Islam in Europe.

An Austrian Christian Cardinal, thought to be on the waiting list to become the next Pope, gave a speech saying Europe is in danger of being conquered by Islam.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/13/austrian-cardinal-tipped-to-be-the-next-pope-warns-of-an-islamic/

With the ongoing influx of migrants from Islamic countries, via Libya etc., and a native european population ageing, having few children, or emigrating to New Zealand, the maths may add up to an eventual muslim majority in parts of Europe, but, is that the same thing as Europe being conquered by Islam?

It is Islam's intention that all mankind be ruled by the Islamic doctrines as that is the only 'true' way for mankind to go. Therefore it stands to reason that Islam will intentionally, but not initially forcibly, spread its testicles - opps nearly got that right - across the globe, as did the Roman Catholic Church, in order to accomplish it's goal. There's nothing new in this. It has been tried before -Crusades etc -. The only difference this time is that by peace and stealth it is far more likely to succeed. ISIS/ISIL/IS or call them what you will haven't the brains to wait for that to happen as they want 'power and influence' NOW. Which is why they will fail and the rest won't - UNLESS - we stop them by restricting the numbers and the propaganda infecting our populations. I have no time for any religions and would therefore restrict their growth whenever possible. But I am but one man and for the world to have freedom and sanity will take far more than me alone and, I suspect, some governments too.

Perhaps it's as much a fading away, a diminishing of at least some of the cultures and societies of the old european nations, leaving a vacum something will fill.

Only the vacuous would fill them with religion or politics. Mankind should know better.

Saying "Mankind should know better" is a bit vague. What would you replace religion and politics with? Basketweaving and circle dancing?

Sports. Games (the non-lethal kind). Space camps. Nature camps. Everything we already do with great success. Teach people to 'get along' together from the cradle onwards. If the species is to survive at all it must soon learn to 'work' together for the good of all. The biggest danger the planet faces is probably from outer-space - natural collision or alien infestation - and we must make all haste to remove ourselves to other 'lands' before this happens. Meanwhile we must advance technology in such a way as to eradicate from ourselves our past sins to enable 20 billion to survive in good order.
What must we do to replace religion and politics -? A question unworthy as no sane peoples would have either in the first place. Which says we are unbalanced to begin with -.

A pleasantly positive view. For the time being, religion, politics, culture and economics are on the agenda, perhaps more so for mainland europe with E.U. leaders declaring crisis.

You engineer socially at your peril. Every economist knows that. Every politician should know that. Every religious nut-case should know that. The fact that they often do and 'still' try to make it work beggars belief in our sophisticated, educated world. It would appear that succeeding generations don't take the trouble to read their history and attempt to learn by their predecessors mistakes. Which is why we continue along the road of make-do and mend and at considerable expense to the species. Rules/Laws are there to help control discipline, for without them society wouldn't survive. But to go beyond and try to interfere with natures laws, in the guise of civil/criminal laws is to go one step beyond that which is logical and sensible. Balance - the key to continued success. Pendulum swings as pendulum do -.

Depends what you mean or understand by 'social engineering'. Societies are constantly changing, and the way they change is partly as a result of what people do to change, or 'engineer' them. Inventing or popularising something like motor cars, jet engines, television, all those things changed society. Laws 'engineer' society, gay marriage and civil partnerships changes society, taxation 'engineers' society, employment law 'engineers' society. Under that definition almost everything anyone does apart from sitting listening to the birds sing is social engineering, from the smallest change to the biggest.

Society has systems, it's mechanisms, politics, religion, consumerism, industry, all those and many other systems that make up the sort of societies we live in, they all change as we go along, sometimes by circumstance, sometimes on purpose.

When systems go wrong or collide, sparks can fly, and beyond that a lot of damage can be done, so yes, politicians etc. with social engineering projects is a hazardous business.

