The Hazards of Belief

recedite · 06-09-2016 12:01am

You have to look at what happens when you pour unskilled migrants into an advanced economy. In the case of a US style economy they provide cheap labour, thus increasing profits for a few wealthy capitalists but depressing wages for ordinary workers. Its dog eat dog, and every man/woman for themselves. These same capitalists will fight tooth and nail to cut back on public services and the likes of public health services (or "obamacare" as they like to call it) They have the money to pay for private hospitals, Yale, Harvard etc.. for themselves.

But in the case of a Swedish style economy the migrants can exist very well on state benefits; free housing education and healthcare. Hence they don't bother working, integrating, or even learning the language. Sooner or later taxes rise and social services become overburdened. The remaining taxpayers resent the fact that not everyone is pulling their weight. Social capital and social cohesion have been lost. The economy is forced then to switch to a more right wing US style economy, which is exactly what some people want.
Why would Sweden allow this to happen? One possible clue is that a few bankster families own a disproportionate number of the businesses in Sweden. For example the Wallenberg family. These are in league with the likes of Peter Sutherland and George Soros. In effect, Sweden up till now consisted of a very socialist minded public, but whose employers were not far off being feudal overlords. Which is a precarious political situation to be in.

So in Europe we are actually moving further away from the more utopian future I described earlier. But 50 years is a long time, so plenty of time for unforeseen "events" to cause a U-turn. Stuff like Brexit, but on a much larger scale.

Hotblack Desiato · 06-09-2016 1:12am

PopePalpatine wrote: »

What's in Nearly Dead Alive! this week?

This is from the front cover, they're plugging a book too:

"Show Yourself A Man", should be popular enough in Maynooth

silverharp · 06-09-2016 9:43am

^^^
no reviews on Amazon , so we will never know

Canadian story about Muslims upset that their kids have to do music classes in school. Personally not a fan of the schools bending to this pressure

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/mandatory-music-classes-strike-sour-note-with-muslim-parents/article31716832/?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=Referrer:+Social+Network+/+Media&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links

When music class begins this week at Toronto’s Donwood Park elementary school, Mohammad Nouman Dasu will send a family member to collect his three young children. They will go home for an hour rather than sing and play instruments – a mandatory part of the Ontario curriculum he believes violates his Muslim faith.

The Scarborough school and the Toronto District School Board originally had offered an accommodation – suggesting students could just clap their hands in place of playing instruments or listen to acapella versions of O Canada – but not a full exemption from the class.

After a bitter three-year fight, however, Mr. Dasu felt he had no other opton but to bring his kids home.

According to documents ob-tained by The Globe and Mail, some parents insist they cannot allow their children to be in the same room where musical instruments are being played. Mr. Dasu, a Koran teacher who sometimes leads prayers at Scarborough’s Jame Abu Bakr Siddique mosque, says he has led the fight on behalf of parents. He has consulted with national Islamic bodies, and requested a letter from the leader of his mosque.

“We here believe that music is haram [forbidden]. We can neither listen to it, nor can we play a role in it,” said the mosque’s imam, Kasim Ingar.

Conceding that Muslims have to adjust when they send their kids to public school, he suggested that some matters, such as teaching music, are beyond debate.

“We do not compromise with anyone on the clear-cut orders and principles conveyed by the Prophet,” said Mr. Ingar, who also leads the Scarborough Muslim Association.

Within Islam, the question of whether Muslims are banned from music is divisive and nuanced. Similar to questions about whether women should wear veils, there is no consensus on the issue.

But Ontario’s primary-school curriculum is unambiguous on music class: It must be taught, without exception, to all primary-school-aged children. Officials at the TDSB say they can only bend the rules to accommodate religious students, but not exempt them.

The Globe used freedom of information laws to access TDSB e-mails on how the issue evolved at Donwood Park, where it first surfaced in 2013.

