She cites a comment piece in the Church of England Newspaper, bemoaning the fact that Britain's Christian heritage is being trampled under the marching feet of encroaching Islam.
"If recent reports of trends in religious observance prove to be correct," it says, "then in some 30 years the mosque will be able to claim that, religiously speaking, the UK is an Islamic nation, and therefore needs a share in any religious establishment to reflect this."
One way to stop that is to outlaw any establishment of any religion, of course, but that wouldn't halt the kowtowing of officialdom, which seems to want to fall over itself to bring about the C of E Newspaper's dire prediction.
The article goes on:
This progress has been enthusiastically assisted by this government in particular with its hard-line multi-cultural dogma and willingness to concede to virtually every demand made by Muslims.
[. . .]
At all levels of national life Islam has gained state funding, protection from any criticism, and the insertion of advisors and experts in government departs national and local. A Muslim Home Office adviser, for example, was responsible for Baroness Scotland’s aborting of the legislation against honour killings, arguing that informal methods would be better. In the police we hear of girls under police protection having the addresses of their safe houses disclosed to their parents by Muslim officers who think they are doing their religious duty.
It talks of how white-men-only clubs have been outlawed, yet swimming pools can have Muslim-women-only sessions; and of how Islam is being "institutionalised, incarnated, into national structures amazingly fast, at the same time as demography is showing very high birthrates".
As secularists must be weary of repeating by now, if religion itself were taken off the national agenda; if it were confined to the private sphere; if people were allowed to get on with their beliefs in their homes and meeting places, but not allowed to impose them in the workplace or the public square; if schools taught about religion rather than inculcate its wackier claims to truth into the minds of students – if all this happened, no religion would have precedence, but all religions would get on with things and live side by side.
Some might even disappear, deprived of the oxygen of constant official encouragement and appeasement.
But we keep making allowances for "sensitivities" that are born of nothing but irrational belief in the unproven and unprovable. And we pay officials and legislators to do it in our name.