This Country is a Joke

[Snods Shinpad 2]

I hate to disrupt the flow of the argument with a few facts, but I thought this may be of interest:

Home Office: Rules for asylum

If you are homeless or without money to buy food (we call this 'destitute') you may qualify for housing provided by us. If you do, we will give you somewhere to live in a place where suitable housing is available. You will not be able to choose where this is. We will provide transport to take you there.

We provide housing in the following regions of the United Kingdom:
north west;
midlands;
north east;
Wales; and
Scotland.

We will not provide housing in London.

[BobG]

You could easily be right about the motives of any single individual Mr Frost. Of course that's a real possibility. But to generalise from one particular incident is a dangerous game. Yes. There are cheats and slackers. But then, there are home grown cheats and slackers too. If we acept that some asylum seekers are on the lookout for a good time at our expense, you cannot avoid also concluding that it is also entirely logical that some asylum seekers are good guys, doing their best under difficult circumstances. As I have suggested above, some, (I'd think quite a lot, though without evidence ) of those guys do end up doing positive good for this country. You won't see that good in one year or even 10 years. But I remember the Ugandan Asians being thrown out by Idi Amin. Many, many of them came here - totally penniless. Yet today they employ hundreds and hundreds of thousands of British people. They pay vast amounts of tax. They  contribute to the life of this country. You sow a little seed corn - and then you help it grow. Imagine, if we'd barred immigrants, Winston Churchill would not have been born. Immigration has its drawbacks, of course it does, but no immigration has bigger ones.

One final thought: I don't have any figures to hand, but have a guess at which country in the world has given other countries more immigrants than any other? I think it's us. If you ban immigration, are you going to ban emigration as well?

Cheers

BobG

[MrFrost]

Bob, I never suggested banning immigration, and I am fully aware that there are also home grown cheats. I know a few personally.
I'm all for a diverse nation, but at the same time keeping our culture, freedom and way of life. Its getting the balance right.
For example, some towns and cities are over run by immigrants and foriegners. I'll use Luton as an example. You can understand why there is such a frustration, and in some cases racial hatred. It can be quite intimidating walking down the street, and finding yourself surrounded by muslims for example.
I believe the influx of immigrants over the last 10-15 years has happened too quickly, and we haven't been able to mix and learn how to live together as a whole.

Its a very touchy subject, and for one there is no real solution.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Remind me again, cos I forget easily. I've asked this one a dozen times but I can never remember any of the multitude of well thought-out answers:

What IS \"our culture\" exactly?

[Barmby Rover]

Snods Shinpad 2 wrote:

I hate to disrupt the flow of the argument with a few facts, but I thought this may be of interest:

Home Office: Rules for asylum

If you are homeless or without money to buy food (we call this 'destitute') you may qualify for housing provided by us. If you do, we will give you somewhere to live in a place where suitable housing is available. You will not be able to choose where this is. We will provide transport to take you there.

We provide housing in the following regions of the United Kingdom:
north west;
midlands;
north east;
Wales; and
Scotland.

We will not provide housing in London.

No answer to this Mr.Frost, but then why let facts get in the way of a good story eh? Maybe you work for the Daily Mail.

[MrFrost]

So you are seriously suggesting this family have not been given a house in London. Oh dear you really are deluded.
And if you really need our culture explaining then you must be a bit simple. But anyway here are a few pointers.
Our language
The festivals we celebrate
Our history
Our heritage
Our freedom and democracy

Or perhaps we should forget it all in favour of something such as Sharia law.

[Muttley]

Our language - a bas**rdisation of Latin, Greek, Saxon, Norse etc

The festivals we celebrate - like Christmas, in celebration of a bloke who may, or may not, have been born 2000 years ago in the Middle East (and the dates of which the Romans apparently moved to coincide with existing pagan cermonies) and popularised by the German Royal family or Mother's Day - invented by the American greeting card industry, or St Valentine's Day named after a Roman Christian martyr...or are you talking about Glastonbury, Reading, Leeds etc  

Our history - see above, this island has been invaded and conquered many times over the years, each time changing the culture, language, festivals etc a little bit to result in what we have now...and it will keep on changing as new influences arrive, whether that is as immigrants from other parts of the world or films and music from America etc

Our heritage - like that castle at Conisbrough that the Normans built, or the nice German family that live at Buckingham palace?

