|
I agreed with many of the points of his postings because he states what official statements and statistics corroborate. There is no need for him to defend them. They are there for all to read. Any objection to them should be directed at the government who provides them and seem incapable of reversing them.
There’s hardly a week goes by when there isn’t some official somewhere who’s allowed children to die through lack of the care that they are well paid to provide.
In many advertisements for carers they specify no previous experience required. In advertisements for even semi-skilled factory hands they specify previous experience essential.
I have now read the other thread Ifti opened and the responses are staggering.
He does not specify any particular grouping being responsible for the state of affairs he is describing.
He does not mention immigration at all
He mentions homosexuality once in a sentence that cannot be refuted. They were once considered to be outside the law and liable to jail for their activities. They were weeded out of the military by law, and that was not that long ago. The Church of England is tearing itself to pieces over the issue; the General Synod last week hardly discussed anything else.
For including that sentence he could be accused of homophobic tendencies, but he does not say so. Could it be perhaps his children have been exposed to teachings that he and his faith condemns? This is nothing more or less than most Christian denominations do except the C of E who are “Don’t knows”
He mentions no other faiths with any other morals. He merely states his own, or what we may deduce to be his own, maybe because that is the only one he feels qualified to comment on.
He points out where the demand for Muslim schools comes from and why. Many parents take a great deal of interest in the education of their children. Some have taken to breaking the law to get them into what they consider to be better schools. Should we condemn him for wanting what he considers to be the best for his?
He does not suggest that the state should provide funding for private Muslim schools.
He does not come across as anything other than a member with a reasonable point of view.
I do not know why he does not argue his case further unless it is that the points he makes are undeniable and irrefutable, and many of the responses are veering away from what he is actually saying. Perhaps he is too clever to get himself involved in semantics. Perhaps he is merely after other points of view that may or may not coincide with his own which he shows no indication of trying to impose on anyone.
I do honestly believe that the level of discussion on some of those postings would be greatly enhanced if respondents read carefully and understood properly what they are responding to.
Many of the respondents are now arguing over points they have made themselves and did not appear in the original posting at all. If he has ulterior motives such as creating division, well he managed that without lifting a finger.
I would defend his desire to argue, or not, his stance in any way he chooses, as I would, and have, defended mine. Look where it got me.
|