Muslim People in Australia (3 Viewers)

[_dhj_]

tats true, but a lot ppl are forced to believe in that stuff, like cos their parents believe in it and their friends etc.

That's a good point. Although if those people are merely adhering to the religious customs rather than actually believing in the religion, they're in a sense just like the rest of atheists. I also don't think that the number of atheists have increased throughout history. There has always been about the same proportion of atheists, but we have just previously been hiding in the closet for fear of persecution (i.e. burnt at the stake).

 

[_dhj_]

I don't see why it's so important for migrants to assimilate. Anyone can hate Australia or Australian culture. Just because someone is a third generation English migrant doesn't mean they can't despise mainstream Australian behaviour or believe in the superiority of English culture and lifestyle. The fact that a person is assimilated doesn't mean their innate terroristic, anti-nationalist or counter polity tendancies are subdued.

Assimilating someone is basically restricting or shaping someone's ideas and values in line with the mainstream. To me, the concept should not be used in policy in a democratic society regardless of whether or not we are talking about immigrants. So what if they don't believe in 'fundamentals' like democracy or freedom of religion. Communists don't eithers. Individual beliefs simply cannot be restricted by the government. It is up to the law to act when those values actually impede on the rights of others. And no, a right to have everyone else believe in the same thing or share the same values as yourself does not exist in pluralistic societies.

 

[banco55]

I don't see why it's so important for migrants to assimilate. Anyone can hate Australia or Australian culture. Just because someone is a third generation English migrant doesn't mean they can't despise mainstream Australian behaviour or believe in the superiority of English culture and lifestyle. The fact that a person is assimilated doesn't mean their innate terroristic, anti-nationalist or counter polity tendancies are subdued.

Assimilating someone is basically restricting or shaping someone's ideas and values in line with the mainstream. To me, the concept should not be used in policy in a democratic society regardless of whether or not we are talking about immigrants. So what if they don't believe in 'fundamentals' like democracy or freedom of religion. Communists don't eithers. Individual beliefs simply cannot be restricted by the government. It is up to the law to act when those values actually impede on the rights of others. And no, a right to have everyone else believe in the same thing or share the same values as yourself does not exist in pluralistic societies.

Democracy isn't a suicide pact. I agree if you have a 2nd/3rd generation immigrant who has no truck with democracy etc, women's rights etc. there's not much you can do. But you can restrict immigration from groups that are likely to hold these views ie Muslims. There are a lot people who want to come to Australia we can and should be choosy. We've had far less trouble with Korean and Chinese immigrants for example.

 

[_dhj_]

Democracy isn't a suicide pact. I agree if you have a 2nd/3rd generation immigrant who has no truck with democracy etc, women's rights etc. there's not much you can do. But you can restrict immigration from groups that are likely to hold these views ie Muslims. There are a lot people who want to come to Australia we can and should be choosy. We've had far less trouble with Korean and Chinese immigrants for example.

I think we simply have a different assessment of the extent to which muslim migrants actually undermine the democratic system. The restriction of Muslim migrants in itself undermines two 'fundamental' values imo - freedom of religion and anti-discrimination.

 

[katie_tully]

I don't see why it's so important for migrants to assimilate. Anyone can hate Australia or Australian culture. Just because someone is a third generation English migrant doesn't mean they can't despise mainstream Australian behaviour or believe in the superiority of English culture and lifestyle. The fact that a person is assimilated doesn't mean their innate terroristic, anti-nationalist or counter polity tendancies are subdued.

Assimilating someone is basically restricting or shaping someone's ideas and values in line with the mainstream. To me, the concept should not be used in policy in a democratic society regardless of whether or not we are talking about immigrants. So what if they don't believe in 'fundamentals' like democracy or freedom of religion. Communists don't eithers. Individual beliefs simply cannot be restricted by the government. It is up to the law to act when those values actually impede on the rights of others. And no, a right to have everyone else believe in the same thing or share the same values as yourself does not exist in pluralistic societies.

It's easy. If you hate Australia, regardless of whether you're an immigrant or a 3rd generation Englishman, then I suggest you POQ to a country that is more facilitated towards your tastes.

The fact that a person is assimilated doesn't mean their innate terroristic, anti-nationalist or counter polity tendancies are subdued.

