The worm turns
A confidential Church of England document leaked to the press says that the British government's "interfaith" policies are exacerbating tensions between religious communities rather than reducing them. The Daily Telegraph describes the report as saying: (emphasis mine)
divisions between communities have been deepened by the Government's "schizophrenic" approach to tackling multiculturalism. While trying to encourage interfaith relations, it has actually given "privileged attention" to the Islamic faith and Muslim communities. ... Written by Guy Wilkinson, the interfaith adviser to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, the paper says that the Church of England has been sidelined. Instead, "preferential" treatment has been afforded to the Muslim community despite the fact that it makes up only three per cent of the population. Britain remains overwhelmingly a Christian country at heart and moves to label it as a multi-faith society suggest a hidden agenda, it says.
The report lists a number of moves made by the Government since the London bombings in July last year to win favor with Muslim communities. These include "using public funds" to fly Muslim scholars to Britain, shelving legislation on forced marriage and encouraging financial arrangements to comply with Islamic requirements. These efforts have undermined its interfaith agenda and produced no "noticeable positive impact on community cohesion", the Church document says.
Insiders at the House of Bishops meeting last week, where the briefing paper was "well received", say it marks a radical departure from the Church's usually diplomatic relations with the Government on the multi-faith issue. One bishop said it was the first time the Church had launched such a defense of the country's Christian heritage.
The BBC's account quotes the report as arguing that government pandering to the Muslim minority has created a market for "victimhood" which bodes ill for relationships between the faiths in Britain.
"One might argue that disaffection and separation is now greater than ever, with Muslim communities withdrawing further into a sense of victimhood, and other faith communities seriously concerned that the government has given signals that appear to encourage the notion of a privileged relationship with sections of the Muslim community,
Coverage by the Times of London is shorter, but very hard hitting:
The Church of England has criticised the government’s approach to integrating British Muslims as “divided, almost schizophrenic”. A paper by the Archbishop of Canterbury’s interfaith adviser said “one might argue disaffection and separation is now greater than ever”. David Stancliffe, Bishop of Salisbury, said: “We are raising serious questions about the government’s strategy.”
Commentary
This is the first time a major Christian denomination widely viewed as liberal has openly argued that "multiculturalist" policies are fueling the rifts between religions rather than closing them. It was a startling reversal of the near-Pavlovian conditioning to apologize for anything Christian and a departure from the unquestioning commitment to pander to anything Muslim which has incited the aggressive behavior of Islamist extremists while "sidelining" not only the Church of England but an earlier generation of Muslims who lived in respectful coexistence with their Christian neighbors. This "interfaith" approach has ironically undermined the very leaders who are committed to real tolerance while boosting the stock of fanatics who advocate abominations like forced marriages and even providing money for these extremists to carry on their activities.
The Church of England's stance has broken the taboo within liberal circles against resisting the ultimatums which have reached the absurd height of demanding that the Pope to convert to Islam. "One bishop said it was the first time the Church had launched such a defense of the country's Christian heritage." The report also comes at a time when fears of a looming backlash against Islamic militancy have been fueled by rioting in the town of Windsor between Muslim and non-Muslims which has already resulted in the firebombing of a mosque.
I think that history will judge the Left's program of headlong appeasement and cultural self-hatred as one of the great stupidities of the 20th century equal to and possibly surpassing the disastrous actions of the Men of Munich in the 1930s. This has been evident for some time. And even the Church of England knows it now. This fatal policy has helped set up a world crisis whose end is not yet in sight and whose course may bring untold sorrow not only to Christians, but to Muslims too.
posted by wretchardthecat at 10/08/2006 02:09:00 AM
21 Comments:
Kudos to the CofE for finally speaking out on this issue. Visitors to the UK see many examples of this national schizophrenia.
But our far off cousins are not alone in this, The US government (and CA, too) have yet to learn the downside of blindly parroting after each distaster, "Islam is a religion of 'peace'", As if wishing would make it so.
Maybe, if we just nod our heads and click our heels three times, we can all finally 'get along', Or maybe not.
Here's an indication of how hot and heavy the cultural wars in the UK have become.
Deputy prime minister John Prescott has rejected an appeal by a cabinet colleague Jack Straw for Muslim women to remove their veils. "We heard those arguments (about Sikhs) and common sense prevailed and it wasn't the great issue we thought it was". Jack Straw, leader of the House of Commons and former foreign minister, sparked protests from Muslims last week when he revealed that he asks Muslim women to remove veils from their faces when they visit his constituency office. (AFP/Breitbart) In related news, Muslims pledge to ruin Straw, according to the Sunday Express.
