You won’t see that heading much around here. However, as others have noted, Angola has decided to ban Islam.
I was surprised by John Galt’s reaction to this, although he is getting some well deserved stick in the comments. Leggy, meanwhile takes the same stance as me.
It’s easy to talk the talk about civil liberties when defending one’s own liberty or that of our fellows. Yet the real test comes when we find ourselves having to stand beside those we despise – indeed those who, given the circumstances, would oppress us. Yet, if we are to ignore our principles when faced with it, we have no principles. If we believe in civil liberties; the freedom to speak as we please, freedom of assembly, of association and religion, we believe in it for everyone, no matter how much we disagree with them, no matter how much we despise them and the test of the liberal is that he stands beside his enemies when their civil liberties are being crushed – because, and this is the key factor, the freedom of Muslims to practice their religion is my freedom to be free of religion. It’s all the same, there is no difference. Either you believe in these principles or you don’t. If you are cheering the Angola action, then you don’t because you are approving an authoritarian regime using the power of the state to crush a minority because they do not practice the state religion – a bit like Islamic theocracies, really.
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Yes, I realise the Islam is a problem. However, banning it is not the solution. All that will happen is that it will go underground, as did Catholicism in England. Did it go away? Did it buggery. All that will happen is that Angola will find itself creating a festering underground movement seething with resentment and seeing in the government’s actions the very reason for their paranoia and justification for their hatred of the kuffir.
All of which, while a purely practical objection, is by the by. The principle is wrong. It will always be wrong. Either you believe in liberty or you don’t Simple as…
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
I really shouldn’t have to remind people of that point, but it seems it is necessary…
Yes, absolutely, Muslims are entitled to live their lives by their own principles, so long as they respect the law of the land and don’t try to force their principles on others.
But I can’t say I’m too keen to leap to the barricades to defend the civil liberties of people who won’t defend mine.
That’s the test, though, isn’t it?
‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,’ – Evelyn Hall (not Voltaire), although she wrote it summing up Voltaire’s attitude, and the quote is generally but erroneously attributed to him.
It is difficult though, to feel easy defending freedom of speech/belief in others when those ideas/beliefs are calling for your own destruction or subjugation. Logic and common sense tells me that a line must be drawn somewhere, but exactly where is of course, subjective not objective.
An independent Black African state proscribing Islam? How fortunate I’m not a Guardian reader:- I wouldn’t know whether to celebrate or weep…
Did you know Italy does not recognise Islam as a religion?
Today there are approximately 1,500,000 Muslims and an estimated 500 mosques in Italy, but the religion is not recognised by the law.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/08/italy-islam-not-recognized-as-a-religion-denied-religious-tax-status.html
I agree with you. I will stand and fight for the rights and liberties of those who would defend mine, but as the Muslims continually try to remove my freedom of expression in my own country then I have a problem, especially as these are the very people who throw racism in my face and would have everyone believe I am a racist just because I won’t kowtow to their demonic 6th century barbarism.
For me to defend their civil liberties would be hypocritical and a double standard, I detest double standards and hypocrisy so for me to defend them would be hypocritical in the extreme and I am no hypocrite.
Anyway their gaff their rules!
After all if the muslims in Angola don’t like it that can always do what all the others do, move somewhere where they can practice their barbarism maybe we should send them tickets here so they can be free and join their compatriots in removing our civil liberties ?
In a sensible world/country, NO religion would be recognised by law. Religion is a private matter for the individuals wishing to partake but deserves no special protection (or oppression) by the lawmakers except for the general protections of freedom of speech/thought which ought to apply to anything, not just religion.
I have a similar view of marriage – if people wish to make contracts between each other then fair enough (and those contracts would have the weight of civil law). However it is no business of the government to encourage, sanction or licence this activity – nor is it their business to offer financial incentives for people who make such arrangements.
I’m perfectly happy with a state not recognising a religion. The state has no business recognising any religion. It is not the place of the state to interfere in personal belief – or lack thereof. The only role the state has any business taking is to ensure that people can practice without fear or favour. It is the latter that has been the root of our problems with Islam. The cowering dhimmitude, the constant refrain that we must respect peoples religious beliefs whereas in reality, we should mock them.
If the state kept itself out of our business and stopped passing law after law, and allowed us to mock, ridicule and generally cause as much offence as we choose and allowed businesses to discriminate according to their conscience, Islam would get the message loud and clear that it is not special and that while we tolerate people practising whatever absurd religion they please, we don’t respect it, and they do not get to impose it on the rest of us. A bit of backbone early on would have saved us a great deal of grief.
What we do not do, is ban things – least of all a belief. You can’t. It is not possible and it is not the place of the state to do so anyway.
But aren’t we back to ‘their gaff, their rules’, just on a grand scale?
There should be freedom of religion. But I would prefer that all of it was not state sanctioned, given ‘charity’ status and the mentally ill were not given rights that trumped those of non-believers capable of rational thought. Then we can all get along can’t we?
A country is not a gaff, a pub, shop or house is a gaff, i.e. private property where the owner decides the rules and anyone entering said gaff should obey the rules or not enter.
