Judaism - Can it ever be 'assimilated'?
On Monday, January 26, 2015 at 3:20:14 PM UTC-6, Travis wrote: > > > > > > > > > No. Islam does not exist or wish to be assimilated. Islam is for the > assimilation (or annihilation of all others). > > > > B > > > > > http://humanevents.com/2015/01/26/islam-can-it-ever-be-assimilated/?utm_source=hedaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl > > > > > Islam – Can it ever be ‘assimilated’? > > [image: > http://humanevents.com/2015/01/26/islam-can-it-ever-be-assimilated/?utm_source=hedaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl]Daniel > > Gallington <http://humanevents.com/author/dgallington/> | Monday Jan 26, > 2015 6:00 AM > > [image: Islam – Can it ever be 'assimilated'?] > > - Share on Facebook *1* > - > - > - 1 SHARES > > Recently, President Obama said that European countries needed to better > assimilate Muslim immigrants, communities and minorities, and Secretary of > State Kerry said the “lack of integration” of Muslims in Europe was like > the American civil rights struggles of the 1960s > <http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/kerry-lack-integration-muslims-europe-us-civil-rights-struggle-60s_824240.html> > . > > The truth is that European countries have been dealing with this issue far > longer than we have, and are now paying for their naiveté – especially > during the 60’s. Having lived in London then, I wrote > <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/daniel-gallington-u.s.-isnt-only-one-with-immigrations-ills/article/35646>: > > “*….England [was] overwhelmed by immigration from India and Pakistan, > especially in the ’60s. Despite acrimonious debate, the policies persisted, > forever changing the demographics of mother England. [T]his debate was > raging between Liberals and Conservatives in the 1960s — and these points > were made over and over again to the British public. …They still don’t > understand that these “new” immigrants hate them, have always hated them > and will always hate them.” * > > In fact, it’s never been a matter of “assimilation” or “integration” – > either in Europe or the United States – rather, it’s been more a matter of > resistance to it and the persistence with anachronistic religious dogma, > some radical versions of which serve as the inspiration and motivation for > the mindless radicalism and violence we recently witnessed in Paris. > > This is nothing new. In 1899 [*The River War: An Historical Account of > the Reconquest of the Soudan* (1899)] Winston Churchill, who could have > just as easily been writing an editorial for *The Times *today, wrote: “*The > fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his > absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay > the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a > great power among men. ….[T]he influence of the religion paralyses the > social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force > exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant > and proselytizing faith.”* > > Over a hundred years later, it would appear that little, if anything, has > changed. We still have brutal “honor killings” of women – even in the > United States – and young girls are murdered, raped and enslaved (in the > name of religious law) throughout the more “modern” Muslim world. And, as > witnessed by the latest series of unspeakable atrocities carried out by the > ISIL/ISIS, Churchill was absolutely correct when he wrote, *“No stronger > retrograde force exists in the world”.* > > Muslim immigration to the Western world has not had much to do with the > West as a “land of opportunity” or a place where one has personal and > individual freedoms unfettered by politics or government. Rather, it too > frequently represents a threat to these grand traditions, this because > there is often no intention to “assimilate”, e.g., wives and daughters > still are regarded as “property”. > > In fact, one could ask if there is *any* similarity between “modern” > Muslim immigration and – just for example – the assimilation of waves of > Europeans who came here in the 19th and 20th centuries? How about later > immigrations from Asia and Mexico? > > And, in spite of Secretary Kerry’s comments, we are light years ahead of > the rest of the world when it comes to the integration and assimilation of > our myriad and varied categories immigrants. Those who disagree need to > spend some extended time in most any other part of the world. I have – more > than a dozen years – and there is simply no comparison to the scale and > degree of our integrated society anywhere else. > > To what extent should/could we impose our modern collective societal > wisdoms and experiences on new immigrants to our shores? Could we, for > example: > > - Prevent the immigration of those who regard their female family > members as “property”? > - How could such a requirement be implemented in a way consistent with > our form of government? > - Could such a covenant be part of the oath that every new citizen > must take? > - Could we require such an affirmation from a longer-term visitor, > student or a resident alien? > > These are legitimate questions for our legal scholars – and could be a way > we might exclude those whose beliefs – albeit in the name of a religion – > are totally contrary to the core of our Constitution and legal system. For > example, could it lead to similar kinds of laws as in France – that the > wearing of *burqas* and *nijabs* are illegal? Last year, the European > Court of Human Rights *“…rejected a claim by a young Muslim woman that > France’s ban on the wearing of burqas and niqabs in public violates her > rights. The French law …**went into effect in April 2011.* > <http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/04/11/france.burqa.ban/>*”* > > Like the French, who have the largest Muslim population in Europe – there > are many Muslim rules and “laws” that simply can never be “assimilated” > here. Just one of them is that women and girls belong to some man as his > property. And like the French, we should find legal ways to make the public > expression of that concept illegal and fundamentally inconsistent with > living here. > > In short, Muslim integration into Western cultures – especially ours – > requires the abandonment of laws, rules and practices inconsistent with > living in free societies. This is nothing radical or new – most other > organized religions have done it for the past few hundred years, some far > more than others. > > > > > __._,_.___ > ------------------------------ > Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected] <javascript:>> > ------------------------------ > > > Visit Your Group > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmbjNybDVzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MjIzMDMyNTU-> > > > > [image: Yahoo! Groups] > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJldTlxYzI3BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQyMjMwMzI1NQ--> > > • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • > Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of Use > <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> > > __,_._,___ > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
