Liquids on planes
September 9th, 2009 at 8:46 am by David FarrarLike many I get frustrated at the airline rules over liquids on planes, having had to dispose of tubes of sunscreen and drink bottles etc.
But this story on the conviction in the UK of three British Muslims, reminds us why the rules came about:
Three British Muslims were convicted yesterday of plotting to commit “mass murder on an unimaginable scale” by blowing up transatlantic airliners in an attempt to kill thousands of people in the air and on the ground.
In a plot that changed rules on what passengers can carry on to planes, the terror cell, operating under guidance from jihadist overseers in Pakistan and inspired by al Qaeda, planned to simultaneously detonate liquid bombs disguised in soft drink bottles on board at least seven flights from London’s Heathrow Airport to North American cities, a court heard.
What shocked many is that most of the plotters were born in the United Kingdom. In fact three of them had only recently converted to Islam.
Thank goodness the security services were on the ball.
September 9th, 2009 at 8:47 am
Reason 1 why getting rid of the death penalty was maybe not such a great idea…….
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 8:58 am
Number one way of really messing with people who are travelling? It’d be after the first nutter hides a bomb inside a book. I don’t mind all he other stuff I can’t carry on with me, but if I couldn’t take a book, I’d go spare.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:00 am
And then the Muslim world come at us about our lack of tolerance and understanding, every one of these nutters would have been clutching a copy of the Koran and heading for a better place with wall to wall virgins.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:01 am
What shocked me was there were seven coinciding flights to be bombed, and they only convicted three of them
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:20 am
What do the uk expect?
Did they think they could open up their borders to muslims and everyone would live happily together, sipping tea and holding garden parties?
Even if only 0.01% of the muslims are would-be terrorists, this a heck of a lot of UK based muslims who want to blow shit up.
Just hope NZ does not make the same mistake.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:40 am
How nice it was to see that lovely Keith Locke and Nicky Hager last night on the news criticising the work of the SIS and GSCB.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Patrick Starr – there were others but there prosecutions failed because of lack of hard evidence. Trying to use criminal law to fight a war is ridiculous. One of those whose prosecution was dropped was going to carry the liquids in with her babies food.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:49 am
@ Wreck1080 re….Just hope NZ does not make the same mistake
I honestly believe we have already made the mistake wreck. I think NZr’s have to be brain dead if they think militant muslim preaching doesn’t happen here.
The likes of locke are traitors to this country in that they give succour to potential terrorists.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:54 am
David,
I agree that proper screening is necessary, but remember that the the restrictions on liquids came *after* these attacks were thwarted, not before – and indeed as a result of these attacks being thwarted. The screening has therefore yet to show its worth, apart from causing immense inconvenience and infringements on liberty besides.
Have a look at the blog from Patrick Smith, a pilot and weekly blogger for Salon.com. Here is is bit on security measures:
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2009/08/28/askthepilot332/index.html
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 9:54 am
“Trying to use criminal law to fight a war is ridiculous”
I suppose just lucky its not in Scotland Brian
(If 8 years for murdering 270 is anything to go by)
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 10:16 am
The ban on liquids looks like security “theatre” for a few reasons:
1. A plastic bottle of liquid isn’t detected by a metal detector. So you can easily carry one on board an aircraft by taping it to, say, your leg.
2. There is a reasonable chance that items in x-rayed carry on baggage will not be detected. The reason a terrorist doesn’t try and smuggle a gun on board is that if it is detected, the terrorist will be subject to arrest and investigation. But if liquids are found, then they’re just thrown away. So if you want to blow up an aircraft with liquids, then you can just keep trying until the screener fails to spot them in your carry on.
3. If confiscated liquids really were dangerous, then you’d hardly dispose of them in a rubbish bin near large numbers of the public. You’d clear the area and send in the bomb squad.
I’m all for dealing with terrorism via intelligence and the use of police and the military. But trying to prevent it by creating rules that target last years specific threat (aircraft, shoes, liquids) isn’t likely to be effective in the long term.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Perhaps we should use machine guns and waterboarding?
And what about for the war on drugs? The war on obesity? The war on illiteracy? Should we fight these with machine guns too?
Let’s have a think about what exactly we are fighting in this “war on terror”. Because if we don’t know then we are unlikely to win are we?
Personally, I think the idea of declaring “war” against a few criminal lunatics is ridiculous. The war is against extremism – a concept, an attitude, a state of mind, a philosophy of intolerance and violence. And machine guns are not good weapons for fighting such a war.
The most powerful weapon is actually exactly what you sneer at: respect for the law, for human rights, for tolerance and freedom.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 10:56 am
They have plenty of motivation to get at us when we are busily blowing away their villages and weddin g parties….
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 11:13 am
Well they sure do have a lot of those wedding parties
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 11:32 am
@s.russell..10;18 .. I would be inclined to agree with your view in a perfect world, but will say this..if the option is not to declare war on these people, I suppose the alternative is to embrace tolerance & freedom, respect for the law, & human rights.
All admirable options, except that is a one way street, islamic fundamentalists do not give 2 flying farts about your tolerance & freedom, or recognising human rights, or respect for the law, in fact they use our PC attitude to infiltrate & subvert our very country, to the degree that they would destroy it, to be able to institute their unique version of hatred, subjegation of woman, illiterate & ignorant, man power society.
I for one do not want to see us go down the Great Britain road, although I fear it is to late.
I certainly do not sneer at those values we all hold dear as mentioned above..That is why I love my country, and war is not too strong a word to describe our requirement to keep those values intact.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 11:36 am
At the time of the arrests, the story was that these guys were under surveillance but they hadn’t done much yet, so the cops wanted to keep watching them until they had enough hard evidence to convict the lot.
But the US was suffering bad publicitity and needed some good anti-terrorism results quick, so they put pressure on Britian to bring them in immediately.
I don’t know how true that is, but if it’s accurate, then we’re seeing the long-term results of that decision.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
lofty,
it seems that we have not evolved much since the 1090′s when the first crusaders invaded Jerusalem to kill “them”
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
It’s all so damnably sad isn’t it – at vast inconvenience and huge cost, airlines the world over have had to implement increasingly intrusive and inconvenient checks on the passengers – and it is ALL, repeat ALL because of the behaviour of muslim believers.
Vote:The Islamic cause has a lot to answer for – next time you mutter and grumble about the inconvenience of air travel
security restrictions – blame it on the muslims.
September 9th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
@robinson666… I agree for the 1st time with something you say, and people say miracles do not happen!
no excuse to resist though.
We either believe in “our” values or we do not.
We either believe enough to “fight” for them or we do not.
If we do not believe in “our” values or have the courage to stick up for them, what does this make us???
Is the answer collaborators?
I have the same dislike for war and killing as anyone, but sometimes it is justified.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
@S. russell…you ask the question
“Perhaps we should use machine guns and waterboarding?”
Yup sometimes you just have to.
The fact that you enjoy the freedoms that NZ has to offer you, and probably the financial support you may have required while studying, did not come about by sitting on the fence bemoaning the uncivilised people throwing rocks at each other.
Those freedoms came about because a society stuck up for it’s beliefs using machineguns and most certainly torture.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Well they have already declared war on us. That includes you. It is not a few criminal lunatics – it is a huge minority of a religion whose stated sole aim is global domination.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
“The most powerful weapon is actually exactly what you sneer at: respect for the law, for human rights, for tolerance and freedom.”
You really are joking aren’t you mate. This is the tactic we have been using for the last 30 years to reduce violence in the schools and since then to reduce crime and rehabilitate offenders.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
I think George W Bush hit it on the head when he created the phrase; “The War on Terror”.
He could have equally said, “The War on Islam”; more direct and accurate, but not as politically correct in these modern times.
Until western (ostensibly Christian) nations realise that we are in fact at war with Islam, and that Islam has openly declared war upon us, then just screening for liquids, etc on planes will do little in preventing Islamic terrorism.
The fact that we let such people enter, gain residence/citizenship, and ultimately become the very fabric of our society, doesn’t bode well for peaceful, democratic societies. It is easier to protect a country from hostiles outside of its borders. But once the enemy is part of the very society it is hell-bent on destroying, there are limited ways to prevent terrorism occurring on home soil. And often any response is after the fact and therefore too late.
Freedom of religion and cultural expression are all well and good, but when those ideologies are not only antagonistic to our societal values, but are set on the destruction of the very society who now hosts them, then we need to implement aggressive means to both defend ourselves, and to remove the enemy from our very presence.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Thanks Kris…well said
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
The term War on Terror is a pathetic excuse for never ending war powers (that most affect their own people).
War on Islam is unfair to most Muslims. And to most Christians and most secularists.
Kris, are you really meaning to suggest anyone who you disagree with should be aggressively removed from “our very presence”. Where would you start? And where would you end?
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Cerium – when sharia law is introduced in Denmark, Holland and the UK, how will you feel? Would you still want to visit those countries and live there? Would you want to live under sharia law anywhere? Would you be happy being a second class citizen as a non-muslim, paying the jizya tax? If the answer to that is NO, then you need to stop making excuses for Muslim extremism. In the UK the majority of muslims want sharia law introduced. Find some Assyrian Iraqis and ask them what it is like being a non-Muslim under Muslim rule? I’ll introduce you to the two guys who make my kebabs. They know and hate Islam and cannot understand why the West continually bows and scrapes to that religion.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
lofty,
it seems that we have not evolved much since the 1090’s when the first crusaders invaded Jerusalem to kill “them”
And they have not evolved since the berbers invaded Spain in 711. Still trying to kill the infidels and create their Caliphate.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Anyone lay odds on a future influx of white Scandanavian refegees comuing here to escape Muslim domination in their homelands?
