Islam helps to boost British values, says ex-archbishop - Polidicks

some of the most english people I know are muslims some of the people I work with are muslims, and I have learned tons from them, eaten some amazing food that they've given me to try, laughed with them anyone who thinks that muslims are not british, is not british. Part of our colonial heritage is the fact that our 'culture' is a complete mess of different people if you want muslims out of the UK, then get the fuck out yourself. You're part of the problem. If we're going with ideals, then Western society has no place for intolerance or repression.

[QUOTE=Sprockethead;45600324][Citation needed] (dont worry i know you cant produce one.) [/QUOTE] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Iraq_under_Ba'athist_rule"]it's quite understood that the u.s. played a pivotal part in shoving saddam into iraq and fucking over the country which almost definitely inspired the following iranian revolution that brought the country out of western style and into the current theocracy[/URL] [quote]Again, Get fucked. We are not catholic christianity, we are now, at least in denmark, almost entirely secular in mind. And other nations that are catholic, protestant or similar, do not allow religious organisations to determine policy of law in the way islam does.[/quote] yeah and secularists/atheists can be bigots just the same; [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion"] lmao, denmark isn't even a secular state, it has a state religion whereas a majority of middle eastern states have no state government[/URL] [quote]So what are muslims doing here in our shitty white, zenophobic, anti-islam nations when there are such great alternatives.[/quote] you do realize people can live in a country and have religious certain religious beliefs and not have been born in the middle east or agree with the government policies in those countries? you again seem to think that every muslim is a radical shariah law believer that hates the western world, when in reality, that is a very small minority have you even met or talked to a muslim? you're spewing almost stereotypical racist xenophobia (lol 'get fucked' great argument)

Those who are willing to integrate or already are, just stay folks because a country always needs good citizens. Those who act like that one video or are simply disrespecting their adoptive country can outright fuck off. Why is it so hard to understand, some people just DON'T want to integrate. Keeping those fuckheads does no good, for anyone.

Muslims themselves may have boosted values probably, different cultures and all that, but not Islam itself, though as a guy from an immigrant family from two muslim countries I don't see how it's benefited the place at all This archbishop has said that muslims should be allowed their own separate courts altogether, completely ignoring common sense that the law should be the same for everyone I notice a lot of the hate muslims as a people get seems to come from a Christian viewpoint, and there's ideological criticism from people who identify as Christians, hypocrites the load of them

[QUOTE=headshotter;45600593]Those who are willing to integrate or already are, just stay folks because a country always needs good citizens. Those who act like that one video or are simply disrespecting their adoptive country can outright fuck off. Why is it so hard to understand, some people just DON'T want to integrate. Keeping those fuckheads does no good, for anyone.[/QUOTE] 'integration' is an extremely subjective viewpoint. what one british person thinks are 'british values' are completely different for another. what about muslims who have lived in the UK for generations? do [i]they[/i] need to 'integrate'?

[QUOTE=Charybdis;45600605]Muslims themselves may have boosted values probably, different cultures and all that, but not Islam itself[/QUOTE] all religious text can be interpreted differently, just as the christian texts can be interpreted in a violent, derogatory, abhorrent way, (as was the case for a good deal of history) so can the muslim texts the quran, and by extension, islam, is no more inherently violent or destructive than catholicism or christianity

[QUOTE=Bobie;45600624]'integration' is an extremely subjective viewpoint. what one british person thinks are 'british values' are completely different for another. what about muslims who have lived in the UK for generations? do [i]they[/i] need to 'integrate'?[/QUOTE] You don't need to be drinking tea every day at 4pm to be integrated into british society. Not constantly shitting on the UK, its people, its culture, having a job (or looking for one), being a law-abiding citizen, this kind of common-sense.

