Headline: “Christians should marry Muslims to tackle Islamophobia, says peer”
Lord Scott, a former Supreme Court Judge, cited his own family – in which two of his four children married Muslims – as an example of how interfaith families can thrive. The peer, who sits as a crossbencher in the Lords, made the comments during a debate on how to improve relations between the Muslim community and other faith groups in the UK.
He said: “Of my two sons one has become a Muslim and of my two daughters one of those has become a Muslim, and I have 12 lovely grandchildren, seven of whom are little Muslims.”
h/t Mark Steyn & BCF.
email to: rrfscott.foscote@gmail.com
Dear Lord Scott,
I wish to reference your quote:
“Of my two sons one has become a Muslim and of my two daughters one of those has become a Muslim, and I have 12 lovely grandchildren, seven of whom are little Muslims.”
A few hundred years from now, when they’re sifting through the ashes of what used to be “Great” Britain, would you worry if I told you that your quote will be an even object of greater derision then than it is now?
Yours truly,
Jamie MacMaster
North Glengarry, Ontario
In other words, “if you can’t beat them, join them”.
Maybe I should be “backside” penetrated a few times to clear up my stance against sodomy.
By that line of reasoning we should deal with homophobia by getting into pedophilia and the bath houses too. No thanks, I am just peachy with my hatreds and phobias, thank you very much. Islam and liberalism are cultural cancers and I refuse to indulge in either.
Great! Another wiser-than-everyone, elitist asshole judge telling all of us peasants how to live!
A phobia (from the Greek: φόβος phóbos,”aversion”, “fear, morbid fear”) is, when used in the context of clinical psychology, a type of anxiety disorder, usually defined as a persistent fear of an object or situation in which the sufferer commits to great lengths in avoiding, typically disproportional to the actual danger posed, often being recognized as irrational. In the event the phobia cannot be avoided entirely, the sufferer will endure the situation or object with marked distress and significant interference in social or occupational activities.[1]
Thus the phrase “Islamophobia” in Lord Scott’s context is misplaced. Rather in this context the correct phrase should be “Christianophobia”.
The Christian does not engage in “surrender” to another faith group; as if marriage were some sort of medieval bargain to keep the peace between warring tribes or kingdoms. Lord Scott is equating the love between spouses as some sort of political statement which has as it’s aim ‘peace between warring tribes’; as opposed to most sane peoples understanding that marriage is about the love of spouses and the formation of families, ie children.
Lord Scott is merely afraid of his own tribes spiritual inheritance; which is to say perhaps he has none…
Matthew 18:10, 12-14 “See that you do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell you that in heaven their angels always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven.12 What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray? 13 And if he finds it, truly, I say to you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray. 14 So it is not the will of my Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Cross-religion marriages are no big deal… IF both participants AND their families agree that it is No Big Deal.
Now, if for example a Christian married a Sikh, or a Jew, or a Buddhist, or a Hindu, they do not automatically -become- a Sikh etc. Nor do their children -automatically- become same. Family will suggest, cajole, nag etc. but they won’t go much beyond that, because its not considered that important. The fact of having blood ties trumps religious observance. Exceptions exist obviously, but are generally restricted to shunning.
Mooselimbs -as a group- seem not to be willing to play along the way the rest of us do. They’ve been known to kill people over stuff like this. If not the actual in-laws, then others in the “community” as the Lefties love to say. The Mooselimb community in fact is the only group where “honor” killings in Western countries are not prima facie evidence of profound mentally illness.
Just one more reason I don’t have much time for them. They’ve unilaterally declared me untouchable and anathema, I see no reason I should go out of my way tolerate their BS demands or indeed countenance their religion in public at all.
Otherwise known as that foundational tenet of the universe: “What goes around, comes around.” It may take a while, but it will eventually, inevitably, inexorably come around. And when it does, it will be a stone beeotch.
Ask any East German apparatchik. Well, if you can find one still alive anyway.
I am only a lowly educator, but a Christian who marries a muslim, then becomes a muslim does NOT make an interfaith marriage. There is only ONE faith represented (Islam). It is regrettable that an educated peer and former judge does not comprehend this simple concept. If the muslim partner allowed and encouraged the continuance of the Christian faith by the spouse one could almost use the term interfaith. In this example there is no interfaith relationship.
How about marrying a black homosexual muslim? It will tackle negrophobia, homophobia and islamophobia. Just ask Michelle O.
This gentleman is a perfect example of the result of inbreeding among the British aristocracy.
Monty Python’s “Upper Class Twit of the Year” had nothing on his lordship.
Worse,the twit in question was a Supreme Court Judge!
Mooselimbs! I larfed and I larfed. My new favourite word.
And the number of muslims who married his Christian children and became Christians is?
On the other hand, Lord Scott could easily walk into the Supreme Court of Canada, and sit quite comfortably on the bench. Besides no one would even notice because we are not allowed to question any of their appointments or pronouncements!
Exactly.