I hope never to see it in my lifetime but suspect I will.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
@robinson666 at 12:10pm
Vote:It seems they haven’t evolved much since 638 AD when an Islamic army conquered Jerusalem.
September 9th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Cerium 2:37 pm,
I believe we have the God (and I do mean the God of the Bible) given right to defend our selves against ANY ideology which is sought on our destruction.
As Brian mentioned, “In the UK the majority of muslims want sharia law introduced.” So called ‘moderate’ muslims are included in that number and are therefore part of the problem.
In my personal opinion I see very little difference in the ultimate aims and end goals of Islam and Hitler’s Nazi Germany. But at least Hitler’s war machine never made it here. Islam, of all shades, is already in our midst. Let’s hope our response doesn’t need to be a violent one, but given the modus operandi of Islam I doubt we have the luxury of not responding in kind. And as you know, I do speak as a Christian.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
For evil to succeed it takes good men to do nothing (or words to that effect)
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
And you don’t want elements of your religion introduced into the law and forced on non-Christians?
I’m quite certain that democratic values can withstand ideological assaults from both you and Muslims alike.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Cerium if it was not for the fact I know you to be an inflamer/troll (you may have disguised your trolling with the odd so called reasonable comment, but you is wot you is) …I would call you a hand wringer, soft cock,apologist, but I wont because of the former.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Ryan, you make a reasonable point, but what about “our” societal values (not necessarily Christian) and the protection of them?
The islamic fundamentalists don’t care about democratic values and will ride right over the top of you and your values.
Do you think that we could fight off sharia law if the muslims gained control of local bodies, central Govt etc, by slowly infiltrating our lovely democratic system which falls over itself to treat all men as equal as is happening in Great Britain, and Europe?
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
An interesting discussion. Unlike Ryan I am not as sanguine about the ability of liberal Western democracies to withstand Islam from within.
That the terrorists were raised within the bosom of British liberal society and chose to rebel against that society and seek to destroy it, should give us all pause to reflect.
To me it exposes the meaninglessness of where our society is going. Basically as a society we have made a bargain — we will ignore the meaninglessness of life and in return we can do pretty much what we want.
In my view we need to rediscover our walk with the God of the Bible. A strong Christian nation would not tolerate Moslem terrorists.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Hitler’s war machine never made it here. Islam, of all shades, is already in our midst.
The big difference is that Hitler’s war machine was, y’know, a war machine, which was used to committ various horrible war crimes. The muslims ‘in our midst’ in New Zealand are ordinary law-abiding citizens not soldiers and they’re not committing horrible war crimes. You see the difference there?
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Lofty, Kris is likening Islam to Hitler in one post, and in another he says “we must implement aggressive means to both defend ourselves, and to remove the enemy from our very presence.” Many Muslims who have come to NZ have moved away from all the crap they don’t like, Kris at best is saying they should be sent back to it. Doesn’t seem very Christian to me.
To do a blanket “removal of the enemy” could be likened to dealing to all those who smack their kids because a few extremists abuse and kill.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Danyl you also make a reasonable point, but you don’t know what you don’t know mate.
Vote:It is not unreasonable to think that plotting is underway here, given the evidence of Great Britain and other european countries, is it?
September 9th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
“A strong Christian nation would not tolerate Moslem terrorists.”
A strong Muslim nation should not tolerate terrorists. Neither should a secular nation like ours.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Cerium, I am happy to give an answer to your statement a crack.
Vote:I certainly do not advocate sending NZrs “back”
But I do advocate our society being awake to the danger and planning for the defence of our country, the law is above all, so they must be robust enough to ward off any threat.
If our laws are incapable of doing so, alternatives would ultimately have to be found, and that sort of alternative is only going to end in tears, but so be it.
September 9th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
It is not unreasonable to think that plotting is underway here, given the evidence of Great Britain and other european countries, is it?
If someone is ‘plotting’ then it’s up to the police and the intelligence services to defend the rest of the country from them. That’s whats happened in the UK in this instance. I don’t see why we need to dismantle our democracy to protect us from less than 1% of the population who don’t seem to be any kind of threat to us.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
“I certainly do not advocate sending NZrs “back””
I know you haven’t, but Kris has implied things like that or worse.
“But I do advocate our society being awake to the danger and planning for the defence of our country”
Yep, but surely that shouldn’t involve removing anyone labeled as being in the “suspicious” category?
We run the risk of becoming victims of our own security like the US. Everyone removes shoes because of one failed attempt. No liquids because of one failed attempt. The next successful attempt is most likely to be due to something that isn’t currently being scrutinised anyway.
It’s easy to sit at our computer and say “bloody Islamic terrorists, eliminate them”.
Vote:It’s easy to sit at our computer and say “bloody criminals, eliminate them”.
It’s easy to sit at our computer and say “bloody government waste, eliminate it”.
It’s a lot harder to do.
September 9th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Freedom of religion, privacy, association, and the presumption of innocence are integral to democracy. If we toss them aside to “defend” democracy from other views, then we are the people who ended our democracy – long before anyone else has a chance to.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Absolutely. But there’s a baby in that bathwater, and human behaviour is seldom as simple as “is Muslim therefore acts like this”. Another thing to pause and reflect on is this: Muslims have lived in New Zealand for generations without doing anything like the same. What is the difference between New Zealand society and UK society? I would suggest that our inclusiveness and multiculturalism is at least one of the factors at work there in our favour.
To respond to Muslim New Zealanders in some of the ways suggested here is to become more like the societies that have demonstrably produced terrorists (ie., the UK.)
It seems to me that the bargain we have struck is that we will not force our meaning of life on others if they will not force theirs on us.
You’ve made a rather radical leap from “tolerating Islam” (or “upholding the democratic value of freedom of religion”) to “tolerating Muslim terrorists”. And your advocacy of “rediscovering our walk with the God of the Bible” is simply advocating state force favouring one religion over others – making you different from many of those you fear only in flavour.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Folks, I would really like to continue this, but it is the end of the day for me and I face a long drive home, sorry, I am not trying to escape as I am a bit passionate about this, but there will be another day for me to have another go at it, I thank you all.
Vote:Cheers
September 9th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Ryan Sproull 3:37 pm,
Do you actually think before you start typing Ryan?
Islam is fundamentally anti democracy, Christianity (or me for that matter) is not.
Sharia Law, if implemented, will roll over democratic society, western values, non Islamic religions, and even anarchists like you.
If you really equate the end goals of Christianity with those of Islam then you live in a fantasy world.
Vote:Most people in Europe, England etc aren’t concerned about Christians overthrowing their society; but they are regarding Muslims.
Maybe as an eye opening exercise you could move there for a while, and then report back regarding whether or not Islam is a threat to democratic society, or indeed to your own anarchist beliefs for that matter.
September 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Western society & Islam = Chalk & Cheese.
The only reason we don’t experience the same things as Britain, France, Holland, Germany, Denmark etc do is because we don’t yet have the same proportion of Muslims in our country. When we do (and we will eventually), I doubt it will be any different. It is sad and a great shame, but true.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Islam is fundamentally anti democracy, Christianity (or me for that matter) is not.
Religion is a rather fluid thing: for roughly 1500 years the favored system of Christian government was divine monarchy, it’s changed over the last couple of centuries. There are now a number of mostly muslim countries that have fairly stable democratic systems (Turkey, Lebanon, Indonesia) and no evidence that the faith won’t evolve to accomodate democracy, just as Christianity has.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
How democratic is the Christian organisation you are a part of Kris?
Vote:How democratic is any Christian group/denomination?
September 9th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
There was an interesting story in the Times from the cop in charge of the investigation who said the Brits were forced to make arrests before they had got enough evidence to convict all the plotters because the Americans panicked prematurely and exposed the surveillance by forcing an arrest in Pakistan.
This is probably why there were only three convictions.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
How democratic is the Christian organisation you are a part of Kris?
How democratic is any Christian group/denomination?
You are free to leave Christianity if you wish, leaving Islam is another story.
Also quite trying to turn this into an arguement between religions, there are a vast number of people who would classify themselves as non-religious/secular who distrust the ‘religion of peace’.
There are now a number of mostly muslim countries that have fairly stable democratic systems (Turkey, Lebanon, Indonesia) and no evidence that the faith won’t evolve to accomodate democracy, just as Christianity has.
Open your eyes man! Turkey is a fiercly secular state, any hint that the current lot would try to install an Islamic government will result in the army removing them. Lebanon seems to be permanently involved in assasinations between the various factions (have you forgotten Habibi already?), the islamic hezbollah has shown time and again that they will blow up any politician who doesnt hold their slanted view of the region. As for Indonesia – thats about the only one that comes close to your statement, and they have never ending problems with islamic facism attempting to blow up anyone with a pale complexion.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Turkey is a fiercly secular state, any hint that the current lot would try to install an Islamic government will result in the army removing them.
That’s right – it’s a fiercly secular democratic state in which 99.8% of the population is muslim. It is overwhelming proof that islam, secularism and democracy are not mutually exclusive.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
As would Christian law, as would any religious values forced on people via the mechanism of the state, because the moment that happens is the moment a nation ceases to be democratic.