[QUOTE=headshotter;45600593]Those who are willing to integrate or already are, just stay folks because a country always needs good citizens. Those who act like that one video or are simply disrespecting their adoptive country can outright fuck off. Why is it so hard to understand, some people just DON'T want to integrate. Keeping those fuckheads does no good, for anyone.[/QUOTE] 99.9% of all Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Sikhs, whatever [I]do[/I] integrate. Sure, they might not convert to Anglicanism and start praising Jesus or anything, but nor do Catholics. It is literally just, at the most, a few thousand idiots, who are totally blinded by religious dogma and do this stupid 'behead everything!!!' bullshit. If you look at Uganda, where Christian values are held to mean 'almost pass a law punishing homosexuality with execution', or even Tibet, where Muslims are slaughtered by extremist fucking [I]Buddhists[/I], it's easy to see that there are violent, murderous idiots in all religions, including the lack of it. Europe has a major problem with Islam because it's recently come into the public eye, and people seem to think that the most extreme, disgusting distortions of its words (just because it's in the book doesn't mean most of them listen to it- just look at the Bible and Torah talking about pretty much the same shit) somehow represent the entire religion, and the moderates are just the 'good ones', when in fact it's blatantly the other way round. Culture is all about slow mixing, at least in modern society. Over time, British Muslims will likely pick up many British traits, and I expect other Brits will pick up some of theirs, too- knowing us, probably the food. This is great, it's wonderful. I think multiculturalism is one of the greatest gifts to modern society, because it means we all end up getting along better due to our intertwined histories. And if you think we won't integrate to them as much as they integrate to us, remember that it was Jewish immigrants who brought battered fish to us- probably the first 'British' thing that pops into anybody's head.

Islam (like a lot of major religions) generally teaches good values to its followers. However there are some parts which I think are unacceptable (treatment of women is a big one, and that's not just in Islam). The best way to keep hold of our "British values" is to remember our heritage and that we're basically a collection of historic cultures in the first place. When your land has been settled by pretty much every nation for the last 3,000 years, your identity is made up of all those people who came into the country at the time. This is still happening now as we have Poles, Romanians and so on who are making lives for themselves here. Ironically an Indian curry house is a very British thing.

[QUOTE=Loriborn;45600653]all religious text can be interpreted differently, just as the christian texts can be interpreted in a violent, derogatory, abhorrent way, (as was the case for a good deal of history) so can the muslim texts the quran, and by extension, islam, is no more inherently violent or destructive than catholicism or christianity[/QUOTE] Well yeah as I said it's hypocritical for muslims and christians to denounce each other because they're pretty much the same The interpretation thing I'm sorry to say is bullshit, only since understanding and acceptance has gone up over the centuries have holy texts conveniently been open to "interpretation" if only to stay relevant. There is no message we got in a good way from the quran that we didn't get in the bible beforehand. Islam itself has brought nothing, immigrants and the mix of cultures has

I'd say that's pretty accurate, I mean, look at all the lovely pro-Britain organisations that have been gaining traction lately.

[QUOTE=Charybdis;45600754]The interpretation thing I'm sorry to say is bullshit, only since understanding and acceptance has gone up over the centuries have holy texts conveniently been open to "interpretation". There is no message we got in a good way from the quran that we didn't get in the bible beforehand. Islam itself has brought nothing, immigrants and the mix of cultures has[/QUOTE] but just because christianity spread first, (largely thanks to rome) to europe, doesnt negate islam's place in the world a religion doesnt have to introduce new ideals to a region be any more valid than the religions that have existed there for centuries

[QUOTE=headshotter;45600665]You don't need to be drinking tea every day at 4pm to be integrated into british society. Not constantly shitting on the UK, its people, its culture, having a job (or looking for one), being a law-abiding citizen, this kind of common-sense.[/QUOTE] not constantly shitting on the uk and its culture are british values? wow man you don't know a lot about our past then

[QUOTE=Loriborn;45600789]but just because christianity spread first, (largely thanks to rome) to europe, doesnt negate islam's place in the world a religion doesnt have to introduce new ideals to a region be any more valid than the religions that have existed there for centuries[/QUOTE] My point is the religions are fake and obsolete and that any benefit muslims have brought is anything but religious

[QUOTE=UberMensch;45600716][B]Islam (like a lot of major religions) generally teaches good values to its followers.[/B] However there are some parts which I think are unacceptable (treatment of women is a big one, and that's not just in Islam). The best way to keep hold of our "British values" is to remember our heritage and that we're basically a collection of historic cultures in the first place. When your land has been settled by pretty much every nation for the last 3,000 years, your identity is made up of all those people who came into the country at the time. This is still happening now as we have Poles, Romanians and so on who are making lives for themselves here. Ironically an Indian curry house is a very British thing.[/QUOTE] you mean an ideology destructive to human happiness, gender relations, pacifism as well as being anti rational, anti life, anti joy, anti reality are good things? granted, that is what the quran teaches, not necessarily what muslims do or are. the theology itself is a wretched horrible thing

