Mary Wakefield

Original sin makes us better people. I wish Muslims believed in it

11 April 2015

9:00 AM

11 April 2015

9:00 AM

These days, on the subject of Islam, non-Muslims have mostly divided into two camps — though there’s a little wandering about between the tents. Camp one says Islam is a religion of peace, and points for proof to the millions of non-violent Muslims around the world. Warlike Muslims are an anomaly, they say, and fight not because they are religious but because they are politicised. Bad guys like Isis aren’t Muslims so much as Islamists, which is different. Most politicians and public figures belong to this camp, including the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Camp two is more furtive. Members look around before they speak. In this gang, sotto voce, everyone agrees there is something intrinsically violent about Islam and that Islamism — Isis, for example — is a natural offshoot of its angry soul. The Queen’s chaplain appears to be in camp two. He sent a wave of revulsion through the media last month when he suggested the Quran might incite violence. Round here they say ‘Islam was spread by the sword’, meaning that conquest is in its DNA. Though Allah has a compassionate face, war is in his nature too. Ploughshares must sometimes become swords. How else will the caliphate be established?

On Easter Saturday, when England was flat with rain, I tried to decide which side to join and instead found myself in a third position, one which I think might make a reasonable refuge for confused clergy. My worry about Islam, as a religion but also as a growing influence on our culture, isn’t that it’s violent but that it doesn’t believe in original sin.

Now I can see that this isn’t going to be a popular camp. Most sensible types revolt at the thought of original sin. It’s medieval. It conjures in the public mind a picture of some spittle-flecked pervert in a dog collar making children cry. The idea that Adam and Eve screwed up so badly that their descendants are all fatally flawed seems both unpleasant and unfair. In Islam’s creation story, Adam makes a blunder, but is forgiven and restored to God’s right hand. Islamic man is therefore born not weak and fallen but perfect, a suitable companion for Allah. This, to a 21st-century mind, might seem the better way.


I disagree. I’m not evangelising, or lobby-ing for a literal interpretation of Genesis. But it seems to me that a nation, a civilisation, which has at its heart the idea that we’re all fallen is gentler than one that doesn’t. Moreover, as creation stories go, I think it’s a far better explanation for humanity; for the way we all behave.

Original sin puts us all in the same boat. It means that no one gets too big for their boots, because we all know we’re riddled with besetting sins. It means that we should care for the weak not just because we’re told to, but because there but for the grace of God goes everyone.

Why does any of this matter? Aren’t we a secular country now? That’s true. A new study by the Pew Forum shows Christianity in England dwindling pitifully. But like it or not, the morals and manners that even atheists hold dear have their roots, in the West, in Christianity. We bring our children up to believe they should forgive the wrongs done them, that it’s bad to hold a grudge. Most Brits, even secular ones, would agree that if it takes ‘he who is without sin’ to throw the first stone, then no stones will be thrown.

The Muslim idea of man as perfect or perfectible is, by contrast, a real bore. Instead of tending towards peace, or the great ‘oneness’ that Islam aims for, it ends up being divisive. If man can be perfect, there’s no excuses for those who have hit the buffers. Worse, it means, inevitably, that some will cast themselves as sinless and set up as judges of the rest. In Islam, because man is perfect, there are those without sin who can cast the first stone, and no one will dare tell them otherwise. You’d need original sin for that.

In January, President Al Sisi of Egypt called for a ‘religious revolution’ in Islam. He said: ‘Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants — that is 7 billion — so that they themselves may live? Impossible… I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective.’ This was seen as a very progressive speech.

PF_15.04.02_ProjectionsOverview_2050-sidebar_310px
Source: Pew Research Center

But Sisi’s difficulty is that there really isn’t much in the Quran to suggest that Allah gives a hoot for non-believers. Muslims are encouraged to forgive one another, but it is not required to forgive infidels, the apostate or people who blaspheme. We’re not all in it together. That Pew study also predicted that sometime soon after 2050 the number of Muslims will begin to overtake the
number of Christians worldwide. In England, nearly one in ten British children is now Muslim — and is that what they’re taught? No need to say sorry to an infidel?

In the interests of preparing my camp, I’ve been reading some imams online who use the idea of original sin as a proof of Christianity’s idiocy. Look, say the imams, these Christian fools believe that babies are sinful. How stupid is that? But it’s far from stupid, the idea that we’re all flawed. In fact I’d say it’s both a spiritual and a scientific fact. Consider the phenomenon of ‘illusory superiority’. When questioned on their general performance, nearly all humans will judge that they outperform the average. In looks, in IQ, in popularity, even in honesty, we all think we’re better than average. If the original sin was pride, I consider that to be a pretty decent proof.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • HeavitreeMaid

    Good and thought-provoking article.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      If only I could read it.

      • Donafugata

        Likewise but if you subscribe would you still get those annoying pop-up ads telling you to subscribe?

        • plumpleton

          Delete your spectator cookies, then you should be able to read it.

          • Donafugata

            Thanks for the tip.

          • Bonkim

            That would be stealing cookies.

          • plumpleton

            And eating them too!

      • Bonkim

        Pay you fees and you will be able to read it.

  • Damaris Tighe

    The image of the crucified man on the cross isn’t at its root a sick image of torture revered by twisted Christians, but a reminder that everything human is broken to some degree. It’s a reminder of the need for humility.

    Islam doesn’t only reject the idea of original sin. It also rejects the crucifixion as a true prophet, in its view, demonstrates his credentials through power not humility. Like Mohammed. In Islam the central Christian story is re-written so that Jesus escapes from the cross & another man dies in his place – thus ripping the heart & meaning out of the narrative & demonstrating Mohammed’s complete lack of understanding.

    Because it’s a human contruct Islam sees humility as humiliating. It can’t stand it. And that’s why it’s the perfect counter-Christian faith & why it visits such misery on the world.

    • Ivan Ewan

      It also makes Islamic Jesus the most pointless, counter-productive prophet you can think of.

      Islamic Jesus comes to the Islamic Republic of Roman-Occupied Judea, converts the Islamic Jews to a slightly more Islamic Islam, then fakes his death on a cross after having utterly failed to persuade the Romans or to conquer them – but this causes all his followers to invent a new false religion called Christianity, which is so successful that it eradicates Islam and becomes the most popular religion on the planet – so that by the time Mohammad comes along and reestablishes Islam, all the Jews have pretended to forget Islam and invented an offshoot of Islam called Judaism, and the Christians are so fixed in their misunderstanding about the crucifixion that there are bloody wars lasting hundreds of years, and it’s still unresolved to this day; when the world is due to end, Islamic Jesus will pay for his failure by killing everyone who believed in his ressurection, and breaking every cross there is.

      Sorry about the lack of full stops there, I just wanted to get across the manic insanity of what Islam actually has to say about Jesus.

      • Excellent summary. Two thoughts occur – in Islam wasn’t Jesus upon being born supposed to have said ‘I am the slave of Allah!’ (and to condemn slavery is, according the foremost Islamic university, to commit apostasy – and we know what the sharia punishment for that is!) and didn’t Mohammed believe the trinity consisted of Jesus, Mary and God?

        • Ivan Ewan

          He was said to speak immediately upon being born (which is disturbing no matter what else), I don’t know about declaring himself to be “the slave of Allah” at this time; however, it would have been redundant if he were born into Islam.

          Here’s another summary I think you will also enjoy.

          In Christianity, every believer is considered a “servant of God” – that is, they choose to follow Biblical commandments, in the belief that it will be better for them and better for the world, that they do so. A Christian, like a servant, is free to leave – their soul and their moral destiny is their own responsibility after all, as an independent sovereign being.

          In Islam, from the moment a person is born to hear their first words – the words of the shahada – or from the moment a person converts by reciting the shahada – they are considered a “slave of Allah” – that is, they have no choice but to follow Koranic commandments, on the basis that they will be considered apostates and killed if they do not. A Muslim, as a slave, is chained for life – their soul and their moral destiny is no business of theirs, as they are bound to the collective, the Ummah.

          Islam is Christianity with inverted colours.

          • Interesting! I was aware of it – I consider Islam more of a cult – or even a political movement – than a religion.

          • sebastian2

            It’s an imperial arab triumphalist political manifesto that, quite falsely and cynically in my view, camouflages it as a revealed, perfect religion. As such, political discourse is forbidden and political challenges are, as we’ve seen, condemned as blasphemy. This pretty well halts further debate.

            Fairly convenient to anyone of megalomaniac tendencies.

        • tolpuddle1

          Mohammed believed the Trinity was “Jesus, Mary and God” because heretical Christians in Syria told him that.

          Heresy is a bad thing – it’s Lies.

          • uglyfatbloke

            Maybe so, but then all religions are lies really. They’ve been made up (like scientology or astrology) to give power and influence to a group.

          • tolpuddle1

            So Jesus and His disciples died painful, premature deaths in order to wield power ?

            No – you’re thinking of Mohammed and his disciples, and L Ron Hubbard.

          • uglyfatbloke

            They did n’t make up a new religion; their successors did that. Of course they may not have actually existed at as historical individuals.

        • sebastian2

          I don’t know about that but he had a fatal – if temporary – attraction towards Al Llah’s 3 daughters (Al Lat, Al Uzza and Manat, each with their own shrine) who were part of the then “pagan” constellation of deities. This allure is what lies behind the “satanic verses” where concessions appear to have been made towards the Meccan polytheists that the “prophet” hoped to persuade to his own ideology.
          This political compromise was subsequently reversed and condemned as satanic temptation.

      • Damaris Tighe

        Exactly!

      • JSC

        Top summary! And the most ridiculous thing is: Christians still defend Islam against “the non-believers” (i.e. atheists) because they think it’s a friendly faith, unaware that when Muslims talk about non-believers they include Christians in that number!

        • Ivan Ewan

          We are both kafir (idolaters) and mushrikun (committing the ultimate sin of ascribing non-singularity to God), which is about as bad as you can get, in Islam.

      • Bonkim

        Does a Christian Muhammad make any more sense?

        • Ivan Ewan

          Well, I hope you were expecting an essay to answer that question, ’cause I got one.

          According to Christianity, Mohammad comes under the category of “false prophet”. That’s the simple, boring answer. But there’s more…

          If Mo is very very lucky, he gets to be “The False Prophet” of Revelation, who is said to initiate war on the entire world until it’s impossible for anyone to live freely without bearing his declaration.

          There are a few things which make Mo a more likely candidate, as far as Revelation is concerned.

          Mohammad’s predictions of the end of the world are (surprise surprise) totally inverse to the ideas in Revelation; if you read the Islamic and Christian texts regarding the end of the world, they mesh like a couple of gears, like Yin-Yang, and very well – there is the notable confliction that each side portrays their own side as the virtuous victors, with Jesus on their side, but that’s to be expected.

          There’s another thing which, by itself seems like mere coincidence, but combined with Mo’s readily apparent keenness to secure the job of The False Prophet, it bears consideration:

          Revelation is a bit fuzzy on the subject of The False Prophet’s aforementioned declaration, and it is even preceded, in scripture, by the statement that it is a bit of a riddle. Something that John, or whoever it was, recounted from a vision as a sign on men’s foreheads and recorded as “666”, leaving it to others to decypher.

          Apparently, the Greek script for “six hundred and sixty-six” looks an awful lot like the Arabic script “bism’llah”, or “in the name of Allah”, appended with a pair of crossed swords. This Arabic motto, crossed swords and all, is often found on the black forehead bandannas of Hezbollah and Hamas soldiers, and elsewhere.

          Whether or not Mohammad actually fits the bill for “The False Prophet”, he is more or less exactly the sort of person that Christianity warns about, and more or less exactly the sort of person that most Christians have been too “nice”, both in the 7th Century and today, to guard against.

          Does that answer your question?

          • Bonkim

            I suppose it is O.K for Muslims to cast a mirror image of all that you say back at you. For me all religions are bunk and your lengthy and meaningless narrative proves the point. Putting it another way Bigots in either religion deserve each other.

          • wudyermucuss

            Only one ideology is wreaking havoc around the globe,but nice false equivalence try anyway.

          • Bonkim

            All ideologies cause havoc from time to time. Keep away from the world’s trouble spots.

          • wudyermucuss

            Only one has from its inception to now.

          • Bonkim

            In nature you get eliminated if you stand still.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Did you forget that plants exist when you made that devastatingly astute observation?

          • Bonkim

            Plants become extinct too if they don’t adapt and change.

          • Verbatim

            You don’t need to; they’ve come to you, in spades!

          • freddiethegreat

            I assume you are atheist, ie you believe there is no God or god? But can you live according to this?

          • Bonkim

            Complete liberation from superstition and silly beliefs. Rational man does not believe in God and spirits. God and spirits invented by man who cannot fully comprehend the nature around him; rational man is not able to explain nature either except by inference but then does not go on to invent an imaginary God to explain the unexplainable.

            The next rational question is if you believe in a God who created God and why? Did God have nothing better to do to while away his/her time? If God created man in his image – why is man creating Gods in many images?

            Religion – created by man and cause of strife all through history. Best not to waste time with religion.

          • Ivan Ewan

            “if you believe in a God who created God and why?”

            You would never really apply this question to your own beliefs. If you don’t believe in God, then who created the Universe? You see? It’s an unanswerable question either way.

            Atheists in the 19th Century, and before that, stated that the Universe was infinite, without beginning or end, and that this meant God had no “creation” to speak of. Everything had always been there.

            Having now understood that the Universe did have a beginning, and that essentially everything, even time, sprang out of an inexplicable singularity, the atheist argument took on its complete opposite form: everything that existed needed to have a creator, so who or what created God?

            You say, who created God? By the same token, who created the Big Bang? Your answer, whatever it is, can likely as not answer your own question.

          • Bonkim

            I didn’t ask the question – knowing that there are no rational answers. A rational mind does not ask stupid questions whereas an irrational mind believes in a supreme being as the answer to all his questions. Muslims are the ultimate believers as they submit unquestioningly to all the bigoted Mullahs that ask them to commit barbarities in the name of their one and true God – not the Catholic Church was not that much different some decades back.

          • Ivan Ewan

            “A rational mind does not ask stupid questions”

            Then I can’t blame you for denying that you asked one.

          • Bonkim

            Wasting time on personal innuendos will not add much to the discussion.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Yes, if they don’t agree and have their own opinion then they’re free to express it. That’s how I understand freedom of speech.

            I answered your question in factual detail, explaining the Biblical Christian perspective on Mohammad without leaving anything important out.

            Possibly you didn’t want me to answer your question? Did you want me to tell you what you wanted to hear instead? Your understanding of free speech sounds more like a bigot’s than mine.

          • Bonkim

            Islam came centuries after Christianity – as such there is no Biblical perspective on Islam except that imagined or invented by so called Christians – either co-existing or warring with Muslims through the centuries. Interactions between Christians and Muslims have been mostly confrontational so free speech means little in that context – even a bigot has his/her right of free speech.

          • Ivan Ewan

            I came across a book recently by Arthur C. Clarke, called “Prelude to Space”. It was written in 1947 and discusses the power of rocketry, speculating on ICBMs and moon landings.

            But as ICBMs and moon landings were only possible more than a decade after the book was published, Clarke must have had no such ideas and cannot have written such a book.

            Are all of your insights to be so deeply misguided as this?

          • Bonkim

            You are no judge of the subject in the report.

            Regards Arthur Clarke – much of the science and Maths of escaping the earth’s gravity and interstellar travel was already known to scientists and mathematicians decades earlier. German Rocket scientists, engineers, chemists and technologists were already working on converting theory into practice – sub-orbital rockets were already a fact in WW2 – the V2 rocket was an early version of mechanically guided missile and incorporated all the basic concepts that went into later satellite launches and moon landings. But of course far more reliable and increasing in control technology, improved materials of construction, propellants, etc.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Oh! Oh, I am no judge but you are? Oh do tell me more about your sterling authority on the subject of “What Ivan Ewan Should Be Allowed To Talk About”.

            In Clark’s time, there were rockets, and in Jesus’ time there were men calling themselves prophets. Clark predicted moon landings, satellite communications and ICBMs, a natural extention of what existed then, and Revelation predicted that a false prophet could manipulate not just dozens, but millions of people, and thereby seriously threaten the entire world – again, a natural extension. When Mohammad turned up he was not new, but a combination of a few established phenomena.

            On this basis, there is, almost inarguably, a “Christian perspective on Mohammad”, regardless of your personal prejudices in the matter.

          • Bonkim

            This is a free country – you can believe and comment what you want on the topic. There is no right and wrong and you have a right to your beliefs/views but don’t expect everyone to agree – discussion throws up all sorts of angles on the subject. Comment on the topic by all means but it is meaningless to pick on others’ comments trying to justify your personal beliefs..

            For me I don’t give a tosh what you think or your views on on religion, Christianity and Islam. Trying to argue against someone’s religious beliefs /or political persuasion is
            waste of time. If you believe in original sin or that Islam is a religion of losers – good luck I have no problem with that but have my right to disagree.

          • tolpuddle1

            The Christian Bigots aren’t going to kill you, though.

          • Bonkim

            There are gun-toting Christians on earth you know.

          • tolpuddle1

            Killing non-Christians from reasons of religious fanaticism ?

            Er, no, there aren’t, actually.

          • Bonkim

            Human conflicts and killings can come from many causes not necessarily connected to religion. At the rate global population is exploding and resources are running out – there is an almighty conflict brewing.

          • sebastian2

            But there’s one especially that’s coming for ………. you! Should it succeed – and we have to prevent this, we really do – then “bunk” will be haram and all “bunkers” dragged in front of a pitiless sharia judge intolerant of “bunk”.

            You don’t believe me? Stand in an Anglican cathedral and tell the priest and congregation of their bunk. You get a cup of tea. Go then to Pakistan’s Faisal mosque in Islamabad and tell them the same during Friday prayers. I don’t think tea will be on offer.

            If you think it’s “bunk” then you’d better support the society – Judeao/Christian – that tolerates those opinions. Otherwise your bunk will be very short lived indeed.

          • Bonkim

            Britain liberated itself from religion 200 years back and now is a post-Judeo-Christian society although having the historical trappings. Pakistan is a long way away and only the mad venture there. Britain is quite capable of keeping the Mad-mullahs in their place within the freedoms we all have of following any religion or none.

          • sebastian2

            Does Londonistan not mean anything to you? Roherham? The acute problems we have in deporting certain people? Mehdi Hasan’s surreptitious mohammedan rantings? Tower Hamlets? An overworked security service routinely thwarting mohammedan plots? FGM (very few convictions)? A brazen ambition to overthrow the UK in favour of a mohammedan state?

            I think there’s no place for complacency here.

          • Damaris Tighe

            You might be interested to know that there used to be a gate in the ancient walls of Jerusalem through which, according to Jewish belief, the Messiah would come at the end of time (the first coming for the Jews & maybe the second for the Christians, reminding me of the joke about the question he is to be asked, ‘have you been here before?’!). The city’s Muslim rulers blocked it up.

      • Peter Stroud

        I think you will find that most Jews will take exception to being described as belonging to an offshoot of Islam. Surely, the only important common originator of both faiths is Abraham. The Old Testament is 100% Jewish and predates Mo by millennia.

        • Ivan Ewan

          But I was writing from the Islamic perspective. Why bring facts into it?

      • wudyermucuss

        I just wanted to get across the manic insanity of what Islam actually has to say.

    • LastmaninEurope

      “& demonstrating Mohammed’s complete lack of understanding” Au contraire – Mo, or whoever it was formulated this revision, understood all too well what they were doing.
      There can only be one ‘Perfect Man’ and, typical of the arrogance, he must be one of their own.

    • Hegelman

      Historically, Muslims were far more tolerant towards Jews than Christians were – until the modern quarrel over the takeover of Palestine by Jews.

      The Holocaust was carried through by a Christian nation and would have been unthinkable without centuries of demonising of Jews by Christians.

      • Zululi

        So are you saying the Nazis slept with a copy of the New Testament of Jesus Christ under their pillow? You might have also mentioned that the Holocaust was perpetrated by a music loving nation therefore music is to blame?

        • Bonkim

          They certainly had Pope Pius on their side.

          • ardenjm

            Piffle.

            East German Communist Propaganda in the decades after the War. Pius XII was universally praised for all he did during the war by Jewish individuals and organisations. The Chief Rabbi of Rome converted and became a Catholic – and was Baptised with the Pope’s own Christian name – Eugenio.

            And lastly, even after misinformation of the last 50 years, Rabbi David Galin wrote ‘The Myth of Hitler’s Pope’ published a decade ago that dismantled the slurs, smears and slanders you’re bandying about here.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Hitler's_Pope

          • Bonkim

            Pius forbade US Military from posting black-GIs in the Vatican. Have you seen the Nazi Party at prayer in German Churches with the Swastika flying proudly? In Germany unlike in Britain and the US everyone paid a religious tax that went to the Church. Southern Germany/Austria part of the Catholic Church were staunchly pro-Nazi – as was most of the Polish and Western Ukrainians – all were happy to join the SS and other branches of the Nazis engaged in herding Jews, transporting them and acting as guards and facilitators in the death camps, as also the slave worker camps in thye industrial hinterlands. If Pius baptised a Jew good luck to Mr Zolli – his choice but very suspicious given he was in fascist Italy during the war and was not sent to the death camps when many of his people were. I suppose you can call it divine protection and good PR for the Catholic Church. But having seen the barbarities committed by the Conquistadores in S America and Catholic fathers in Asia, the demolishing and plunder of temples of other faiths, forced conversions, etc, etc, not much to choose between the Church of Rome and present day ISIS. Quite apart from the wholesale paedophilia in Catholic-run schools, orphanages, etc, all across the Globe.

