Multiculturalism

As bad, sure, but the point is it wasn't intended as part of the ongoing conflict which has its own historical momentum. That's how I've understood it anyway. I need to find a trustworthy account of these things. I don't trust Tempe's for reasons given.

Perhaps your account is correct though as usual all we are doing is trading assertions. And you continue to implicitly deny that the Catholics did anything to deserve the restrictions. Again, I find it hard to consider your one-sided view of this. I might find the restrictions excessive and in need of modification, but as long as it is denied that the Catholics provoked them upon themselves it's hard to get a clear picture of any of this. Catholics murdered Progtestants for being Protestant, remember? They plotted against Protestant monarchs, trying to assassinate them, Guy Fawkes Day being one notorious instaqnce. I'm only too aware that the Irish treat Cromwell's military move against them as unprovoked and Cromwell some kind of evil villain when he had moved to quell the bloody murders by the Catholics. Get the other side into your picture and I'll be better able to get yours into mine.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

May I suggest that you try to listen to the pastor I referred to. I linked to him in Message 1030 where I also specify which section of his talk refers to the conflict in Ireland. He's Irish and he lived through it. I wish I had a solid written account of the events from the Protestant point of view but don't as yet, so this talk is the best I can do. It's only about half an hour.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm not interested in defending the English policies against Ireland, but this blanket refusal to acknowledge that the Catholics gave them more than enough provocation over centuries, and I mean WAY MORE THAN ENOUGH, is a big fat hole in your argument that may not be noticed by others but discredits your whole position to anyone who knows something of the other side of the story.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm defending one group, you're defending one group. Long as you play down the bloody violence of the Catholics, and you are playing it down, this conversation is effectively dead. I grant that I need to study the history of all this more, I hope I can get to it.ABE: There is one more thing that I think needs acknowledging. England's Protestant religion has been as good as dead for a century or so by now, so when we are talking about governmental actions against the Irish or Catholic Irish we are not really talking about Protestant actions. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Ivan Foster was born in Ireland and converted to Protestantism in Ireland.I didn't see Caffeine's post so I'm looking at it now.

He did convert, listen to his testimony at the beginning of that talk I posted. He rejected his family's Protestantism so had to convert later.Only a born again Protestant can appreciate this, though, I suppose, since Catholics and others think you are a certain religion simply by being born into it. Protestants do not see it this way, you have to experience a conversion, being born again, to become a Christian because being a Christian is a supernatural thing. This is why your complaints about the No True Scotsman fallacy are not valid. Nominal Protestants are not Protestants because they do not have the supernatural birth.

I wouldn't claim to know what phony Protestants such as yourself believe, you certainly have a large collection of beliefs that aren't even traditionally liberal Protestant, just something of your own bizarre invention.

Conversion means a change, that's what the word means. It may mean different things in different contexts but I've always understood it to refer to being born again. I can stick to born again if it makes things clearer.Jesus Himself said you must be born again you know, but it can't just be assumed, it is an actual supernatural change that people do experience.

Listen to his testimony, he was very nasty to the girls who witnessed to him, definitely not a Christian at that point.

With the exception of some orthodox Presbyterian and Lutheran churches, your references are to apostate or nonChristian churches and groups who haven't a clue what Christianity really is, but you can be sure that the identification of the RCC with Christianity gives them the boost they need to recover the world domination they lost at the Reformation and reinstitute the Inquisition. I can hardly wait, how about you?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Which is how I try to deal with you too.

I think the link speaks for itself and it takes a nasty ugly bias to talk about him as you did. I have no interest in defending him to you. Stew in your own lies.

But what you've failed to understand is that Multiculturalism is NOT simply the assimilation of different cultures, it's in fact the philosophical perspective that REQUIRES the attitude you are here objecting to, that we give up our own values to encourage those of foreign cultures entering western societies. Those who do this are not "guilty of provocation" they are doing exactly what Multiculturalism teaches, perhaps believing the nave PC ideology that pretends all cultures and religions are basically the same.Multiculturalism is NOT the proverbial "melting pot" by which foreign cultures adapt to the host culture's laws and values while retaining their own cultural expressions that don't conflict with those values, it's one of the tenets of Political Correctness which comes out of Cultural Marxism and is aimed at undermining Western Civilization. Not requiring that the foreign culture adapt IS Multiculturalism. It's aimed against Western Civilization. It's aimed against the very rights and freedoms that have historically attracted foreigners. If you give rights and freedoms to a tyrannical creed you destroy those rights and freedoms. Nobody expects Muslim countries to absorb western values but the west is expected to absorb all kinds of alien values including Islam. Since Islam's values promote the subjugation of other cultures to Allah this is a recipe for suicide of the West.It sounds like you have the melting pot in mind. That's a time-honored position of the West, but you are confusing it with Multiculturalism. If you really understood what MC is you would probably oppose it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Freedom of religion.
Freedom of speech.
Women's rights.They lie low as long as there are more of us than them, but you can tell from how they are rioting in Niger against Charlie Hebdo's right to criticize Mohammed that Islam is not happy with that particular freedom.