Is Islam right for Ireland?

ArthurDayne

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Jesus F. Christ.
we've reached peak leftyliberalism. Youre even contradicting yourself.


One leaves a functioning, subjectivity more handsome mickey, with arguable health benifet. and not universally regarded as a violation of human rights however.

One butchers a girls lady bits as a control of female sexuality, leaving a lifetime of " recurrent infections, difficulty urinating and passing menstrual flow, chronic pain, the development of cysts, an inability to get pregnant, complications during childbirth, and fatal bleeding. "

With no known health benefits.

It's disappointing that you respond to this with accusations of "peak leftyliberalism" -- I had believed that we were speaking as adults rather than pathetically slapping labels on eachother's heads. I think I've seen some posts of yours before and from, what I have seen, I would have thought this lazy practice was beneath you.

Anyway, just so that I am not misrepresenting you -- I take it from your post that in the scenario where two infants, one male and one female, are both subject to circumcision of the foreskin / clitoris under modern medical conditions -- you are telling me that one of the procedures is seriously abhorrent to you, but the other is absolutely fine. To me they are both wrong -- notwithstanding whether one has more serious implications in later life, or whether the procedures are carried out on an operating table or a rock in the wilderness.

It would seem to me that, while you are very happy to condemn the mutilation of a female's genitals (and rightly so), you seem strangely reluctant to condemn the exact same practice when it comes to infant males. It's even more interesting that you bring up the medical reasons, despite the fact many religious traditions (including Christian and Jewish) do it as a cultural/religious norm which was borne out of a sexual context and not a medical one. So, to do you a courtesy I repeat what I said -- do you condemn the mutilation of a child's foreskin for non-medical reasons.

If not -- why not?

blinding

Sure Islam is no good if ya want to see some female leg ....no good at all at all .

Midlife

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Ah you're new here, let me just fill you in on the type of poster I am, you accuse me of misinterpreting facts, I've no problems backing up my opinion;


According to the available census data from the UK (2011) Muslim men account for approximately 2.2% of the overall population.

https://www.ons.gov.uk...ralidentity/religion

https://www.ons.gov.uk...ralidentity/religion

Yet according to available data from the UK's Ministry of Justice, 12% of all convicted rapists serving time during the year 2014 were Muslim.

https://assets.publish...ales-rape-muslim.doc

https://assets.publish...ales-rape-muslim.doc

When it comes to grooming gangs the statistics are even more damning, with 75% of all convicted groomers coming from this same 2.2% sector of society.

https://www.channel4.c...f-sexual-abuse-gangs

https://www.channel4.c...f-sexual-abuse-gangs

Do I believe all Muslims are rapists? Absolutely not, of the UK's approximately 1,330,000 adult male Muslims, the vast, vast majority have never been sexually abusive, yet why they are demonstrably four times more likely to commit abuse than other members of society needs further discussion in a level headed manner.

I don't for one moment believe Muslim attitudes toward women are incapable of improving to what one could consider "Western Ideals", but it will not happen if people such as yourself continue to claim there isn't an issue.

links don't work.

Also, do you want to perhaps deal with my interpretation of your earlier stuff before getting onto another load of statistics?

You're happy to misinterpret something I said and assume that I'm referring to something I'm obviously not.

Is that it? One-liners, link-dump without reading contents and pounce on any possible flaw?

4068ac1elhodqr

15% of the PP from just 4% of the population in Eng&Wales isn't exactly encouraging (+7% since 2002).

blinding

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

15% of the PP from just 4% of the population in Eng&Wales isn't exactly encouraging (+7% since 2002).

Islam seems to be bad for your Mental Health and your Criminal side !

SnakePlissken

Midlife wrote: »

links don't work.

www.ons.gov.uk...ralidentity/religion

https://assets.publish...ales-rape-muslim.doc

www.channel4.c...f-sexual-abuse-gangs

No idea why links aren't linking correctly, they'll open if you copy and paste into your browser.

Captain Obvious

SnakePlissken wrote: »

https://www.ons.gov.uk...ralidentity/religion

https://assets.publish...ales-rape-muslim.doc

https://www.channel4.c...f-sexual-abuse-gangs

Still not working. Not being pasted in full.