          • Hegelman

            Hooray ! A magnificent rejoinder to the Christian liars. Crushing!

          • ardenjm

            Uh huh.

            Yup.

          • ardenjm

            Lie number one:
            “Pius forbade US Military from posting black-GIs in the Vatican.”

            This claim comes from a report the Pope received about French Algerian troops. The report said that these troops had raped and pillaged in other areas where they were stationed, and the Pope did not want these specific soldiers stationed in Rome. Pius expressed his concerns about these specific men to British Ambassador Osborne who broadened the statement in his cable back to London, saying that the Pope did not want “colored troops” stationed at the Vatican.

            You have decided to repeat the Chinese Whispers and say that Pius was talking about African-American troops, which is clearly not correct.

            “Have you seen the Nazi Party at prayer in German Churches with the Swastika flying proudly?” I’ve also seen photos of Nuns walking past giving the Nazi salute. I’ve also read Mit Brennender Sorge when the Pope wrote to the Catholics in Germany “with burning anxiety” about the racialism of Nazi politics. And that was in 1937. Time magazine made Hitler their Man of the Year in 1938. You dress up your bigotry as enlightened moral acuity.

            Lie number two:
            “staunchly pro-Nazi – as was most of the Polish and Western Ukrainians – all were happy to join the SS and other branches of the Nazis.” Wicked slander. Nearly as many Polish Catholics died at the hands of the Nazis as did Polish Jews. About 2,700,000 of the former and about 3,000,000 of the latter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_crimes_against_the_Polish_nation

            Lie number three: “If Pius baptised a Jew good luck to Mr Zolli – his choice but very suspicious given he was in fascist Italy during the war and was not sent to the death camps when many of his people were.”

            He wasn’t sent because he fled Rome. But even if he hadn’t he could have been amongst the 477 Jews hidden in the Vatican and another 4,238 Jews were protected in Roman monasteries and convents. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were saved through the Church during the War. FOR ANY OTHER INSTITUTION OR PERSON THIS WOULD HAVE MERITED ANY NUMBER OF TREES IN YAD VASHEM AS RIGHTEOUS AMONGST THE NATIONS. But, of course, the double standards The World operates in relation to the Church is notorious. You are a perfect example of it.

            Lie number four: “not much to choose between the Church of Rome and present day ISIS”. The Church in the Middle Ages – from the Fall of the Roman Empire to the Reformation gave the world the Book of Kells, the Lindisfarne Gospels, Gregorian Chant, Polyphony, Romanesque architecture, Gothic cathedrals, Hospices, Hospitals and Universities, the study of classical languages and advances in science and medicine. It’s early days yet for ISIS but somehow, 500 years hence, I doubt we’ll see them as builders of civilization.

            Lie number five: “wholesale paedophilia in Catholic-run schools, orphanages, etc, all across the Globe.” As wicked and heinous as these crimes are the statistics are also clear: such crimes are less likely to occur within church-run institutions than those run by other bodies. As we’re slowly beginning to find out in the UK…

            You’re not interested in the truth.
            You’re rendered yourself incapable of hearing it.

          • Bonkim

            No one is suugesting all Catholics were bigoted or murderous – and seriously you are talking to yourself – the clarifications will not change the course of human history – effects of past actions cannot be reversed and finding rationale justifying this or that conclusion will not change that. I might add Hitler sent many good Christians – many Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Gypsies, and even Germans that did not agree with Nazi policies or those that helped victims of Nazi persecution. There are good men and women in all societies that are prepared to make a stand or what they consider justice and fair play and in support of their beliefs.

          • serge

            viz. Clive James’ ” … backing away slowly, with smoke pouring of the wheels”.

          • Bonkim

            Catholic theology however is bigoted and not true Christianity though – but it is good that most are born Catholics or politically and culturally Catholic – don’t know any better than to believe what you have been brought to from birth – regrettably all religions are like that once you are born into a religion – it is like the Mafia – difficult to get out.

          • Zululi

            Yes, claiming that Nazi Germany was a Christian nation is silly in the extreme.

          • Bonkim

            I am not claiming anything – The Germans were Christians as others in Europe – assuming all that profess to be Christians are true Christians – they went to Church and celebrated Christian festivals, theur Church Fathers blessed their marriages, and Christenings, etc, etc. The Pope had a Concordat with the Nazi Government – live and let live and the Nazi flags flew in Churches – now how far do you want to go to disprove the Germans in Germany were or not Christians – just ask them and check their Church records.

          • Hegelman

            The Holocaust would have been unthinkable without 2000 years of ruthless Christian demonisation of Jews as “Murderers of God”.

            The lie that Hitler was irreligious was invented by the churches after he fell to cover up their murderous collaboration with him. He constantly invoked Jesus as his inspirer, ceaselessly invoked “the Creator”, and explicitly ridiculed the nouveau-pagan tendencies of Himmler and a few Nazis. Atheism was a serious offence under Hitler.

            The pope hailed Hitler as the “Saviour of Germany”, and made his birthday a special day of celebration in the German churches. The Catholic church made a Concordat with Hitler and NEVER ex-communicated any leading Nazi except Goebbels: for marrying a Protestant. After the war, the catholic church helped many Nazi war criminals to escape to safe havens under extreme right wing dictatorships in Latin America.

            Read Richard Steigmann-Gall’s well-received “The Holy Reich” to learn that the Nazis were thick as thieves with the Christians.

          • Bonkim

            Eichman was taken from S America and huge numbers fled with their loot to Chile and Argentina. Their legacy of despotic dictatorship survived well into the twentieth century.

          • Zululi

            Read inside the third reich by Alber Speer. It was a group of “papists” who, unsuccessfully, tried to rid the world of AH and paid for it dearly. The vatican signed a concordat with hitler is far from giving him support, it is effectively a declaration of neutrality like Switzerland. So hitler was religious? Yep receiving the sacraments regularly no doubt like a good catholic, oh puuuuuulease! Any nazis escaping to south america after the war could do so through the many gangs and organisations that existed and still exist till this day in that part of the world. Governments were corrupt and to blame christianity for WW2 because of some spurious, oblique claims indicates an unhealthy fixation. Likewise goes for anyone blaming today’s troubles in the ME with christianity.

        • Hegelman

          The Holocaust would have been unthinkable without 2000 years of ruthless Christian demonisation of Jews as “Murderers of God”.

          The lie that Hitler was irreligious was invented by the churches after he fell to cover up their murderous collaboration with him. He constantly invoked Jesus as his inspirer, ceaselessly invoked “the Creator”, and explicitly ridiculed the nouveau-pagan tendencies of Himmler and a few Nazis. Atheism was a serious offence under Hitler.

          The pope hailed Hitler as the “Saviour of Germany”, and made his birthday a special day of celebration in the German churches. The Catholic church made a Concordat with Hitler and NEVER ex-communicated any leading Nazi except Goebbels: for marrying a Protestant. After the war, the catholic church helped many Nazi war criminals to escape to safe havens under extreme right wing dictatorships in Latin America.

          Read Richard Steigmann-Gall’s well-received “The Holy Reich” to learn that the Nazis were thick as thieves with the Christians.

      • Infidelissima

        so all those tolerant parts in the Koran that tell Muslims to slay Jews, and that Jews are apes and pigs, and that Jews need to be killed under rocks and behind trees, were written after 1948?

      • wudyermucuss

        The Nazis committed the Holocaust for racial reasons,not religious ones.

        Historically,Jews had mixed experiences under all other ideologies but were always second class citizens under Islam.
        They could,and did reach the highest positions under Christians.

        Palestine was taken over by Islam by force,Jews have been there for millenia.

        • Bonkim

          Everybody is second class in lands dominated by other religions.

          • wudyermucuss

            False.

          • Infidelissima

            Everybody is second class in lands dominated by islam.

            there, you go, now it makes sense.

          • Bonkim

            Read carefully – man is a social animal – social values are established by history, religion and culture – so regardless of the extremes of bigotry in certain parts of the world you will be at a disadvantage if you venture to locations where your history, language, religion and culture are not in the majority. That is the human condition all across the globe – and yes in some parts you may be actively hunted down and eliminated. Open up your eyes – all religions, cultures and ethnicities have historically discriminated against or exploited those from other faiths/cultures/ethnicities.

            The Arabs and Europeans collaborated in the slave trade, The Catholic Church in cahoot with colonial Empires exploited and forcefully converted populations across the Globe including in Europe. It may be history now and others such as the Islamic bigots are showing utter ruthlessness in parts of the Middle East today but history has a habit of repeating itself.

            The relative peace and human rights/tolerance, and economic gains post WW2 is a tiny glitch in the long history of human conflict to gain supremacy or dominate over others. Look around in today’s world – religious and ethnic minorities continue to be discriminated and/or exploited on all continents of the globe even in the relatively more tolerant west. It is only a question of degree – not of substance – much of the more affluent/industrialised world have moved on from historic bigotry and prejudices as that was seen as harmful for trade and bad for international business – but resurfacing as a counter to the utter ruthlessness of those that are re-asserting their faith however silly/idiotic it may seem to the rest and wishing us harm.

            Taking sides in a religious debate is farcical particularly if you think all religions are bunk.

          • Sarka

            Bla bla bla.
            If you think all religions are bunk, then please don’t take part in any religious debate. If you think all careful and complex history is bunk (yea yea it’s all colonialism and exploitation innit?), please please don’t take part in a historical debate.
            You will not offer anything useful in either.

          • Bonkim

            No comprende Espaneol.

        • Bonkim

          Race, religion, culture and geographical concentration make for a potent mix. All are individually and collectively leading to elimination of those that don’t conform to expected norms.

        • Bonkim

          Europeans were reluctant Christians but once the Church of Rome emerged as the natural successor to the Roman Empire it used Imperial power to conquer and forcibly convert the warring tribes in Europe. Theoretically Christianity was not natural to the barbaric tribes in Europe compared with the more settled ancient civilisations of Central and West Asia, and Egypt/North Africa. But once converted they acquired the virulent form of anti-Jews and non-Christians as a natural attribute of their culture – Christian love, etc, etc, emerged mostly in the Colonial era as a paternalistic sop of colonial barbarity that was thrut on the illiterate and exploited masses of the occupied lands – slaves were given the Sunday off and encouraged to convert which was good politics.

          • Sarka

            Actually, the conversion of “Barbarian Europe” to Christianity in the early medieval period was much more about soft Roman power than conquest and forcible conversion…This, remember, was the period of the collapse of the Western Roman Empire and of course much conversion was achieved in areas that had not been subject to Roman power earlier! The chieftains of barbarian tribes were attracted to Christianity because of its prestige…. (whether from Byzantium or Rome).
            The idea that “Christianity was not natural” to the barbarians is a bit weird – even racial. It’s true, though, that missionaries tended to have to simplify the very complex theo-philosophy of the Late Roman world Church Fathers to get it across…And by the High Middle Ages you see a certain “catch-up” effect – sometimes known as rechristianisation of the Church in Western Europe – which of course proceeded via monasticism, and above all universities.
            I am hardly one to defend all aspects of Medieval Christianity…(though arguably, antisemitism even increased in the early modern period, for complex reasons), but you are quite wrong if you think the Church was always just the supplier of gung-ho hate-speech for this or that ruler’s conflict du jour. The church was responsible for a great deal known as “pacification of society” – which had been pretty rough in the early feudal area with the breakdown of central authorities. I somehow don’t get the impression you have read much church history. or even state history.

            “Christian love etc etc emerged mostly in the Colonial era as a paternalistic sop of colonial barbarity burble burble…”
            Crikey, Dave Spart is more persuasive than this.

      • Bonkim

        Have to agree with you there. The Holocaust was the culmination of two Millennia of hatred against the Jews who were second class Citizens continuously used as money-bags and eliminated when the Lords could not pay their debts. Then again the world consists of those with power and the vast majority of ignorant working underclass t be exploited as hose in power considered fit – and the Jews were simply a powerless racial/religious subgroup in Europe to be used.

      • Ivan Ewan

        “Muslims were far more tolerant towards Jews than Christians were” – as long as they paid their protection money and minded their Ps and Qs. Actually do you have a source for that statement?

        “the takeover of Palestine by Jews.” – another loser with the BDS version of history. This is so tiring.

        The Jews lived in Judea and Samaria, the region now covering what you would call Palestine. According to the Bible as a historical document the Jews took over from the Canaanites, and had regular disputes with the islandic Philistines who came from Crete, having probably been a slave race for the Greeks.

        The Romans occupied Judea and Samaria, but after putting down a Judean revolt, they expelled a lot of the Jewish people and, to add insult to injury, renamed the whole region Palestine, a Latin transliteration of Philistine.

        A few hundred years later, and the Arabs were advancing against the softened-up Roman Empire, which was now split in two. They invaded and occupied Palestine.

        After hundreds of battles which advanced the Arab nation with its newfound Islamic religion throughout the middle-east, north Africa, and even south-western Europe, a number of Crusades were fought in order to halt their momentum and to liberate Jerusalem. The second of these goals was only marginally successful.

        It wasn’t until the defeat of the serially genocidal Ottoman Empire in the early years of the 20th Century that Palestine went up for grabs. The British had acquired this territory according to the rules of war, and for whatever reason, established the Palestinian Mandate for a Jewish state. The state was originally to cover Judea, Samaria, and Trans-Jordan.

        Judea and Samaria were genuinely barren wastelands that the Arabs didn’t go near until the Jews had brought in a lot of finance and skills to recultivate it – but Trans-Jordan was more populous, and there was a TWO-STATE SOLUTION enacted so that the Arabs would have Palestine East of the Jordan, and the Jews would have Palestine West of the Jordan. There was the war of 1948, blah blah blah, we’re in modern history now, where everyone is calling for a three- or four-state solution and calling it a two-state solution.

        As for the Holocaust, it’s difficult to describe Nazi Germany as a Christian nation. Christianity was suppressed heavily by the Nazi thought police, and it was the Nazis, with their bizarre mongrel ideology incorporating socialism, neo-paganism, racialism, Eastern mysticism, and Roman imperialism that enthusiastically pursued genocide of a people stereotyped as rich, powerful, and treacherous. I don’t know what’s very Christian about that.

        • Hegelman

          The Holocaust would have been unthinkable without 2000 years of ruthless Christian demonisation of the Jews as “Murderers of God”.

          The demonisation continues to this day in the venomous Easter services of the Catholic Church, full of gripes about an old killing that was far from exceptional. Christians when they grabbed power were far crueller.

          The lie that Hitler was irreligious was invented by the churches after he fell to cover up their murderous collaboration with him. He constantly invoked Jesus as his inspirer, ceaselessly invoked “the Creator”, and explicitly ridiculed the nouveau-pagan tendencies of Himmler and a few Nazis. Atheism was a serious offence under Hitler.

          The pope hailed Hitler as the “Saviour of Germany”, and made his birthday a special day of celebration in the German churches. The Catholic church made a Concordat with Hitler and NEVER ex-communicated any leading Nazi except Goebbels: for marrying a Protestant. After the war, the catholic church helped many Nazi war criminals to escape to safe haven under extreme right wing dictatorships in Latin America.

          Read Richard Steigmann-Gall’s well-received “The Holy Reich” to learn that the Nazis were thick as thieves with the Christians.

          • Ivan Ewan

            I regard the Catholic Church as a corruption of Christianity, but I’d like to see some sources for those statements.

            Certainly, the idea that Hitler was religious because he collaborated with religious people is a fallacy. Hitler collaborated with all sorts of people he later had enslaved or killed.

    • Bonkim

      All religions including Christianity are human construct and reinterpreted in each generation. Religion was not fashionable in the 1960s and 70s and is resurfacing in virulent forms in the 21st century.

      • Zululi

        If you mean Islam is resurfacing in virulent forms, please say so rather than blame ALL religions.

        • Bonkim

          All religions are bunk and idiotic bigots are re-surfacing in so called Christianity too – it would be fun to have another Crusade against ISIS rampaging through Vienna and Constantinople..

          • Ivan Ewan

            Funny that, how Muslims were peacefully living in that well-known Islamic city of Vienna for, oh, centuries, until those blood thirsty Christian maniacs ransacked it and pretended it had been theirs all along.

            Or if you don’t believe that, why the double-standard?

          • Bonkim

            Vienna was a Roman military camp and the Germanic tribes have been knocking around Central Asia and Europe – not sure what you are talking about – Central Asian Mongol Khanates were the superpower of the Middle Ages later converting to Islam. No doubt they expanded their Empires Westwards towards Asia minor and Europe and Eastwards towards India and East/SE Asia. The Arabs and Central Asians were also the economic superpower and dominated trade and shipping all through history until the emergence of Europe and exploration/colonization of the New world and Asia/Africa. Not sure what you are talking about – those in power always try to expand their territory or impose their culture/norms – much of post WW2 world was culturally and economically colonized by the US and similar forces are in play today with countries like China, India, Brazil. etc on the ascendancy whereas the older powers slowly fading. Christianity or Islam were simply trappings that waxed and waned as the military and economic powers fluctuated. No double standard whatsoever – nature is cyclical, and all Empires go through their lifecycles.

          • Zululi

            Informed, sweeping statement, much? Fun? I can see where loyalties lie, Bonkim.

          • Bonkim

            Good beer in Austria.

      • wudyermucuss

        Islam is.
        Other religions are toodling along,if not getting beheaded,shot etc by one particular religion.

        • Bonkim

          Keep away from trouble-spots of the world.

          • wudyermucuss

            No.

          • Bonkim

            Good luck and don’t complain.

          • Hubward

            Would you count Communism & totalitarianism as bunk & idiotic too? People don’t need religion to go around murdering & oppressing their fellow humans.
            Christianity does however set out a framework for understanding we all are flawed and that the best ways to treat our neighbours is with compassion & love.
            Not something every doctrine or other religion can claim.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Thank you!

          • Bonkim

            Accept part of what you say. Man is a competitive animal but collaborates/accommodates/cooperates where common survival or economic/social/existential issues are at stake.

            You have to be ruthless and classify others you do not wish to coexist with as sub-human to be able to eliminate them from your world – that was the nature of human history until WW2 when people recognised that they either survive together or not at all. Much of subsequent moves towards protecting the weak, minorities, human rights, international aid, justice, etc, etc, stem from seeing that going back to the bad old days when a few cold dominate the ignorant masses were ending and that you just had to play ball or will be eliminated – today’s existence is therefore one of mutual mistrust and threat cloaked in the language of humanity, compassion, Christian love, etc, etc. All O.K until renegades such as the ISIS Mob or even the Israeli Nationalists or their Palestinian counterparts start braying pure old fashioned religious and ethnic bigotry – these groups have nothing to lose and hence dangerous to the stability and survival of all.

            Man is continuously negotiating with all around them for survival – and in any negotiation you can’t have it all your way – those pushing this or that sectarian/ethnic/cultural points of view without recognising similar aspiration of others however much you may disagree or dislike them will be the ultimate losers.

    • AverageGuyInTheStreet

      And being based on Christianity while completely perverting the message, you could almost describe Mohammed as an “anti Christ”.

      • Damaris Tighe

        Not only perverting the message but inverting all Judeo-Christian values: don’t kill; don’t steal; don’t lie. The inversion is important & tells us something.

        • Bonkim

          Survival of the fittest. Those who flinch whilst crossing the road get killed.

      • Bonkim

        Not relevant to most of the world whether Muhammad is anti-Christ or whether Muslims love Jesus.

        • AverageGuyInTheStreet

          We usually ban dangerous cults. It is indeed relevant.

          • Bonkim

            who decides which belief system is a dangerous cult? Under English Law you cannot pre-judge or take action until proven that they are dangerous.

  • English_Independence_Movement

    I long for the days when we can put superstitions behind us. Believing in Gods helps no one.

    • ardenjm

      Might I remind you that Christianity – actually of the Catholic and Orthodox kind since Protestants allied themselves with the Turk, including Elizabeth I – protected and defended Europe for 1000 years against more than 500 Muslim (Arab and Turk) invasions, attacks, armadas, slave-kidnapping, sacking, pillaging and jihads.

      In the space of 100 years, however – from 1960-2060 – post-Christian secularised Europe will not only have rejected and jettisoned Christian influence but will also have allowed 50 million Muslims to effectively create a parallel society.

      Your ‘English Independence Movement’ will mean NOTHING if secularists like yourself continue to contracept and abort your babies. Demographics is destiny. At this point only the Catholic Church is still teaching to welcome babies and not kill or avoid having them – even though most secularised Catholics in Europe are blithely ignoring the Church. Fine. That’s their choice. But don’t come bleating when peoples that are having babies replace you and your kind.

