Thursday, 21 August 2014

The Friday People

The kid from Luton or Staines who sawed off James Foley's head is dead. Or as good as dead. Every second that remains to him will be spent listening for the sound of the drone that's targeting him - a drone that may well be piloted by another Brit, from a control desk in RAF Waddington. He won't be needing his gym membership back when he comes home. But how the hell did we produce this excrescence? And if Cameron doesn't think we're at war with Jihadist Islam, Jihadist Islam certainly thinks it's at war with us - so what to do? A response to a recent post by Sebastian Weetabix is well worth quoting fully;
We have some very nice immediate neighbours right next door. He is an IT director; his wife is a GP. They are both of Pakistani origin - born there, in fact. (They also happen to be first cousins, as well as married, though that is not germane in this thread.) They are clearly educated people, well assimilated, what I would describe as 'nominal muslims'. They have one son and one daughter. (Low birth rate, educated, see.)

The mother dresses western style, but modestly. The father is completely westernised, though he doesn't drink alcohol or eat pork. Now we come to the children... the 18 year old daughter wears the complete niqab. The 19 year old son, somewhat to his father's discomfort who says he cannot get through to his son, now sports the full Jihadi beard complete with shalwar khameez and woven skull cap. He was a nice young lad until he got religion; now he doesn't even speak to us when we see him in the street because we are 'kuffar'. I think we can guess his opinions on ISIS etc.

The problem is not poverty or lack of education. (The lad is a physics student and I would conservatively put his parent's combined income at circa £200K/yr.) The problem is ISLAM. Unlike Christianity or Judaism it is not susceptible to reinterpretation, it is immutable. It is the revealed word of God and Muhammad is his messenger so anything he did is OK because he is the measure of man. His sword was called Zulfiqar, which means "cleaver of verterbrae" and he consummated marriage with an 8 year old girl. And his message enjoins the use of deception and lies for the furtherance of Islam and the conversion or death of the unbeliever. You can be a good human being or you can be a good Muslim following the precepts of the message, but you cannot be both.
There was a cabbage-witted Guardian columnist somewhere yesterday describing the Brit Jihadists in Syria as 'Kevins' and put it down to teenage rebelliousness; they'll come home quietly, he said, and carry on with their BTECs in IT Administration at the local college. Like Hell they will. The dribbling fool knows nothing of the effect that having been in combat, in battle, will have had on these men - and their inability to settle for 10 to 4 at the Tech. We had the same problem post-wars. Suicides amongst 21 year old ex fighter pilots who couldn't adjust to running a country pub were embarrassingly high.

So just what do we do about the Friday People? Keep it realistic and legal please ...


Thud said...

We need new laws pronto for their return and a firm rejection of their inevitable usage of European led human rights etc, these people come to kill.

Quiet_Man said...

Mass expulsion would appear to be the only cure, even the westernised ones unless they publicly renounce their religion.
Yes it's harsh, but unless we do this now or are prepared to fight in the future, we're going under.

Prawn Sandwich said...

"We" can do nothing other than fiddle at the edges. "We" do not have the stomach to do what needs to be done.
The real battle is between Muslims. IS want to return to the safety and certainty of the 7th century, via a Caliphate and kill any and all in their way. Especially the apostate Shia and lax Sunnis. The West are peripheral.
If "we" were willing to suffer real pain, the US would impose financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia and Qatar, seize assets and block all military sales. But we have too much to lose and we love our comforts. The silent majority of Muslims will have to do something about IS/Salafism and "we" should do nothing at all. Let the silent majority stand up and stop hiding behind the Wests skirts - they have more to lose.

backofanenvelope said...

I'm afraid that I just think of that cliche, if you are in a hole, stop digging. So stop importing these people. No foreign nationals to be granted permanent or indefinite right to reside and their children to take the nationality of their parents.

DeeDee99 said...

We don't allow the terrorists back into the country where they will immediately exploit the HRA (legally aided of course) with sob stories about their conflicted background to justify carrying out atrocities.

Then we need to start an immediate programme to make British Muslims adopt British culture - and stop importing any more.

No more cousin marriage, unless your cousin is already living in the UK.

It's won't happen of course. Our political class are terrified of the Muslim fifth column they imported - and Cameron wants their votes.

We're going under ... it's only a matter of time and I'm glad I won't be around to see it happen.