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45598465]No all abramic religions do that.[/QUOTE] Not true. "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." No such distinction exists in Islam. It proclaims to take care of everything. Your legal system, your diet, your dress code, your banking and economic systems, everything. There is no distinction between terrestrial power and religious power in Islam, and up until recently, no Islamic states have made such a distinction.

[QUOTE=Kentz;45602226]you mean an ideology destructive to human happiness, gender relations, pacifism as well as being anti rational, anti life, anti joy, anti reality are good things? granted, that is what the quran teaches, not necessarily what muslims do or are. the theology itself is a wretched horrible thing[/QUOTE] He just said it has bits that are unacceptable and he's right that the Quran does preach good values, just look at Ramadan one of the pillars of Islam and try to say that's bad.

[QUOTE=Loriborn;45600153]islamic countries have historically been places of progress and learning while christian europe suffered under tyranny and oppression under the catholic church[/quote] This is a gigantic myth that people need to stop repeating. Your so-called "Islamic Golden Age" was to put it briefly the product of Ancient Greek texts on the sciences which the Muslims preserved and their conquests of surrounding peoples from which they "borrowed" a lot of their ideas, like the algebraic concept of zero for example (from the Hindus). Conquering was how they achieved most of their progress; once they stopped, they stagnated horribly. There were of course a number of genuine advancements made here and there by Muslims like Avicenna and Al-Jayyani at the time, but how exactly do you rationalize that as being a product of their religion? Same for Chrisitianity; how do you attribute advancements made by Christian philosophers, doctors, etc. to the religion itself? I hate this argument because of how fallacious it is. Also, the myth of a Christian Dark Age in Europe is exactly that: a myth. Even after the fall of the Roman Empire, Europe was not a place of mindlessness and poverty. Advancements in technology and social awareness for things like charity, healthcare, philanthropy, even farming and the issue of slavery were there. Actually, in comparison to the superstitions of the Greco-Roman past, there was a lot of change for the better concerning ideas on human equality, the philosophy of god and the universe, etc. There was an immense amount of progress made by the Franks in the Imperial Carolingian Renaissance and by the Byzantines in their golden age covering architecture, law, engineering, writing, theology, and artistic endeavors. One of the greatest things about the Catholic Church as well which you've failed to mention is that it directly enforced religious unity in Europe and helped in this way to maintain peace. And they were also responsible for financing a lot of the artistic and even scientific pursuits that were made in the Middle Ages. [quote]the bullshit idea that islam is any worse than any other religion is silly, because the only reason 'islam is bad,' is because of recent changings in the forces in power in the middle east[/quote] No, it's silly because what makes it "worse" is a matter of opinion. Although personally, it's historical track record for violence, beginning with a conquering holy warrior of a prophet engaging in the brutal religious suppression of neighboring tribes and cities, is what turns me off to it. You should actually read the Quran sometime. I get that it's the product of 6th and 7th century superstition and harsh living conditions, but some of the things condoned in it are disturbingly brutal even in relation to what you'll find in the Bible's more disturbing segments. There's no reason to condone this religion and its teachings and especially its history, unless you've been raised your whole life to believe in it. That's true of most religions, but is particularly true in Islam's case. Not all religions teach or have historically practiced the same thing; therefore, not all religions are equal.

