dialamah

FFS. I provide an opening for a 'reasoned' discussion with you, and you start of with this BS again. But to answer your moronic question, the 1 billion Plus Muslims who do not belong to ISIS or any other terrorist group, who do not blow things up, who speak out against terrorists and conversion by the sword, who are dying from and fighting against the same terrorism we are fighting against.

It is the extremists in Islam that give it a bad name. We should get rid of those. The rest of the people, not so much.

Here's a martyr: Focusing on only the things that extremists do means we miss stories like this. What Qu'ranic verse inspired him to try to stop a terrorist? Could it have been one of the many DoP says are 'abrogated'? How many more like this man are there among the billions of Muslims around the world, that we never hear about? I don't want to downplay the seriousness of extremist actions by people claiming to follow Islam. At the same time, I don't want the humanity of the majority of people who follow Islam to be forgotten.

I would be very interested in hearing your side of it.

Point taken. Although given I have relatives who are Muslim, and they live the "official rhetoric", I still believe it has more validity than, for instance, the rhetoric of a cult. I have been shunned as well, though it was called disfellowshipped. My kids were very young, so I didn't have to worry about them having to join in the shunning since I just took them with me. Nor did I have close relatives who were involved in the same religion. It was hard to lose a couple of close friends, and an entire social support network. This church did not engage in pedophilia, however, and their female oppression behavior was about the same as any conservative Christian church. It's not that I think DoP is entirely wrong in what he's saying, it's that he refuses to see or admit the validity of any other point of view or interpretation. How can we build on the peaceful and tolerant interpretations of Islam if we don't admit they exist?

Feel better, now that you've got that off your chest? Here is a scripture from Qu'ran 3.98, which uses the word Shahid. Which one makes more sense to you? "O followers of the scripture, why do you reject these revelations of God, when God is a Martyr (Shahid) over everything you do?" "O followers of the scripture, why do you reject these revelations of God, when God is a Witness (Shahid) over everything you do?" Can a god be a martyr? Would he even think of martyring himself over people who do not follow his rules?

Shahid is a 2013 Indian Hindi biographical film directed by Hansal Mehta and produced by Anurag Kashyap. It is based on the life of lawyer and human rights activist Shahid Azmi, who was assassinated in 2010 in Mumbai.[3][4] Shahid - Bail Denied in Honor killing case Shahid - a TV network of some kind. Shahid - Shahid and Shaheed (Arabic: شهيد‎‎ šahīd, plural: شُهَدَاء šuhadāʾ ; female: šahīda) originates from the Quranic Arabic word meaning "witness" and is also used to denote a martyr (From Wikipedia) Now watch as DoP gloms onto the "martyr" meaning of Shahid to continue his agenda of proving how evil Islam is.

Would you give evidence against them if they were investigated in Canada? Do you know if there is any push to do that?

This is what scares Westerners the most about Islam, that so many of it's followers want a religious state and that if too many come to Canada, they'll overwhelm our political system and implement Islam. I don't believe they can get away with it, our commitment to a non-religious state is pretty strong. At the same time, those Muslims who move to countries which do not have and do not want a religious state should make a commitment to following our system and to ensuring their fellow Muslims do as well. I believe most do, which is why I'm not hysterically proclaiming Islam to be a scourge on Western countries. If a Muslim wants a religious state and think they need to impose it wherever they are, then they need to remain in their own countries.

I think it's more fun to watch him ask it over and over and over again.

And as far as I'm concerned, it would be great if those people who expected you to shun your children could be held accountable. Perhaps a similar 'coerce and control' law could be implemented in Canada, though I admit I do wonder about unintended consequences. Could they be used against parents who are merely trying to safeguard their kids? Against cops who are lawfully going about their business of obtaining information from witnesses and suspects? Against spouses who perhaps say something in the heat of the moment that they do not really mean?

I like this article, and this commentator.

I think it's always been recognized that coercive and controlling behavior is part of domestic abuse. Enshrining it into law may work well for everyone, not just Muslim women. I agree that reformation of Middle Eastern culture won't come from outside. However, there is active effort from within those countries, and within those communities in the West to make changes, so saying it 'will never reform' is probably wrong. Just because they are behind us on this doesn't mean they're incapable. Presumably the laws apply to everyone who lives in that country, so there were not two sets of laws. Creating another law to address a similar-but-different problem will at least give people a way of addressing it. But the problems of getting the victims to help themselves still remains, in my opinion. That is not being addressed. There are already laws against spousal abuse and killing one's spouses, but non-Muslims still do those sorts of things. The problem isn't in the laws, or in the general societal disapproval of such things, but in helping the victim realize she (or he in some cases) can and should leave. Where did I say I was ok with *allowing* this behavior "just because it's their religion/culture"? Nowhere at all. What I said was this problem exists, and part of the problem is that it's hard to get victims to make the move to escape from their abusers - it's hard for non-Muslims, and it's even harder for Muslims *because* of their culture, community and even the fact that they are immigrants. I have also said that laws such as 'not allowed in public spaces in a burka' makes it even more difficult for these women to escape, should they wish to. Passing laws, however well-intention, doesn't solve the problem of abuse or of victims who feel they cannot leave because their family will disapprove, their friends will know 'how stupid they were', the abuser has threatened to kill them, their children, their mother/father/sister/brother. This is true for non-Muslims, and even more so for Muslims who are under the control of their family. What this law does is give the authorities some legal means of penalizing the abuser, and I certainly support that over something that penalizes the abused person.

I became convinced of the capriciousness of the justice system through my son's experience. He didn't succeed because of any built-in fairness of the system, but only because people got changed around at the last minute.

I have to say I have learned from people here, and I have also learned about myself here.

I think that's a really good article, makes some excellent points. But how does one address it? It's all well and good for people to want to help women who are being abused, or even controlled - but the problem is getting the victims to accept the help. Even when a woman is born white and raised in Western society, it can be really difficult for family, friends and authorities to get her to leave her abuser. How much harder for a woman who may have been raised in a different country and culture to escape an abusive relationship? I don't know what the answer is here. A big issue with domestic violence is that if the woman tries to leave, that's often when she's in the most danger. Police involvement can be sought, but men have been known to ignore restraining orders and attack their victims, and even their children, anyway. In a culture which includes honor killing, how much more danger is a woman in? So far, I've seen people rail against the misogyny that exists within Islamic cultures, but their solutions often seem to include removing even more rights from the *women*. That makes no sense to me. Or the *solution* of not letting them into a country where they at least have the opportunity to find freedom from that kind of abuse. Certainly that keeps the problem out of our sight, but that would be unfortunate for the women who would eagerly take advantage of an opportunity, as well as the women who may realize after a time that they are entitled to more freedoms. I wish there was an easy answer to this.

Many, in the TDS universe.

Decided you aren't worth bothering with.

Sometimes they also refuse babies who have certain names. There is nothing they won't do to keep us 'safe'.

I agree. The issue we have with DoP is that he keeps insisting that the violent interpretation is the correct one, and that the non-violent Muslims aren't following the teachings of Islam, and so aren't true Muslims. I do think it's important to fight this message of Islamic violence whether it comes from a non-believer, such as DoP, or a Muslim - except I don't know any Muslims who advocate for violence and conversion by the sword, either personally or online.

I provided a cite, perhaps you should as well. Otherwise, I'll have to assume you are talking out of your ass again. Yeah, but you did didn't you? With Rev Canada?

Haha, good one!

I think this sounds like propaganda too.

Sorry my mistake.

I agree. Do you think belief in God is needed for morality?