None of that changes what is basic fact: freedom of religion is essential to democracy, and any government that favours one religion over others – whether it’s yours or someone else’s – is not democratic. One does not need to count apples in Paris to know that one and one are two.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
And that’s the point you repeatedly refuse to address, Kris, by going off on tangents.
Tell me:
Do you want the New Zealand government to favour one religion over others?
Because if you do, stop claiming you’re about defending democracy, because you’re not. That word is taken. Find a new one.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Ryan Sproull 5:17 pm,
Freedom of religion is a privalege of democracy.
But you seem to be saying Ryan, that democracy should permit any ideology/religion whose prime aim is the destruction of democracy to exist and prosper in its midst. I really don’t get it. Are you saying by definition democracy cannot defend itself? Many consider Naziism a religion, so on that basis no resistance should have been offerred against the Nazi war machine by democratic countries?
What is the anarchist’s method of defense for the society he lives in when it is attacked by aggressive ideologies/religions such as Islam?
Vote:Roll over and ‘scratch my belly’, but please don’t cut my throat?
September 9th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
That’s right – it’s a fiercly secular democratic state in which 99.8% of the population is muslim. It is overwhelming proof that islam, secularism and democracy are not mutually exclusive.
Yet they have a party in power who has been trying to identify the country Islamic instead of secular, the only thing that stops them is a army that is fiercly loyal to the ideal of secularism – you seem to excuse the extremists just because there are a number of moderates, those moderates dont mean shit if they dont stand up to the extremists in their own home. Much like the German civilian should feel shame for not doing anything for curbing the actions of the extremists amoung them in the 30′s and 40′s, so should the moderate muslim for remaining deafly silent when the extremists act in the name of their religion. How many muslims were disgusted to see their countrymen dance in the street on Sept 11? If the role was reversed and the US purposely bombed the pilgrims on the way to Mecca, the outcry from the rest of the world (including NZ) would be deafening.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
This reminds me of what an IRA thug said after the assassination attempt on Thatcher:
“You have to be lucky all the time. We have to be lucky once.”
I shouldn’t need to remind anyone of the Palis openly celebrating the 9/11 attacks, or the French “youths” regularly rioting, or the Thai buddhists being murdered by Muslim fundamentalists, or the fact that most British muslims support the suicide bombing of coalition forces in the Middle East, or the virulous behaviour of Muslims in Bethnal Green and Bow against the former Jewish Labour MP there. This is the nature of the threat we are dealing with – it’s not massed tank armies on the North German Plain anymore.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Indeed. And it’s deliberate. Uber-socialists like Locke want the chaos and destruction invited by opening our borders to groups which include terrorist-minded individuals. More fear amongst the general population has us – the fearful ones – calling out for a stronger state, more control. Precisely what Locke and his ilk want.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Nice words, but the reality is somewhat different. Our [Christian] friends in Turkey have been advised not to use the words God, Jesus, Christ, Christian or Church in any their email correnspondence to us, and to cancel their Facebook accounts lest Turkish ‘authorities’ deduce their religious beliefs as part of their regular monitoring. Doesn’t sound secularly democratic to me.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Kris K wrote:
Can you cite a reference for that?
There are a lot of Muslims in the UK, but oddly no Muslim political parties of note. If there was such a desire to change the UK law, wouldn’t they be getting political?
When did Islam declare war on us? I hope you’re not going to quote from the Koran; that’s about as a reliable as quoting from the Bible.
A small number of fanatics, many of whom have been demonstrated to know bugger about Islam, have declared war on basically everything they don’t like. But there are over 1 billion Muslims. If they wanted to take over wouldn’t they be a bit more, ummm, active?
Personally I’m more concerned about fundamentalist Christians pushing their anti-science nonsense like intelligent design.
cheers
Malcolm
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
It is a rare thing for me to quote Margaret Thatcher, but she made a profound point based on the IRA experience: “There are no political criminals”. There are just criminals”. Terrorists = murderers and we should call them murderers. Otherwise terrorists will become “freedom fighters” for some. Murderers, killers, criminals: label and treat them as such.
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
The reason that Cerium, Danyl, Ryan etc do not see fundamentalist islam as evil is because they have deconstructed everything in their own minds and no longer see black and white, good and evil. Everything is shades of gray and they figure that the only reason these people aren’t nice to us is because we have been nasty to them.
Fools the lot of them and they won’t understand even as their infidel heads roll.
Just look at that idiot Harmeet Sooden – not only is he luck to still have his head, but seems to want to go back for more.
Isn’t it just wonderful to enjoy the freedoms that others have fought for and then turn around and rub our faces in it?
Vote:September 9th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
“The reason that Cerium, Danyl, Ryan etc do not see fundamentalist islam as evil ”
I don’t think any one of us has claimed anything like that. There is a major problem with a small minority of, as pkiwi quotes Thatcher, criminals and potential criminals. Extremist nutters. That doesn’t mean every Muslim should be treated as a nutter.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 1:57 am
@cerium, if we open up the borders to muslims on the basis of treating them as non-nutters then we will end up with a few extremists wanting to blow up stuff.
Are you saying that you are willing to take that risk?
I’m not.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 7:36 am
That’s like saying that voting is a privilege of democracy.
You’ve made a jump again. I haven’t said anything about not defending yourself against military attacks. But as for permitting any ideology/religion whose prime aim is the destruction of democracy, yes, while it is words and ideas.
I want to be clear that I don’t agree with you that every (or even hardly any) Islamic Kiwi wants to overthrow democracy in New Zealand. As far as I’m concerned, Islamic Kiwis are just looking to work, get paid, support their families and watch their children grow up in a safe society – in other words, the same as just about everyone else.
But even if being Muslim did mean wanting to overthrow democracy, words and religions should not be persecuted by the state (if the state calls itself democratic), and no one should suffer or be disadvantaged for professing their religion.
If you’d prefer a pragmatic argument rather than a principled one, consider that persecuting religious groups tends to make terrorism and attempts to overthrow governments more likely, not less likely.
Back to principles, though, there’s always Franklin: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
I have no desire to defend myself from a free exchange of ideas, nor defend myself from someone else’s words or beliefs. Anarchism is “attacked” by ideologies that disagree with it constantly. If an anarchist’s response to criticism of anarchism was to censor it, he would have ceased to be an anarchist. The same goes for believers in democracy.
Kris, no one should be persecuted for professing their religion.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 7:42 am
I no longer see the world as a cartoon, no. Not since I was perhaps 9 years old.
TCrwdb, have you even been reading what I’ve said?
How am I “rubbing your faces in it” when I am arguing against those who wish to throw away the freedom of religion that others have fought for? I am the one saying keep the freedom, it’s important. I am arguing against people who want to end that freedom because they’re scared.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 8:11 am
I smell a very big rat here. There is something not right about the claim that thse terrorists planned to explode liquid bombs disguises as drink bottles. Think about it. Given that nobody can carry ANY liquid in any quantity onto a plane, how on earth did they think they were going to get through security with them? The court might as well have claimed that they were planning to drill through the floor of the aircraft with a pneumatic road drill, for all the success that plan would have had. No serious terrorist would plan an attack which involved drink bottles.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 9:20 am
# Danyl Mclauchlan (596) Vote: Add rating 5 Subtract rating 5 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
If someone is ‘plotting’ then it’s up to the police and the intelligence services to defend the rest of the country from them. That’s whats happened in the UK in this instance. I don’t see why we need to dismantle our democracy to protect us from less than 1% of the population who don’t seem to be any kind of threat to us.
*************************************
Not a threat, eh? You recall the London bombings, or the abortive attack on Glasgow airport (one just cant find good Jihadiis these days)? I can assure you that the precursor cultural/religious elements that led to it do exist here and I have seen it myself, and I don’t mean women walking around in burkhas.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Dave, the ban on liquids come in _after_ this plot was broken up. As a consequence of.
cheers
Malcolm
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Again a very interesting discussion here. There appear to be one group — Ryan, Cerium, Danyl etc — who think that Islam is basically okay but spoiled by a few bad apples.
Also the greatest fear they hold is the return of New Zealand to Christianity. They seem more afraid of Baptist grandmothers than they are of angry young men of Arab descent.
The difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christianity cannot rightfully be imposed on the person. One cannot make somebody Christian. In the end it is a choice to follow God as revealed in Jesus Christ. Now if a significant amount of people become Christian then that will have an effect on society. That stands to reason. However I would suggest to you that democracy and our liberal Western society have come out of a Christian framework. Secularism is taking it in a particular direction, but the liberalism many hold dear came from a Christian society.
Islam on the other hand is very different. One can hold a gun to a person’s head and make them into a good Muslim. The God of the Moslems — Allah — is a strong man on his own who is watching you. You can’t see him, but he can see you. So generally Moslems states have either strong dictators and/or a council of spiritual leaders who rule the nation as a theocracy. There is no separation of church and state in Islam.
I would suggest that if the number of Moslems increased significantly in New Zealand eventually they would want to take over and impose sharia law. I can’t see secular New Zealanders resisting them particularly. Who really wants to fight for the anaemic values of diversity and tolerance? Christians would fight. But not secular people, in my opinion.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Scott [September 10th, 10:00 am],
Absolutely. And something I am sure many secularists would prefer to ignore.
Why we think the end goal if Islam is any different here to what is happening in Europe, England, France, etc is at best naive. And I believe some see Islam as a vehicle by which western democracy can be overthrown, and actively encourage uncontrolled muslim immigration.