1. A confidential Church of England document leaked to the press....
O.K. Let me charge that some element, and maybe all of the leaker's thinking, clearly liked the way the Catholic Church lost lives and property from the Pope's comments. Maybe they can bring deaths to endanger members the C of E? Can there really be a maybe about it? This leak follows a pattern: a clearcut deliberate aim to provide radical Islamists with more targets. The Advance of the Death Cults.
2. divisions between communities have been deepened by the Government's "schizophrenic" approach to tackling multiculturalism. While trying to encourage interfaith relations, it has actually given "privileged attention" to the Islamic faith and Muslim communities.
This is typical of just about every "liberal" policy. While pretending to ease the punishment of criminals because "we're more civilized than them and must set a good example", the result is the weakening of the punishment and its threat, and the end result is society winds up with more victims. The nihilistic Left's way of furthering its death wish. The Protection of Innocents.
The longer the anti-natalism and "sustainability" arguments stay in the background, the easier will it be for deathists -- internal as well as external -- who target the West to continue to operate with impunity.
The life you save may well be your own.
Thousands of years of cousin-marriage have had a disastrous impact on the arabs.
Are you saying most of the Arab
population is littered with weak genes? Is there a study to back this claim up, or is it just a bald assertion?
I made this up but why does it ring true?
Man sues over Arabic script in EKG
SEATTLE - Ramsey Almansur, 34, of Lakewood, has settled out of court with Mercy Medical Center after he sued the hospital last year for reading the phrase "Allah is swine" in his electrocardio-gram (EKG). On a Tuesday evening last May, Almansur entered Mercy emergency care complaining of heart palpitations. The emergency room staff quickly hooked Almansur up to the heart monitor known as an EKG, a device that measures the intervals of heart rhythms using a linear electric pulse. After a few minutes Almansur claimed he saw the phrase “Allah is swine” scroll across the EKG monitor. As his arrhythmia became more agitated the script became more pronounced. ER staff rallied to Almansur's bedside and, with additional medication, restored his heart rate to normal. The offending script disappeared from the EKG monitor which prints hardcopy printout along with a digital record. Almansur, however, remained traumatized by the experience and sued the hospital for religious defamation.
Mercy Medical admitted to no intentional wrongdoing but hospital administrator, Dr. Phil Wattage, said in a public statement, “we deeply apologize to the Islamic community for our overall insensitivity. We are working hard now to replace the EKG graph - with its similarity to linear Arabic script - with another kind of graphic chart. The heart rate can be represented by any number of signal graphics, say, bar graphs or even a pie chart. It shouldn’t be hard to change in our age of electronic wizardry.” Administrator Wattage added that the Catholic hospital is considering removing all crucifixes from all rooms because "it is time to enter the 21st century of global multicultural sensitivity and diversity."
The Council on Muslim American Developments, CMAD, was persuing an investigation into whether or not the offending Arabic EKG readouts were deliberate given that Mercy Medical Center is run by Catholic Church sponsored Dominican Nuns. With the announcement of the settlement, which hospital sources indicate was in the seven figures, CMAD has decided to drop their inquiry.
Watching the unstoppable force of multiculturalism impact the immoveable object of the Left's core beliefs is one of my greatest pastimes. Something has to give eventually.
Even moderate muslims are religious conservatives. They feel the same about a lot of issues as Christian conservatives. Eventually that is going to have an impact. I can see Christian and Muslim conservatives cooperating on many issues like abortion, gay marriage, etc. Ecumenical differences can be overcome for political ends. Even if this does not happen, they will both vote the same on many issues.
This is gradually becoming clear to those of the secular and Leftist tradition. Something has to give. Multiculturalism is hated by many and its main supporters should soon realize the dangers it poses to them. Encouraging religious conservatives of any faith is not progressive.
Wouldn't you love to know if there's a red phone between the Vatican and the Archbishop of Canterbury, and they're coming together to face the Muslim onslaught?
First the Pope's criticisms of the last couple of weeks regarding Islamic violence, and now Canterbury's criticisms of "multiculturalism" and the favoritism involved.
I wonder when we can expect to hear from the Dalai Lama that Buddhists don't love Muslims any more either.