People do not choose to be born in a country and governments do not own the country they govern whatever the level of democracy. Even if a majority votes for measures that discriminate against a minority, that does not make the measures right, that is just a tyranny of the majority. As long as individuals do not interfere with the rights of others they should be free to do whatever they please.
PedoMo’s medieval cult is an interesting case as it could be argued that it seeks to deny the freedom of others and as such should be banned from propagating its evil, ignorant agenda (I nearly typed philosophy but would not like to imply that there is anything remotely intelligent about believing in Islam). It could also be argued that it promotes a crime, i.e. pedophilia.
I’m inclined to feel that if the ignorant confine themselves to nutting the floor, wiping their arse with their left hand and wearing silly clothes then they should be left alone, but their sensitivities about people belittling their pathetic cult should not be entertained in anyway. Equally, they should not be allowed to infringe on the rights of others, e.g. in addition to not blowing others up, they should not be allowed to dictate what others eat, say, think, etc.
I was going to say exactly this. You beat me to it, so I won’t.
It is easy to be a libertarian when everyone else is. It is easy to be a democrat when everyone else is. It is easy to be a pacifist when everyone else is. It is easy to advocate religious freedom when everyone else does.
What do you do when you are up against a people that don’t believe any of the above?
While you have the chance you could try ridicule but when your political leaders erect legal barriers that isn’t possible. You could try telling the truth loudly but again we have politicians who swear black is white so what chance is there of that? (I have in mind the PM showing his ignorance of Islam AND the indigenous people of these islands when he implies that the former has no wish to kill and the later might have following the killing of Lee Rigby. Also Muslims have openly asserted, without challenge, on Radio 4 that death is the mandatory punishment for apostasy. We SHOULD be in an ideological war but that is a no-no, “Islam is one of the GREAT religions and should be respected” etc.).
My response to Kath earlier on pretty much covers this one, too.
Unfortunately the whole raison d’etre for western civilisation and it’s tolerance, cohesiveness, compassion and ultimately it’s understanding of Justice and systems of law lies in the Christian religion, the Rennaisance, Industrial revoloution, progress of science ( despite Galileo ) is because of the underlying theology written and explored over the period of it’s existence. Islam is like a molecular acid which completely destroys the fabric of western societies. Islam is non negotiable, you WILL submit, any concession is seen as a weakness, any attempt to explain a different point of view is laughed at and any acquiescence to western societies norms is to father it’s destruction; until people wake up to the fact that Islam will happily destroy anything that resists it’s ethos and is prepared to reply in terms at least as forceful then these same people will be forced to submit or be killed. It is as simple and as blunt as that, therefore Angola is only trying to stop what it sees as the destruction of it’s society, I find it perturbing that people opine about liberty but do not know why, where or how their concept of freedom came from.
I understand perfectly where it came from and I understand perfectly why we should be uncompromising in its defence. You do not defend liberty by taking away someone’s liberty. it doesn’t work like that. Banning an ideology does not make it go away and when we ban an ideology, we are as bad as that which we are fighting.
Being strong in the face of a scourge such as Islam does not mean compromising our principles or we have no principles to defend and deserve all we get.
Subsequent stories are suggesting that the Angolan position is similar to that of Italy – it is not recognising Islam. Also, it would seem that the mosques that were destroyed did not have planning permission… So,perhaps Angola isn’t seeking to defend it society against Islam after all… If these reports are more accurate than the earlier ones, I’m relaxed. I see no reason why a religion should be recognised by the state.
One problem in many is the difference of perspective and I am very aware of how different my understanding of freedom, gleaned through my education and Christian upbringing is very different to that of someone bought up under any of the Islamic sects, let alone a violent one; having spoken to Turkish Muslims in Turkey about 12 years ago the concensus was that they were very glad they lived under a benign regime and shuddered at the thought of life under a much stricter one, however they still could not conceive freedom as I do; as a Muslim what is banned is banned and there is no exceptions for Muslims of Kuffirs alike; It is no good trying to debate a concept with a person or peoples who have no wish to understand your point of view and who’s beliefs only allow you to exist IF you support their lifestyle without complaint. Islam will subjugate the west if steps are not taken to contain or terminate it’s spread, that is one of it’s central tenets, to apply liberal thinking to try to come to terms with an ethos that will never respond to another way of thinking is only going to end very badly for the liberally minded, It is one thing to take a flu jab to avert a dose, quite another to take Cyanide to cure it.
I don’t support their lifestyle and I don’t do it without complaint. What I am saying is that the state has no business involving itself in religion as that is a personal and private matter. Providing Muslims practice without making any attempt to impose their religious beliefs on others, then they should be free to do so. The moment they cross that line, the moment they seek to have people censured for “causing offence” or insulting their prophet or whatever – then they get slapped down good and hard. It is that part of it that our politicians have failed to observe and given these bastards the foothold they need. We have been badly let down as a consequence.
Utter bollocks.
Unfortunately the whole raison d’etre for western civilisation and it’s tolerance, cohesiveness, compassion and ultimately it’s understanding of Justice and systems of law lies in the Christian religion,…
Beziers, Magdeburg, Inquisition, witch-burnings, Huguenot flight … etc …. the compassion of christianity.
Like I said.
Bollocks.
It’s a religion & they all kill & blackmail
You appear to be struggling with the concept of the term raison d’etre and the actions of a religions followers.