dialamah

@taxme. If you want to see a variety of interracial hetero and gay couples hooking up, try the local adult store. As I recall they have material for every taste; I am sure you'd find something.

Apparently me, Omni and jacee at the very least.

You give Christians a bad name. You are no better than that Pastor and his wife in BC who are charged with 28 counts of sexual assault against girls. Thank goodness I know real Christians who are compassionate and who have enough basic humanity not to advise a woman to lay back and enjoy her next rape, else I would have to profile Christians as being hypocritical sexual deviants.

They do already, if the victim is dead. If she is not, she can identify her attacker. Unless she is shamed into silence by such as Betsy who say ... Well, what were doing that got you raped?

Well I can't rape myself, but somehow you expect me to be responsible for others who might. I would say you are letting archaic Christian beliefs overrule the modern belief that when a man rapes or sexually assaults a woman he is entirely responsible for that. BTW, I was assaulted by men I had known for years when I was 12 and 16. My parents also knew these men. Most children and women are assaulted by friends or family, so please take your ignorant and victim-blaming "advice" and shove it where the sun don't shine.

Betsy hasn't called me a liar, I think you have misunderstood her. Or was it me who missed something?

And if someone else is burning down your house? Do you think that should be on you or the arsonists? Why shouldn't I just expect men to not sexually assault me? After all, I live in Canada, not in a Muslim country or India where women are routinely blamed for men's sexual misbehavior.

Yes, if he manages to do a couple things right, a substandard performance every where else should be fine.

Oh yes. I never thought of blaming me, the victim - takes a "Christian" to do that. But you know, you could be right. Perhaps I should wear a burka or only leave the house with a male escort so I don't tempt men into sexual misbehavior, poor little dears.

Not enough to do anything anyway. I kind of get it because when we had that trouble with the WS neighbor, the cops told us all three times we talked to them there needed to be more than he said/she said, we needed witnesses or a long and consistent history from several people. He was finally charged with death threats because three other people besides the target witnessed it. I guess the degree of proof required is designed to discourage vendettas by cop, and to allow people to say outrageous things as part of their free expression. But still, in this case I agree that the system/authorities screwed up in not being more thorough and not being able to take his extremist talk more seriously.

Perhaps he bounds between laps?

Seems to me she doesn't like the idea that Saudi is a lapdog to Trump. Pretty funny really, since a lot of people think Trump is a lapdog to the Saudis.

Here's the kind of Christian I could like and respect. He goes on to discuss several key issues, saying that Christians need to avoid being one-issue voters and to pay attention when "pro-life" politicians fail to support pro-life policies beyond abortion.

I think this becomes more true everyday. People doing the real work can simply humor or sideline him, send him off to "play" at his rallies while they take care of business. It is probably the best outcome overall. Impeachment would create even more anger and divisiveness in the US. Death by natural causes would create conspiracy theories and even more suspicion and assassination is unacceptable. Letting him finish out as an irrelevant figurehead seems ideal. Trump is no longer President. Oh sure, he has the title and he has the bully pulpit – from which he’s bullying everyone from NBA players to people protesting white supremacists to DACA kids. But he’s not actively governing the United States. That work is happening elsewhere – in Congress, the courts, the Fed, the career civil service, lobbyists, and in the states. Or it’s not happening at all.

Yup, I agree. But still, I don't 'profile' white men for violence, because it's not going to make me any safer. Most white men are perfectly safe. Unless we are in a situation of war or societal breakdown, in which case all bets are off, regardless of gender, color or creed.

Yup, you are right. I shall restate: I don't support "wiping out" anyone's religion, but it would be ok with me if atheism was suddenly (magically) the only 'belief system' we had.

Well you are entitled to your opinion, right, even if I think you are wrong. Watched a lady being interviewed on BBC today, her party came in third I think in the recent elections in Germany. The interviewer asked if Muslim women should be allowed to wear a headscarf and the politician said "No, we don't want that in our schools and public places". The interviewer than asked if nuns should also be banned from wearing their coif, and the politician said no, that was ok. So, do you think that is discrimination against Muslim women, or a reasonable stand to differentiate between female oppression and a religious garment?