That doesn't make any sense. If they've assimilated, then that means they are adhering to the baseline culture, and are no immediate threat. The fact that they assimilated means that they harbour no resentment towards their adopted culture, a resentment that may cause them to act out.
Obviously if they have resentment, then they haven't assimilated, have they.

So what if they don't believe in 'fundamentals' like democracy or freedom of religion.

Well then why the fuck are you in a country which is founded on secular beliefs, which clearly states that people have the right to democracy and freedom of speech and religion. Clearly if you hate democracy, moving to a democratic nation isn't your smartest move. If you don't believe in living in a country where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are accepted, then once again, you're obviously in the wrong country.

Communists don't eithers. Individual beliefs simply cannot be restricted by the government. It is up to the law to act when those values actually impede on the rights of others. And no, a right to have everyone else believe in the same thing or share the same values as yourself does not exist in pluralistic societies.

I don't see Comrade Nathan strapping himself to a pipe bomb in the immediate future, because the majority of Australians are capitalist and not communist.
In other countries this may be the case, but then again those countries do not demonstrate the same freedom of speech that we do.

I'm not sure which values impede on the rights of people. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to list the values in Australia which directly impact upon the 'rights of the individual'..

I think we simply have a different assessment of the extent to which muslim migrants actually undermine the democratic system. The restriction of Muslim migrants in itself undermines two 'fundamental' values imo - freedom of religion and anti-discrimination.

Well when Chinese immigrants and Korean immigrants start building home made bombs to use on Australians, we will re-evaluate the extent to which they undermine the democratic system.
Until such a time, we will focus on the fact that there is a problem with the Islamic community of Australia.

 

[garbagedump]

Katie, u must be missing my whole point..possibly ignorance

When we go to places like Saudi Arabia, we HAVE to assimilate to their values. We HAVE to dress according to their laws. We HAVE to do everything according to their culture, because their pentalties are somewhat more harsh than ours.

EXACTLY..then U go on to say that muslims should assimilate in australia...just like what they're doing

I don't recall anybody saying that clothing and prayers are extremist behaviour. Stop trivialising.

So what kind of extremist behaviour are u talking about? There is obviously no excuse for terrorism and only a minority go down that path.

Don't give me any bullshit about Muslims in Australia being "misunderstood", as I am no longer buying your lame attempts at trying to justify extremist behaviour. There is no excuse for extremist behaviour in Australia.

seriously try answering the whole questions rather than some parts

When the Italians, Greeks, Africans, British, New Zealander, Asian, Canadian, Greenlandian etcetera immigrants start inciting racial hatred, and start blowing people up en masse, I will write them a little ditty also.

OK...so u haven;t seen asians inciting racial hatred against aussies...u havent even seen anglos inciting racial hatred against aussies?!@
I think know i get u...u have been suckered believing what the media portrays biasly...t

 

[katie_tully]

Obviously you're still in denial. Or perhaps it's ignorance?

EXACTLY..then U go on to say that muslims should assimilate in australia...just like what they're doing

They aren't all assimilating. That is the point. That is what this entire argument is about. The fact that some migrants come to Australia with the expectation that they will not have to assimilate. Yet if we went to their country, we would have no choice but to, or face a harsh penalty.

So what kind of extremist behaviour are u talking about? There is obviously no excuse for terrorism and only a minority go down that path.

If you're honestly too stupid to know what falls under 'extremist behaviour', let me know and I'll draw a picture for you. Maybe then you'll comprehend.
Oh looky here, you then go on to say that only a minority go down that path. Thus you're admitting to knowing what extremist behaviour is, because YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT THERE ARE MUSLIMS IN AUSTRALIA WHO ARE PRONE TO EXTREMIST BEHAVIOUR.
Dear lord, make up YOUR mind.

seriously try answering the whole questions rather than some parts

Try asking a question that isn't stupid, or self explanatory.

OK...so u haven;t seen asians inciting racial hatred against aussies...u havent even seen anglos inciting racial hatred against aussies?!@
I think know i get u...u have been suckered believing what the media portrays biasly...t

Oh noes. The media is bad. The media has an anti Muslim agenda. Blah blah blah.
How can an anglo incite racial hatred towards another anglo? In effect, it's not racial hatred, it's just two yobbo's having a spat on the street.
I haven't seen asians, en masse, inciting racial hatred towards Australians. If there was such a predominance of cases, as there is with Muslims, I'd be speaking out against that too.

