Skip to main content

View Diary: Canterbury Archbishop Wants Sharia for UK Muslims (146 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Fool's Golden Rule (0+ / 0-)

    "Some people say" that Anglicans eat babies. Oh, I know you didn't say that, but I'm going to argue against it with you anyway, countering your point that Anglicans kiss babies. Maybe in your world that's not a strawman", but in the real world, it is. Though maybe under some personal alternative to the laws of logic you'd like to carve out, across the street from "the Queen's sharia", it's not. Except maybe in some fool's paradise.

    European immigrants to the New World who broke the laws of the tribes they met here destroyed the landscape and genocided the people. The laws they adopted as their own, like from the Iroquois and the Huron, were the basis of democracy and a federal republic, which are those immigrants' only saving grace. Unless you're such a fool as to believe Europeans made their world a better place apart from increased productivity. Or maybe you're the kind of fool who thinks bringing Christian laws to the Americas was OK as a "personal alternative", which didn't just take over when it had the chance.

    People who immigrate to other countries have to adopt their laws. Britain's democracy includes the right of the people to change its laws to suit them as times change. But changing the fundamental basis of law as equal for everyone is such an extreme option that it can be considered along with, say, slavery (which sharia authorizes) as anathema, antithetical to the rule of law the law permits modifying. So lawyering the principle of using the law to change the law to one that isn't a universal law is a travesty. It's replacing the law, not changing it.  Foolish.

    Sure, you're not worried about furry old Williams. That's what they count on. I expect the Romans weren't too worried about the Germans they installed inside the Empire to defend from the German invaders, either. By then there were plenty of Christians in the Senate offering fallacies and complacent assurances, too. There were probably plenty of pagans who thought adding Christianity to the mix with the incoming Romans would be a good way to keep the social order. Plenty of tribal American weren't worried about those furry Christians cutting down trees to make churches and carve out "New Jerusalems" under "god's law". After all, they'd keep it to themselves, and laws are just arbitrary inventions, after all. How far could it go, when the tribes had thousands of years of their own way, which was clearly superior to the endless conflict between those new churches? Though surely plenty of fools ignored whatever they'd heard about the history.

    And if you'd like to guess that I'm implying that some Muslims (the most radical) won't be satisfied with just a little sharia for themselves, then you're absolutely right. But I'm not going to argue that with you, since you've disqualified yourself to argue even merely documented facts already established, let alone educated speculation about the future. But I remind you of the stakes, which Williams clearly sees for himself and believes he has an advantage in the power vacuum, which will leave his Church better positioned than it could be if it had to count on its own dwindling membership - which Williams probably believes a healthy old Crusade or local jihad would surely boost. Because he's a fool.

    You have no place instructing me about "grace". You tried to beat a strawman, and now try to deny that it's a strawman. You tried ignoring the essential points of the argument. You're willing to type out lots of paragraphs, even dragging others' arguments into ours as a strawman, but claim that I should find somewhere your supposed arguments against the evidence that Williams wants Catholics exempt from laws protecting adoptive gays from bigotry - where, with your track record, I expect to find some fallacy aimed at some other argument entirely. And now you're trying to invoke (again) an appeal to authority fallacy, that Williams is nice enough, so he couldn't possibly actually mean what he clearly said. Or maybe he's just an old fool - though not the only one, which is how foolish changes get started in a democracy.

    The gracious thing for you to do would be to admit that Williams, however nice and harmless an old man he might be, is abusing his seat in the House of Lords and the head of the official state Church to try to carve out exceptions to the universal law that governs all Britons. By fooling people with examples of exceptions for every other sect but his own.

    Which the facts clearly show. History clearly shows. Logic clearly shows. Fool yourself, but don't try to fool me.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 07:14:23 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Spot the strawman (0+ / 0-)

      Some (utterly unspecified, and probably mythical) people think that Anglicans kill babies.

      Some people in the thread I was replying to - whose comments I quoted - asked who told Muslims to come here, and suggested that those who disagreed with the law should leave.

      See the difference? If not, there's probably no point continuing this.

      •  You're It (0+ / 0-)

        Yeah, the difference is that one doesn't help your "argument", the other does.

        But they're both straw men. When you invoke someone else's argument in place of the one you're countering, that's a strawman. As I documented for your edification. But you've got none of the graces of someone worth arguing with.

        So there is clearly no point continuing this argument. However, your willful ignorance of any of the terms of this debate, especially the underlying argument Williams is sticking with, that you're defending with all manner of fallacy, will thereby continue with your sanction. And of course you're not the only Briton swayed by his holy majesty. So you "win", by default, a Pyhrric victory. So you lose. Goodbye.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:29:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site