Worrying About the Future

[Professor S]

I was watching Dennis Miller on his CNBC show a while back, and quite to my surprise John Rhys Davies (Gimli of LOTR fame) made a very valid and very controversial point. That point was that in a short amount of time (I forget what the exact timespan was, but I think he said 10 years) the majority of people living in Western Europe will be Muslim, whether by conversion or relocation. (He also cited a study on it, which I forget right now)

Now this may not seem like a big deal, as on the surface religion seems to have little effect on government, but when you look deeper into it this becomes more troubling.

Islam and Democracy do not make for good bedfellows.

Islam is tied very deeply into every aspect of a Muslim's life, especially in their political views as the Quran (sp?) is essentially taken as law in most cases in Islamic nations.

If Islam becomes the majority in Western Europe in the near future, how will this effect non-muslims? How will this effect the very nature of democracy and the separation of church and state?

I would like to get the input of some Europeans on this, both Muslim and Christian and get their feelings. Maybe the nature of the Western Muslim is different than that of the Middle Eastern Muslim like the nature of the American Muslim tend to be.

So what are you're thoughts?

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

the holy book for muslim (ijust wanted to avoid trying to spell it), doesn't necessarily have vastly different political views, for example, i doubt that saddam hussein followed the book very closely. More often than not its the western hemisphere having differences with them, and this is how wars start.

[Bond]

Islam will just be transformed to fit into society like other religions have. I'm not too worried.

[Crono]

Islam is the fastest growing religion in Canada right now. Especially in Toronto.. tons of Muslims and immigrants from the Middle East. Now a days, in a lot of areas in Toronto, if you're white (and Christian), you're a minority. Kind of makes me feel uncomfortable (not in a racist way... just being from northern Ontario, there is little diversity when it comes to other religions and races). They are even trying to get a "Sharia Court" in Canada.. a Muslim Court (set up by Muslims).. so that Muslims can be governed by it... which, I am totally opposed to. Becuase they want to use the Koran to determine the rights of Muslims in Canada.

But I agree with Bond.. somehow it will be merge with society, just like Christianity has.

[BlueFire]

Wasn't Christianity somehow responsible for molding the society we know now?

[Stonecutter]

I was watching Dennis Miller on his CNBC show a while back, and quite to my surprise John Rhys Davies (Gimli of LOTR fame) made a very valid and very controversial point. That point was that in a short amount of time (I forget what the exact timespan was, but I think he said 10 years) the majority of people living in Western Europe will be Muslim, whether by conversion or relocation. (He also cited a study on it, which I forget right now)

Now this may not seem like a big deal, as on the surface religion seems to have little effect on government, but when you look deeper into it this becomes more troubling.

Islam and Democracy do not make for good bedfellows.

Islam is tied very deeply into every aspect of a Muslim's life, especially in their political views as the Quran (sp?) is essentially taken as law in most cases in Islamic nations.

If Islam becomes the majority in Western Europe in the near future, how will this effect non-muslims? How will this effect the very nature of democracy and the separation of church and state?

I would like to get the input of some Europeans on this, both Muslim and Christian and get their feelings. Maybe the nature of the Western Muslim is different than that of the Middle Eastern Muslim like the nature of the American Muslim tend to be.

So what are you're thoughts?
Once Americans and "The West" learn to be more tolerant of other cultures, (which should be right around the time the liberals retake control of the United States government) things will be fine. Until such time, I fear right along with you.

Of course, you could just stop giving aid to Israel and all your muslim problems would be over in about 24 hours, but there's no time for logical solutions.

[TheGame]

Wasn't Christianity somehow responsible for molding the society we know now?

Yes... America was built on the morals of the Bible. The world is so screwed up right now that I don't even want to have children. Too many changes for the worse are happening all over the world... in america and over seas. And yes... people will always twist the bible's words to fit there own needs.

[TheGame]

Once Americans and "The West" learn to be more tolerant of other cultures, (which should be right around the time the liberals retake control of the United States government) things will be fine.

How exactly would us being more tolerant of their culture make them any more tolerant of ours?

[Professor S]

How exactly would us being more tolerant of their culture make them any more tolerant of ours?

Excellent point and you beat me to it.

As for those who believe that Muslims will just incorporate themselves into what is in a large part Christian law, what happens when Muslims are empowered by numbers and feel the need to be ruled by what they view as their law and not ours, as was pointed out is already happening in Canada?

What happens id Muslims have their own courts one commits offense against a Christain? What court will that case be decided in? Will the other side respect the decision of the court the case takes place in?

What happens if a Muslim kills a Christian and is let go because he killed an infidel/heretic (and depending on your interpretation of the Quran that is a viable argument)?