It is interesting to note that as western (ostensibly Christian) nations have cast off their Christian heritage, and embraced in its sted human secularism, we have seen an opening of both physical and spiritual borders to foreign ideologies/religions (including Islam).
Because human secularists can’t/won’t acknowledge the spiritual realm, they therefore refuse to acknowledge that the threat from Islam is driven by a satanically motivated spiritual foundation that is ultimately driven by hate/anihilation; especially against Christianity and Judaism, and those countries that have historical links to those two religions (of the one true God). Those being western nations and Israel.
As Scott just mentioned: “I can’t see secular New Zealanders resisting them particularly. Who really wants to fight for the anaemic values of diversity and tolerance? Christians would fight. But not secular people, in my opinion.”
Vote:And as others have mentioned, once Muslim critical mass is achieved in NZ, then, as can be observed in Europe, etc, we will observe a similar Muslim response here.
September 10th, 2009 at 11:54 am
“Also the greatest fear they hold is the return of New Zealand to Christianity. ”
Why do you think this? I don’t have a problem with a lot of things Christian. I don’t fear it. But I think it is probably going to fade – as peoples get more educated they tend to move from it. The biggest growths in Christianity have been in undeveloped countries.
I have had people trying to impose Christianity on me. Fortunately these days it is easy to tell them I’m not interested. There were times when it was imposed under threats of eternal damnation, torture and death. But you cannot make someone be Christian, or Muslim, or atheist or anything. Especially you can’t make anyone be a good anything at gunpoint (except maybe a “good” enemy).
Democracy often had to fight against the powers of the the Christian churches, most of the church leaders didn’t want to give up their power and their control. Most denominations have been autocracies or dictatorships rather than democratic.
I don’t feel threatened by Muslims in NZ. But if a threat developed, from them or Christians or RBs or Maori extremists or any other group, why on earth wouldn’t secular NZers resist as much as anyone else?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Cerium….and when NZrs resist as much as anyone else, how do they resist??
Vote:Islam has no time for your namby pamby feel good rainbow nation theories, they have a mission to complete.
What will YOU do to resist when the time comes??
September 10th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
“Because human secularists can’t/won’t acknowledge the spiritual realm, they therefore refuse to acknowledge that the threat from Islam is driven by a satanically motivated spiritual foundation that is ultimately driven by hate/anihilation”
I don’t refuse to acknowledge any threat, I am well aware of threats. Real threats rather than Muslim under the bed threats. But, seemingly unlike you, I don’t hate all of them and don’t want to annihilate them all of them. Many of them have as much right as me to live peacefully.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
“What will YOU do to resist when the time comes??”
Depends on the time and what the actual threat is. But I wouldn’t invade their country and try to force them to be democratic at gunpoint, that would tend to annoy anyone, Christian, Muslim or otherwise.
What are you suggesting to repel the threat lofty?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Not really what I’m arguing, though probably accurate. I’m saying that freedom of religion and freedom of speech are…
1. Too important to start making exceptions.
2. So essential to democracy that a country throwing them away would cease to be a democracy by definition.
Scott, perhaps you could provide some quote or evidence that “the greatest fear I hold is the return of New Zealand to Christianity” or that I “seem more afraid of Baptist grandmothers than of angry young men of Arab descent”. Or retract your statement. You pick.
Scott, in this thread I have been engaging almost solely with people who claim to want to mix church and state in New Zealand. I have been arguing for the separation of church and state.
And you can’t make someone a good Muslim by putting a gun to their head. A person can claim under threat that they believe in God and/or that Mohammed was his prophet, etc., but – like Christianity – Islam requires actual belief in these things, not just words.
Look harder.
I can only speak for myself, but I am as in favour of the separation of mosque and state as I am of the separation of church and state. Kris has demonstrated that he would fight not for separation of church and state but rather for the influence of the right (read: his) church on the state.
Scott, if you are arguing for the separation of church and state, then join me in disagreeing with Kris’s desires that Christian values be imposed in New Zealand via the state.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Lofty, Muslim Kiwis are just folk, just as Christian Kiwis are, and all other Kiwis are, and practically everyone in the world is. Folk want to raise their kids in a safe, free environment, and see them prosper.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Cerium, I didn’t ask what you would not do, I asked what you would do. I made my position quite clear yesterday in answer to your deflection, look it up.
Ryan…I know all that, but we are not talking about the average, want to be good kiwi muslims here and you know it.
Vote:We are talking hate filled, on a mission, minorities who will threaten our society.
They are the threat and will have to dealt with, as I am sure you know also.
September 10th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Firstly, I don’t know that at all. Islamic terrorism has repeatedly and predictably targeted those countries who actively interfere with Muslim countries. Osama’s original accusations of the US were their support for Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, their economic and medical sanctions against Iraq, and their military presence in the Arabian Peninsula. Australia was hit in Bali because it joined in the illegal invasion of Iraq. The UK was hit in the subways because it joined in the illegal invasion of Iraq.
Now, these are violent, criminal and (in my opinion) immoral responses to those countries’ actions. But the fact remains that New Zealand’s best defence against Islamic vigillantism is to continue to refrain from fucking over Muslim countries in the manner of the US, UK and Australia.
All evidence points to Islamic terrorism being politically motivated, rather than a vast evil conspiracy to stop you from eating pork.
Secondly, even if there were these hate-filled minorities on a mission – Muslim equivalents of the National Front – throwing out basic democratic liberties, making exceptions to our most essential principles, is still not the appropriate response. The very first thing persecution would do is provide ammunition to anyone attempting to recruit otherwise decent Muslim youths into a violent splinter group.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
“I asked what you would do.”
Until I know what the actual threat is here I can’t answer that. There is no obvious threat here. Except perhaps from those who want to judge and exclude people based on their differences rather than on crimes.
I’m confident this country has sufficient character to resist any concerted effort to take us over, whether it be by Muslim extremists or by US fundamentalists or whatever. NZ has made strong stands in the past and paid a high price, I am sure it would stand strong if our own country was actually threatened. And I would hope we wouldn’t stuff ourselves if we do have the misfortune to experience another terrorist attack. I think we do allow French people into the country don’t we? A bad decision by a past government shouldn’t condemn all of them to be persecuted.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
One thing is for sure Ryan, you & I do not sing from the same song sheet.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
lofty, yesterday you said “the fact I know you to be an inflamer/troll “.
If by calling people on things I think are blatantly false or I disagree with makes me an inflamer then so be it. But I come here most to learn (and that happens a lot) and to debate. That means sometimes disagreeing with people. Some don’t like that. And some are happy to actually engage in a debate. I come here with opinions. Sometimes I stand by them, sometimes I change them. Is that being a troll?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Cerium 12:00 pm,
The trouble happens, of course, when they come out from under the bed.
And you continue to put words in my mouth.
Even though Islam is ideologically founded upon the hatred and annihilation of ALL non Muslims, to say that these are also beliefs I hold is disingenuous. I have never stated or implied that I either ‘hate’ or desire the ‘annihilation’ of Muslims. Although I am diametrically opposed to everything that Islam stands for I will agree with. Hate the sin, love the sinner.
Of course Muslims can only live in true peace with other Muslims according to the Koran. All others are to be murdered, converted to Islam, or live as second class dhimis or slaves to the Muslim state.
Vote:Those Muslims that choose to live in peace with the infidel either deny much of the teachings of the Koran, or are biding their time ‘under the bed’ until critical mass is achieved whereby revolt against the host state/country can actively begin.
September 10th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
“Of course Muslims can only live in true peace with other Muslims according to the Koran. ”
Kris can only live in true peace with other Kristians?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
I’ll drink to that. Makes life interesting, though, doesn’t it?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Cerium..I stand by my troll comment, I have been scanning this blog for quite some time. you may have donned a more “inclusive” tone over the last few days, but leopard and spots and all that.
I will give you a brownie point for the Kristians comment…very droll.
Ryan.. Yup if we all agreed it would be a boring old life. Make mine a rather stiff G&T.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
“Even though Islam is ideologically founded upon the hatred and annihilation of ALL non Muslims”
The word Islam derives from the same semitic root as the Hebrew word Shalom, which means peace. Islam means “entering into a condition of peace and security with God, through allegiance or surrender to him”.
http://www.islamfortoday.com/beliefs01.htm
How much do you actually know about Islam? And about how all 1.3b Muslims think?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Ryan Sproull [September 10th, 2009 at 12:08 pm],
I have made no such statement.
Acknowledging what Islam stands for, and that democratic countries need to defend themselves against an ideology/religion sought on its very destruction, has nothing to do with imposing any church upon the state. Christians, and many secularists, acknowledge the threat to democratic counties from Islam. I view myself as nothing more than a watchman on the tower sounding the warning of imminent attack.
It has nothing to do with imposing Christian values. But let’s not forget NZ was founded upon Christian values. Christianity (in its true form) has always been a freewill choice. Many people believe that it is only Christian values that allow true democracy to exist; that democracy must spring from a strong moral base (some would say a biblical foundation) – if it doesn’t it ceases to be democracy and heads toward a socialist dictatorship. I believe with no biblically derived moral and value driven foundation that democracy will fall to the strongest ideology that comes along to challenge it; whether that be the socialist ‘state’ or the Islamic state based on Sharia law. Doing nothing will inevitably lead to the destruction of democracy.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
What do you see trolling as lofty?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
I see what I see cerium, I have an old saying and goes like this..never bullshit a bullshitter.
