Part 2 of 8 - What threat?

Part 2 of 8:                                             

As the tentacles of Islamification spread, our government takes the ostrich approach to leadership.

We, the people of NZ, must be allowed to consider and discuss whether we want to continue admitting Islamic immigrants/asylum seekers to our country.

New Zealand is a signatory to The Human Rights Act 1993.  We proudly and whole-heartedly support this. Islam does not; and Muslims cannot.

The Human Rights Act 1993 makes it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of sex (including pregnancy and childbirth), marital status, religious belief, ethical belief, skin-colour, race, ethnic or national origin (including nationality or citizenship), disability, age, political opinion, employment status, family status and sexual orientation.

Not being allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religious belief, make it impossible for us to discuss issues regarding Islam, or at least it does if Islam is classed as a religion; but from a ‘western, liberal democratic’ perspective, it is not; it is considerably more. 

We in the west have democratic parliaments that create the laws, and the Rule of Law is followed by all. The state (as represented by the King or Queen) is a nominal role only now, though useful at times. The once coequally powerful church, too, fell from grace, split into factions, and lost its Earthly leadership role.  

Whereas Islam is so much more than merely a religion; it is a total way of life.

Remember, it spread by conquest.  Whereas Christianity spread by evangelism, by proselytising; a very different approach, and we need to consider the ongoing ramifications of this in the 21^st century.   

The early armies of Islam were incredibly successful, overwhelming tribe after tribe, country after country, defeating all nearby lands. The rate of expansion was rapid and continued at pace for 150 years, before slowing, but progressing relentlessly for a thousand years; and wherever they conquered, they converted.

Although converting is a euphemism really. At least with evangelism, there was choice.

By 1700 AD, Islamic armies had defeated all countries along their trading routes, and progressed as far as India in the east, taking over large parts of the subcontinent, before moving into China.  The advance was only stopped by the Mongols, who reversed the tide and won back much of the latter lands lost.

Hundreds of thousands were killed; while survivors accepted the new way of life; it was mandatory.

Qur’an [9:29] “Fight those who do not believe in Allah and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture”

The Caliph managed a complete takeover of each defeated country, by replacing its ruler with one of his own.  Subservient to the Caliph, but with total autonomy otherwise.  This leader was head of state/religion/judiciary/courts/military….  He had the final say on everything, while ensuring all eligible men joined the ever-growing, invading armies of Islam.   

I am tolerant and inclusive of people of all religions and beliefs, and remain so, but now I am older, and believe wiser, realise this is not about religion, per se, it is about a way of life, and the Human Rights Act allows me to discuss this.

I have employed Muslims, I have taught Muslim children, and certainly, as first-generation immigrants found them delightful, polite, willing to learn, obedient, prepared to try the work set, in fact the ideal students.  My issue here is not with people. My issue is that Islam is a way of life that is intolerant of our way of life, and in the end, the more devout people will overcome.

How can we continue to accept as residents, a people who do not support human rights for their own, let alone we non-Muslim Infidels?

I am not writing a ‘hate speech.’  This is a ‘love speech’, proclaiming my love for my fellow New Zealanders and our way of life. And I refuse to accept that our way of life must go, because we can’t even discuss it.

I have been quite conflicted writing this article.  My conscience has questioned me every step of the way and made me examine my morals and values, paragraph by paragraph. However, I have come to realise that woke is fine, so long as common sense prevails. And we need common sense here, if we are to maintain our way of life.

Please realise, that I too have been ‘woke’. I have supported Diversity, Inclusivity and Equality (DIE). But am intelligent enough to see that in this case, supporting DIE, will see our way of life do just that; and do so without a struggle.  Not even a whimper.  We are not allowed to talk about this existential threat that concerns us all.  

P.S_:  In 630 AD, Catholic Christianity was a total package deal too; and just as intense.