Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by siwelmail)
    Whenever I hear Islam I hear terrorism in my head echoing, that's not being racist, that's just looking at a trend

    Edit: Neg rep is fun!
    lol, that not looking at a trend; thats being brainwashed by the gutter journalism that surrounds us.

    ps. keep it real brother
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    If people feel happy because of their blind faith in a diety that is good for them
    Exactly, you said it yourself - it's good for them. For blind followers, both religion and consumerism are "opiates of the masses", indeed. That said, consumerism is an opitate with a huge amount of negative side effects, whilst I believe the "side effects" of religion are hugely beneficial.

    (Original post by Good bloke)
    I've got bad news for you. Those aspects of western society that you don't like are not going to change for the better (in your eyes). Not only that, but western society is going to become more secular as time goes by, and the chances of it becoming Islamic are slim to zero. If these things really are important to you you are going to have to think about moving to a Moslem country. I suggest that Saudi Arabia will put you closer to Mecca and Medina. At least you'll be able to find out at first hand whether or not living there is an improvement. Be sure and let us know, won't you?
    I've got bad news for you, you're completely wrong.

    "Muslim population 'rising 10 times faster than rest of society

    2004: 1,870,000

    2005: 2,017,000

    2006: 2,142,000

    2007: 2,327,000

    2008: 2,422,000 "

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5621482.ece

    (and I could quote a hundred other sources of the rising influence of Islam in the West). And if you don't like that, I suggest you and your secular buddies go live somewhere else.[

    QUOTE=ForeverIsMyName;30921652]So basically, religion is a disincentive to actually improve the place in which you live?[/QUOTE]

    I didn't say that at all, you've completely put those words in my mouth. Even if I did say such a thing, it would be untrue:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sc...ld-469452.html
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)

    "Muslim population 'rising 10 times faster than rest of society
    The days of unhindered immigration, engineered by the Labour party for reasons of political gain, are over. You'll find that the number of atheists and other non-religious people is rising faster than the number of Moslems, despite past high immigration and higher birth rates.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    Exactly, you said it yourself - it's good for them. For blind followers, both religion and consumerism are "opiates of the masses", indeed. That said, consumerism is an opitate with a huge amount of negative side effects, whilst I believe the "side effects" of religion are hugely beneficial.



    I've got bad news for you, you're completely wrong.

    "Muslim population 'rising 10 times faster than rest of society

    2004: 1,870,000

    2005: 2,017,000

    2006: 2,142,000

    2007: 2,327,000

    2008: 2,422,000 "

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5621482.ece

    (and I could quote a hundred other sources of the rising influence of Islam in the West). And if you don't like that, I suggest you and your secular buddies go live somewhere else.[

    QUOTE=ForeverIsMyName;30921652]So basically, religion is a disincentive to actually improve the place in which you live?
    I didn't say that at all, you've completely put those words in my mouth. Even if I did say such a thing, it would be untrue:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sc...ld-469452.html[/QUOTE]

    Then roll on the civil war, because I'd die before I'd allow the likes of you to impose your barbaric ways on my kids and family.
    You are an idiot if you believe that shari'ah is a better way of life.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    Exactly, you said it yourself - it's good for them. For blind followers, both religion and consumerism are "opiates of the masses", indeed. That said, consumerism is an opitate with a huge amount of negative side effects, whilst I believe the "side effects" of religion are hugely beneficial.


    Oh you're right. Religion has never had a bad side effect.

    *Cough*9/11, 7/7, millions of deaths in Iraq & Afghanistan, repressive regimes in Middle East, leading cause of terrorism, *cough*
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    The days of unhindered immigration, engineered by the Labour party for reasons of political gain, are over. You'll find that the number of atheists and other non-religious people is rising faster than the number of Moslems,
    despite past high immigration and higher birth rates.
    You're focussing on immigration. Even without immigration, it remains true.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU
    Few notable things..

    "In order for a culture to sustain itself, there must be a fertility rate of 2.11 children per family or higher. Historically, no culture has ever reversed a 1.9 fertility rate. England's fertility rate is 1.6. "


    Open your eyes. Where I live it's rare to see a non-Muslim family with more than 1 child. However I always see Muslim families walking around with about 6 or more children running around. You cannot deny that Muslim birth rates are higher than non-Muslim birthrates, therefore every hour, week, month, year that passes, Muslims make up a greater proportion of the UK society.

    The current population of atheists is irrelevant. Even if 90% of people in the UK suddenly called themselves atheist, and 10% called themselves Muslim, if the Muslim birthrate was higher than as time went on, they would increase their proportion of the population.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Oh you're right. Religion has never had a bad side effect.