Vote:End of comment on Cerium & trolling.
September 10th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Cerium [September 10th, 2009 at 1:18 pm],
And, of course, if you don’t pledge allegiance and surrender to Allah (ie convert to Islam) then you will have no ‘peace’. This means in ‘Islamic speak’ that you will die or become a dhimmi or slave.
Quite a lot actually.
Vote:And when the majority of the 1.3b Muslims are either silent or dancing in the streets in response to the latest Muslim terrorist attack, then I know this is an ideology worth standing against.
September 10th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Ryan Sproull (2500) Vote: 1 0 Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
“…New Zealand’s best defence against Islamic vigillantism is to continue to refrain from fucking over Muslim countries in the manner of the US, UK and Australia”
Bali Bombings – 12 October 2002 – and which Muslim countries was Australia ‘fucking over’ (your term) prior to that date?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Do they say things like this?
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. John 3:36
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 2 Thes 1:6-9
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Kris..I spent a number of years living in a strictly muslim nation, I for one understand the threat and see your perspective (although not from a strictly Christian point of view).
I am confident that I can have a view that encompasses a practical component.
I would doubt that cerium or ryan or danyl have seen 1st hand (on the ground in the crowd) the glee shown when the islamic terrorists have a success in their eyes.
The argument with these people is an utter waste of time, there are none so blind as those who will not see.
I am fearful of liberals such as these, but they are entitled to their viewpoint. Danyl & Ryan are very erudite, and even earnest, cerium on the other hand….
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Cerium – when people start quoting bible verses to justify why they don’t think there is an Islamist threat they have lost it. I have never heard of airports introducing security measures for because rabid Christians want to stick bombs up their own anus and detonate themselves.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Ryan Sproull [September 10th, 2009 at 12:26 pm],
This is of course the reasoning behind the ‘leave them alone and they won’t bother us’ syndrome.
But this ‘reasoning’ doesn’t stand up too well when considering most of the murders of non Muslims by Muslims in increasingly Islamofied Africa.
Let’s be clear, Islam has declared war on the entire globe. Appeasing Islam will get the same results as attemting to appease Hitler in WWII.
Vote:There are too many ‘Neville Chamberlains’ in the world today crying ‘Peace, peace’; when there is no peace.
When they come in like a flood it will be too late, and to say ‘we never saw the warning signs’ will have a hollow ring to it.
September 10th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Cerium – you are an ignorant twat – anyone can pick and choose selected quotes from any book/speech/movie/etc and spin to suite. Michael ‘Lardarse’ Moore is a master at it, the only thing you are a master of is baiting.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
TCrwdb,
Good point. What did they claim their motives were?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Ryan Sproull (2500) Vote: 0 0 Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
“I’ll drink to that…”
Try that in a fundamentalist Muslim country and see how you go.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
They hated western civilization and because fighting and killing the infidel is mandated by a higher authority.
Remember of course that the biggest killers of Muslims since the Mongols have been other Muslims.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Also remember that for all the talk of western oppression of the Middle East, some of those countries were under western mandate control for about 20-30 years at most in the middle of the 20th C, all the rest of the time it was the Ottomans.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Cerium — even the devil can quote Scripture to suit his own purposes.
Those of us that know God through his son Jesus Christ can testify to his goodness and love.
However there will come a time — which those Scriptures you quote refer to — when the end will come. Those who do not believe in Jesus will be condemned to hellfire. Those who believe will receive everlasting life. I don’t think this is news to anybody. It is basic Christian doctrine. God is the Creator of all things, including ourselves, and we were made to be in communion with him. Those who choose to rebel against their own creator cannot expect to dwell with him in heaven. Indeed would they even want to?
But the difference between Muslims and Christians, Lord knows why I have to explain this, is that I don’t know of any Christian terrorists right now. I know that not all Muslims are terrorists. But almost all terrorists in the world today are Moslems.
Ryan’s point — is so off beam that one wonders what planet he is on. The reason Osama bin Laden masterminded September 11 was because of American support for Israel and the presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia. That the American troops were there to protect Saudi Arabia from invasion by Iraq under Saddam Hussein appears to have escaped Mr. Bin Laden.
One wonders what the justification was for the bombing of Bali?
But appeasement is very popular. If we just were nice to Moslems then they wouldn’t attack us. If we didn’t support Israel and we didn’t support the war in Afghanistan and we didn’t support the war in Iraq and if we said nothing to criticise the Koran and Muhamed, then all will be well.
It didn’t work in 1939 and neither will it work in 2009.
In the Moslem mind, the world is divided into two houses — the house of Islam and the house of war. It really is that simple.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Even if you are correct about Islam seeking the very destruction of democracy, you would still be beating them to the punch if you got rid of freedom of religion in New Zealand.
Okay, Kris, how exactly do you propose that a biblical or Christian foundation for a democratic New Zealand be implemented? I may have misunderstood you at some point, and I apologise if this is the case.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Which part of “I’m all in favour of separation of church and state” did you not understand?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
“Ryan Sproull (2501) Vote: 0 0 Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Bali Bombings – 12 October 2002 – and which Muslim countries was Australia ‘fucking over’ (your term) prior to that date?
TCrwdb,
Good point. What did they claim their motives were?”
You tell me, according to you it’s because Australia was “fucking over” muslim countries.
From memory one of the ‘excuses’ that they used was Australia’s involvement in freeing Timor Leste, which along with most of eastern Indonesia has never been muslim. Go figure.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Kris, how exactly do you explain the lack of Muslim Kiwis murdering non-Muslim Kiwis simply for being non-Muslims?
Let’s be clear. Hitler used the same “we’re all in danger” argument to justify breaking down liberties and instituting state persecution of minorities in Nazi Germany.
I’ll say it again, Kris – you start persecuting people for the religion they profess and you have killed democracy faster than anyone else could.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
I’m open to input, which is why I asked.
Hmmm. Where would I find out? Can’t find much about motivations on Wikipedia. I’ll have a better look.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Regardless, he didn’t say anything about trying to destroy democracy.
Any idea what reasons the bombers gave?
The word you’re looking for is “simplistic”. I’ll ask you the same question I asked Kris: What’s your explanation for law-abiding Kiwi Muslims not going out militating and killing non-Muslims, etc?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Cerium [September 10th, 2009 at 2:10 pm],
The verses you quoted pertain to God/Christ’s view/response to those that haven’t availed themselves of the offer of salvation.
Christians are never encourage in the New Testament to take the law into their own hands, or, for that matter, to force anyone to accept Christ. We are encouraged to share God’s ultimate act of love for a lost world; His death on the cross for the sins of ALL men (including Muslims – and I have witnessed to some). Christ’s death on the cross makes no sense unless there are eternal consequences to man remaining in his sinful state – that being eternal punishment in hell. The consequence of freewill is the ability to either accept or reject Christ’s payment on our behalf for our sins. It is ultimately each individuals choice as to his final eternal state.
I tend not to enter into debate regarding Christian theology, quoting verses, etc because to many this is nothing but a red rag. But as you raised the issue I am compelled to defend my Lord and Saviour, and His word.
The God of the bible is motivated by love, as are true Christians. Islam, as I mentioned before, is motivated by hate and has the end goal of annihilating ALL who stand against it, and all who refuse to convert to it.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Ryan – whilst doing your research – have a look back through the history of liberal western democracy and note the role of protestantism and it’s struggles with the Roman Catholic church in the development of the liberal democratic society that we enjoy today.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
The Moslems in New Zealand are just too numerically weak at the moment. Give them a few years and we will be like Great Britain. The Moslems march on the streets, commit violence and terror.
That is my prediction. Given the problems the Moslems have caused in Australia — pack rapes, Denmark (ditto), as well as their many terrorist acts around the world, one wonders why we should be so sanguine about Moslems in New Zealand?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
@Ryan – Wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings
First paragraph in the section titled ‘Suspects’:
“A week after the blasts Arab satellite channel Al-Jazeera put to air an audio-cassette purportedly carrying a recorded voice message from Osama Bin Laden saying that the Bali bombings were in direct retaliation for support of the United States’ war on terror and Australia’s role in the liberation of East Timor.[9]“
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
I’m aware of the history. Is this an argument against freedom of religion – an argument for the state favouring Christianity over other religions?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Okay, thanks. That fits with what I was saying – political motivation.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
If this belief motivated state persecution of Muslims in New Zealand, it may well become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Ryan Sproull [September 10th, 2009 at 2:44 pm],
It’s not an issue of legislation, if that’s what you think I mean.
Vote:It has to be a groundswell public awareness consisting of individuals ‘choosing’ to embrace Christian values and principles; ultimately individuals choosing to follow Christ. The opportunity to reject such values, and indeed Christ Himself, has always been central to biblical Christianity. Christianity will never be spread at ‘gunpoint’, nor legislation for that matter.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Okay, fair enough. And what do you think the appropriate response is to what you see as the threat of the religion of Islam?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Geeeze ryan, circles within circles…………
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Ryan Sproull [September 10th, 2009 at 2:49 pm],
Lack of critical mass as I stated before.
Hitler lied.
I’m not suggesting ‘persecuting’ anyone necessarily, but doing nothing will also end in killing democracy, as has been stated before.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Okay, which of these quotes do you agree with and which do you disagree with?
“By warding off the Muslims I am fighting for the Lord’s work.”