You don't get me. You don't know shit about me. Go read Psychology for Dummies, and then I'll let you psychoanalyse me.

 

[garbagedump]

hey aren't all assimilating. That is the point. That is what this entire argument is about. The fact that some migrants come to Australia with the expectation that they will not have to assimilate. Yet if we went to their country, we would have no choice but to, or face a harsh penalty.

RElli are u that stupid? so ur values are turning into theirs...assimilate totally(which u are against) ?

If you're honestly too stupid to know what falls under 'extremist behaviour', let me know and I'll draw a picture for you. Maybe then you'll comprehend.
Oh looky here, you then go on to say that only a minority go down that path. Thus you're admitting to knowing what extremist behaviour is, because YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT THERE ARE MUSLIMS IN AUSTRALIA WHO ARE PRONE TO EXTREMIST BEHAVIOUR.
Dear lord, make up YOUR mind.

Oh looky here, you cant relli put up a sensible post so u try to *create* humour... DO you know what the point of this is?> EVERYONE knows wht extremist behaviour is and it is not tolerated ANYWHERE...we';re not disputing wheterh or not muslims are prone to extremist behaviour...coz it's obvious taht some muslims are extremists (they are commonly called terrorists, katie)

YEAH TRY TO actually answer a proper qeustion, keeping in mind what the point of the discussion is.

Sorry, i meant to say anglos incitying raical hatred against lebs etc

"I haven't seen asians"
POINT PROVEN

Go read Psychology for Dummies

i was unaware there was a book about this...have u read it? coz i think u need to read psychology for trolls first
No one actually needs to do a course.l..it;s pretty obvious that ur posts are pretty lame ...and almost troll like..

thankyou

 

[katie_tully]

Please. Speak English. It makes proving you wrong all the more easier for me.

RElli are u that stupid? so ur values are turning into theirs...assimilate totally(which u are against) ?

I don't even understand what that is meant to mean.

You say this

EVERYONE knows wht extremist behaviour is

Yet before, you said this...

So what kind of extremist behaviour are u talking about

I don't get what you're trying to prove. That you're lost? You have no idea what you're arguing for, or against?

Sorry, i meant to say anglos incitying raical hatred against lebs etc

"I haven't seen asians"
POINT PROVEN

What point was proven? The point that you can paraphrase? Allow me to quote the entire sentence again, for you. I think you missed a few words.

I haven't seen asians, en masse, inciting racial hatred towards Australians.

Next time you're trying to prove a point, be so kind as to quote the entire text.

No one actually needs to do a course.l..it;s pretty obvious that ur posts are pretty lame ...and almost troll like..
thankyou

No, you're right. Nobody needs to take a course to shoot shit from their mouth. It generally makes them look less dumb though.

we';re not disputing wheterh or not muslims are prone to extremist behaviour...coz it's obvious taht some muslims are extremists (they are commonly called terrorists, katie)

Then none of us get what you, or your little Muslim friends are trying to argue. If you admit that there are extremist Muslims in the Australian community, why have they/you been denying it, and debating against it for the last 154 pages?

 

[_dhj_]

Katie tully your main problem is that you are vastly exaggerating the threat of terrorism in Australia. You acknowledge that it is only strapping oneself to bombs etc that you detest, rather than praying or wearing particular clothes. The reality is there hasn't been a single terrorist attack on Australian soil thus far, nor has there been a single death on Australian soil due to a terrorist attack. Now, I'm not denying that the risk of a terrorist attack in Australia is relatively high, but surely that risk can be adequately dealt with by law enforcement. Surely, if a Muslim is found to be planning a terrorist attack, he or she could be arrested just like any other Anglo or ethnic criminal. Bearing in mind that this risk, although relatively high as Australia is a Western democracy, is in absolute terms quite low compared to other crimes that are committed, such as murder, so to argue that we are to exclude Muslims from migrating to Australia in response to this low risk would not only ironically undermine what Australia apparently stand for, but would also be a disproportionate action to take for the risk that is posed. Even if that action is taken, and assuming that only Muslims commit terrorist acts, how would you stop an Australian citizen from converting to Islam (e.g. Hicks, for the purpose of this example assuming that he is a terrorist)? Surely it is impossible to actually assimilate someone who is already intending to commit a terrorist act.

