Something vaguely interesting in the wake of recent terrorist attacks.

[Burney]

Not yet, but it's next to my bed.

I hope it actually gives a credible account of how he forsees the death of Europe taking place step by step (beyond the obvious). In his recent podcast outings he's not really volunteered this insight.

As they put it themselves: 'Thanks to your democratic laws we will invade you; thanks to our religious laws, we will dominate you.'
It's pretty much already happening. They have been allowed in in ever greater numbers (and are still coming), they are out-breeding us and, as their numbers increase, so will their political weight, meaning it will become ever less likely that there will be the political consensus to stop the immigration of more and more of them. Equally, their democratic weight will start to fundamentally alter our political, cultural and intellectual landscape to suit them. Eventually, no democratic government will be able to act to prevent the inevitable.

[Burney]

When it properly goes off, who is Pakistan likely to be lending a few warheads? I don't fancy being in Tel Aviv.

I'd fancy the Israelis to be pretty alive to that sort of threat. They don't tend to fùck about when it comes to that sort of thing.

[Burney]

So we can agree on one thing then… other religions have potential for untold harm and are capable of being fundamentally separated from modern values by those who wish to do so.

This leads neatly on to the area where we seem to disagree. That it is not the fault of Islam but the fault of an interpretation of Islam- an interpretation that every single Muslim I have ever met, from Palmers Green to Las Vegas via Malaysia, does not share. I blame this interpretation every bit as much as you do. The difference between us is that I seem to be willing to divorce this interpretation from Islam itself and the very many more modern, peaceful interpretations accepting by hundreds of millions of muslims throughout the globe.

I take this to mean that Islam, like every other potentially lethal and ludicrous religion, is capable of change, of modernisation and of a more generous and peaceful interpretation that doesn’t require regular murder.

Look at Malaysia. A Muslim country. Homosexuality is illegal, particularly in public, and carries a prison sentence. Not stoning to death. And the attitude is slowly changing. The country is not becoming ‘less Muslim’. Simply more accepting (albeit slowly) of a modern world that it wishes to be a part of. You could argue that this is at least partly due to a western influence over two centuries, and in fact it is.

On the subject of geopolitics, you seem to be trying to sell Islam as the sole barrier to an acceptance of western values. Is it a barrier? Yes, of course. Not just as a religion but because it forms the backbone of their moral code, their notions of justice and their form of government. But also note that all the examples you give come from a certain part of the world where geopolitics has played havoc with people’s lives for generations. There is a distinct difference, geopolitically, between Malaysia and Saudi Arabia- many, actually. It is a little naïve to think that religion is the only one.

Either way….the fact remains that those countries adopting a more modern interpretation of Islam are not causing us problems. This is how religion is supposed to work in the modern world. Perhaps the more complicated point is which interpretation (the modern or the fundamental) is the real *******isation of Islam- but let us not get into that…..

If you want to say all religions are bad, I might agree with you.

If you want to pretend some religions aren't worse than others, we have an issue. Only a fool would pretend that Anglicanism or Buddhism are as dangerous as Islam.

[Ash]

I take this to mean that Islam, like every other potentially lethal and ludicrous religion, is capable of change, of modernisation and of a more generous and peaceful interpretation that doesn’t require regular murder.

Thank god for modern, secular, liberal Turkey.

Oh

[Monty92]

So we can agree on one thing then… other religions have potential for untold harm and are capable of being fundamentally separated from modern values by those who wish to do so.

This leads neatly on to the area where we seem to disagree. That it is not the fault of Islam but the fault of an interpretation of Islam- an interpretation that every single Muslim I have ever met, from Palmers Green to Las Vegas via Malaysia, does not share. I blame this interpretation every bit as much as you do. The difference between us is that I seem to be willing to divorce this interpretation from Islam itself and the very many more modern, peaceful interpretations accepting by hundreds of millions of muslims throughout the globe.

I take this to mean that Islam, like every other potentially lethal and ludicrous religion, is capable of change, of modernisation and of a more generous and peaceful interpretation that doesn’t require regular murder.

