dialamah

Do you even read DoPs posts? If you two didn't believe virtually all Muslims behaved in certain ways, you wouldn't be having meltdowns every time I, or anyone, presented a moderate Muslim behavior. DoP wouldn't constantly post Quranic verses to "prove" that Muslims must be violent and hateful, while claiming that verses about peace and non-violence didn't count. You wouldn't insist that a woman in a hijab must, by definition, be an extremist and/or her husband abusive and controlling. You would allow a range of behavors among Muslims, from extremely conservative on one end to extremely progressive on the other end, with the largest majority at some point in the middle - which I have no problem saying would be conservative. This is a lie. I have not offered an opinion on how widespread the doctrine of not making friends with non-believers might be within the Muslim world. I merely said, in a response to Argus, that its not an uncommon belief in any religion, whereupon DoP jumped in with his Koranic quote and challenged me to demonstrate same in another religion. I did so, and he immediately denied the sermon said what it did. And you are busily defending him; why would you do that if you really didn't think virtually all Muslims believe they must not be friendly with non-believers and thought I was completely wrong by saying there's Muslims who don't believe that. I am not defending Islam. I am pointing out bigotted thinking, Islamophobic attitudes and people who cling to a black/white view of the world despite evidence of gray all around them.

No, in this post to DoP: You can deny all you want that Muslims making friends with unbelievers is not allowed, but you are clearly wrong. And before you try to lie again about what I believe or think I repeat: just like Christians, some Muslims believe association and friendship with non-believers is wrong and some believe it isn't.

You, Argus and DoP have predictably responded to anything about moderate or even progressive Muslims with denial and derision. You three have constantly made accusations about what centrists or moderates think or don't think or believe, ignoring every instance where they've decried Islamic terrorism, expressed concern over oppression of women, or especially in MH's case, attempted to find a middle ground in the discussion of immigration. You three are predictable in ignoring what people say in favor of presenting their positions in as unreasonable a way as possible. The assumptions I make about you and DoP are pretty spot on. Argus is sometimes more moderate than I expect. I inderstand how much you hate having your flawed thinking pointed out, but too bad. You don't like it, start posting reasonably.

As much as Allah is God in any other language, it is indeed instructions from God as far as these Christians are concerned. My sister held a job in Egypt for several years. She travelled to and from work on public transit, unaccompanied by any male family member. She spoke of one woman in her workplace whose husband or another male family member, accompanied her to work and remained there all day. She was unusual there. So don't go making out like Muslim women everywhere are followed around by their husbands, because that would be a lie. I spend years debating with Evangelical Christians and most of them held the belief that avoiding non-believers, other than to prosletyze, was their duty. I don't think such a viewpoint is unusual in Christianity, but I also don't think it describes the majority. Unlike DoP does with Muslims, I do not take a single belief of some Christians and apply it to all Christians, frantically insisting that is the only possible interpretation. But you let DoP make out like Islam is all about not making friends with unbelievers, when its equally clear that both viewpoints are held and promoted, same as in Christianity. Funny how you've convinced yourself that DoP's one-sided and extremist version of Islam is correct and reasonable, and constantly attack me for presenting a more moderate version of Islam. Who is lying, eh? Someone who sees both extremists and moderates as part of Islam, or someone who will only allow extremists to be Muslim?

Interesting. My sister's husband and his brother used to enjoy those festivals, but as they've come to know and love the street dogs my sister has rescued, they have found themselves unable to attend. I only mention this as an example of how people's minds can be changed, even Muslim minds living in an Islamic country. Interesting and I agree that such events should not be tolerated in Canada. I believe the issue us that you simply "assumed" how people who don't share your views on Muslims would react to the news stories posted by scribblet. You didn't bother to find out, you just went ahead and condemned them.

The gist of the sermon and the use of those biblical passages is to tell Christoans to avoid non-believers. I lived that life for seven years, being actively discouraged from befriending wordly people (non-believers) and encouraged to limit contact with my family. So take your lies and Islamophobia and insert them where the sun don't shine.

The message from the Christian leader is the same: non-believers are a threat to your faith. Saying its "the opposite" is a lie. By the way, here is advice to Muslims, backed up by the very words of Allah, to be friends with non-believers. A Muslim is allowed to take non-Muslims for acquaintances and friends, to be sincere towards them and they be sincere towards him, to help one another in fulfilling the needs of this life. Almighty Allah has said in His noble Book: “Allah does not forbid you in regard to those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice.” (60:8)

Here's an entire Christian sermon, including backup Biblical references. Final message: If, for the sake of preserving our relationship with God, we break off, limit or prevent a human relationship in our lives, God will more than compensate for this faithfulness. “So Jesus answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel’s, who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time…’” Mark 10:29-30.

