Multiple reasons:
1 — I was indicating that I knew we were talking about religious duality.
2 — I was providing a clear example of how your support for duality as opposed to liberal critique might be worth questioning because of the clearly oppressive result we see in islam. In other words, if you want oppression, duality is a great way to get there. (contrast to liberal critique)
3 — Somewhat less obvious, I was pointing to a growing oppressive religion that is hunting for weakness in Western civilization… at the exact moment in time that Critical Theory has clearly torn at the nation’s institutions so dramatically that everyone can easily see that things are coming apart (we see your call for unity in the face of it).
Being dis-unified (mission accomplished, CT), means that Islam has the opening for expansion that they openly advertise and pursue (fastest growing religion, by far).
If our battered institutions fail to protect you (theoretically), you can conceivably be faced with your new role in the expanding “duality” that is islam. It’s not like they’ve not done it before… heck, they are doing it now.
I don’t think you would like your role in it.
So why are you defending duality? You pretend it is simply banging on pots… it’s not… but even that is disrespectful of others.
It seems foolish at best, suicidal at worst.
Here is someone that sees things generally as you do I estimate, though he’s a little more, shall we say, direct. He wants a “ruckus” too.