Eu migration to Ireland - got an opinion?

studentjourno

Hi,

I'm a student journalist currently writing a piece on EU migration to Ireland.

I'm interested in finding out people's opinions to other EU nationalities, particularly countries who have only joined since May (Czech Republic, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Latvia, etc), setting up in Ireland. I'd also like to know what people who've come here think on the subject.

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?
Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?
What is your experience of it so far?
Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?

I'm interested in knowing what you think!
Thanks!

Nuttzz

Lazy hack.....

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?
Yes

Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?
It does

What is your experience of it so far?
Havent met too many of them

Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?
It will cause problems if they keep driving their clapped out LV darkend windowed bangers at high speed. Other than that I dont have aproblem with them we are all in the same club so to speak

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

DadaKopf

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?
I've no idea, it's hard to spot who's from Eastern Europe.

Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?
Probably, where there's an opportunity to earn more overseas, some people will go for it. But lots of people aren't so adventurous and have reasons to stay in their own country. But when the jobs start being created in the accession countries, and wages go up, I'm sure the majority would rather stay at home. And some of us might head over there.

What is your experience of it so far?
Not much experience working with Eastern Europeans at all, I'm afraid. But Poles are good drummers and like Sonic Youth.

Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?
Sure it's a positive step. There'll only be problems if migrants get exploited or exploited Irish people perceive their being here as a problem Hmm, maybe it could be a problem but I hope not.

mike65

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?

Yes but its simply increasing an exisiting trend.

Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?

Yes

What is your experience of it so far?

I've had little first hand experience,but those from the east how I have had dealings with in my work have been just fine.

Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?

Positive, Ireland needs some new blood and new thinking. It'll only be a problem if the native population make it one.

Mike.

studentjourno

Then do you think there already has been some exploitation of workers coming from eastern and central europe?
Would you think they are discriminated against when they work here, as so many organisations do?
Those of you who work along side these people (and especially those of you who have immigrated) might know best.

thejollyrodger

Im in favour of all these immigrants coming into the country. I think its going to help keep down wage inflation and also help the economy to grow at its potential. Also the people from the E.U bring with them new ideas, ways of doing things and it broadens our culture as well.

Many of the people from eastern Europe have little problems in fitting in with us and as long as they dont come over here for the dole (which they cant claim anyway) then Im all for it, the more the merrier IMO.

However, I dont want to see Turkish people arrive here by the boat load to be brutally honest. I dont think they will integrate (just like Germany) and there willl be a culture clash (especially the way this country is moving to a more secular place). So Im totally against any turks coming over here, sorry if thats not P.C but Im in favour of the government here giving them grants to help build up their own country instead (or lobbying the E.U to give them massive loans with minute % intrest) thats pretty fair

gandalf

Maybe you can furnish us with some of your opinions as well. This isn't a research board for lazy students its a discussion board, I am sure alot of us would be interested in your views as well.

simu

thejollyrodger wrote:

However, I dont want to see Turkish people arrive here by the boat load to be brutally honest. I dont think they will integrate (just like Germany) and there willl be a culture clash (especially the way this country is moving to a more secular place).

No wonder it's hard for them to integrate with people who think like this around! Have you ever thought that you might augmenting the problem you want to solve?

OfflerCrocGod

simu wrote:

No wonder it's hard for them to integrate with people who think like this around! Have you ever thought that you might augmenting the problem you want to solve?

Those ideas come from somewhere, I think there is a small fringe which resists ALL attempts at intergration. I walk around Dublin and my heart fills with joy ( this the 100% truth ) when I see people from all over the world from India, China, Eastern Europe, Italy, Spain, Latin America, Nigeria, Africa, Asia, North America, Western Europe, Greece, EVERYWHERE all walking around looking just like us, talking to other Irish people, working with other Irish people, dressing like Westerners and with the same relaxed/liberal attitude as us. And then I see a veiled woman. Or a man with a big beard and dressed like a pillock. Why are they special? Why are they different from everyone else? Why do they resist integration?

If they want to remain separate from our society unlike all the other nationalities, then why are they here!! A Muslim girl I knew in college, who grew up here in Ireland, and was a very friendly girl with everyone in the class is the perfect example of their......mindlessness. She never wore the veil, until France banned it then she started wearing it all the time. She got to third year with one year left in her degree and then she was married.....nope she didn't get married she was married. A man she never saw was choosen as her husband and she went back to her parents home country and married him - she was one year from her degree. She is now being the good Muslim wife and getting ready to have this strangers kids.......She grew up here, our taxes paid for her education and now she has left Ireland and "gone home"; to have babies. That's it!, that's her purpose in life! These people don't want to intergrate they are brainwashed zombies with no individual freedoms and choices. That is the reason these attitudes exist. Where there's smoke there's fire.

What a terrible faith for a nice, intelligent girl

sceptre

studentjourno wrote:

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?

Whether I think it is or not is irrelevant - all figures and estimates I've seen indicate that it is

Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?

Obviously

What is your experience of it so far?

Grand. I'm working with a few people from Poland and one from Latvia (as well as one from Macau) and they tend to understand that a day's work does not consist of hanging out at the water cooler all day. Nice people too.

Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?

Depends on the economy at any given time. At the moment we're crying out for workers, especially in manufacturing and the service industry so obviously its a method of keeping an economy (in this case ours) ticking over.

I reckon your questions need some work to be honest as they're not particularly good.

And toss in your own opinions as well as this isn't a substitute for getting off your ass and either starting a discussion here or posting somewhere else so if you post your own opinion in the next 24 hours I won't lock this.

Frank Grimes

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

And then I see a veiled woman. Or a man with a big beard and dressed like a pillock. Why are they special? Why are they different from everyone else? Why do they resist integration?

Because they've different opinions and beliefs than other people do.
And I don't believe that people who don't dress "like us" are resisting integration. What has what they're wearing got to do with anything really? In a "free" society surely they can wear whatever they want. Right?
Why do you have such a problem with people (namely Muslims from what I can see) who don't think the way you do?

These people don't want to intergrate they are brainwashed zombies with no individual freedoms and choices.

From your posts, the only way you'll be happy is if we're all walking around, dressed the same, thinking the same secular thoughts, having the same opinions as each other. And you call them brainwashed? A brainwashed population seems to be a utopian ideal for you.
You talk about no individual freedoms and then you criticise people for having religious beliefs that you do not share. Is it not their freedom to hold these beliefs or does freedom only count if it involves thinking the way you do?
People don't think the same, that's what makes the world interesting.
Try opening your eyes a bit.

bonkey

studentjourno wrote:

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?

It depends on what you mean by "more commonplace".

Are more people coming here? Yes.

Is the number of people per month coming here rising? I don't think there's significant variance there, but amn't sure.

Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?

Arguably. If the EU hadn't enlarged, I don't think it would have had a significant impact on the numbers of people coming here, but thats just conjecture.

What is your experience of it so far?

<qualifier>
I live in Switzerland
</qualifier>

The only people I've ever had problems with while in Ireland are the Irish - inside the workplace or out.

Generally, though, I tend to find that in skilled work environment, workers from developing-economy nations tend by and large to be more dilligent and harder working. I can't comment on semi-skilled or unskilled positions, because I don't work in that area.

Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?

Both.

It is a positive step, both in terms of supplying a labour shortage, and in terms of the positive aspects of multicultural diversity.