The released records redact the names of students for privacy reasons, and very few families appear to have been adamant over pulling children from music classes. Early internal e-mails show administrators wanted to find “some common ground.”

robindch · 06-09-2016 10:32am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

"Show Yourself A Man", should be popular enough in Maynooth

I'm gonna have to find me a copy of that edition and leave it around at home with that bit marker-circled for the next time Popette visits

kylith · 07-09-2016 11:51pm

“We here believe that music is haram [forbidden]. We can neither listen to it, nor can we play a role in it,”

How very sad. Even the most primitive cultures have music and song, it's one of the things that makes us human. I feel sorry for them.

Hotblack Desiato · 08-09-2016 12:52am

Sucking the joy out of life, one fatwa at at time.

Hotblack Desiato · 11-09-2016 7:46pm

Trouble at mill in Athy:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/lesbian-couple-to-retake-church-roles-they-were-forced-to-leave-1.2785746

Lesbian couple to retake church roles they were ‘forced’ to leave

Athy activist who asked women to resign ‘will not be intimidated out of the parish’

A married lesbian couple who felt pressured to stand down from choir and Minister of the Eucharist roles in the Catholic parish of Athy, Co Kildare, are to return to those roles at 6pm Mass there on Saturday evening.

Jacinta O’Donnell and Geraldine Flanagan married last July and stepped down from leadership positions in the St Michael’s church choirs due to what they described as pressure by local Catholic activist and editor of the conservative Catholic Voice newspaper Anthony Murphy. He had also conveyed his views to parish priest Canon Frank McEvoy who, the couple said, had been supportive of them.

...

Mr Murphy told The Irish Times he believed their decision to return was as a result of “a campaign of hate and threats of physical violence” against him which the Garda was investigating. He said gardaí had advised him “not to attend Sunday Mass this Sunday [at St Michael’s] for my own personal safety”.

He and his family “will not be intimidated out of the parish or out of the town”. He accused the Catholic Church and Sinn Féin locally of having entered into “a bizarre alliance” against him.

Speaking to Kildare FM on Thursday, Ms O’Donnell said they had stepped down “when we were made aware of Anthony Murphy’s feelings and when we saw some of the very negative and I suppose hateful stuff, really, that was on his Facebook page etc and then when I got the personal text message from him.”

...

“The choir is on the altar, almost centre stage with the priest. It’s a very public contradiction [with church teaching banning same-sex marriage]. The church has to decide whether it believes what it teaches,” he said.

He emphasised it was not a case of gay people not being welcome in the church. “Of course they are welcome in church and to sing in the choir, but they could not assume leadership roles because of the contradiction,” he said.

He instanced what it could lead to; how a young girl on the choir had come home to her mother in Athy when she heard Ms Flanagan and Ms O’Donnell were married and announced she was going to marry her girlfriend too when she grew up.

“If Tesco had a sign saying ‘don’t buy here, go to Dunnes’ or if someone at a Sinn Féin Ardfheis said ‘Vote Fine Gael’, they’d do something,” he said. The email he sent the couple on July 23rd, three days after they married, emphasised that he did not wish to judge them or fall out with them.

It said, he recalled, that they “should have the decency to resign from the choirs and as Eucharistic minister, in the same way as you had the decency to resign from Lay Dominicans. Anything else would be a contradiction and hypocrisy.”

He accused local Athy Sinn Féin councillor Thomas Redmond of launching “a campaign of social media terrorism” against him, “Sinn Féin who oppose almost everything the church stands for, supports the parish priest [in this case]. It’s a bizarre alliance,” he said.

recedite · 11-09-2016 11:57pm

Its a bizarre story alright, full of contradictions. This Murphy guy is like somebody who finds a field full of ostriches, all with their heads in the sand. So he goes around kicking them all in the ar$e. One of the ostriches turns out to be the Gardai, who had previously been enjoying the peace and quiet.

silverharp · 13-09-2016 12:23pm

Im not up to date on fatwas concerning vegetarianism and veganism but obviously someone didn't think its kosher

Sonam Mahajan ‏@AsYouNotWish · 2h2 hours ago

This young Indian Muslim woman urged fellow Muslims to celebrate a bloodless Eid. We all can see what happened next.

