dialamah

If a group is 'at special risk' they should get the 'same protection' as those not at special risk. Got it. So, let's apply this logic elsewhere: Children under a certain size are at special risk of being injured in a car accident. But the government should not mention, notice or address that in any way, because to say a child under a certain size needs special protection is to say that a child over a certain size deserves less protection. Poorer neighborhoods tend to have more domestic violence/crime than wealthier neighborhoods. But police should not pay 'special attention' to poorer neighborhoods, because to do so is to say that wealthier neighborhoods deserve less attention. Women and children are at greater risk of sexual assault than men. No additional resources should be provided to women or children to prevent or address sexual assault, because that means that 'men deserve less'. Is this really what you mean?

I agree with you: Islam, and Islamic countries need to be a lot more dedicated to changing this.

I am not the only one who sees the similarities between anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim rhetoric. From Lindsey Green, a Senior Fellow with Humanity in Action: Brian Klug, from Oxford University writes: From a former White Supremacist: From an essay by a Richard Silverstein. ( I'm aware that Isreal doesn't like this guy and that you'll reject everything he says out of hand. People not so blinded by partisanship may find it interesting, however.) Most of these articles also point out how anti-Semitism and Anti-Muslim rhetoric are different, which I have already acknowledged in my discussion with BCSapper, as well as the difference between 'then' and 'now', which means the likelihood of a genocide against Muslims by Westerners is practically nil; that there are pockets of the world where Muslim genocide is being attempted isn't particularly relevant, imo.

I was talking about the similarity of anti-Jew propaganda by the Nazis and current anti-Muslim propaganda when you butted in. If you aren't interested, why did you butt in? Pew Report: European Muslims primary targets of nationalist political parties and politicians. Seems to be just the opposite: Jews and alt-right are making common cause against Muslims. There is documented evidence that she was older. In any case, young marriages were the custom; consummation of the marriage was commonly waited upon until the girl was a 'physical adult' - namely menstruation. IF Aisha was 7 at marriage, with marriage consummated at age 9, that does not mean Mohammed was a pedophile; girls can begin menstruating any time from age 9 to 16, with the average being between 12 and 13 years. He would have been following the exact customs of his day. Historical context and customs is important to you when it comes to Sir John A Macdonald and Residential Schools, but not when it comes to a religion you don't like. https://www.truthortradition.com/articles/mary-a-teenage-bride-and-mother Note these key words: Biblical Palestine, 1900s, frequently married as young as nine. Mohammed and Aisha become less and less remarkable, eh? True, but it has been common throughout history to 'marry' children off at very young ages, and then the girl lives with her parents till puberty, when the marriage can be consummated. Seriously? She was pregnant. Maybe Joseph didn't consummate the marriage, but someone sure did. Really? So, you can provide evidence that Muslim men today are busily marrying six-year-olds, and then consummating the marriage when she turns nine? You can't, because it doesn't happen. I would say it's the guy who keeps insisting Muslims are pedophiles because Mohammed followed the customs of the day is the one who lacks logic. FIFY.

Yeah, the law should be enforced regardless of race, religion, culture, wealth, power or influence. We're not perfect by any means, but we're still a damn sight better than many countries in the world. Can't always agree, I guess. Not sure what you mean here. I was harassed in high school because some of my friends had black hair, brown eyes and foreign sounding names. Hearing people make demeaning remarks about 'towelheads' is a very different experience to being called a 'snake charmer', a 'Paki'lover', and to have someone hold their nose as you walk by with your East Indian friend. That experience no doubt has something to do with my reaction to the rhetoric I see here.

You posted this: What exactly were you implying, Goddess, if not that I don't think Muslims should be held accountable for practicing FGM? Care to explain?

