Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Religious discrimination or Christian persecution?

Cranmer has received an email from a correspondent (what should Cranmer call these? Communicants? Brethren?) which accorded with his own experience. It raises very important issues of immigration policy, particularly with regard to the faith of those who are admitted, and the inequities inherent in the respective assessment processes:

"For many months now I have had an Iraqi Christian, a Catholic of the Chaldean Rite, in my parish. He already has close relatives, already living in England with the right to remain indefinitely. He is a highly qualified, professional medical man who is fleeing the persecution of Christians in his homeland. The Home Office have been exceptionally difficult throughout and opposed his further stays in this country with every weapon in their armoury. In court case after court case the Catholic Church has pleaded for him to be allowed to stay, as yet with little success.

"I was anxiously pondering this case when I was given a copy of the journal of the United Reformed Church. There was an article entirely devoted to the plight of Christians fleeing persecution and attempting to gain admittance to the UK. In essence the article pointed out that the Home Office sets absurdly difficult tests which they expect Christian asylum seekers to pass, often asking questions that a well informed Catholic would find taxing. Furthermore, these tests are uniform across the Christian spectrum and make no distinction between a Catholic petitioner and one from say a Salvation Army background. When the bishops of the Church of England asked the Home Office if they could advise them on what were appropriate questions to test the authenticity of applicants from across the wide spectrum of the Christian family, they were refused. Earlier in the year, asylum seekers who had committed serious crimes were allowed back into the community after their terms of imprisonment. The comparison with the treatment of Christians is remarkable and surely poses an important question."

Cranmer is aware of one instance of immigration assessment in which a Christian convert was asked to explain the Trinity. This, apparently, was considered a fair line of inquiry to determine the veracity or otherwise of the conversion. Since the matter of the Trinity has been a cause of theological strife since Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, first used the term (in writing) in 160, it would seem a little unreasonable to demand that a recent convert would be able to expound the complexities of Monarchianism.

Cranmer wonders if Muslims trying to enter the country are asked to explain the theology of Jihad?


Anonymous Colin said...

The Libertarian H.L. Mencken summed it up: "Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under."

3 October 2006 at 15:01  
Blogger Serf said...

As all reasonable people have long since understood, the asylum system is not for people who are persecuted, but rather a concrete representation of post colonial guilt. All kinds of terorists and pimps use it to enter the country, whilst the real refugee is turned away.

Believe me, if terrorists thought that learning about the trinity would get them into the country, they would set up training courses. Simple asylum seekers however are not cunning enough to think of such things.

3 October 2006 at 16:16  
Anonymous religion of pieces said...

"The time has now come to form a global Pan-Christian Front" (even uniting Irish Protestants and Catholics! ) http://lark.phoblacht.net/JC0210062g.html

3 October 2006 at 16:55  
Blogger Fruning Graplecard said...

Can I ask, how many theologians and philosophers does the home office employ, or is the trinity line of questioning in essay form?

3 October 2006 at 19:51  
Blogger The Ghost Of Peter said...

Wonderful, some Zimbabwean slapper who is here illegally and has sex on Big Brother (its a television program) is given leave to stay in case she get beaten up at home for having had sex on a TV program and an eminent Medical professional is made to hop around on a pin head to prove his faith.
Simple solution he robs a post office whilst being filmed for crimewatch and then copulates on camera mid getaway, 2 years inside and then he gets his British passport.

3 October 2006 at 21:39  
Blogger Croydonian said...

As ever, His Grace avoids the obvious when he posts.

I imagine the powers that be are in thrall to the idea that racism = power + prejudice, and as they think that Christians have power (I imagine they know nothing, and care still less about the work of the Barnabas Fund) and therefore cannot be at, erm, sharp end of the stick.

3 October 2006 at 22:32  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

I know the Barnabas Fund, they do excellent work. I'm aware that Christians get routinely discrininated against when it comes to immigration, no matter what skills they have, and people of other religions have less of a problem. Why, I have no idea. It makes no sense to me at all.