On Arab consanguinity (cousin marriage):
link
In Iraq, as in much of the region, nearly half of all married couples are first or second cousins to each other. A 1986 study of 4,500 married hospital patients and staff in Baghdad found that 46% were wed to a first or second cousin, while a smaller 1989 survey found 53% were "consanguineously" married. The most prominent example of an Iraqi first cousin marriage is that of Saddam Hussein and his first wife Sajida.
By fostering intense family loyalties and strong nepotistic urges, inbreeding makes the development of civil society more difficult. Many Americans have heard by now that Iraq is composed of three ethnic groups -- the Kurds of the north, the Sunnis of the center, and the Shi'ites of the south. Clearly, these ethnic rivalries would complicate the task of ruling reforming Iraq. But that's just a top-down summary of Iraq's ethnic make-up. Each of those three ethnic groups is divisible into smaller and smaller tribes, clans, and inbred extended families -- each with their own alliances, rivals, and feuds. And the engine at the bottom of these bedeviling social divisions is the oft-ignored institution of cousin marriage.
another link
Rooted in ancient custom, consanguinity is nonetheless widespread in the Arab world; for example, a 1989 study in Iraq found 53 percent of the subjects to be consanguineously married. One result is the prevalence of extended clans that lead to nepotism and lower levels of identification with the state. The clan structure is a major factor in the Arab world’s endemic corruption and lack of civil society.
But if, as the Israeli study highlights, inbreeding is also a major cause of disease, another conclusion seems inescapable. Just as modern medicine recognizes genetic sources of many physical illnesses, modern psychology recognizes genetic components in many psychological problems including criminality. Presumably, a region where inbreeding is rife—and reinforced through successive generations—should also have a greater frequency of such mental ailments. Though, not surprisingly, there seem to have been no studies in that regard given the delicacy of the subject, the high levels of social pathology, violence, and terrorism in the Arab world suggest that inbreeding is one of the causes.
Such observations are not, of course, comfortable because they are likely to inspire absurd charges of racism. Racism, of course, is not the issue; inbreeding is equally bad for all kinds of people, but Arabs happen to practice it. Indeed, in today’s world it is found mainly in a salient extending from Morocco to Southern India.
World map of prevalence
I think I just heard a deep gong sound in the belfry of my mind.
To everything,
Turn,
Turn,
Turn,
There is a season,
Turn,
Turn,
Turn,
A time to lie sleeping,
A time to wake up...
And you might want to scroll down.
This is great news! After years of ECUSA insanity, I finally have a reason to be a proud member of the anglican communion. We need religious leaders of all faiths - but especially the abrahamic ones, christian, jew and muslim - to stand up to this crazy bs and say enough already.
Presumably, a region where inbreeding is rife—and reinforced through successive generations—should also have a greater frequency of such mental ailments. Though, not surprisingly, there seem to have been no studies in that regard given the delicacy of the subject, the high levels of social pathology, violence, and terrorism in the Arab world suggest that inbreeding is one of the causes.
That's what I thought, there is no data, other than a map of the prevelence of cousin-marriage which seems to overlap with the region of the world that is causing the most trouble for the West lately. This is racist science and I don't even want to be loosely associated with a blog that tolerates it.
It's not racist, it's just science. There are reasons why inbreeding in families is prohibited in the West today; we've have the royal European families as a good example of a bad practice. These were white people.
The science is not done, so there are no empirical studies, because of people yelling 'racist' if it concerns anyone other than white.
How convenient. This reminds me of creation "science"...there's no empirical data, but the explanation is the ATHEIST CABAL won't let anything that opposes the Darwin party line get published.
Isaac and Rebecca were cousins who got hitched. Jacob got hitched to two of his cousins, Rachel and Leah. God even commanded Zelophehad's five daughters to hook up with their cousins. Now why would the creator command his chosen people something that was harmful?
LOL. Who says it wasn't harmful? That there wasn't a warning to be learned from those matches? Esau wasn't exactly the sharpest tack in the box. And Esau's grandson Amalek was the vilest end result of such mistakes. Amalekite influence continues today with those who question the clear outcome.