Midlife

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

15% of the PP from just 4% of the population in Eng&Wales isn't exactly encouraging (+7% since 2002).

Seriously everyone, this just get thanked by a couple of people because it shows how awful Muslims are? That's the level of stastical analysis we're at?

Between that and the dump of a video of a Jordanian guy being accused of grooming, I find it hard to see this thread as anything other than straightforward racist opportunism.

Captain Obvious

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

15% of the PP from just 4% of the population in Eng&Wales isn't exactly encouraging (+7% since 2002).

Couldn't those same figures also mean Muslims are unfairly targeted and discriminated against by police? Is there not a lack of a causal link?

SnakePlissken

Midlife wrote: »

Also, do you want to perhaps deal with my interpretation

You claimed;

Midlife wrote: »

100% of pedophile rings are white.

This is both grossly untrue and quite frankly a ludicrous statement.

You then claimed;

Midlife wrote: »

I've just explained how a white British person is just as likely to abuse a child as a British Asian.

This is also incorrect.

As conviction rates and census data demonstrate, Muslim men in the UK are over four times more likely to commit sexual assault than other members of society.

This does not suggest all Muslim men are rapists, but it does prove this is an issue that will not go away by pretending it does not exist.

4068ac1elhodqr

Midlife wrote: »

Seriously everyone, this just get thanked by a couple of people because it shows how awful Muslims are? That's the level of stastical analysis we're at?

Between that and the dump of a video of a Jordanian guy being accused of grooming, I find it hard to see this thread as anything other than straightforward racist opportunism.

So is an severe over-representation of a group a good thing for Eng&Wales?

Should any suggestion or discussion to address the causation be swept under a carpet? Any attempt at a long-term remedy such as a focus on better integration, or attempt to gain understanding of this issue simply be hushed up?

Don't understand.

Ok everyone no mention ever again about this 7% rise of a key group in the prisons across Eng & Wales. Let's hope it's just a temporay glich if its to be ignored.

Carry on. Do not discuss!

4068ac1elhodqr

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Couldn't those same figures also mean Muslims are unfairly targeted and discriminated against by police? Is there not a lack of a causal link?

Ok, so it's the (underfunded/staffed) police's fault for the 375% over-representation.

There you have it from Cap' Obvious, case closed.

Next.

SnakePlissken

Midlife wrote: »

Seriously everyone, this just get thanked by a couple of people because it shows how awful Muslims are

You've got some nerve, not once have you provided any links to support your argument, then when another poster provides statistics to support theres you pull the race card.

Midlife wrote: »

I find it hard to see this thread as anything other than straightforward racist opportunism.

You've only begun posting on this thread, and thus far you've proven yourself to be a liar, nobody cares how you see this thread.

The_Kew_Tour

Oh dear. It's all the Cops fault.

Close the thread. Tin Foil hat is now in overdrive

enricoh

Midlife wrote: »

Seriously everyone, this just get thanked by a couple of people because it shows how awful Muslims are? That's the level of stastical analysis we're at?

Between that and the dump of a video of a Jordanian guy being accused of grooming, I find it hard to see this thread as anything other than straightforward racist opportunism.

In a thread that asks is Islam right for Ireland a poster shows that muslims are 4 times more likely to be in prison in the UK.
No comment from you on their over representation apart from that it was racist to highlight the fact! Priceless!
Sometimes when facts are so damning, it's best to leave the thread for a while n come back and nitpick at something else!

blinding

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Oh dear. It's all the Cops fault.

Close the thread. Tin Foil hat is now in overdrive

And the Cops from loads of different Countries are getting the same results ...but hell no it couldn’t be the muslim criminals like it can’t be young black men killing 50% of the people who also happen to be black in London despite they being nowhere near that percentage of the people . Next these posters will say its the Police killing the young black men in London when it is in fact young black men . Facts ain’t Racist .

