dialamah

I don't think you are smarter than me, though I don't doubt you are better educated; most people are. If you do not accept them because mainstream Islam does not, then you cannot accept ISIS either, as they are not accepted by mainstream Islam. Yet, far from denying ISIS, you.promote their ideology as the only valid one.

When do you denounce the kind of hateful rhetoric that led to Bissonette shooting 19 people? You do not; you support it, and agree with it. I have denounced Imams who preach hatred of Jews, here and specifically stated I think there should be legal repercussions for them. I have challenged Muslims who say women "should be" covered or that homosexuality is wrong. You don't see it here because there are no Muslims here saying that. Muslims ganging up on a girl because she is Isreali is wrong. So is slut-shaming girls into suicide by good "Canadian" kids. So is Isreali soldiers beating up an unarmed Palestinian boy, or a Muslim school teacher telling Muslim kids to hate Jews. These actions are driven by hate and intolerance and they are all wrong and I denounce them all. I also denounce the hate and intolerance I see on this forum. You asked why I couldn't see that attitudes led to actions. I could ask you the same. Do you really think that the claim that only violent Muslims are "real Muslims" helps? Its not true, but its repeated here and elsewhere as if its truth. I don't see you denouncing that, but god forbid I should say Muslims are not a homogenous group of haters and you are all over that. PIK and someone else, I forget who, essentially said that if Muslims were attacked or killed, that was not a problem for them. Didn't see you object to that, but you certainly held me to account when you thought I wished death on DoP. Consider that Argus dismissed attacks on Muslims as just minor stuff like verbal attacks and property damage, but refuses to do the same for similar attacks against Jews. Where is your condemnation for that double standard? Why am I the only one you feel obliged to call out for a double standard?

I have a son who was stabbed multiple times by a Canadian of White European descent. My daughter was brutalized by a different born and bred Canadian, and I was beaten by yet a third White Canadian. I have only ever been sexually assaulted by Canadians, all of White European descent. The nightly news frequently features murders; nearly as frequently, the murderers are White males with very Canadian names. I think its best if I profile White men for incipient violence.

Agreed. My attempted parallel fails. i don't think there is much freedom of thought allowed in any religion, honestly. I don't know how devout a Jew you are, but can you really say you have 'freedom of thought' around the basic tenets of Judaism? I don't see mainstream Islam as being violent; to me, it's fundamentalist, paternalistic and patriarchal and too intolerant towards anyone not a Muslim and not male - but for most Muslims, that intolerance does not translate into violence. I talk about Egypt because my sister lives there so I think it's easier to get a sense of what is true for at least Egyptian Muslims. There is ongoing debate on the Muslim brotherhood, on the status of women, on homosexuality. She told me the other day that there are some companies in Egypt that will not hire women with a headscarf because it's seen as too religious and too old-fashioned, and of course other places that won't hire a woman unless she wears a headscarf. She says that most women wear a headscarf in public, and that the number of women who wear the full niqab/burka and the number of women who wear nothing on their heads seem to be about the same. Of four other women in her immediate family - all born and raised in Egypt - one dresses similarly to my sister (conservatively Western), two wear a headscarf in public, but it's rather casual while the last one is very particular about ensuring she shows very little skin, though she does not wear the niqab. Each husband allows his wife to wear what she prefers. My sister also talks about a woman she works with, the only one she knows who wears a niqab - and that woman's 11-year-old daughter, who does not even wear a headscarf, though she would be of an age to were her parents determined that she should. She talks about a Muslim man she knows who denies there is any homosexuality in Egypt - it just doesn't exist as far as he's concerned, and her husband - who admits it exists, but doesn't like it. I also remember when her husband, imagining I might want to make Egypt my permanent home and knowing I was not Muslim, introduced me to his unmarried Christian friend. This diversity of thought and behavior I see among Muslims, from my sister's family to other Muslims I know and have talked to is what I believe to be the accurate representation of Muslims everywhere. This is why I get so frustrated with statements like "Muslims hate gays/apostates/non-believers and kill them" or "Muslims are inherently violent" or "Muslims can't/won't change their ignorant, backward ways". I am not unaware of the problems of Islam, or of the generally authoritarian regimes in these countries - but I am also aware of the ways in which the people in the region are attempting to change Islam and change their culture, through laws, education and social activism. They aren't stupid, they aren't barbarians; they are human. And 50 years ago, we weren't a lot different in our social attitudes and even in some of our laws.

*sighs* So you've moved the goal posts: didn't you claim that Muslims "always" kill non-believers? There are non-believers still alive in Egypt. If you want to claim that non-believers/Christians are treated as second class citizens in Egypt, I agree.