Enoch was right: there will be rivers of blood.

Anonymous said...

I don't know what to do, but we certainly can't 'send 'em back', it isn't an option, much as some people might like the idea.

I suppose we government should just treat them like they would treat our more established citizens... i.e. With utter contempt. We shouldn't be making a special case.

As for the middle-east, we should keep our noses out of their 700 year battle for control of the Zakat... Let them let blood, It'll keep the population under control.

Any "jihadists" that wish to leave for warmer climates, should be allowed to, and they should have their passports revoked, and must re-apply for citizenship.

Sackerson said...

Ideological battle. We need to work out what we ourselves believe, and state it clearly and publicly. We need to break away from the wasn't-that-a-dreadful-act moralising (moralising without a root, merely reacting emotionally) because all such acts will be explained (as with the IRA beardie) as "regrettable" but necessary. We didn't bomb Hamburg for fun. We've been living in a moral Disneyland for too long, dazed by our assumptions of universal banal benevolence, because by and large we haven't had war on our front doorstep for 70 years.

Anonymous said...

I can't do anything yet, I will be asked to do something soon, what worries me - how many we will have to fight.

I don't hold out any hope that the political fuqwits and media dolls will help me, they'll probably report on me and call me all sorts of names for defending my country..........
ring any bells?

Sebastian Weetabix said...

It seems to me the first priority is we must regain control of our own borders; if we can't decide who comes in or out, everything else is just moot anyway. If that means leaving the ECHR and the EU, so be it. We face an existential threat in the long term and we must do what it takes to counter it.

Once we've established that control the first thing is zero additional muslim immigration. No wives, no husbands, no grandfathers or uncles. To those already here, if you want to live with your relatives that badly, then go home. They're not coming here. No planning permission for any new mosques either. When we can cathedrals in Mecca they can have Mosques in Rome and Canterbury, so to speak.

We should also start stripping citizenship from the likes of Anjem Choudary and send them off to Saudi where they belong. And anyone who goes off to Isis stays with Isis and doesn't come back. Not even in a box.

Kemi said...

I certainly don't know the answer, R.

All I can say is that subconsciously, I am terrified. I was born in 1980 and the world has never seemed as scary as it does today.

I find myself wanting to see measures taken which intellectually I can't defend as a small-state classical liberal or, in fact, as someone from an ethnicity that's always at the wrong end of the stick when they're carried out....

Nick Drew said...

God knows what will happen in detail as this plays out. However, in amongst the inevitable utter ghastliness, there is likely to be a return to the type of social cohesion that flourishes when there is a clear, common purpose - which sadly, typically means a clear, common foe.

Being a good bit older than (e.g.) Kemi, I well recall the simple perspectives of when Russia was a material threat; and it was clear from my parents' and grandparents' conversation that this had carried over pretty seamlessly from the different but equally black-and-white WW2 threat

And I can also track the falling-away of this clarity-of-worldview + resultant cohesion, as the Russian threat gradually tapered off, all the way down to its being an irrelevance

(not a linear process, mind, and with curious random fluctuations such as 1982)

"If that means leaving the ECHR and the EU" - yes, Europe needs to get its act together. The USA, Russia and China have a rather more decisive approach to such matters

Elby the Beserk said...

How the hell? We opened the doors and invited it in, and made it an offence to offend them. Now we are reaping the whirlwind.

Keep an eye on this site

There are still radical Islamists in the UK, and they are still able to peddle their vileness. We need to get mediaeval on THEIR asses. Let them know terror.

Sackerson said...

No need for the torches and pitchforks. We need to say confidently what we believe and stand for. What's letting us down is the blithe assumption that everything will be okay without a foundation - the Millenium Dome was a good symbol of that inchoate nonsense.

And msny of those who have come here have come precisely for peace and the rule of law.

Sackerson said...

Anonymous said...

Why is it a problem if they come back suicidal, so long as they take themselves out without involving anyone else?

I imagine that the Left will welcome them back with open arms - they did with the people who came back from the Spanish Civil War where they'd contributed to the misery there. Then they'll get the hero treatment denied to ex-servicemen.

Perhaps it's time for us to decree that any Muslim who commits a crime where the Sharia punishment is worse than British law gets the Sharia they want.

Budgie said...