    *Cough*9/11, 7/7, millions of deaths in Iraq & Afghanistan, repressive regimes in Middle East, leading cause of terrorism, *cough*
    How immature. I believe the effects are overwhelmingly positive.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    You cannot deny that Muslim birth rates are higher than non-Muslim birthrates
    For the time being. How long will that continue? It seems more likely that Moslems will become assimiliated into western scoiety to a large extent. Birth rates have fallen for every society as its wealth has risen, and recent immigrants and their offspring (which includes nearly all Moslems in Britain) will experience lower brithrates as they become wealthier and integrate into the society they have adopted.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    How immature. I believe the effects are overwhelmingly positive.
    But that is solely because you follow a religion. Looked at dispassionately from the outside religion can be seen to have caused wars in the past and certainly directly causes considerable suffering now. It is also a root cause of terrorism and is likely to cause more wars in the future.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    For the time being. How long will that continue? It seems more likely that Moslems will become assimiliated into western scoiety to a large extent. Birth rates have fallen for every society as its wealth has risen, and recent immigrants and their offspring (which includes nearly all Moslems in Britain) will experience lower brithrates as they become wealthier and integrate into the society they have adopted.
    Muslims can't simply "adopt" a society, due to the nature of Islam itself. Islam is a lifestyle as well as a religion. There may be some integration, yes, but the birth rate on average will still be overwhelmingy greater.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    But that is solely because you follow a religion. Looked at dispassionately from the outside religion can be seen to have caused wars in the past and certainly directly causes considerable suffering now. It is also a root cause of terrorism and is likely to cause more wars in the future.
    Wars and strife will always happen. 80% of the planet's population are theist, so obviously around 80% of the wars are going to be between theists.

    It's a correlation =! causation situation.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    How immature. I believe the effects are overwhelmingly positive.
    Really? Immature you say?

    Of course, to blame incidents that have their direct routes in religion on religion is immature :rolleyes: How silly of me.

    Grow up, take the good with the bad. I believe that religion although on a personal level may have a positive effect, it is overwhelmingly a bad force. It causes strife unlike that seen by any other direct cause. I mean, just look at the conflicts between Shia and Sunni Muslims.

    The not so distant conflicts between Protestants and Catholics in Northen Ireland. The multitude of clashes in the East that happen seemingly every day. Are you going to say these have nothing to do with religion?

    And also, I love how you seem to hold up Muslims high birth rate as a good thing. I wouldn't really be proud of a religion growing primarly through the irresponsible mass procreation of it's adherents.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    The current population of atheists is irrelevant. Even if 90% of people in the UK suddenly called themselves atheist, and 10% called themselves Muslim, if the Muslim birthrate was higher than as time went on, they would increase their proportion of the population.
    How can one disagree with logic like this... are you seriously suggesting that high muslim birth rates will continue indefinitely?

    The way I see it, this is an issue of development. A hundred or so years ago, Christians had high birth rates too - it is a tenet of literal Catholicism and Judaism that women must have as many children as possible. Indeed, my grandma was threated with being kicked out of her catholic church after she wanted to stop breeding after having six children after being told not to have any more children by a doctor. Much like how most religions have moved on from using religion as an excuse to have wars, oppress women and maintain a rigid social structure. It seems pretty inevitable that the Islamic world will follow (and indeed it seems to already be happening - try googling for some of the recent studies on Saudi youth - Saudi women spend more on make-up than any other nationality and Saudi men have become obsessed with Western videogames). Its a little fanciful to think that one part of the world and one part of British society is going to stay in a time-warp forever.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    How can one disagree with logic like this... are you seriously suggesting that high muslim birth rates will continue indefinitely?

    The way I see it, this is an issue of development. A hundred or so years ago, Christians had high birth rates too - it is a tenet of literal Catholicism and Judaism that women must have as many children as possible. Indeed, my grandma was threated with being kicked out of her catholic church after she wanted to stop breeding after having six children after being told not to have any more children by a doctor. Much like how most religions have moved on from using religion as an excuse to have wars, oppress women and maintain a rigid social structure. It seems pretty inevitable that the Islamic world will follow (and indeed it seems to already be happening - try googling for some of the recent studies on Saudi youth - Saudi women spend more on make-up than any other nationality and Saudi men have become obsessed with Western videogames). Its a little fanciful to think that one part of the world and one part of British society is going to stay in a time-warp forever.
    I am no expert on birth rates :rolleyes: all I can say is, birth rates right now are very high (relatively speaking). Let's say Muslim birth rates are 7, and non-Muslim birth rates are 1.4 (these are completely random, but possibly broadly true). Until that Muslim birth rate comes to equilibrium with the non-Muslim birth rate, Muslims will continue to increase in proportion. This is undeniable. Now, that figure of 7 is not simply going to drop to 1.4 overnight. It will take, I believe, hundreds of years. Easily enough time for the Muslim to become the vast majority.