This kind of thing is exactly why I call you a bigot. Many religions advise their adherents to avoid unbelievers; be friendly, they say - but do not become close. Islam isn't particularly unusual in that regard. Nonetheless, Muslims befriend non-believers, just as Christians befriend non-believers. Using a practice common among all religions to condemn Muslims alone is bigotry. That a majority treats a minority within it's country poorly is hardly behavior limited to Islamic countries: consider how Canada has treated aboriginals. When I read about the way in which Christians in Egypt face casual social and official discrimination in their day-to-day life, I am reminded of how similarly we have treated our native population for as long as I've been alive. Using that kind of discrimination to condemn all Muslims, while ignoring or dismissing the exact same behavior in your own country is bigotry. Are you as equally concerned about the persecution Muslims in Myanmar or China as you are about persecution of Christians in Egypt? Nobody denies that there are extremist, violent fundamentalists among Muslims who target Christians or anyone who doesn't follow their version of Islam. Using extremists as the definition of Islam or Muslims is as stupid as using the Westboro Baptist Church to define Christianity and Christians. That you take the most extreme and lurid examples of Muslim behavior as representative of all Muslims, and dismiss any effort by individuals, groups or even a government, to use whatever teachings available within Islam to bring Islam into the modern world and a more progressive interpretation is your bigotry. That you deny a woman wearing an hijab could be gay or accept gays is your bigotry. That you tell me I'm being lied to when told my brother-in-law refuses to have an abusive husband in his home is your bigotry. You allow yourself only one view of Muslims: violent, hateful, backward, ignorant, misogynistic and you actively fight against someone having any other view. That's bigotry. It's no different than the Muslim bigotry that inspires discrimination against Christians in Egypt. It's ugly and it's not representative of Canadians in general. Nor is the person who shot to death Muslims while they prayed - even though Muslim bigots in Egypt would no doubt use that incident to 'prove' that Canadians hate and want to kill Muslims. Before you, or anyone, goes off the rails claiming I said or believe "there are no bad Muslims" , please note the times I have acknowledged violence by Muslims, extremists within the Muslim world, discrimination against Christians in Egypt. Seeing both sides, good and bad, is a reasonable viewpoint. Seeing only one side is not.

Sure. Albeit, maybe not so many goat herders as previously. Your mistake is that you apply those terms to virtually all Muslims and if anyone suggests any redeeming quality related to Muslims, you reject it. Case in point: Egyptian government uses Islamic teachings, including quoting Mohammed, to encourage Muslims to treat Christians with respect. Your response? "Too bad its not true." As if you know everything taught by Islam, which you do not. And why would you even want to deny an Islamic government encouraging civility between Muslims and Christians; that makes no sense at all, especially given how often you bring up issues between Muslims and Christians as a way of denigrating Islamic countries and Muslims.

Prove it. When Argus says Muslims are "goat herders", "barbaric", "ignorant", "misogynist" etc. I call him a bigot. If he said "most immigrants work in menial jobs like janitor, fast foods, taxis" I'd either agree or say nothing. If he added that they worked those jobs because they were lazy, or ignorant or too stupid to do more complex jobs, I might indeed call him racist. I am sure the difference will escape you, given how subtle it is.

So ridiculously arrogant, assuming you can read minds and motivations of people you don't know and refusing to pay attention to anything but your own misguided assumptions. Many immigrants are janitors, taxi drivers and fast food workers. Often its because they can't get work in whatever field they may have trained for at home. Many of the jobs they do are the ones non-immigrants avoid. That isn't racist, that's reality. As for trolling Argus, I essentially agreed with something he said. Till you showed up, no trolling was happening.

And yet, my first comment on this thread was that I didn't object to your suggestion of lowering immigration to 200,000 if that was all that was required. Funny how you ignore what I have said in favor of attacking me for what I haven't said. Something you have in common with Goddess. I suppose it would hurt both your heads too much to think beyond your stereotypes of "leftists", "progressives", Muslims, Blacks, etc.