Social engineering is when 'someone' attempts to mix or change or otherwise impose 'changes' which go against nature (what can be considered as natural biologically) or cultures that are endemic within populations or species. Examples would be homosexuality ( a natural phenomenon) or banning the speaking of Welsh in Wales in Victorian times. Or in the case of the EU the attempted integration of multiple cultures , economies, beliefs and faiths into one overall culture, economy and belief. It's not about moulding on a small scale the laws and conditions within a State to take cognisance of evolution and natural changes within the accepted norm. All unwanted invasions or unwanted Empires have by the very nature of the species collapsed or been defeated throughout history and only where the indigenous population have been totally eradicated or removed has such attempts had a modicum of success. Change has to be acceptable to the larger majority and beneficial in its methods for such 'engineering' to work.

In a nutshell - if it's not broken don't try to mend it. And if it's natural in its present form - leave it alone.

Many a mickle makes a muckle. We have a vaguely similar definition of social engineering, yours with more emphasis on what is larger scale and 'natural' or not. Not a lot about human society is straightforwardly natural.

The E.U. project is a large scale social engineering project we have opted out of. Has that 'perilous' and unbalanced social engineering project left europe vulnerable to social and economic disorder ? Apparently so.

With the war in Syria driving refugees away, and migrants from other countries drowning in the mediterranean attempting to reach europe, it's a confusing picture. Europe has to cope with an ongoing influx of Islamic peoples and influence, whether that is a 'conquest' or part of a larger tragedy is hard to define.

With the EU we have both the problem from without and the problem from within. A double whammy so to speak. Internal migration (known as free movement) with the poorer moving to areas where the wealth lies eg Romania to UK and external with economic migration from other parts of Africa and the Middle East (often confused with refugees). Creating super-states from a melange of vastly differing cultures (a good example is the Soviet Union) now the United States of Europe or EU is social engineering at its most ridiculous. For these 'states' to exist and work together requires they be 'held' artificially either by physical force or diktat. In the case of the Soviet Union it took seven decades to fall apart, in the case of the EU it could take either much shorter or longer according to the peoples patience and frustrations. What I am saying in a nutshell is - You can lead the horse to water but you can't make it drink. That by any stretch of the imagination is an attempt at 'social engineering' - and - - it doesn't work. Evolution is the only criteria by which changes can be truly effective - that which happens as a natural progression as directed by nature and its environs. Anything else is prone to failure. As for the African migration - that is for the most part economic with a smattering of 'refugee' amongst it. As for the Middle East that is mainly as a result of war and almost wholly refugee - but we have discussed that problem before - and its remedies. As for conquest - there are many forms of conquest -. Take your pick.

Picking on the religious aspect, Reverend Kelvin Holdsworth of Glasgow Cathederal is surprised by the hostile reaction to his arrangement for anti-Christian verses from the Koran to be read out to his congregation.

Perhaps Rev Kev is not up to speed on all issues in society today.

Religion is still an emotive subject in society. It may be just a job to him, but a lot of people feel strongly about it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-38591559

That people themselves feel strongly about religion really doesn't help. We are divided by continents and tribes and religions. One less would make things much easier to deal with. It wouldn't stop man being an arsehole - but it would certainly help towards it.
Pooling religions is like pooling peoples. We've tried that and it doesn't work. Again it's a form of 'social engineering'. We are not bloody monkeys so stop with the facile eugenics.

As for the Koran and the Bible - written by man, created by man, fostered by man. Man - are you kidding me -!!!!!!

Next week the Very Reverend Kelvin Holdsworth will invite head hunters to give a craft demonstration on how to shrink heads to make wall decorations.

Apparently, he says he didn't even know what arabic verses were to be read out, and seems to have a similar attitude to the Bible and Koran as you do Atlas, i.e. all bunkum so what does it matter.

All very well, but perhaps the Very Reverend Kelvin Holdsworth is not really the chap to be in charge of running a cathederal.