Teresia, et. al. : references on behavioral and psychiatric effects of inbreeding:
http://www.consang.net/bibliographies/clinical_outcomes/Clinical%20Outcomes%20Behavioural%20and%20Psychiatric%20Disorders..pdf
http://www.anpaonline.org/documents/research/ANPA_RC_Lauterbach1998.pdf#search=%22consanguinity%20behavioral%20psychological%20effects%20%22
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3852/is_200301/ai_n9213259
Theresita you silly slut - if you got to the ArabNews website and scan through their archives, you will see mention made upon occasion there of the high incidence of birth defects in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
One of the stories I'm remembering from a year or two ago mentions a new center that will be built to deal with birth defects ... AFTER the child is born. In other words AFTER a Saudi couple gives birth to a baby with two heads, THEN they will receive counseling on how to deal with it. It wouldn't do, you understand, to do anything about it before the birth.
I'm also remembering another story that a new commission was proposed to be set up (although I think it was just at the proposal stage) to counsel people about to be married on whether that would be a good idea given their family history. The translation for this was that they'd be advised whether their two family's genetic history would likely combine to produce another two-headed baby (or the Arab equivalent of that).
Finally, you might take into consideration that the lack of empirical statistics is NOT because there is are no genetic defects to count, but simply that the Arabs refuse to take census or to track this sort of information.
If the exquisitely sensitive government of Saudi Arabia is lowering itself to counseling couples on their likelihood of producing mutants, doesn't it give you pause to wonder how many mutants are being produced to necessitate such a thing?
And ask yourself when the terrorists run out of suicide bombers they can convince to explode themselves, and they strap the dynamite belt on some poor little guy with the IQ of a turtle and send him toddling off towards the crowd ... WHY are there so many poor little guys with the IQ of a turtle in the Middle East?
"From my point of view as an atheist, there is nothing to choose between Christianity and Islam. They are both big media industries based on lies and fantasy, extracting money from their victims by moral blackmail. If those two monsters drag us all into a fight, everybody will suffer."
I used to be an atheist, and one of particular intellectual rigor I see lacking in atheists these days. One reason why I have no regrets in departing the their tent was the prevalence of the syndrome we see here: a devotion to an abstract ideal—such as the irrationality of religious sentiment—has blinded them to the facts on the ground—such as that a Christian extremist is likely to send you a Jack Chick pamphlet, whereas an Islamic extremist is likely to send you a suicide-bomber. A Christian, if offended, and if true to the laws of his religion, will turn the other cheek: a Mohammedan, if offended, and if true to the laws of his religion, will convert you by the sword, killing you if you resist.
No matter what else the two religions have in common, surely you can tell the difference between that.
I am really disappointed by some of what i read in the comments section of this blog. Who'd have thought that literate people could be so ignorant. Did we not learn anything from the Eugenics movement of the third Reich?
Firstly, the idea of 'Crime' is a social construct developed in recent human history - after the ability to write whilst at the same time over 99.999% of our gene pool has been around for far longer than that - hence crime cannot be genetic. Ideas like that belong in the bin along with phrenology and eugenics.
Secondly, Islam strictly forbids the marriage of close relatives and actively encourages out breeding (the opposite of inbreeding) hence the spread of Islam to everyone from Albania to the habasha (Ethiopia), from the Africans to mongols by breeding and marriage. Just look at the gene pool of Islam around the world for proof, or see the Spanish. Islam taught that all humans are equal and abhorred racists. It is interesting to note that the only Abraham religion that encourages inbreeding is Judaism - hence the development of congenital birth defect that only exist in Jewish populations. Some people will manipulate whatever is to hand to justify their actions, religion, science.... any culture that promotes inbreeding is not doing so for Islamic reasons so lets not be so naive as to accept their assertions!
Do you think you are really so different from your neighbour? Do your research...
PS. If you think that Saudi Arabia as an Islamic country you need to do more research - it isn't. Islam and the monarchism Incompatible.
PPS. Superfly - your a sicko.
Bob Smith.
Sorry to take away another stick of hate from you but Inshallah does not mean "will of God".
It means "...if god wills it". It is used in reference to things beyond personal control like the weather...
For example - I could say "i wish it were a sunny day tomorrow" and you could reply "Inshalla" if you didn't have anyhitng better to say. It would certainly make you look more intelligent than if you'd have said VooDoo with a Veil eh?
To all those that think that Islam is to blame for every evil act done by a Muslim - where was the church during the holocaust? Would you blame Christians for that? I wonder...who you would you blame? Weren't most of the 3rd Reich Christian?
The hypocrisy is as big as the sky that's falling on our heads...
Post a Comment
<< Home