It will cause problems, for two major reasons:

1) There are enough people who have multicultural issues.
2) As the economic world turns, Ireland will sooner or later change in its appeal for foreign investment. When this economic shift comes, regardless of how we weather it, there will be those who generally have no issue with multiculturality who will develop a "why should they get to take our jobs" issue.

I'm interested in knowing what you think!

As one moderator already pointed out...we're interested in knowing what you think. Its kinda expected of you.

Also, may we assume that this is notresearch for anything specific (a project, an article, or whatever)....as common courtesy would surely oblige you to disclose as much at the start.

jc

ionapaul

Some people resist integration because they have no interest in and are hostile towards integration, particularly if they dislike or are contemptuous of the culture they could integrate into.
Not that some of those hostile to integration have any love of multi-culturalism, they don't, as they view other cultures as decadent and harmful and would prefer if everyone else integrated into *their* culture and belief system! Personally and off topic, I think there is a happy medium between integration and multi-culturalism.
I think the current movement of workers from Eastern Europe to Ireland is positive thing, the movement of workers from China even more so. I don't think we will see a comparative movement from Ireland eastwards even with much business opportunities opening up in future. I also think our relative geographic isolation compared to Germany, Austria and France will limit the numbers from Eastern Europe.

PH01

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?
Echo what Bonkey said, what do you mean by commonplace?

Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?
Yes and no. These people were coming here to work before EU Enlargement. It's easier now, and they don't have to go thought too the hardship as they've had to do before.

What is your experience of it so far?
I've had a very positive experience so far.

Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?
Absolutly positive. In fact I'm in favour of easing our immigration system and making sure that it's as non-obtrusive as possible.

Redleslie2

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

And then I see a veiled woman. Or a man with a big beard and dressed like a pillock.

Like nuns and bishops? And goths?

The Corinthian

Do you think it's becoming more commonplace?

While it is now much easier for some East Europeans to migrate to Ireland, the end of the Celtic Tiger and slower economy (although much healthier here than most of the rest of Europe) has slowed this migration. Nonetheless, yes, it is on balance becoming more commonplace.

Do you think this has anything to do with EU enlargement?

It has made it easier for some East Europeans to migrate.

What is your experience of it so far?

Women from the Baltic states who grew up under the Soviet system and hence have no Catholic guilt trip where it comes to sex.

Is it a postitive step or will it cause problems?

Largely positive, with some caveats vis-a-vi the migration of parasitic groups that can come those nations, namely Gypsies.

thejollyrodger

No wonder it's hard for them to integrate with people who think like this around! Have you ever thought that you might augmenting the problem you want to solve?

well he did ask my opinion and Im just giving it. The thing is, I dont think that turkish people will want to integrate. IMO they dont belive in any of the secular stuff here.

If it is a small number of people coming over then its ok, they have to integrate, if its open doors then they are coming over by the ship load then personally I think they just want to have their own ghettos and why bring that over here?

studentjourno

Sure I'll gladly give my opinion.

For the record i'm not just a lazy a student. I'm genuinely interested in the subject and this is just a starting point for my research. I've been in touch with groups who work in this area (Immigrant Council of Ireland and the Eastern European Foundation of Ireland, etc). So don't worry - you're not doing an entire assignment for me.

I think the Eastern Europeans deserve as much as they can get from our economy. I've vistied most of Eastern Europe and indeed worked with them in a number of different environments - i've found them to be incredibly hard-working. And it should always be those that work hardest that get the most. At the moment that is certainly not the case and we in the west are really in a position of undeserved priviledge.

I think there's definately more people from the Eastern block in our country these days and it may have quite a bit to do with the enlargement of the EU. Cultural diversity will never be a bad thing as far I'm concerned.

Raskolnikov

ionapaul wrote:

I also think our relative geographic isolation compared to Germany, Austria and France will limit the numbers from Eastern Europe.

The opposite is true actually. Our labour market (along with the UK and Sweden's) is open to workers from all EU countries. Not only that but Ireland has chosen to extend full welfare benefits along with this right to work, something which the UK and Sweden have put restrictions on. This contrasts the labour markets of Germany, France, etc are all currently closed to the newest members of the EU, infact, they were openly hostile to the suggestion of an open labour market. Since our economy is (relatively) the more buoyant of the above, we're now seeing an increasing amount of workers coming from Eastern Europe (there was a report out a few months back that said tens of thousands had come within months of the new EU members joining). Even from my own anecdotal evidence of working, travelling on the bus or even walking around Cork I can see and hear this for myself.

Economically, I think the benefits to Ireland will be positive although I think that using the argument that this multiculturalism will benefit us as being a load of bollox.

Redleslie2

thejollyrodger wrote:

IMO they dont belive in any of the secular stuff here.

Perhaps it might be worth noting that Turkey has had a female prime minister. And we haven't.

OfflerCrocGod

Frank Grimes wrote:

Because they've different opinions and beliefs than other people do.
And I don't believe that people who don't dress "like us" are resisting integration. What has what they're wearing got to do with anything really? In a "free" society surely they can wear whatever they want. Right?
Why do you have such a problem with people (namely Muslims from what I can see) who don't think the way you do?

I dislike all religions, I just don't see Christianity as anything other then a spent force. I see all religions as a disease - a cancer of the mind, it's not based on logic or reason; it's based on fear and ignorance for proof look at the Deep South and the Middle-East. Fear == Terrorists || Evil America && Ignorance == Creationism || Wide Spread Illiteracy. I've long though those two regions are a lot alike, bigotry is rife in both these areas ( after all bush won because of 'moral' issues ). I do think they are resisting integration; you can see this by the fact that other people of the world are integrating when they come to our country but these people aren't. I like my free society and I want to keep it that way, that's why I dislike these people they want *us* to become like them. Why should we go back in time 500 years? I just hope that in time they will also progress, after all we did.

Since I like my free society I don't think we should do something as stupid as what France/Bavaria did and ban their clothes in schools. We should just be mindful that a Mohammed Bouyeri may decide to punish us for our 'sins', and blow something up in Europe....like Madrid. We also have to keep an eye on the far-right who will try and exploit this; all in all not a nice situation. Pretending these people don't exist though is plain stupid.

Frank Grimes wrote:

From your posts, the only way you'll be happy is if we're all walking around, dressed the same, thinking the same secular thoughts, having the same opinions as each other.

Not exactly. As long as you don't threaten my free, prosperous society then I have no problem with you. If you want to wear a burka, fine do it, but I don't have to like it and I don't have to accept it as a good thing. I won't have us accept an Abu Hamza just like I wouldn't accept a Buttiglione in the Commission. It may seem hypocritical me arguing for freedom and yet trying to restrict the freedom of these people, but it's because I value Freedom that I don't want these people in power and dislike them. They would abuse the Freedom to get power and then they would remove it. Look at Bush.

Frank Grimes wrote:

And you call them brainwashed? A brainwashed population seems to be a utopian ideal for you.

No it's not, a population that is free and well-educated is utopia for me. You can't argue with GOD'S WORD, it's final and that's where these people believe they get their backing from!, don't like GOD'S WORD Frank? Tough Sh1t - up againts the wall we'll show you what we do to blasphemers.

