dialamah

See? You yourself would be part of the cohort that would reject facts you didn't like.

Are you suggesting that thousands of Canadian every day say that restaurants owned by Muslims only serve Jihadists and rapists?

I agree that accurate facts would be great. Given the current notion among (some) people that academics are merely left-wing mouthpieces, I expect that if a conclusion that (for example) Black dysfunctional families were no more prevalent than White dysfunctional families and that the rate of crime was identical between Blacks and Whites, that conclusion would simply be disregarded by those people who preferred their bias over facts.

I agree with that. That "Muslims are going to turn us into a Sharia State" seems pure hysteria to me. Sure, it *could* happen but I think we'd become a "Christian State" before we'd become a Muslim State and I think the chances of that are pretty much non-existant. And if anyone thinks living under Christian rule would be better than living under Muslim rule, they haven't been paying attention. I would point to the example of the Harper Government suspending aid to third world agencies that offered abortions along with other family planning and health care. Sure, he said his reason was to avoid offending local governments but other governments didn't seem concerned about that By the same token I don't think Trudeau should have forbidden people who are pro-life from running as Liberals.

I know that there is an expectation that Islam direct every part of a Muslim's life, including in areas where secular law takes over in other countries. I don't think it is required to be intertwined with the State per se, since plenty of Muslims live in non-Islamic countries and they are enjoined by their religion to follow the laws of the country in which they are living. I do think most Muslims have more in common with the Conservative Christians of the world than those Christians would like to admit. But as a secular nation we have become gradually more socially progressive despite pushback from Conservative and fundamental Christians and I don't see Muslims changing that. I think that most of them will follow suit, even if they don't like it, just as Christians have done since the 50s.

I find it more confusing than annoying. You have to bring Trudeau and his lack of influence/importance into every conversation. Why? Why is it so important to you that everybody acknowledge that American/Trump influence is surpasses Canada/Trudeaus? Do you think Trump accepts 'feedback' from anyone, really? Because that was the comment I was responding to and you, contrary to your claim of merely drawing appropriate parallels and pointing out hypocrisy, decided to drag JT into it as if somebody were making claims about JT that you had to rebut. You also claim that Trump is not above criticism, so why do you try to scuttle every criticism of Trump with 'Whatabout' Canada and Trudeau? If this thread is about Trump, then bringing JT and Canada into it is off-topic. If you want to slag them, find or start a thread that is about them. Certainly other people do. Why do you want everyone else to shut-up about Trump?

And nobody claimed they would, so like ... what's your point? Just your usual slagging of Canada in your desperate attempt to prop up Trump? I thought you said you were non-partisan and merely pointing out hypocrisy .....

I agree that having a 'good relationship' with world leaders is important. But having "good relationships" with just dictators isn't having a good relationship with 'world leaders'.

I absolutely agree ... JT is a nice guy to have at parties, but for the important stuff Trump needs to talk with the crime bosses.

So how often is Trump in communication with Putin, Kim Jong Un, Duterte for their feedback? Daily? Weekly?

There are definitely some dangers with pot, just as there is with alcohol. Those dangers exist whether it's legal or not.

This is true but if one is oriented either gay or straight one isn't going to be swayed to the other side, even if they try it out. Otherwise, virtually every gay person in the world would be straight because virtually all of them try to be straight first because that is what their parents, peers and society generally expect of them.

Aren't you still on her 'ignore' list? Even if you are not, I doubt she could come up with a coherent reason anyway, just as any religious fanatic cannot. I give her a break because I was a bit of a religious fanatic at her age, but I outgrew it - and at least she is here being exposed to different viewpoints (sort of, haha) and maybe after a few years perculation, those ideas will bear fruit. I think the 'harm' is that the leaders of these countries will lose power. As long as they can convince their citizenry that the laws are backed by God, there is less effort involved in keeping them in line. I don't suppose it's any coincidence that the more highly educated/higher income-earners in these countries are the most likely to flout religiously-based laws without reprisal. Its as if they are all in on their little joke on the "ignorant masses".