Progressive ownership of Western culture projects a nullity in the form of multiculturalism and moral relativism while Islam offers a concrete-bound retrograde authoritarian theocracy. When one meets the other guess which one dominates.
I can see the missing clitoris being a problem, YerGrace. Just sayin’.
Allow me to paraphrase: “I for one welcome our new Muslim overlords.”
There’s nothing like a one way trip to membership.
DrD, well said.
This judge may be educated, but he is an imbecile.
One of my nieces from a Christian family from the Niagara area married a Muslim in Toronto. She and her children are now attending the Mosque. Her mother is fine with this, the father is not, and they are now divorced. The father does not see her or the grandchildren anymore.
Hans, exactly.
“…There’s nothing like a one way trip to membership…”
Heh! Welcome to the Hotel Caliphornia.
“You can check-out any time you like,
But you can never leave! ”
The daughter of a local Imam married a Christian man and became a Christian. She attends my church. Interfaith marriages have a dismal survival record when both partners do not give up their faith for the other. This includes followers of the Secular Humanist religion as well.
This gives a new meaning to the term “sexual surrender”.
Nothing new here. The establishment is full of idiots that back the wrong side. Here’s a link to an article about the ones that liked the Nazis in WW II. The same anti-semitism is still there, just a different mask on it.
http://www.rense.com/ufo6/nazisym.htm
I had to convert to marry my wife in Malaysia, it’s the law there and if I had not and we had gone back the Vice police would arrest us and possibly seize the kids. My wife is a modern Muslim who does not pray at the mosque and went to a Catholic convent in Malaysia so she would get a proper education. Now I married into a fairly devout family and it was tough for them to accept that I was Muslim in name only but they have grown to accept that. Nevertheless I am careful what I say about islam as I can be tried under Sharia law when I am there.
Somebody needs to tell that idiot that his children and more likely grandchildren still have something to worry about.
As a Sunni, should they be of that Muslim stream, they can still worry about being beheaded by a Shia as the battle for dominance spreads to the rest of Europe in the next few generations.
As a Catholic, I am not worrying too much about some Evangelical coming along and disagreeing with me ergo I will be staying where I am.
So the only way to prove you’re not an Islamaphobe is to submit to Islam, and if you don’t submit to Islam, you’re an infidel that needs to be killed, and it’s entirely irrational to fear religious fanatics wanting to torture, rape, enslave, and murder you, thus… phobia. Also, shut up.
George Orwell was a prophet.
Does not Lord Haw-Haw http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Haw-Haw realize that he is advocating surrender?
Mr. Scott, a former judge;
“I have 12 lovely grandchildren, 7 of whom are little muslims”
How many “little muslims” will there be when they marry their first cousins and convert them too?
and their children from these first cousin marriages, how many will end up institutionalized?
Most parents want what’s best for their kids. Lord Scott seems to enjoy what’s best for his image.
Why would anyone even bring this up unless they are a total liberal as-hole?
Culture matters and even a compatible match is hard work. There are plenty of inter-faith/inter-cultural marriages and many of them work. They do because there are accommodations and understanding. That doesn’t exist in the Islamic culture. What this nobleman has witnessed is the extinguishing of his family.
“careful what I say about islam as I can be tried under Sharia law”
You’ll always find people who want to take away your freedom by threat of violence or force.
John 8:32 “and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Sorry, I can’t respect your decision. Assuming you are a Christian, you’ve renounced Christ and are to be despised. There’s no such thing as doing it “in name only,” you’ve legally and publicly submitted to Islam. That’s despicable.
Sorry, I can’t respect your decision. Assuming you are a Christian, you’ve renounced Christ and are to be despised. There’s no such thing as doing it “in name only,” you’ve legally and publicly submitted to Islam. That’s despicable.
I had no real religion when I married. The only reason I agreed was not to cut my wife off from her family. The good side is that I cannot write off Muslims as a big group doing bad, I actually have a lot of respect for my devout Brother inlaw who gave up his job to care for their disabled daughter and his wife who is a doctor earns the money. If more Muslims were like him, they would have a lot less problems. It’s also given me a window into that world to see the good and the bad. Much of the issue came with the Whabbi takeover of the mosques using oil money to force people to adhere to their Nutbarissm. In fact even Malaysian culture is being suppressed by them. The majority of Muslims there are peaceful but afraid to stand up to the nutbars because you will be at the very least excluded from the community, but more likely jailed/caned for some pretence of crimes against Islam or murdered.
and Christ is considered one of the 25 most important Prophets in Islam. In fact almost everything that involves the religious ceremonies in Mecca predate Islam by quite a bit and are based on Abrahamic beliefs.
Colin >
“The only reason I agreed was not to cut my wife off from her family…..”
Jeeze….maybe you should have, let her get cut off that is.
It’s not like she was gay or anything like that.
“Christ is considered one of the 25 most important Prophets in Islam”
That’s impressive, Colin. Really impressive. Do you know where he is on the list? 25th, 24th, maybe 15th, or possibly 10th? Or is he in the top five?