    Also, don't forget that the current birth rate we have in this country of non-Muslims can be thought of as NEGATIVE. That is, anything below the figure of 2.11 children per woman leads to NEGATIVE population growth amongst a community. This can only exemplify the situation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    I am no expert on birth rates :rolleyes: all I can say is, birth rates right now are very high (relatively speaking). Let's say Muslim birth rates are 7, and non-Muslim birth rates are 1.4 (these are completely random, but possibly broadly true). Until that Muslim birth rate comes to equilibrium with the non-Muslim birth rate, Muslims will continue to increase in proportion. This is undeniable. Now, that figure of 7 is not simply going to drop to 1.4 overnight. It will take, I believe, hundreds of years. Easily enough time for the Muslim to become the vast majority.

    Also, don't forget that the current birth rate we have in this country of non-Muslims can be thought of as NEGATIVE. That is, anything below the figure of 2.11 children per woman leads to NEGATIVE population growth amongst a community. This can only exemplify the situation.
    You're forgetting though that babies are not religious. Kids born in the UK to muslim parents can choose not to follow their parent's religion.

    Also don't forget that kids today have easy access to the internet, a vast repository of information. And you know what kills religion faster than anything else - information. See jacketpotatos post about the Saudi men and women.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    I am no expert on birth rates :rolleyes: all I can say is, birth rates right now are very high (relatively speaking). Let's say Muslim birth rates are 7, and non-Muslim birth rates are 1.4 (these are completely random, but possibly broadly true). Until that Muslim birth rate comes to equilibrium with the non-Muslim birth rate, Muslims will continue to increase in proportion. This is undeniable. Now, that figure of 7 is not simply going to drop to 1.4 overnight. It will take, I believe, hundreds of years. Easily enough time for the Muslim to become the vast majority.

    Also, don't forget that the current birth rate we have in this country of non-Muslims can be thought of as NEGATIVE. That is, anything below the figure of 2.11 children per woman leads to NEGATIVE population growth amongst a community. This can only exemplify the situation.
    To have a rate of 7 per person, each Muslim women would need to have 14 children. Needless to say this isn't realistic.

    Obviously the dynamics will change. But to say that it will take hundreds of years is fanciful. Birth rates have changed in far less time than that in almost any society you care to name, as societies (or parts of society in places like India and China) become more wealthy. I don't think so many Muslim households will stay in poverty forever.
    In addition, demographics are against you: the UK's young Muslim population is huge (see the link, 33% under 16). As these people grow old, the birth ratio is going to plummet.

    Unfortunately for your viewpoint, even if one ignores demographics and the experience of every other society and religion in history, and Muslim birth-rates don't drop, it doesn't mean the Muslim community will gain influence. This was tried centuries ago in Europe and it didn't work. Note the influence of the Jewish community through enterprise rather than numbers. The only thing one achieves by high birth rates is a lot of impoverished children.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    To have a rate of 7 per person, each Muslim women would need to have 14 children. Needless to say this isn't realistic.
    Sorry if I am wrong but I thought that "birth rate" means "births per woman", not per person, in which case it's quite substantially more realistic (the video I posted a while back said the birth rate for Muslims in France is higher than 8, which even I find very hard to believe, but there you go).

    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    Obviously the dynamics will change. But to say that it will take hundreds of years is fanciful. Birth rates have changed in far less time than that in almost any society you care to name, as societies (or parts of society in places like India and China) become more wealthy. I don't think so many Muslim households will stay in poverty forever.
    In addition, demographics are against you: the UK's young Muslim population is huge (see the link, 33% under 16). As these people grow old, the birth ratio is going to plummet.
    I don't understand your point about the UK's young population. Why would youngsters growing old cause the birth ratio to plummet?

    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    Unfortunately for your viewpoint, even if one ignores demographics and the experience of every other society and religion in history, and Muslim birth-rates don't drop, it doesn't mean the Muslim community will gain influence. This was tried centuries ago in Europe and it didn't work. Note the influence of the Jewish community through enterprise rather than numbers. The only thing one achieves by high birth rates is a lot of impoverished children.
    Well, I disagree with this completely. You can't deny that Muslims have more influence in a country where they are 60% of the population than if they were 2% of the population, for example.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah you're right - Thats why Christian countries mostly live in nice, comfortable and safe first world democracies and in most hardline islamic countries people live in hunger, poverty and wipe their arses with their left hand.. places so ****ing backwards and **** they are all rebelling against their own leaders because their lives are so miserable.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    I don't understand your point about the UK's young population. Why would youngsters growing old cause the birth ratio to plummet?
    Because inevitably young, second/third generation Muslims aren't going to have as many children as their parents because they'll be more assimilated into the local culture, so the birth rate is going to drop when they become of childbearing age. The Muslim birthrate in the UK is already predicted to drop by 0.5 in the next 20 years.

    Not to mention this doesn't take into account young Muslims leaving the faith, which although unlikely, is still more likely than for older generations.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    atheism is where it is at
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.