      • Revster

        My imaginary friend is better than yours… Great argument.

    • Ivan Ewan

      People will always believe in gods. If you destroy believe in supernatural deities, people will ascribe deity to something or someone else, or even themselves.

      It is an irremovable component of the human condition.

      • The Great Cornholio

        People believed in witchcraft for most of our existence. They still do in less educated parts of the world.

        But with modern science most of us have jettisoned this primitive superstition as it became untenable.

        Belief in god is going the same way. It is not an eradicable part of the human condition. There are millions of atheists who don’t ascribe deity to anything.

        • Ivan Ewan

          “It is not an eradicable part of the human condition.” So we’re in agreement there.

          “There are millions of atheists who don’t ascribe deity to anything.” I don’t know, a lot of atheists I’ve become aware of seem terribly susceptible to ascribing godhood to the State or its ruler, or sometimes to themselves, if they’re wealthy enough. George Soros springs to mind for the latter category.

          • The Great Cornholio

            Apologies, meant to say “ineradicable”. (In future I’ll avoid the double negative. Always a source of woe.)

            So, are millions of atheists in Britain worshiping David Cameron?

            Sorry mate, your argument just doesn’t hold up. Most people who have given up a god belief have not ascribed a replacement.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Was Caesar not a god? Was Stalin not a god? Is Kim-Jung Un not a god? They all thrived on state atheism (in Caesar’s case, atheism disguised as paganism). There are plenty of additional examples of the State using atheism to make itself supreme. Hitler’s mystical neo-pagan emulation of Caesar’s domain was probably the most unusual.

            History upholds my argument. Your argument is based on a refusal to think.

          • The Great Cornholio

            I am not saying that it can’t happen that human can be thought of a gods or demigods, although this is more common within religious institutions when their leaders claim divine authority and be god’s representative on Earth, e.g. popes, ayatollahs, etc, or, that atheistic monolithic ideologies like communism can’t be followed like a religion.

            What I am saying is that it is not necessary to ascribe deity to something else in the absence of a traditional religious belief, and that in the west today this is extremely rare.

            Take a conservative estimate of atheists in Britain, of say 10% of the population (I suspect the real figure is closer to 50%). Are 6 million British atheists worshiping the state? Do we congregate once a week to give thanks David Cameron or the Queen and ask them to forgive our sins? Is patriotism even more common among atheists?

            No, we lead reasonable, moral lives without any appeals a higher powers of statehood or otherwise. This is true of millions of atheists throughout Europe and increasingly in the US. Thus, it is possible, and very common, to be without a god belief an not ascribe deity to anything.

        • William_Brown

          It’s all ‘witchcraft’. It’s just under a different guise.

    • beloved2

      How would you know that?

      • English_Independence_Movement

        Does it cure cancer, build houses, improve crop yields, make trains run faster…. ??

        When was the last time ‘God’ invented anything, why didn’t he invent the internal combustion engine?

        People who know that others are praying for them do get better faster, but those patients who do not know that people are praying for them do not get better faster: it’s the placebo effect.

        Perhaps all those parents of children dying of nasty incurable diseases just haven’t prayed hard enough.

        • beloved2

          Again I ask. How would you know?

          • Callipygian

            You’ve indicated that you have no interest in knowledge, only in what you yourself without evidence believe.

            Next!

        • Ivan Ewan

          If God did that kind of thing all the time, we’d end up as childish people, unwilling and eventually unable to take responsibility for ourselves because “God’ll sort it all out for us”.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        You’re the one promoting after life insurance. We don’t have to prove a negative, namely that God doesn’t exist.

    • William_Brown

      Hear, hear. One cycle of superstitious, infighting zealots follows another, then another, then another…I’m not sure that the human race will ever learn.

  • Immanuel

    Well done Mary Wakefield for the insight. The concept of sin is one of the most differentiating factors between Christianity and Islam. It affects our understanding of God and ourselves, the kind of relationship we have with God, the need for salvation and how we should live our lives. The concept in Islam that man can earn favour with God through his work and become a better person than other people is both dangerous and destructive. Similarly, believing in Humanism and the ability of man to be good away from God is wrong and misguided. Only Christianity through the concept of original sin and the grace of God can explain and solve the human condition.

    • lightinfantryman

      People do know, don’t they, that the 4th Century British divine Pelagius rejected original sin, held that people attain Grace through Good Works, and that baptism is “not a sign an seal of the remissions of sins” but of admission into the community of Christ? And all this 300-odd years before Muhammad?

  • Ivan Ewan

    “Muslims are the best of peoples raised up from mankind” and “Jews and Christians are the worst of creatures” aren’t verses which really encourage anything but supremacism and hatred, to be honest.

    • AverageGuyInTheStreet

      Could’ve come straight out of Mein Kampf. Burn their evil book though and you’re in deep trouble with the British authorities.

      • Icebow

        ‘Allahu akbar’ is essentially equivalent to ‘Heil Hitler’.

        • wudyermucuss
          • Icebow

            Knew that, but thanks anyway. Either way, bad news for Jews.

          • Richard Baranov

            This link doesn’t work.

          • wudyermucuss

            Does for me;google hezbollah nazi salute,loads of Islamists giving nazi salute

          • Simon Smith

            Google “Rangers Fans nazi salute”.
            Loads of pictures of the Ibrox Loyal doing the same thing. What does your point prove exactly?

          • wudyermucuss

            I followed your advice and found 1 Rangers fan done for Nazi salute.
            My point proves that hezbollah use the Nazi salute,en masse,on a regular basis.

        • Jack

          Bit of a ridiculous thing to say, isn’t it? In what ways, other than both being proclamations that a particular thing is great, are they “essentially equivalent”? They’re both co-opted from Roman custom thanks to some scumbags Imperial fetish?

          • Icebow

            Chronic reaffirmation of fanatical loyalty to a creed according to which all others are invalid. Fair comment, I’d say, regardless of your highly improbable co-Roman origin.

          • Jack

            Of course it’s improbable, I was pointing out how ridiculous your comment was. Obviously.

          • Icebow

            It obviously wasn’t ridiculous. Gordon Bennett.

          • An Egyptian Copt who can read Arabic says the actual meaning of Allahu akbar is ‘Allah is greater!’ – not ‘Allah is great!’. Which gives it a fundamentally different slant altogether. It’s a comparative not an absolute statement. From that point of view, it’s a statement based on spite and envy.

          • ardenjm

            Allah is the greatest is what it means.
            Which fits in perfectly with the root meaning of the word Islam: submission and also with the apartheid of the Islamic world into Muslims and non-Muslims (with the dhimmi status for the Christians and Jews).

          • Apparently – according to an Arab speaker – the word for ‘great’ and ‘greater’ are quite different in Arabic – and the phrase Allahu Akbar means Allah is greater.

          • sebastian2

            I’ve also heard this.

        • Aliama Mehru

          Allah is greater than Islam. Allah made the creation that made man. man made islam. Man will be after islam. Allah will be after the creation destroys man.

          • Warbling J Laskitude

            YIPES

    • Robbydot1

      The worst of creatures, I believe it’s apes and pigs.

      • Ivan Ewan

        Either Mohammad meant that Jews and Christians are the worst, below even apes and pigs, or he meant that J/C are the worst creatures which have been established to be apes and pigs.

        It’s all much of a muchness.

    • JoeDM

      Religion + Politics = Social Poison

      • SiMoebus

        Extremism Religion + Extremism Politics = Social Poison.

      • Leon Wolfeson

        Right. Stop trying to poison us all.

    • SiMoebus

      And the same can be said for the reverse scenario.

  • ardenjm

    G K Chesterton made the case for Original Sin in Orthodoxy.
    Worth taking a look at.

  • Diggery Whiggery

    Very interesting point of view.

  • willshome

    I don’t believe in original sin. I don’t believe I have it, I don’t believe anyone else has it. I don’t believe it needs to be beaten out of anyone, I don’t believe anyone needs to be redeemed from it. I’m not a Muslim. I don’t believe in any sky pixies. And I don’t believe anyone who purports to have an “in” with the lead sky pixy who says that every baby born into this world comes with a dollop of wickedness that it must atone for by living by the sky pixie’s rules. I also don’t believe that any rival sky pixies can sanction the killing, harming, or distress of any other human being simply by its omnipotence. Because I believe that we all arrive randomly, by chance, on a randomly inhabited planet in an indifferent universe. So the very least we can do is be kind to one another for the short time any of us exist, while we have the chance. Since that is all that we have. Does that make me a bad person?

    • Marshal Phillips

      Who am I to cast the first stone or to judge? But if I do judge, I will also be judged. I believe we’re human, all too human.

      • Bonkim

        Some are more human than others and some more animal than animals. You need to defend yourself or will be eliminated.

        • Marshal Phillips

          Humans ARE animals. But the only logical way forward is through cooperation.

          • Bonkim

            Cooperation where necessary, elimination where possible.

          • Ivan Ewan

            So you’re a monster now? I thought it was just religious people you said were monsters.

          • Bonkim

            Jumping to conclusions – Man is a competitive animal and adapts and changes as necessary for survival. Needless to say we all fight for what we believe in and make compromises where we have to.

            Religious people are nut-cases not all monsters. But mix of religion, nationalism, ethnic and cultural superiority can easily turn people into bigoted monsters.

            I don’t mind people believing or doing what they want as long as they don’t encroach on my territory.

            That is life.

          • Ivan Ewan

            You said “eliminate where possible”, I’m wondering where this is coming from?

          • Bonkim

            You eliminate opposition if you can – that is a human trait.

          • Marshal Phillips

            To each his own.

    • ‘Sin’ can also be translated as ‘ignorance’.

      • goodsoldier

        Not understanding the concept of ‘sin’ is true ignorance. Educate yourself with G.K. Chesterton’s ‘Orthodoxy’ and ‘Everlasting Man’, as well as C.S. Lewis ‘Mere Christianity’–it is all online on youtube, that is if you’re not lazy and are sincere about rejecting ignorance. Bon voyage!

        • I’m not being literal – I meant one of the interpretations of sin can be that we are ignorant beings, ie we are not in possession of omniscience. If we were not ignorant we would be perfect, so I’m supporting the gist of the idea that the doctrine of ‘original sin’ is beneficial to human beings if adopted with the right frame of mind.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Surely the opposite is true. The reason we do not ascribe sin to animals is that they have really no knowledge aside from their instincts.

    • beloved2

      No Will but it does seem to encourage you to sneer at other people’s cherished beliefs.

      • Revster

        No matter how ‘cherished’ a belief is, it doesn’t make it right!

        • beloved2

          Sure, but sneering is uncivilisedand smacks of’ My belief is smarter than your belief’

          • Callipygian

            But what if it IS, dearie? I believe that my belief that we shouldn’t try to drown witches and see if they float in innocence is superior to the belief that gave rise to that.

            Try being rational. Just once.

          • Icebow

            The dismissive ‘sky pixie’ may be rather new. Atheists are so stupid.

    • Zululi

      You sound like a good person- except for your patronising language which exposes underlying hostility towards people whose beliefs vary from yours 🙁

    • mrs 1234

      Fortunately you are free to chose what you believe unlike millions who live in Muslim countries where apostasy means death. It looks to me like the culture of believers of one ‘sky fairy’ brought about the evolution of free society while the other did not.
      What concerns me is for how much longer will we have these cherished freedoms of conscience, sexual equality etc when the inevitable happens and Islam becomes the predominant faith of this country. It only takes a tiny minority to usher in the vilest expression of Islam – look what ISIS is achieving? Public executions of sorcerers, unbelievers, adulterers and gays.
      Our grandchildren will hold us and our lazy, liberal views in contempt. You don’t think it will happen?

    • wudyermucuss

      Not bad,but naieve?
      You do accept I presume that not every one wants to be kind to others?
      Do you accept that Islam,if it became the ruling ideology here,would be absolutely against your wishes?
      Most sky pixies are benign in practice.
      One is also an ideology,an ideology with hate written in its guiding book,practised by its founder and maintained and spread by force even as we speak.

    • Bonkim

      Spot on willshome – you the right approach to life.

  • thetrashheap

    Original sin doesn’t say we are all flawed. It says we are all bad. Being a sinful person isn’t considered being a flawed person, its considered being a bad person.

    Saying babies are bad and guilty of a sin when they haven’t done anything is sick.

    Islam’s problem is that it is a religion built round a 7th century Arabian warlord, who killed his prisoners, conquered lands, married a 7 year old, took women as sex slaves etc. Sharia is all written down. If a modern westerner needs to debate what is wrong its only because for ideological reasons they aren’t able to accept the truth.

    • Ivan Ewan

      Original sin isn’t a sin so much as it is an inclination toward sin.

      I’m with you on the last part, but even if Mohammad were all flowers and ice cream, without a concept similar to original sin, a religion would always have self-righteousness in its DNA.

  • Arthur Ascii

    If you read Maajid Nawaz’s book Radical then he’ll tell you that Camp One is correct, and that Islamism gains recruits and ploughs its own furrow while borrowing from Islam.

    If you read Ayaan Hirsi-Ali’s latest then she’ll suggest that Islam needs to reform, and she has some support. Then there’s Sisi’s speech, and the fact that the Egyptians bombed IS in Libya, which is encouraging.

    But when you read, “Sisi’s difficulty is that there really isn’t much in the Quran to suggest that Allah gives a hoot for non-believers. Muslims are encouraged to forgive one another, but it is not required to forgive infidels, the apostate or people who blaspheme.”

    … well, not exactly encouraging is it? It’s reformation, or this are going to get progressively worse in Europe and elsewhere.

    • AverageGuyInTheStreet

      Hmm wonder what Christianity would be if the Jesus character had been a paedophile fascist warlord. Don’t need to imagine too hard thanks to the RoP.

    • Ivan Ewan

      Islam has no capacity for a reformation that would make it a legitimately peaceful religion.

      But Islam does have antidotes, and from what we’ve seen in Egypt particularly, having Islamists run things for a while is very sobering to the people who vote them in.

  • JSC

    “England, nearly one in ten British children is now Muslim — and is that what they’re taught? No need to say sorry to an infidel?”
    No need to say sorry to them because you’ve no need to speak to them, no need to touch them, think like them, associate with or listen to them. They’ve no need to eat their food, watch their TV, speak their language or read their books. All they need is their welfare system and control of their government and media, and all that needs is time.

    • MikeH

      From visible evidence in my local area, which one assumes would not even make the top fifty of “British Muslim communities”, the one in ten claim is wildly and dishonestly misleading. One could easily be mistaken into thinking a huge Third-World foreign exchange program was in effect. Remove the surrounding scenery and I would defy anyone to identify the demographic as “British”

      • mrs 1234

        One only needs to look at the demographic of state school pupils in London to know that 1:10 is bs.

        • wudyermucuss

          They don’t know the figures.
          There are no border controls.
          Londonistanisloviaongo is now a third world world transit camp.

          • Guest

            Great, feel free to leave for your home country and never come back,
            At least until you can bother to read up on basic UK law, like the border controls – the lengthy ones.

          • wudyermucuss

            I’m in my home country,though it is now a foreign place due to the deliberate mass tidal wave of cheap labour that has flooded it.
            The million odd illegals (again,no-one knows the real figure)testify to the efficacy of our border controls.

      • Guest

        So you’re trying to use anecdote to disprove statistic.

        And you probably don’t identify as British either – English, perhaps. And yes, the poor white areas where gangs of kids with your ideology..

    • Guest

      Thanks for your talking about your far right.

  • goodsoldier

    Excellent and true article! UKIP is the only party that recognizes the tremendous value of our Judeo-Christian heritage and culture. Only this can save us from doom. The EU, along with Islam and the Left, despise our heritage because they have read too much propaganda a la Edward Said and others obsessed with our colonial past. Our colonial past was a vicarage tea party compared to what Islam has in store for us, thanks to the EU and Left wing mind-set who certainly think they are perfect and shudder at the word ‘sin’.

  • goodsoldier

    Read online Hillaire Belloc’s ‘The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed’ He understood all of this one hundred years ago and therefore would never be taught in universities today. Now they only teach lies and Edward Said.

    http://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/HERESY4.TXT

  • Baz Ryan

    There really is a huge amount of utterly uniformed and ignorant comment here not least the central thesis of Ms. Wakefield’s article which is essentially a canard. Let’s be absolutely clear, Islam’s default position is that we are all flawed and imperfect as human beings, deeply and irrevocably flawed, and it is only through taking refuge in God that we can hope to address these flaws. Nobody in Islam is perfect, absolutely nobody, not even the prophet himself and its is only through the constant remembrance of God that we can hope to transcend our essentially flawed humanity. I suggest that Ms. Wakefield needs to study a little genuine Islamic theology and ignore the constant disinformation and misapprehension which colours this debate. I would recommend the works of Gai Eaton, particularly his ‘Reflections’ as a good jumping off point.

    • Dan O’Connor

      The larger the percentage of the popúlation Muslims become, the sharper their elbows will get . It’s the same everytime .
      You are justy trying to lull us back to sleep with a load of cutsey sounding sentimentalised drivel

      • Baz Ryan

        No Dan, with all due respect,nothing sentimental, merely pointing out that the central thesis of the article in question is incorrect and that depressingly the discussion has veered away from the topic at hand and into the usual ill-informed, barely concealed islamaphobia that characterises every discussion about Islam or muslims in this country today. There is of course a genuine discussion/debate to be had, but lets base it on fact not fiction (however nicely it might fit an ideological position or agenda).

        • Dan O’Connor

          ” Islamophobia ” . Oh here we go .

          You are a Muslim are you not ?
          I just ask , because you have me at a disadvantage because my name alone must give an indication of my historical heritage , and I think I should know if I am wasting my time trying to convince a turkey to vote for Christmas

          • Baz Ryan

            No Dan, I’m not a muslim, just a student of religion in general. From your name I’d say our heritage is similar, though I don’t want to make assumptions.

          • Dan O’Connor

            ” No Dan. I’m not a Muslim ”

            Then what are you doing defending a backward, expansionist rival, malignant narcissistic cult founded in desert brigandy, fear , domination and conquest by the sword and rooted in a series of deceitful evasions, decepetions, half truths, superstitions, crowd control and lies —with a few pious sounding words thrown in to make it look like a religion as a way to prevent questions . It has no redeeming features whatsoever

            ” I’d say our heritage is similar ”

            You are an utter disgrace to your heritage

          • Baz Ryan

            Peace to you Dan, and good luck.

          • Dan O’Connor

            The Archbishop of demographic jihad

          • mrs 1234

            What do you make of the fact that persecution of Christians and other religious minorities is rife in Islamic states? It has a name: Christianophobia. In fact there is an excellent book with that title by Rupert Shortt. If you can manage to get your blinkers off I really think you ought to read it.

    • AverageGuyInTheStreet

      “it is only through taking refuge in God” is a meaningless statement though. How does that work? Refuge? Huh? “god?” Its nonsense. man-made, mumbo jumbo designed to fool the weak-minded into suspending their critical faculties and believing / supporting your doctrine and goals. Ergo, Islam is nonsense. Get your head around that- there are Muslims, and there are non-Muslims. We non-Muslims do not believe that what Muslims believe – therefore we disbelieve it. We disbelieve it because it isn’t true. And here’s the thing, we’re right and Muslims are wrong.

    • Islam is inherently violent. Its theology is worthless as it is not a genuine religion, it is a political movement. Mahommed was not a prophet as his teachings are the exact opposite of true religion as found in Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Taoism, Shinto, Zarathustrianism and others.

    • Damaris Tighe

      Gai Eaton belonged to a group of highly sophisticated European thinkers called ‘traditionalists’ (Rene Guenon et al). They believed in the perennial tradition at the root of all religions & some like Eaton & Geunon converted to Sufi Islam because they saw in Sufism one of the only remaining living sources of this tradition. They believed that it had once been alive in Christianity but was now dead. Eaton et al are as representative of mainstream Islam as Quakerism is representative of mainstream Christianity.

    • Hybird

      “Nobody in Islam is perfect, absolutely nobody, not even the prophet himself…”
      Mohammad is often referred to by Muslims as “The Perfect Man.”

    • mrs 1234

      It is easy to claim disinformation but the facts of life for many in Islamic countries speak for themselves ( women, apostasy, lack of plurality – the persecution of religious minorities etc..) and unfortunately these facts will colour the debate. It is the ultra conservative expression of Islam, influenced by the wahabist and Deobandi movement that is in the ascendancy not sufism and that is of concern for those who cherish the civil rights and freedoms that have been hard won in the west by the sacrifice of others. The fact that a great many Muslims in Europe want to see the caliphate spread across the west and to see the introduction of sharia is a cause for great concern and I do not see that concern as being ignorant in anyway at all.

  • Dan O’Connor

    ” Not all Muslims are .., not all Blacks are , not all …blah , blah , blah. ”

    This is the kind of knee jerk oversimplistic Politically Correct anti-cognitive neuro-linguistic clap trap that has only been adopted by the cleverst and most educated people in all of human history –White middle / upper class university indoctrinated White guilt reeking Liberals , who have succeeded in the shutting down of rational thought and the Western mind – Our once pround citadels of courageous debate and enquirey are now indoctrination camps of cringing conformism and demographic death worship .