4068ac1elhodqr

enricoh wrote: »

In a thread that asks is Islam right for Ireland a poster shows that muslims are 4 times more likely to be in prison in the UK.
No comment from you on their over representation apart from that it was racist to highlight the fact! Priceless!
Sometimes when facts are so damning, it's best to leave the thread for a while n come back and nitpick at something else!

Agree, and the Captian within 30 seconds, assumes direct blame to (multi-demographic, highly accountable) police force operating from a (democratic state) (jury's and everything!) for the +375% representation and it's now 2018, not the 50/60's.

(image search) : brush, carpet, sweeping action (.jpg)

Taytoland

Always makes me laugh when you hear the excuses for Muslim or black gang crime. It must be poverty, they have it rough as if millions of white people aren't living rough lives or in poverty on council estates, take responsibility for your own actions.

blinding

Ya’d think the religion would keep the Muslims on the straight and narrow but they sure produce plenty of criminals .

A La Carte Muslims....criminal when it suits a big enough percentage . Does the religion give them a free go on the criminal stuff ?

enricoh

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Agree, and the Captian within 30 seconds, assumes direct blame to (multi-demographic, highly accountable) police force operating from a (democratic state) (jury's and everything!) for the +375% representation and it's now 2018, not the 50/60's.

(image search) : brush, carpet, sweeping action (.jpg)

Here's me thinking the cops in the UK were slated for not investigating the grooming gangs for years due to 'cultural sensitivities'. However another ostrich with his head in the sand on here reckons the groomers could be banged up due to the racist cops! Set up a Facebook and GoFundMe campaign captain n let's get these paedophiles back on the streets!!

Midlife

8% of schoolchildren are Mulsim. Again, it's less than 5% of the population.

So does Islam make you young?

That's the level you're at people. Either through willful ignorance or just good old fashioned ignorance.

Midlife

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You claimed;



This is both grossly untrue and quite frankly a ludicrous statement.

You then claimed;



This is also incorrect.

As conviction rates and census data demonstrate, Muslim men in the UK are over four times more likely to commit sexual assault than other members of society.

This does not suggest all Muslim men are rapists, but it does prove this is an issue that will not go away by pretending it does not exist.

Yet again, your links aren't working and can you please address the comments I made earlier about your inaccuracies before you get on to dumping new information.

Also, I don't really need to post too many links when the last time the statement you made didn't even correlate with your own evidence.

Now please address that before dumping more.

4068ac1elhodqr

Midlife wrote: »

8% of schoolchildren are Mulsim. Again, it's less than 5% of the population.

So does Islam make you young?

That's the level you're at people. Either through willful ignorance or just good old fashioned ignorance.

Hardly worth a response, this nonsense ignorant post from new-reg.

Why does the UK prison service even bother compiling reports, why does statistics even get taught as a key subject on most university courses?

You're maybe x3 times more likely to crash a car when drunk, do car crashes themselves actually make people become intoxicated?

ArthurDayne

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

So is an sever over-representation of a group a good thing for Eng&Wales?

Should any suggestion or discussion to address the causation be swept under a carpet? Any attempt at a long-term remedy such as a focus on better integration, or attempt to gain understanding of this issue simply be hushed up?

Don't understand.

Ok everyone no mention ever again about this 7% rise of a key group in the prisons across Eng & Wales. Let's hope it's just a temporay glich if its to be ignored.

Carry on. Do not discuss!

In fairness Liana Scruffy Jell-o -- it is discussed. There is a lot of commentary about it online. In fact, Sadiq Khan brought it up more times than anyone else in the Commons when he was an MP, so one of the UK's most prominent Muslim political figures was not brushing these numbers under the carpet.

I would also point out that, if nothing else, the figures completely annihilate the oft-cited notion that the police in the UK 'go easy' on Muslims for fear of being branded racist. It would seem apparent that the criminal justice system has no reservations when it comes to locking up Muslims accused and convicted of crime.

There are several potential reasons why the Muslim population is over-represented in prisons -- not least among them the very fact that they are a people who in the past quarter century have been treated with increased suspicion and resentment.

