http://www.amazon.co.uk/Teach-Yourself-Catholicism-Peter-Stanford/dp/034096880X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1393063621&sr=8-1&keywords=teach+yourself+catholicism
The history of Catholicism demonstrates perfectly why Islam is quite right to dispense with a corrupt priesthood.
The corrupt priesthood now are only interested in smelly bums on their rotten pews, not in in maintaining morality. Catholic priests are terrified of being accused of being paedo priests, and so will avoid discussing sexual morality like the plague. It is more than their job's worth to do more than perform their Catholic rituals when expected and required.
The history of Catholicism also demonstrates the fundamental error of denying that the truth of this proposition: that the difference between religion and politics is a distinction without a difference.
If religion is state ideology, then state ideology must be supported by legislation.
The religion of the West is not Christianity, as so many people mistakenly think. The religion of the West is PC Liberalism. This is so because government supports PC Liberalism and elevates this ideology as supreme over all other competing ideologies.
PC Liberalism is the opposite of patriarchal and the opposite of social conservatism.
It is obvious that to implement Islam we have to abide by its principles, and the only way to abide by its principles is to legislate according to Koranic principles. Why else do you think the Muslims are so keen on their Sharia law?
Sadly, it is a truth not universally acknowledged that the the only way of bringing back the patriarchy is to respect marriage, and this means invoking God and practising social conservatism.
If you refuse to invoke God or impose a theocracy, you would be relying on UKIP or the BNP to bring it back, and believe me, they are too morally-compromised and afraid of women to do anything like that.
Only last week Nigel Farage was boasting on Woman's Hour that UKIP has been taken over by women.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulhs7CghURw
As for the BNP, who is going to listen to a bunch of lower class CHAV bastards and sluts, even if they could bring themselves to support marriage? Nick Griffin will never raise the subject because he knows most BNP men are unmarriageable or do not want to get married and that most BNP mothers are SSMs. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379
No, the answer is a theocracy based on Koranic principles but without a priesthood ie Secular Koranism. A properly trained judiciary who are not required to be Muslim is enough to interpret and apply such laws.
Secular Koranism is a legal system and not a religion, and is in fact no different to living under a government whose every law you do not agree with. Not that different to what we do now, except that it will be socially conservative instead of PC Liberal.
If you find yourself objecting to this idea, then kindly let me know which verse you find most objectionable. At this point you will of course say that you cannot bring yourself to read that "filthy book" and that will be the end of this debate.
Understand this, right-wingers:
Your currently helplessness and impotence is directly related to indiscriminate suffrage in which women exercise a disproportionate influence.
Why are all the political parties chasing the female vote? Because they are mad, stupid and immoral, of course. The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible, as Oscar Wilde would say.
Why do Muslims refuse to integrate? Because they don't want their sisters, daughters, nieces and grand-daughters turning into White Dee. However much of an Islamophobe you are, can you really really really blame them?
Feminism causes immigration. Feminism is so filthy, stupid and rotten that it will allow in the very people with the religion that will destroy Feminism.
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/if-you-hate-gay-marriage-blame-83-of.html
83% of female MPs voted for gay marriage while only 48% of male MPs did. What does this mean for feminism?
 |
| by Peter Stanford and with an introduction by Cherie Blair! |
The history of Catholicism demonstrates perfectly why Islam is quite right to dispense with a corrupt priesthood.
The corrupt priesthood now are only interested in smelly bums on their rotten pews, not in in maintaining morality. Catholic priests are terrified of being accused of being paedo priests, and so will avoid discussing sexual morality like the plague. It is more than their job's worth to do more than perform their Catholic rituals when expected and required.
The history of Catholicism also demonstrates the fundamental error of denying that the truth of this proposition: that the difference between religion and politics is a distinction without a difference.
If religion is state ideology, then state ideology must be supported by legislation.
The religion of the West is not Christianity, as so many people mistakenly think. The religion of the West is PC Liberalism. This is so because government supports PC Liberalism and elevates this ideology as supreme over all other competing ideologies.
PC Liberalism is the opposite of patriarchal and the opposite of social conservatism.
It is obvious that to implement Islam we have to abide by its principles, and the only way to abide by its principles is to legislate according to Koranic principles. Why else do you think the Muslims are so keen on their Sharia law?
Sadly, it is a truth not universally acknowledged that the the only way of bringing back the patriarchy is to respect marriage, and this means invoking God and practising social conservatism.
If you refuse to invoke God or impose a theocracy, you would be relying on UKIP or the BNP to bring it back, and believe me, they are too morally-compromised and afraid of women to do anything like that.
Only last week Nigel Farage was boasting on Woman's Hour that UKIP has been taken over by women.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulhs7CghURw
As for the BNP, who is going to listen to a bunch of lower class CHAV bastards and sluts, even if they could bring themselves to support marriage? Nick Griffin will never raise the subject because he knows most BNP men are unmarriageable or do not want to get married and that most BNP mothers are SSMs. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379
No, the answer is a theocracy based on Koranic principles but without a priesthood ie Secular Koranism. A properly trained judiciary who are not required to be Muslim is enough to interpret and apply such laws.
Secular Koranism is a legal system and not a religion, and is in fact no different to living under a government whose every law you do not agree with. Not that different to what we do now, except that it will be socially conservative instead of PC Liberal.
If you find yourself objecting to this idea, then kindly let me know which verse you find most objectionable. At this point you will of course say that you cannot bring yourself to read that "filthy book" and that will be the end of this debate.
Understand this, right-wingers:
Your currently helplessness and impotence is directly related to indiscriminate suffrage in which women exercise a disproportionate influence.
Why are all the political parties chasing the female vote? Because they are mad, stupid and immoral, of course. The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible, as Oscar Wilde would say.
Why do Muslims refuse to integrate? Because they don't want their sisters, daughters, nieces and grand-daughters turning into White Dee. However much of an Islamophobe you are, can you really really really blame them?
Feminism causes immigration. Feminism is so filthy, stupid and rotten that it will allow in the very people with the religion that will destroy Feminism.
 |
| http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2565121/So-White-Dee-does-feel-poster-girl-thats-wrong-Britain.html |
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/if-you-hate-gay-marriage-blame-83-of.html
83% of female MPs voted for gay marriage while only 48% of male MPs did. What does this mean for feminism?
2 comments:
Excellent, thought-provoking piece. You really need to debate some of the Guardianista feminists head-to-head.
That would be nice, but members of the liberal media warn each other not to engage with me at all.
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/an-action-in-defamation-francis-wheen_10.html
Post a Comment