    It is like saying , – ” not all Russians were murdering Bolsheviks ”
    True , , only a tiny percent , but look what happened . 30 million Christian Slavs rounded up and shot and worked to death in Soviet camps

    • WTF

      As has repeatedly been said “There are moderate Muslims but there is no Moderate Islam” and there lies the root of the problem. Most moderate Muslims have not read let alone understood their two primary religious sources as they are schooled in that language. When challenged by extremists they are not in a position to question the teachings of those scriptures as (a) they never understood the original text and (b) to question it would be dangerous.

      • Dan O’Connor

        It doesn’t matter if we are replaced by Muslims , Africans or high IQ Chinese , because it is always a civilizatonal calamity and an invitation to conflict to be overrun by other alien peoples and cultures who identify with a totally different ancestral , historical , mythological . lingustic historical stream .

      • sebastian2

        This is a good point. Add to that the prohibition on questioning or challenging these immaculate texts even if you did understand them (if you can understand even part of this impenetrable commentary then you’re a better person than me http://www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/madhhabs.htm), and where are you?
        Scholars have probably highly disproportionate, excessively powerful influence over their congregations who may be generally ignorant of their own doctrines and unable to read them – in Arabic – for themselves. They can neither read for themselves nor question and think for themselves. They are, therefore, subject to the ultimate “received wisdom” and powerless to challenge it.

    • JSC

      “Not all Muslims are .., not all Blacks are , not all …blah , blah , blah. ”

      I’ve seen this argument literally dozens and dozens and dozens of times. I am truly sick to the back teeth of it. The root of it, IMHO, is a deliberate and cynical attempt to derail a conversation by exploiting the ambiguity in the English language between a specification and generalisation.

      • Verbatim

        Spot on!! See my earlier posting.

      • sebastian2

        Mohammedans generalise when it suits – “this will offend all muslims”; the “muslim world”; “British muslims” and so forth – but are highly particular at other suitable moments – “Don’t stereotype all muslims”; “this doesn’t represent muslims”, and so forth. Switching between the collective and the isolated as circumstances require. This is part of mohammedism’s dualist nature.

        It is up to us to see through this. And it’s up to us to view mohammedism in terms of its “sacred” and emphatic doctrines and not in terms of those moderate mohammedans who, for many reasons, don’t completely stick to their own cult’s revealed, violent commands.

    • Verbatim

      That’s absolutely right; it doesn’t have to be ALL Muslims, Blacks, etc. etc.”. There are enough of them drawn from this demographic or ethnicity for us to look in that direction and ask, “what is it about these people…?”. For example, what can we say about New Zealanders based on their terrorism, religious bigotry, violence and social unrest? That’s right; nothing. Because they don’t engage in it.

    • Guest

      You show your PC, and your ideological alignment with the extremists.

      You are indeed a death worshipper, cringing lest you encounter a Jew or a coloured person.

  • Dan O’Connor

    When taking into account what all the evidence of history and human experience teaches us abut people who become minortities , , the quesation must be ,. are the risks and perils so minimal. and the winnings and the benefits so great and so obvious that European man should take the one time only win or lose gamble of allowing Muslims and other third world immigrants to reduce Whites into minorities of dwindling numbers and influence in our homelands in North America, Australia and Europe within the coming decades and who no longer have the numbers required to determine our own future or defend ourselves against genocide .?

    Wow , really difficult brain racking question huh ?
    I’d rather create the ideal conditions for mayhem , chaos and death and lose my country , than be called a nasty name , like ” racist “

  • Dan O’Connor

    It is the replacement for biblical Original Sin that has been used to colllectively criminalise, disarm and paralyse the auto-immune and threat recognition mechanisms of Western man against intruding and rival cultures and peoples .
    This replacement Original Sin is the cornerstone of anti-White Cultural Marxism / Leftism / mainstream Liberal Progressivism , and population transformation .
    It has all the properties of a religion and acts like a religion.
    It is called ” Holocaustianity “

    • Ha ha! Brilliant- absolutely true!

    • Ivan Ewan

      I think that would only apply to Germany, and even there it’s been losing its sting. America does have it’s “original sin” of racism, which of course is being dealt with in the worst possible way. Britain’s “original sin” would be colonialism, but comparitively speaking we were never all that bad.

  • TFK97

    Islam does not say that man is born perfect, merely that he is born innocent- with a clean slate. He is certainly very much fallible and prone to weakness.

    The whole concept of ‘original sin’ presupposes that a) children are born sinful b) there is such a thing as ‘collective’ sin

    In Islam everyone is born pure and good (no matter the colour, religion or marital status of the parents)- capable of both good and bad and ‘sin’ can never be transferred. Each individual is responsible for his or her actions only. Which to me seems a very rational system.

    If anything original sin shifts the focus from individual agency to society or a group in society being tainted. I accept the point about knowing that you’re flawed but in Islam we are taught exactly that (in fact asking the forgiveness of God is integrated into our Salat-daily Prayers which by their very make-up encourage humility and soul-searching) yet we do not have sinful as our default state. We are innocent until we ourselves do something to change that. But the Quranic God is also one of Mercy and Justice.

    As for the point on not forgiving others, it is simply inaccurate. Islam places high value on forgiveness & mercy as noble qualities. Of course some fringe groups have no moral compass, but the vast majority of Muslim mothers impress upon their children the same universal human values of kindness and forgiveness for all.

    • WTF

      No matter what faith (or faithless) you are, some are born with original sin as evidenced by their future behaviour even at a very young age. The difference is that Christians accept that we will have sin but Christ will carry our sins from us whilst there is no such similar concept in Islam.

      Christians are not burdened with sin as a consequence whilst Muslims who have no one to carry that burden end up with a permanent chip on their shoulders of gigantic proportions which probably explains their attitude to infidels.

      Actions speak far louder than words and we haven’t seen any forgiveness & mercy from Islam for those who lampoon Islam and even innocent aid workers who have been brutally killed in the name of Islam.

      On the subject of Islam and its teachings, very few Muslims in the west or even the world at large can understand its scriptures as they don’t speak ancient arabic. As a devout Pakistani man famously said recently, I can recite the Koran and Hadith word for word and I’m now surfing the internet to try and find a translation of them I can understand.

      • TFK97

        Thank you for your response- it was very interesting to read especially coming from a different perspective.

        I think Christianity and Islam certainly have different approaches to the idea of sin and atonement. Clearly a Christ like figure on which to lean brings comfort and reflects how in Christianity you connect with the divine via the Christ figure

        However I feel that in Islam the institution of daily prayers and building a personal relationship with God are also sources of warmth and comfort reflecting how in Islam you connect with the divine directly via prayer & the Quran. Love of Allah is a cornerstone of Islam, and so we seek to please Him by being righteous as opposed to emulating the kind and righteous example of Jesus in Christianity.

        It is sad that the scenes we see in the Islamic world are not often of kindness however we must take into consideration historical and present events and conflict as well as socio-economic/developmental factors. In short war and poverty do not bring out the best in anyone but having grown up in the Middle East I firmly believe goodness does exist there- though you’ll never hear it being reported!

        And on the teachings point- yes it is true to an extent- low levels of literacy in developing countries like Pakistan exacerbates the problem not to mention the politicisation of the mainstream religious elite. However teaching must be distinguished from practice nonetheless!

        • ardenjm

          Allow me to involve myself uninvited into this interesting discussion. First – I do think Iwan Evan’s post above on the Islamic version of Jesus is worth your consideration. He makes a thought-provoking argument that Muslims would do well to consider.

          Second – you write this:

          “The whole concept of ‘original sin’ presupposes that a) children are born sinful b) there is such a thing as ‘collective’ sin.”

          Catholic teaching is that we are all born in need of God’s grace to get to heaven and that original sin is the state human nature is in – with a tendency to sin (a slippery slope if you like) which is called concupiscence. This is not ‘collective sin’ but universal in so far as it affects all human beings: it is the way our human nature is damaged by the consequences of our First Parents’ sinful acts. So, no children are not presupposed to be wicked sinners – but just born with a weakened human nature. Evidence of THAT is seen even in little children long before they reach the age of reason (around 7) when they actually become capable of wilfully doing wrong and thus sinning.

          Basically what the Church says is very similar to what you say here:

          “Islam does not say that man is born perfect, merely that he is born innocent- with a clean slate. He is certainly very much fallible and prone to weakness.”

          Except that the Church says that our fallibility and process to sin isn’t Original Innocence or Justice either.

          You also say this:

          “In Islam everyone is born pure and good (no matter the colour, religion or marital status of the parents)- capable of both good and bad and ‘sin’ can never be transferred. Each individual is responsible for his or her actions only. Which to me seems a very rational system.”

          However, if they are born pure and good and responsible for their own actions where does the “prone to weakness” come from? Does it come from the way Allah creates us? For Christians that’s impossible – it would mean that God is directly responsible for being at the origin of the evil that men do. So you seem to want to have your cake and eat it: You want to have those parts of Original Sin that the Church teaches (weakness and prone to sin) and to reject it by claiming that we’re actually pure and good at birth (but not that pure, and not that good!) In fact, however, Islam rejects Original Sin simply because it is Christian teaching and Islam also knows that Christians claim that Christ came in the flesh and gave His life on the Cross as a response to sin and to Original Sin: He comes in order to RESTORE human nature to its Original Perfection through grace and forgiveness and thus re-establish friendship, right relationship and, in Him, sonship, with God. None of these things are promised in Islam which finds the notion of God loving His creatures to that extent of self-abasement repugnant. Hence your rejection of the Death of Our Lord on the Cross.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Thanks for the mention. I do my best.

          • TFK97

            You are of course very welcome to join in- especially with such an insightful comment. Thank you for the clarification on original sin. It has increased my understanding of the term greatly.

            Islamic teaching on sin differs from the Christian one in emphasis. Just to clarify God does not set man on a path of sin, and neither have any prior actions of man. The focus is not on ‘sin’ or ‘innocence’ at all but on the ‘path’ and how we each navigate it- known as the greater, inner Jihad (everyone’s favourite word!). And if the path has both good and evil, hardship and reward; in Islam this is explained as being an exercise in spiritual betterment that leads to growth and purification.

            And as for the point about Christ and restoration, as I said I think its just that Islam’s approach to sin is just a little bit different! People have believed in God through various channels including Christ. However in Islam we believe in the Unity and Oneness of God- but since we have no concept of original sin or of any mortal having divinity we do not have the concept of restoration. The Quran and Hadith both emphasise that Allah is a loving God and Him being Perfect actually for me-just a personal view- means that He represents Truth and Beauty at its highest transcendent form perfectly.

          • Damaris Tighe

            Hello TFK. I’ve read this convo with interest & would just like to add my five-pennyworth. First, in your last paragraph here you reflect a common mistake Muslims make about the Christian view of Christ. Christians do not believe him to be a ‘mortal having divinity’. It’s complicated, but best summarised as the other way round – divinity taking on mortality. And if you think about it, this is quite different from saying – as many Muslims do – that Christians deify a human being. It’s more about emphasising God’s immanence as well as his transcendence (to get a bit technical).

            Second, I do appreciate the role that daily prayer can play in the spiritual development of the individual Muslim. It was also once important in Christianity & the monastic orders still do structure their day around regular communal prayer. I believe that the decline of structured spiritual practice in Christianity is one of the reasons why Islam attracts converts from ‘troubled’ youth looking for the structure they never had in their chaotic families.

          • ardenjm

            Thank you for your response which was very interesting.

            It didn’t answer my central observation which was the following:

            “You seem to want to have your cake and eat it: You want to have those parts of Original Sin that the Church teaches (weakness and prone to sin) and yet also to reject it by claiming that we’re actually pure and good at birth. But as you yourself admit we’re actually not that pure, and not that good because we are fallible and even have a tendency to sin!”

            How does your Islamic teaching resolve that tension? Where does the tendency to sin and evil come from within human beings? Either it’s inherent (the consequences of Original Sin idea.) Or it comes from God (who thus becomes responsible for evil in some way.) Or (and I believe this is the Islamic line) the Devil somehow contaminates human beings after birth. If this is your preferred solution you have to explain what Allah’s Plan was in allowing that. At least in the Original Sin story we see that God’s Plan culminates in the extraordinary intervention of the Incarnation of God and the Saving work of the Cross and Resurrection.

        • WTF

          I should make clear at this point that I am an atheist although I was brought up in a christian environment and as a child I went to church. I believe in the culture of Christianity as the 20th century is a good example for people within a society to live together in relative harmony and since 1945 we have seen peace within the west. That said, I have rejected Christianity as a religion for myself as I reject all religions as I have no need for them.

          The simple fact is having been taught compassion & empathy at a young age from those religious teachings and especially with the parables of Jesus Christ as a ‘guide for good behavior’ I no longer need religion. Its no different to learning to read and write at school, once you’ve learned the basics, there is no need to repeat them over and over again.

          In the 21st century, the differences I see between the teachings of Christianity and Islam is in the content of what is taught and who teaches it. Christianity had its problems with extremist clerics who cherry picked the old testament to justify evil actions such as the witch finders in the 17th century. They ignored the new testament that preached love & forgiveness and killed women who would upset the apple cart and threaten their power. Islam likewise has its clerics who have been doing much the same for 1400 years but the main problem in Islam today is there is no ‘sanitised’ or newer interpretation like the new testament that discards all the ‘nasty parts’ and replaces them with love and forgiveness.

          This gives Islamic extremists carte blanche to use the Koran & Hadith as a ‘reference manual’ for all the sorts of evils we have seen for centuries. Joining a dogmatic religion with its followers who cannot even understand the original texts, the extremist clerics have and will interpret Islam in the same manner as Judaism & Christianity was used as a social engineering tool to control the masses by force. Its a truism that whilst there are moderate Muslims there is no moderate Islam and the reason is simple, if allowed, all Muslims will eventually ignore the extremist elements of Islam and be compassionate. The problem we in the west have is that we only see the extreme elements as moderate Muslims are either unwilling or too frightened to show themselves.

          Religion has always been used as a suppressive tool of the ‘elite’ against the uneducated but education is the real weapon within a society to counter this. It is a fact that in Muslim schools in the west that kids there can recite by rote all manner of texts from their religious scriptures but they clearly don’t understand them let alone contextualize them. Additionally, kids at those schools are bottom of the league in general education standards as religious indoctrination is far more important than learning the the ‘R’s for example. We still see a little of this approach by the western elite today with this ‘need to know’ approach on certain issues but if you can control the information flow to young kids, you control them as individuals and indoctrinate them from the beginning.

          In summary, Islam is a political & cultural system used to control the people by using archaic religious teachings that threaten people with fearful consequences if they rebel. This is one very good reason why Muslims rarely integrate in the west as that control will be diluted over time if immersed in a western society and the clerics know that. Lebanon was a classic example of this where Christians and Muslims used to live side by side in peace. Once the balance of power swung to Islam, extremist Muslims took over and drove most Christians out of the area whilst invoking hard line Islam on the moderate Muslims living there.

          Christianity was no different centuries ago but since its people became educated, it lost its power to control the people and has little if any power on the state.

    • sebastian2

      Try that one on ISIS, Boko Haram, The Taliban, Pakistani Courts that condemn Christian villagers to death for “blasphemy”, on Hamas who murders its opponents, on the Sudenese who demanded the death of an English primary school teacher over a toy bear’s name. And so on. You are, in any event, citing notions that predate mohammedism but which your alleged “prophet” appropriated and then announced as if original – which they are not. Muslim mothers? What about mohammedan fathers – especially those who attend jihadist rallies and whose daughters, thus made susceptible by parental example and exhortation, finally hasten to join ISIS.

      Please try harder.

  • WTF
    • The Great Cornholio

      That is a great article. It should be read by everyone.

      • WTF

        Lets keep spreading the word to counter all the appeasers in power !

  • Dan O’Connor

    Muslims use the primoridal part of the brain and agitate unapologetically , unashamedly and uncontrovesialy for their own tribal group advantage and interests

    The White man uses the intellectual part of the brain and has over-intellectuallised himself with a series of oversentimentalised hyper moralisms , hystrerical egalitarianism and universalist abstraction s taken to ever inceasing heights of infrantile self-deception and into a state of demented civilizational and racial suicide cultism , because he is obessed with wanting to see himself as a saint , and to be seen as a saint by others . The entire reason d ‘etre of the White existence is putting the interests of the ” Other ” before the interests of his own kindred flesh and blood at every available opportunity

  • Hegelman

    Christian contributions to civilization?

    The Jews were almost made extinct by regimes thrown up by devout Christian populations.

    As long as Christianity dominated Western life, Europe was a cesspit of bigotry, ignorance, savage poverty and hatred of Jews. It was ONLY after the French Revolution began the secularisation of Europe that the West began to become tolerant.

    The West made progress not BECAUSE of Christianity but because it was, by a miracle, able to marginalise it.

    If Christians were ever civilized, it was because the development of secular human thought and the economy compelled it: It was not before industrialism that slavery was abolished in the West.

    Jesus was an obscure fanatic who had not an atom of tolerance for any philosophy other than an unconditional cult of himself. He was constantly threatening people with hell fire.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Ah yes, original sin, something St. Augustine dreamed as a cruel and stupid solution to the non-existent problem. I looked in the main mosque in Georgetown while for the cars to arrive on the “Road to Mandalay Rally. I quote:
    “The concept of original sin is completely foreign to Judaism and EWastern Christianity, having achieved acceptance in only the Western Church.”
    The same applies to Buddhism, namely Buddhism belief is diametrically opposite. Original sin is just another way Mother Church attempts to lay a guilt trip on the weak minded.
    Keep in mind the Limbo was another of Augustine’s pronouncements. Imagine the anguish this must have caused literally millions of parents whose child died before it could be baptised. What a sadist, just to ensure parents had their child baptised sooner rather than later. But then the guy was a misogynist.
    He also decided that the world was flat, this setting back science, and in particular astronomy by some 1,200 years. Largely because he couldn’t get his head around the notion that people on the other side of the Earth would have the soles of their feet facing his. In around 240 BC, Eratothenes, head of the library at Alendandria had conclusively proved that the Earth was essentially a sphere.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Reading the majority of comments leads me to the conclusion that organised religion is nothing more than violent superstition, and human kind would be far better off without it.

  • Benjamin O’Donnell

    I think a far better chastening idea than the fictions of the Fall and Original Sin is the apparently true story of our lowly animalistic origins – we are rising apes, not falling angels. And as rising apes we must always remember that our brains and minds evolved to negotiate the savannah and the small tribe, rather than the city and a global civilization. Traits that served our ancestors quite well – small group solidarity, xenophobia, dominance games within the tribe, the propensity of young males to commit violence – now hold us back or even threaten to destroy us. Our “original sin” is that we were once senseless beasts, and despite our marvellous tools and intellectual and civilizational achievements, we haven’t fully grown out of being beasts just yet – indeed, we probably never will fully shake off the lowly stamp of our beastly origins.

  • Bonkim

    Religions is superstition. All are bunk.

    • Hegelman

      Absolutely.

      The Jews were almost made extinct by regimes thrown up by devout Christian populations.

      As long as Christianity dominated Western life, Europe was a cesspit of bigotry, ignorance, savage poverty and hatred of Jews. It was ONLY after the French Revolution began the secularisation of Europe that the West began to become tolerant.

      The West made progress not BECAUSE of Christianity but because it was, by a miracle, able to marginalise it.

      If Christians were ever civilized, it was because the development of secular human thought and the economy compelled it: It was not before industrialism that slavery was abolished in the West.

      Jesus was an obscure fanatic who had not an atom of tolerance for any philosophy other than an unconditional cult of himself. He was constantly threatening people with hell fire.

  • Zed largo

    It’s hard to imagine why, unless assuming the truth of Original Sin, any self respecting publication would print such a monumental load of tosh as this. It’s not even 1st year undergraduate level. It’s is a confused mess of ideas, none of which are argued with any convincing force whatsoever; and not one jot of it holds together as remotely interesting, let alone possible. So, yes, the Spectator proves it’s own imperfection by paying this woman a sinful amount of money for pure garbage. Yes, it reminds me of Crime and Punishment: a crime to publish and a punishment to read.

  • Bonkim

    Silly assuming others will believe in the same things you do. Religion = Faith = meaningless for those without faith or with other faiths.

  • mzhou

    The writer is mistaken in her understanding of the status given to humans by Islam. Islam teaches that all humans are born free from sin but does not teach
    that people (or Muslims) are perfect. Accounting for the limitations and flaws
    we all suffer, Islam teaches that ‘Allah burdens not any soul beyond its capacity.
    It shall have the reward it earns and it shall get the punishment it incurs.’ (2:287)

    Furthermore,the Holy Quran states “Ascribe not purity to yourselves. He knows best who is truly righteous.” (53:33) Therefore, a true Muslim, is the essence of
    humility; ever aware of his sins, shortcomings and weaknesses for which he is
    constantly imploring God for His forgiveness and mercy. Therefore, there is no
    way that true Muslims are in danger of getting ‘too big for their boots’ or casting
    the first stone.