Frank Grimes wrote:

You talk about no individual freedoms and then you criticise people for having religious beliefs that you do not share. Is it not their freedom to hold these beliefs or does freedom only count if it involves thinking the way you do?
People don't think the same, that's what makes the world interesting.
Try opening your eyes a bit.

Try open yours. They want all of us to think like them and be like them - look at the societies of the Middle-East, how free are they? I don't want Ireland to become a Jordan or *even* a Turkey. I don't want a regressive belief to gain a foothold in Europe because of their sheer numbers and their reluctance to integrate. I don't mind people practicing their religion but I don't like it taking over a persons life - it's a waste of a life. In the end they are coming to our countries we are not going to their countries. What's wrong with me pointing out I wouldn't like my country being swamped by very religious people from some backwater country; and them trying to live the same way they lived in their backward country?? When they can clearly see the prosperity that our society has brought us! That's some amazing blinkers they wear. Hopefully time will remove them.

Redleslie2 wrote:

Like nuns and bishops? And goths?

Yes. Except Goths, that's not a religion, that's just muppetry. It's their choice to be muppets though :rolleyes:

OfflerCrocGod

Redleslie2 wrote:

Perhaps it might be worth noting that Turkey has had a female prime minister. And we haven't.

Perhaps it might be worth noting that they have an army enforcing secularity in Turkey. And we haven't.

Frank Grimes

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

I do think they are resisting integration; you can see this by the fact that other people of the world are integrating when they come to our country but these people aren't. I like my free society and I want to keep it that way, that's why I dislike these people they want *us* to become like them.

Again, they're resisting integration into our "free" society by not dressing the same as we do (your words)?. (BTW. you mean to tell me that you've never seen African or Indian people in Dublin dressed in their "traditional" (or however you want to put it) clothes? Are they backward and refusing to integrate too, or it that only the case if they're religious as well?)
What makes you say *they* want *us* to be like them? Do you not think that sounds just a little hysterical? Do all Muslims in the country want that, or just the ones that dress like "pillocks" (your words again)?

It may seem hypocritical me arguing for freedom and yet trying to restrict the freedom of these people, but it's because I value Freedom that I don't want these people in power and dislike them.

Yes, it is very hypocritical of you. No one has said anything about "them" getting into power either, you've just been bad mouthing immigrants for being religious and dressing differently.

No it's not, a population that is free and well-educated is utopia for me. You can't argue with GOD'S WORD, it's final and that's where these people believe they get their backing from!, don't like GOD'S WORD Frank? Tough Sh1t - up againts the wall we'll show you what we do to blasphemers.

A great deal of Muslims are educated too as I'm sure you know.
And please stop insinuating that they're all terrorists along with being stupid and backward.

I don't mind people practicing their religion but I don't like it taking over a persons life - it's a waste of a life.

A practising Muslim would disagree with you there, and that's their belief which they're perfectly entitled too. It's a "free" society is it not?

In the end they are coming to our countries we are not going to their countries. What's wrong with me pointing out I wouldn't like my country being swamped by very religious people from some backwater country; and them trying to live the same way they lived in their backward country??

Newsflash: Not all Muslims are the same and they don't all come from the same country.
Maybe when you realise that you're making sweeping statements about 1 billion plus people from different countries, socities, political backgrounds, economic backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds, religious backgrounds (not all Muslims practise the same "version" of Islam or religion at all) you'll see what's wrong with what you said there. There's no point in me trying to point it out to you until then.

OfflerCrocGod

Frank Grimes wrote:

Again, they're resisting integration into our "free" society by not dressing the same as we do (your words)?. (BTW. you mean to tell me that you've never seen African or Indian people in Dublin dressed in their "traditional" (or however you want to put it) clothes? Are they backward and refusing to integrate too, or it that only the case if they're religious as well?)

As long as the clothes are not linked to something religious I don't really mind them dressing like that but you see my problem is the fact women have to go around all in black not allowed show even *an ankle* in case society breaks down and because their religion said so. Look at all the women going around dressed in nice clothes here in the West - somehow we haven't fallen to bits because of lust. Somehow our society is prospering and their isn't, really weird. That's why I dislike those clothes they don't question they just blindly obey. Those clothes are a visible symbol of their slavery, one which they proclaim proudly.

There has not been ONE prosperous, successful, religious state ever. Our way of life is better, theirs ( where the state follows the laws of the $HOLY_BOOK and therefore removing the need for change ) is broken, it's an obvious truth; so WHY do they resist change so much!!!. I'll let a far greater man then me put it into words.

Plato wrote:

We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark. The real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.

Frank Grimes wrote:

What makes you say *they* want *us* to be like them?

The extreme elements of Islamism do actually see all societies which are not Islamic as "corrupt". So let's say we get a huge influx of Muslims who do not want to integrate. The society they move to is a Western, secular, liberal society ( the worst kind for the extremists ). Question: What do they try and do? That is obviously an extreme case which may never happen but that doesn't mean that there won't be a lunatic fringe who will still try and cause trouble. Also if there are enough of them they could be enough to vote againts a progressive piece of legislation in a particular country, again somewhat unlikely that there would be enough but what if Turkey is let in to the EU?

Frank Grimes wrote:

Do you not think that sounds just a little hysterical? Do all Muslims in the country want that, or just the ones that dress like "pillocks" (your words again)?

I'm talking about extremists, that kind of person is never a sane person. Remember only 19 people were needed for the 11th of Sept, not 19 Million. A small fringe group could be quite dangerous if suicidal enough. I'm not saying that all Muslims are dangerous but there are some with backward views. I know a few muslims in college who I have no problem with, as long as you're not religious then I'm happy for you to be here and to stay here. No religion, we have been under the thumb of the Holy Cath Church for soooo long I don't want to see another order spring up and replace them.

Frank Grimes wrote:

Yes, it is very hypocritical of you. No one has said anything about "them" getting into power either, you've just been bad mouthing immigrants for being religious and dressing differently.

My fashion sense is disgusted by their clothes - I mean that burka is SOOO LIKE 1500's COME ON, go on a shopping spree or something, you need a makeover! Look at Mohammed Bouyeri he wasn't elected and yet because of him mosques and churches are being burnt to the ground in Holland. That is a form of power; no one elected him to be the head of the Muslims in Holland and yet they are paying the price for his actions. A fringe, lunatic group as I already said does not need the support of the majority; it just needs to be. Those are the people I dislike Frank; they are close minded and are dangerous.

Frank Grimes wrote:

A great deal of Muslims are educated too as I'm sure you know.

Yes, I say 'Hi' to them every day in College; I don't fear them they are my friends.

Frank Grimes wrote:

And please stop insinuating that they're all terrorists along with being stupid and backward.

Were did I say the were all terrorists? I never though that and I don't think that. One of my favourite lectures is Muslim and I think he is very intelligent, even though he is very religious. That's because he is tolerant enough that he has no problem with female relatives of his not wearing the headscarf.

Frank Grimes wrote:

A practising Muslim would disagree with you there, and that's their belief which they're perfectly entitled too. It's a "free" society is it not?

I'm entitled to disagree with them, I just can't make myself like Sharia Law - I'm such an intolerant person.