Our freedom and democracy - agreed!

[eastender]

It looks like there on there way out as the red tops get on their case.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/144140/BENEFITS-FAMILY-EVICTED/

[not on facebook]

dont forget what happens today plays a massive part in the
english/british culture

going to the football,rugby,horse racing or fishing

music creation bands songs etc etc

sunday dinner

the local pub....albeit thats on its arse

fish and chips and now curry

i could go on but culture is just as much in the past as the present.

in 40 years time 1 in 5 of the uk population will be from ethnic origin...source was sky news today.... that is a tad worrying for all the wrong reasons.

what worrys me the most is not 40 years time but 100years time as to what state will the uk be in now?

ok i will be 6ft under but me kids kids will be in their prime.

with all the influx of some many different ethnic origins wrong or right down the line the whole culture way of living of the uk will be diluted down and not be able to be brought back to the extent that the ethnics will not see the uk as such a atractive place/heaven

[Glyn_Wigley]

MrFrost wrote:

And if you really need our culture explaining then you must be a bit simple. But anyway here are a few pointers.
Our language
The festivals we celebrate
Our history
Our heritage
Our freedom and democracy

And if you think any one of those are 'under threat' from immigrants, you are extremely simple.

C'mon, examples. I bet they're tabloid scare stories that people are stupid enough to believe.

And I'll tell you a bigger threat to all those elements of our culture, and it's absolutely nothing to do with immigration. I won't tell you now, I'll let you try to work it out.

[German Rover]

eastender wrote:

It looks like there on there way out as the red tops get on their case.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/144140/BENEFITS-FAMILY-EVICTED/

So the kids are going to be evicted and probably have to leave the good school they now attend, but this is alright as the right wing press can claim they are fighting for british culture, makes me ashamed to be english

[MrFrost]

German Rover wrote:

eastender wrote:

It looks like there on there way out as the red tops get on their case.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/144140/BENEFITS-FAMILY-EVICTED/

So the kids are going to be evicted and probably have to leave the good school they now attend, but this is alright as the right wing press can claim they are fighting for british culture, makes me ashamed to be english

Why should they be put up in a posh school? What was wrong with their last school. The fact that they had to catch the bus to get there.

Regarding the previous post that our culture wont change in the future, I'll ask you to consider this scenario:

I know a lass pretty well who started seeing a Muslim chap. She is a white English girl. She ended up getting pregnant and having a little boy. Now, he is absolutely terrified of telling his parents as they are strict muslims, and obviously this goes against their religion. He has decided he wont tell his folks and try and keep the kid a secret forever.
Now in a land where freedom and democracy is part of our culture, how is this right. This muslim lad has no freedom. He is bound by a set of rules that sets out what he can and cant do. In my opinion, there is no room for this way of life in our country.
The lad has been brought up in a Western world, and God knows what his parents would do if they found out. Would they turn the other cheek, I very much doubt it. But what do they expect? What do people expect to happen living in a Western country. This isn't a dig at Muslims, but it highlights the problems we face of living in society together with such vastly different beliefs and ways of life. It is naive to think we can live together in perfect harmony.
I notice today that France have voted to ban the full face veil. Interesting.

[Snods Shinpad 2]

Muttley wrote:

Our freedom and democracy - agreed!

The Ancient Greeks were responsible for these ideals. I think that probably covers everything.

[Glyn_Wigley]

MrFrost wrote:
I notice today that France have voted to ban the full face veil. Interesting.[/quote]

I hope they all start wearing halloween masks or crash helmets instead just to show what a stupid f**king law it is.

Do you support France removing the freedom to wear what you want?

[BillyStubbsTears]

MrFrost wrote:

So you are seriously suggesting this family have not been given a house in London. Oh dear you really are deluded.
And if you really need our culture explaining then you must be a bit simple. But anyway here are a few pointers.
Our language
The festivals we celebrate
Our history
Our heritage
Our freedom and democracy.

Still a bit hazy for me old chap. Would you mind awfully expanding on what you mean by \"heritage\"?

Or just what exactly you mean by \"our\" history? Are you suggesting that we are some sort of monolithic people with a single, all-encompassing history? Only, half my family are Irish Catholics (immigrants - dirty uneducated scum who came over here, took our Jobs and houses, bred like mice etc...) See, to them, (and by extension, to me) Oliver Cromwell's annexation of Ireland, the Battle of the Boyne, the potato famine and the Easter Rising were vital parts of history. But I suspect the typical Englishman (tell me if you find one by the way) wouldn't give two shits about any of those historical  events. To my family, \"heritage\" was more about St Patrick than Henry VIII. The Pope was more important than the Queen.