Oh, darn, did I take the only spot in the forum thread where Altai could reply? Christianity or Atheism or any other shitty belief systems has no place in the World and have to be wiped out Ok, atheism should not be wiped out...that I disagree with.

Yup. Sorry sis, I love you and all, but if I could peacefully and painlessly eliminate Islam along with all the other religions, and as a result have everybody believe in tolerance and equality, I would.

I don't think people who support burka bans are monsters, merely misguided who think simple solutions will work for complex issues.

Yeah. And I think Western women leading by example is the best way. I think that the current sentiment that burkas or headscarfs should be banned or the accusation that they are simply an example of Islamic misogyny are making women of faith more inclined to wear them, not less.

Could be, and I think the answer is no. But the way you phrased that made me wonder if I mis-remembered and rather than *assume* and *react* I decided I would just ask. Sorry to have wasted our time.

I like the idea of a religion that allows it's adherents to question and change the religion, but that's pretty rare I think. I don't recall anything in my years exploring Christianity that allowed for questioning of Christianity to change it as needed. Once one believed, one was supposed to accept the Bible as the final word of God and scripture from both old and new Testament was used to support whatever tenet a particular sect felt was important to believe. Change has happened, of course, at least in Western countries, but I think that was more a function of living in an increasingly secular society, starting with the division of Church and State, and less to do with the will of the majority of Christians. I see signs of the same process in Islam and among Muslims, but it is such a slow process for them, as it has been for Christianity - we've been working at this for 150 years at least, and we still have 'Christian' hangover in terms of how we view women and family. I recognize too that in the Middle East, progress seems to have slowed or even gone backwards in some ways since the 60s or so, and I think much of that has to do with Western influence in the Middle East. This is not to say that the West is "responsible" for every Islamic terrorist attack, but one can't claim that installing dictators or bombing vast swaths of a region doesn't result in some kind of effect on the attitudes and behavior of the people in that region. I think it's an extremely complex topic, and simplistic answers like "The West did it" or "Islam is the problem" simply don't make sense to me. Is that integrity, or stupidity? But thanks. Most of my exposure has come through my sister. She was very cute as a young women, and dated a lot. Despite the misogynistic Muslim stereotype, the Muslim men she dated in Canada - even those newly arrived from places like Iran and Tunisia - treated her very well. They did not hit her or dictate her clothing. They treated her with respect, with gentleness, with love. She's found the same with the Egyptian Muslim man she married, and with all his brothers. This is not to say that life in Egypt is perfect; she clearly recognizes the ways in which the culture limits her due to her being female and the way in which Islam favors males. She can also see the way in which Islam celebrates and honors women, even when Muslim men and the government fall short of what the Koran teaches. It's not a simple black/white "Muslim men are misogynistic because they force women to wear the headscarf" and Western men aren't because they don't. Consider that Muslim husbands are also required by Islam to ensure his wife's sexual satisfaction through patience and foreplay, including oral sex and manual stimulation, while in the West the lack of interest or consideration for female sexual pleasure has been called misogynistic. Of course, I don't mean to imply that a woman shouldn't have both great sex and be able to be uncovered, but that the issue of Islamic misogyny is just more complicated than many people seem to want to allow. In regards to the violence currently so prevalent within Islam, I think it's also more complex than "Islam teaches violence, here are some koranic verses and some hadiths to prove it". Something like 97% of Muslims condemn terrorism, so it's not a mainstream belief regardless of how many verses and hadiths one wants to quote. Yet, we still have armies and terrorists torturing and killing in the name of Islam. Blaming "Islam" is very easy, isn't it? But does anyone really think ISIS would go away if we waved a magic wand and Islam disappeared overnight? Desire for territory and power would still drive them, but they might call it "True Arabic State" instead of "Islamic State". Pretending it's all about Islam doesn't solve any problems; it just helps us focus on the wrong solutions. Religion is one of the greatest motivators for war, it's either just before or just after "to save the women and children", which is also closely related to 