Michael OBrien · 13-09-2016 6:11pm

silverharp wrote: »

Im not up to date on fatwas concerning vegetarianism and veganism but obviously someone didn't think its kosher

Here is a video about it.

looksee · 13-09-2016 6:12pm

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

Michael OBrien · 13-09-2016 6:15pm

looksee wrote: »

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

First instinct for fundies is death. 7th century thinking.

silverharp · 13-09-2016 6:42pm

looksee wrote: »

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

thanks for the context, thats shocking

Peregrinus · 14-09-2016 2:06am

looksee wrote: »

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

Well, it's not that apparent. Google doesn't seem to know anything about it. LinkedIn reports that she completed an MBA two years after being killed. And PETA India seem to think she's still working for them even today; she's named as the go-to person on their current press releases like this one. She tweeted last month, and posted on her Instagram account yesterday.

There is life after death, it seems!

silverharp · 14-09-2016 7:38am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, it's not that apparent. Google doesn't seem to know anything about it. LinkedIn reports that she completed an MBA two years after being killed. And PETA India seem to think she's still working for them even today; she's named as the go-to person on their current press releases like this one. She tweeted last month, and posted on her Instagram account yesterday.

There is life after death, it seems!

good to know!, 2000 years ago she'd have been the the founder of a religion :pac:

looksee · 14-09-2016 7:57am

Thats good, I was going on a fairly definitive statement at the end of the video.

Peregrinus · 14-09-2016 8:35am

There’s a striking contrast, is there not, between the attitudes displayed when someone is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that Muslims in Bhopal find provocative, and the attitudes displayed when a Muslim is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that French people find provocative? In the first case, the incident is considered shocking, those who threaten her with violence are criticised as fundies displaying seventh-century thinking, and people uncritically accept scurrilous lies being circulated about them. In the latter case, those who threaten violence are backed up by the force of the state, and this meets with, if not unanimous, then certainly quite widespread approval.

A curious double standard, no? In the “hazards of belief” thread, should we be considering the beliefs which underpin this obviously dangerous double standard?

silverharp · 14-09-2016 8:44am

Peregrinus wrote: »

There’s a striking contrast, is there not, between the attitudes displayed when someone is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that Muslims in Bhopal find provocative, and the attitudes displayed when a Muslim is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that French people find provocative? In the first case, the incident is considered shocking, those who threaten her with violence are criticised as fundies displaying seventh-century thinking, and people uncritically accept scurrilous lies being circulated about them. In the latter case, those who threaten violence are backed up by the force of the state, and this meets with, if not unanimous, then certainly quite widespread approval.

A curious double standard, no? In the “hazards of belief” thread, should we be considering the beliefs which underpin this obviously dangerous double standard?

I dont see a huge connection, nobody forced this woman to do this, there isnt a religion which coerces girls and women go around covered in lettuce

Peregrinus · 14-09-2016 8:55am

silverharp wrote: »

I dont see a huge connection, nobody forced this woman to do this, there isnt a religion which coerces girls and women go around covered in lettuce

Huh? What has that got to do with anything?

You seem to be saying that if somebody is forced to dress in a way that others find provocative, or if you just assume that they have been forced, then threatening them with mob violence is just fine, and should be reinforced with the threat of state-sanctioned violence. But if they choose to dress provocatively, then the threat of mob violence is objectionable, fundamentalist, etc.

You reinforce my point. Should we not be scrutinising the beliefs which not only underpin dangerous double standards, but lead people to advance transparent nonsense by way of rationalisations for them?

silverharp · 14-09-2016 9:11am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Huh? What has that got to do with anything?

You seem to be saying that if somebody is forced to dress in a way that others find provocative, or if you just assume that they have been forced, then threatening them with mob violence is just fine, and should be reinforced with the threat of state-sanctioned violence. But if they choose to dress provocatively, then the threat of mob violence is objectionable, fundamentalist, etc.

You reinforce my point. Should we not be scrutinising the beliefs which not only underpin dangerous double standards, but lead people to advance transparent nonsense by way of rationalisations for them?

what? let me clarify, what happened in that photo was wrong because it was a small mob deciding what do, on that basis alone I don't see a huge connection. nobody should ever be attacked by the public for what they wear

silverharp · 14-09-2016 10:00am

You don't normally see the Catholic Church come out punching these days, is there a new trend afoot?