So, I'm guessing that MY history and heritage, my culture if you wish, is different from YOURS.

My kids' will be different again, given their Italian mother.

Which us PRECISELY the point. Culture is not a static, monolithic, permanent concept. It evolves. Oslo mentioned music, presumably pop/rock music. Deeply connected to Afro-Carribean immigrants and influences.  He mentioned curry, which hardly needs expanding on. Both of these deeply embedded parts of our \"culture\" would have been bewildering to someone from 1950. Because culture changes. It will change over the next half century and our kids and theirs will be as happy with it as we are today. Alternatively, if any of us are still alive, we will feel as put of place as a 90 year old today would, having a Vindaloo after a rave or seeing explicit sex on the Internet.

Culture changes. Just like language does by the way.   Wicked innit?

[MrFrost]

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

So you are seriously suggesting this family have not been given a house in London. Oh dear you really are deluded.
And if you really need our culture explaining then you must be a bit simple. But anyway here are a few pointers.
Our language
The festivals we celebrate
Our history
Our heritage
Our freedom and democracy.

Still a bit hazy for me old chap. Would you mind awfully expanding on what you mean by \"heritage\"?

Or just what exactly you mean by \"our\" history? Are you suggesting that we are some sort of monolithic people with a single, all-encompassing history? Only, half my family are Irish Catholics (immigrants - dirty uneducated scum who came over here, took our Jobs and houses, bred like mice etc...) See, to them, (and by extension, to me) Oliver Cromwell's annexation of Ireland, the Battle of the Boyne, the potato famine and the Easter Rising were vital parts of history. But I suspect the typical Englishman (tell me if you find one by the way) wouldn't give two shits about any of those historical  events. Their \"heritage\" was more about St Patrick than Henry VIII. The Pope was more important than the Queen.

So, I'm guessing that MY history and heritage, my culture if you wish, is different from YOURS.

My kids' will be different again, given their Italian mother.

Which us PRECISELY the point. Culture is not a static, monolithic, permanent concept. It evolves. Oslo mentioned music, presumably pop/rock music. Deeply connected to Afro-Carribean immigrants and influences.  He mentioned curry, which hardly needs expanding on. Both of these deeply embedded parts of our \"culture\" would have been bewildering to someone from 1950. Because culture changes. It will change over the next half century and our kids and theirs will be as happy with it as we are today. Alternatively, if any of us are still alive, we will feel as put of place as a 90 year old today would, having a Vindaloo after a rave or seeing explicit sex on the Internet.

Culture changes. Great innit?

So going back to my example a few posts above. What is your take on that scenario? Some Muslim groups are pushing for Sharia law to be recognised in the UK. Would you embrace that change?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Me personally? No I wouldn't. That's becuase I am strongly anti-religious and I believe that ALL religions have a corrosive and illiberal effect on society.

By the same token, I would kick all the (Church of England) bishops out of Parliament, rescind the bigotted legislation that debars anyone who is a Catholic from becoming Monarch and close all religious schools in the country. I also detest the bigotry of the Catholic church that has spent much of its existence doing its damnedest to keep its flock subjugated, terrified and ignorant. I detest the Little Englander attitude of the Church of England that spurred on the jingoism that sent the thick end of a million Britons off to die on the Western Front in 1914-18. And I despise the petty bigotry of so many CofE'ers today with their disgust over female and gay clergy.

Which, by way of example, shows that there are many, many ways in which religion has (what I consider to be) a deeply negative influence on society. So why just highlight Sharia?

[MrFrost]

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

Me personally? No I wouldn't. That's becuase I am strongly anti-religious and I believe that ALL religions have a corrosive and illiberal effect on society.

By the same token, I would kick all the (Church of England) bishops out of Parliament, rescind the bigotted legislation that debars anyone who is a Catholic from becoming Monarch and close all religious schools in the country. I also detest the bigotry of the Catholic church that has spent much of its existence doing its damnedest to keep its flock subjugated, terrified and ignorant. I detest the Little Englander attitude of the Church of England that spurred on the jingoism that sent the thick end of a million Britons off to die on the Western Front in 1914-18. And I despise the petty bigotry of so many CofE'ers today with their disgust over female and gay clergy.