The post I deleted was addressing a comment made by Argus. You are just so full of yourself. When you admit that the Ahmadiyya are a legitimate expression of Islam, we can move on to the next lesson of why they are, including the verses of the Koran that support their peace-loving ways.

No. I have a very strong opinion that some of the posters on this forum are the type of people who fan the flames of anti-Muslim sentiment in Canada and if they gain too much of a toehold in Canada, our country will end up doing something stupid - like we did to the Japanese or the Chinese not so long ago. I will say that I am heartened by the fact that a year ago on FB posts, when the Muslim hate flowed in comments there was very little pushback but now I see a lot more from people who value the same things I do - fairness, honesty, accuracy, reasonableness. There is little else to fight hatred and intolerance, since I'm just not a fan of violence. When one is presented with all-or-nothing statements like "Islam is violent; they always kill non-believers" and I point out they do not with proof, why do you think I am the one who is unreasonable, anyway? Why do you accept, without objection, those kinds of statements, but continually object to my statements - backed by facts almost 100% of the time - as defending the indefensible?

Less than you assume. And, those attacks are condemned by most Muslims - just as most Canadians condemned Bissonette's actions in shooting Muslims in their Mosque.

Del

Oh, abrogation. Too funny. I know you fancy yourself some expert Islamic scholar but real experts disagree on the details of abrogation. In any case, if nearly 1.6 billion Muslims believe that their Koran tells them to live peaceful lives, why would abrogation matter? Unless of course, you continue to assert that only violent Muslims are 'real Muslims.'

There are approximately 1 Million peaceful Muslims in Canada. There are close to 1.6 billion peaceful Muslims around the world. Unless of course one is going to claim that if they aren't out killing apostates and unbelievers, they aren't 'real Muslims'. I know the gullible fall for this line of 'reasoning', but I guess I can't fix stupid.

Old news, doesn't happen any more. And it's still a far cry from Argus' contention that Islam invariably forced conversion by the sword or killed unbelievers.

How about you stop doing the acrobatics about only letting violent Koranic verses define Islam, while denying Koranic verses promoting peace are invalid. Maybe then we can have a "reasonable" discussion about the way in which a TINY MINORITY of Muslims use the Koran to promote war and terrorism in the Middle East and around the world.

Uh, no. You are wrong. There are many examples, now and throughout history, when non-Muslims lived peacefully and well within Muslim-controlled areas; You may claim that they were not always treated equally, but that is a hell of a lot different than forced to convert through violence or killed.

I deny DoP's constant contention that Islam only teaches violence. Clearly, people take from their books of worship what they want: most Muslims are not violent, but they can certainly find support for violence in the Koran if that suits them. I have said the same thing over and over and over over the past two years, but hey - I understand. Not joining the hate brigade around here means that I must therefore be some kind of idiot who thinks there are no bad Muslims in the world.

I can easily acknowledge that there is Muslim extremism and that those people target innocent people Muslims and non-Muslims both. What I don't acknowledge is that it this extremism is representative of Muslims generally.

Really? Please, prove that. Btw the way, are the hate-crimes against the Jews as irrelevant and minor as the same hate crimes against the Muslims? You have still failed to answer that question.

You can lie about what I post, too.

Oh, I get it ... when Mainstream Muslims deny ISIS and it's violent ideology, that is to be ignored. When Mainstream Muslims deny Ahmadiyya's non-violent ideology that is to be accepted. Logic and consistency are not your strong points, are they?

You can pretend I wrote the Koran.

See? This is a group that uses the Koran to practice a specifically pacifist Islam and you deny them. Your claim that I can't produce an example of peaceful Islam is disproven again. So again, GFY.

True, but we weren't talking about terror attacks, were we? We were discussing how awful Islam is for women. If you want to talk about Christian terror attacks, look no farther than the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas. Sure, they'll put it out there that he was some lone wolf, or disturbed or something - but he's a white guy from a Christian country, ergo he's a Christian and this is a Christian terror attack. See, I can use the same logic you do, DoP.

I can and have. When I have, you have claimed these aren't "real Muslims" because they aren't following the violent texts you claim are the "real Islam". So, GFY.

Yeah, I don't like religion either. In Egypt, the Christian Copts are planning a conference on homosexuality. It's a sin, or an illness, and they want to determine the best way of 'treating' it. The Christian Coptic Church also segregates women from the men during services, and tells women they should submit to and obey their husbands. Coptic Christians also encourage women to cover their hair to show their modesty, humility and to avoid distracting men with their long, beautiful locks. Religion sucks, especially for women.