Potential Pope Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn says Muslims will take over Europe | World | News | Daily Express

Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn gave the unexpected warning on Sunday during a special celebration for the Church festival "Holy Name of Mary".

According to the Archdiocese of Vienna, the Cardinal said: "Will there be an Islamic conquest of Europe? Many Muslims want that and say: Europe is at its end."

He asked God to have mercy on Europe and to show mercy to its people, which he said "are in danger of forfeiting our Christian heritage."

Cardinal Schoenborn, who is also the Archbishop of Vienna, explained that people could already feel this loss, "not only economically, but above all, in human and religious matters."

The statement by the Carnival came as many places across Austria have been commemorating the 333th anniversary of the Battle of Vienna.

During the battle in 1683, combined Christian forces defeated over 100,000 soldiers from the Ottoman Empire.

The battle was fought by the Habsburg Monarchy, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Holy Roman Empire against the invading Muslim Ottoman Empire.

Michael OBrien · 14-09-2016 10:51am

Peregrinus wrote: »

There’s a striking contrast, is there not, between the attitudes displayed when someone is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that Muslims in Bhopal find provocative, and the attitudes displayed when a Muslim is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that French people find provocative? In the first case, the incident is considered shocking, those who threaten her with violence are criticised as fundies displaying seventh-century thinking, and people uncritically accept scurrilous lies being circulated about them. In the latter case, those who threaten violence are backed up by the force of the state, and this meets with, if not unanimous, then certainly quite widespread approval.

A curious double standard, no? In the “hazards of belief” thread, should we be considering the beliefs which underpin this obviously dangerous double standard?

A mob of muslims went nuts over a girl advocating for a vegan Eid and attacked her. Police had to physically protect her from serious harm. It does display seventh century thinking because that is where the thinking stems from, the time after Mo started Islam. I am delighted if she was not killed, but it is hardly surprising if she WAS killed, as that happens a LOT too to those that upset muslims sensibilities. If the police were not there, she may very well have been killed by them.

robindch · 14-09-2016 11:32am

silverharp wrote: »

You don't normally see the Catholic Church come out punching these days, is there a new trend afoot?

That article is from the Daily Express and, trying to primary source it, other links in the first google page include Breitbart and the Daily Mail. None of the three can be trusted to report reliably.

The original German text is here and there are clarifying comments here, both in German. In (google) translation, neither read like the hair-raising call-to-arms that the gutter press would have one believe - it seems to be just another tired call by an elderly religious male leader for there to be more of his monotheistic religion at the expense of another monotheistic religion. That said, the "islamic invasion of Europe" is a common theme amongst fundamentalists of many hues and it's certainly a well-worn staple of publications like Alive! as well as the Daily Express, the Daily Mail and Breitbart.

Film at 11.

recedite · 14-09-2016 8:55pm

robindch wrote: »

The original German text is here and there are clarifying comments here, both in German. In (google) translation, neither read like the hair-raising call-to-arms that the gutter press would have one believe...

I'm not really seeing any disparity between the original sermon and the reports of it. In the original he says

Today 333 years ago Vienna was saved. Is there now a third attempt at an Islamic conquest of Europe? many Muslims think and wish that and say it: this is the end for Europe.

In the subsequent clarification/unpology, he tries to point out that he wasn't referring specifically to the current migrant/refugee influx. It seemed at first that he was blaming the current generation of Europeans for throwing open the gates of Vienna, but now he is just blaming them for throwing away Christianity.

However, nearby Hungary is a different kettle of fish. Its still a firm "no surrender" there.

Mr. Asselborn works tirelessly to destroy Europe’s security and culture. In stark contrast, Mr. Szijjártó said, over the course of its history Hungary has always defended Europe – as it is doing now. On 2 October Hungarians will express their opinion on illegal migration, Brussels’ quota package, “Jean Asselborn and his ilk”, the Minister added, saying that “This is how things are in a state under the rule of law”.