Try not to respond to this by dissecting each sentence individually and out of context. Deal with the crux of the idea.

 

[katie_tully]

Now, I'm not denying that the risk of a terrorist attack in Australia is relatively high, but surely that risk can be adequately dealt with by law enforcement.

No, it won't. Because law enforcement requires a small amount of participation and co-operation from the community. When members of the Muslim community are unwilling to release information about possible trouble makers (as was the case after Cronulla retribution attacks), it makes it increasingly hard for the law enforcement agencies to STOP these people BEFORE an attack.

Even if that action is taken, and assuming that only Muslims commit terrorist acts, how would you stop an Australian citizen from converting to Islam (e.g. Hicks, for the purpose of this example assuming that he is a terrorist)? Surely it is impossible to actually assimilate someone who is already intending to commit a terrorist act.

Well the idea would be that people who aware of the anglo convert would dob them in, before the event of an attack.

Try not to respond to this by dissecting each sentence individually and out of context. Deal with the crux of the idea.

I respond to each sentence individually, because it is the points in the individual sentences that I am disagreeing with.

If I have misquoted, or quoted out of context, be sure to let me know. Thus far, I believe I am yet to do so.

 

[garbagedump]

Sorry i was in a rush so i did not have time to edit, besides it was rather trollish so i was pretty sure u will definitely be able to read it

Last edited by Generator: "There's a limit to the number of mild insults that I'll accept"

Last edited by garbageddump: Today at 6:30 PM Reason: Much of the relevant facts were deleted by Generator.

 

[The Brucemaster]

OK so essentially what Katie is saying is that immigrants should be forced to assimilate culturally to ur country for the following reasons:

1) If you are in our country you should respect the way we live, this is where the whole household analogy gets thrown around a lot: if you have a friend over at your house they are expected to abide by the rules of your house, same should go for the country.

2) People with opposing ideologies are a possible threat to our security. This is referring, of course, to Muslims who hold extremist views and actually any others who also hold extremist views.

Both these points are in fact linked to each other thus, the main argument is that we should require immigrants to assimilate to reduce the threat to our security (please correct me Katie if you think this is wrong).

So it would logically follow, in my mind, that assimilation should only extend to those deemed a threat to security. In whch case, it is far easier to simply deport these people. If immigrants aren't a threat to security in any way then there is no problem so why not let them in?


As to garbagedump's argument, it seems it is merely a refutation of Katie's argument with a very loose basis in the idea of cultural acceptance. The only real substance I can see is that all immigrants are not extremists and thus we shouldn't require them all to assimilate. Other than its all basically personal insults about Katie's apparent lack of intellectuality, electricity and other such things.
As such there's nothing much else i can say about it because there's nothing to say anything about.

To conclude, I agree with the principle behind Katie's argument, in that we should require some assimilation of opposing culture's. Realistically, though, id say it would be more integration rather than assimilation. Assimilation ss impractical and wouldn't be able to be implemented.
On the other hand, however, we can't just open up the country to every man and his dog.

 

[garbagedump]

No phatbruce, i only reply properly to those with sensible and well thought out posts.
As such, i will reply to yours.
First, i was only identifiying the hypocrisy of katie's rather ignorant statements that she has concluded in her previous posts.

It seems that she is willing to adopt assimilation for migrants in Australia, whilst she still criticises the implementation of asssimlation in middle eastern countries. She also continues to say that the point of this whole discussion is to debate whether or not muslims are terrorist or something similar

Then none of us get what you, or your little Muslim friends are trying to argue. If you admit that there are extremist Muslims in the Australian community, why have they/you been denying it, and debating against it for the last 154 pages?

As you probably know there has been several arrests of extremist muslims in the past few years, so it is pretty stupid to debate this fact.

And this rather ridiculous comment,

Don't give me any bullshit about Muslims in Australia being "misunderstood", as I am no longer buying your lame attempts at trying to justify extremist behaviour. There is no excuse for extremist behaviour in Australia.

