I hate these sorts of emails and am looking to reply to the person who sent it to me. I am assuming that there is a version for America the UK etc and folks just whack in whatever country they don’t want Muslims to be a part of (ie
is not an aussie thing).
I am wondering how many factual error there are in this piece (aside from the whole
which I can personally attest is not always true)
I apologise if I am not making much sense this morning as I am suffering a sleep deficit
They forgot
And “competitively - no,” because they stubbornly refuse to participate in all-you-can-eat pork ribs contests.
They sure do have a lot of allegiances. Seems like they could squeeze in a few more to the local country, government, etc, without even noticing.
You could make a similar email about Catholics and their allegiance to the Pope. Obviously (I hope) it would be just as asinine.
I’m pretty sure the “moon god” thing is a lie. “Allah” just means “the [sole deity] God”. Wikipedia saith:
I’m not sure why the theological/religious/scriptural points are even relevant, unless “Australian” is now a religion. And all religions tend to start from the point of “we’re right and everyone else is wrong” so picking on Islam for this is just stupid.
Likewise, “Geographically” is stupid unless True Australians are supposed to pray to Uluru or the Sydney Opera House or something like that.
“Socially” is just flat out wrong, as is “Politically”. They’re confusing the way Muslims act in theocratic countries such as Iran or Saudi Arabia with the way they act in other cultures, and the reason they act that way in those countries is BECAUSE of the cultures. You’d have a better argument saying that Catholics have allegiance to the Pope ahead of their country, and most non-insane people gave up on that one a long time ago.
“Domestically”…I’m pretty sure most Muslims don’t have four wives, nor are they required to. And for advice on how women should be treated the Bible isn’t exactly Miss Manners either.
“Intellectually”…I don’t know enough about the Australian Constitution to know what specifically “Biblical principles” it’s based on, but I’m guessing based on the “one nation under God” thing later on this is a C&P from the usual horsepuckey about the US Constitution. And it has nothing to do with intellectual ability anyway.
“Philosophically”…wrong again. Democracies exist in predominantly Muslim countries. Some of them are more dubious than others (Pakistan vs Turkey or Indonesia, say) but they exist.
“Spiritually”…I don’t even know how to respond to this one. It’s a series of non sequiturs and what tenuous argument I can parse is like arguing that “Islam” = “I slam” and therefore “see - they’re all about violence!”. Never mind that one of the aforementioned Five Pillars is about charity or that Jesus is considered an important figure in Islam.
In short, this is someone viewing a strawman from a long long way away and claiming that it’s the vanguard of an invading army. The amount of ignorance displayed is staggering.
(And “legally” - not true either.)
On the other hand, that right there is a sign of damnation. And their punishment is never to know the joy that is bacon.
Maybe they just don’t show them in the U.S., but do see a lot of mobs of Muslims burning Australian flags on TV in Australia?
I’m reasonably familiar with the Australian Constitution, and I don’t know what “Biblical principles” it was based on. The main sources were:
(1) the Westminster system of parliamentary government, and
(2) the United States style of federal government.
The only significant part relating to religion is section 116:
That doesn’t sound like a “Biblical principle”.
Oh and one more they forgot
Racially-No,…because they have brownish skins