Which, by way of example, shows that there are many, many ways in which religion has (what I consider to be) a deeply negative influence on society. So why just highlight Sharia?

So in your perfect society, there would be no place for religion? Surely that would effect our democracy?

[Glyn_Wigley]

MrFrost wrote:

Some Muslim groups are pushing for Sharia law to be recognised in the UK. Would you embrace that change?

Usual deliberate twisting of what is being proposed. Some Muslim groups are calling for Sharia Courts to be recognised. These would rule in civil disputes (not criminal cases) in cases where all parties agree to be bound by the decision of the Sharia Court. They would not be compulsory in any shape or form, but for the rulings to also have any standing in the rest of the legal system, the court would have to be recognised as part of that system, albeit outwith of it.

Given that the alternative is for these cases to take up time in Magistrates and Small Claims Courts at the taxpayer's expense, I'd have thought you'd have been all in favour of Sharia Courts lifting the burden of cases from the existing court structure. I certainly would.

But no doubt you've not looked any further than the word 'Sharia' and decided it would be a bad thing.

[MrFrost]

Glyn_Wigley wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

Some Muslim groups are pushing for Sharia law to be recognised in the UK. Would you embrace that change?

Usual deliberate twisting of what is being proposed. Some Muslim groups are calling for Sharia Courts to be recognised. These would rule in civil disputes (not criminal cases) in cases where all parties agree to be bound by the decision of the Sharia Court. They would not be compulsory in any shape or form, but for the rulings to also have any standing in the rest of the legal system, the court would have to be recognised as part of that system, albeit outwith of it.

Given that the alternative is for these cases to take up time in Magistrates and Small Claims Courts at the taxpayer's expense, I'd have thought you'd have been all in favour of Sharia Courts lifting the burden of cases from the existing court structure. I certainly would.

But no doubt you've not looked any further than the word 'Sharia' and decided it would be a bad thing.

Sharia courts have been recognised for civcl matters since 2008, if you actually bothered reading up on it.
Certain groups are calling for full Sharia law to be introduced, and that is a fact. Read up on Islam4UK. No doubt you'll spout some pearls of wisdom that defend extremists like them also. I think you are just picking at things for the sake of an argument, pal.

[BillyStubbsTears]

MrFrost wrote:

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

Me personally? No I wouldn't. That's becuase I am strongly anti-religious and I believe that ALL religions have a corrosive and illiberal effect on society.

By the same token, I would kick all the (Church of England) bishops out of Parliament, rescind the bigotted legislation that debars anyone who is a Catholic from becoming Monarch and close all religious schools in the country. I also detest the bigotry of the Catholic church that has spent much of its existence doing its damnedest to keep its flock subjugated, terrified and ignorant. I detest the Little Englander attitude of the Church of England that spurred on the jingoism that sent the thick end of a million Britons off to die on the Western Front in 1914-18. And I despise the petty bigotry of so many CofE'ers today with their disgust over female and gay clergy.

Which, by way of example, shows that there are many, many ways in which religion has (what I consider to be) a deeply negative influence on society. So why just highlight Sharia?

So in your perfect society, there would be no place for religion? Surely that would effect our democracy?

In a debate, mate, you need to answer the odd question before asking other, tangential-to-irrelevant ones.

I asked you a while back for some more clarification on precisely what you meant by the vague terms \"our culture\" \"our history\" and \"our heritage\". See, since you seem to believe that these are under threat by the invading hordes, it would help if you defined them, so that we could have a serious discussion. If you can't put your finger on exactly what they are, and what their timeless, eternal, unchanging qualities are, then you really don't need to worry about them being destroyed, because they probably never existed in the first place.

[MrFrost]

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

Me personally? No I wouldn't. That's becuase I am strongly anti-religious and I believe that ALL religions have a corrosive and illiberal effect on society.

By the same token, I would kick all the (Church of England) bishops out of Parliament, rescind the bigotted legislation that debars anyone who is a Catholic from becoming Monarch and close all religious schools in the country. I also detest the bigotry of the Catholic church that has spent much of its existence doing its damnedest to keep its flock subjugated, terrified and ignorant. I detest the Little Englander attitude of the Church of England that spurred on the jingoism that sent the thick end of a million Britons off to die on the Western Front in 1914-18. And I despise the petty bigotry of so many CofE'ers today with their disgust over female and gay clergy.