'saving our way of life". Those are the reasons given for war to those who fight and those who pay for the fighting. But for the ones who benefit from war, the true motivator is territory/resources and/or power and in our capitalistic age, money. I think 'we are all the same' is more true than many people realize. I believe most people want to have safety and security for themselves and their families, they want enough to eat and to be able to live and love in peace - and of course, enjoy the newest mod cons, whether it's the invention of fire or the latest iPhone. Unfortunately, there are those who decide that "those people over there" don't have the right to live in peace and so they plan their attack - using religion, family, country to get everyone else to go along. It's bizarre to me that a (relative) handful of terrorists can put 1.5 billion non-terrorists on people's radar as a 'threat'. All perspective is lost, but that's the beauty of propaganda isn't it? Things were better when I was 16, 17, 18 too. And yeah, extremism has grown - and not to 'blame the West' for everything, I think we do have to take some responsibility for how things have played out in the Middle East. Now, I basically support Jews having a homeland, so no problem with Isreal. But I can also understand someone from Egypt saying "Sure, the Americans and British simply decided that was where Isreal should go, without any consideration for the people already there". It's done now, and I don't see any way of changing that, but certainly for the people who used to live there, who saw their homeland simply removed from them - even if the new people had a valid and pre-existing claim - that would be a hard pill to swallow. Again, another complex situation not helped by simple statements that Israel is wrong and usurpers, or that Palestinians should be grateful for what they still have and stop fighting about it. This makes me so sad. Once again, I don't see why Israel shouldn't have their homeland, and to enjoy peace and security. But I don't know what the answer is, because I also think the Palestinians are suffering as they are squeezed by Israel's expansion. This would be indescribably terrible, I cannot even pretend to imagine how this affected you. I have a cousin who went through an experience in which he felt threatened by those around him over a long period of time, and he still feels that sense of distrust about other people. He has to consciously work not to assume others are out to get him in some way. My son, who was attacked and almost killed, had his sense of safety shattered for a long time, and I'm not sure he'll ever get it back completely. But both of them work at it daily, they both had to learn to be open and emotionally communicative, I think, in order to deal as well as they have with it. I believe I see the same in you, in the openness, honesty and sometimes even passion of your posts here. This kind of trauma is not an easy thing to overcome or to live with. Yes, I agree that Trudeau is like most Canadians, who come from sheltered environments and many do not see the danger that you do. At the same time, those of us who do not see the same danger are not necessarily wrong, either. I think there is value to both perspectives, and that it can help us meet in the middle. But for me personally, the threat has to be more credible than "Sharia law is coming because Islamophobia was mentioned in a motion for a study" or 'Look what's going on in Europe" for me to take it seriously. The most concerning item I've seen in all the (hysterical) claims that have been made concerns Imams have been recorded preaching against Jews. That should absolutely be unacceptable and imo, the Imams should have been charged with hate crimes and a full investigation should have been done. But that it wasn't done does not convince me the government has 'an agenda'. It just is one more example of a justice system that is surprisingly hit and miss, too often missing clear guilt as well as clear innocence. Yes, those who continually fan hatred and fear of Islam are playing into ISIS agenda, but they just don't see it that way - they are sounding the alarm, protecting their country, protecting their women, children, culture. Against such pure motivation, how can one persuade them they are really serving the terrorists? I think the message that we will stand together with Muslims is really the best way to frustrate the goals of Islamic extremism, at least as it applies to the West. I think community directed programs to present a view that contradicts the claims of extremists is important, and for that we need Muslim support. But we aren't going to get it by calling them backwards, violent and barbaric people, unable to fit into our culture; that kind of rhetoric is just going to get them to bunker up and pretend they don't have any problems, especially any incipient terrorists. Hopefully it's working better than it appears to be. Thanks, Rue. Good being able to dig a little deeper into the issues, and learning your perspective and experiences.