“It is the spiritually homogenous group, to membership of which all Muslims throughout the world deliberately adhere, regardless of their whereabouts and of their country of domicile.”
“Only when this Muslim disease infecting the life of peoples has been removed can one hope to establish a co-operation amongst the nations which shall be built up on a lasting understanding.”
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
I dont think those terrorists are “muslim” any more than I thought the IRA was “christian” (well OK Catholic which may not be the same thing).
The love of money might be the root of all evil but intolerant god-botherers of any flavour must come in a close second.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Ryan Sproull [September 10th, 2009 at 3:19 pm],
The only real way of protecting a country against a regime/ideology sought on destroying it, is to prevent that ‘enemy’ crossing your borders. Of course, in a real war, sometimes you have to destroy the power base of the enemy as well. The fact that we have already allowed the enemy to cross our borders, and the enemy is not a nation state, but an ideology/religion makes our response very complicated indeed. And, short of divine intervention, I have no answer to the problem. But restricting Islamic immigration is certainly a start.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
So you’re suggesting restricting immigration to New Zealand on the basis of what religion people profess.
Would that require investigation in case they lie about their religion?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Too good and timely not to link here:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/2850487/Religious-fanatic-hijacks-jet
When oh when will they stop Christian fanatics from flying?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Ryan Sproull 3:41 pm,
Perhaps I could answer your question by putting one to you Ryan:
If someone publicly declared they supported ALL of Hitler’s apsirations; that their aim was world domination. That they intended firstly becoming a NZ resident; then overthrow the government and set up their own fascist regime; killing all those who opposed them, and then moving on to the rest of the globe. Oh yes, and they called their ideology a ‘religion’.
Knowing all this would you: Carry out further investigations? Allow this individual/group to cross our borders? Become a resident? etc.
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Well, I would let them in, of course. But in the context of this discussion, where I’ve been talking about what is or is not democratic, the question would be how such explicit statements fit in the context of things like conspiracy to commit crime, etc.
Are you saying that every Muslim is, by virtue of their religion, equivalent to someone who has declared these kinds of intentions? Even if they say that such accusations are complete fabrications and that their religion demands no such things?
Would you turn away a potential immigrant at the border because they said the words, “I am a Muslim.”?
Vote:September 10th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Ryan Sproull 6:02 pm,
My response to any Muslim seeking to enter our country would likely be:
• Sir, do you adhere to all the tenants of your faith as espoused in the Koran, Hadith and Muslim writings?
• Do you model your life on the practices and beliefs of the Prophet Mohamed as detailed in the Muslim holy writings?
• Please explain what the main aim of Islam is, and whether you are sympathetic to that aim.
• What is your attitude toward Israel; Jews; Christians; western democracy?
• Are you a Muslim in name only; because you come from a repressive Islamic state and fear for your life?
[And a few other questions that would form part of any application to enter NZ]
Depending on the responses and demeanour while answering these questions would determine whether or not entry was granted.
Vote:And there would be ongoing monitoring during a predetermined trial period to ensure assimilation into NZ culture/society.
September 10th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Kris, in which case they would probably just say “No, I’m a Christian”.
How would you tell if they’re lying?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Naturally. And what if they gave the following answers?
• Sir, do you adhere to all the tenants of your faith as espoused in the Koran, Hadith and Muslim writings?
Of course! I’m a good Muslim!
• Do you model your life on the practices and beliefs of the Prophet Mohamed as detailed in the Muslim holy writings?
I model my life on the divinely inspired revelation of God via His Prophet Muhammed.
• Please explain what the main aim of Islam is, and whether you are sympathetic to that aim.
To live in accordance with God’s will, come to know Him more fully through daily prayer, and so be acceptable to Him after death.
• What is your attitude toward Israel; Jews; Christians; western democracy?
Israel is a criminal state whose treatment of their indigenous people is appalling! Jews and Christians are fellow People of the Book. It’s atheists whom I cannot remotely understand.
• Are you a Muslim in name only; because you come from a repressive Islamic state and fear for your life?
I am proud to be a good Muslim.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:13 am
Malcolm & Ryan,
One of the beneifts of being a Christian is that I/we have direct access to our Heavenly Father through prayer.
I/we also have the Holy Spririt who both seals and indwells all those in Christ. The Holy Spirit gives us spiritual wisdom and insight which far exceeds our own ‘natural’ abilities.
Having said that; to discern whether or not any prospective Muslim immigration applicant was lying I would prayerfully ask my Heavenly Father for wisdom and insight, and that the Holy Spirit would lead and guide me throughout the application process, and also throughout the subsequent trial period should the applicant be successful in initially gaining entry to NZ.
“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:17 am
Okay, so would you suggest that Immigration officials picking out undesirables consist entirely of Christians with the requisite spiritual insight to determine who are really Muslims and who aren’t?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:22 am
And no doubt your heavenly father would miraculously answer in line with your prejudices.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:22 am
@Ryan Arguing with nut jobs just makes you stupider, I’d give up if I were you.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:27 am
I’m a nut job myself, KiwiGreg.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Kris K wrote:
This is getting well off-topic but is interesting to me, at least.
Can you give a personal example where you’ve prayed for something and it has happened, but which can’t be explained by coincidence?
How does your Heavenly Father lead you? Does he talk to you directly or does he shape your thoughts? Or something else?
On a more practical note, do you honestly think that immigration cases should be decided by self-professed* Christians, talking to their God?
cheers
Malcolm
*I say self-professed as there doesn’t seem to be an objective test. I’m sure you’d agree there have been some spectacular frauds.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
poor old Kris, getting the mick taken from him over his Christian viewpoint.
Kris, I am much more pragmatic about this whole issue of subversives infiltrating NZ (which I whole heartedly believe is happening) I am not big on asking for divine guidance, but I respect your view.
I like looking at pretty girls, enjoy a drink, bright educated young people, women who can speak their minds without fear, Govt that is honestly elected by the people, social gatherings that involve all types & sexes of people, Univerities that accept a diverse range of students & offer a broad range of subjects, etc etc etc
Things we here in NZ take for granted, what we could call our values I suppose.
Islamic fundamentalism would want to take all that away and replace it with talebanesque society.
I don’t mind speaking out against them here in NZ, I have Grandchildren to consider.
Cerium, ryan, & danyl…I accept you have your views but I can’t buy ‘em
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Ryan Sproull 11:17 am,
With thinking like that Ryan, I might even offer you the immigration portfolio.
Hello Cerium, I thought you’d died and gone to heaven.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Kris,
Just trying to understand where you’re coming from.
What does separation of church and state mean to you, and do you support it?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Ryan Sproull 12:11 pm,
The phrase ‘separation of church and state’ is often misunderstood. The original intent was to actually protect the church from governmental interference, not the other way round (I don’t have documents at hand I can quote; buried in books in my library. But should be easy to source on-line if you’re really interested).
It was viewed that Christianity should influence good government, not by legislation, but by Christian values, morals, and principles guiding those in positions of authority.
Regarding Islamic immigration: As I believe Islam is a satanically inspired religion/philosophy, then I feel that some spiritual insight is required to counter what is essentially a ‘spiritual assault’ upon our (and other) nations. Having Christians involved in this process would, I believe, be beneficial.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Okay. What does “freedom of religion” mean to you?
Do you think that would require our government to take the official stance that (your brand of) Christianity is the only correct religion?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
lofty, I’m certainly not taking mic. It’s a good discussion.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Do you think that would require our government to take the official stance that (your brand of) Christianity is the only correct religion?
Thats naughty ryan
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
lofty 12:00 pm,
I have come to expect to be attacked/ridiculed for my Christian beliefs. Par for the course I suppose.
Even though we may have a different philosophical base, we can both recognise Islam for what it is.
Vote:Perhaps I just additionally see Islam as springing from a satanic spiritual base. Either way, it’s an evil ‘ideology’.
I have appreciated your viewpoints and explanations throughout this thread.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Kris, I am not anti your Christianness. What I do question is why you seem to think that someone who is not a god believing Christian can’t have as good morals and be as good a person.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Ryan Sproull 12:40 pm,
I think this has more than adequately been answered by myself and others throughout this thread.
To my knowledge there is only one ‘brand’ of Christianity. It’s called biblical Christianity.
Regarding any so-called official government stance; I think I’ve already answered that one:
“It was viewed that Christianity should influence good government, not by legislation, but by Christian values, morals, and principles guiding those in positions of authority.”
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Cerium 12:56 pm,
That’s nice of you to say Cerium, but I do sometimes feel your responses are driven by nothing more than a ‘kick the Christian’ motive. Maybe I’m wrong?
I believe many non Christians have good, strong morals, and I apologise if you feel I have implied the opposite. Although I don’t believe I have – I am always very careful about that sort of thing.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
@cerium, I see Kris perspective a bit differentky, I cannot for the life of me see anywhere Kris has said “someone who is not a god believing Christian can’t have as good morals and be as good a person”.
He seems to accept that I for instance ,who lays no claim to being any such thing, have a view he can accept.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
@Kris, , you have nothing to apologise for Kris, cerium is a habitual stirrer, who can be a bit of fun sometimes.
You are entitled to your beliefs and I for one will defend your right to speak out, I am also sure that the owner of this blog respects your views, or he would have said so.
Never apologise to a stirrer pal.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
malcolm 11:48 am,
On the basis that your questions are genuine I will try to answer.