Which, by way of example, shows that there are many, many ways in which religion has (what I consider to be) a deeply negative influence on society. So why just highlight Sharia?

So in your perfect society, there would be no place for religion? Surely that would effect our democracy?

In a debate, mate, you need to answer the odd question before asking other, tangential-to-irrelevant ones.

I asked you a while back for some more clarification on precisely what you meant by the vague terms \"our culture\" \"our history\" and \"our heritage\". See, since you seem to believe that these are under threat by the invading hordes, it would help if you defined them, so that we could have a serious discussion. If you can't put your finger on exactly what they are, and what their timeless, eternal, unchanging qualities are, then you really don't need to worry about them being destroyed, because they probably never existed in the first place.

I can answer a question with a question.
Are you suggesting our country has no culture, history or heritage? Thats what it sounds like to me. By suggesting what you are, then we haven't, and none of us can claim to be completely British either, if we look back far enough.
But, that isn't the point here.
My originaly point was the problems created by mass immigration and asylum, different cultures that do not mix, as highlighted in my example.
To start nit picking at things that happened hundreds of years ago that have made our country what it is today, is simply shying away from the problems that now exist.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Our 'culture' is under more threat from Americanisms than any danger posed by immigraton. And they ain't even moving to this country.

[Glyn_Wigley]

MrFrost wrote:

Glyn_Wigley wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

Some Muslim groups are pushing for Sharia law to be recognised in the UK. Would you embrace that change?

Usual deliberate twisting of what is being proposed. Some Muslim groups are calling for Sharia Courts to be recognised. These would rule in civil disputes (not criminal cases) in cases where all parties agree to be bound by the decision of the Sharia Court. They would not be compulsory in any shape or form, but for the rulings to also have any standing in the rest of the legal system, the court would have to be recognised as part of that system, albeit outwith of it.

Given that the alternative is for these cases to take up time in Magistrates and Small Claims Courts at the taxpayer's expense, I'd have thought you'd have been all in favour of Sharia Courts lifting the burden of cases from the existing court structure. I certainly would.

But no doubt you've not looked any further than the word 'Sharia' and decided it would be a bad thing.

Sharia courts have been recognised for civcl matters since 2008, if you actually bothered reading up on it.
Certain groups are calling for full Sharia law to be introduced, and that is a fact. Read up on Islam4UK. No doubt you'll spout some pearls of wisdom that defend extremists like them also. I think you are just picking at things for the sake of an argument, pal.

I thought you were talking about the proposal backed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, where he got the usual kicking from the right-wing rags for even considering it.

Perhaps you should have elucidated a bit more. All sorts  of people call for all sorts of crackpot crap, hard to know which bunch of loonies your talking about if you don't say.

[MrFrost]

Glyn_Wigley wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

Glyn_Wigley wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

Some Muslim groups are pushing for Sharia law to be recognised in the UK. Would you embrace that change?

Usual deliberate twisting of what is being proposed. Some Muslim groups are calling for Sharia Courts to be recognised. These would rule in civil disputes (not criminal cases) in cases where all parties agree to be bound by the decision of the Sharia Court. They would not be compulsory in any shape or form, but for the rulings to also have any standing in the rest of the legal system, the court would have to be recognised as part of that system, albeit outwith of it.

Given that the alternative is for these cases to take up time in Magistrates and Small Claims Courts at the taxpayer's expense, I'd have thought you'd have been all in favour of Sharia Courts lifting the burden of cases from the existing court structure. I certainly would.

But no doubt you've not looked any further than the word 'Sharia' and decided it would be a bad thing.

Sharia courts have been recognised for civcl matters since 2008, if you actually bothered reading up on it.
Certain groups are calling for full Sharia law to be introduced, and that is a fact. Read up on Islam4UK. No doubt you'll spout some pearls of wisdom that defend extremists like them also. I think you are just picking at things for the sake of an argument, pal.

I thought you were talking about the proposal backed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, where he got the usual kicking from the right-wing rags for even considering it.

Perhaps you should have elucidated a bit more. All sorts  of people call for all sorts of crackpot crap, hard to know which bunch of loonies your talking about if you don't say.

