YES to Judeo-Christian-based immigration, NO to human-rights-based immigration

This title is not racist or discriminatory, and to prove it let me begin with an analysis of Yves Mamou of the Gatestone Institute presented in his paper “France: Human Rights vs. The People”:
Jean-Louis Harouel, Professor of the History of Law at the Paris-Panthéon-Assas University, recently published a book entitled, Les Droits de l’homme contre le peuple (Humans Rights against the People). In an interview with Le Figaro, he said:
“Human rights, are what we call in France ‘fundamental rights’. They were introduced in the 70’s. The great beneficiaries of fundamental rights were foreigners. Islam took advantage of it to install in France, in the name of human rights and under its protection, Islamic civilization, mosques and minarets, the Islamic way of life, halal food prescriptions, clothing and cultural behavior — Islamic laws even in violation of French law: religious marriage without civil marriage, polygamy, unilateral divorce of wife by husband, etc.
“Through the assertion of identity, Islamists and mainly UOIF [Union of Islamic Organizations of France — the French branch of the Muslim Brotherhood] exploited human rights to install their progressive control on populations of Northern African descent, and coerce them to respect the Islamic order. In particular, they do all that they can to prevent young [Arab] people who are born in France from becoming French citizens.”
The human rights movement was born in 1948 with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, launched by Eleanor Roosevelt. For 70 years, nine major “core” human rights treaties were written and ratified by the vast majority of countries.
Like a disease, the “human rights ideology” has proliferated in all areas of life. The United Nations website shows a list of all the human rights that are now institutionalized: they range from “adequate housing” to “youth” and include “Food”, “Freedom of Religion and Belief”, “HIV/AIDS”, “Mercenaries”, “Migration”, “Poverty”, “Privacy”, “Sexual orientation and gender identity”, “Situations”, ” Sustainable Development”, “Water and sanitation.” At least 42 categories of human rights fields are determined, each of which are split into two or three subcategories.
Thus, as the facts presented by Yves Mamou prove, the human-rights-based immigration is destroying the very spiritual fabric of French people. Why the so inspiring concept of equal human rights for everybody is so destructive in practice? What is wrong with the very idea of universal human rights?
The concept of universal human rights was created by honest people of Judeo-Christian morality, including both religionists and atheists, who honestly but wrongly believe that their morality is the universal morality as well for the peoples of non-Judeo-Christian world. It should be so, they believed, since the creator of this morality was One God – One for all humans created in His image and likeness. The Judeo-Christian morality were presented to non-Judeo-Christian peoples under the name of “universal human rights” authorized and legalized by the UN.
However, the law cannot change the morality – the law is a reflection of the morality of the majority – the law may protect a minority group as well from the overwhelming power of the majority if a minority group does not destructively intrude into the spiritual realm of the majority.
While many non-Judeo-Christian immigrant groups are successfully assimilating in Western Judeo-Christian countries, one immigrant group is destructively intruding into the spiritual realm of the Judeo-Christian majority. This group consists of Muslims mostly from the Arab world. No doubt, some Muslims among them would like to assimilate but they are afraid of the spiritually powerful among them.
Islamic morality does not accept equal coexistence with Judeo-Christian and other non-Islamic moralities while Judeo-Christian morality does it – that is why most Islamic immigrants in Western Judeo-Christian countries are working to subvert the Judeo-Christian morality while the Western promoters of Islamic immigration dream of Islamic assimilation. In particular, it could be seen in the following.
• As a rule, Islamic immigrants are not joining Western social and political organizations which strengthen the Judeo-Christian fundamentals of Western countries as Jews and Christian are doing – Islamic immigrants prefer their own organization with their own agendas
• As a rule, Islamic immigrants prefer to follow their own Islamic Sharia laws which are foreign to the Western laws based on the Judeo-Christian morality
• As a rule, Islamic family allegiance is a tribal one – not a country-wise one as typical in Western tradition
• As a rule, Islamic religious institutions, the mosques, are condoning terrorist-minded members while the Jewish synagogues and Christian churches promote peace and coexistence.
That is why the countries of Western Judeo-Christian civilization have to test all potential immigrants on the acceptance of Judeo-Christian morality in public life instead of testing everybody on the suffering along the lines of “human rights” ideology. The suffering Islamic people should be helped but in their own world.