Church of England Synod member’s call to ban building of any new mosques. Is it ok ?

Is there any other kind of religion?

 

Alot of the white biritsh middle class are converting to Islam - http://www.islamfortoday.com/england01.htm

Also - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_notable_converts_to_Islam

Check into the NHS to treat your xenaphobic mindset.

 

Sure there are going to be some converts, But the increase in muslims is a result of immigration, Not conversions.

 

Sure alot of people have immigrated, but people are converting to Islam at a bigger and faster rate than any other religion, surley that statistic suggests Islam has something that these people want and find it attractive? Or do they suggest nothing?

 

It suggests nothing of value. At most it would suggest that middle class white people think islam is trendy and the current "in thing". A bit like they did with kabbalah, Scientology and Buddhism.

What it certainly doesn't suggest is how good islam is. To assume that the numbers suggest quality is an appeal to popularity, It's a logical fallacy.

The fact remains though, The increase in muslims is a result of immigration. According to wikipedia only 0.1% of "white British" people are muslim.

 

I agree, and that is all well and good. But it doesn't happen. Married people get more privilege and resources than unmarried people. Some minority groups may or may not get assistance (depends how you look at it) in job quotas, education etc.

And if 66% of people declare my behavior or opinions criminal, then it will be. They need only pass a law to define it as such.

Let's not even get into how the laws will go too far, and not every citizen has the means to protest and combat their illegitimacy.

 

The question will be if we will not have democarcy then what are we going to replace it with? Some form of minority rule or acceptance of the "fact" that some elite groups and people are more suitable for governing the society?

The examples that you have mentioned has nothing to do with democracy as a government form since even in a dictatorship, you can pass laws and regulation that benefits certain groups in front of others. In a democracy it is not possible to make an idea criminal since it is giving preferance treatment to one citizen way of thinking in comparision to other citizen but it is possible to make certain actions criminal and pass law against it since it will be criminal no matter who does it.

 

I think this statistics making to pop up this calls :

Usual Sunday Attendance

On the basis of these figures in the decade to 1980 the Church of England lost around 30,000 members per year. In the 1980s this decline slowed to around 10,000 a year but decline accelerated in 1992 (the year when women were ordained as priests) to around 20,000 average per year though in the last 3 years the anual fall appears to be less severe.

Year

Usual Sunday Attendance

1968 1,606,000
1970 1,542,000
1978 1,243,000
1980 1,230,000
1984 1,182,000
1986 1,167,000
1990 1,143,000
1991 1,137,000
1992 1,123,000
1993 1,090,000
1994 1,081,000
1995 1,045,000
1996 1,016,000
1997 996,000
1998 977,000
1999 969,000
2000 not collected
2001 938,000
2002 914,000
2003 901,000
2004 903,000
2005 881,000



source : http://www.churchsociety.org/issues_new/church/stats/iss_church_stats_attendance.asp

 

This is a good news, it shows people are becoming more educated and smart. I am sure that the same process is happening among the intellectuals and educated people in Muslim countries.

 

You're creeping me out with the smilies brother.

What we need is a better way to reinforce the absolute protection of those basic rights. The only way I can see that possible, is to make the individual more sovereign. To shrink the power of government as it relates to each citizen.

On the contrary, it has a lot to do with democracy. I think it's an issue with most if not all governmental systems.

That's an argument for whether thought is an action or not. Apparently Saddam Hussein had thought about attacking America, so we had to go kick his ass, and kill hundreds of thousands of people.

 

Sounds good but what does it mean? In a true democracy the citizens are the government, the problem at present time is the people have given up in participating in politics and the governments are actually a minority government that are only democracy in name.

If the problem is with most governmental systems then it proves that it has nothing to do with democracy as government form, so what do you suggest; having no government. Do you think we should all move to wayoming and live on a open range?

This government would have attacked Saddam even if didn't have one thought about attcaking USA, so your example doesn't prove anything. Thoughts are not actions.

 

Participating or not, the system shouldn't fail. Again, those universal rights shouldn't be susceptible to minority votes or elections.

Who are you, and what did you do to gworld? Now only is this badly written, it's not the level of discourse I would expect from J.

See above.

 

Minority rights, governments and societies don't exist in vacuum. If the citizens of a society fail to participate in the government then they will suffer the consequences. No one gives you RIGHTS, you have to protect your rights at every instance. Why should people who destroy the Constitution or the economy by starting a war the only benefits them should feel sorry for idiots who do not want to think and participate in their country politics?
Did you know that the root for the word idiot is from a Greek word meaning people who didn't take part in politics of the society?

 

OK, now you sound like gworld.

But we're back to blaming the citizens, not fixing the system. Even with 100% participation, that does not mean that the problems I have brought up would be addressed.

 

There is never a guarantee for anything but Democracy is still the best form of government for the citizens to co-operate with each other in running their society. The 100% participation increases the possibility of a true democracy which is beneficial for all the citizens since it is natural for human beings to act in away that protects their interests.

 

Actually, as science has progressed in Muslim majority countries, it has drawn people closer to Islam as alot of new things discovered in this and the 20th centruy are in accordance with the Quran which was written 1400 years ago, so rather than people being drawn away due to education, they are being drawn closer.

http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
http://www.islamicmedicine.org/medmiraclesofquran/medmiracleseng.htm

 

Unfortunately for you, I have intensively traveled through the Muslim countries and from my own personal experience I have seen that most well off and educated people in these countries, don't give a flying fu*k for Islam or any other religion.
I have also read the Koran and it is not a very scientific book, so would you care to explain what scientific discovery is mentioned in koran that is in accordance with 20th century science?

 

That's great, i hope you had a good time on your travels. Check the links I provided, hundreds of different statements are provided. The Quran is not a book of science, you are right but the statements in it are in tune with modern science.

 

The links you post are worthless. They are from obviously biased websites.

 

I had a very good time in my travels. Some of the parties that you can find in Muslim countries match or are better than hot spots in Europe. many of women in Muslim countries have shorter skirts than you can find in Ibiza.

I did check your links, it takes a 1 liner from koran and then try to bull shit around it to make it something it is not. For example from a line that God made heaven and earth which is also the same theory as other religions, he draws the conclusion that Koran is talking about the big bang theory.