    Allah, as the creator of all people according to Islamic teaching, cares deeply for all of creation including non-Muslims and has made receiving good treatment from Muslims a right. Specifically addressing the treatment of non-Muslims the Holy Quran states ” Indeed, God loves those who act justly” (60:8)

    The Quran does not discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims when it commands “Alms are only for the poor and the needy, and for those employed in connection therewith, and for those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and for the freeing of slaves, and for those in debt, and for the cause of Allah, and for the wayfarer- an ordinance of Allah.” Those who do not discharge their duties towards human beings (Muslim or otherwise), even if they are doing their duties towards God, are said to be ‘in a precarious position and they are not secure…it will be said that he is acting upon the teachings of half of the Holy Quran’ only. (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS)

    • WTF

      Islam just like the liberal fascists is the motherlode of ‘double think’, contradictions and hypocrisy, no wonder they make good ‘bed fellows’. No one can really make it out or explain how barbaric edicts and alleged peaceful statements can co-exists and that includes those who worship Islam.

      Its a bit like a non Muslim criticizing the extreme elements of Islam with a cleric who keeps insisting Islam is the religion of peace. However after 10 minutes of very heated debate the extremist cleric responds if you don’t shut up, I’ll cut your head off proving the others point.

    • Hybird

      Something that has always puzzled me is that Allah states in the Koran that he alone decides who will and who will not be a believer. He says he “blocks the ears” of those he has decided will be unbelievers. Then, when these unbelievers die, he tortures them for all eternity (using the most barbaric methods) for not being believers. Is Allah completely insane, or what?

      • Ivan Ewan

        He also said that “if you had been a people without sin, I would have wiped you off the face of the Earth and replaced you with a people who would sin, so that I could forgive them.”

        Well thank God for Satan then, eh?

      • mzhou

        I imagine that you are describing the verse “Allah has set a seal on their hearts and their ears, and over their eyes is a covering and for them is a great punishment” (2:8) It is incorrect to take the verse to mean that God had himself sealed up their hearts so the disbelievers could not believe. The Quran contradicts this view and states clearly that it is the disbelievers themselves who seal their fate and God’s seal only follows as a result of their action e.g. “Then because of their breaking of their covenant, and their denial
        of the signs of Allah, and their seeking to kill the Prophets unjustly, and their saying, ‘Our hearts are wrapped in covers,’- nay, but Allah has sealed them because of their disbelief” (4:156) Because all laws proceed from God, and every cause is followed by its natural effect under His will, so the sealing of the hearts and the ears of disbelievers is ascribed to Him.

        It is true that the Holy Quran depicts the horrors of hell but according to the Holy Quran both heaven and hell are places for the perpetual advancement of man. The torments of hell will be the means of purging people of the evil effects of their deeds done in this life so that they can enter paradise for continued spiritual progress. Unlike heaven, hell is not eternal because of the mercy of God. The Holy Prophet said that ‘God displayed only a hundredth part of His mercy in this world, and that the other ninety- nine parts of His mercy will be displayed in the next life.’

        • sebastian2

          Why ninety-nine? Why not forty two? Why not all? You keep referring to the “holy quran” for evidence. It (the quran) says “……………………” etc etc. – all in pseudo Authorised King James biblical style English. But if the quran is an historical document its claims require historical corroboration. If it’s a statement of mere belief then its claims must be open to question and interrogation.
          Explain “all laws proceed from God,” in terms of the law for wearing motor-cycle helmets and car seat belts, the law of equality for women in inheritance matters and giving legal witness about rape, laws protecting gays’ rights and freedoms, and laws permitting alcohol sales.

    • TNT

      Utter lies. The Unholy Quran is full of passages that refute every piece of self-righteous nonsense you have typed.

    • sebastian2

      Could you put this in ordinary English please? Which are the original bits? Where’s the unique revelation here? All sounds a bit like pinching Christian scripture to me. We might call this “plagiarism”.

  • mrsjosephinehydehartley

    But why do people assume the stark fact God told Adam and Eve was anything to do with punishment? If you eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you will positively die..God told them. So of course when they did eat the fruit that gave them this knowledge..look what happened. But God just told them the truth and yet we have built all our systems around notions of sin, punishment and exclusion and positively death.Why fear and crave death? It’s positiveyl stupid..the ultimate debt which serves the wrong thing altogether.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      In the Jewish Book of Fairy Stories, Adam and Eve is a put-down of women.

      • Bonkim

        But that was a good move!

    • Bonkim

      How old are you Mrs Josephine?

  • Bob John

    The Bible is crystal clear. Adam and Eve did exist, they did fall in the garden of Eden, and we have all inherited a sin nature. However, the good news of the Gospel is that Jesus died as a sacrifice for our sins and rose again to be our Saviour.

    For those of us who have repented and accepted Christ as our personal Saviour we have assurance of Heaven, not because of any good in us, but because of what Jesus did on the cross.

    • Bonkim

      You mean riding the back of Jesus and not having to do anything worthwhile to deserve Heaven – Can you get your passage to heaven on benefits? May be we should ask Cameron and Miliband to do God and offer free passage.

  • SNP UPRISING

    Muslims, as followers of a religion, are no better or worse than any Christian, Hindu, Jew, Budist, Athiest or whatever.

    There are many religious zealots within every religion, but unfortunately for Islam, the vast majority would refer to themselves as Muslims.

    Those evil so called Muslim organisations such as IS cannot to reasoned with and, for the benefit of all humanity, these cowardly murdering thugs should be eliminated.

    • Bonkim

      You are trying to bring common sense into a discussion on religion – that is not common sense.

  • The Great Cornholio

    There you have it. The antidote to religious nonsense is – different religious nonsense.

    Stupidest Spectator article I’ve ever read.

    How about embracing the reality that we are a special animal, evolved through natural causes, with remarkable intelligence and creative powers but still bearing the mark of our lowly origin, thus, our efforts to reason, including moral reasoning, undermined by our prejudices, superstitions and even psychopathologies?

    This is no better evidenced than the attachment to our iron age belief systems in the light of modern science.

    Except the truth of our fallibility as the limitations of our biology instead of this ludicrous self flagellation that we are filthy sinners in a fallen world.

  • Peter Stroud

    But we also have divisions within the Muslim faith. Sunni and Shia: to say nothing of the various sub sects within these two major denominations. These seem to be based on tribal histories. So not only do all Muslims have the right to enslave and kill non believers, but they can kill those of the other denomination. Rather like Christians once behaved. Christians burned their heretics, but The Prophet ordered his followers to smite the neck (behead).

    • Bonkim

      I suppose a clean cut neck is painless and preferable to being burned alive the Christian way of dealing with Heretics.

  • TruthAlone

    The two groups Ms Wakefield begins this article with certainly exist. With group two being highly misinformed and biased by misrepresentations of Islam.

    I believe there are many fundamental errors in the theory proposed by Ms Wakefield. First the concept of original sin is, at its core, contrary to the system of justice. For how can one be punished unlimited for a limited sin. Adam and Eve were severely reprimanded for their limited sin. They did not continuously commit this sin so why the continual punishment? Furthermore how can one be punished for another’s sins? What system of justice is this that firstly one can never redeem themselves and secondly one is punished for the sins of others? Surely such a system of justice leads one to feel there is no point in pursuing righteousness for one is damned to punished whether they are righteous or not!

    Secondly, Ms Wakefield claims that without the concept of original sin and with the Islamic concept of reward and punishment according to one’s actions Muslims become unforgiving. What Ms Wakefield fails to realise is that Islam recognises the weakness of man, God Almighty says “…for man has been created weak”(Holy Qur’an Chapter 4: Verse 29) but it also teaches that the mercy of God Almighty encompassing everything. Thus knowing how merciful the God of Islam is and with the Islamic system of justice Muslims are inspired to excel and just as God is Merciful to them so must they be to their fellow humans. I would ask Ms Wakefield to take a look at the emphasis of Islam on moral values such as forgiveness, humility, mercy, love for one’s neighbour… Do these values make a nation heartless? Certainly not.

    Ms Wakefield claims that the Holy Qur’an gives not a “hoot” about non-believers. How highly misinformed. God Almighty says that Muslims have been created for the good of “Mankind” not just Muslims! (Holy Qur’an Chapter 3: Verse 111). How can one love the artist without loving his art? How can one love God if he does not love His creation?

    • q-pantagruel

      Rubbish. Allah positively loathes unbelievers and says so in hundreds of verses.

      • Ivan Ewan

        Give him a dozen or two dozen.

      • Bonkim

        All religions believe their God is the one and only true God and all others evil or misguided.

  • mrs 1234

    What a pity that Christian leaders have failed to point out the essential differences between the two faiths instead of proclaiming Islam as a peaceful religion.

    • Bonkim

      Not many Christian Leaders and in any case most don’t want their Leaders to do God.

  • SiMoebus

    It is technically the same religion and many of the same core beliefs. There are some cultural differences but that is about it. It is kind of ironic that people want to forget the history of other groups to focus on flaws of a few in a particular group. We need to stop blaming an entire group for the bad acts of a few, and blame bad act in every group including ours.

    • WTF

      One can argue technicalities about a whole range of Judaism & Christian religions as there are indeed a raft of variations however Islam does not seem to have any clearly identifiable variants in the same manner as these.

      We have Methodists, Baptist, C of E, Jehova Winess’s, Catholics and I can google everyone of them to find out individual quirks they each have. There is only one Islam based on one set of religious teachings as far as I can see and that is the problem as there isn’t a moderate and a strict version as such, there is only Islam.

      Most people do not blame all Muslims for the actions of a few percent but most sane people do blame Islam for radicalizing those that want to cause mayhem around the world and with plenty of justification.

      • SiMoebus

        I know it is hard for some people to accept but all three are the same religion. However, it is ironic that Christians have to hide their acts to pretend that they have no “blood on their hands.” As their are no radical Christians out there. A few have been doomsday cults. The blame put towards Muslims is not sanity but prejudice.

        • WTF

          Total and absolute BS & lies !

          I could post many you tube links where Christians accept we had our own blood fest, genocide and killings in centuries gone by and I personally accept that as well. In contrast I could equally post many links from radical Islamists like Anjem Chowdary where not a one admitted to Islams barbarity, be-headings, stoning’s etc, etc and when pushed in a corner their response is –

          (a) deny it had anything to do with Islam !

          (b) blame the west for some vague historic event may centuries ago !

          (c) claim its plods fault that their daughters go off to become Jihadist ho’s !

          (d) Any lame contrived excuse that is never their own doing.

          Not forgetting that the Armenian massacres by Turkish Muslims was all the fault of American imperialism despite the fact that America hadn’t even become a world super power at that time.

          Islam is a lying, deceitful religion full of contradictions, double think & barbarity and when taught to uneducated people of whom the majority can’t read or write let alone understand ancient Arabic, its no wonder it spawns the worst excess’s of the 21st century !

          If the cap fits, wear it and Muslims have dug this hole for themselves with very little help from the west and are still doing it.

          • SiMoebus

            Why don’t people like you stop hiding behind the acts done by a few and admit you just don’t Muslims because they are Muslims. There are even recent examples of “crimes” committed by Christians. As they are only our leaders most just can not take the blame for those acts, but maturely blame those individuals.

            Sorry, but all is read is denial. If you want to condemn Islam than you must condemn Christianity and Judaism.

          • WTF

            OK, lets look at some recent crimes that Christians have committed before we look at the massive catalog of Muslim crimes as I’m not afraid to admit our crimes/mistakes unlike Muslims !

            Iraq was a major mistake to which the majority of people in the UK agree with and you have your eyes wide shut to the fact that 99% of people of ALL faiths despise Tony Blair for waging war and we would like to see him tried for war crimes. We certainly haven’t hid those facts as Blair the hate figure regularly appears in the British press.

            How does that fit with your ignorant statement “However, it is ironic that Christians have to hide their acts to pretend that they have no “blood on their hands.”. Other ‘wars’ we have had in the last few decades, well we’ve had terrorism with the IRA but that had nothing to do with Islam. Then we’ve had Camerons recent venture into the middle east that the British public is very vocal and most definitely against, and we never hide it.

            I haven’t a clue where you live but 99% of British people are against their government interfering in Islamic affairs in other countries and show it all the time. Contrast this with Islamic states, Muslims there wouldn’t dare protest against their government as we do and that’s assuming they even disagree with their policies. They even try and dictate what our laws should be in our own countries ! When one of their Jihadist commits a terrorist act against innocent civilians some where in the world, the in-bred retards over there behave like rabid dogs and go out on the streets to celebrate the deaths of thousands. People in the west are a tad more civilized, we protest against our own governments rather than rejoicing in a bloodfest !.

            The facts do not support your ignorant assertions and you cant even be bothered to substantiate where Christian people have denied recent acts of war because we haven’t denied any. In contrast, Muslims are exterminating other Muslims, Christians & Yazedis by the thousand as we speak, they did the same in the early 20th century by the hundreds of thousands in Armenia and they have done it through the 1400 years of Islam.

            If you want to continue this debate, come up with some real facts as I cant be bothered to continue this debate with someone who hasn’t any evidence to support his flawed position. This seems to be a common trait with those of the Islamic faith as Islam is the ONLY religion that preaches the use of deceit & lies to try and justify itself, its barbaric customs and its colonial expansion desires !

          • SiMoebus

            The problem is not looking a acts committed by which ever group. It is people who will blame an entire group for acts committed by a few individuals, while REFUSING to take responsibility for similar acts committed by a few individuals in their group.

            Just Christians who have committed horrible acts do not represent Christianity. Similar acts committed by Muslims do no represent Islam. Athrocities committed in the Second World War neither Christians or Atheists want to take that responsible, nor should they.

            Stop avoiding the subject and admit you just don’t like Muslims. Or, is the reality is you just like bashing people who are different from you just to feel superior. Yes, you are a better person that terrorists.

            It is sad that some in our world has not moved beyond such trivialities.

          • WTF

            It would seem you’ve changed the subject since I called you out.

            No longer are you trying to substantiate (without success) that Christians deny acts of war carried out by their governments against their wishes. Now you’ve moved onto the that tired old Islamic excuse that only a few people commit acts of violence or terrorism. I didn’t avoid the subject, I addressed it but you avoided it by changing the subject because you couldn’t provide any facts.

            We Christians in the UK even took responsibility for our part in the black slave trade to the Americas EVEN though we were just middle men. The actual ethnic group that ‘collected’ slaves for the middle men like the UK & Holland were actually Muslims, but no surprise there, its in the religion and unlike the UK no apologies for their sourcing of slaves. Saudi even has slaves at this very moment in time so check your history and see who were the real deniers !

            No matter, I’m quite comfortable debating your new subject and I’ll provide facts and figures that seem absent in your protestations.

            Out of 1.6 billion Muslims globally, it is believed that around 1% are active in terrorist atrocities world wide. Problem is, that equates to 16 million Muslims that are active in killing other people one way or another. This of course includes Muslims killing their own, their opponents and infidels. The west doesn’t even have a standing army of 16 million troops and as for the UK, it only has around 180,000 people in the military. That’s an army that’s only 1% of the size of those actively bent on our destruction let alone the other 99% of Muslims with varying degrees of support towards their 1% of active Jihadists.

            The pew report link below shows the various levels of support that Muslims globally give those 16 million active Jihadists and its frightening to say the least.

            http://www.pewglobal.org/2006/05/23/where-terrorism-finds-support-in-the-muslim-world/

            I have no problem with any ethnic group in the west and have close Indian friends in London but maybe that’s because they integrate, they don’t blow up trains, they don’t sexually groom underage girls and they don’t want to become Jihadists. The irony is I’m still open to anyone and treat them as I find them but the weight of evidence that labels Muslims is mainly their own doing and its for them to apologize for their religion causing so many deaths but it never happens, does it ?

            My Indian friends despise Muslims with a vengeance unlike me but there again, perhaps its like the Armenian slaughter when Muslims did the same to Sikhs & Hindus a few centuries ago. There does seem to be a pattern here but Europe managed to turn back the Islamic colonialism from Africa before it reached northern Europe and we were saved.

            Its all about History which you refuse to engage with as nothing has changed from Islam in 1400 years to make it a religion of peace. The evidence is in front of you and if you want to see it first hand, just pop on a 2 hour flight from Heathrow and enjoy the delights of extremist Islam and those 16 million Muslims who are killing anything that moves and even destroying their own heritage.

          • SiMoebus

            You never called me out on anything. My original comment, the original in this thread finished “We need to stop blaming an entire group for the bad acts of a few, and blame bad act in every group including ours.”

            See the problem with people like you is you just don’t like applying the same standard to yourself as you want to others.

            When are you going to take responsibility for your leaders who are Christians who some say “lied” to start illegal wars, and even tortured people. I suspect never. For you, like me, will only blame those individuals for those acts. The difference is that you just can’t apply that standard to others. That fact alone suggest that you are prejudiced towards Muslims irrelevant of their behavior.

          • WTF

            I called you out on your comment –

            “However, it is ironic that Christians have to hide their acts to pretend that they have no “blood on their hands.”

            I have provided many factual examples of where we (British people) have not hidden inconvenient truths be it our objection to the invasion of Iraq and our apology over the slave trade. Muslims globally and for the most part, either rejoice in events like 9-11, London & Madrid bombings and if they don’t actually run around like rabid dogs celebrating they are as quiet as a church mouse when in the minority.

            They are the two comparisons and you haven’t provided any evidence to the contrary. Sure you make all manner of deceitful Islamic style protestations but no evidence or facts

          • SiMoebus

            So is that an admission that you are will to take responsibility for lies made by Christians in the 21 Century. The previous leaders of both Britain and the US both Christians lied to you to start an illegal war. Why do you keep on pretending that they are not Christians, or pretend that their religion is not an issue?

            Maybe, it is just that as a Christian you can not accept the truth, let a lone apply the same standard to people who are the same as you.

          • WTF

            Before we discuss any responsibility for anything, I’m still waiting for you to state factually what lies you claim non Muslims living in the UK are responsible for.

            As far as accepting the truth, I’ve already stated that the UK was responsible for acting as middle men in the slave trade as well as going to war illegally in Iraq. Why wont you accept responsibility for Muslims being the procurers of Slaves in the 18th century or better yet, procurers in sexual abuse in Rotherham for the last 10 years.

            It would seem that my standard of honesty in accepting responsibility for our errors is never reciprocated by Muslims with any admissions for their crimes against humanity.

            David Starkey sums it up very well here, its that pathetic, deceitful and lame victim status that you always trot out when you lose the argument due to lack of facts.

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3034720/Historian-David-Starkey-astonishing-attack-victim-status-Muslims-disabled-people-ethnic-minorities-says-women-average-intelligence.html

            Get some real facts and debate or STFU and p*** off to Syria where you’ll be in better company being used as cannon fodder by your mates.

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3033741/European-ISIS-fighters-seen-cannon-fodder-commanders-desperately-try-prove-worth-committing-sickening-atrocities-says-former-prisoner.html

          • SiMoebus

            Keep your self-centred denial. Examples were pointed out but as keep in your hypocritical state you just refused to acknowledged them. It is that utter refusal to apply the same standard that you want to apply to others.

          • WTF

            Ad-hominem attacks no longer work as an alternative to answering the question you keep evading.

            I repeat, give me an example of where non Muslims in the UK are in denial over an unsavoury period in our history. I’ve already mentioned slavery which we have apologized for but Muslims are not only in denial over but still practice and I covered Iraq as well.

            Please enlighten all of us here of a single instance where we are in denial of our historical mis-deeds as you haven’t answered anything yet !

          • SiMoebus

            Ad-homimem attacks says one who has blindly accepted an article that uses that exact same type of arguments. Maybe, with that you might realize why your arguments have been wrong.

          • WTF

            Proof, reference instead of another ad-hominem attack ?

          • SiMoebus

            When it comes to irrational prejudices anything that attempt to presented a logical inconsistency is an “ad-homimen” attack? All the best for you.

          • WTF

            There’s nothing irrational being prejudiced against be-headers or sexual grooming gangs !

          • SiMoebus

            Another hypocritical arguments. Like gang rape does not exists in our culture, let a lone rape. Does it make you feel better dismissing facts?

          • WTF

            I stated sexual grooming based on race as Muslim girls were not targeted !

          • SiMoebus

            Hyperbolic nonsense based on nonsense build in your head. Like girls in western nations don’t go through those problems. Close your eyes cover your ears and hum to yourself … for all you are doing is expressing a prejudice towards another group.

          • WTF

            Conveniently ignoring the racist element are we?

          • SiMoebus

            Is that some sort of private conversation. For as politely as I have been being that has been one of the principles of my condemnation.

          • WTF

            Perhaps you didn’t read my much earlier post where I clearly denounced the UK’s involvement in Iraq as has most of the UK but I should point out it had f*** all to do with Christianity and everything thing to do with a lying nut job that was in power at the time.

            So now I’ve reiterated that the people of Britain are not in denial over Iraq or the slave trade, what other denials are you going to try and fabricate.