4 October 2006 at 13:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Easy - it's to fill the country with anything but Christians.

4 October 2006 at 16:52  
Anonymous Colin said...

Fighting the immigration of Christians is part of the strategic blueprint of the Left developed by the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci.

Following Gramsci, Leftists believe that Christianity remains the greatest obstacle to their victory in the culture war. "The civilized world had been thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2000 years," the Italian had written. Something, he preached, had to be done about that.

Gramsci postulated that the workers will never see their true class interests, as defined by Marxism, until they are freed from Western culture, and particularly from the Christian religion – that they are blinded by culture and religion to their true class interests. In 1921, Cramsci wrote:

"What remains to be done? Nothing other than to destroy the present form of civilization. In this field, 'to destroy' does not mean the same as in the economic field. It does not mean to deprive humanity of the material products that it needs to subsist and develop. It means to destroy spiritual hierarchies, prejudices, idols and ossified traditions."

Cramsci adviced to destroy Western culture by forming alliances with groups victimized by Western civilization; in his view, the Third World, non-Christian religions, imprisoned criminals, sexual minorities, women and children.

Just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e. workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness certain groups are good – feminist women, blacks, non-Western cultures and religions, Palastinians, criminals etc. These groups are seen as "victims," and are automatically good regardless of what any of them do. Similarly, white males, Americans, Israelis are automatically evil, the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic Marxism.

Gramsci counseled to begin a "long march through the institutions", by which he meant the capture of the cinema, theater, schools, universities, seminaries, newspapers, magazines, radio, television, and courts, according to an article "Culture War" by Lee Congdon , Professor emeritus of history at James Madison University, and a member of the Board of Scholars of the Virginia Institute for Public Policy.

To realize Gramsci’s plan, a think-tank was founded in 1923 in Germany by a wealthy young son of a millionaire German trader by the name of Felix Weil (see photo, upper row, second from the right) in order to translate Marxism from economic into cultural terms, which created Political Correctness as we know it today. Young rich Felix endowed an institute, associated with Frankfurt University, which was named Institute for Social Research . In 1930, Max Horkheimer became director of the Marxist think-tank in Frankfurt. Max was very interested in Freud and combined Marxism with Freudism. By drawing on Marx and Freud, the Frankfurt School created the so-called Critical Theory with the purpose to uncritically critize Western culture.

Other uncritical thinkers joined the club at this time, i.e. Theodore Adorno, Erich Fromm and Herbert Marcuse. When the Nazis came to power, they all had to flee to the USA where they happily continued their cultural war against Western civilzation, this time in the English speaking world.

In the 1960s, Herbert Marcuse saw the student rebellion, driven largely by resistance to the draft and the Vietnam War, as the great opportunity to take the work of the Frankfurt School and make it the theory of the New Left in the United States. In his book Eros and Civilization , Marcuse argued that repression is the essence of the capitalistic order and the cause of neuroses, because sexual instincts are repressed. In other words, free the world by making love. Could there be anything more pleasant for young men than to follow the new religion of cultural Marxism?

Fourty years later, after a happy march through the institutions, these young men and some feminist women are sitting at the levers of power and the people in the Western world are wondering about all the nonsense coming out of theaters, schools, universities, newspapers, radio, television, courts, and governments.

It is the century-old secular religion of cultural Marxism. The priests of the cultural-marxistic “religion” preach water to the populace (higher taxes to fund their cultural wars) and drink the wine in the form of jobs financed by the populace. In line with their creed, these cultural-marxistic jihadists want to destroy what they see as the great obstacle to the creation of a Marxist paradise: Western civilization and Christianism.

In 1919, Lukacs, who was considered the most brilliant Marxist theorist since Marx himself, said "Who will save us from Western Civilization?" Today, we know that the Left has found the answer: mass immigration from Islamic countries.