[Typhoid]

There shouldnt be laws according to religion, it should be laws according to the country/region you are in.

If your in a Muslim country, then you get muslim laws, Christian country, christian laws etc. etc.

[Crono]

There shouldnt be laws according to religion, it should be laws according to the country/region you are in.

If your in a Muslim country, then you get muslim laws, Christian country, christian laws etc. etc.

And what of Muslims eventually out numbering Christians in these "Christian" countries? Laws should be based off of common sense of what's good and bad, not religion.

[Professor S]

And what of Muslims eventually out numbering Christians in these "Christian" countries? Laws should be based off of common sense of what's good and bad, not religion.

There lies the problem. Notions of common sense and good and bad can vary greatly depending how deeply entrenched you are into Christianity/Islam. Many Muslims find women's rights to be offensive enough that if a women were to walk down a street in Saudi Arabia in a tank top they would be stoned by the populace.

A Christian sense of common sense and right and wrong would find that criminal, while the much more socially conservative Muslim ideals would have little problem with it.

This is where my worries stem from.

[Crono]

There lies the problem. Notions of common sense and good and bad can vary greatly depending how deeply entrenched you are into Christianity/Islam. Many Muslims find women's rights to be offensive enough that if a women were to walk down a street in Saudi Arabia in a tank top they would be stoned by the populace.

A Christian sense of common sense and right and wrong would find that criminal, while the much more socially conservative Muslim ideals would have little problem with it.

This is where my worries stem from.

Well I understand what you are saying. Women in Islam can not even have male friends. They are stoned to death for cheating, and you get your hands cut off for stealing.

But... I would think (or hope) that most Muslims become more socially relaxed like we have, and not take their religous laws to the fullest extent. Example... the legalization of gay marriages. It specifically says in the Bible that "God hates that" (referring to gay/lesbians), yet some countries, who are Christian, will still legalize it.

I really don't think that Islam will over throw Christianity, but then again, it's happened in the past, in some places.

Kind of worries me too, I suppose.

I guess we need to start another Crusade. Who's up for it?! :D

[Professor S]

Yeah, that worked out so well last time :D

[Stonecutter]

Yes... America was built on the morals of the Bible. The world is so screwed up right now that I don't even want to have children. Too many changes for the worse are happening all over the world... in america and over seas. And yes... people will always twist the bible's words to fit there own needs.
We shouldn't expect them to be tolerant of our culture until we give them a reason. Actually respecting theirs would be a good start.

[Professor S]

We shouldn't expect them to be tolerant of our culture until we give them a reason. Actually respecting theirs would be a good start.

I would love to hear you're historical perspective on why the West is the problem in this tense relationship. For now I'm writing this off as your everyday liberal self-hate.

[Crono]

We shouldn't expect them to be tolerant of our culture until we give them a reason. Actually respecting theirs would be a good start.

I don't think Christians and Muslims would ever get along that well. It's the same reason why Protestants will hate Catholics, why Muslims will hate Jews, and why Hindus will hate Muslims. Religion makes people too attached to their feelings.

[Rndm_Perfection]

I believe Osama said that America is the greatest threat to Islam. Now... could it possibly be because we're trying to spread Democracy?

[Typhoid]

I would love to hear you're historical perspective on why the West is the problem in this tense relationship. For now I'm writing this off as your everyday liberal self-hate.


I dont want to start another hate forum...but what do you mean "your going to write this off as"? Was i sick the day your was the only opionion that counts? Whay can someone have an opinion without you saying how their views are wrong and illogical? Do like ruining people beliefs? Do you tell little children that there is no Santa, other than the fact that you dont think so?

I have no problem with you or what you say, just the manor you chose to say it in. You make it sound like you know everything.

[Crono]

I dont want to start another hate forum...but what do you mean "your going to write this off as"? Was i sick the day your was the only opionion that counts? Whay can someone have an opinion without you saying how their views are wrong and illogical? Do like ruining people beliefs? Do you tell little children that there is no Santa, other than the fact that you dont think so?

I have no problem with you or what you say, just the manor you chose to say it in. You make it sound like you know everything.

First of all... telling children that there is no Santa is awesome. It's what Maddox would do. http://maddox.xmission.com

Second of all... opinions are worthless if they are not based off of any facts. I don't know why you don't see this. If "opinions" come randomly out of the head, then they're wrong... yes, wrong. If you have the facts, then you can form an opinion.

And third of all... Uh... yeah.

[Typhoid]

So then isnt The Strangler wrong in stating his OPINION on how someone elses OPINION was wrong? ( which is what i was saying)

And yes Maddox is the king...well...pirate king that is...except on april fools day, then he was the Mr. Clean king who loved everyone..

