Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
"Virtue signalling" was addressed to Andrew who so signalled when he wrote "agreed". Specifically, not lazily, aimed.
Past events certainly contribute to where we are now. But they have little bearing on current go-politics.
None of you answer my basic question: What would happen to us if there was a Muslim majority in Parliament?
On the Scriptures, in the Judeo-Christian world, they are fast becoming an irrelevance. See the Archbishop of Canterbury for details. The nearest we have to valid scriptures is what is interpreted into criminal law from the Ten Commandments.
Let's face it, there is no god that is good, and if there ever was, then he's long been dead.
---------- Post added at 16:42 ---------- Previous post was at 16:38 ----------
WOKERATI: Generally those who can't call a woman "a woman" and who would call a fisherman "a fisherthem".
REMOANERS: Those who consider the democratic majority who voted in the Brexit Referendum to be total fools.
|
The mere use of the term 'virtue signalling', whoever it is aimed at, has become an indicator of a right-wing mind set. Having said that, I once used it ironically against a right-wing correspondent who indulged in actual virtual signalling.
You can't dismiss history just because it no longer suit you. I first brought up recent immigration of Jews as an example of how the current stereotyping of Islam and Muslims has happened under similar immigration circumstances, but in the context of Judaism and Jews. I was hoping you might learn from history. Right-wing fanatics and fascist like Oswald Mosley warned us of Jews doing what you are now telling us that Muslims are planning.
You then dip into history to explain that Europe has always been Judeo-Christian and that is why Jews integrated so well. Pity someone didn't explain that to Oswald Mosley
I then dipped into history to explain how relatively tolerant of Christianity Islam was when it was at its height in contrast to the brutality of evangelical Christian European colonialists. I also explained how the scriptures predisposed all three Ibrahimic religions to being either brutal or highly civilised. I explained that on this basis Muslims weren't exceptionally hard to integrate. Suddenly, you decided that history wasn't so relevant after all.
You tell me that history is no longer relevant, because we are looking at Muslims now, not 900 years ago, presumably because Islam now is intrinsically different than it was then.
Having then decided it is Muslims now that are the problem you then fail to convince us that there is a conspiracy to take over the western world. You are convinced this is there ambition berceuse ... erm history tells us that they are like that and that some of them are quite angry now for some reason or other.
Finally, there's that question you asked somewhere in that previous 13 pages of debate.
"What would happen to us if there was a Muslim majority in Parliament? "
Firstly, if that were to happen, then it would seem that most of the 93% of the country that aren't Muslim, decided they wanted Muslim MPs.
Suddenly we must have decided that Muslims R us!
But, to be fair to you, I guess you meant that this might happen in some future you have in mind, where all those Muslims breeding like rabbits and arriving in rubber dinghies outnumber non-Muslims. I think that scenario has already been well and truly dissed. The only way that would happen is if most of the the folk of sub-Saharan Africa and the near East headed this way because climate change had made their land unlivable! Whoops! Perhaps we better sort out climate change quickly. After all, global warming is the enemy of all of us.
BTW. Your definitions of the made-up words Wokerati and Remoaner are just laughable. They would be hilarious terms if it were not for the fact that such words are deliberately deployed by the right-wing's puppet masters because they know that if their marionettes have those words in their vocabulary they can use them to pigeon-hole and dismiss members of the liberal left without having to engage them in informed rational debate. This makes it so much easier to propagate conspiracy theories amongst the gullible, keeping them socially and intellectually at a distance from those who might explain what is really going on.