When my daughter was around six, I taught her about sex. I did this so she wouldn't be misinformed by kids older than her or taken advantage of either by older kids or adults. Perhaps this was the result of a 13-year-old boy attempting to introduce me to sex when I was around 9. His attempt to persuade me included the information that he, his father, and his brother all enjoyed his sister - but now she got her period, so pregnancy was a possibility. At 9, I had no idea this was wrong - it seemed weird, but not 'wrong'. This was a family who attended Church on weekends; my parents left us because they thought this family was 'safe'. Around the same age a girl a couple of years older than me tried to seduce me - suggesting we pretend to be husband and wife in bed. It wasn't unpleasant, but it was weird and I left. I didn't know it at the time, but found out years later that she was being sexually abused by her stepfather. There was a lot of other sexual play when I was between the age of 9 to 11, while we were living in a small, relatively religious rural community. Lots of 'girl-on-girl' to practice for 'boy-on-girl' when they got older. How many of these kids were learning this stuff from their parents - as did both the boy and the girl who tried to have sex with me - and spreading out to kids like me, who knew absolutely nothing about sex. Early and *accurate* sexual information is important to safeguard kids, not to corrupt them. Too many parents still think kids 'don't need to know' until they are 'older', apparently completely unaware of the real world and how early sex can become an issue in a kid's life.

@scribbletAs has been pointed out several times, other administrations found other ways of managing this situation; Trump and his minions deliberately went with the harshest, cruelest and least humane method, one that had been rejected by previous administrations. That is the issue and it is neither absurd nor unhelpful to point that out. Unless one is a die-hard-Trump-Supporter, who can brook no criticism of Trump, of course - then one supports the unnecessary incarceration of kids, while whinging about $7500 for a play set for Trudeau's kids.

JT might be a bit putzy, sadly I have to agree somewhat with that assessment a couple of years into his term. However, I still would rather have him than a sinkhole like Trump.

Kids don't talk to parents if they don't trust them; they do talk to parents they trust. Existence of a club doesn't change that basic fact. Parents who are "out of the loop" on their kids lives need to look at their relationship with their kids rather than assume other people have to keep them up to speed. Gay kids want to be accepted by their parents but when (some) Christian parents would respond with outright rejection or desperate and intrusive attempts to "fix" them, is it any wonder they would prefer to keep this facet of their life from parents who would try to bully them into being different? The problem isn't the schools "keeping things" from parents or clubs that make being gay desirable. Its the ancient religious doctrines that makes being gay a sin that is the problem.

Funny how you don't criticize Trump for exploiting refugees - using children - to try to extort support for his political agenda.

I agree with this in theory; having an effective, but humane way of forcing people to apply through proper channels would be my ideal. But that also needs to come with a decision on how much of a moral obligation we (or the US) have to 'save' people at risk due to their own country's lack of adequate, honest and ethical law enforcement, or legal protections for women, children or gay people. Do we have an obligation to help political dissidents in totalitarian-type regimes? Or those fleeing war, whether civil war or otherwise? If, as a country, we (or the US) call ourselves more moral, more democratic, more humanitarian than the regimes that people flee from, does that obligate us to practice what we preach even with those that arrive at our borders looking for what we boast about?

I agree that this particular situation is particularly unnecessary; the Trump administration could do the same as the Obama administration but they choose not to. Trumptards who defend this choice are equally immoral. Separating kids from addicted parents or abusive parents or even occassionally from illegal immigrant parents is not even in the ballpark of what Trump decided to do here. If I believed in God, I would say that Trumptards will have a lot to answer for on Judgement Day.

At least I don't support a lying, misogynistic conman, who cheats on his wife and lusts after his daughter, like you do.

The original comment to which you objected had nothing to do with you, but was about our resident White "Nationalist". You asked for clarification from Michael, he provided it without any reference to you and you proceeded to take offense. And again, I told you what I considered traitorous to Canada, specifically saying I didn't know if that applied to you but that you seemed like a Trump supporter so .... Prove how you have you sacrificed for this country.

The only shriveled dicks I see are those Canadians who support the petulant, cowardly bully that Trump is.

No its not unpatriotic to criticize Trudeau; the lack of patriotism arises when they also expect JT to bend over and let Trump screw Canada over.