( And Crono..i do know that...read the sig, its been there for a while...)

[Rndm_Perfection]

And third of all... Uh... yeah.

And third of all... he may not know everything, but by they way he presents his information, it appears he knows more than you. It's your job taking part in the debate to respect that; if you don't, he has no need to respect your opinion.

But, that's not the case here. I think you just missread what he posted, because I couldn't find a relation to what you said and what you quoted.

[Crono]

So then isnt The Strangler wrong in stating his OPINION on how someone elses OPINION was wrong? ( which is what i was saying)

And yes Maddox is the king...well...pirate king that is...except on april fools day, then he was the Mr. Clean king who loved everyone..

( And Crono..i do know that...read the sig, its been there for a while...)

Isn't a "view" and an "opinion" the same thing?

[Typhoid]

Isn't a "view" and an "opinion" the same thing?


Semantics my friend....but yes, they probably are...but the sentace wouldnt sound right without one of them in it...

[TheGame]

Typhoid, you need to take a philosophy class. There is a such thing as a valid and invalid point... your arguements are not valid because you don't base them off of facts. That doesn't mean you are "wrong" but it does mean that you can and never will come out on top in a debate and you will be made to look wrong by the people who use more facts to back there arguements.

Here's an example:

You are in a room, the room has two sides seperated by prison bars... On one side there is you, the keys to open up the door in the bars, and a gun. On the other side there is your worst enemy, and he is yelling at you that he will kill you the second you open the door and let him through.

"In my opinion you should hand him the gun and unlock the door and let him through, because I think if you do that he may become your best friend and not want to harm you at all."-Mr. Dumass

Is that opinion "wrong"? No... but is it based off of facts? No. Thus making the person who made the opinion sound like a complete idiot. Just think about it.

[Professor S]

Typhoid, a basic concept you are having trouble grasping is that there is a difference between having an opinion and having that opinion respected. The lynch pin in having your opinion respected is factual evidence to back it up.

There are many people here who don't agree with me but respect my opinions because I back them up with information and evidence and often times just common sense.

Do you see anyone here getting your back in this argument? That should tell you something.

All I did was ask Stonecutter for some information to back up why he felt that the West was the problem in the relationship between the Middle East and the West. Now there is plenty of information there if he wishes to look it up going back as far as the Crusades or as recent as the founding of Israel. I just wanted to see whether or not he was basing his opinion on political correctness or on actual information.

Now you might wonder I tend to be very blunt when challenging people's opinions, a reason I have kept secret until now...

The answer is simple: I am going to school to become a secondary school teacher and the best way to engage a young mind to tell them they're wrong, because as we all know young people think they are always right. By telling them they are wrong, even if they have a valid point, it inspires further study and gives them a reason to become more involved in the topic.

Just look at how far Dyflon has come before I first began aguing with him. Debating him has become increasingly difficult since I began this strategy, though I can still take him;). Unfortunately that strategy is not working with Typhoid... :(

[Stonecutter]

I would love to hear you're historical perspective on why the West is the problem in this tense relationship. For now I'm writing this off as your everyday liberal self-hate.
Well, we'll start with the west's support of Israel. The country in violation of the most UN sanctions, and the largest terrorist state in the entire world.

Oh wait, I'm sorry.

They're "Freedom Fighters."

[Professor S]

I can see where you're coming from Stonecutter, but I have to disagree for several reasons:

1) Who started the chain of violence? It wasn't Israel.

2) Israel targets their opponents, while the terrorists just attack civilians, dogs, children. It doesn't matter to them.

3) Palestine is a fictional state and there are no such thing as Palestinians. Look it up, its true.

4) Israel has made large land concessions in the past, which the "Palestinans" used to continue their terror attacks.

5) The "Palestinian" terrorists want the total destruction of Israel, not land concessions. This has been evident when cease fire after cease fire was broken by the terrorists that the PLO is either unable or unwilling (I'm betting the latter) to control. Do you think this is a realistic goal in ending the violence?

In the end peace lies in the hands of the "Palestinians". They have to make and KEEP an agreement if they want peace. Israel is not going anywhere and no one should expect it to, whether or not you agree or disagree with the circumstances surrounding Israel's creation. Once the terrorists come to realize this, then we may see an end to the violence.

Now I can see how Middle Easterners can dislike the West for their support of Israel, but I do not agree with you calling them terrorists. Israel does not qulaify on any level.

[Typhoid]

I just want to say to the Strangler that i dont mind you, its the fact that you alway need to be right and get in the last word.

And i dont care if nobody has my back, maybe they dont want to, because you will reem them out for opposing your opinions, and "common sense". Like you, i stand by my opinions and remarks whether people agree with me or not, but i also admit when im wrong.