When witnessing (or preaching/teaching) to someone often scriptures and analogies ‘come to mind’ out of the blue. There can also be a sense that the conversation is being directed, and often I feel I have greater than normal wisdom in such situations. Subjective perhaps, but it really is a sense, an awareness of God’s presence if you like.
For me often it may be as simple as knowing when to open my mouth, and likewise, when to keep it firmly shut.
Vote:Often, even when commenting on this blog, I sense God’s hand guiding and directing my thoughts; like you said “shaping my thoughts”.
September 11th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
That’s pretty vague, Kris. Would those values, morals and principles influence legislation and policy at all? If so, how?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Damn!
I get the same thing when pontificating (to a captive audience in my car) about the disgrace that is the NZ rugby coach and administration.
Coincidence?
Maybe your god doesn’t rate them either.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Ryan Sproull 1:26 pm,
I personally think a person’s morals and value system largely shapes who they are and how they respond to situations and circumstances they may find themselves in. Whether an individual is a Christian or not, any choices they make regarding legislation and policy would no doubt be influenced by their value sytem.
I personally think, for example, that the laws, etc passed under the nine year reign of Labour were largely influenced by the fact that Clarke was a socialist, atheistic, feminist, anti family, control freak who would never back down, or admit she made a mistake (even when caught red handed).
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Kris, maybe I have got things wrong. Maybe you don’t link declining morals and behaviour in society with a declining interest in religion (in NZ).
Except you seem to be doing that in what you have just posted.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Presumably, but I still don’t see how you could implement a Christian Immigration team using their spiritual insight to determine which potential immigrants are genuine adherents to a Satanic-inspired religion and thus turn them away…
…without Christianity being enshrined in law or policy as the only correct religion.
I mean, when you talk about the politicians you want, you don’t mention them forcing Christianity on the nation, but rather make wise decisions informed by a Spirit-filled life. But when you talk about policies like this immigration one, it couldn’t really happen without those politicians saying, “Well, Christianity’s right, other religions are wrong, and we’re not letting this other religion in the country.”
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
@ryan…may I be so bold as to have a go at answering your query to Kris?
Kris talks about values shaping our legislation & policy, and this has been true throughout our short history, & imported values & ideals from whatever mother country.
In short, like it or not NZ is a christian value based country.
Islam does not form the basis of our thinking or policies, therefore we have an absolute right to demand compliance to our laws and values.
danyl made the point yesterday (rightly) that we have to rely on our security agencies to track down and deal with subversives, they do this using our unique NZ value system.
I like you could not live with immigration rules around denying anothers beliefs, but I can live with having rules around compliance & adherance to our laws and societal rules.
If that adherance is not forthcoming we must treat those who disobey, as criminals.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
“If that adherance is not forthcoming we must treat those who disobey, as criminals.”
Exactly. But not to treat them as criminals otherwise.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Kris seems to be saying that profession of the Islamic faith is necessarily a profession of criminality.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
No, it is a profession of non-compliance with the societal norms and rules of the new host country.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Agreed cerium, except to say sadly they play us at our own game…they know how to use the rules that we abide by to subvert the system, because they are on a mission.
We are being played for fools, we know it and yet, because we “beleive” in our system we are almost powerless to stop them.
The nano second our security forces broke down doors and arrested suspects, you and your hand wringing mates would be all over the security forces (read Govt) screaming blue murder about trampeling on peoples civil liberties etc.
locke & his cohorts would have a field day, subverting in their inimatable way.
Around & around we go.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
@ryan..”Kris seems to be saying that profession of the Islamic faith is necessarily a profession of criminality”
No I never read anywhere that he has said that, Brian is right & I am trying to make the point also that it is non complaince with our societal norms and rules that we must resist (poorly at times I admit).
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Lofty, how many Muslims coming to NZ are on a mission? And how many do you think are trying to come to a better way of life?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Lofty,
It was here: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/09/liquids_on_planes.html#comment-605980
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Ryan Sproull 1:53 pm,
I think the best way to look at this is to look at the NZ of the past.
Even though there has never been a time when all NZers were Christians, we certainly had a society more founded upon Christian beliefs and values in the past. For instance, many non Christians still sent their kids along to Sunday School at the local church because they recognised the good values and principles they would be taught there. I believe that the bulk of our society over the age of say 45, still hold true to most of the biblical values that they grew up with and were taught as kids. Hence the reason that perhaps Lofty and I would agree on many values and recognise what is important to have a truly rich and free democratic society. And perhaps even you and I Ryan would agree on certain values that may not be shared by someone of the ‘younger’ generation who has been brainwashed by socialist/marxist thinking.
As our society has been increasingly brainwashed by all the ‘isms’ since (approx) the 80s, and cast off our Christian heritage and value system, then, as a result, we have opened ourselves up to ‘spiritual attack’ – especially regarding Islam of late. I really do see it that simply Ryan; as we have cast of the ‘old God’ we have lost the associated spiritual protection, and all the ‘new gods’ and godless philosophies have had essentially free reign to breach our borders, and poison our country.
I think with less Christians and people with Christian values today, there is less recognition of the spiritual and physical threat that Islam is to democratic and/or Christian nations. And of course, when one is confronted with the truth it is easy to recognise error.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
@cerium..I do not know anymore than you do, but experience from Gt Britain etc tells me that it is without doubt happening….oh for fucks sake…more circles..I am over it, you win, stick your pathetic point scoring up your lefty arse..
Happy now?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
“the ‘younger’ generation who has been brainwashed by socialist/marxist thinking”
Is that who controls branding and advertising?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Okay. And given all of that, please answer the following question:
Would you like to see Christianity enshrined in law and/or policy in New Zealand as the one true religion?
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Kris wrote (extracts):
With respect Kris, that’s pretty weak beer.
I also have stuff come to mind when having discussions or thinking. This is just the normal workings of the brain. i.e. pulling-up relevant stuff you’ve read or heard or thought through previously. And the ideas are often beyond my abilities, but this is surely just because we have access to the work and writing of much cleverer people than ourselves.
Have you considered that your awareness of God could be nothing more than your imagination, pre-biased by immersion in your religion? I mean, when a scripture comes to mind, surely that’s just because it was already in your mind, from reading the Bible?
You didn’t answer my question about a personal example of a non-coincident prayer outcome. You’ve been doing a stirling job of replying to all these posts but I was wondering if that was because you couldn’t come up with an example?
Assuming that is the case, wouldn’t that seriously undermine your belief that you can communicate with God, or indeed that there is a God to communicate with?
Interesting discussion.
cheers
Malcolm
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Ryan Sproull 2:36 pm,
No, Christianity has never worked like that.
Vote:Christianity is about personal/spiritual transformation. When more people adhere to Christian values the society is strong. When less do the society is weak – both spiritually/morally and society has less resistance against spiritual/philosophical attack.
September 11th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Why do you folks feel the need to question Kris about his beliefs??
Who are you to quiz him? he has stated his position numerous times over the last couple of days, and a very sterling effort he has made I must say, manning up to you lot takes courage of conviction.
Well done that man, Kris if I met you and thought you would drink it I would buy you a beer.
I say again who do lot think you are??? …tossers! yeah you ryan, cerium & you to malcolm.
You would have made good inquisitors.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Okay, so we’re back to the earlier question:
Presumably, but I still don’t see how you could implement a Christian Immigration team using their spiritual insight to determine which potential immigrants are genuine adherents to a Satanic-inspired religion and thus turn them away…
…without Christianity being enshrined in law or policy as the only correct religion.
I mean, when you talk about the politicians you want, you don’t mention them forcing Christianity on the nation, but rather make wise decisions informed by a Spirit-filled life. But when you talk about policies like this immigration one, it couldn’t really happen without those politicians saying, “Well, Christianity’s right, other religions are wrong, and we’re not letting this other religion in the country.”
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
I’m trying to understand his point so that I can make my own understood to him. There are a few questions I can’t quite get him to answer, the main one being how his immigration policy suggestion (team of Christians using their spiritual insight to determine who are Muslims and therefore should not be allowed into the country) could be implemented without Christianity being enshrined in law or policy as the one true religion.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
yeah yeah good on you ryan, You are badgering for the sake of it.
Kris has tried his best over & over again, just accept that you cannot agree and move on.
Have a modicum of respect for his views.
Like I said who are you?
To re-use yesterdays quote to cerium…”never bullshit a bullshitter”
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
If Kris wants to stop discussing this with me, he can tell me himself, Lofty.
Don’t click on the thread if reading the discussion pains you.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
malcolm 2:44 pm,
All I can say is it’s ‘different’.
I’m an engineer, I design stuff; calcs, specs, drawings, commissionig, etc. Things occur to me ‘naturally’, just like they do to you. Not everything that comes to me is by ‘divine’ revelation. But I must admit to having been stumped occassionally with particular engineering problems; prayed about them specifically, and then ‘got an answer’. Once again, it’s different. Other Christians know what I mean and can relate similar things to me. It’s hard trying to explain ‘spiritual truth’ to someone who isn’t also a Christian. Best I can do sorry.
Oh yes, Christ gives me incredible peace and security both in this life, and in the sure knowledge of my eternal destiny. Truly. Once again, it’s that ‘God awareness’.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Get stuffed ryan I will click where and when i want to.
Vote:Like I said who are you?
Kris is more than capable of seeing you off I know, I have said my piece.
September 11th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Okay, Lofty.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Ryan Sproull 2:50 pm,
Exactly.