We are losing because we have lost our self belief. When we think that all is relative we have no defence against those who think in absolutes. We had no defence when we started to think that morals were a matter of opinion, that our way of life should be not just jeered at but positively denigrated, and that Jonny Foreigner owed us a living.

To recover we must believe in right and wrong as absolutes again. We must consequently believe that our culture is valuable, has something worthwhile and humane to say to the world, and that our country is our home not any old Jonny Foreigner's to recast as he sees fit.

I can just hear the Tingeys and the Drews squawking that there are no such things as absolutes, and that (absurdly mis-quoting Dr Johnson) really, patriots are scoundrels. Until that changes we have no hope.

hatfield girl said...

Christianity is the organised, culturally supportive, civilised response to Islam. If Sackerson is right, that we must,

'work out what we ourselves believe, and state it clearly and publicly. We need to break away from the wasn't-that-a-dreadful-act moralising (moralising without a root, merely reacting emotionally)'

then there is no need to start from zero; we have, most of us, our Faith, with or without a God, to live by.

Christianity is the living response to Islam and its miserable denial of humanity's graces. We have the Church Militant to inspire us (not to be confused with the church belligerent).

Going to church makes a start on the public acts that are needed to assert our unity in the face of barbarism.

Sackerson said...

HG: it is long past time that those who run things here in the UK should stop trying to airbrush Christianity out of our national life and consciousness. People don't realise how much of what we think of as normal in our ethical views has a Judaeo-Christian root. I think that even at the time of the loaves and fishes, the gospel of love and forgiveness was more amazing to the people.

Anonymous said...

We need to follow Denmark's lead, dump the UN conventions, they are probably designed to be destructive to the nation state anyway.

Guess who signed ours off, yup, Bliar's Liebour............


Anonymous said...

Anon: "Perhaps it's time for us to decree that any Muslim who commits a crime where the Sharia punishment is worse than British law gets the Sharia they want."

No, no need to recognise Sharia in any manner whatsoever, simply reinstate the death penalty for treason, and prosecute these people for formenting treason.

As an added bonus, we could get Blair on the same charge too.

Anonymous said...

If, for the sake of argument, we put aside the varied (political) justifications for mass immigration in the post-war era:

1. Labour shortage.

2. They helped us win the war.

3. We owe them cos we is evil slavers.

4. Enrichment.

5. Globalisation.

6. Our civilization would collapse without them.

..then what we get comes via the law of unintended consequences.

Folk, from a completely alien culture and heritage, have spawned a generation, or two, who reject in whole the place where there parents came to. Oh dear.

Not a problem if they were just a few thousand of them. Big problem when it's now 3 million - and doubling every ten years.

Self-determination comes next and they will not back down or be reasoned with.


Anonymous said...

hatfield girl: "Christianity is the living response to Islam and its miserable denial of humanity's graces."

Ahem! Christianity pre-dates Islam by a few hundred years.

Ed P said...

Hamstrung by EU laws, there's little Britain will be allowed to do to stop these scum returning. But, if the fascinating book I'm reading, "Twilight of Abundance, by David Archibald" is even half right, most Muslim countries are heading for really big problems - mass insurrections and starvation within 20 years, as they will be unable to afford, or secure, adequate grain imports to feed their increasing populations. This book is a "must read"! So they will not have the time or energy for jihad soon, but will self-destruct in-fighting over the last scraps of goat.

G. Tingey said...

Sebastian comment: Unlike Christianity or Judaism it is not susceptible to reinterpretation is self-contradictory, though.
Look at the very different interpretation put on by father & son!
Or the differences between Sufi, Ahmadhi, SHia & Sunni + Whahbi .....
Err ....

Prawn Sandwich also has a valid point.

Ideological battle - correct.
Just the same problem we had with the murderous, terrorist Roman Catholic church in fact back in the 1580's onwards. *cough*

Oh grow up
There are absolutes - zreo degrees Kelvin is one such.
But, if you are trying to say that christianity is the answer, then you are only substituting the vileness, aren't you?

ditto Hatfield Girl
You only too obviously have never actually read the bible, nor read or learnt any history of christianity ....

Anonymous said...

You can do, dress it up, and or deny it all you like, but civil war is coming [back] to Britain.

Sebastian Weetabix said...

Tingey, you are trolling again. It seems to have escaped your attention that the Sunni Salafists are busy cutting off their co-religionists heads precisely because they consider them to have been re-interpreting Islam.

