http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwznJfl7-qo

ShawnF – “I think that Jules141 has stated that he does support Christianity as he supports Multiculturalism. Jules141 sounds like a person I would like to hear more from. I would also like to know if he supports Richard Dawkins as a spokesman for Atheism or if he denies him. Dawkins is adament in his opposition of Christianity as a part of any society is he not?”

I would like to thank you for that first point, “supporting multiculturism over objecting against Christianity”. You’ve summed up my feelings better than I did. Richard Dawkins however, I’m not entirely sure about him. Whilst I very often agree with what he says, and very much like the way he says it, the idea of having some self-appointed atheist spokesperson, or atheist missionary seems wrong. Atheism isn’t something which needs to be preached, is there really any point in preaching it? You do not choose to become an atheist, you choose not to believe in god.

Richard Dawkins has lead people to believe that atheists are a group of like-minded people, a religion itself. When really there is only one requirement to become an atheist.

On the other hand, I don’t want to imagine a world without someone like him. Many people don’t understand that Richard Dawkins is speaking his opinion, and not every atheists opinion. This is Dawkin’s own fault.

I am glad he is here though, I sometimes get the impression he is sticking up for other atheists, whether they like it or not, more than he is preaching atheism.

rae – “JULES141 says he’s not…”self-indulgent enough to want heaven or even a reasonable after-life…” Darwin’s evolution negates mankinds link to a personal supernatural Creator thereby subjecting “believers” to baseless values which hold no promise, no hope. He says…”and I am not a coward, afraid of God, or afraid of being wrong, but standing up for the truth, which I believe is right.” You equate cowardism with belief in an Almighty Creator? How can there be any “truth” in your world where there is no basis for right and wrong since all is relativistic? Your “standing up for the truth, which I believe is right” holds no more water than do Muslim incrementalists who demand legitimacy for their “truths”.”

Truth … as I know it. We could go-on about the correct words and terms to use, but for now I will speak as simply as I can. I have no reason not to “believe” scientific theory. Or to “believe” that there is nothing to “believe” in. For lack of better word.

I will try to comment more later.

The blending of individual cultures under one nation’s social traditions and law is only possible when all agree to a common cohesive goal. Multiethnic, multifaceted,multidisciplinary, multidirectional…all aspects of a multilayered multimedia morass which challenges religious and civil practical beliefs worldwide.

JULES 141 says he would treat all religions equally…he’s not afraid of God, and trusts all scientific theory. Good grief!

Scientific theory is nihilism in a lab coat. Nihilism: 1. a doctrine that all values are baseless and that nothing is knowable or can be communicated. 2. Rejection of all distinctions in moral value, constituting a willingness to refute all previous theories of morality.

JULES141 says he’s not…”self-indulgent enough to want heaven or even a reasonable after-life…” Darwin’s evolution negates mankinds link to a personal supernatural Creator thereby subjecting “believers” to baseless values which hold no promise, no hope. He says…”and I am not a coward, afraid of God, or afraid of being wrong, but standing up for the truth, which I believe is right.” You equate cowardism with belief in an Almighty Creator? How can there be any “truth” in your world where there is no basis for right and wrong since all is relativistic? Your “standing up for the truth, which I believe is right” holds no more water than do Muslim incrementalists who demand legitimacy for their “truths”.

The philosophic theory that truth is an ethical relative to the individual or group that holds it, provides the atheist or religious with the same outcome.

Muslims believe they must convert all and die doing so for Allah. Christians believe God is well able to defend Himself and will bring an eternal judgment on all who reject His “escape plan”…Jesus’ atoning death and resurrection. Atheists believe there is nothing to believe in. There’s an oxymoron!! Nilpotency supreme.

Yet, in the land of the living, we must recognize our true enemy. Nations have a soul…it’s the soul of the people. If we negate our own worth, then we’re doomed now and in the hereafter.