Hotblack Desiato · 14-09-2016 9:33pm

robindch wrote: »

The original German text is here and there are clarifying comments here, both in German. In (google) translation, neither read like the hair-raising call-to-arms that the gutter press would have one believe

Whoever translated it didn't do a great job

The statement by the Carnival came as many places across Austria have been commemorating the 333th anniversary of the Battle of Vienna.

Peregrinus · 15-09-2016 2:59am

silverharp wrote: »

what? let me clarify, what happened in that photo was wrong because it was a small mob deciding what do, on that basis alone I don't see a huge connection. nobody should ever be attacked by the public for what they wear

You really don't see the connection? That is precisely what happened to women who wore burqinis on a beach in Corsica a little over a month ago; they were attacked by a mob who took exception to what they were wearing. And the response was not to denounce the mob or to take steps to vindicate the right of women not to be attacked for what they wear; it was to pass laws reinforcing the violence of the mob with the force of the state, by criminalising the wearing of burqinis.

As I say, a flagrant double standard. This clearly isn't about liberating women from oppression; it's about who gets to oppress them.

Peregrinus · 15-09-2016 4:17am

Michael OBrien wrote: »

A mob of muslims went nuts over a girl advocating for a vegan Eid and attacked her. Police had to physically protect her from serious harm. It does display seventh century thinking because that is where the thinking stems from, the time after Mo started Islam. I am delighted if she was not killed, but it is hardly surprising if she WAS killed, as that happens a LOT too to those that upset muslims sensibilities. If the police were not there, she may very well have been killed by them.

I'm certainly not defending or justifying the attack on this woman. I'm pointing out that there was a very different reaction when Muslim women were attacked for what they were wearing by a non-Muslim mob.

Peregrinus · 15-09-2016 4:29am

recedite wrote: »

I'm not really seeing any disparity between the original sermon and the reports of it . . .

I think the disparity is that the Daily Mail report takes a number of his comments and puts them after their report of his comment about "a third attempt at an Islamic conquest of Europe". This leaves the impression that Schönborn presents economic, human, religious losses, danger of forfeiting our Christian heritage, etc, etc as flowing from attempted Islamic conquest.

But when you read his original remarks, he doesn't say that at all. He presents these ideas in the opposite order to the order in which they appear in the report and, if he's suggesting a causal link, it's the other way around.

So, yeah, piss-poor journalism. Being able to report the gist of a speech without distorting or misrepresenting it is to journalism what being able to change gear is to driving a car. It's a basic skill that you should master early on and apply without having to think too much about it.

volchitsa · 15-09-2016 6:29am

Peregrinus wrote: »

There’s a striking contrast, is there not, between the attitudes displayed when someone is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that Muslims in Bhopal find provocative, and the attitudes displayed when a Muslim is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that French people find provocative?

If you're talking about the attacks in Corsica, I believe the Muslim groups attacked first, in both cases.
http://www.france24.com/en/20160815-corsica-tense-burkini-beach-brawl-france-muslim-islam

I think that makes a big difference for any purposes of comparison.

Peregrinus · 15-09-2016 6:51am

volchitsa wrote: »

If you're talking about the attacks in Corsica, I believe the Muslim groups attacked first, in both cases.
http://www.france24.com/en/20160815-corsica-tense-burkini-beach-brawl-france-muslim-islam

I think that makes a big difference for any purposes of comparison.

Well, the report you link doesn't actually say that the Muslims attacked first. It says that they raised the first objections, but it doesn't say who first resorted to violence. As far as I can make out from googling, nobody has actually been charged over the violence, so it may still be unclear who intitiated threw the first stone, as it were.

I agree, if they the violence was initiated in an attempt to stop photographs being taken, that would be a material point of difference.

The report does highlight, however, the fundamental illogicality of the burkini ban as a response. " Some of those involved in the brawl were reportedly armed with hatchets and harpoons." Who brings hatchets to the beach? And if you have a problem with people attacking one another on the beach with hatches and harpoons, you seriously think you're going to solve that problem by regulating swimwear? You don't think that maybe regulating weapons on the beach might be a more rational approach?

The Hazards of Belief

Comments