But don't take my word for it. Look up Al-Qaradawi (Ken Livingstone's mate). I paraphrase, but in essence he says there is no political Islam, Ottoman Islam, Malay/Indonesian Islam, modern Islam or ancient fundamental Islam. There is just Islam, the Quran, which is to be taken completely, utterly, literally and unalterably as the revealed word of God. It's not parable or analogy or metaphor. Anybody who dissents from that can convert or die. To put it in scientific language, he is not an outlier; this is mainstream Sunni opinion. But don't worry, if we fight back and they start losing the Quran says they can offer a 30 year truce. But when that time is up they have to pick up the sword again.

These are the kind of people with whom you cannot reason or compromise. They use the same words as us, but they mean different things.
'Justice'= everybody under Sharia
'Peace' = everybody is a Muslim
'Equality' = everybody under Sharia
Even my otherwise estimable neighbour is at it. He told me solemnly once "Islam means 'peace'". It doesn't of course, it means 'submission'.

Islam is built on three inequalities:
Men are superior to women
Muslims are superior to non-Muslims
Freemen are superior to slaves (The Quran allows slavery)

So stop pretending that Christianity, Judaism, Sikhism etc are morally equivalent to Islam. They are not.

John M said...

Let's start with :

If you want to leavge the Uk to travel to one of these "zones" for more than two weeks you require prescreening and approval by the Home Office or it's automatic arrest and deportation when you finally return.

Anonymous said...

We need to start making lead-lined petrol and diesel tanks and stop objecting to a little radioactivity in fuels.

Cascadian said...

So a concensus seems to be emerging that those UK residents presently (for want of a better phrase) in ISIS conflict zones should be screened by the UK Border Agency. Excuse me while I laugh hysterically-OK I feel better now.

Those proposing this measure will be happy I am sure that Ms May, the home secretary cannot presently turn her mind to that option, she is exceedingly busy dealing with the much more damaging issue of bullying husbands. Thats the way politics is in yUK, fiddle around at the perimeter with useless issues while the central issues are ignored.

It was good to see actionman camoron chairing yet another COBRA meeting and concluding "something must be done",announced of course while he adopted his bunny paws stance. NOTHING will be done.

By the time this mob agrees on a suitable response Londonistan, Bradford and Bedford should have their sharia law and you shall have deserved whatever comes your way.

By way of a proposed solution, might I offer the following(stolen shamelessly from elsewhere)-I see your jihad, and raise my crusade.

G. Tingey said...

Sebastian W

BOTH "sides" of the islamic civil strife are re-interpreting their versions of a supposedly fixed "holy truth" - just like the christians, in fact, & several hundred years late - so I stand by my statement.
You are entirely correct in this staement:
Islam is built on three inequalities:
Men are superior to women
Muslims are superior to non-Muslims
Freemen are superior to slaves (The Quran allows slavery)

BUT the bible allows & accepts slavery too.
Sorry, but they (the various religions) ARE morally equivalent - why do you think I'm an atheist - because the whole thing, all of it, is morally repugnant.
You STILL don't get it, do you?

Anonymous said...

We cannot win a war until we know who our enemy is. Some of the suggested actions above are perfectly reasonable self defence once we understand who we are and who our enemies are. But not until we have identified our enemies. Without that step we will be open to all sorts of attack.

I maintain that our enemy is both the Left and Islam. Both seek to destroy Western civilisation, and are currently in an unholy alliance to do so.

Just as in the 39/45 war we must curtail the activities of Enemy Aliens, the enemies' fifth columns. In those days persons of German or Japanese origin were rounded up for internment. Now we have no choice but to do the same, we have left it far far too late to do anything more "civilised". We must round up and intern our enemies, both Lefties and Muslims. Then we can concentrate of fighting the active enemy, undo the damage, and rebuild our Nation (which will include putting on trial those traitors against whom there is sufficient evidence).

Sadly, because those in power have already given the enemy an effective veto over any attempt at self defence by this country, what will actually happen is that all those who wish to defend the country will be rounded up and interned "to maintain public order". In this way there will be no protests when the government machine rolls over and accepts that "There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed was his messenger" while at the same time agreeing that "Religion is the opium of the masses" and that the only path to Utopia is that of the Communist Manifesto.

I'll see you in the camps!

Sebastian Weetabix said...