Some links:


4 October 2006 at 19:04  
Anonymous Colin said...

In line with the cultural-marxist agenda of destroying the Western civilization, conservative European politicians resisting mass immigration from Islamic countries are now banned from parliament in Belgium, while extreme right-wing immigrants from Islamic countries, e.g. members the Turkish organisation Grey Wolves, are permitted to run for the Socialist Party of Belgium. See article in the Brusselsjournal: Brussels: Elected Politician Barred from Office for Leaflet.

Brussels is testing the blueprint for the EU.

4 October 2006 at 22:33  
Anonymous religion of pieces said...

I wonder whether Belgium or France will be the first European country to become ungovernable:


5 October 2006 at 12:06  
Anonymous Colin said...

religion of pieces

Thank you for the highly interesting link: Muslims are waging civil war against us, claims police union.

It appears to be the beginning of ethnic cleansing in Muslim dominated areas.

“Asian youths,” a British euphemism for Pakistanis and Muslims from South Asia, in parts of Oldham are trying to create no-go areas for white people. One of them told: “There are signs all around saying whites enter at your risk. It’s a matter of revenge.” However, it’s not just the white natives that are targets of Muslim violence, but other non-Muslims, too. A report on Hindus being driven out of the English city of Bradford by young Muslims was described by some Hindus as “ethnic cleansing.” Some of them want to leave the city to escape the “Talibanization of Bradford.”Beheading Nations: The Islamization of Europe’s Cities

In an online story in newspaper The Daily Telegraph that was removed “for legal reasons,” former Muslim Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo warned that British Muslims could soon form a state within the state. Dr Sookhdeo believed that “in a decade, you will see parts of English cities which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law.” “In 1980, the Islamic Council of Europe laid out their strategy for the future – and the fundamental rule was never dilute your presence. That is to say, do not integrate.” “Rather, concentrate Muslim presence in a particular area until you are a majority in that area, so that the institutions of the local community come to reflect Islamic structures. The education system will be Islamic, the shops will serve only halal food, there will be no advertisements showing naked or semi-naked women, and so on.” The next step will be pushing the Government to recognize sharia law for Muslim communities – which will be backed up by the claim that it is “racist” or “Islamophobic” to deny them this. The Islamization of Europe’s Cities

From an Interview with German Islam Expert Bassam Tibi:

Tibi: Accusing somebody of racism is a very effective weapon in Germany. Islamists know this: As soon as you accuse someone of demonizing Islam, then the European side backs down. I have also been accused of such nonsense, even though my family can trace its roots right back to Muhammad and I myself know the Koran by heart.

SPIEGEL: You have said numerous times that the conflict between the Western world and Muslim groups here is an "ideological war."

Tibi: The result of a conflict between two sides is that people politicize their cultural backgrounds. In Germany representatives of the Islamic communities try to hijack children who are born here, along with the entire Islamic community, to prevent them from being influenced by the society which has taken them in. Children born here are like blank sheets on which you can write European or Islamic texts. Muslim representatives want to raise their children as if they don't even live in Europe.

5 October 2006 at 12:47  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Accusing people of racism will work for a year or two more, max. Most are becoming aware of proxy straw man methods in the cultural war. Less of us will be deceived. Once that nonsense is out of the way, the real debate will begin. Hopefully without knuckle sandwiches and sanguine filling or worse.

The guiding light will be religious and cultural intolerance by so many Islamics. They can’t help it, the Koran dictates their need to look down on all infidels. Full stop! Many of them are at war with us, for centuries it seems.

As for the left, once again some socialists are on the wrong side of history, not bad really, they will only reap what they sow. More power to them. Political survival is a very potent wine, even Mr Straw has waded into a contentious area big time. Like it or lump it, the process of readjustment is under way. We can but hope the debate will be that......a debate not a civil war.

Will many on the left stay on the wrong side? Probably, but many will not if Mr Straw is anything to go by. The Gramsci suicidal lefties will stay the course and bed down with IslamoFacism, be that as it may. I just wonder how they think they can outwit the Islamic cultural warriors when the time comes. Frankly, I don’t give a damn.

14 October 2006 at 22:52  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older