Utterly illiberal

I often have a go at the left for its various illiberal tendencies, its generally a target rich environment as their anti-establishment beliefs often lead them into alliances with people whom most would regard as monsters. But the left are not alone in their desire to make the world a better place by enslaving or controlling us all, step forward Boris Johnson, a possible leader of the Conservative Party.

BBC.

Muslim children who risk radicalisation by their parents should be taken into care, Boris Johnson has said.
Writing in his weekly Daily Telegraph column, the London mayor said such children were victims of child abuse.
Mr Johnson said they should be removed from their families to stop them being turned into “potential killers or suicide bombers”.
A “fatal squeamishness” had developed over intervening in the behaviour of certain groups in society, he added.
But he said there was a need to be “stronger and clearer in asserting our understanding of British values”.
He warned that some young people were being “taught crazy stuff” similar to the views expressed by the two men who killed Fusilier Lee Rigby on a south-east London street.

And innocent until proven guilty goes straight out of the window and the spectre of a child catcher straight out of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang becomes a distinct possibility.
Dear lord, can’t he see just how wrong this is and how likely it will turn other muslims from simply espousing their nonsense to actually carrying it out?
Certainly I believe that their is no place for islam in a civilised society and my preferred choice would be for them to make a choice to drop it or leave. But under no circumstances would I ever advocate taking their children off them, I cannot think of a more likely circumstance to switch them to jihadi mode and Boris would have given them the perfect excuse.
Remove them or convert them, but for gods sake do not antagonise them like this, you wouldn’t like it done to your children and there’s no proof that the children will accept the teachings of their foolish parents.
Honestly, it’s an idea worthy of the illiberal left…

6 comments for “Utterly illiberal

  1. john in cheshire
    March 3, 2014 at 11:15 am

    QM, I agree with you; in addition, is this another ruse to increase the size of the pool of children that the child sex abusers will have to fish in? Or another nail hammered into the coffin of the family, by crypto-communists?

  2. Tom
    March 3, 2014 at 11:58 am

    Boris has blown his cover with this foul idea. If it ever took off how long before the children of all who disagree with conventional thinking would be taken away to be indoctrinated? The wackiest family is a better place to be brought up in than the best state care. The only word of your post I disagree with is “anti-Establishment”. The Left is the Establishment now and has been for decades. If the authors of any site were aware of that, I would have hoped it would be those at OOL

    • March 4, 2014 at 11:15 am

      “The wackiest family is a better place to be brought up in than the best state care. “
      Are you sure Tom: really, really sure?
      Pure libertarianism is a wonderful thing but is it possible that the stopped clock of social liberal BoJo might actually be correct just this one.
      ‘Family care good; state care bad’ makes a good slogan, but it doesn’t take into account the nature and purposes of government when it is good; which is to protect the weak. Sometimes, -ok, often – it fails and fails big, but even in the following cases where the state did not protect children because it was insufficiently intrusive , if it had intruded successfully and fostered the children with sandal-wearing Gaia worshippers pending further investigations would they have been worse off than when the state failed to intervene? Hmm?

      Victoria Climbié
      Charmaine West
      Heather Ann West
      Baby P

    • March 4, 2014 at 11:31 am

      “The wackiest family is a better place to be brought up in than the best state care. “
      Are you sure Tom: really, really sure?
      Pure libertarianism is a wonderful thing but is it possible that the stopped clock of social liberal BoJo might actually be correct just this one.
      ‘Family care good; state care bad’ makes a good slogan, but it doesn’t take into account the nature and purposes of government when it is good; which is to protect the weak. Sometimes, -ok, often – it fails and fails big, but even in the following cases where the state did not protect children because it was insufficiently intrusive , if it had intruded successfully and fostered the children with sandal-wearing Gaia worshippers pending further investigations would they have been worse off than when the state failed to intervene? Hmm?

      Victoria Climbié
      Charmaine West
      Heather Ann West
      Baby P
      😉

  3. Ed P
    March 3, 2014 at 11:59 am

    Forcing religious beliefs on children, regardless of the religion, is, by definition, indoctrination.
    Stopping all state funding of religious schools, whether Christian, Jewish or Muslim, etc., would help to reduce fundamentalism in all its manifestations.
    But taking children into “care” (as JiC says above) would be counter-productive and endanger the innocent.

    Is BJ just trying to carve out a platform for his ambitions?

  4. March 4, 2014 at 12:51 am

    It is well to point out that ‘Indoctrinating’ children (by parents) to love one’s neighbour despite him being different on the one hand and killing the neighbour for being different on the other hand, is qualitatively different.

Comments are closed.