Tingey, you are such an ignorant fool the mind boggles (not very Christian of me, I know - but then we are all sinners).

You can search for an endorsement of slavery in the New Testament until doomsday and not find it. The slave trade was ended by people like Wilberforce who were entirely motivated by their Christian convictions. To this day, for example, people suffering from Ebola are being tended by Christian missionaries. On the other hand I have yet to see an atheist mission in Africa relieving suffering. Abortion clinics on the other hand - I'm sure you and your atheist mates will be right there to suck the foetus out.

There are none so blind as those who cannot see. No, the various religions are not morally equivalent, and I am sorry for you that you do not see the difference. It is your loss. Christians will forgive your ignorance and offer you food and shelter, as will Jews who will pity your misfortune at not being a Jew. Jihadi Muslims, on the other hand, will simply chop your stupid head off, given the opportunity. I suggest you move to Syria at the earliest opportunity and see the "equivalence" of religions at first hand.

If you want to see someone who does not get it, I suggest you look in the mirror.

Thud said...

tingey, nice troll work, keep it up I'm sure isis and their supporters here in the U.K. appreciate your efforts.

G. Tingey said...

Article VII
VII. Of the Old Testament.
THE Old Testament is not contrary to the New; for both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to
mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man, being both God and man. Wherefore there are not
to be heard which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises. Although the law given from God by
Moses, as touching ceremonies and rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the civil precepts thereof ought of necessity
to be received in any commonwealth; yet, notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of
the commandments which are called moral


I can remember being told of my godmother ranting at the then vicar of the church here, after he gave a sermon on "The sins of the Fathers" & denounced him (in his own pulpit - in the mid-50's !! )
Because there were parishoners in the audience with Down's syndrome children - & she knew it & knew that so did he ...

Christians slaughtered the surrendered other christians after Carbisdale, didn't they?
Look up Arnoud Amoury, too.
Or the 30 years War.
Or the delightful police state set up by Jean Calvin.

I am not trolling, I regard "ISIS" as worse than the christians are, at present - they need stopping asap.
What that has to do with the (lack of) "virtue" of another set of blackmailing religious lies is a separate question.

Sebastian Weetabix said...

I find it utterly hilarious that you adduce one of the articles of the Church of England in support of your thesis. Even the Devil knows to quote scripture! There are upwards of one billion Christians in the world, the vast majority of whom are not members of that pathetic, effete institution. How insular can you get?

Never mind. We Christians will try to stop the Muslims cutting off your stupid atheist head.

G. Tingey said...

You really, really don't get it do you?
There is no "god" - to prove me wrong, produce eviience.
There isn't an "allah" either, or a "devil".
There is good & evil in the world & humans are responsible for all of it, & so blaming or praising someone else, even an imaginary BigSkyFairy is just a cowardly get-out.

I suggest you re-read my previous piece - how did I know about all all this stuff?
Because I used to be a regular churchgoer, that's how.
I know my bible & I've read the "recital". Which, incidentally, is a deeply unpleasant book, that makes "sense" (for some value of sense) if one imagines it ranted in a Ulster accent.

Budgie said...

G Tingey said: "... the whole thing [religion], all of it, is morally repugnant."

When you can tell me where you get your morals from, I will believe you.

steve said...

A better question perhaps is to ask why those children of Westernised Pakistanis turn to religion when Christian churches are struggling to attract or better retain teenage members? I see nothing in Islam apart from promotion of Islam. The Flower Generation in the 1960s might have rejected traditional religion, but at least the message they adopted was one of love for all.

Sebastian Weetabix said...

Young men in particular tend not to be attracted to the kumbaya aspects of modern Christian practice. Someone young who is morally conservative in outlook and disgusted by the decadence in western society (or freedom as I see it) has a retail choice of Tingey's peculiar brand of bitter, bigoted, nihilistic atheism (a cold house, that), a weak effete CofE that seems happiest proselytising about climate change, an RC church tainted by scandal, or assorted far-out evangelical nut jobs. (The Jews always strike me as quite sensible but they don't seem to be interested in acquiring recruits - and who wants to be circumcised?)

When you contrast this with the singular purpose of the Jihadis and their justification for violence and sex slave captives in war, it must appeal to angry disaffected horny young men who aren't getting any sex or the respect and status they think they deserve.