Every generation has to have its parasites. I think the religious looneys should revert back to the Middle Ages, live in closed communities and forage the land they already have and be self-sustaining. If they can't manage that - tough. And leave the rest of the world's populations to manage as best they can. I can think of no good reason why my laws or taxes should be set or benefited by deluded nincompoops. This is the 21st century. Man knows better how and from where he comes and how he must act to survive. Warbling nonsense to outer space won't make any of that any better. Cathedrals. Archbishops. I'd ban the lot.

They do seem rather a motley crew. However, as they go, the Chaplain to the Queen seems a wise chappie, he says -

"The Provost (Reverend Kelvin Holdsworth) might consider apologising to Christians, especially those who have suffered so deeply at the hands of a re-energised Islam that has violently assaulted Christians and the Christian faith across countries and continents, from Europe to Australia.

Some people will wonder if he has sufficient theological astuteness to remain in such a responsible office in times as fraught as these? Our interfaith relations require both integrity and competence. The strategy in Glasgow appears to have been short of both."

Read more at http://archbishopcranmer.com/quran-eucharist-provost-glasgow-cathedral-christian-revelation/

The whole thing is a non-news item to me. They can all go and throw themselves of a cliff somewhere where they can wash out to sea and disappear. Believe and worship by all means if you so wish but keep it to yourself and leave the rest of society alone. Society can do with less to worry about, not more. Religions is politics by other means - and we all have quite sufficient politics to be going on with. Ergo - Just go away - peacefully.

It's about geography, territory, or location as much as anything. In many places you would be killed for expressing unbelief in the local religion. Not in the UK, and it would be nice to keep it that way.

That won't happen without strong government with a willingness to uphold and support our 'traditions' and 'laws' and with a willingness to refuse any other traditions and laws not taken from our history.

You can't please 'all' the people 'all' the time especially when from different cultures and countries.
Those that try will inevitably fail and come to ruin at the cost to the whole of the society in ques tion.

Quite so. Having seen Rev Kelvin Holdsworths' jokey blog comments, about goat worship and other inane and evasive drivel, might be best for all if he rolls himself up into a ball and goes to see the Canon.

For society to survive peacefully requires violence. This is achieved by disciplines which the majority feel to be fair and the minority made to acquiesce by the use of minimal violence. Democracy has been born from those two 'knowns'. Freedom to think being foremost and freedom to act within the constraints of the society's norms. Religions come within those parameters which as long as the parameters are not exceeded is both accepted and tolerated. But straying beyond is unacceptable and with today's PC world such straying seems to many to be the norm. Each independent democratic society has its own historical 'norms' which include laws of the land. To break those or attempt to inculcate new 'outside' laws for all is always going to ferment social upheaval and thus are a very bad thing for the general peace and harmony one is attempting to attain. Time and stealth works well. Allowing for a natural progression works the best.

Perhaps we are seeing the beginning of a new trend, or as some might say 'natural progression', with news of the muslim call to prayer being sung out at Gloucester Cathederal, as part of a multi-faith celebration/exhibition.

If things continue on this way, we may, eventually, see some of our British Cathederals become 'interfaith'.,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tBnLdiY5Eg

I strongly believe (if we are talking about 'belief') that the populations of the world has quite sufficient to contend with just simply getting along with 'politics' as such is demanded given one's tribal associations and innate loyalties to the 'tribe'. Religion stems only from the desire of man to explain his existence and hope that 'this' isn't all we have to look forward to. In essence 'a dream'.
That 'dream' has been usurped by the power-mongers who wish to combine the two i.e. politics and religions = ultimate power.
Removing one, which has to be the religions, would make the world a more peaceful comfortable place. But this of course is yet another 'dream'.
Therefore 'faith or inter-faith' holds nothing for me whatsoever as the in-fighting will continue regardless of the efforts of others to integrate and abide. Concious social-engineering very rarely works. Evolution is the only mechanism that can possibly have any long lasting effect.

Removing either politics or religions may appeal, but, it's a  'Stop the world I want to get off!'  sort of idea that isn't going to happen.