And when Christianity was more dominant, as it was in the past, then more people, including those politicians who were Christians, would have no trouble in agreeing with the statement: “Well, Christianity’s right, other religions are wrong, and we’re not letting this other religion in the country.” With the additional clause that Islam seeks the destruction of western/Christian/democratic nations, along with the rest of the globe. I have no trouble with Hindus coming here, and I don’t think NZ percieves them as a threat; Islam is a whole different kettle of fish.
But we are going around in circles Ryan. I think if you view Islam as an idealogy, rather than a religion, you’ll get past all this ‘freedom of religion’ stuff. Much in the same way that I mentioned to you previously that because some regard Naziism as a religion, therefore we shouldn’t have resisted Hitler during WWII because it would breach your ‘freedom of religion’ clause. I’m sure you see we’re I’m coming from Ryan.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Calm down and get a grip, lofty.
We’re having a discussion. As you say, Kris is more than capable of writing his own posts and arguing his side. I’m not taking the piss. On the contrary I’m enjoying my conversation with Kris. If Kris doesn’t feel the same he can just stop. That’s how it works.
Seems like you’re not enjoying it though, so just stop.
cheers
Malcolm
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Thanks for the lesson malcolm…. same answer as ryan got..get stuffed.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
I think I’m about ready to join you Lofty for that beer.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Kris, something you have touched on here that I think is worth further discussion some time later – the spiritual vacuum. It’s something I’m interested in exploring, don’t know what the answers are, but it could be a significant problem and potential problem.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Yeah Kris, it’s like flogging a dead horse.
Vote:I am over it.
Good luck, and well done Kris, you did a great job of sticking up for yourself, while I do not share your enthusiasm for Christianity I most certainly “value it’s values”.
Catch you on another thread sometime.
September 11th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Oh and I go with my parting shot….regardless of the deflection of argument, the threat still remains.
Unfortunatly we are destined to suffer the consequences of inaction by fools.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Cerium 3:39 pm,
I assume, by “spiritual vacuum” you mean that ‘God shaped hole’ in the non Christian. I actually hate that phrase, but I assume that’s what you mean?
I imagine suggesting DPF have a daily ‘General Spiritual Debate’ thread would be about as popular as a cold cup of sick around here.
Vote:What would you suggest?
September 11th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Kris K wrote:
Me too
Power systems (substation design and construction etc) with bits of software development as well.
Thanks for the answer. Basically I take your answer to be “I believe this because I believe it.” Fair enough. It’s a bit circular for me though and it wouldn’t pass a design review:
– How did you size that cable, Kris?
– I just know it’s right. I can’t explain it, but I just know.
– OK, that’ll do. Order it.
Anyway, good discussion.
cheers
Malcolm
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
See you ’round Lofty, it was a pleasure.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Even in General Debate would be ok, yeah, may not be popular but I’m a bit used to that. I just haven’t got time for the rest of the day, may put some thoughts together in the weekend. General gists of what I am thinking – religion doesn’t have the same influence as it did, many people lack something to believe in and look up to, and how to manage reasonable religious/non-religious discussions without them degenerating into religious arguments.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Cerium,
I know there are a few other Christians floating around as well who may be interested in contributing.
Why the decline of religion (Christianity), and that people lack ‘something’ to believe in – would certainly be something I have a perspective on. The thing is Cerium I’ll have to start quoting from the good Book to support some of my views – more cups of cold sick I fear.
But if you’re genuine I guess you won’t mind a little of the ‘good stuff’.
As to, “how to manage reasonable religious/non-religious discussions without them degenerating into religious arguments”, I really don’t know. But i think it has a lot to do with whether people are genuinely after the ‘truth’, or just in for a bun fight. But hey, I’m a sucker for punishment (up to a point), so bring it on.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
I do see where you’re coming from, I just don’t think that you can implement the immigration policy you suggest without enshrining one religion over others as correct and enforcing it (at least in that respect) via the state. That’s why I asked you what you thought of separation of church and state. To do what you would like to see done, things would have to go further than simply having wise Spirit-inspired Christians at the reins of the established state. It would require Christianity to explicitly become part of the structure of that established state.
With regards to Naziism as a religion, I don’t think you see where I draw the line between speech and action. I do not think it is in keeping with democratic principles of freedom of speech and freedom of association to inflict state force on someone for any words, and that must include Nazi words. But what the Nazis did was clearly beyond getting together and saying words, and at the point where it becomes action (or perhaps explicitly planned action), it moves beyond expression and into criminality.
I don’t think it’s contrary to democratic principles for someone to be locked up for murdering in the name of Jesus, for instance. Their freedom of religion precludes them being attacked by the state for saying, “I am a Christian,” but does not give them a pass to commit crimes by attaching “it’s my religion” to the end.
But I do think that the freedom to profess one’s religion without fear of being locked up (or turned away from a country that would otherwise let you in) is too important to throw away in an attempt to deal with a small perceived threat via blanket discrimination.
Then again, I speak as someone who is not a Christian, and therefore does not share your own desires for how people in New Zealand should believe, speak, vote and act.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Kris, Ryan, Cerium et al. Kudos to you guys. This topic often sprials downhill into rants and ad homen attacks. Quite the opposite here. I’ve seen [from the sideline] an increasing respect of each others’ views. Well done!
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
I hope you can see, Kris, that to me the choice is between a democratic state or a Christian state of the sort you are suggesting, just as the choice is between a democratic state or an Islamic state of the sort you fear. In both cases, I would choose liberty over religion, and in both cases it is a choice between liberty and religion. In fact, it is a choice between freedom of religion on one hand and a religion on the other.
Christianity’s been on the victim side of that dynamic before. I’d like to think that Christians would have some sympathy for a religion targeted by a state for persecution.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
I appreciate that, GS.
On that note, I’m off to Waiheke for the weekend. Thanks for an interesting discussion, Kris. I hope my insistence didn’t come across to you as it clearly did for others – as badgering. The world would be a boring place if we all agreed on everything.
Vote:September 12th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Ryan,
I guess one of the benefits of living in a Christian/democratic country is that we are free to openly express our views such as the debate we have been having here. That same opportunity is generally not available within most/all Islamic countries.
Although you seem to see democracy as not being dependent upon Christianity, I see it as quite the opposite. As I said earlier, true democracy is dependent upon a strong moral and value driven foundation; and I believe a biblical foundation. So while democracy will run on for a while under its own inertia if that moral foundation is removed, it will inevitably become a socialist state, or be taken over by other ideologies (such as Islam), because the very thing that defined it has been removed.
In the NZ of old, because that foundation was still in place, we were afforded spiritual protection against both Godlessness (socialism/marxism/darwinism/atheism et al) and anti Christian ideologies (such as Islam). As our country has thrown off our Christian heritage we have embraced a socialist mindset which includes being culturally sensitive; religiously tolerant; non discriminitory of alternative ‘lifestyles’; and being open to ALL ideologies that are traditionally foreign to our culture. And while these things all seem good on the surface, when you dig below just a little they are actually attacks upon our culture; religious heritage; and indeed the very values that make NZ what it is (or at least was).
While I know we cannot turn back the clock, but if it were possible to do so then, I believe, we would once again come under the spiritual protection that once ‘watched over’ this nation. And as a Christian I believe that protection is from the God of the bible; the Creator of all. So I guess what I’m trying to say Ryan, is that if our society honours God then He will honour us, and in a very real sense we will have to do nothing else at all. He will take care of all our needs (and quite likely many of our wants).
As a Christian I have these ‘spiritual filters’ which perhaps gives me a different perspective on things when compared to how you may perceive them. But hopefully you see a little better some of my concerns, and perhaps some of my ‘solutions’.
And yes, it has been an interesting discussion – we are starting to chalk them up, aren’t we.
The fact that you (and perhaps Cerium) disagree with me in fact forces me to better clarify my particular viewpoints/beliefs. There is indeed nothing worse than shouting into a vacuum. And who knows, I may even eventually win you over to the ‘Dark Side’.
Have a good time on Waiheke (never been there myself; Great Barrier I have though).
Vote:See you ’round the blogosphere.
September 12th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Hi Kris, I’ll touch on a couple of things you say here, and move onto current topics tomorrow. This has gotten a wee bit off topic but its become interesting.
I don’t think you will win me over to the whatever side. But I don’t think that is necessary. It is better that we learn to accept different beliefs and find a way to move forward together without competing and name calling (that has happened plenty between different Christian factions too).
I think you are right about the move away from Christianity and it’s hard to see a move back. But I think you are wrong about things moving to socialism/communism. None of those countries that tried it kept it going past the end of last century. And none of the “Western” countries got taken in significantly by it. It is a failed last century ideology. Capitalism hasn’t failed completely, but it has shown it has enough flaws of it’s own to only be workable on a partial basis, uncontrolled it self destructs.
So I think we have to move forward as part Christian, part Capitalist democracies. And find what is the best way to complement both of those.
Vote:September 12th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Hi Cerium 1:24 pm,
I think I can agree with that.
Vote:Perhaps the controlling factor for Capitalism to work is in fact a strong Christian/moral foundation?
But as you imply, perhaps a topic for another day.
September 14th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Yeah, that’s the main reason I come here – you learn more about your own views by discussing things with people who disagree with you. As for winning me over to the Dark Side, I spent several years studying to a Christian minister, and while I know better than to think I’ll never change my mind about anything, I wouldn’t recommend putting any money on it.
Vote: