******Official politics thread ******

[Throndor]

Contrarily, by allowing mass migrants to come into the western world, and set up their own courts, whereby they are free to operate under their own antiquated cultural mores, you are arguing that some sort of compromise on secularity is in order. It absolutely IS NOT. THIS is what frightens those of us who have just FINALLY been given the freedom to pursue the life we are inclined to pursue, after several millennia of persecution on both sides of the fundamentalist aisle have used their desire for cultural superiority to justify exterminating us.

[Throndor]

When you try to reduce that very justifiable fear, to an irrational fear of "islamaphobia" you're being rather dismissive, divisive, and disingenuous. Im sure you MEAN well, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions (as they say).

[Cecily]

Now you could make the argument that subjecting yourself to contrary opinions only helps to reinforce and strengthen one’s convictions, but I wonder if that isn’t just a psychological defense kicking in. I’m right. They’re wrong. That’s not thought. It’s reflex (which doesn’t involve the brain).

[Cecily]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Throndor]

No, what im saying is that your attempts to reduce my position to mere "racism" or "islamaphobia" (borne of christian bias) is YOUR bias showing. You cannot see this as a mutlifaceted issue, it can only be binary to u.

[Throndor]

Secularity must be an unconditional surrender of anyone attempting to migrate into our secular culture. They cannot have it both ways. Until the left has homogenized on this view, they cannot validate their position on forced multiethnicism. Multiculturalism is a myth, culture itself is just a social construct, its imaginary. Attempting to homogenize us and unite us under one banner whilst not uniting us is a unresolvable paradox.

You cant just slip happy meaningless words loosely affiliated with "inclusiveness" in there to church it up with a pathos-infused bow whilst ignoring the logical fallacy.

[Cecily]

Originally Posted by Throndor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Secularity must be an unconditional surrender of anyone attempting to migrate into our secular culture. They cannot have it both ways. Until the left has homogenized on this view, they cannot validate their position on forced multiethnicism. Multiculturalism is a myth, culture itself is just a social construct, its imaginary. Attempting to homogenize us and unite us under one banner whilst not uniting us is a unresolvable paradox.

You cant just slip happy meaningless words loosely affiliated with "inclusiveness" in there to church it up with a pathos-infused bow whilst ignoring the logical fallacy.

Good points except that little freedom of religion thing we implemented awhile ago being a integral part of American culture.

Here’s the first amendment. It’s not just about free speech anymore.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

[misterbonkers]

what if we make them wear a big belt like the wwe heavyweight championship and call it the bible belt

[Throndor]

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Good points except that little freedom of religion thing we implemented awhile ago being a integral part of American culture.

Here’s the first amendment. It’s not just about free speech anymore.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Thats besides the point. Congress cannot make laws excluding specific religions but they can make laws governing the people. Nonsecular courts are unconstitutonal. If islam intends, to include within its doctrine, an insistence upon self governence that is THEIR problem to resolve. Theyre the ones bringing this ideology to us, not the other way around.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Any nonsecular courts they attempt to recreate under the jurisdiction of our secular courts CANNOT have validity nor the ability to enact punishment upon their own people even if they are only used in cases of transgressions between muslim and muslim, because by the constitution theyre agreeing to accept when they migrate here, nonsecular courts THEMSELVES are unconstitutional.

I mean, if they wanna make courts with non-tangible penalties, such as losing 3 imaginary heaven points for violating their imaginary rules, thats cool. But thats about the extent of their authority over matters of crime and punishment. This conversation is over.

[Throndor]

Originally Posted by misterbonkers [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

what if we make them wear a big belt like the wwe heavyweight championship and call it the bible belt

Best idea ever.