Frank Grimes wrote:

Newsflash: Not all Muslims are the same and they don't all come from the same country.
Maybe when you realise that you're making sweeping statements about 1 billion plus people from different countries, socities, political backgrounds, economic backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds, religious backgrounds (not all Muslims practise the same "version" of Islam or religion at all) you'll see what's wrong with what you said there. There's no point in me trying to point it out to you until then.

I though they all came from Islamistan!!!! Look at that world Globe and all those little countries I've never heard of!!! WOW ee-rack, what's that? and afganestan, is that a place? AMAZING :eek: !!! Thank You Frank I though there was 15 Muslims in the entire world and they had all moved to Ireland en mass!! I've now been enlightened by you! I realise that from now on I must tolerate all peoples opinions and ways of life: bring on Sharia Law and Honour Killings! I can't wait till I afto kill a woman because she had the temerity to be raped. I must tolerate everything.

Frank Grimes

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

I've now been enlightened by you! I realise that from now on I must tolerate all peoples opinions and ways of life: bring on Sharia Law and Honour Killings! I can't wait till I afto kill a woman because she had the temerity to be raped. I must tolerate everything.

You don't get it at all do you?
All I'm trying to say is that you do not need to make continuous mass generalisations about all Muslims which for some reason you insist on doing.
You should do yourself a favour and try to differentiate between a small fraction of extremists and a general population of people.
And maybe, just maybe, try to understand that some people choose to hold religious opinions without brainwashing or whatever you want to call it.

OfflerCrocGod

Frank Grimes wrote:

You don't get it at all do you?

No you just don't get it. Are you even reading my posts?

Frank Grimes wrote:

All I'm trying to say is that you do not need to make continuous mass generalisations about all Muslims which for some reason you insist on doing.

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Look at Mohammed Bouyeri he wasn't elected and yet because of him mosques and churches are being burnt to the ground in Holland. That is a form of power; no one elected him to be the head of the Muslims in Holland and yet they are paying the price for his actions. A fringe, lunatic group as I already said does not need the support of the majority; it just needs to be. Those are the people I dislike Frank; they are close minded and are dangerous.

The meaning of fringe group must have changed dramatically while I was asleep.

Frank Grimes wrote:

You should do yourself a favour and try to differentiate between a small fraction of extremists and a general population of people.

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Yes, I say 'Hi' to them every day in College; I don't fear them they are my friends. Were did I say the were all terrorists? I never though that and I don't think that. One of my favourite lectures is Muslim and I think he is very intelligent, even though he is very religious. That's because he is tolerant enough that he has no problem with female relatives of his not wearing the headscarf.

I like these people because their minds have not been taken over by an ideology which is regressive.

Frank Grimes wrote:

And maybe, just maybe, try to understand that some people choose to hold religious opinions without brainwashing or whatever you want to call it.

To believe in an organised religion is to be brainwashed - there are degrees of it though, the higher the degree the more dangerous. There are lots of people who say they are of X religion when in fact they never or rarely visit their place of worship and don't really care what their religious leader says or what their holy book says - those people are normal and I have no problem with them. It's the rabid Christians/Muslim/Movementarians that I dislike and think could be dangerous. Oh and the last paragraph that you chose to highlight was written with levity the multiple !!! are a big hint.

bonkey

As long as you don't threaten my free, prosperous society then I have no problem with you. If you want to wear a burka, fine do it, but I don't have to like it and I don't have to accept it as a good thing.

Sorry, but this reads to me as "I have a problem with you wearing this stuff, but can't admit it as it undermines my argument".

Why don't you like it? And...more importantly....how can you say you don't think its a good thing, don't like it, but don't have a problem with it???

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

I dislike all religions,
...
.No it's not, a population that is free and well-educated is utopia for me. You can't argue with GOD'S WORD, it's final and that's where these people believe they get their backing from!, don't like GOD'S WORD Frank? Tough Sh1t - up againts the wall we'll show you what we do to blasphemers.

I'm taking these two points together, because they are strongly related. There are no shortage of religions, OCG, where you can argue with GODS word, and its not final. Indeed, nowadays, most Christian religions are beginning to realise that they fit into this category as well.

They want all of us to think like them and be like them

And for you to be happy about them being here, you would like all of them to think and be like us....

I don't see why this gives you some higher moral ground....

- look at the societies of the Middle-East, how free are they?

How long have they had to establish that freedom compared to the rest of us? More importantly....how do you ever expect them to change if your solution is not to give them freer access to a world which will show them how limiting those restrictions are.

I don't want Ireland to become a Jordan or *even* a Turkey.
I don't want a regressive belief to gain a foothold in Europe because of their sheer numbers and their reluctance to integrate.

There's more than one regressive belief out there, and I would be inclined to say that isolationism is one of them. So it would appear that you're already too late. In "fighting" against one belief you see as regressive, you would appear to have embraced an alternative with open arms.

I don't mind people practicing their religion

As long as they don't do it over here, in any large numbers, with a religion you're not comfortable with.

What's wrong with me pointing out I wouldn't like my country being swamped by very religious people from some backwater country;

I think you answer that question very eloquently just by asking it the way you do.

When they can clearly see the prosperity that our society has brought us!

BEcause prosperity, and all that comes with it in our society, is unquestionably a good thing by all moral standards, yes?

Those who believe, for example, that the cost to the environment, or the growing wealth-divide, or the taking advantage of emerging economies is too high....they're all dangerous nutballs who don't understand the prosperity our society has brought us and who threaten our very existence for nothing more than their beliefs too.... right?

Because what your objection here is to is the different moral standards of different people, not the fact that its a different religion behind them...right? You did say you'd no problem with religion per say...it was the effects of it that you've problem with. So surely you have the same problem when an equally fervent belief exists from a non-religious source?

That's some amazing blinkers they wear.

It never amazes me how many people believe that those who believe differently to them must do so because they are blinkered. I'm sure they say the same about you, Offler....and I'm sure that you'd be only too happy to ignore the flaws in our society they complain about in favour of pointing out the flaws in theirs to show that your "blinkered" allegation is somehow more true.

jc

OfflerCrocGod

bonkey wrote:

Sorry, but this reads to me as "I have a problem with you wearing this stuff, but can't admit it as it undermines my argument".Why don't you like it? And...more importantly....how can you say you don't think its a good thing, don't like it, but don't have a problem with it???

Re-read what you quoted - I said I don't like it and don't see why I should accept it. So I do admit it, it's part of the reason why I think letting huge numbers of them into our country is not good. Look at France, Germany, Holland, look how well these people have intergrated there! They got on like a house on fire in Spain.

The suspected ringleader of the Madrid bombings blew himself up along with four other suspects during a police raid, Spain's interior minister said.
......
Eleven of the detained 15 suspects are Moroccan.

The Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group is the main focus of police investigations.

The reason I don't like religion? It can pollute and take over a persons mind, help them justify horrible acts because they have GOD on their side. It feeds on ignorance and gullibility and it promotes the idea that change is not neccesary because the word of GOD is immutable: therefore negating the need for Democracy and Freedom of Choice. Those are some of the minor issues I have with religion. I don't like it but I don't have a problem with it because it doesn't impinge on my lifestyle, it doesn't really affect me personally. I still feel sad when I see people following their religion. For example a Jewish friend of mine would not eat pork eventhough he admited it wasn't bad for you.....he just couldn't break the shackles on his mind, it was really sad.

bonkey wrote:

I'm taking these two points together, because they are strongly related. There are no shortage of religions, OCG, where you can argue with GODS word, and its not final. Indeed, nowadays, most Christian religions are beginning to realise that they fit into this category as well.