            I note there’s still no admission from any Muslims for their part in procuring black slaves for the Americas. Perhaps you would offer an apology although I don’t hold out much hope there !

          • SiMoebus

            No, I did not say denounce. I said take “responsibility.”

          • WTF

            Why is it that Muslims seem to have this mental block when it comes to contextualizing anything. They can’t contextualize their scriptures hence the atrocities that have been happening for 1400 years and you cant even contextualize what I was implying by saying ‘denounce’.

            If my kids did something wrong I could take responsibility for their actions and try to make amends to anyone hurt as a result and probably punish them accordingly. I can’t really make amends for the slave trade of 250 years ago but I can and have denounced it.

            Perhaps you can enlighten us in how British people at an individual level can take responsibility for our governments past mistakes centuries ago. Better yet, perhaps you can even explain why that Muslim father cant take responsibility for the daughter he radicalized who them went off to Syria.

            We can denounce the past but I don’t expect the Romans (Italians) to take responsibility for invading the UK 2000 years ago.

            You seem to enjoy throwing words around to confuse but never explain or justify any facts. Is there any chance you will change and be honest to yourself let alone the rest of us ?

          • SiMoebus

            The only person with a “mental block” are people that posses prejudices against people different than them.

          • WTF

            I just love the irony of your lame accusations of ‘prejudice’ coming from a religion with the motherlode of prejudices.

            Islam is chock full of prejudices against non Muslims. In many Islamic countries if they wont convert to Islam or pay a protection tax, they’ll be killed. If that isn’t the ultimate prejudice I don’t know what is.

            In Saudi, all religions except Islam are banned under pain of death and yet we in the west allow all religions to exist even when they preach hate !

          • SiMoebus

            Sorry. I am no more religious than you are nor rake religion as seriously as you do. I am only witnessing the same old prejudice and discriminatory attitude that has been put on people of sexual orientation, gender, ethnic group, and even religion. That you for replying for it is only proof the such irrationality still exists in the 21 Century.

          • WTF

            Islam, gays, you’re having a sick joke surely ! How many have been tossed off roofs lately.

            BTW, I have gay friends as well !

          • SiMoebus

            I have encounter gay people who are racists, it does not mean all gay people are racists. Your acceptance of one group does not mean you have a deep seated prejudice against another group.

          • Bonkim

            There is no compulsion on any group to accept any other group or all groups. There are many that detest all groups and do not wish to be part of any. That is what individual freedom is all about.

          • SiMoebus

            Went it comes to “goodwill” one must work with others on areas of commonality. Yes, you are free to have “an irrational prejudice.” Freedom is also about people pointing that fact out as a reason of no longer associating with such people who are prejudicial to others. However, one the principle of “goodwill” people will attempt to resolve the relationship by pointing out that “irrational prejudice.”

          • Bonkim

            What is the point of establishing relationships with people of other lands, cultures, and religions? That would be inviting trouble. You have enough coping with your day to day battles to survive.

          • SiMoebus

            UK is a mishmash of people from over Europe and from around the world. The culture including sports of UK has been influence by every culture that has touch it. There are really few battles. Some are more serious, but none serious that effects my daily life.

          • Bonkim

            That is because the British are a tolerant lot and believe in live and let live – but that can change if there are too many of different cultures and values creating discordance and choosing to live and enjoy the benefits without contributing much in return. Many live under self-imposed apartheid in their Ghettos.

          • SiMoebus

            It is known that the majority of British who are tolerant, but that is not how the UK has been influenced.

            Self-imposed? They actually see that differently, but that is another issue.

          • Bonkim

            You will remain a stranger unless you adapt and change.

          • SiMoebus

            If you want to believe that then fine.

          • Bonkim

            Do you think the Chinese, Indians, Somalis, Arabs, Iranians, and Sudanese are racists?

          • SiMoebus

            I know that in every group that one can think of that there will be at least one person who is “racists.” However, I will always view that there are good people irrelevant of their culture or ethnicity. You see an entire group and form a prejudicial bias against them. There are many words for that, the kindest is “an irrational prejudice.”

          • Bonkim

            Prejudice can be perfectly rational. You warn children not to talk to strangers, you keep away from harmful bacteria, or people that can do you harm, etc, It is human condition to be fearful of the unknown and for good reason – perfectly rational not to walk in the human jungle after dark, etc.

          • SiMoebus

            Prejudices are never rational. People usually use illogical arguments or false equivalents to justify their prejudices. Strangers are unknown people, that includes someone that resembles your father. For that person just want to do harm to you. Sorry, there is a difference between fearing someone and having an irrational prejudice.

          • Bonkim

            Pre-judice is by definition irrational – you should learn the basics of human behaviour. People that look and act differently are kept at a distance in all societies particularly if they are in numbers and pose a threat or imagined threat. You should travel to Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or India or some African countries, also other parts of Europe/Russia to see how human societies react to strangers in their midst.

          • SiMoebus

            Sorry, the world that you believe in has ended. People actually do find common ground to cooperate on issues.
            It is known that there are still those who hold the archaic ideas relating to prejudices. Maybe you should go to Saudi Arabia. I already know that there will be people who will welcome me and other who have “prejudices.”

          • Bonkim

            Depending on need.

          • SiMoebus

            The need to have a peaceful like.

          • WTF

            But events have shown that in ISIS controlled areas all Muslims there seem to be homophobic with extreme prejudice !

          • SiMoebus

            So what. ISIS is not Islam.

          • WTF
          • SiMoebus

            A name is a name and nothing but a name. It is what the origination or group does. Unfortunately, for some just can not accept that ISIS is not Islam.

          • WTF

            Been off on a ‘Club Jihadi’ trip have we for a re-indoctrination, as you’ve been absent recently ! A name is a name and describes exactly what Islam preaches hence all the barbarity we see in the middle east at the moment. It ALL stems from Islamic teachings !

            Anyway, ISIS is driving to establish an Islamic state in the Middle East ruled by strict shariah law and even Islamic elements in the west are trying to do that here as well. Unfortunately some like you deny the truth despite the overwhelming evidence that ISIS is inspired and motivated by Islam.

            Here’s 5 links (out of hundreds) that support this conjecture, can you be bothered find one that disputes the link between Islam and ISIS ?

            http://www.infoplease.com/news/2014/isis-explained.html

            http://www.vox.com/cards/things-about-isis-you-need-to-know/what-is-isis

            http://rt.com/news/166836-isis-isil-al-qaeda-iraq/

            http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/12/world/meast/who-is-the-isis/

            http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_world_/2014/08/27/why_does_isis_or_the_islamic_state_or_qsis_have_so_many_names_what_should.html

          • SiMoebus

            ISIS is not Islam. It is not rocket science.

          • WTF

            Where’s the URL link that backs up your claim ?

            I’ve supplied 5 links supporting my point that ISIS is linked to Islam and there’s plenty more where they came from, surely you can find just one supporting your position ?

            You’re full of posturing but bereft of proof !

          • SiMoebus

            Islam has existed for hundreds of years, thousand if you want to consider its origins. Believing that ISIS is Islam is illogical. Honestly, illogical doesn’t full express the fallacy.

          • WTF

            I was just thinking about you in that I hadn’t been given a link on ISIS vs Islam and I did a bit of google searching myself as obviously you don’t seem to know how to surf the internet.

            My search criteria was “Is ISIS connected to Islam” and I’m afraid I couldn’t find a single link that backed your view point. For a second I thought this one might help you –

            http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/muslims-say-isis-has-nothing-to-do-with-islam/2014/09/17/0/?print

            but it turned out to be an in depth article of Muslims like yourself who deny any link but can’t provide proof as there isn’t any. The next post down was –

            http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/arnold-ahlert/the-muslim-brotherhood-isis-connection/

            Muslims the world over have made their position clear: No matter how many people they kill to gain power, how many fellow Muslims they terrorize into submission, or how loudly they scream their self-righteous blasphemy to the heavens, ISIS is not — nor will ever be — Islamic.

            The fat lady has sung and in the eyes of most in the world and certainly on the internet, ISIS practices the literal preachings of Islam no matter how often you try and pretend otherwise.

          • SiMoebus

            Give it up. All you seem to be doing is using ISIS as a place to hide your prejudice against Islam. Sorry, but I do not have prejudices against people just because they are different from me. That obviously includes Muslims.

            Muslims are over one billion people. You are but one person. Muslims like everyone else has a variety of opinion on a variety of issues. You are an individual who has opinions unique to yourself. Only you and you alone are going to accept that your prejudice against Muslims in not only misplaced but wrong.

          • WTF

            It really is rich you accusing me of prejudice against Islam (I have none against Muslims) considering the examples set by Islam itself. That’s akin to the pot calling the kettle black or people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones !

            Prejudice 1: Islam using the pejorative term infidel against all those who are not of the Islamic faith is a blanket prejudice against the majority of the people on this planet. In general parlance be it in the media, on TV or anywhere else non Muslims refer to those of the Islamic faith as Muslims or Moslems and not some derogatory term like infidel.

            Prejudice 2: We have al-Taqiyya: the Islamic word for concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies to all non Muslims in a prejudicial way.

            Prejudice 3: The Holy Quran in 9:5 commands Muslims to kill the idolaters wherever you find them and take them prisoners, and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. Clearly a prejudice against all who do not worship Islam.

            Prejudice 4: The Koran exhorts believers to “Fight those who oppose Islam, Allah will torment them with your hands, humiliate them, empower you over them, and heal the hearts of the believers, removing the rage from their hearts” (Koran 9:14-15). A very clear prejudice against non believers.

            Prejudice 5: Gays – “Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.” Qur’an 7:80-81. Definitely a homophobic prejudice by all who practice Islam and very extreme in the case of Islamic State.

            Prejudice 6: Jizya or the mafia style protection racket practiced by Islam against non-believers. Clearly discriminatory and clearly prejudiced.

            Prejudice 7: Whilst the west allows any recognized religion to practice freely many Islamic states are prejudiced and ban all other religions.

            Prejudice 8: Probably the biggest prejudice of all with Islams stance against women and many examples of same.

            Qur’an (4:11) – (Inheritance) “The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females” (see also verse 4:176). In Islam, sexism is mathematically established.

            Qur’an (2:282) – (Court testimony) “And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women.”Muslim apologists offer creative explanations to explain why Allah felt that a man’s testimony in court should be valued twice as highly
            as a woman’s, but studies consistently show that women are actually less likely to tell lies than men, meaning that they would make more reliable witnesses.

            Qur’an (2:228) – “and the men are a degree above them [women]”

            Qur’an (5:6) – “And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it” Men are to rub dirt on their hands if there is no water to purify them following casual contact with a woman (such as shaking hands).

            Qur’an (24:31) – Women are to lower their gaze around men, so they do not look them in the eye.

            Qur’an (2:223) – “Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will…” A man has dominion over his wives’ bodies as he does his land. This verse is overtly sexual. There is some dispute as to whether it is referring to the practice of anal intercourse, which it has been used historically to justify. If this
            is what Muhammad meant, however, then it would appear to contradict what he said in Muslim (8:3365).

            Qur’an (4:3) – (Wife-to-husband ratio) “Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four” Inequality by numbers.

            Qur’an (53:27) – “Those who believe not in the Hereafter, name the angels with female names.” Angels are sublime beings, and would therefore be male.

            Qur’an (4:24) and Qur’an (33:50) – A man is permitted to take women as sexual slaves outside of marriage. Note that the verse distinguishes wives from captives (those whom they right hand possesses).

            It is ludicrous to pretend that Islam is anything but the most prejudiced and cancerous cult in existence today when considering just eight of its prejudices described above. Any sane person would have strong feelings against such a brutal religion and it has nothing to do with irrational prejudice but everything to do with Islams teachings and practice !

            You clearly have not read or understood your own religion or are in denial over its teachings, that is not a prejudicial comment but a factual observation. If as you claim, you are a devout Muslim then by default you must have all these prejudices that I have highlighted above.

          • SiMoebus

            WTF if you really want me to be a Muslim then all you have to do is pray … and maybe just maybe your wish will come true.

            Yes, I do have friends of various different ethnicities, religious and cultural background. I really don’t care about none of that but the quality of the person and our commonalities. I am sorry that you just can not accept that people with different backgrounds actually co-exists.

            A lot of words just to hide your prejudice. Showing examples of prejudices does not justify your right to be prejudiced against others.

          • WTF

            Considering I actively socialize with many different ethnic groups including Asian, European and African I fully accept that people with different back grounds can co-exist. My issue is not over people but over the many prejudices that Islam preaches which you are in denial over.

            Conflating a distaste of certain religious practices is NOT the same as racism or bigotry against an ethnic group which clearly you would wish it to be !

          • SiMoebus

            Really can not accept that your prejudice is irrational. What you defriend people after you find out they are Muslims? Honestly, I doubt that you socialize with people outside your group. For if you did you would not be engaging in your behaviour after hearing realizing how your type of prejudice actually makes them feel.

          • WTF

            Doubt away as I have invited my Indian friends into my home and Spanish villa to stay for a vacation and I have been invited into their homes as well. They have no hang ups or persecution complex in discussing religion, facts and history so why do you ?

          • SiMoebus

            Says that you that because of their xenophobia who just can not admit he has any Muslim friends. Claiming to have Indian people over to your house does not dismiss your prejudice against a group of people. Especially, being Indian does not exclude being Muslim. So, what you defriended you Muslim Friends?

          • WTF

            Where I live, there are very few Muslims anyway and none in my neighborhood of retired pensioners nor with my Spanish, German & Swiss neighbors. In any respect, living in the UK, I found Muslims refused to integrate unlike Sikhs, Hindus and all other ethnic groups. In some areas like Leytonstone or Tower Hamlets they even tried to prevent ‘infidels’ entering !

            In fact at two houses I lived in I had Indian neighbors and was invited to weddings and parties they had. Rather strange that you accuse me of xenophobia, racism and the like when they & I have no problem integrating with each other when they look very similar to Asian Muslims so it can’t be a problem with skin colour can it.

            Maybe the rape and pillage of India by Muslims several hundred years ago much like the feelings of the Armenians towards the Turks 100 years on from their genocide has something to do with this bad PR Muslims have.

            Maybe Islam has something to do with it don’t you think,
            it seems to be at the center of all strife whether its Muslims against non Muslims or Muslims against Muslims !

          • SiMoebus

            Congratulations. It is really not that important. However, many people go through an entire life time without recognizing that why their prejudice is wrong.

          • WTF

            Your prejudice is your irrational refusal to see that Islam is the mother of all prejudices !

          • SiMoebus

            The only irrationality is your arguments. See, I will forget about your prejudice against people different from you once you drop it.

          • WTF

            But I don’t have any prejudice against any people and you can’t even point out where I might have made a prejudicial remarks against any group of people.

            Why do you keep confusing criticism and prejudice ?

            Was it a poor education that explains your mistake or a blatant conflation of ethnic grouping and religion for prejudicial reasoning ?

          • SiMoebus

            There you go again. I said before if you want me to be a Muslim you are going to have to wish for it. Sound like you are slowly admitting that you were wrong.

          • WTF

            Youre not making any sense at all on this post.

          • SiMoebus

            You seem to want to believe that anyone that disbelieves claim about a group must be a member of that group. So, if you want be to be a Muslim that believe that I am will not suffice.

          • WTF

            I don’t know or even care what your religious fancy is, I am debating your blind support of a religion that is causing more bloodshed that anything else at this point in time.

          • SiMoebus

            It seems that you are trying hard to demonstrate something that is false, while pushing your own “blind support” of an idea.

            Sorry, my position is that an individual can practice whatever they want to or nothing at all, as long as that “individual” harms no one.

            People will always try dehumanize others or be prejudiced against other. They will get support from people who have the same “blind support” of that idea, but miss that those attempt are opaque.

          • SiMoebus

            It is the same as racism and bigotry. Both terms that I have been activity avoid.

          • WTF

            Believing and practicing Islam is embracing prejudice not avoiding it as I clearly pointed out in my 8 salient points earlier.

            The only thing you excel at is avoiding discussion of Islam, its prejudices and its barbarity !

          • SiMoebus

            No you are prejudiced against Muslims. So, prejudiced against them is when a person who in NOT a Muslim points it out you try to pretend that they are. That is it.

          • WTF

            You’re confused like all apologists for Islam, you’re conflating the abhorrence for the barbaric customs & teachings of Islam with those who worship Islam, they are quite separate things.

          • SiMoebus

            Barbaric is nothing more that ad-hominem attacks. I understand you have a prejudice against Muslims. Nothing really special about it. Well until you feel the other end of a prejudiced.

          • WTF

            Wrong, oh so very wrong. Its grammatically impossible to make a ad-hominem attacks against a inanimate concept such as Islam, its called criticism !

            Look it up in the dictionary !

          • SiMoebus

            Yes, “prejudice” is in a dictionary so is “ad hominem.” There is nothing special about your attitude towards people different than you, and only is a reflection on yourself.

          • WTF

            If you’ve bothered to look up these words in a dictionary surely you have to accept you can’t make an ad-hominem attack on an abstract concept like religion ?

            On prejudice, unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social, or religious group, pretty much epitomes Islams prejudice based on those eight examples I gave previously and especially the last one against women !

            Let those who are without sin cast the first stone, that pretty much rules out Islam !

          • SiMoebus

            The sun will come up tomorrow, and people will go on there life. There will always be people who have an irrational impression of people they know absolutely nothing about. Get over it. It is your choice.

            Anyway, nice try in pretending that your attack is not against a group of people.

          • WTF

            I don’t have to pretend anything here as anyone reading these posts will see your refusal to substantiate your rhetoric as an excuse for being in denial of the truth of Islam. They will not jump to the incorrect conclusion that I am attacking people rather than an abstract idea.

            They can see I am only criticizing a religion even though you’re desperately trying to make out its an attack on an ethnic group. In other posts I have criticized Christianity as a religion but not those that worship Christianity but you seem to have this warped mind set that says Islam = Muslims or Christianity = Christians when that isn’t the case.

          • SiMoebus

            My “rhetoric” is to treat people as you would like to be treated or at least equally. You decide to reply to my original comment trying to prove nothing. Strawmen or is it a scarecrow which one do you want?

          • WTF

            My proof is very clear, criticizing an inanimate abstract belief for its evil teachings is not prejudice against a living person. Nothing you have said or could say will prove any different.

            Its interesting that the most contradictory complaint that you and many others have against right thinking people is an accusation that we conflate Islam with Muslims when discussing Islamic extremism. Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse us of by trying to say that by criticising Islam we are prejudiced against Muslims even when we specifically separate the abstract from the real..

            Perhaps this link might help you understand the differences –

            http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/conflating-muslims-with-islamic-doctrine/

          • SiMoebus

            It is a known fact that people take away from religion what they want to. For you quoting text does not in all represent how another person interprets that text, let alone considers it as part of their personal faith.

            Religious people have used religious text to treat people badly, while people in that same group have used the exact same text to argue the opposite. That type of attitude is not exclusive to religious.

            Yes, it is possible to find a web site that argues that the earth is flat.

          • WTF

            “It is a known fact that people take away from religion what they want to.”

            Agreed, but therein lies the very obvious problem when people can cherry pick what they want from a religion.

            If a religion allows or in Islams case, actively encourages barbaric acts then some people will enact them like ISIS, more moderate followers will agree with these teachings but not carry them out and a few may actually ignore them totally.

            In modern day societies in the west, we don’t normally allow people to take away what they want from a religion, a sect, a cult or a sick minded group if it is against our laws & moral fabric, we make it a crime and ban that group.

            For instance, we ban child pornography for that very reason even though there is not a proven direct link between pedophiles viewing that stuff and child abuse. Its quite possible a child has no knowledge of photos of this kind being published in dark areas of the internet and no harm would result but we still ban it. Just as with religion, people will “take away what they want to.” from images like these.

            Even at school plays these days, a totally innocent gathering of parents and kids, we ban photography in case one or two perverts want to ‘take away’ what they view as ‘pornographic’ pics of kids performing and then subsequently distribute it to like minded pedophiles.
            That I would argue is a perfect analogy as to why we should ban any religion where one or two people can “take away” ignorance, barbarism, homophobia, sexism, racism & prejudiced preaching and then share with or indoctrinate others.

            If we can ban parents taking pics of their kids we should certainly ban a ‘cult’ that has those risks as well !

          • SiMoebus

            Kind of ironic that you want to “cherry pick what” you “want from a religion.” It seems that it is time to recognize that it is contradictory to both condemn a behaviour while engaging in it.

          • WTF

            I’m not the one cherry picking homophobia, discrimination against women or killing blasphemers am I ?

          • SiMoebus

            Yes, you are cherry picking. Homophobia, discrimination against women, or harming no believes is not unique to a particular religion or religion. It is ironic that someone will clearly demonstrated that.

          • SiMoebus

            One last point. I WILL stand up to people being prejudice against you, but i will NOT defend you being prejudice against others no matter what excuse you make.

          • WTF

            Correction, I am NOT prejudiced against Muslims or anyone else and nothing have I said in my posts has showed that I am prejudiced against any ethnic group as a whole. I am purely against those that show ignorance and dishonesty in their posts (any post) and refuse to back up their faux position with solid facts.