No idea how you got that from what I posted. As for the rest of your post: I said that in the case of a barbaric practices law, the perception that FGM is strictlya Muslim practice would result in "the public" only looking at and reporting Muslim suspects and assuming Christians and other girls from areas that practice FGM were safe. You do recall that a "tip line" was part of his proposal, do you not? Why is it such a problem for you I think the Christian/other girls who suffer FGM are equally as important as the Muslim girls? Why do we all have to act like its a Muslim problem, as if the 70% of Coptic Christians in Egypt aren't also victims, or the 87% of cut Catholic girls in Eritrea don't exist? If FGM is such a Muslim issue, why do Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have such low rates? Are you concerned about FGM and how to address it, or are you concerned that including all the girls who suffer will weaken the "Islam is exceptionally evil" narrative? A page or two ago, I agreed with you that the US legal system failed those two girls when the judge decided the law hadn't been properly written. Just two posts ago, I agreed with Sapper that we (Canada) could do a better job of protecting girls and prosecuting practioners. I fully support legal consequences for people who cut girls and I have said so many times. Nonetheless, you imply that I don't think Muslims should be held accountable. Pathetic. Clearly, you have no good argument against my points and so your only recourse is ignore what I say and make unfounded accusations against me.

1. Nonetheless, the Nazis regularly posted stories about how the Jews were raping German women. You should do some research. 2. You should do some research about White Nationalists and the alt-right movement. Muslims are an easy target, because they engage in terrorism in Western countries, and it's bloody easy to make them the 'bogeyman'. Have you never been struck by how many sources there are for you to find 'all the bad things Muslims do'? Or how often these stories are 'recycled' to appear new? Or how often they are just outright lies, as was the story Scribblet posted the other day about a Muslim waitress who 'refused' to serve Christians? 3. How old Aisha was when Mohammed married her is disputed. Some put her at 9, some put her at 15, some put her as old as 20. Also, in many cultures throughout history, a 'betrothal' was the same as 'marriage', without the sex and the terms could be used interchangeably. In any case, early marriages were extremely common throughout history - even if she was 9, Mohammed would have been following custom, not engaging in pedophilia, and as would be the custom, sex would not happen until she reached puberty, likely around 12 or 13. Consider that Mary is thought to be around 12 when she was betrothed to Joseph and gave birth to Jesus. Consider that in some States, it is *still* lawful to marry a girl off at 12. This is not to claim that it's common or condoned now but only as an indication of historical norms - something you demand people consider when it comes to the treatment of aboriginal children in Canada. That you refuse to consider any historical context here, or even acknowledge the dispute about Aisha's age more learned people than you have, and continue to insist it was 'pedophilia' is your bigotry in action.

I agree that we could do a better job of protecting girls from FGM and of prosecuting the people who do it. The issue I have with this is that FGM is not a Muslim practice and yet it is presented primarily as a Muslim practice: many, many girls are at threat of FGM, including Christian girls. In some countries, FGM is practiced by Christians in greater numbers than by Muslims. The Embera people, in Columbia, practice FGM: they practice a shamanistic type religion. Because Muslims are popularly considered to be the primary practicers of FGM, what would happen if a "Barbaric Practices" law were passed? People would be looking at Muslims, reporting them - doing their duty to save/protect girls. In the meanwhile, Christian girls and others would be considered 'safe' even as they are also victimized. Addressing the issue of FGM requires that people understand it's not just Muslim girls who are at risk, but all girls from certain cultural backgrounds or certain countries. I don't know who does that, though. I know I get accused of it often enough, but it generally comes after a conversation that goes something like this: (someone): A Muslim did this terrible thing! Muslims do terrible things! It's because of their religion! (me) Yes, that Muslim did a terrible thing, but not all Muslims do that. (someone) You refuse to listen to the truth about Muslims, how terrible they are and how they are driven to do terrible things by their religion! So when the accusation is made about people who are ok with Muslims doing terrible things is made, I take it with a grain of salt. I agree that for various reasons, Muslims are not at risk of enduring what Jews endured at the hands of Nazis and I don't mean to imply that they are. The comparison I am trying to draw is the similarity of the anti-Muslim rhetoric now to the anti-Jew rhetoric used by the Nazis. The same themes are prevalent in both: (This group) is different; they are not like us; they do not fit into our culture; we are superior to them; they are dangerous; they will rape our women; they want to take over. The same tropes were used against Japanese during World War two, prior to their being incarcerated and having all their property confiscated. It's complicated all way round. I think religion and culture are intertwined strongly, so while something like FGM predates both Islam and Christianity, it's also true that as those religions became common in the areas where FGM was practiced, FGM became a religious practice. That's why I think FGM has to be addressed separate from religion, and that is how it's addressed in the countries where it's common by the government and by aid agencies who are trying to eradicate it. If we in the West are going to address it effectively, we also need to remove the 'religion' from it.