Yes I don't see Christianity as anything other then a spent force, it cannot command the unquestioning obedience of nations anymore. Anyway religion isn't a buffet where you get to pick and choose the parts you like and don't like; if you are of religion X you live by the code of conduct presented in religion X's holy book, if you don't then you are just pretending to be an Xian. People like that tend to have offspring with even less interest in X then the parents - it's a vicious cycle for the religion ending in it losing it's support/power ( look at Ireland ) Questioning GODs words is good it means the religion is losing it's power. I'm worried when people don't question.

bonkey wrote:

And for you to be happy about them being here, you would like all of them to think and be like us....

I don't see why this gives you some higher moral ground....

I have the higher ground because the Western world is more advanced and liberal then a religious society. Read me. I don't want to see my best friend dragged into the street and beheaded or stoned to death. Sorry for being such an intolerant person.

bonkey wrote:

How long have they had to establish that freedom compared to the rest of us? More importantly....how do you ever expect them to change if your solution is not to give them freer access to a world which will show them how limiting those restrictions are.

Look at South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and large chunks of S East Asia, Eastern Europe, Ireland the chunks of the world that were backward and poor only 200-50 years ago. Of course there is one huge difference between S East Asia/Europe and the Middle-East, I'll give you one guess.....God is great, bonkey, God is great. We here in Europe dragged ourselves up into the Western, liberal societies we see today. We had no one to help us or to copy from, I'm not advocating a total shutdown of our borders just to filter people who may not be too open to living in a secular society, with particular emphasis on Angry, Young, Rebels ( Male of course )

bonkey wrote:

There's more than one regressive belief out there, and I would be inclined to say that isolationism is one of them. So it would appear that you're already too late. In "fighting" against one belief you see as regressive, you would appear to have embraced an alternative with open arms.

It seems you are not reading my posts, there are plenty of East Europeans/Chinese/Africans/Latin Americans that I would welcome ( and I am very happy to see in our country ) who can take the place of these possible extremists. Anyway the vast majority of people coming into our country are perfectally fine and will never cause trouble. Still there can be a small hand full that could and for that reason I think we should filter people coming in, Canada has been very succesful in it's filtering system. We should copy their one, they encourage professionals and well educated people who speak English into their country - that is what I'd like. Especially the English speaking....it's annoying trying to talk to someone who cannot understand a single word you are saying. Maybe free English classes would be a good idea ( if they are not already available? )

bonkey wrote:

As long as they don't do it over here, in any large numbers, with a religion you're not comfortable with.

Yes, exactly. I'm not comfortable with any religion.

bonkey wrote:

I think you answer that question very eloquently just by asking it the way you do.

Oh yes intolerant bastard I am - why would I have a problem with hundreds of thousands of unchecked, unfiltered people swamping my country. Don't try to see who is coming in just let them pile in if we have any problems later.....well we can sort them then - when they are settled in. Not that they would want to come here.

Nearly everyone here talks about Europe in terms of jobs and money, or the chance of exodus for their children.
I can't quite imagine what these barely educated children might do in Europe, except perhaps live in a different, and probably more unpleasant, kind of grinding poverty.

It will all sort itself out on it's own, no doubt.

bonkey wrote:

BEcause prosperity, and all that comes with it in our society, is unquestionably a good thing by all moral standards, yes?

Winston Churchill wrote:

Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried.

You are free to come up with something better bonkey, I wont stand in your way.

bonkey wrote:

Those who believe, for example, that the cost to the environment, or the growing wealth-divide, or the taking advantage of emerging economies is too high....they're all dangerous nutballs who don't understand the prosperity our society has brought us and who threaten our very existence for nothing more than their beliefs too.... right?

Being poor in Modern Ireland means you can't afford a second TV. Being poor in Iran means you freeze to death in the streets in winter. Which one would you prefer? Yes we have problems and we have to sort them out, but that doesn't mean we should import more of them! What's more dangerous a bomb blowing up the Luas, or a property developer buying the rights to build a shopping centre in location X? If you honestly believe the problems we have in the west are worst then the ones in a religious society then move to the Middle-East. Say 'Hi' to all the people moving in the other direction. I don't hear your suitcase being packed, bonkey. Their beliefs require there be no seperation of church and state, I'm sorry but that ideal is nothing but trouble!

bonkey wrote:

Because what your objection here is to is the different moral standards of different people, not the fact that its a different religion behind them...right? You did say you'd no problem with religion per say...it was the effects of it that you've problem with. So surely you have the same problem when an equally fervent belief exists from a non-religious source?

Those kind of beliefs don't tend to last long i.e. Nazism, Communism. Religion just tends to be able to hang on for dear life because it's far harder to destroy faith in a ghost then it is to bankrupt a broken system ( communism ) or to tackle it on the battlefield ( nazism ) and destroy it there. You can't shoot Father Christmas, or bankrupt the Tooth Fairy or the Sandman; they don't exist so you can't do anything to them. That's why religion is dangerous, you can't disprove a religion.

bonkey wrote:

It never amazes me how many people believe that those who believe differently to them must do so because they are blinkered. I'm sure they say the same about you, Offler....and I'm sure that you'd be only too happy to ignore the flaws in our society they complain about in favour of pointing out the flaws in theirs to show that your "blinkered" allegation is somehow more true.

I don't ignore them I tackle them and complain about them and want them highlighted and discussed - it's they who ignore their flaws. If you get your laws from a holy book they can't change but if you get them from a law book it can change. That's why our secular way of life is superior to a religious dominated way of life, we can change and we can adapt and we can change our attitudes with time. Look at condoms in the 30's we had to go up North to buy them....no we get them in dispencing machines in toilets. The same with Divorce several referendums afterwards......and we got it. I hope the same will happen with things like Abortion and Gay Marriages, with time we change. That's why our system is better.

bonkey

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Look at France, Germany, Holland, look how well these people have intergrated there!

I'm looking at you posting articles about how a tiny, tiny minority of the entire group that you're complaining about have done something that you can point to as having done something more objectionable than wearing clothes you don't like, and wondering how this backs up any rational fear of the larger group.

The reason I don't like religion? It can pollute and take over a persons mind, help them justify horrible acts because they have GOD on their side.

You keep saying "religion" here, but you obviously mean "Islam". You've already qualified your other arguments to explain that Christianity doesn't really have this problem any more, or to explain that you've no problem with the Buddhists, Hindi, etc. that come from other places......so could you either stop generalising about having a problem with religion, or stop saying you don't have a problem with all these people from other places who are predominantly religious[\i], because the two don't gel.

therefore negating the need for Democracy and Freedom of Choice.

I'm looking for the democracy on the planet which has a majority of its population who are not followers of any religion, and I'm coming up blank. Maybe you could explain how religion is the problem, as opposed to
Islam??? While you're at it, could you address the point I made previously which you dodged first time round, which is explain why you don't like religions which do not do anything of the sort (i.e. no absolute doctrine, nothing which undermines democracy, no killing in the name of their God)

Those are some of the minor issues I have with religion. I don't like it but I don't have a problem with it because it doesn't impinge on my lifestyle, it doesn't really affect me personally.