But let's look at other reasons. Less than 1% of the Muslim prison population are terrorism convicts so that one does not seem to explain the full story. One other reason of course might be that the over-representation of Muslims in prisons might have something to do with their over-representation on a certain socio-economic level -- namely that 46% of Muslims live in the 10% of most deprived districts in the UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/young-muslims-in-the-uk-face-enormous-social-mobility-barriers). The link between economic deprivation and crime has always been a strong one.

The 2010 Thematic Review on Muslim Prisoners by the Chief Inspector of Prisons (http://www.ohrn.nhs.uk/resource/policy/MuslimPrisonersThematic.pdf) noted that "Muslims in Britain have a notably younger age profile than non-Muslims and more likely to come from lower socio-economic groups" and that one in five of the population of the 10-17 year old prison institutions were Muslims.

Terrorism and sex crimes are of course the 'flavour of the month' when it comes to perceptions of Muslim criminals -- but the reality may simply be the social deprivation leads to higher crime rates (one sees it in the US with the black population for example).

Captain Obvious

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Ok, so it's the (underfunded/staffed) police's fault for the 375% over-representation.

There you have it from Cap' Obvious, case closed.

Next.

Again you ignore the point in favour of some strawman. I'm not saying it's the police's fault. I'm pointing out that your figures could be used to justify either argument in isolation. You need additional data to make the connection you are trying to make.

Taytoland

Taytoland wrote: »

Always makes me laugh when you hear the excuses for Muslim or black gang crime. It must be poverty, they have it rough as if millions of white people aren't living rough lives or in poverty on council estates, take responsibility for your own actions.

You will find a high percentage of white people that live in poverty on council estates commit crime too.
Socioeconomic reasons are fair more likely to rsuslt in criminal behavior than the colour of one's skin

Midlife

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Hardly worth a response, this nonsense ignorant post from new-reg.

Why does the UK prison service even bother compiling reports, why does statistics even get taught as a key subject on most university courses?

You're maybe x3 times more likely to crash a car when drunk, do car crashes themselves actually make people become intoxicated?

Clearly statistics weren't on your University course, or you weren't paying attention.

Take a look at the terms 'conformation bias', 'causality' and 'correlation'.

BTW, what difference does new-reg make? I could have 20,000 posts of nonsense. So what?

Midlife

bubblypop wrote: »

You will find a high percentage of white people that live in poverty on council estates commit crime too.
Socioeconomic reasons are fair more likely to rsuslt in criminal behavior than the colour of one's skin

Shhhh. it's not about skin colour, it's the erm...religion...not suiting our western ideals. We'll stick with the pedophilia cover-ups and babies in septic tanks, thanks.

Christ, imagine an offical body of Islam got caught doing that stuff. This thread would love it.

4068ac1elhodqr

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Again you ignore the point in favour of some strawman. I'm not saying it's the police's fault. I'm pointing out that your figures could be used to justify either argument in isolation. You need additional data to make the connection you are trying to make.

Do you randomaly insert 'strawman' in every other post you make just for fun?

Please supply additional data to make your connection for +375% directly due to 'police discrimination' - which you 'directly alluded' to on the previous page.


The other poster (above) makes a more valuable contribution and likely connection, that poverty might be 'a factor', but even then it probably doesn't account for +375% over-representation. Poverty in the UK is fairly widespread.

The primary crime classification is voilent 'assault on the person'.

Not robbery, theft or burglary which might be more commonly associated from poverty-line offenders.

Omackeral

Midlife wrote: »

8% of schoolchildren are Mulsim. Again, it's less than 5% of the population.

So does Islam make you young?

If you're trying to make a point in favor of Muslim you're actually doing them a big disservice. School is mandatory, prison is not. 8% vs 15% is just more damning evidence against criminal followers of Islam.

Omackeral

Midlife wrote: »

We'll stick with the pedophilia cover-ups and babies in septic tanks, thanks.

Christ, imagine an offical body of Islam got caught doing that stuff. This thread would love it.

The whole religion is supposedly based off some guy who married a 6 year old and then raped her when she was 9, is it not?

Midlife

Omackeral wrote: »

If you're trying to make a point in favor of Muslim you're actually doing them a big disservice. School is mandatory, prison is not. 8% vs 15% is just more damning evidence against criminal followers of Islam.