I just did  

[BillyStubbsTears]

MrFrost wrote:

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

Me personally? No I wouldn't. That's becuase I am strongly anti-religious and I believe that ALL religions have a corrosive and illiberal effect on society.

By the same token, I would kick all the (Church of England) bishops out of Parliament, rescind the bigotted legislation that debars anyone who is a Catholic from becoming Monarch and close all religious schools in the country. I also detest the bigotry of the Catholic church that has spent much of its existence doing its damnedest to keep its flock subjugated, terrified and ignorant. I detest the Little Englander attitude of the Church of England that spurred on the jingoism that sent the thick end of a million Britons off to die on the Western Front in 1914-18. And I despise the petty bigotry of so many CofE'ers today with their disgust over female and gay clergy.

Which, by way of example, shows that there are many, many ways in which religion has (what I consider to be) a deeply negative influence on society. So why just highlight Sharia?

So in your perfect society, there would be no place for religion? Surely that would effect our democracy?

In a debate, mate, you need to answer the odd question before asking other, tangential-to-irrelevant ones.

I asked you a while back for some more clarification on precisely what you meant by the vague terms \"our culture\" \"our history\" and \"our heritage\". See, since you seem to believe that these are under threat by the invading hordes, it would help if you defined them, so that we could have a serious discussion. If you can't put your finger on exactly what they are, and what their timeless, eternal, unchanging qualities are, then you really don't need to worry about them being destroyed, because they probably never existed in the first place.

I can answer a question with a question.
Are you suggesting our country has no culture, history or heritage? Thats what it sounds like to me. By suggesting what you are, then we haven't, and none of us can claim to be completely British either, if we look back far enough.
But, that isn't the point here.
My originaly point was the problems created by mass immigration and asylum, different cultures that do not mix, as highlighted in my example.
To start nit picking at things that happened hundreds of years ago that have made our country what it is today, is simply shying away from the problems that now exist.

Of course I'm not saying that we have NO culture, history or heritage. Quite the reverse. I'm saying that we have as many as there are people in the country. Every single person has a different take. That's why serious historians no longer write books entitled \"THE History of Britain\" for example - they write ones called \"A History of Britain\". Because they know that it is arrogance of the highest order to claim that their own perspective is the correct one. Would Arthur Scragill's History of the 1980s be the same as Maggie Thatcher's? Would Ken Richardson's \"History of DRFC\" be the same as John Ryan's?

I'm quite certain that our \"culture\" will change as a result of immigration. It alread has, on a pretty much constant basis throughout our history. Where I differ from you is in my confidence in the strength of us as a country and a people to absorb and change as a result. The immigrants will be changed by the process of becoming British. And, crucially, BRITAIN will also change as it absorbs them. And everything will turn out just fine in the long run.

Just like it did when we absorbed the Normans, the Jews, the Hugenots, the Irish, the Ugandan Asians and my Italian father in law. Have some faith in your country man!

And by the way, what are \"history\" and \"heritage\" if they are not the accumulation of things that  happened hundreds of years ago. YOU introduced those terms into the discussion, not me. If you are going to carelessly chuck these sorts of comments around, don;t be upset if other people take them to the logical conclusions.

[bobjimwilly]

I hate Americanisms. Don't event get me started on high school \"proms\".  :angry:

[MrFrost]

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

MrFrost wrote:

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

Me personally? No I wouldn't. That's becuase I am strongly anti-religious and I believe that ALL religions have a corrosive and illiberal effect on society.

By the same token, I would kick all the (Church of England) bishops out of Parliament, rescind the bigotted legislation that debars anyone who is a Catholic from becoming Monarch and close all religious schools in the country. I also detest the bigotry of the Catholic church that has spent much of its existence doing its damnedest to keep its flock subjugated, terrified and ignorant. I detest the Little Englander attitude of the Church of England that spurred on the jingoism that sent the thick end of a million Britons off to die on the Western Front in 1914-18. And I despise the petty bigotry of so many CofE'ers today with their disgust over female and gay clergy.

Which, by way of example, shows that there are many, many ways in which religion has (what I consider to be) a deeply negative influence on society. So why just highlight Sharia?

So in your perfect society, there would be no place for religion? Surely that would effect our democracy?

In a debate, mate, you need to answer the odd question before asking other, tangential-to-irrelevant ones.