Don't you mean "as long as", and not "because". After all, the reason you want to keep the Muslims out is because you're convinced they will impinge on your lifestyle by threatening the very way of life that you have???

Anyway religion isn't a buffet where you get to pick and choose the parts you like and don't like;

Really? There's only one Christian faith? Only one Muslim faith? Hindii? Buddhist? Jewish? There's no distinction between the fundamentalist, the extremist, and the more "conventional" religious castes?

if you are of religion X you live by the code of conduct presented in religion X's holy book, if you don't then you are just pretending to be an Xian.

Ah. I see. How convenient. So...anyone who violates any precept of their religion isn't actually religious. Given that Islam is fundamentally a religion of peace....wouldn't that mean that all of the people you have an objection to aren't really religious, but only pretending to be? Why, then, blame the religion that they're not following??? Why punish those who do follow that religion for those that only pretend to??? Or are you saying we should punish those who are only pretending to be Muslim because the real religion is one of violence?

I have the higher ground because the Western world is more advanced and liberal then a religious society.

But the western world is a religious society. The majority of the people in it follow a Christian faith.

Of course there is one huge difference between S East Asia/Europe and the Middle-East, I'll give you one guess.....God is great, bonkey, God is great.

God is great that he put all that oil in one place??? OK....fair enough...

While we're at it...why don't you have a look at what type of social conditions are most suitable for religions to form and to increase in popularity. There might be a lesson to learn there.

We had no one to help us or to copy from,

I suggest you study some history. We had no shortage of empires to copy from. Or do you think it was entirely co-incidental that that there was an extremely popular move in the 12th or 13th century to rename London as New Troy? Do you think the Renaissance - the rebirth - was not actually a "re" anything???

And as for maths...we didn't get that from those iggerant, backwards Muslims. No sireee. We made that up all on our own. Algebra, Calculus, the decimal numbers....all good western inventions. And gunpowder too....we had no help there.

who can take the place of these possible extremists.

..says it all really. "Possible Extremists"??? Because they share the same religion, or are from the same part of the world?

Anyway the vast majority of people coming into our country are perfectally fine and will never cause trouble.

Yes indeed. Including the vast majority of Muslims....

Still there can be a small hand full that could and for that reason I think we should filter people coming in,

How? Oh...I see...adopt the Canadian model....

Hmm. The Canadian model...

Rich, educated Muslims are not a problem. Poor, less-well-educated Muslims are.

Why then do you conclude that its the religion which is the threat/problem???

Yes, exactly. I'm not comfortable with any religion.

Well, you seem to varicate between saying that, and clarifying that you've no problem with the vast majority of people, most of whom statistically are religious by normal standards (and...as I pointed out earlier...you never established why the terrorists should be considered religious on your exclusionary "if you don't follow all the rules, you're only pretending" standards)

Oh yes intolerant bastard I am - why would I have a problem with hundreds of thousands of unchecked, unfiltered people swamping my country.

And you accuse me of not reading your posts? If you could just show me where I suggest this, I'd be most grateful. You might explain how you've conveniently re-interpreted "very religious people from some backwater country" as "unchecked, unfiltered people" along the way...because it might give you some hint as to what I was actually pointing to.

You are free to come up with something better bonkey,

I'd rather you explain to me how telling me that democracy is the best system we have actually answers the question I posed, which was whether or not prosperity, and all that comes with it in our society was unquestionably a good thing. You're telling me you don't see a single aspect of our modern western society that isn't necessarily a good thing? The rapid increases in obesity? The increasing prevalance of gun-related crime? The decline of our environment? The all-powerful god Profit? Its all good???

Which one would you prefer?

I'd prefer to have the choice...not be villified for it by people who would associate certain choices of religion with social incompatability. I'd prefer to live in a culture that looked to see what it could learn from others, as opposed to one which followed in the footsteps of all those which fell before it as it held on to its self-belief of absolute superiority even as it fell apart.

What's more dangerous a bomb blowing up the Luas, or a property developer buying the rights to build a shopping centre in location X?

Personally? I think the villification of an entire religion for the acts carried out by a few extremists in its name is more dangerous than either. Such logic would lead me to look at Northern Ireland and conclude that neither Catholics nor Protestants should be allowed in this country either, or to conclude that there is some fundamental moral difference and implication between a Catholic blowing up a street in Enniskillen and Muslim doing likewise in some other place.

Their beliefs require there be no seperation of church and state,

Who is they? The Muslims in the democracy of Indonesia? In the democracy of Turkey? Or the Muslims living in Ireland, England, the US etc.? The millions of Muslims who just voted in Afghanistan and didn't vote for a religious leader? After all...its the religion you're blaming...so you should surely be able to explain how Muslim-majority democracies actually exist on this planet.

If you get your laws from a holy book they can't change

Been to any good Auto da Fé recently?

No change in the Catholic Church's position on anything in the past decade?

Nuff said.

jc

SkepticOne

bonkey wrote:

I'd rather you explain to me how telling me that democracy is the best system we have actually answers the question I posed, which was whether or not prosperity, and all that comes with it in our society was unquestionably a good thing. You're telling me you don't see a single aspect of our modern western society that isn't necessarily a good thing? The rapid increases in obesity? The increasing prevalance of gun-related crime? The decline of our environment? The all-powerful god Profit? Its all good???

To be fair, the prevalance of gun-related crime isn't really a key feature of modern western society. Plenty of other societies have severe problems with this. Other societies also have problems with the environment e.g. India, China. As to obesity, at least it is something that individuals can do something about, as opposed to starving in countries where there is no food. The all-powerful god Profit, again, is something worshiped in non-Western societies and, some would argue, is better than the all-powerful god Loss which benefits no one. Give me a modern Western society any day even if it is not based on the strictures of some religious book.

bonkey

SkepticOne wrote:

Give me a modern Western society any day even if it is not based on the strictures of some religious book.

I'll take one too...that wasn't the point I was making.

I was objecting to OFG basing half of his argument on a tirade against religion and how our religiously-freed western society is superior....whilst basing the half - the examples of his arguments all on one specific religion. If one is willing to blur such distinctions, its easy to see why all practicioners of a given religion are tarnished with the same brush for the actions of an extremist few. Its more or less the same level of generalisation.

OFG is alterning between attacking "religion" as being the problem, and illustrating Islam being the problem. While he persists in this, I'm quite happy to have he, you, or anyone else point to aspects of Islam which "prove" his point about religion in general.

The point in question was me fishing to see whether he'd slam all aspects of all religions, or - yet again - use Islam as his evidence of rationality in arguing against religion.

jc

SkepticOne

bonkey wrote:

The point in question was me fishing to see whether he'd slam all aspects of all religions, or - yet again - use Islam as his evidence of rationality in arguing against religion.

OK. I would agree that you can't use the example of one religion to argue a point about religion in general. However, many religions don't in themselves have strictures about how to organise societies. What I think, and I'm open to correction here, is being argued is that society is best organised on secular principles. Islam is probably one of the better examples here in that it does have such strictures. From the point of view of a devout muslim in a Western society, it may be the case that, although they are bound by Islam to obey the laws in the country they are in, the society, if it is not based on certain religious principles may be, in a sense, wrong. This may lead to conflicts that, for example, a Buddhist may not experience.

