Liam Neeson is certainly not stupid. He is, unfortunately, a dhimmicrat. A dhimmicrat is one who uses his social, cultural, or political position to smooth the path of sharia, the law they have in Saudi Arabia. Prince Charles and the Archbishop of Canterbury are prime examples of dhimmicrats. The Prince of Wales has argued publicly for Westerners to embrace Islam's values in order to save the planet from global warming. The Archbishop of Canterbury thinks Britain should permit sharia in ever wider areas to accommodate Islam's strictures on family life. That means polygamy. That means arranged marriages. That means the legal subordination of women.
31 comments
The Prince of Wales is an idiot. That said, he only mentioned that the Islamic concept of "nature" is fairly positive.
I had no idea America's political parties were multi-national.
(eh... on second thought I've got a feeling that he's being sarcastic and does not literally believe that Princes Charles and the Archbishop of Canterbury are Democrats.)
By the way, don't try to tell me that there aren't Christian conservatives who'd like to see women legally subordinated.
"The Prince of Wales has argued publicly for Westerners to embrace Islam's values in order to save the planet from global warming."
"That means polygamy."
"That means arranged marriages."
"That means the legal subordination of women."
@UHM
Our Constitution is based on enlightenment values realized by philosophers from many areas of the world.
Madison and Jefferson contributed to these values and enshrined them in our Constitution.
The Constitution then became a blueprint for secular republics throughout the world.
It is possible to argue that some European countries are closer to the founder's vision of America than America is, unfortunately.
Prince Charles is pretty much by definition as a prince of the realm a Church of England Christian, who would no more want to see Sharia Law than a herd of buffalo living in Buckingham Palace.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is brand spanking new, but as far as I can tell seems much more of a traditionalist than the old one, and has the same level of interest as Charles in fostering Sharia law - zero.
As the fellow above you plainly admitted, the subordination of women is doubtless fine with you as long as you're doing the subordinating. Nonetheless, I doubt you either look like Liam Neeson or can get any women to subordinate.
You know, Democrats and Republicans are a US-only phenomenon. Oh wait, you probably DON'T know that. You probably think that the rest of the world is just like the US only inferior. Why do I say that? Because I've seen that kind of thing from "patriots" like you and the fact that you call them by (a bastardized version of) the word "Democrat" is a red flag to me that you've Americanized the politics of a country that (like all countries) has a unique political dynamic.
There are millions of Muslims who married for love. There are millions of Christians who had arranged marriages.
Don't fundie Christians get rather vocal on the whole 'the husband is the head of the family' and 'wives, submit to your husbands' thing?
The European Declaration of Human Rights; also the Muslim Council of Great Britain's statement that Sharia Law will never exist in Britain
I'd stop watching Faux News and stop reading the Daily Fail if I were you, Kenny-boy.
Liberals don't want sharia, bozo-head! Get that through you thick skull! WE DON'T WANT SHARIA & ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM MAKES US PUKE!
Respect for normal, nice, sane Muslims/Islam =/= PRO-SHARIA-THEORACY!
We loathe IslamoSharia as much as your ChristoSharia!
You couldn't squeeze in one more conspiracy theory in there, could you?
Democrats are mostly liberals, as in liking freedoms and human rights, including freedom and human rights for women. As such they abhor religious-right Muslims just as much as they abhor religious-right Christians.
Prince Charles and the Archbishop of Canterbury are prime examples of dhimmicrats.
Wow.
Since taking a public stand on anything involves, or at least should involve understanding the cause, this disqualifies Prince Charles, seeing that grasping concepts is not one of his stronger virtues.
As for the present (and very new) Archbishop of Canterbury, the only thing I see linking him to Islam is his sickening homophobia and his thinly veiled disregard for women outside of the home. He's a bit of a let down. The wrong man at the wrong time. :-(
News flash for several Americans on here: he's not referring to the American political party Democrats with a capital d. There is such a thing as a democrat with a small d, i.e. someone who believes in democracy. Don't make us look like the (apparently at least partly true) stereotype that we think everything's about us!
Spoilers, England's royalty don't actually have any power over anything.
I also like how you are mad an actor you like is a democrat but you like him so you won't call him stupid.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