            Additionally, despite being an atheist I am not prejudiced against any religion including Islam BUT I am not going to let you get away with accusing me of prejudice just because I criticize a religion that shows prejudice in almost everything it preaches. Its a very cheap shot of conflating my criticism of something with prejudice or racism. We see this attitude far too much these days and it always comes from those who have no facts to support their position and are so bigoted in their views they refuse to even look for the truth.

            If you have a week argument, do some research to reinforce your your position instead of resorting to ad-hominem attacks on non Muslims. If you had any honesty or back bone you would stand up against teachings in Islam for being prejudiced against non Muslims but no, you are part of the problem. You’re even too dumb to understand why Muslims get bad PR for refusing to condemn Islams prejudices and barbarity.

          • SiMoebus

            You still do not get it. You are only one person. One individual who has a prejudice against a group of people. They are many people who identify with your group who do not have your prejudice.

            All you want to do is hide behind the manipulation of the truth to vilify a group of people. Not original at only.

            The only truth is that you have an irrational prejudice.

            You are the only person using “ad-hominen attacks.”

          • WTF

            When you have the courage to debate Islams edicts then you’ll be viewed with some credibility but so far you’ve ignored all truthful references about Islam !

            You’re the one doing the hiding because you cant face the truth about Islam let alone supply facts to dispute them.

          • SiMoebus

            The only truth is your prejudice. Your fallacy can be applied to any group. However, you are so blinded by it.

          • WTF

            Your silence is an admission that you know Islam is prejudiced against all ‘infidels’, I need say no more !

          • SiMoebus

            Yeah! Right. You make it seem as though the world revolves around what you make up in your mind based on a small minority of people. Other religions are the same way, even some atheists. People hate because they want to hate. Nothing special about it or unique. The reality is people are just sick and tied of all the nonsense.

          • WTF

            Unlike you, I have supplied many links to back my assertions as none of what I have stated is fantasy. Its a pity you cant reciprocate by offering URL links for your position instead of dreaming it up in your pea brained mind.

            As for hate, Islam is full of it !

          • SiMoebus

            Yes, there is a lot of “links” out there. From fallacies to out right misinform. Of course I am “pea brained” because it takes a lot of work to judge each individual based on the merits of each and everyone of their actions.

          • WTF

            I haven’t see a single link from you, does it tax your brain that much or are you trying to deny the truth ?

          • Bonkim

            Which is everyone on earth.

          • SiMoebus

            If that makes you feel better about yourself then so be it.

          • Bonkim

            People are a nuisance but one has to tolerate them as they are all around you – no escape. Best to ignore those you don’t like.

            Seriously SiMoebus if you feel uncomfortable where you are at present you should emigrate to Saudi Arabia where you will probably be more comfortable with people who have similar mindset to yours, will love you as a fellow Muslim and you can love unconditionally. Best of luck.

          • SiMoebus

            I think you are a little confused. So, now you seem to be suggesting that Saudi Arabia is one of the most open and tolerate countries in the world. Kind of contradicts you entire argument against Islam.

          • Bonkim

            Horses for courses – was suggesting Muslims will feel at home there. You should always look at the world through others’ eyes not your own which would be biased towards your values. Simple.

          • SiMoebus

            Yes, I do “look at the world through others’ eyes” and image how they will feel in situations of prejudice. Willing to listen to others who have encountered prejudice including those who never experienced it until they went to a foreign country.

            If you want to dislike Muslims or Islam that is your choice. One of my value is to treat others the same. If you are biased towards that then don’t be surprised how people treat you.

          • Bonkim

            Are there any countries with Muslim majority that look at everyone as their own? Racial and cultural prejudices run deep in all societies and more so in countries of Asia and Africa where the rule of law does not exist – whereas it is less acceptable in the West and illegal under law – people will always discriminate against those that do not share their history and values. You feel more comfortable and contribute more when you are surrounded by a common culture and values.

          • SiMoebus

            See the problem is just like it is a minority, but some see it as a majority. One common value is being around people who want to share their culture and do not express prejudices against those who are different than them.

            If you do not want to experience another history or culture so be it. However, not wanting to do so as a basis of a prejudices only re-enforces that irrationality.

          • Bonkim

            Some people may know other cultures and their history well and choose to reject them based on rational judgement. Why do you expect the rest of the world to respect or share your beliefs, and values. In a free world people have choices.

          • SiMoebus

            It is known that people have prejudice. It is nothing special about. The basis of my values is on the UN human rights, something designed by the majority.

          • Bonkim

            You can blame the entire group for keeping quiet about the minority within carrying out unspeakable atrocities in the name of their religion. Guilty by association.

          • SiMoebus

            So is that an admission that I can blame you for keep in quiet, for that what your faulty logic suggests. “If the shoe fit” seems suitable for your attitude.

          • WTF

            With any ethnic group there is a threshold where certain characteristics become the norm or majority view as opposed to the exception. For example, if 40% of a particular ethnic group practices paganism whilst 30% practice Christianity and the remainder are atheists, its quite reasonable to say that for this ethnic group, they are primarily pagans as the majority are pagans.

            Equally, if 60% of UK Muslims lend support in varying degrees to Islamic Jihadists and terrorists, then its quite reasonable to suggest the majority of Muslims back it. No one suggests that 60% actually carry out terror attacks or go to Syria but ‘backing’ for this sort of behavior encompasses a very wide range and levels of support and they are guilty of a lot more than purely association.

          • Bonkim

            Often groups are identified with what they are against rather than what they stand for. As an example US/British action in Iraq and Afghanistan come up as an anti Muslim act amongst Muslims although most Muslims will never opt to voluntarily go and settle at either locations.

          • SiMoebus

            That is nothing but a prejudice and has not validity. One of the hardest thing to remember is that people with deep seated prejudices find it hard to abandon them. When they do they just ignore that they were wrong. Maybe, you will discard them. Maybe, you will not. Sorry, for bothering you. Thank you for reminding me of something that I forgot.

          • WTF

            By your twisted thinking that would suggest that dogs are prejudiced against cats because most of them want to chase cats or I am prejudiced against sexual grooming pedophiles for some irrational reason rather than most of us think they are sc*um.

            When a majority within a group of beings (human or otherwise) exhibit similar behavior or traits they will rightly be labeled with a similar name. Lemmings are a very good example in the animal world hence our use of that to describe humans who follow cults & religion without questioning their motives or reasons.

            That neatly brings us back to Islam where all true Muslims practice & follow that religion and its practices without question. In effect they are human lemmings where they cannot think for themselves due to either religious indoctrination or lack of education and like lemmings, some will commit suicide just to kill others. At least Lemmings only kill themselves.

            Still waiting for a collective apology from Muslims for the Armenian genocide instead of a denial !

          • SiMoebus

            No the twist thinking is yours. All I have been doing is trying to point out the contradictions in your logic. My mistake was forgetting that people with deep seated prejudices never change.

          • WTF

            Islam is the ultimate in prejudicial practices, just read its teachings !

          • SiMoebus

            Reading you comment is an example of prejudice.

          • WTF

            Here we go again and again, stating an inconvenient fact like Islam practices a religious protection racket is now a prejudice.

            So where am I wrong, does not Islam preach that infidels should pay a tax as that is clearly a prejudice, or is it a prejudice to state incontrovertible facts ?

            The first defence of anyone defending the indefensible is to accuse the other party of the same act as you have done many times so far. Wake up, this ploy no longer works any more as the left and Islam has tried this deceitful trick so many times now its lost any credence.

            Any one with half a brain would debate my point and either dispute what I said is incorrect and supply proof to that effect or justify why there is a ‘protection’ tax. Clearly you lack even half a brain in refusing to do either and just keep repeating prejudice in an endless loop.

          • Bonkim

            Are there many ‘We Christian’ in the UK? Speak for yourself and dragging Wilberforce from his grave will not prove your point. Accept it – nothing has changed in Islam since their Prophet started his murderous mission – no point arguing with religious faith – I bet you would not have gained much arguing with the Conquistadores either.

          • WTF

            My mistake as I tend to use the word Christian interchangeably between culture and religion mainly because although I was brought up as a Christian but I am an atheist and have been for a long time. I now use the word Christian in a cultural rather than religious sense.

          • Bonkim

            History, religion, culture and language/location all go into ones identity and most people if challenged would find it difficult to prove their religious or cultural identity – once you have put these on difficult to take off.

          • WTF

            Personally I don’t see a problem or any complication here however the factors you mention will have varying degrees of influence which are primarily dependent on religion.

            Culture is easily the most closely aligned element to religion as culture normally comes from religion and always has done. History is really part and parcel part of culture and closely linked to religion. Language is quite separate as different languages evolved millennia ago and due to the distances between locations with no transport systems, many different languages evolved. Despite those language differences, religion still influenced culture to such an extent that European culture (and the Americas) is very similar despite many different languages and dialects.

            I would add that an atheist has no religion even if brought up in a religious manner and attending a church, mosque, temple or synagogue as a child. Clearly religion will set your cultural views as a child and with most religions that will stick with you for most if not all of your life.

            Surely the only real proof of any religious identity is what you practice whether at home or at a place of worship.

          • Bonkim

            Muslims haven’t done much to generate good PR – that is their problem – We don’t want to know. Also they appear to multiply like rabbits – check the statistics in the refugee camps of the conflict zones and Muslim people in the West – they don’t realise it is unfashionable to have so many children destroying the earth.

          • SiMoebus

            PR is the problem? Right so an individuals right to live their life without unduly prejudice is all about PR. The best argument in avoidance ever read. PR.

          • Bonkim

            Too much in-breeding amongst Muslims destroys the brain. Islamic societies have not progressed beyond the Middle Ages in terms of social evolution and are out of place in the modern world.

          • WTF
          • Bonkim

            But it is costing the NHS plenty.

          • SiMoebus

            Repeat that too yourself 10 times, click your heels twice, and just maybe if you believe in fairies it will come true.

          • WTF

            PR isn’t a problem as the majority in the west know exactly what these people believe and its through their actions we get their PR. I don’t believe Bonkim was saying that PR was a problem at all, he was saying that Muslims had a problem in that the only PR they generate is bad. Do you understand that distinction ?

            Undue prejudice is an irrational hatred against someone, prejudice is a rational hatred against someone gained from actions against you.

            Funny things is that flying planes into office towers, blowing up public transport, beheading aid workers, stoning adulterers, sexual grooming, killing gay people and many pedophile activities does tend to create bad PR. Who would have thought it, certainly not the 90% of Pakistani Muslims that back this sort of lifestyle according to the PEW research papers.

            Remind me, how many Nobel peace prizes have Muslims received compared to Jews ?

          • SiMoebus

            PR is an instrument of organizations, not people or religion. For people in a city, town, church have different opinions and different believes on issues. They are not these homogenous entities that some want to pretend that they are.

            In the West it really is not news when Muslim leaders condemn something, other times some just don’t pay attention or raise the bar.

          • WTF

            Shame you didn’t check the definition of PR first instead of posting cr** as this is what PR really means -.

            1. the actions of a corporation, store, government, individual, etc., in promoting goodwill between itself and the public, the community, employees, customers, etc.

            2. the art, technique, or profession of promoting such goodwill.

            Clearly it involves individuals and groups and clearly in point ‘2’ Muslims still have a lot to learn in promoting goodwill !

            I rest my case !

          • SiMoebus

            Sorry, to bother you. Maybe, you should actually talk to some Muslims. In that way you can “learn about promoting goodwill.”

          • WTF

            Keep changing the subject when you cant be bothered to reply to my points. I call it as I see it and I see precious little good will coming from a Islamic ghettos in the UK but plenty of Anjem Chowdary’s..

            Where were the Muslim fathers exposing sexual groomers in their midst ?
            Where are the Muslim fathers teaching their kids peace and integration rather than radicalizing their sons and daughters.

            In this world, you have to show by example as that aid worker tried when he went to Syria but was be-headed for his ‘sins’. Where was the apology from Muslims over his death ?

            Islam cannot promote good PR because currently there”s nothing good in Islam to promote when you look at the actions that result from Islamic indoctrination.

          • Bonkim

            You are overloading this poor chap’s brain with too much logic.

          • WTF

            I hope so but its hard work after Islam has brain washed someone !

          • SiMoebus

            I get that your are prejudiced against Muslims. It is the same treatment that the Jews faced.

          • WTF

            In actuality I have Jewish friends as well and I had a close relationship with a lovely Jewish woman for several years. I have no problem with other ethnic groups but I do with those who wont integrate and commit criminal acts in the name of religion.

            All I see now is Hamas terrorists trying to exterminate Jews in Israel or Islamic Jihadists in Paris targetting a Jewish Deli and killing most of the Jews inside the shop.

          • SiMoebus

            So you don’t have Muslim friends. What happens you find out that they are Muslim and you end your friendship? Sorry, but citing your religion to invade another country is the same thing as you attempt to condemn.

          • WTF

            Quite obviously if I were unknowingly friends with some Muslims, it wouldn’t make any difference to me if I subsequently found out they were Muslim. That’s no different to finding out some male colleagues and friends of mine were gay. Clearly I would socialize with them in my normal environment and clearly they would be integrated into that same environment so no problem.

            Now what would happen if a devout Muslim suddenly found out a colleague was gay. What a dilemma, do I follow the Islamic teachings as I’m commanded to and throw him off the roof or do I do what Christians do and ignore certain parts by contextualizing those scriptures.

            Well, we all know what happens in parts of the middle east !

          • SiMoebus

            Just like what people said about people who were friends with Jewish people, Chinese, LGBT or even of a particular political group. Honest, get out of your “cave” and live your life.

          • WTF

            You’re rambling now and not making any sense !

          • SiMoebus

            Well it is hard to make sense to a person who can not accept their deep seated prejudice.

          • Bonkim

            But you have to learn Arabic and convert to Islam for that – too much trouble. And who wants to promote goodwill with an alien culture that has one track-mind?

          • SiMoebus

            I have meet a lot of people, not knowing their language and have gotten along with them. Sorry, I really do not understand your concern. For goodwill does not require learning another language.

          • Bonkim

            Many individuals employ PR consultants and many religious institutions also have publicity departments that deal with Public Relations and image building.

            Muslim leaders one hopes are listened to by their followers – they are of no news value to the majority. There are many religious organisations and I bet all are busy creating a positive image for themselves.

          • SiMoebus

            And people believe the moon is covered in cheese.

          • Bonkim

            No some people believe the moon is made of goat-milk cheese.

          • SiMoebus

            A lot of people believe in things that a fictions and base their entire logic on that. All the best.

          • Bonkim

            Look up the history of Muhammad the founder of Islam – he was not just a prophet as he claimed but also a shrewd political and military General that eliminated anyone that questioned his authority – look also the history of Islam and the way religion and criminal violence went hand in hand – not denying that those that professed Christianity did not similarly commit unspeakable violence and military conquests eliminating those that did not toe the line.

            Your problem is trying to defend the indefensible – all religions including Islam is superstition and at a strategic level highly political – and all is fair in politics and war where your objective is to eliminate the opposition – accept ISIS is behaving to the Dark-Ages type (both Muslims and Christians did similar nasty things) – and the best I can say is that they are not hypocrites but a little out of date. The best way to deal with ISIS is to carpet bomb their territory and not anyone escape. The worst thing is to stop sending humanitarian aid to the Middle East. Let them eliminate each other and the world will be a peaceful place.

          • SiMoebus

            And you speak as if it was the Church of England, the Catholic Church or any other entity. Denial runs deep.

          • Bonkim

            What makes you think Christians are as hung up about religion as the backward cultural groups do in the Middle East or South Asia?

            Governments exercise polics including waging wars to suit their self interest – nothing to do with Christianity or religion. Most people in the West look at Christianity or religion as irrelevant to their life and don’t get heated about it as do the mad dogs in the Middle East.

            The only way out is to carpet-bomb ISIS and their like out of existence instead of sending humanitarian aid to these war-ravaged lands – let the mad dogs kill each other – just keep the navy to surround these bad-lands and torpedo any one trying to escape.

            May be send military aid to both sides in Syria or Iraq so they will eliminate each other quicker.

          • WTF

            I missed the last sentence but personally, I have no problem condemning Islam, Christianity and Judaism as I have no use for any of them.

            We can lampoon Christianity as in ‘Life of Brian’, we can lampoon Judaism as in ‘History of the World Part 1’ and very little is said. Lampoon Islam, and all the in-bred retarded Jihadists crawl out from under a rock to kill us.

            Need I say more !

          • SiMoebus

            And we can Lampoon Atheists “A self centered disillusioned.” If you can not laugh at yourself first, then we should rethink before laughing at others. For me I really indifference, it is the right of someone to create such illusions and others to walk away by finding nothing of interest in those illusions.

          • WTF

            Atheists have always been able to laugh at themselves just as I can, its religious nuts that have the problem. Christianity had a problem with it up until a couple of hundred years ago and Islam had that problem from its satanic beginnings right up until today.

            “it is the right of someone to create such illusions and others to walk away”

            Yes indeed, but when are Muslims going to learn to turn the other cheek as Jesus Christ preached. I may be an atheist but he certainly had empathy and common sense compared to Islams prophet !

          • SiMoebus

            If you accept the preaching of Christians, then you naturally have to accept the preaching of Muslims. Now, that is common sense.

          • WTF

            Your line “If you accept the preaching of Christians, then you naturally have to accept the preaching of Muslims” is totally BS as what happens in Christianity is very different to what happens in Islam.

            Christians do not use that word “accept” in reference to their preachings as though its the laws of the land passed down from government. Christians use their preachings as nothing more than a sort of “Good House Keeping Guide” for the benefit of living together in a community. There are no severe penalties for failing to follow outdated draconian ‘rules’ unlike Islam. You cannot compare the two religions in the 21st century as they are so unlike each other in all respects.

            There lies the difference between Christianity and Islam as I don’t accept 100% of the ‘social engineering’ teachings of Christianity or even 80%. Over 95% of all Christians (and all atheists) do not take at face value all the teachings of that faith and follow it rigidly. They embrace what is sensible, cohesive and what benefits society as a whole whilst rejecting old testament barbarity or unnecessary edicts from centuries gone by. With Islam, its all or nothing, there might be a few good bits but they are outweighed by all the barbarous parts !

            The Catholic faith for example has contraception banned but 80% of Catholics practice contraception and there’s no stoning to death for going against the ban. Similarly there are many other ‘religious customs’ or edicts in the Christian faith that Christians choose to ignore in the 21st century for the simple reason they can contextualize what makes sense today. Muslims cant do that as their religion forbids it and as you rightly said, they have to accept and practice all of Islams teachings.

            Perhaps if you can accept this contrasting view of two very different religions, it will explain to you the very big issues between Islam and Christianity. All Muslims (I am told) accept and follow the teachings of Islam 100% whilst Christians certainly do not with their religion. The former is a dogmatic control religion with no empathy whilst the latter is a spiritual aid for those seeking help or comfort, its that simple.

          • SiMoebus

            For a person who dislikes people who are different than them any truths are BS.

          • WTF

            There are many different ethnic groups in the UK and they have warmly embraced British culture just like we have embraced various elements of their culture. My close Indian friend is a case in point, I thoroughly enjoy his culinary differences and he enjoys sharing a bottle of my wine with me. Its that quaint word called “Integration” from both sides that doesn’t seem to be in the Islamic vocabulary !

            My problem is I don’t want to embrace Jihadists, sexual groomers or be-headers !

          • SiMoebus

            It is your choice drop you prejudice or be welcoming to others. Yes,
            people will try things from other culture even adapt them to their own.

            There
            is nothing irrational to distance oneself from people who do bad
            things. However, it is a prejudice to distance oneself from a group of
            people because a person in that group has done a bad things.

            I am
            not going to end by friendship with by friends from UK because one
            person has a prejudice against another group. That does not include
            saying something “stupid” about a person in my group or another group.

            Why don’t you just admit you dislike Muslim for no rational reason.

          • WTF

            You still have it all wrong as the prejudice is primarily from Islam towards everyone else and what little there is the other way is a direct result of self inflicted bad PR by Muslims.

            Lets look at that those hate mongers at CAGE who were trying to blame the police because they didn’t act as ‘baby sitters’ for those girls who went off on a Club ‘Jihadi vacation’. CAGE were deceitful in true Islamic fashion by not disclosing the fact that the father had radicalized one of his own daughters and now this government has taken steps to try and protect these vulnerable Muslim girls. Next up, CAGE is deceitful yet again in saying Muslim parents will have their children taken away by the police.

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3035188/Cage-s-lies-new-anti-terror-laws-Terrorism-apologists-accused-scaremongering-warning-Muslims-police-children-away.html

            With the lack of any moderate representatives in Islamic communities, no wonder their PR sucks and they all get labelled the same way. It is not irrational for non Muslims to form the views they have when the only interface with Muslim communities is from mouthpieces like CAGE and that ethnic group refuses to integrate !

            Its a bit like Gullivers Travels, if you only see one ethnic group and they are all small, you would assume everyone to be small as there’s no one to show you differently.

