Dawkins leads with the question: Why do we offer intellectual concessions to those who possess strong religious convictions, while not making similar exceptions to those who believe in anything from astrology to boogie men, when all are based on the same amount of factual data?

Enter Mark Steyn: America Alone.

Steyn is a human blow-torch. Where Dawkins asks the high-brow questions, Steyn jumps right in the trench and blankly states that there is one religion that consistently refuses to play nice with other. It starts with I and ends with slam. Shelve that for a minute.

The crux of America Alone is a study of demographics that is hard to argue with. Try this: Western Europe has the largest entitlement programs that are funded by the highest taxes, anywhere. The problem they face is one of dwindling birth rates. Most of Western Europe is at or below 1.5 kids per household. That is below replacement rate and means that every generation at that rate equals 20-30% less people. Which, if you're funding such an entitlement state, is a huge problem. Skipping the why component of Western Europe's low reproduction rate - could be a new consciousness, or simply that too many Parisians are content sipping espresso and listening to their iPods in quaint cafes - the what is a significant factor. Europe's native populations are decreasing, with Spain being the worst at a rate of 1.2 kids per household.

But that doesn't mean that their populations are dwindling. Guess which groups have fantastic replacement rates? Hint: starts with I. You got it. Most Muslim countries have rates between 3 and 6. Now, Steyn doesn't correct that for first-world and third-world variables. Even considering that, it doesn't take too long to see who is moving in. Western Europe's nanny state is failing to sustain itself, for whatever reason it's native people are not procreating. Muslim populations are immigrating to fill the void. When they do, they will begin to shoulder the tax burden and with it, gain more political leverage. See also: America's hispanic influence on immigration policy.

At this point, some of you are ready to wave the asshole flag in my direction. Not so fast. What's being presented here is a completely normal thing when it comes to demographics. One population goes down, the one that goes up gets power. Simple enough. I am not suggesting here that there is an attack on western culture. What I am describing is a potential shift in the tide, same as any time in history.

The difference is that tide is unified under a set of memes that do not openly endorse alternative points of view. Wanna try it out? Count the number of instances where Muslims openly protested against their own citizens for inciting the cartoon riots. How about the number of times Muslims have held memorial services for their own citizens that were the victims of their own terrorists. Come up empty? Think about that the next time the anniversary of the Oklahoma Bombings comes around, or Columbine. Dawkins' question of why we grant asylum to the insane, in the name of respect and diversity rings true.

Steyn goes on to cite numerous examples of why a utopian welfare state modeled after Western Europe is a tragic mistake. Say what you want about idealistic goals of a modern society. Point blank: the reason Western Europe can afford their current entitlement programs is because their defense was subsidized by America. Altruism aside, it just so happens that they were in between the Red Bear and Uncle Sam. The U.S. does not have the same luxury. Current tax burdens and entitlement guarantees have the potential to strap America with an economic chastity belt. A healthcare overhaul is not in the best interest. But that's off-topic.

What is of note is that a shift in demographics towards Muslim inhabitants will change the face of Europe. The question that is left is what type of change that will be. Will it be a shift that assimilates to a multi-faceted culture? Or, is there a component to the Muslim culture that is more receptive towards 7th century values? Of course there are no absolutes, insert the not-all-this or -that disclaimers here. Steyn could be a doomsday crier. Or he could be raising a flag that says Creeping Normalcy at Play. To bring Dawkins back into the mix, and I do not know that the two would even entertain a conversation, if a predisposition towards faith in teams through memes is a given, then we should be really specific which teams those are. Diversity for diversity's sake is a delusion.