OfflerCrocGod

bonkey wrote:

You keep saying "religion" here, but you obviously mean "Islam". You've already qualified your other arguments to explain that Christianity doesn't really have this problem any more, or to explain that you've no problem with the Buddhists, Hindi, etc. that come from other places......so could you either stop generalising about having a problem with religion, or stop saying you don't have a problem with all these people from other places who are predominantly religious[\i], because the two don't gel.

I think I understand what you mean.....Yes I don't see Christianity as anything other then a dead force it's flock is getting smaller by the day and in Europe it's lost a huge amount of influence and power. It won't die with dignity, but it will die which is what matters. Islam is more dangerous because it is a hugely powerful force in poilitics and everyday affairs in the Middle-East, it dominates the landscape in the Middle-East much like Christianity used to in Europe - that's why I'm confident that with time it will end up like Christianity did in Europe. In Islam, like it once was for Christianity, the holy books are tought to be the source of the states laws. In this case the Qur'an and the Sunnah ( Hadith is the arab word ) , the problem with that mentality is that those books never change, not really so good for the society.

bonkey wrote:

I'm looking for the democracy on the planet which has a majority of its population who are not followers of any religion, and I'm coming up blank. Maybe you could explain how religion is the problem, as opposed to
Islam??? While you're at it, could you address the point I made previously which you dodged first time round, which is explain why you don't like religions which do not do anything of the sort (i.e. no absolute doctrine, nothing which undermines democracy, no killing in the name of their God)

I've got no problem with religions like that, ones that can be used to justify terrible things are my problem. Islam, Christianity, Protestant etc...really aren't like that. Western democracies have this thing called seperation of church and state which we have no problem with here in the west, in the middle-east they traditionally need the army to enforce it though. That's a tradition we can do without.

The vast majority of people who claim they are religious are not really....I think I covered this before, they are "part-time" religious people. They have their weddings and so on in churches but they don't really care what the church say. Most people in Europe rarely go to mass - in the UK it's 8% attendance. Those people will still classify themselves as belonging to a certain religion though. They aren't though they just like to believe they are.

bonkey wrote:

Don't you mean "as long as", and not "because". After all, the reason you want to keep the Muslims out is because you're convinced they will impinge on your lifestyle by threatening the very way of life that you have???)

They could, not they will. I'm calling for filtering bonkey, not a total shutdown of our borders, I'm convinced you are not reading my posts. Yes "as long as" is correct although I don't see how that could ever happen. I am more worried about tensions between communities and small fanatic groups doing stupid things. But yes if by some very bizarre twist ( impossible! ) our goverment is replaced with religious loonies and our democracy is stripped away then it will be my problem.

bonkey wrote:

Really? There's only one Christian faith? Only one Muslim faith? Hindii? Buddhist? Jewish? There's no distinction between the fundamentalist, the extremist, and the more "conventional" religious castes?

What I meant is that if you are of religious domination X, you live by X's rules, you don't get to choose the ones you prefer and discard the ones you don't. If you do that then be brave enough to admit you are not an Xian because you disagree with it's rules. People who are like that are the majority in western countries - I can't be arsed to listen to what my priest says but I'm in his religion. Those people are harmless, they aren't religious fanatics. I already said I have issue with the extremists, not with the "part-timers".

bonkey wrote:

Ah. I see. How convenient. So...anyone who violates any precept of their religion isn't actually religious. Given that Islam is fundamentally a religion of peace....wouldn't that mean that all of the people you have an objection to aren't really religious, but only pretending to be? Why, then, blame the religion that they're not following??? Why punish those who do follow that religion for those that only pretend to??? Or are you saying we should punish those who are only pretending to be Muslim because the real religion is one of violence?

Religion can be used by people to justify the acts they carry out, or should I say they get other people to carry out. "You go blow yourself up and you'll get 66 virgins in paradise". An Imman is to be listened to and obeyed - if he preaches hate he will be listened to. I've heard Islam is a religion of peace....some of it's followers haven't it seems. Sharia Law isn't pretending, it's real and it's pretty backward, it is Islamic law. I'm not calling for "punishment" ( were do I call for that? ) I'm saying I dislike it.

bonkey wrote:

But the western world is a religious society. The majority of the people in it follow a Christian faith.

Condoms. Seperation of state and religion. Divorce. Gay marriages in a few countries - it's spreading to others. Abortion. Evolution taught in schools. 2 people went to Maynooth to become priests this year. Declining numbers in mass. Vatican can't get it's constitutional header. bonkey Europe is about as religious as my fat ass.

bonkey wrote:

God is great that he put all that oil in one place??? OK....fair enough...

Allah Akbar....what I was trying to hint at is that the difference between those places was their attitude towards religion. In a place were it was more important and more intolerant it was more likely to hinder progress.

bonkey wrote:

While we're at it...why don't you have a look at what type of social conditions are most suitable for religions to form and to increase in popularity. There might be a lesson to learn there.

Ignorance and poverty - the lesson there is that we also has those here in Europe we don't anymore to the same extent. That's why religion has lost it's power here.

bonkey wrote:

I suggest you study some history. We had no shortage of empires to copy from. Or do you think it was entirely co-incidental that that there was an extremely popular move in the 12th or 13th century to rename London as New Troy? Do you think the Renaissance - the rebirth - was not actually a "re" anything???

No sh1t, I thought the Roman Empire was South American! Are you telling me that it was actually European??!! In other words we had ourselves and our history to call upon....so you could say we had ourselves and no one else to copy from when it came to our constitutions and laws except ourselves. In other words we did it on our own.

bonkey wrote:

And as for maths...we didn't get that from those iggerant, backwards Muslims. No sireee. We made that up all on our own. Algebra, Calculus, the decimal numbers....all good western inventions. And gunpowder too....we had no help there.

I said that right now their system is backward....yes 800 years ago they came up with some great things....but they haven't changed since then. That doesn't strike me as so great. Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz and Sir Issac Newton where Muslim? I didn't know that, thanks for that interesting fact. I don't know what the Chinese have to do with this the Hui are a small minority and had nothing to do with Black Powder. I already said I welcome the Chinese into Ireland, some of my friends are Chinese.

bonkey wrote:

..says it all really. "Possible Extremists"??? Because they share the same religion, or are from the same part of the world?

Ummm....no, because they are angry young men who may not be sympathetic to the western lifestyle. Of course "possible" I'd hope convicted ones will never be let in to our country, why should we let them in if they are young men who hold extreme views? Let their own goverment deal with them not ours. Continued....

OfflerCrocGod

bonkey wrote:

Yes indeed. Including the vast majority of Muslims....

I said it's only a fringe group we need to filter out. Yes the vast majority of Muslims are no problem at all ( we take in such small numbers anyway )

bonkey wrote:

How? Oh...I see...adopt the Canadian model....Hmm. The Canadian model...Rich, educated Muslims are not a problem. Poor, less-well-educated Muslims are. Why then do you conclude that its the religion which is the threat/problem???