[QUOTE=Govna;45603500] You should actually read the Quran sometime. I get that it's the product of 6th and 7th century superstition and harsh living conditions, but some of the things condoned in it are disturbingly brutal even in relation to what you'll find in the Bible's more disturbing segments.[/quote] They both condone basically all of the same things, if you consider the Old Testament. The moderates of both religions have just come up with convenient ways to whitewash the things their religion used to condone - Christians ignore the Old Testament, Muslims point to how the Quran is chronological and later writings override past ones. And honestly, that's fine. Some pretty terrible shit has been done in the name of the biology too, but we don't immediately dismiss those sciences. What counts is what people currently do in the name of their religion. In the cases of both Christianity and Islam in the western world the vast majority basically just use it as a social club.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;45603969]They both condone basically all of the same things, if you consider the Old Testament. The moderates of both religions have just come up with convenient ways to whitewash the things their religion used to condone - Christians ignore the Old Testament, Muslims point to how the Quran is chronological and later writings override past ones. And honestly, that's fine. Some pretty terrible shit has been done in the name of the biology too, but we don't immediately dismiss those sciences. What counts is what people currently do in the name of their religion. In the cases of both Christianity and Islam in the western world the vast majority basically just use it as a social club.[/QUOTE] Not true at all. This myth of equity between religions needs to end. Not all religions are teaching the same thing, they're not all intrinsically benign, and they aren't all just different paths to the same truth. These are things a lot of religious moderates like to pretend, but it simply isn't true in practice or in theory. Buddhism and Judaism are completely incompatible. Christianity and Islam aren't just "social clubs," but they are institutions which possess massive potential power and sway in the terrestrial realm (political power, etc.) Would circumcision exist without religion? Would female equality be better or worse in the Middle East without Islam? Would the teaching of evolution even be a question without Evangelical Christians fighting against it? Religion doesn't just sit on the side of the road as mean people come by and use it as an excuse. It gives rise to imaginary conflicts and creates problems where none exist.

[QUOTE=headshotter;45600665]You don't need to be drinking tea every day at 4pm to be integrated into british society. Not constantly shitting on the UK, its people, its culture, having a job (or looking for one), being a law-abiding citizen, this kind of common-sense.[/QUOTE] I don't have a job at the moment and I constantly shit on the uk and I've broken laws and I'm a British national should I get out of this country?

[QUOTE=Govna;45603500]big post[/QUOTE] Well hold on a moment there [quote]One of the greatest things about the Catholic Church as well which you've failed to mention is that it directly enforced religious unity in Europe and helped in this way to maintain peace.[/quote] [quote]No, it's silly because what makes it "worse" is a matter of opinion. Although personally, it's historical track record for violence, beginning with a conquering holy warrior of a prophet engaging in the brutal religious suppression of neighboring tribes and cities, is what turns me off to it.[/quote] So Charlemagne's Frankish conquests and his ritual executions and forced conversions of pagan Saxons were just "enforcing religious unity for peace," whereas Islamic invasions, nearly at the same time I might add, are "brutal religious suppression," ?

tbh the islamic invasions really just preyed on two already weakened empires the reason islam did so well isn't because of any inherent moral convictions of the followers, nor numbers, nor innovative military techniques or the such. the arabs were a collection of squabbling tribes that ransacked the carcasses of the byzantine and sassanian empires before standardizing and enforcing a single religion to try and create some form of unity for this vast new empire that had been created while they settled down, the moslems tended to live in small forts on the outskirts of the big cities full of christians and zoroastrians (the widespread conversion did not get momentum until the high middle ages), generally promoting tolerance and having a loose hand on social and economic affairs. the greatest works in their philosophy, sciences, technologies, etc were made during this time by the time of the crusader states and mongol invasions however, the islamic countries began a slow slide into irrelevance (with the ottomans being the last), progressively losing to the west as they stagnated both socially and economically. i think the major difference is that while the europeans were banning witch burnings and starting to reform their criminal systems and to develop new political philosophies in the 18th century, the islamic countries were still stoning people for quite some time afterwards

[QUOTE=Emperorconor;45605561]tbh the islamic invasions really just preyed on two already weakened empires [/QUOTE] Erm, and which weakened empire do you think the Franks got their religion, military structure and academic resources from?

