Slovakia toughens church registration rules to bar Islam


#1

Slovakia passed legislation on Wednesday to effectively block Islam from gaining official status as a religion in the near future in the latest sign of growing anti-Muslim sentiment across the European Union. reuters.com/article/us-slovakia-religion-islam-idUSKBN13P20C


#2

That’s sad. Punish the peaceful many for the atrocities of a few.


#3

Funny, American gun owners and police make the same argument.

They would not have to be doing this if not for ridiculous EU mandates.

Eastern Europe knows a conquest when it sees one, and they know that this refugee situation is a rouse for more sinister political motives of some very bad actors.


#4

Get out those pesky history books and take a look at what occurred at the hands of Muslims over the centuries. Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it. Europe is suffering today because of the idiocy of allowing muslims to flow freely into their countries, creating havoc. looking at Muslim countries themselves you can see their is no peace involved, instead only death and destruction. Muslim sects war amongst themselves. Know Christ, Know peace. No Christ, no peace.


#5

Eastern Europe in their history has probably seen more attempts at conquest by the Muslim countries than Western Europe.


#6

It’s more than that. Apparently Slovakia subsidizes “recognized” churches, like a number of European states do. Tolerating Islam is one thing, giving taxpayer money to it is quite another. Apparently Slovaks don’t want more Muslims in their country and most certainly don’t want to pay them besides.


#7

This is a bit of a red herring because the issue in question isn’t who people are nor their current behaviour patterns, but the belief system itself.

Is the belief system (Islam) peaceful? All indications – Sharia Law, patterns of historical conquest, pogroms to subdue infidels, current Islamic regimes, treatment of “apostates,” frequency of terrorist acts – are that it isn’t very “peaceful,” at all.

In addition, it can be characterized as a political system masquerading as a religion precisely because the stated mandate of Mohammed and the Qu’ran itself is to bring about the submission of all people outside of its “religious” belief system. This includes overthrowing constitutional forms of government.


#8

No, your outsider analysis of the belief system of Islam (you aren’t a Muslim, are you?) is the red herring. Because the issue in question is exactly the behavior patterns - current and expected. And since current behavior is the best predictor of future behavior, and the current behavior is all we have to go on, analysis of current behavior is the best possible criterion on which to base policy and rules for a society.


#9

This shows the problems faced by any nation that chooses to mix church and state affairs too closely. The founders of the US were wise to reject state subsidies for any religion.


#10

Are you a Muslim? So you are an “outsider,” as well?

Behaviour patterns, both historical and current are available to be assessed or analyzed.

The problem with permitting merely an insider analysis to count is that the insiders themselves have their own reasons for pushing a certain perspective.

In other words, your “insider vs outsider” paradigm is a poor one and also a red herring. The only objective criterion available is the public evidence built up over some 1400 years of what Islam has brought into the world and continues to. There are good reasons to be skeptical about the ideology, regardless of whether or not current believers appear “peaceful,” whatever that means.

The other appropriate consideration is what Islam actually teaches – not cherry picked or sanitized – but what comes out in the wash. And yes, I am not an “expert,” but neither are you. It does appear, however, that many of the “experts” are and have been, themselves, advocates of the more radical forms of Islam, including for example, the current leader of ISIS who has a PhD in Islamic Studies from one of the elite Islamic universities. And he is not the only one – Mohammed, the founder, was another.

Something to chew on…

youtu.be/I_To-cV94Bo


#11

No actually, current behaviour isn’t the only or even best predictor of future behaviour. We also have PAST behaviour and, because Islam is an ideology, we can also use what it teaches to predict what its adherents will likely do.

The other bone to pick on this, is that there are plenty of current behaviours carried out by adherents to Islam which are profoundly troubling, as is the tendency of leftists to ignore the connections of those behaviours to Islam proper.

If we look at the state of the ME and the number of terrorist acts committed worldwide in the name of Islam, we have good reasons to raise an eyebrow when you bring up “current behaviour” as if nothing that “peaceful” Muslims are doing in the world currently should be concerning to us.


#12

I am making no claims about the belief system of Islam, so I do not have to be a Muslim to recognize when someone is claiming more than they are qualified to claim.

Behaviour patterns, both historical and current are available to be assessed or analyzed.

The problem with permitting merely an insider analysis to count is that the insiders themselves have their own reasons for pushing a certain perspective.

I have not relied on insider claims either.

In other words, your “insider vs outsider” paradigm is a poor one and also a red herring.

It was adequate for the point I was making.

The only objective criterion available is the public evidence built up over some 1400 years of what Islam has brought into the world and continues to.

That is true. As long as it is analyzed in its totality and not cherry-picked.

There are good reasons to be skeptical about the ideology, regardless of whether or not current believers appear “peaceful,” whatever that means.

Or, we could simple ignore the uncertain ideology. No need to accept it or reject it.

The other appropriate consideration is what Islam actually teaches – not cherry picked or sanitized – but what comes out in the wash. And yes, I am not an “expert,” but neither are you. It does appear, however, that many of the “experts” are and have been, themselves, advocates of the more radical forms of Islam, including for example, the current leader of ISIS who has a PhD in Islamic Studies from one of the elite Islamic universities.

You said you weren’t going to cherry pick, yet here we are.

And he is not the only one – Mohammed, the founder, was another.

While objective facts about ISIS are easy to come by, facts about the teachings of Mohammed are not so easy.


#13

Outsider telling Muslims what they believe.

The other bone to pick on this, is that there are plenty of current behaviours carried out by adherents to Islam which are profoundly troubling.

They are troubling. But they don’t justify a policy toward the group as a whole.


#14

Thanks be to God! I hope that many other nations will follow the lead of Slovakia.


#15

When the tension, conflict and violence of the Middle East is imported into Europe, the liberal left will simply blame Europeans for anything that goes wrong.


#16

Insiders not exactly being candid about what they believe…

youtu.be/8PSo5kAsGj4


#17

That should be judged on a case by case basis, I would suggest.

And I would suggest that countries and groups should be prudent about available information and make the best judgement possible.

As to “insiders” vs “outsiders”…

Are you a resident of Slovakia? You are not an “insider” in Slovakia, then?

I didn’t suppose you were, but why are you venturing – as an “outsider” – opinions about what Slovakians should or should not do?

Doesn’t your position on this question run smack against your position that “outsiders” should refrain from interfering in or having opinions about what “insiders” should believe or do?


#18

Even when it comes to “helping” the poor?


#19

If you read my postings in this thread carefully you will see I have not ventured an opinion about what Slovakia should do, except a kind of agreement with their choice not to subsidize Islamic schools or churches. My objections have been over generic attacks on Islam in general.


#20

What about “generic” endorsements of “Islam in general?” For example, the claim that Islam is a “religion of peace?”

Is that also subject to your “generic” and “in general” critique?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.