepresent you, but I can only go with what you give me, and what you gave me wasn't very positive, nor did it seem to me to have anything to with how you explained it. It's like this:
Person A (you): "I think we oughtta kill everyone! People don't deserve freedom."
Person B: "What?! Are you crazy? That's completely sociopathic!"
Person A: "Don't take me out of context, you idiot. I clearly meant we should not let people attack us without retaliating."
Yes, I know it's not what you meant, but the way you said it, without much explanation, was how it came out in my eyes.
Other Comments by Cholmonedeley
48. Comment #19742 by -TheCodeCrack- on January 29, 2007 at 5:38 pm
MouthAllMighty"Stop Muslim Immigration to Australia immediately. If there is a violent demonstration on the streets by Muslims, you KNOW you have done the right thing, for the very fact that they are willing to kill to get people of there religion in the country means the problem required urgent attention, no putting it off.
Typical! You build yourself a "clear thinking oasis" and some tosser comes along and takes a dump in the drinking water!
Maybe we should have him banned from the site - if he complains then, "you KNOW you have done the right thing."
Fuckwit!"
MouthAlmighty
"fuckwit", were you trying to be clever or funny? either way you failed at both spectacularly, and the attempted malice of your insult missed. I'm not a "fuckwit" as you so wittedly remarked, giggle at you, but my opinion is a solution to a problem.
you failed in your intellectually impoverished reply to then go on and voice your own theory!
What is mouthalmighty's solution to tackle Islam?
Lets here it! Don't slag others before you give us your solution, that's the number one rule in pollitics. lets here what you would do first?
I'll refrain from a personal insult at you to ask your opinion in how best to tackle the problem, I won't slip to immaturity like you almost willfullly leap into.
You give my theory anger, but no worthy challenge that is for sure, we'll how do you want to confront Islam right now in the West?
what we're doing right now is NOT working obviously, I believe we need to get tougher, step it up a notch, ban mosques from being built.
so what's your theory mouthallmighty, or is it just, once again, you poorly attempting to 'talk the talk' on a topic and once again forgetting to 'walk the walk', yes you do do that a fair bit.
What's your theory that will stop Islam in the West, stop the above article etc etc?
Other Comments by -TheCodeCrack-
49. Comment #19749 by savroD on January 29, 2007 at 6:41 pm
Chol;I accept your apology and will refrain from further off-topic comment here.
Cheers
Other Comments by savroD
50. Comment #19756 by hmsbeagle3 on January 29, 2007 at 7:32 pm
I hear real estate in the beta-Centauri system is going for next to nothing. Anyone else sick and tired of waking up to this nonsense is welcome to come along. Bring a sleeping bag, toothbrush, and an extra pair of socks. Space gets cold.Other Comments by hmsbeagle3
Comment Entry: Please Login
Register a new account
Upcoming Events:
DVDs
'The Genius of Charles Darwin: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'The Genius of Charles Darwin' DVD
'The Enemies of Reason: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Richard Dawkins: Appearances & Events 2007-2008' DVD
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Root of All Evil?' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
1. Comment #19608 by Roy_H on January 28, 2007 at 10:47 pm
OK live by Sharia law if you want to ,but not in my country, the airport is thataway >>>>>>
Other Comments by Roy_H