Obviously extremist behaviour is not tolerated anywhere, so what is she trying to say...that praying etc. is extremist behaviour lol

She has been owned a lot of times on this thread and many times even one single page.

 

[The Brucemaster]

First, i was only identifiying the hypocrisy of katie's rather ignorant statements that she has concluded in her previous posts.

It seems that she is willing to adopt assimilation for migrants in Australia, whilst she still criticises the implementation of asssimlation in middle eastern countries. She also continues to say that the point of this whole discussion is to debate whether or not muslims are terrorist or something similar.

See I disagree with that. All Katie did was to point out the fact that Middle Eastern nations require assimilation of foreigners, she was not criticising it as far as I can tell.

And this rather ridiculous comment,
Obviously extremist behaviour is not tolerated anywhere, so what is she trying to say...that praying etc. is extremist behaviour lol

No I dont think she is saying that at all. She is simply saying that we should not tolerate extremist behaviour in Australia, which is not unreasonable by any means.

She has been owned a lot of times on this thread and many times even one single page.

I again disagree. You are the one that is doing the alleged owning therefore you are extremely biased towards yourself. Your arguments, whilst you may think are all well and good, indicate a lack of understanding of Katie's argument as a whole. You pick out minor discrepancies within Katie's statements and highlight their supposed fallacies yet you fail to deal with the argument as a whole.
While the arguments that you present may be correct they do not deal effectively with the issue being raised.

 

[HotShot]

OK so essentially what Katie is saying is that immigrants should be forced to assimilate culturally to ur country for the following reasons:

maybe she is maybe she isnt?

1) If you are in our country you should respect the way we live, this is where the whole household analogy gets thrown around a lot: if you have a friend over at your house they are expected to abide by the rules of your house, same should go for the country.

respect is important, but it has to go in both ways, if your bad host dont expect to be respected- just a point, not pointing towards anything,.

2) People with opposing ideologies are a possible threat to our security. This is referring, of course, to Muslims who hold extremist views and actually any others who also hold extremist views.

keyword is possible, thats really rare that such ideologies are negative. most of em i feel have driven advancement in australia - in society, technology etc

Both these points are in fact linked to each other thus, the main argument is that we should require immigrants to assimilate to reduce the threat to our security (please correct me Katie if you think this is wrong).

there will always be a threat of some sort, rather than avoiding, its best to address. ignorance is not the way.

So it would logically follow, in my mind, that assimilation should only extend to those deemed a threat to security. In whch case, it is far easier to simply deport these people. If immigrants aren't a threat to security in any way then there is no problem so why not let them in?

ha, ha ha nice one.

As to garbagedump's argument, it seems it is merely a refutation of Katie's argument with a very loose basis in the idea of cultural acceptance. The only real substance I can see is that all immigrants are not extremists and thus we shouldn't require them all to assimilate. Other than its all basically personal insults about Katie's apparent lack of intellectuality, electricity and other such things.
As such there's nothing much else i can say about it because there's nothing to say anything about.

look the fact is we are humans, special in our way, accept it and get along. find someone you dont like, either u just avoid them, or go up to them and say i dont like you. or u can change, or u can TRY to change to them (not force).

To conclude, I agree with the principle behind Katie's argument, in that we should require some assimilation of opposing culture's. Realistically, though, id say it would be more integration rather than assimilation. Assimilation ss impractical and wouldn't be able to be implemented.
On the other hand, however, we can't just open up the country to every man and his dog.

i actually very much against assimilation. just think of it in large scale - where does it stop. first you want australia, then the world to hold australian values which would mean large scale invasion (hitler style). see the fact people have differences its fact. some of them of conflicting thats also fact. it wont change, you are not going to have better society by forcing assimilation, cos there will always be group who wish to have others to follow their ideologies.

 

[banco55]

I don't think it's only terrorism that is a problem with large scale muslim immigration. For example if you're a feminist do you really want muslims becoming a big voting bloc given that many of them have retrogade views on the role of women? If you're a jew do you really want to be under siege from the crazed muslim youth like the Jewish community in France?

 

[Comrade nathan]

Obviously inciting racial hatred towards your 'adopted' country is a blatant display of refusing to assimilate. Planning to and buying ingredients for home grown terrorist attacks, which people in Australia HAVE been found doing, is obviously *not* assimilating.
I thought better of you Nathan, I thought atleast you wouldn't be so lame as to try and trivialise the issue.