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;45604937]Well hold on a moment there So Charlemagne's Frankish conquests and his ritual executions and forced conversions of pagan Saxons were just "enforcing religious unity for peace," whereas Islamic invasions, nearly at the same time I might add, are "brutal religious suppression," ?[/QUOTE] Charlemagne's response to the pagans was the result of prior tensions with them-- tensions which were not started by the Christians. See back when Clovis, the first king of the Franks, converted to Christianity in 496 because of the fact his wife was a Christian, this caused as you might expect a lot of anger and resentment from the pagans. They turned to the ruler of Cambrai, Clovis' relative Ragnarius, for military action because Ragnarius was still a pagan. There were several thousand of Clovis' own warriors who defected to Ragnarius over this issue in fact. Long story short: there was spying and fighting, Clovis defeated and killed Ragnarius, and that settled the issue of Frankish unity for the time being. Now fast forward to 772 when Charlemagne's war with the Saxons began. There's already been centuries of religious tension by that point. Charlemagne began the war after a band of Saxon pagans looted and burned the church of Deventer in Austrasia. He destroys some of their strongholds, begins negotiating with their nobles, and then gets sidetracked on the Lombards and their lands because they're an issue for the pope. So him and his uncle focus on Lombardy for the time being; meanwhile, the Saxons, led by the pagan Wittekind, are still rather pissed off at how badly things went for them, so they start raiding Frankish settlements along the Rhine. Charlemagne goes back from Italy and puts the rebellion down several years later. Basically, the reason why he went hardcore on the pagans was because he was sick of dealing with them rebelling all the time and figured the best way to prevent it from happening again would be to make things simple: either you become a good Christian and thereby a good Frankish subject, or else you're fucked. It was over religion, yeah, but Christianity was not the belligerent one in that situation. I mean that as in they didn't start any shit at the time; the pagans did. Islamic invasions in the meanwhile were not at all of this nature. The Abbasids at the same time of Charlemagne's wars were invading the Byzantine Empire, because they were of course massive rivals and the Caliph al-Rashid wanted to be as much of a dick to the Byzantines as he could (actually making it at one point to Constantinople). That sort of religious belligerence over their border regions was nothing new, though. You're off on my point here though: Charlemagne was not the prophetic figure around which Christianity based itself. Muhammad was the prophetic figure around which Islam based itself, and Muhammad was indeed actually a conquering holy warrior guilty of everything from attempting to exterminate all the Jewish tribes of Medina and the region, because fuck them for being Jews, to capturing/beheading/raping several hundred other people for being "guilty" of Fitnah (disbelief). Why in the name of fuck would you in the 21st century choose to believe that that man was a prophet and actually hold him in reverence? That's ridiculous. I mean religion in general is pretty ridiculous with some of the stuff it claims, but just that historical fact alone makes Islam particularly grotesque, all other history relating to it aside.

Where did this 'nation of immigrants' crap come from? First there were the Brythons, who were Celts, then the Anglo-Saxons slaughtered them and pushed them West. Then the Vikings came, slaughtered some English, especially in the North. Then the English pushed a lot of them back again. Then the Normans came, slaughtered some English, especially in the North, and became toffs, but ended up speaking English. These were the biggest migrations AFAIK until the 20th Century. If this is the precedent people are using for modern migration, well - if you're from Yorkshire, time to build a bunker. The whole thing smacks of Americanism. Or Londoners.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;45605898]Erm, and which weakened empire do you think the Franks got their religion, military structure and academic resources from?[/QUOTE] None really. Rome had ceased to exist for several centuries by that point. The Franks only converted to christianity and adopted the Catholic church centuries after the Roman Empire had left Gaul, and they didn't even share the same military structure at all.

[QUOTE=007JamesBond007;45598374][video=youtube;psZBaJU_Cvo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psZBaJU_Cvo[/video] This is why a lot of people hate muslims in britain. "British police go to hell" how about you get the fuck out, theres an airport right there. [IMG]http://i.gyazo.com/c6293b114214fec9d4f4b861fc00921c.png[/img] fuck no[/QUOTE] She got really offended when they said that anyone who isn't Muslim is going to hell... but don't Christianity and Judaism say the same thing? There's certainly a minority of Christians/Jews who do believe that and it's the same case here. To imply that the opinions of one idiotic protest is in any way representative of everyone of that religion is just wrong.

[QUOTE=Loriborn;45600153] what of all the countries with predominantly muslim demographics that arent 'wartorn shitholes' like kosovo, indonesia, and kuwait?[/QUOTE] Are you saying Kosovo isn't wartorn shithole? I'd rather live in Africa than go near that shithole now.