Britons must believe they don’t deserve to flourish or else they’ve been drugged into submission by welfarism and a PC guilt over Britain’s colonial past. Forget the past misdemeanors and high crimes of ancient forbears. Modern Britons shouldn’t grant anyone perpetual victimhood and demands for reparation.

Americans continually flog themselves over black slavery. It’s poisonous sting still injects into every socio-political conversation and most of us are tired of it. Any race which wallows in it’s past persecution will fail to find it’s potential.

Muslims believe any land which they laid claim is forever part of “The house of Islam” and must be reclaimed. When did they ever claim Britain or America? It’s an Islamic dream and our nightmare.

Right now, I need to focus on supper. The brauts are in need of attention and so is tomorrow mornings sausauge-bisquit gravey.

“At the same time Chuck you are doing a pretty good job in supporting your ideas but it is exactly at the point where you are adding atheism to the mix that your arguments would benefit from a bit more elaboration.” — ShawnF

But I don’t think this is not the venue to address such an item.

I invite you to make this comment on the comments portion of the link I provided (above) to Jules141.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[As iron sharpens iron, so does one mind sharpen another. -- Paul (paraphrased)]

My heart tells me “yes”, just as I feel resonance even with the rhetoric that Infadel (sic) said. I want to find justification for these ideas or to have someone show me why they are not real. If I can get Jules141 to explain how this is nothing more than alarmism I will try to change my views as I am ready to assume that I have been misled by media hype. At the same time Chuck you are doing a pretty good job in supporting your ideas but it is exactly at the point where you are adding atheism to the mix that your arguments would benefit from a bit more elaboration.

If I have it correct what you were saying specifically about atheism
1. Atheism is a part of multiculturalism
2. Atheism does well in an environment that promotes different cultures
3. Atheism promotes different cultures
4. The Church of England is suffering a decline because of multiculturalism

I would have to agree with points 1, 2, 3, and 4. I do not see anything wrong with any of those statements. I would agree with point 4 from a simple basis that any ideology will do better without competition. On a side note I would like to point out that I am specifically referring to the Church of England in regards to competition. Personally I think that a christian organization would do better if it were better organized around concepts that resonated with its public as “true”. The Episcopal Church in the US has been suffering greatly from internal conflict and I can only assume that the drama is also carried into Britain. Internal conflict such as this will certainly spell doom in a competitive environment of ideals.

I think you are also suggesting that atheism is an aggressor against some ideologies and promotes others. This is not multiculturalism but rather it is an undeclared war. Multiculturalism would mean that Atheism would try to protect Christianity. I think that Jules141 has stated that he does support Christianity as he supports Multiculturalism. Jules141 sounds like a person I would like to hear more from. I would also like to know if he supports Richard Dawkins as a spokesman for Atheism or if he denies him. Dawkins is adament in his opposition of Christianity as a part of any society is he not?

ShawnF

“This is a “foot-in-the-door” situation and should be dealt with as such.” — Doubting David

I think it more apropos to use the Arab metaphor….

The camels nose in the tent.

And, as we’ve discussed above, the atheists are aiding and abetting their efforts. Probably something to do with a bad admixture of ennui and angst. Their ill conceived world is too boring and they crave excitement. Unfortunately, if they ‘win’ they’ll find they have traded a misidentified ‘enemy’ for a REAL one.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Reality encourages no looseness, pardons no errors. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson (paraphrased)]

Exactly.

Incremental chipping away at civil/secular society is a major prong of the plan to restore the ummah and is an intentional aspect of jihad. It’s true in Britain, it’s true in Canada, it’s true on the European continent, it’s true in Australia, it’s true in the United States.

I recall reading a few years ago of a radical Islamist relgious leader in Britain whose family’s main source of support was British welfare. He preached to members of his mosque that ruining the British financial system was part of their duty, as well. He was (is) doing his small bit to drain the coffers.

Osama bin laden is very big on bringing down “the west” financially. The Twin Towers were chosen as symbols of American capitalism.

Somewhere this is all laid out in a conscientious 12-Step (ok, maybe it’s 15-Step jihadist agenda. Seriously.