Just trying to point out misuse of statistics.

Captain Obvious

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Do you randomaly insert 'strawman' in every other post you make just for fun?

Please supply additional data to make your connection for +375% directly due to 'police discrimination' - which you 'directly alluded' to on the previous page.


The other poster (above) makes a more valuable contribution and likely connection, that poverty might be 'a factor', but even then it probably doesn't account for +375% over-representation. Poverty in the UK is fairly widespread.

The primary crime classification is voilent 'assault on the person'.

Not robbery, theft or burglary which might be more commonly associated from poverty-line offenders.

I use the term strawman whenever a poster uses a strawman argument. It just seems to happen quite frequently here. You provided a statistic and claimed it meant something. I'm pointing out that it could just as easily mean something else and you can't make a connection without additional data. You're now asking me to provide evidence to disprove your logical leap. That's not how it works. You made the claim, you provide the link between it and your isolated statistic.

ArthurDayne

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Do you randomaly insert 'strawman' in every other post you make just for fun?

Please supply additional data to make your connection for +375% directly due to 'police discrimination' - which you 'directly alluded' to on the previous page.


The other poster (above) makes a more valuable contribution and likely connection, that poverty might be 'a factor', but even then it probably doesn't account for +375% over-representation. Poverty in the UK is fairly widespread.

The primary crime classification is voilent 'assault on the person'.

Not robbery, theft or burglary which might be more commonly associated from poverty-line offenders.

I'm not so sure about that -- it certainly wasn't my experience back when I worked in criminal law. There is a demonstrable link between figures for violent crime and socio-economic deprivation (often the assaults take place as part of the other thieving crimes you cite).

For instance, if one looks at the two maps in the below link, one sees that a map of London's most impoverished areas correlates closely to a map of areas recording the highest amount of violent crime:

https://metro.co.uk/2018/06/14/maps-highlight-shocking-link-poverty-violent-crime-wave-london-7626335/

4068ac1elhodqr

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Muslims in prisons might have something to do with their over-representation on a certain socio-economic level -- namely that 46% of Muslims live in the 10% of most deprived districts in the UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/young-muslims-in-the-uk-face-enormous-social-mobility-barriers). The link between economic deprivation and crime has always been a strong one.

Your sensible discussion points are certainly a more valuable contribution to others here who drop in 'strawman' at every opportunity they can.

There is one interesting point relating to the above (poverty/deprivation).

That is: a very high proportion of working-age Bangladeshis and Pakistanis (most deprived groups), particularly women, are not in paid work.

How can we help them if they won't help themselves out of poverty, due to their cultural norms, thus causing a cycle of poverty, and even crime?

Can they change, and will they change - to help themselves?

4068ac1elhodqr

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I use the term strawman whenever a poster uses a strawman argument. It just seems to happen quite frequently here. You provided a statistic and claimed it meant something. I'm pointing out that it could just as easily mean something else and you can't make a connection without additional data. You're now asking me to provide evidence to disprove your logical leap. That's not how it works. You made the claim, you provide the link between it and your isolated statistic.

Nope, I provided statistics, and asked why there was an over-representation.

YOU immediately suggested 'it was the polices own fault', and failed to back it up, with data or why YOU made this connection, an illogical leap out of thin air.

Omackeral

Omackeral wrote: »

The whole religion is supposedly based off some guy who married a 6 year old and then raped her when she was 9, is it not?

No I don't believe that's actually right, but that doesn't matter to you.
Also you can't judge 6th or 7th century life by today's standards.
Mary, mother of Jesus was said to be around 12 when she gave birth

Midlife

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Your sensible discussion points are certainly a more valuable contribution to others here who drop in 'strawman' at every opportunity they can.

There is one interesting point relating to the above (poverty/deprivation).

That is: a very high proportion of working-age Bangladeshis and Pakistanis (most deprived groups), particularly women, are not in paid work.

How can we help them if they won't help themselves out of poverty, due to their cultural norms, thus causing a cycle of poverty, and even crime?

Can they change, and will they change - to help themselves?