Look at Malaysia. A Muslim country. Homosexuality is illegal, particularly in public, and carries a prison sentence. Not stoning to death. And the attitude is slowly changing. The country is not becoming ‘less Muslim’. Simply more accepting (albeit slowly) of a modern world that it wishes to be a part of. You could argue that this is at least partly due to a western influence over two centuries, and in fact it is.

On the subject of geopolitics, you seem to be trying to sell Islam as the sole barrier to an acceptance of western values. Is it a barrier? Yes, of course. Not just as a religion but because it forms the backbone of their moral code, their notions of justice and their form of government. But also note that all the examples you give come from a certain part of the world where geopolitics has played havoc with people’s lives for generations. There is a distinct difference, geopolitically, between Malaysia and Saudi Arabia- many, actually. It is a little naïve to think that religion is the only one.

Either way….the fact remains that those countries adopting a more modern interpretation of Islam are not causing us problems. This is how religion is supposed to work in the modern world. Perhaps the more complicated point is which interpretation (the modern or the fundamental) is the real *******isation of Islam- but let us not get into that…..

To quibble about whether it is the religion or the interpretation of that religion is a total red herring and would not be applied in any other context than a discussion about religion.

Let's just imagine if someone said Mein Kampf should not be blamed for its role in the rise of the Third Reich because it said some positive things about the importance of national identity and social cohesion and it's not the author's fault that a load of people have taken all the bad stuff literally...

The one thing we can agree on is that Islam could potentially, conceivably, change and reform. The irony is that your attitude, in twisting yourself in knots to absolve the core religion itself of its direct role in creating Islamic fundamentalism, is making it much, much harder to undergo such a reform.

[Peter]

If you want to say all religions are bad, I might agree with you.

If you want to pretend some religions aren't worse than others, we have an issue. Only a fool would pretend that Anglicanism or Buddhism are as dangerous as Islam.

I don’t think I am pretending that. I think I am saying that some religions have been exposed to a lot more light and moderate thought and have managed to find themselves a civilised place in the background of our societies- apart from parts of American where bible bashing ****s constitute a worryingly large political lobby.

We can all argue about how common the fundamental interpretation of Islam is, and how dangerous. However, if you wish to argue that there are no good muslims, that the whole religion is inherently evil and must be banished…well, then I am afraid I have to disagree. I can live with the ridicule.

[Burney]

Thank god for modern, secular, liberal Turkey.

Oh

The western hope that a more liberal, 'enlightened' version of Islam will emerge from some sort of Islamic reformation rather falls down on the fact that Islamic history is littered with movements to do just that, only to be defeated by the regressive, backwards and violent forms of the religion.

[redgunamo]

As they put it themselves: 'Thanks to your democratic laws we will invade you; thanks to our religious laws, we will dominate you.'
It's pretty much already happening. They have been allowed in in ever greater numbers (and are still coming), they are out-breeding us and, as their numbers increase, so will their political weight, meaning it will become ever less likely that there will be the political consensus to stop the immigration of more and more of them. Equally, their democratic weight will start to fundamentally alter our political, cultural and intellectual landscape to suit them. Eventually, no democratic government will be able to act to prevent the inevitable.

In fairness, even Lonesome George and Gu Gu the polar bear have outbred most of us. Well, most of you anyway. So you've really only yourselves to blame.

[Monty92]

I don’t think I am pretending that. I think I am saying that some religions have been exposed to a lot more light and moderate thought and have managed to find themselves a civilised place in the background of our societies- apart from parts of American where bible bashing ****s constitute a worryingly large political lobby.

We can all argue about how common the fundamental interpretation of Islam is, and how dangerous. However, if you wish to argue that there are no good muslims, that the whole religion is inherently evil and must be banished…well, then I am afraid I have to disagree. I can live with the ridicule.

No-one worth listening or talking to has ever said there are no good muslims, that the whole religion is inherently evil and must be banished, so this is a big fat straw man.

[Pokster]

No-one worth listening or talking to has ever said there are no good muslims, that the whole religion is inherently evil and must be banished, so this is a big fat straw man.

A few AWIMBER's have said that all Muslims should be expelled from this country... the fact 1 of them was Rich does help your "no-one worth listening to" comment