Also, if you decide not to go to mass on sunday, no one is going to kill you. If you're born into a serious muslim family you're pretty much trapped. I remember chatting with a nice young Pakistani waiter who liked a drink from time to time; he said to me (quietly, while checking none of his co-workers or family could hear him) "the trouble with Islam is everything enjoyable is haram". I can't see that lad decamping to Syria but he isn't about to join the humanist society or become a Christian. Most people aren't prepared to turn their backs on their community or family, so they live lives of quite hypocrisy instead.

G. Tingey said...

Ever heard of:
"the golden Rule"?

I suggest you are uneducated ....

the decadence in western society LOVELY - I want more of it ... ahem.
Ah, you said "mass" - so you are, possibly an adherent of the bloody-handed RC liars & murderers, then? *cough*

Much more seriously, If you're born into a serious muslim family you're pretty much trapped. - SPOT ON: If said young muslim males can;t go for a pint, are not allowed by their parents to mix in our society are ghettoised by their own supposed elders & betters, then what do you expect?
You have at least half a very valid point there & it needs pursuing.

Anonymous said...

The atheist charm school alumnus strikes again.

Sebastian Weetabix said...

I'm Glasgow Irish/Red Clyde Catholic in upbringing. That's my tribe, though these days I'm an agnostic. Having experienced the dubious pleasures of Paisleyites on the march smashing windows because Catholics live behind them I am allergic to your brand of bigoted sectarian abuse.

As to what to expect from Muslims? Well, I expect them to behave like Muslims. Which is why I think we need to keep their numbers below 5% of the population, or we're in for it. I can't see your persuasive alluring brand of nihilism winning them over, but feel free to give the imams an ethics lesson. I for one would pay money to watch.

Budgie said...

G Tingey, you have already accepted that there are no moral absolutes, therefore your "golden rule" is not absolute. So why should I take any notice of it? Indeed, why should you? In any case where do you get the concept of "good" or "moral" from to judge the "golden rule" as moral or good? Sooner or later you will be forced to admit that "good" and "moral" must be absolute values or the words are meaningless.

G. Tingey said...

I don't love the Evangelical protestants any more than you do, these days; though the vicar & church I referred to earlier was definitely one such.
My "abuse" is not sectarian, simply because the RC church is indeed bloody-handed, it's an accurate description.
However, if one looks at the record of Jean Calvin, what do we find - oh what a surprise, a blood-streaked mirror image - how nice! (not).

In the meantime WHAT "nihilism"?
I'm merely stating the testable proposition that BigSkyFairy doesn't exist - in what way that could be interpreted as nihilistic, I don't know.
In fact I assert that the universe is, indeed real & physical & present & important.
Much too important, in fact to waste one's time & effort on imaginary friends

IIRC you said "no absolutes" - not moral absolutes.
I also stated that there are absolutes, & here are some:
Zero Kelvin, the velocity of light, the Planck length, the values of "e" & "pi" & the fact that "e to the I Pi" is ONE - a remarkable fact. There's quite few more too, but I think you should get my drift?
The trouble with moral absolutes, very like "strict liability" crimes, is that circumstances alter cases.
And then what do you do?

Killing (murder) is bad, therefore, should one waste an ISIS murderer?
My opinion is "yes" in this particular case, but as a moral absolute ...
I never said it was easy ....

Anonymous said...

@ Tingey

The velocity of light is an 'absolute'. No it's not, it depends what medium the light is travelling through.

e^iπ = -1

G. Tingey said...

Anon - I was "assuming" a vacuum .....
Indeed, the phenomenon of refraction depends upon differing velocities in different media.

Budgie said...

G Tingey, "no absolutes"?!? If you bother to actually read my comments you will see I have been trying to educate you in the reverse. "Good" and "moral" must be absolutes. I have made no comments about your introduction of irrelevant physics/maths formulae.

G. Tingey said...

Why & how must "good" & "moral" be absolutes?
You have made a simple ex cathedra staement, with no back-up or justification.

Maths & Physics are anything but irrelevant.
They encompass the unbreakable rules that govern this universe.

Let us suppose that there is an absolute moral rule, not to kill, or murder.
Then, what is one to do with a criminally-insane murderer from ISIS?
Conversely, should one have capital punishment for "normal" murder, when the courts make mistakes ... ?
An "absolute" moral rule, in either direction, will than land you in trouble, won't it?