I asked you a while back for some more clarification on precisely what you meant by the vague terms \"our culture\" \"our history\" and \"our heritage\". See, since you seem to believe that these are under threat by the invading hordes, it would help if you defined them, so that we could have a serious discussion. If you can't put your finger on exactly what they are, and what their timeless, eternal, unchanging qualities are, then you really don't need to worry about them being destroyed, because they probably never existed in the first place.

I can answer a question with a question.
Are you suggesting our country has no culture, history or heritage? Thats what it sounds like to me. By suggesting what you are, then we haven't, and none of us can claim to be completely British either, if we look back far enough.
But, that isn't the point here.
My originaly point was the problems created by mass immigration and asylum, different cultures that do not mix, as highlighted in my example.
To start nit picking at things that happened hundreds of years ago that have made our country what it is today, is simply shying away from the problems that now exist.

Of course I'm not saying that we have NO culture, history or heritage. Quite the reverse. I'm saying that we have as many as there are people in the country. Every single person has a different take. That's why serious historians no longer write books entitled \"THE History of Britain\" for example - they write ones called \"A History of Britain\". Because they know that it is arrogance of the highest order to claim that their own perspective is the correct one.

I'm quite certain that our \"culture\" will change as a result of immigration. It alread has, on a pretty much constant basis throughout our history. Where I differ from you is in my confidence in the strength of us as a country and a people to absorb and change as a result. The immigrants will be changed by the process of becoming British. And, crucially, BRITAIN will also change as it absorbs them. And everything will turn out just fine in the long run. Just like it did when we absorbed the Normans, the Jews, the Hugenots, the Irish, the Ugandan Asians etc. Have some faith in your country man!

And by the way, what are \"history\" and \"heritage\" if they are not the accumulation of things that  happened hundreds of years ago. YOU introduced those terms into the discussion, not me. If you are going to carelessly chuck these sorts of comments around, don;t be upset if other people take them to the logical conclusions.

Decent points.
Unfortunately, I have little confidence in our country at the moment, for a whole host of reasons, and I geuninely believe soon, events will come to a head.

What's your take BST on the scenario I spoke about earlier regarding the Muslim lad and his English girlfriend? I'd actually be interested in your opinion.

[BobG]

Listen Mr Frost, I do believe you have in you the makings of a reasonable debater, a reasonable speaker and a reasonable mouthpiece for whatever you choose to believe in. But really, you are going exactly nowhere until you take a time out to think hard about what form your argument should take, how you should put it forwards and what it is that actually does convince people. Clearly, you have failed in this debate. Not even the other right wing types on here are helping you out now. That alone should tell you quite a lot.

Be as controversial as you like. Be as forceful as you like. But for goodness sake, don't regurgitate newspaper headlines, don't avoid difficult questions and don't fall back on abuse when the going gets tough. Instead, write as if you actually have thought about the subject for 2 minutes. Thinking actually does impress people. odd I know. But true. No bugger likes being abused. No bugger likes being patronised (for which I apologise in advance as this is coming out as exactly that!) and no bugger likes being told to believe stuff which they can see with their own eyes is simply b*llocks. It loses you more support than you could ever imagine.

Cheers

BobG

[MrFrost]

BobG wrote:

Listen Mr Frost, I do believe you have in you the makings of a reasonable debater, a reasonable speaker and a reasonable mouthpiece for whatever you choose to believe in. But really, you are going exactly nowhere until you take a time out to think hard about what form your argument should take, how you should put it forwards and what it is that actually does convince people. Clearly, you have failed in this debate. Not even the other right wing types on here are helping you out now. That alone should tell you quite a lot.

Be as controversial as you like. Be as forceful as you like. But for goodness sake, don't regurgitate newspaper headlines, don't avoid difficult questions and don't fall back on abuse when the going gets tough. Instead, write as if you actually have thought about the subject for 2 minutes. Thinking actually does impress people. odd I know. But true. No bugger likes being abused. No bugger likes being patronised (for which I apologise in advance as this is coming out as exactly that!) and no bugger likes being told to believe stuff which they can see with their own eyes is simply b*llocks. It loses you more support than you could ever imagine.

Cheers

BobG

What have i told people that is b*llocks, could you please point that out to me.

What newspaper headlines have I refered to (apart from the original one that started the whole thread off).

I don't see any other \"right wing type's\" posting. Just the usual few who tend to always pick other people's point of views apart if it isn't to their liking.