Yes, those gangs are horrific. They target kids and young women who are vulnerable to provide them to those who have an interest, and Asians make up the majority of those gangs. At the same time, White guys make up 100% of gangs (two or more) who target kids because the men are pedophiles. Both are horrific crimes and so destructive to the kids involved, but where is the outrage over groups of White pedophiles preying on kids? Where are the stories in the media, and the posts and discussions online? The story about Pakistani sex gangs are true; the propaganda is how that story is used to support the narrative of Muslims as pedophiles and criminals who victimize girls. The White guy pedophile groups are ignored. This story is about 80 coaches, in the UK, who have been convicted of child sex abuse; one of those guys victimized 50 kids. But that story barely makes a ripple on the world stage, though it may be big news in the UK, I don't know. But it's certainly not mentioned on these kinds of forums. What do you suppose would be the story if these were 80 Muslim guys, hmmm? The alt-right would at that story out and spread by their unknowing minions in seconds. We would certainly see it here as more proof of Muslim barbarism. All these crimes are horrific, and my goal is not to dismiss or downgrade the crimes of Pakistanis or Muslims by saying White guys are as bad, but only to highlight the difference in the way these stories are disseminated. For the rest, I will try to get back after work. Thanks for the actual discussion.

I did say so. And I presented my argument. Are you suggesting that no Jewish kid in Nazi Germany was ever bullied long before Anne Frank was hiding in an attic? Do you think that anti-Semitism burst full upon German consciousness, followed the next month by concentration camps and ovens? Nah, took years of increasing propaganda to get to that point In any case, I did not say that we in Canada or the States or anywhere else in the Western world was on track for Muslim genocide. I suspect social media, with all its faults, would be key in preventing that, just as its key in spreading the propaganda that gets the kid in Huddersfield bullied. I expect the worst that would happen is the refusal of Muslims into Western countries, potentially expelling Muslims from Western countries, perhaps even making the practice of Islam illegal here. Bad, but not as bad as genocide, though it would still leave us at risk of having to apologize to Muslims at some point in the future. Guess it all depends on how many people can be persuaded that Muslims are completely unacceptable because they are Muslim. And yes, I am aware that other groups, especially Jews, are targets of rhetoric that results in kids being bullied. That isn't a reason to ignore anti-Muslim rhetoric, imo.

In propaganda truth doesn't matter. If a Jew assaulted a woman, he would be held up as representative of the rapacious Jewish nature, regardless of whether or not Jews assaulted women more, less or as much as any other group. I see that regularly on these forums: a Syrian Muslim who touches girls at a swimming pool is held up as proof that Muslims are pedophiles. If a Jew was caught engaging in criminal behavior, he would be presented as proof that Jews were inclined to criminal. If a Muslim is caught engaging in criminal behavior, it is presented here as a feature of being Muslim - not that the individual is a criminal, but that Muslims are criminals. Jews looked different, they believed differently, they dressed differently, they had their own customs: all of this was used to persuade Germans that Jews were too different to be accepted as part of German culture. They were portrayed as a threat to German culture, that they wanted to take over and become masters over German citizens. All of this is happening with Muslims today in many places, not just on this forum. They look different, they have different beliefs, they have different customs and so they are presented as too different to fit into our Western culture, that they want to take over and become masters over us all. The similarities in the anti-Jew propaganda then and the anti-Muslim propaganda now is pretty striking really. This isn't to say that I think posters here are a bunch of Nazis or are deliberately spreading propaganda because they hate Muslims. For the most part, they are simply fooled by the propaganda and are spreading it with the best of intentions, for the good of their country and culture. Exactly as the Germans did, no doubt. I am also not suggesting that this will lead to mass murder of Muslims in Western countries; I very much doubt that would happen. Still, I think it's important to counter this propaganda: remind people that most Muslims are not the ones featured on the 6:00 news, even if they do have some conservative religious views about gays or women, or think apostasy is the worst possible sin. And if you are uncomfortable comparing Nazi anti-Jew rhetoric with today's anti-Muslim rhetoric, perhaps you should ask yourself why that would be.

