Leaderboard

Allow me to help you get more comfortable with this. If a woman is hired as policewoman, do we tell her what to wear? Do we force her to wear a uniform or she can wear whatever she wants? If a woman is a teacher, can she wear whatever she wants? Can she do her job in bikini? Nope, we have a certain minimum requirements and therefore, we tell her what to wear and what not to. Depending on what you do or where you are, there are up to a certain point, rules where we tell women what to wear... just as well as to the men. The rules are the same and applied on both gender. We always said what to where and we will always do. Even if the rules are very flexible, there are still rules. So, banning a garmant that covers your face, does it remove the women the right to wear what they want? Not more than getting topless into a bus. It's a justified rule for identification. IT IS NOT, under any circumstances, an excessive restriction over the right for the women to wear what they want.

If I think that the Islamic Ideology as described in Qur'an is "bad", that says nothing about Muslims. I also think that the ideology described in the "Old Testament" is equally bad. That says nothing about Jewish people or Christians. I also think that the Nazi ideology is bad and that the KKK ideology is bad, and the Chinese Communist Ideology is bad. These are not statements about people. I respect Muslim dissidents and Muslims who are trying to reform the medieval ideology. I don't respect people who think Apostates or Homosexuals should be killed or those who are defending those beliefs, no matter their religion.

Yes, sorry I have seen this argument before in regards to Christianity's crimes throughout history. It's not objective. You have basically provided an axiom that says Christianity is better than Islam because the latter is 'most often' coerced whereas the social indoctrination of our society is apparently better... somehow. Why not just ban Islam ? You can prove it's evil, right ? All of the bad things they do ?

Then, according to your definition, your are a racist, because you treat Islam with indecency. The last four items are pillars of Islam. And you are completely wrong on your assumption that the "the vast majority of Muslims would also answer no": https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/01/64-percent-of-muslims-in-egypt-and-pakistan-support-the-death-penalty-for-leaving-islam/?utm_term=.4043ac6d1e97 It's a fallacy of Islamist apologists like yourself to project your liberal views on Islam practitioners. They are nothing like you. And they tell you that if you ask them.

Bill 62 is about banning a face covering in certain circumstances, not about banning religion. The Niqab is sending the message that our western culture and freedoms are rejected. This is a political ideology of control under the cover of a religion. Do you support this?

We have discussed this before in another topic. Stop trying to create stupid excuses. You dont have right to invade their lands whatever story you fabricate in your pink dream World. You also have massacred them in various ways. So you didnt assimilate into Native culture but you forced them to be disappear together their culture and today you hypocritically want new coming migrants to be assimilate into your culture, you are disgusting.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/rohingya-canada-ambassador-macarthur-rae-1.4367084 600K according to this. I think there are limits in such discussions; if an individual promotes conspiracy theories, or wants to vilify large groups of people then you should reconsider discussing policy points that have any degree of nuance to them. You will be wasting your time. Perhaps take the discussion back to the greater points: should Canada have a refugee program at all? how should one of the richest nations on earth administer its humanitarian programs? You will probably have more of an impact, and get more out of them to discuss such basic principles than detailed responses IMO.

May I take up your first words and use them as a basis to make some rhetorical questions to try make a point. Thank you because I am removing them out of the context you used them for which I appreciate. Can anyone name a Muslim country that has treated another Muslim country or non Muslim country fairly? Can anyone think of a Muslim country accepted or acknowledged its collective responsibility for a war or conflict, ever? The selective take on history that Muslim countries are victims is with due respect just that selective and it leads I would argue to a false narrative and a rewriting of history to falsely portray Muslim states as victims of the West. Muslim states vicitimize and kill. If one looks at the history of Muslim nations from the organized implementation of Islam through Sharia law states to the nations of today, this depiction of Muslim states being victims is false. They have victimized more than they have been victimized and they have victimized Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Bahaiis, Hindus, Christians, Zoroastrians, Siekhs, Druze, Kurds, Azidi, communists, trade unionists, gays, women, on and on. Islam is not and has never been a peaceful religion in the manner in which it has been practiced by states and imposed by war on others whether it be fellow Muslims or non Muslims. Muslim countries not treated fairly? What country has been treated fairly on this planet and who decides that? With due respect when referring to the history of Islam, there is very little peace. To pretend it was a peaceful society only to be victimized by the West into becoming bad is a crock of crap. Its the same false script that falsely states Muslim extremists, Muslim terrorists are only violent because the West victimized them. Oh bull sheeyat. Muslims have been and continue to be their own worst enemy clinging to a non flexible approach to their ideology and condemnation of progressive Islamic movements trying to teach and guide them to move past fundamentalist rigid thought processes to critical analysis and free thought. My concern is for progressive Muslims and all kinds of Muslims and non Muslims being victimized by Islamic extremists. My concern is that states in Niger, Chad, Malawi, Sudan, or in pockets of Nigeria, or in Bahrain, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, are corrupted and violent-blaming the West for Muslim uprisings in China and Russia is nonsensical. Suggesting Boca Ratan are reacting to Western unfairness in Nigeria is crap. When the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt tried to wipe out Coptic Christians, when Sudan does the same through its Muslim Brotherhood to its Christians, when Assad engages in what he does, when Erdogan of Turkey openly calls for war against Kurds and encourages their genocide and denies the Armenian genocide, that's not because the West was unfair. The Arab league nations that chose to ally with the Nazis, then Soviets and try wipe out Jews for having a tiny country were not victims-in fact they victimized Palestinians and turned Palestinians into pawns for their failed victimization of Jews in Israel. the 900,000 Jews expelled from the Arab world, the hundreds of thousands of Jews persecuted in Arab countries along with Zoroastreans, Bahaiis, Christians, were not victimized because of the West victimizing Muslim nations. My comments are directed at Muslim governments and extremist Muslim terrorists and theologians, not ALL Muslims. I have been careful to state the Muslim governments I criticize hate everyone especially fellow Muslims in their own nations.

And the godless (Communists), who believe there's no one to answer to, kill their own people like we swat flies!

"Digressives" are just happy being racists.

What a bunch of ridiculous nonsense.