And The Game, that example was common sense...in no way would i hand the gun to the prisoner..because well if someones yelling at you that hes going to kill you...giving him a gun isnt all to smart. You cant just guess on what i would sa with a lame "example", and dont imply i would be so stupid either.(NHF)

[Stonecutter]

I can see where you're coming from Stonecutter, but I have to disagree for several reasons:

1) Who started the chain of violence? It wasn't Israel.

Israel's creation started the chain of violence[/i]

2) Israel targets their opponents, while the terrorists just attack civilians, dogs, children. It doesn't matter to them.

Israel doesn't "target" much of anything,They'd rather just launch a flechette round into a densely packed civilian area. (http://www.thenausea.com/elements/Israel/israel-doc1.html) You want to argue about whether or not the areas are "densely packed" go ahead, but you cannot justify the use of flechettes in any civilian area (nor can you justify the use of cluster bombs)

3) Palestine is a fictional state and there are no such thing as Palestinians. Look it up, its true.

1)Who said anything about Palestine?

2)Why does that hold any weight?

3)They call themselves Palestinians, therefore, that is what they are.

4) Israel has made large land concessions in the past, which the "Palestinians" used to continue their terror attacks.

5) The "Palestinian" terrorists want the total destruction of Israel, not land concessions. This has been evident when cease fire after cease fire was broken by the terrorists that the PLO is either unable or unwilling (I'm betting the latter) to control. Do you think this is a realistic goal in ending the violence?

In the end peace lies in the hands of the "Palestinians". They have to make and KEEP an agreement if they want peace. Israel is not going anywhere and no one should expect it to, whether or not you agree or disagree with the circumstances surrounding Israel's creation. Once the terrorists come to realize this, then we may see an end to the violence.

Now I can see how Middle Easterners can dislike the West for their support of Israel, but I do not agree with you calling them terrorists. Israel does not qualify on any level.

This quote is from an essay written by a Jew and published by a group called Jews for justice, you can find the link to the entire essay at the bottom of this post

""An article by Yitzhak Epstein, published in Hashiloah in 1907...called for a new Zionist policy towards the Arabs after 30 years of settlement activity...Like Ahad-Ha'am in 1891, Epstein claims that no good land is vacant, so Jewish settlement meant Arab dispossession...Epstein's solution to the problem, so that a new "Jewish question" may be avoided, is the creation of a bi-national, non-exclusive program of settlement and development. Purchasing land should not involve the dispossession of poor sharecroppers. It should mean creating a joint farming community, where the Arabs will enjoy modern technology. Schools, hospitals and libraries should be non-exclusivist and education bilingual...The vision of non-exclusivist, peaceful cooperation to replace the practice of dispossession found few takers. Epstein was maligned and scorned for his faintheartedness." Israeli author, Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, "Original Sins.""

Palestinians just want their land back, it was theirs for about 1200 years and it's rightfully theirs now. Israel is a piss ant country without United States/Western military support. That alone would be enough to make me pissed at the United States if I were an Arab.

What happened to the Jews was awful, but it doesn't justify their land grab. I admit there's no easy answer to the solution, but the current one is dead wrong.

http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

[TheGame]

And The Game, that example was common sense...in no way would i hand the gun to the prisoner..because well if someones yelling at you that hes going to kill you...giving him a gun isnt all to smart. You cant just guess on what i would sa with a lame "example", and dont imply i would be so stupid either.(NHF)


Um... I wasn't saying YOU would do it. Look again. I'm showing an example of a unrespectable opinion that's not based off of any facts surrounding the situation. I'm not implying that you would do that.

[Professor S]

[/b]

Palestinians just want their land back, it was theirs for about 1200 years and it's rightfully theirs now. Israel is a piss ant country without United States/Western military support. That alone would be enough to make me pissed at the United States if I were an Arab.

What happened to the Jews was awful, but it doesn't justify their land grab. I admit there's no easy answer to the solution, but the current one is dead wrong.

http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

Good stuff, Stonecutter. You pointed out a lot of things I didn't know. I'll have to go back and check out some of the information you cited and linked. Thanks for the reply.

[Stonecutter]

Good stuff, Stonecutter. You pointed out a lot of things I didn't know. I'll have to go back and check out some of the information you cited and linked. Thanks for the reply.
Well when you do, let me know if you still don't think they're not even the slightest bit "terroists."

What happened to the Jews is probably the single worst event in the history of humanity, but we cannot treat the Israelis as Pariahs. They are in the wrong on almost every issue and we look away, or we encourage them.

Something has to change if there is ever going to be peace.