If these 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation people have a problem with the way WE live. If these 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation people want to engage in a little bomb making hanky panky, or if they want to hold seminars to rally their buddies to hating Australia, then I have no problem with them fucking off out of this country, to somewhere that is more in tune with their tastes.
I hear Iraq is nice in the summer time.

Aboriginies didn't migrate to Australia 30 years ago, with the idea that they could live seperately from mainstream Australia.
Don't be a dick.

Dude I can't even argue against what you said, because it makes no fucking sense. How does being a gay or homosexual conflict with the baseline culture of Australia? It doesn't. Jesus christ.

I wrote a little ditty. It goes a little something like this.

When the Italians, Greeks, Africans, British, New Zealander, Asian, Canadian, Greenlandian etcetera immigrants start inciting racial hatred, and start blowing people up en masse, I will write them a little ditty also.

Well your hard to figue out where you a going with this, you are throwing around words like muslim, assimilate and base line culture.

For starters not all Anglo Australians adhere to base line culture. Not all Muslim are terrorist, and there is no legitimate reason why they should (though mostly they are) assilimate with base line culture. The majority of Muslims worldwide are moderates. No muslims are living seperate from mainstream Australia.

Do you even know what mainstream is? Having a sub culture (ie praying, wearing a different dress, speaking two languages etc) is not living outside mainstream Australia. The only group to live outside (and in some cases still do) mainstream Australia is Aboriginal Australians, which was not excactly their choose. You can only be outside the mainstream of society if you do not interact on equal grounds with society.

This Islamophobia is very irrational, it uses exaggerations and sterotypes to portray the group of people. It forgets or seems to ignore other problems, or people who are similar. It blames all problems on this group not on individuals. If a muslim rapes a White woman, it is Muslims who rape white women. If a white man rapes a women of any race, it is just a man who rapes a women. A muslim man is a muslim before he is a man, he can't be a man without being muslim. So anything he does he does as a muslim. This is the attitude of the Islamophob (just like the racist and anti-semite). This attitude is coming more and more common in Western society.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Great post.

I think we would need considerable evidence that the average Muslim was actually a rabid fundamentalist before there'd be any reasonable grounds to discriminate with regards to letting them live here.

On the other hand, I really am afraid we'll end up like England where they treat them like royalty.

 

[Enlightened_One]

If a muslim rapes a White woman, it is Muslims who rape white women. If a white man rapes a women of any race, it is just a man who rapes a women. QUOTE]

If you're referring to the gang rapes in Sydney a few years ago, then I'll say this, something I mentioned back then.

The blokes who perpertrated those rapes made their religion, and their race, and issue. They made derogatory remarks about the women they violated. They called them "Aussie pigs" and "white sluts", thus debasing them because they were white and Australian. Thus the rapists made their religion and race an issue.

To not state that otherwise would be to say that the Cronulla riots were just a bunch of blokes beating up a bunch of other blokes for no apparent reason.

Bad Host, Hotshot? Australia is one of the few countries in the world that allows migration to the level it is currently at. There are all sorts of services available for migrants to allow them to cope when they first migrate to this country.

As Katie was alluding to at the end of her argument, if any other group of migrants caused these problems then society would be wary of them too. None of the other migrant cultures in Australia have caused the disruption the point that muslims have. Further, some may point out that 'white' Aussies aren't perfect, and we never said we were. We already have enough problems and we do not need to import more.

No migrant group has organised itself to the extent of the muslim community in Australia. They seem almost like a subset to the Australian culture. Very rarely are their muslims living outside of their 'own' suburbs, whereas every other migrant group has spread through the society fairly well.

Already a political party has been established to introduce Sharia law into this country, which is the only example of an 'outside' force trying to take over this nation. The communist party etc consisted of people already part of Australian culture.

The final point is the way that, firstly, the muslim community needs so many 'leaders'(such as Keyser Trad), and secondly, how those leaders are continually on the offensive whenever even a constructive criticism is aimed at the muslim community. It seems as if they have something to hide.

By the way, isn't muslim law that no muslim shall submit to any non-muslim authority? Or something like that?