I read each of his posts here and responded to the part I felt I could agree with, while noting that many immigrants are employed in fast food joints, as janitors and as taxi drivers. You bopped on here, and called me a racist. I am not at all perturbed by that, but I do wonder who is "looking for a fight".

Not being scared sh**less of brown people, I didn't see anything else worth responding to. According to Argus, immigrants do not provide any economic benefit, they lower the overall wage scale of all Canadians and will have negligible effect on mitigating the effect of our aging population. We put obstacles in the path of immigrants with advanced education and training so that they end up working jobs far below their skill level. So you tell me, why do we need immigration? Why?

That's true. Fundamentalists tend to be extremists and fruitcake-like.

I wouldn't even object to that. If 200,000 is enough for whatever it is immigrants are supposed to do (clean our office buildings, serve our coffee, drive our taxis?) then ok.

1. Maybe it was there yesterday, we didn't go out. 2. In Egypt, there is official messaging to people, reminding them that showing respect for Christmas is in line with Islamic teaching. Perhaps she heard both stories and chose the the one she believes more closely reflects her faith.

Found a gift on my door this morning, a Christmas Card with "Merry Christmas" in big letters, from my hijab-wearing neighbor.

Merry Christmas, MH.

I have given and received "Merry Christmas" several times this year already, certainly more than "Happy Holidays". This "nobody can say Merry Christmas any more" is as big a myth this year as it was last year, and the year before and the uear before that.

Isn't this the same logic used by some religions to impose a "modest" dress code on women? "Men cannot control themselves in the face of the temptation of women. It is, therefore, up to women to manage male uncontrolled response to them." Here's a thought: men should be expected to be responsible for their own behavior, and if they cannot be, then to face the consequences, including that which comes from "structural power."

So long as credible media disputes the lurid half-truths and outright falsehoods of the media you favor, I will continue to disbelieve your narrative. Asian Grooming Gangs. A few Swedish facts for you, not nearly as exciting as the bullcrap you prefer. Sometimes, simplistic and occasionally inaccurate information about Sweden and Swedish migration policy is disseminated. Here, the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs looks at some of the most common claims. Claim: "There has been a major increase in gun violence in Sweden." Facts: Data from the Swedish Crime Survey shows that in terms of lethal violence, there has generally been a downward trend over the past 25 years. Nonetheless, the level in 2015 – when a total of 112 cases of lethal violence were reported – was higher than for many years. Studies conducted by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention show that lethal violence using firearms has increased within the context of criminal conflicts. The number of confirmed or suspected shootings was 20 per cent higher in 2014 than in 2006. The statistics also show that 17 people were killed with firearms in 2011, while the corresponding figure in 2015 was 33. Figures from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) show that in 2012, 0.7 murders were committed in Sweden per 100 000 inhabitants. Read more: Crime and Statistics in Sweden Swedish Crime Statistics explained Global Study on Homicide (UNODC) Claim: "There has been a major increase in the number of rapes in Sweden." Facts: The number of reported rapes in Sweden has risen. But the definition of rape has broadened over time, which makes it difficult to compare the figures. It is also misleading to compare the figures with other countries, as many acts that are considered rape under Swedish law are not considered rape in many other countries. For example: If a woman in Sweden reports that she has been raped by her husband every night for a year, that is counted as 365 separate offences; in most other countries this would be registered as a single offence, or would not be registered as an offence at all. Willingness to report such offences also differs dramatically between countries. A culture in which these crimes are talked about openly, and victims are not blamed, will also have more cases reported. Sweden has made a conscious effort to encourage women to report any offence. Read more about the legal implications of the term 'rape' (in Swedish): http://www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19620700.htm#K6 https://www.bra.se/brott-och-statistik/statistiska-undersokningar/nationella-trygghetsundersokningen.html Claim: "Refugees are behind the increase in crime, but the authorities are covering it up." Facts: According to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention's Swedish Crime Survey, some 13 per cent of the population were the victim of an offence against them personally in 2015. This is an increase on preceding years, although it is roughly the same level as in 2005. The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention has conducted two studies into the representation of people from foreign backgrounds among crime suspects, the most recent in 2005. The studies show that the majority of those suspected of crimes were born in Sweden to two Swedish-born parents. The studies also show that the vast majority of people from foreign backgrounds are not suspected of any crimes.

Media Bias Fact Check lists Voice of Europe as a questionable source: Repeating "information" from these sites is as reprehensible as Imams preaching hate against Westerners.