Thats bullshit. Whatever the intention of the OP, this thread has simply become a repository of every Muslim misdeed, true or not, adding fuel to bigotry and Islamophibia. Scribblet's story, true or not, of gays being threatened with death happens everywhere with remarkable regularity - but is there a thread specifically catering to non-Muslims behaving badly? Nope. If the Uber driver were a Ugandan Christian would it have rated any kind of comment anywhere? Probably not: its only Muslims that require special mention for every instance of violent or criminal behavior. In that sense, Jonas comment is accurate: the Nazis would have loved a forum such as this to demonize Jews.

I was disappointed about this as well; it makes no sense to me why a law forbidding FGM would be at all suspect. I am disappointed in the outcome as I said. On the other hand, part of the strength of our democracy is that laws can be challenged and made better. Let us hope that happens here, too. But ultimately this is a failure of a system that should have been able to offer justice to these girls.

I understand. Using tax money to help the less fortunate is anathema to some people. Especially if it's for women or girls:

Ah yes. As oldsters become less and less relevant, they try to pretend the young people aren't leading the world into the future by making dismissive and insulting remarks.

Wow! That explains so many of your posts!

Hard to imagine docs prescribing dangerous drugs so heedlessly. Will any of these doctors be prosecuted?

Republicans in Alabama passed a law in November, allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed in Government buildings and schools. So what should it be ... Separation of church and State or accommodation for Christianity. http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-Alabama-Ten-Commandment-constitutional-amendment.html

Hundreds of young Muslim and Jewish volunteers came together on Sunday at East London mosque and dozens of venues across the country to cook up traditional pots of soup, as part of the Jewish Mitzvah Day, or charity day.

Interesting; I did not see that when I was looking stuff up this morning. Do you have a cite? Sounds like opinion; do you have anything to back that up? El Slavador is extremely violent, yet has a homogenous population.

Saudi Arabia, Japan and Norway all report low crime rates. Which country should we emulate?

Yes. I have heard and seen the effects of their PTSD, the nightmares, the inability to make a decision on some simple choice taken-for-granted by the rest of us, the endless search for a job nobody will give them because of their record, the assumptions made about them, in and out of their hearing. I've heard the stories of the brutality by the guards, the fear of violence from other inmates, the constant wariness, the mind-destroying weeks and months in solitary, the lack of freedom to decide anything - when to eat, what to eat, when to sleep, when to get up, where to go, the constant fear and despair of prison life. I have seen how the ingrained lack of trust in others and in the system, the internalized belief of their own worthlessness, learned and reinforced in prison and then by a society that rejects them, makes jobs and relationships much more difficult for them to establish and maintain. A color tv, conjugal visits and three squares a day does not make up for any of that, by any stretch of the imagination; most people would rather live on the street than spend time in prison. That so many do, somehow, overcome all of that to succeed is a testament to the resiliency of human beings, not to the effectiveness of a system that seeks to break them. Thank you for giving some of them a job. Wouldn't it be better if many more of them could get a job, if many more were capable of keeping that job, of succeeding outside jail in greater numbers and sooner. That is the value of true rehabilitation vs. revenge and punishment.

Reabilation increases public safety. "Victim satisfaction" is pretty subjective; some people forgive even the most horrific crimes against themselves or loved ones, other people never do, regardless of the severity of the punishment. I do not agree that state-imposed revenge on behalf of victims is worth more crime, more victims, more misery.