I think that it's a long road but ultimately education is the way out. Not schooling females or schooling people in typical values only is a fairly good way to keep women down.

if you grant all women the same access as men to education, my feeling is that they'll stop putting up with it after some time. Won't happen overnight though.

Midlife

bubblypop wrote: »

No I don't believe that's actually right, but that doesn't matter to you.
Also you can't judge 6th or 7th century life by today's standards.
Mary, mother of Jesus was said to be around 12 when she gave birth

The age of consent nowadays in Japan is 13. Think about the things that makes legal.

Is Shinto right for Ireland?

realitykeeper

Correct me if I am wrong but didn`t Mohammad take a six year old for his wife? If so, are six year old wives right for Ireland? Mohammad prayed that the mountain would move as a demonstration of his faith (the mountain didn`t move because apparently it was angry that day). By contrast, Christ told Satan where to go when asked to put God to the test. The Book of Revelations warned of false prophets and warned against adding to "this book." Did Mohammad not read the book of Revelations?

All that said, Muslims have faith and they pray diligently. In that respect, they are an example to Christians. It is said Our Lady of Fatima choose that town in Portugal because of her great love of Muslim people.

ArthurDayne

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Your sensible discussion points are certainly a more valuable contribution to others here who drop in 'strawman' at every opportunity they can.

There is one interesting point relating to the above (poverty/deprivation).

That is: a very high proportion of working-age Bangladeshis and Pakistanis (most deprived groups), particularly women, are not in paid work.

How can we help them if they won't help themselves out of poverty, due to their cultural norms, thus causing a cycle of poverty, and even crime?

Can they change, and will they change - to help themselves?

I think it's important to point out the socio-economic factor when so many people, on this thread too, seem to jump to the supposition that there is an inherent problem with Muslims for the simple reason that they are Muslim. Economic deprivation has always been a corollary to crime, and ethnic minorities / immigrant populations tend to be very vulnerable to deprivation as their community melds itself into the "mainstream" population. It was the Irish in America once, before they assimilated and got replaced by a new scapegoat.

Without focusing purely on Bangladeshi / Pakistani women, 58% of Muslim women in the UK are economically inactive (http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/employment-opportunities-for-muslims-in-the-uk/written/34259.html). A large number indeed, but the equivalent figure for all non-Muslims is 42% -- so while obviously smaller, that's still 4/10 non-Muslim women who are economically inactive. So it's not a matter which has a purely 'Muslim theme'.

It's also worth pointing that, of the economically inactive Muslim population, 21% of those are students -- that's almost double the figure for non-Muslims (11%). So we can start to see a rebalancing of the figures to show that while there are a lot of economically inactive Muslim women, female economic activity is not a strictly 'Muslim' issue.

Indeed, the 58% figure above is actually is a 6% decrease from 2011 -- while the unemployment rate decreased from 23% in 2011 to 16% in 2015.

In essence, to answer your question, there is evidence to suggest that -- while female economic activity is clearly not an issue isolated purely to Muslims -- the issue may be lessening as time goes on, possibly due to the gradual integration of the Muslim minority into the 'mainstream' population (for want of a better term) and with that better employment and career prospects.

SnakePlissken

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Terrorism and sex crimes are of course the 'flavour of the month' when it comes to perceptions of Muslim criminals -- but the reality may simply be the social deprivation leads to higher crime rates (one sees it in the US with the black population for example).

Therefore you must concede there is no benefit to opening our borders to uneducated migrants if, as you have alluded to, they will no doubt become socially deprived as they have in every other European state in which they have failed to integrate, and may indeed contribute to higher crime rates.

Omackeral

bubblypop wrote: »

No I don't believe that's actually right, but that doesn't matter to you.

You're right, it doesn't. It's all poppycock. I'm sure I've read many times she was a pre-pubescent child anyway but sure it must all be wrong what I read.

Also you can't judge 6th or 7th century life by today's standards.
Mary, mother of Jesus was said to be around 12 when she gave birth

That one is even more bat-sh*t insane. An angel came down and impreganted some pre-teen with the Lord's baby who then gave birth to... the Lord? Imagine Jacinta trying to convince Anto of that scenario nowadays. Off to Dundrum Mental Hospital you go.