You are less likely to follow a religion blindly if you are educated. The same goes for being well off. Religion is the tool that is used to control people. If you don't believe it the tool fails to control you.

bonkey wrote:

Well, you seem to varicate between saying that, and clarifying that you've no problem with the vast majority of people, most of whom statistically are religious by normal standards (and...as I pointed out earlier...you never established why the terrorists should be considered religious on your exclusionary "if you don't follow all the rules, you're only pretending" standards)

I'm not comfortable with religions because they can be used to manipulate people. If the people are gullible enough they can be sent out to do anything/commit anything. Most people don't take their religion that seriously, it's more a habit/hereditary thing and they are in the majority. With time there will be fewer of these because they are just too lazy to bother. Someone who believes their way religion is under threat can react very violently and can justify it to themselves because they are "Defenders of the Faith". They can become terrorists.

bonkey wrote:

And you accuse me of not reading your posts? If you could just show me where I suggest this, I'd be most grateful. You might explain how you've conveniently re-interpreted "very religious people from some backwater country" as "unchecked, unfiltered people" along the way...because it might give you some hint as to what I was actually pointing to.

Your original statement was vague, I took it to mean I was being intolerant towards these people because I disliked the ones who were very religious. Well yes I don't see why after having finally removing the Catholic Church as a power in our country we should start importing other religious power bases. I don't want to start from scratch, it could take 3 or 4 generations before they are fully intergrated! That's why I have strong misgivings toward Turkey joining Europe. If you are secular, modern in your outlook then OK you can be let in but if you are strongly religious then some filtering should take place, background checks just to make sure someone who could cause problems isn't let in.

bonkey wrote:

I'd rather you explain to me how telling me that democracy is the best system we have actually answers the question I posed, which was whether or not prosperity, and all that comes with it in our society was unquestionably a good thing. You're telling me you don't see a single aspect of our modern western society that isn't necessarily a good thing? The rapid increases in obesity? The increasing prevalance of gun-related crime? The decline of our environment? The all-powerful god Profit? Its all good???

Read SkepticOne's post.

bonkey wrote:

I'd prefer to have the choice...not be villified for it by people who would associate certain choices of religion with social incompatability. I'd prefer to live in a culture that looked to see what it could learn from others, as opposed to one which followed in the footsteps of all those which fell before it as it held on to its self-belief of absolute superiority even as it fell apart.

You have the choice, you can be a super-religious person and no one will stop you. I don't see why we should let in people from other parts of the world who are like that though, since religious societies tend to be regressive. So many people would want to come into our country so we may as well choose the best; the ones who will integrate the easiest and fastest. Instead of the ones who could take generations to integrate.

bonkey wrote:

Personally? I think the villification of an entire religion for the acts carried out by a few extremists in its name is more dangerous than either. Such logic would lead me to look at Northern Ireland and conclude that neither Catholics nor Protestants should be allowed in this country either, or to conclude that there is some fundamental moral difference and implication between a Catholic blowing up a street in Enniskillen and Muslim doing likewise in some other place.

You asked about our problems bonkey compared to the problems we could get by letting in everyone without any sort of checks. A small fringe group who may have no support in their community could carry out such an attack. It happened in Madrid and I don't think they had any support in muslim community there, they don't need support they just need to be let into the country. I have repeated over and over again that I'm worried about fringe extremists and that's why we should check out any strongly religious people before letting them in. Up North they don't chant "God is great", they don't believe that if you martyr yourself you will go to heaven, there are no martyrs up there, the church up there is about as powerful as it is down here. Young kids aren't brought up to follow the orders of their local priests as if it was law. Don't be ridiculous the North is not a religious hotbed.

bonkey wrote:

Who is they? The Muslims in the democracy of Indonesia? In the democracy of Turkey? Or the Muslims living in Ireland, England, the US etc.? The millions of Muslims who just voted in Afghanistan and didn't vote for a religious leader? After all...its the religion you're blaming...so you should surely be able to explain how Muslim-majority democracies actually exist on this planet.

I'm not saying that it's impossible to have a democracy and religion, I'm saying that having extreme religious views are most definitely not conductive to democracy. Turkey is secular because it's got a very.....overbearing army. I am saying extremists are dangerous, speaking of Indonesia have you been to Bali recently? Nice place except for a big smoking crater in the ground. Afghanistan! YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME! I wont even bother refuting that one it's such a bad choice. As long as the people don't follow their religion in their choices of leaders it's OK, once they do things can turn out really bad.

bonkey wrote:

Been to any good Auto da Fé recently?

Of course not, the inquisition ended in the 19th century bonkey and we don't do them anymore because we don't follow the Church in matters of law anymore. Seperation of church and state, remember? When was the last time the Bible was edited or the Qur'an?

bonkey wrote:

No change in the Catholic Church's position on anything in the past decade?

Do you think they welcome change? That they actually would change anything at all if it weren't for the fact that our modern world is forcing them to! It's the modern secular world that's forcing them to change it's not voluntary.

OfflerCrocGod

bonkey wrote:

I'll take one too...that wasn't the point I was making.

I was objecting to OFG basing half of his argument on a tirade against religion and how our religiously-freed western society is superior....whilst basing the half - the examples of his arguments all on one specific religion. If one is willing to blur such distinctions, its easy to see why all practicioners of a given religion are tarnished with the same brush for the actions of an extremist few. Its more or less the same level of generalisation.

My problem is with a religion that asks for your unquestioning allegiance and that sets it's self up as the sole store of justice and truth. That expects to be the foundations of the laws of any country that practices it. Buddhism is a way of life, a philosophy, it's not really a religion at all, it doesn't ask it's followers for all those things at all. The kinds of religions which are like I described are the one which belong to the "People Of The Book" category. Christianity, Islam, Judaism those tend to ask of their followers that their laws are the laws of their respective holy book......that I find totally stupid and ridiculous. A religion to me is something which makes statements beyond proof and expects its followers to just "have faith". Even when those claims are proven to be horsecrap. Gautama never said he was anything more then a teacher. So it's not really a religion to me. While Hinduism.....well it's not really tied down to any set of religious laws or religious concepts, much like Buddhism

bonkey wrote:

OFG is alterning between attacking "religion" as being the problem, and illustrating Islam being the problem. While he persists in this, I'm quite happy to have he, you, or anyone else point to aspects of Islam which "prove" his point about religion in general.

The point in question was me fishing to see whether he'd slam all aspects of all religions, or - yet again - use Islam as his evidence of rationality in arguing against religion.

jc

Religions which accept no compromise are dangerous. I use Islam because Christianity is spent, Judaism has few followers left alive, Buddhism is not a religion, Hinduism is very similar to Buddhism and doesn't really classify as a religion to me, it's more spiritualism like Confucianism or Taoism a school of tought, a philosophy. To me a religion will not accept new thoughs or learning - it is written down so many years ago and that's the way things will be forever and you have no choice in the matter, you must accept that. If that's not dangerous then bonkey I don't know what is.

ionapaul

Leaving the Muslim question to the side, does anyone know the mechanism by which so many Chinese work visas are issued? Does Ireland have a special relationship in that regard with China? I personally think it is wonderful, Chinese people are friendly and extremely hard-working, the 'model minority', I don't think anyone should take offence when I say if I was a business owner looking for workers I would choose Chinese over Irish any day!

OfflerCrocGod

Yes all my Chinese friends are very hard workers and very friendly. I heard some where that there were nearly 100'000 of them in Dublin/Ireland(?) that is nearly 10% of the population of Dublin! I find that figure believable since there are so many of them on the streets. It's cool because it gives Dublin a very cosmopolitan feel