          • SiMoebus

            So blame an entire group for prejudice is only an attempt to hide ones own prejudice. I known that their are people who are similar to you who do not share you prejudice, and that is where the difference is.

          • WTF

            Its certainly fair to state that people like you appear to suffer from a genuine persecution complex, thinking that many people are prejudiced against those of the Islamic faith. Its that which partly explains this perpetual state of victim hood, but what is this root cause of this persecution ?

            Muslims when they come into contact with infidels are confused by a religion which demands all manner of contradictory edicts that would even drive Sigmund Freud nuts trying to figure out.

            They are constantly controlled by their religious clerics who demand total allegiance & submission to their religion and anyone who is in a perpetual state of submission is certainly going to feel persecuted.

            Their community leaders and spokespersons are as much use as a spare p**** at a wedding as rather than promoting integration in their host country, they demand separation and end up feeling isolated.

            When people are left alone and not brain washed by political or religious interference, people from different ethnic groups will naturally integrate over time to create a new melting pot or cultural group. Enforced integration has failed when the left tried it and enforced isolation as practiced by Islam when in the minority, also fails adding to this culture of persecution or prejudice. When in the majority, enforced integration into Islam is only achieved under threats of death or paying protection money.

            In the 21st century, Islam alone has the distinction of creating ‘Pavlovian Conditioning’ of victim hood & persecution on 1.6 billion people around the globe in a similar manner as Pavlovs dog reacted to food (or the thought of food) by salivating. With a canine it is in its genes and a dog follows its natural instinct whilst Islam achieves its conditioning on infants at a time the brain is most receptive. That conditioning remains throughout life for 99% of its followers and they don’t even realize they are submitting to a fantasy deity, crackpot ideas and a barbaric prophet.

            That more than anything probably explains this persecution complex and faux prejudice I see from your repetitive posts about injustices without any data or facts to support it.

          • SiMoebus

            It is more of a prejudice than being persecuted. Fortunately, for Muslims in the UK they only have to occasionally deal with a few “yahoos” in their daily lives. Most of the time they are meet with respect.

          • WTF

            As I said before, its a self created feeling of prejudice & persecution indoctrinated into the Muslim psyche by their faith. Christianity used to have this self same problem centuries ago especially in the Catholic faith but Christianity got over that. Its part of the ‘control’ or ‘submission’ aspect of religion to keep the ‘flock’ in line to obey its teachings. Islam still has to confront its problems if ever it will !

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortification_of_the_flesh

          • SiMoebus

            See, problem is all you are doing is condemning a group of people with various attitudes by engaging in the behavior that you have condemned. You are one individual.

          • WTF

            You’re completely missing the point, its Muslims that have condemned themselves to persecution & prejudice by practicing Islam. Islam means submission, don’t you get it ?

            http://www.whyislam.org/islam/what-is-submission/

          • SiMoebus

            No point was missed. I do understand your prejudice.

          • WTF

            Too lazy to provide a link backing you assertion that ISIS isn’t Islam or just dyslexic on the internet, Which is it ?

          • SiMoebus

            Lazy? Sorry, but Islam has been around longer than the Internet, and the Internet has been around longer than ISIS. Is mathematics a problem or the concepts of “greater than/less than” to difficult. Yes, I can find that “evolution” is a religion on the Internet or any other false concepts, but is does not make it true. It is an intelligently dishonest concept that ISIS is Islam.

          • WTF

            Evasion, deceit, deception, you certainly have been indoctrinated by that cancerous religion as you practice those same facets !

            “It is an intelligently dishonest concept that ISIS is Islam” but you can’t provide ANY proof to back it up can you ?

          • SiMoebus

            Evasion, deceit, deception is your method of trying to degrade Muslims. The reason you want to engage in such behavior is unknown. Yes, you are correct that ISIS was what Adam and Eve conceived the moment after they bit into the apple.

            Proof was provided and has been provided again. However, you are too blind with your prejudice against Muslims that you can see it. Honestly, I feel sorry for you.

    • WTF

      “It is technically the same religion and many of the same core beliefs”

      Just like a benign tumour and a malign tumour have technically similar cells but the latter will kill you !

      • SiMoebus

        I get it for no rational reason you do not like Muslims even the peaceful one. All the best with that.

        • WTF

          We don’t have a problem with peaceful Muslims but due to all the deceit that is preached by Islam, its very difficult to tell them apart just like tumors. Perhaps there’s a ‘biopsy’ we can carry out to help us ?

          • SiMoebus

            However, that has never been your argument.

          • WTF

            It has ALWAYS been my argument about any ethnic group that as long as they are peaceful and don’t cause trouble, I will welcome them. That’s why I will castigate white yobs causing trouble and applaud other groups that mix in and integrate.

            Playing the victim card is a very tired old Islamic ploy to disguise its own failings and those who practice that faith. Deceiving infidels is in its scriptures and attempting to bring in Sharia law to a host country is its ultimate goal.

            With bombings, sexual grooming & beheading in the UK plus the endless drip of Islamic inspired hate by the likes of Anjem Chowdary, that’s hardly a good advert or PR stunt for Muslims in the UK.

            Rational people would squash those that create a slur on the majority or moderates in their ethnic group but apparently not with Islam. The only conclusion is either (a) they agree with the criminal acts carried out in Islams name or (b) they are too lazy or dumb to do anything about it.

          • SiMoebus

            That has never been the essence of your argument however you seem to be trying hard to be rational while still sticking to an absurd concept. Good luck with that.

          • WTF

            This discussion has been going on for a long time now and obviously the argument expands as it develops especially when trying to get a response to a clear fact that I have made but so far has eluded me.

            Somewhere inside your head there may be a bit of rational thought that would allow you to denounce Islamic atrocities as I have with Christianities but “nowt, nada, nothing” you are still in denial over the Armenian massacres of the 20th century just as you are over the Indian massacres 2 centuries previously

            In fact you refuse to even talk about it, why is this ?

  • Ricardo Hotatio

    Do not make yourself any illusions Islam has its origins in the demonic realm.

  • StoryHugh

    Spot on I my experience. I have only one very close encounter with a full on Muslim. I can only talk about this one single acquaintance though it is tempting to generalise. He and his wife go on and on and on about their ‘rules’ that they live by and interfere in everyone else’s lives telling them how to live in an imposing and intimidating way. I called them self righteous and up themselves only a few days ago and they were stunned. It had never occurred to these rule followers that they were anything less than perfect. This in my view is the culture clash. In our culture by and large we have humility and room for others. Islam makes no room for anything but itself.

    • Bonkim

      How come you put up with them?

    • Albert Zbingswiki

      I assume that they then shouted at you and/ or ignored you forever, as you’re clearly an inferior kuffar pig dog, and they are perfect?

      • StoryHugh

        This was a complicated story, involving a very close friend and her near-relatives. Her sister married a muslim and became one herself. I have to be a bit obscure because it is all personal. However, you are right, this rather sinister individual and his wife have gone and promise never to speak to us again. I hope that proves to be the last we hear from him.

        • Albert Zbingswiki

          Ah. My commiserations. You’ve probably made it onto The List of Enemies Of Islam. I wish you well.

    • Yavver

      That’s because it sees all its texts and the injunctions arising from them as the unalterable word of God. Your last sentence is spot-on.

  • Steve Clarke

    I’m left staggered at the utter stupidity contained within this nonsense. To even begin to criticise one dysfunctional myth narrative by citing the bollocks contained in another dysfunctional myth narrative is hardly the basis of a solid argument…. maybe a solid case for straitjacket approval though.

    “I’ve been reading some imams online who use the idea of original sin as a proof of Christianity’s idiocy. Look, say the imams, these Christian fools believe that babies are sinful. How stupid is that? But it’s far from stupid, the idea that we’re all flawed.”

    Right so original sin is the idea that we are all flawed? “Original sin is an Augustine Christian doctrine that says that everyone is born sinful. This means that they are born with a built-in urge to do bad things and to disobey God. It is an important doctrine within the Roman Catholic Church. ” So not flawed then.

    What we have here then is a redefinition of original sin in order to promote spurious arguments and idiotic bigotry.

    You have to hand it to the religious., when it comes to spouting pish then no one can touch them… that would probably be sinful anyway.

    • q-pantagruel

      Well said.

  • q-pantagruel

    This is the dumbest article I’ve ever seen in the Spectator. The Qur’an makes it quite clear in many hundreds of verses that Allah positively hates unbelievers and if his followers don’t do them in in this world, he’ll get them in the next. The problem with Islam has nothing to do with “sin” whether original or purchased in the supermarket. The problem with Islam is Islam. And that starts with its so-called “holy” book and the guy who “revealed” it.

  • AverageGuyInTheStreet

    How long before online conversations like this are classed as Islamophobic Hate Crimes? Vote lib-lab-con and that’s what we’ll get to.

  • Muttley

    There is no difference between a Muslim and an Islamist, any more than there is between a Christian and a Christianist.

  • Hegelman

    As long as Christianity was at the centre of European life the continent was a cesspit of murderous hatred of Jews, savage ignorance, bigotry and poverty. It was the miracle of Europe separating itself from Christianity that saved the continent from the fate of the Middle East. The French and Russian Revolutions, by secularising Europe, did everything for the progress of mankind.

    Of course Islam has its history of gross crimes. But then, so has Communism, and we still value its cultural achievements, like those of Christianity.

    Stalin was a savage, grotesque criminal: educated in a Christian seminary. He got his dogmatism and hatred of Jews from there.

    But the Bolshevik Revolution was much more than oppression and atrocities. It also created a socialist culture, a sense of international fraternity and equality from which the whole world has benefited.

    Chritianity came at a grim and terrible price. Christians destroyed the temples and academies of the Greek and Roman world, and destroyed the Amerindian civilizations of the Americas. They persecuted Jews almost to EXTINCTION. Islam destroyed most of the great cultural heritage of the Hindus.

    If, nonetheless, we value the cultural contributions of Christianity, so should we value that of Bolshevism.

    And we should value the contributions of Islam, too.

    • sebastian2

      Maybe – but mohammedism should value the contributions of Judaism and Christianity too, and of the Hindus who provided the Arabs with their numbering system. From the ordinary toothpaste tube, to the flourescent light, to the car battery, to the touch screen smartphone, to the hair-thin disposable syringe that injects anaesthetic into the gum prior to dentistry, to the breeding of better camels …………..

      But mohammedism doesn’t.

      • Bonkim

        Do you need all the artefacts you list to live?

    • Innit Bruv

      Good comment !!

      • Hegelman

        Thanks! Good to find a single sensible person – he or she makes up for a billion fools !

    • Mary Squire

      Excellent comment. And food for thought.

      • Hegelman

        You’re welcome!

  • Sean L

    Surprised this tosh got published. You’d expect a weightier argument in a student magazine. Compared to this garbage Petronella is Iris Murdoch. The dumbing down of the front half of the paper rivals the Daily Telegraph, much of which is now barely distinguishable from the Daily Mail. Where once were Paul Johnson and Ferdinand Mount you now have Hugo Rifkind and James Delingpole. . .

  • Innit Bruv

    The Spectator may not be the best forum for any intelligent discussion of this particular topic. (Just look at some of the comments below).

    • Bonkim

      Do you need much intelligence to discuss religion or politics?

      • Innit Bruv

        It certainly helps.

        • Bonkim

          Going by the comments here one wonders.

          • Innit Bruv

            I couldn’t agree more.

    • Guest

      your local mosque that is filled with barely literate inbreds, might be a better place for you

      • Innit Bruv

        How many times do I have to keep on telling you, Guest, Infidelissima, jjj, Mister Dribble (or whatever else you call yourself):
        I am NOT a Muslim !!
        Your comment just proves my point, you’re probably too thick to realise that.

  • Sean L

    Someone said that blaming global warming on man made CO2 rather than the sun was akin to examining your rear left wheel hub cap to identify the cause of your car’s breakdown rather than looking under the bonnet, say. Ditto postulating the doctrine of original sin, or its absence, as a distinguishing characteristic of Islam. But Pelagianism, the basis of leftist thought, best expressed in our era by Rousseau, also denies original sin, and is far more influential in our political culture than Augustinian original sin: our educationalists, our penal reformers are Pelagians to a man. Singling out Muslims in this respect is baseless. Islam entails submission to God’s law. There is no space for man-made law, secularism, liberalism, government by consent, that’s to say submission to the laws of men. Law as it has developed in Christendom is negotiable, consensual and evolves over time, by definition. By the same token God’s law is immutable. Thus Muslims could, with perhaps more legitimacy, accuse liberal secularists of ‘pride’. After all they’re merely enacting the word of God. Whereas, at least in their eyes, secularism subverts it. Arguably many Islamic cultures are much *less* proud. It was actually a key motive of the 7/11 attacks on the Twin Towers, pride: what they saw as Godless Western vanity symbolised by those monstrous buildings, which they regarded as sacrilegious, architecture student Mohammad Atta particularly. As for giving to the poor, isn’t that one of the Seven Pillars of Islam? Plenty of grounds to criticise aspects of Islam, never more so than now, but none of them to be found here. . .

  • sebastian2

    There are millions of Buddhists around the world living peaceful lives. Millions of Hindus similarly. Mormons fall into the same peacefully living category. As do Egyptian and other Middle-Eastern Copts. Jews. Baha’is. Methodists. Yazidis ………….. and others. With rare exception, there’s no equivalent to what mohammedism routinely engages in: jihad – even against its own co-religionists. Sunni / Shia mutual bloody slaughter being the most prominent instance. And now we have ISIS to which many “peaceful” mohammedans (Ordinary Yorksihre lads. An ideal employee. We’re shocked and surprised. Etc etc) appear drawn to. How, with all this going on, can anyone describe mohammedanism as a “Religion of Peace” as if that was all that required saying?

    Examine mohammedan texts and the facts of its early expansion under their alleged “prophet’s” leadership, and the violence emerges with a vengeance. With a vengeance and with a reformation behind it as the quran’s later bellicose passages abrogated (“reformed”) the more conciliatory earlier ones. That was then in around 620. Now, in 2015, a second reformation is in progress: the re-institution of original mohammedan purity. And this is done with the most uncompromising savagery.

    Mohammedans may dispute all this; but still they gain for themselves a certain reputation that other faiths generally have not: for denial, for controversy, mutual intolerance, confusing, contradictory and often arcane rhetoric, acts of violence. None of this looks good for mohammedism in the 21st century and all of it completely demolishes their collective boast: the final testament; the perfect faith; the perfect man.

    That there are many mohammedans leading peaceful lives makes them neither better nor worse that all those others leading peaceful lives as well. But we have seen how susceptible “peaceful” mohammedans are to jihad. And the incentive for that ready conversion comes from their sacred texts that ordain and justify such, and bribe with the promise of sumptious paradisal rewards.

    Sam Harris said the quran is “the motherlode of bad ideas.”. Mohammedans prove that almost on a daily basis.

    • WTF

      As many Islamic debaters constantly state when proved wrong “If you don’t agree with me, I’ll f******* kill you” exactly proving the point of the debate but the irony escapes them !

    • Bonkim

      Peaceful Buddhists in Sri Lanka and Burma? that is a laugh – war-criminal Buddhists eliminating minorities.

      Peaceful Hindus in India – that would be a bigger joke – look at how bigotry is setting in under the Hindu Safron Flag.

      Muslims don’t make any bones about their religion – Muhammad was not only a Prohet of God as they claim – but Muhammad was also a shrewd politician and Military commander ruthlessly pursuing his goals – take no prisoners and submit to Islam or get your head chopped off – he must have learnt much from the Roman Church of the time – and later Muslims too from the politics of Rome and eliminating non-believers.

      Not sure of the Mormons but similarity with Islam about the infallibility of the Prophet, many wives and child brides – all religions have worms crawling inside if you open them up.

    • AverageGuyInTheStreet

      “there are many mohammedans leading peaceful lives” – most ordinary Germans lived peaceful lives in the mid 1930s, and most of those in their army were not extremists. Yet we interred German citizens during the war for our own safety. What has changed? Oh yeah, mass immigration and so-called globalisation (which means we English are supposed to accept that England isn’t actually ours). How many Jihadists have returned from Syria so far? 2,000 “British” Muslims are estimated to be out there fighting. How many more sympathisers are already here among us, claiming our benefits, working in our jobs, converting our schools and public buildings into mosques, chipping away at our democracy, and biding their time for their numbers to reach the point where they can demand anything and get it?

    • Innit Bruv

      There are also plenty of Hindus and Buddhists who aren’t leading peaceful lives.

      • sebastian2

        It’s a case of what their doctrines say. What do their sacred texts demand of them?

        Consider, for example, what Jains believe:

        ‘Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being.’

        Consider the Dalai Lama:

        ‘This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness.’

        Dalai Lama

        And this:

        “The hard and mighty lie beneath the ground
        While the tender and weak dance on the breeze above.”

        Lao Tzu

        As far as I know, none of these principles have been abrogated.

        If you draw parallels between mohammedism and other creeds – sketch out an equivalence in terms of their violence – you’re admitting at the very least that mohammedism, like others you rank it with, is not a religion of peace. That the RoP narrative is equally false.

  • Annie

    Believing in original sin, dying for our sins, turning the other cheek, not casting the first stone, the mote in the eye, will be what does for us in the end.

  • Michael Sager

    But Judaism does not believe in original sin either. It is very different from Christianity here, as I understand. Simply put, Judaism says we are not born inherently sinful. We are born imperfect however.

  • Albert Zbingswiki

    The biggest motivation to finding another habitable planet should be that the rest of us can all go and start again in safety, and leave them here to indulge their unslakable bloodlust on each other.

  • Cobbett

    I don’t believe in original sin either. Better to 1. Don’t et any more Muslims into Europe 2. Remove those already here.

  • moronophobe

    very encouraging analysis of the situation. there still may be hope, after all. although I don’t fully agree with the camps definition.
    most of those who have managed to overcome the simplistic relativist point of view depicted as camp 1 don’t think of islam just in terms of physical violence but also in terms of structural violence through social control and a mindset that rejects criticism per se. especially the rejection of criticism and doubt is the main reason for the complete backwardness of the islamic world in terms of science.

    essentially, the muslim philosophy comes down to this: if you are stronger, enforce your terms. if you are weaker, try to cheat to have your way and if cheating doesn’t work, try to kill your opponent. if neither works, bow to the inevitable but don’t forget that everybody else but yourself is guilty for your misery.

    islam is a religion of thieves and criminals.

  • James Hamilton

    I think it’s the “strike of the heads of the unbelievers” stuff that is the problem rather than the want of original sin.

    • mrsjosephinehydehartley

      It doesn’t have to be such a problem I think, in view of what God says in the bible to the evil serpent and what he says about Eves’ offspring ..who will crush it’s head,whilst it will strike at our heels. But of course God is talking about the evil one ie the thing that’s really in control of this world. It’s not a person.

  • Allan

    Ghandi (inspired by Jesus) said the following “Let us be the change we want to see in the world – if blood is to be shed to do it – let it be our own”.
    In essence radical Islam can be summarised as “You will be the change we want to see in the world – if blood is to be shed to do it – it will be yours”.
    Search online for “9-11 Tragedy by Art Katz”

  • mrsjosephinehydehartley

    I wonder if it’s possible to be both Sunni and a shi-ite? Or is that something to do with where a Muslim is born?

    • Yavver

      Of course it isn’t possible. Can someone be a Roman Catholic and a Protestant at the same time?

  • jack
  • zanzamander

    Even if you lived to be 150 Mary Wakefield, you will remain blind to Islam. Even after the entire Christendom succumbs to Islam, you and people like you (the dozy ones) will remain dumb. Your lefty propaganda and natural tendency to love Islam is a danger to us all.

    Enough said.

  • Yavver

    Er, original sin is only part of it. The idea of original sin was an elaboration by St Augustine of the interlocking ideas of the Fall (by Adam and Eve) and the subsequent Incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity and Atonement and Redemption. These are crucial to Christianity and to its idea of providence and the loving-kindness of God.
    There is no corresponding notion of providence in Islam which rejects the Trinity and with it the ideas of Atonement and Redemption. The God of Islam is not a god of love and is not obliged to be good or loving — or anything whatsoever. As Michael Cooke points out, he can even turn men into apes quite capriciously. A commitment to do nothing but good would in the view of Islamic theologians conflict with his absolute power and sovereignty. Instead religion is simply a mission by the individual to carry out the commands of God, embodied in the Koran and the Hadith. The reward for this is heaven. Moreover each action by God is independent of any other action by and has no causal or binding connection with subsequent ones. This is what omnipotence means. Whether it is a coherent conception I leave others to judge.

    • Bonkim

      Mumbo Jumbo makes better sense.

  • Bonkim

    Isn’t this junk closed yet? Enough drivel on Islam!

  • Arthur Thistlewood

    Mary Wakefield – the best of all possible essayists.

  • Kyle Smith

    Goddam, so glad this author has an imam level of education about Islam.

    I’d like you British fuccbois to know that your hatred of Muslims is like the hatred of black people and Hispanic immigrants where I live in the states. Only, you guys are more worse and outright about your bigotry. Toodles assholes!

Close