Midlife

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Therefore you must concede there is no benefit to opening our borders to uneducated migrants if, as you have alluded to, they will no doubt become socially deprived as they have in every other European state in which they have failed to integrate, and may indeed contribute to higher crime rates.

So it's about uneducated migrants and not to do with Islam?


Also, still no interest in posting those links which we were going to look at AFTER you justified your earlier comment. Is it just me that's expected to back things up?

Omackeral

realitykeeper wrote: »

Correct me if I am wrong but didn`t Mohammad take a six year old for his wife?

Bubblypop said it's not true so I'm not sure. I've always read similar.

JohnMc1

Omackeral wrote: »

Bubblypop said it's not true so I'm not sure. I've always read similar.

Apparently its true, but it wasn't consummated until she was 9.

https://islamfyi.princeton.edu/is-it-true-that-muhammad-married-a-child-bride-by-the-name-of-ayesha-when-he-was-53-and-she-was-9-years-old-if-so-how-do-muslims-justify-this-from-their-exemplary-prophet/


http://www.muslim.org/islam/aisha-age.htm

SnakePlissken

Midlife wrote: »

The age of consent nowadays in Japan is 13. Think about the things that makes legal.

Is Shinto right for Ireland?

You're posting grossly misleading information yet again.

The age of consent of 13 only applies if the boy in the relationship is under 15, this is commonly called a Romeo and Juliet law, in Japan, any male over 15 who has sexual intercourse with a girl under 15 is committing a felony.

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-age-of-consent-so-low-in-Japan

But I'm pleased you brought up the age of consent as it highlights the thread title greatly. The majority of Muslim countries have no actual age of consent, the only stipulation being sex is not permitted outside of marriage, and what age can a child be permitted to marry? As young as 10 in Iran.

So yes, in Iran, it is perfectly legal for a sixty year old male to have sex with a ten year old child once they are married... I honestly feel repulsed having to write this, not only by the thought of those poor girls, but also the understanding you're now going to attempt to deflect from this fact in someway.

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Asia.html

SnakePlissken

Midlife wrote: »

we were going to look at

Who's we?

ArthurDayne

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Therefore you must concede there is no benefit to opening our borders to uneducated migrants if, as you have alluded to, they will no doubt become socially deprived as they have in every other European state in which they have failed to integrate, and may indeed contribute to higher crime rates.

Such a concession would require a belief on my part that ending immigration would end deprivation in Ireland -- it would not. There was deprivation here long before African and Middle Eastern migrants arrived. Indeed, unemployment was a bigger problem in the 80s than it is right now -- even with our immigrant countrymen among us.

The issue of course is that the vulnerable classes eventually get replaced. Irish prosperity has increased dramatically in the past 50 years, and with that career opportunities in the professional environment have developed here. More and more Irish people are working in professional services where their parents and grandparents may have worked in traditional working class roles. So, as the Irish in Ireland become more qualified, a new critical mass is needed to take on the jobs which the Irish are now over-qualified to do. That is where, to a significant extent, our immigrant population has slotted in.

Having said that, just who exactly is supporting the mass immigration of uneducated immigrants into the country? Nobody really. The system isn't really geared towards letting vast numbers of uneducated or unqualified people in. We do not have an open border policy as so many like to claim. That's not to say that the system doesn't have flaws, nor to say that its weaknesses shouldn't be scrutinised and remediated where necessary -- but if you're telling me that Ireland has the critical population mass to maintain its economic output in an increasingly competitive world, I just don't see how it does.

EDIT : p.s. I note that you have moved off Islam and rotated to the topic of education levels . . .

Captain Obvious

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

Nope, I provided statistics, and asked why there was an over-representation.

My apologies. It was the poster after you that made the comment i was referring to. What do you think those statistics mean?

Liana Scruffy Jell-o wrote: »

YOU immediately suggested 'it was the polices own fault', and failed to back it up, with data or why YOU made this connection, an illogical leap out of thin air.

It seems you are still not getting the point. I am not claiming the stats are down to police discrimination, I'm saying they easily could be used as proof of that without additional data.