dialamah

1. Just one example of Christians attempting genocide. 2. Plenty of examples of Christian conversion by sword. These examples of Christian barbarity is not to excuse Islamic extremists (or any other extremists) who think forcing someone, by threat of death, into conversion is acceptable. Its to disabuse you of the notion that Christianity is any better or different than Islam when it has power over people. In regions of high religiousity, political violence is supported equally by Muslims, Christians and Hindus, although only a tiny minority actually engage in that violence. Just because our nightly news only reports violence by non-Christians doesn't mean Christianity is exempt. If everyone - politicians, Muslims, Christians - rejected the tribalism you champion, there would be considerably less violence in the world. If everyone practiced the tolerance you eschew, there would be less violence in the world. To me, personally, your continued harping on the barbarity, backwardness, dress, beliefs and unacceptability of Muslims looks no different than a Muslim harping on Westerners' immorality, barbarity, war-mongering, dress, faithlessness and unacceptability. Both look equally ignorant and extreme to me.

Are you sure about that? Cause some of the policies that were put in place certainly suggests otherwise. I'm living with someone who experienced, first hand, "what our ancestors did." You only need to feel bad about your cluelessness if you refuse to learn more about the way "our aboriginals" were treated, both by government policy and societal attitudes. Government policy may have changed some, but societal attitudes need a lot more work when people still think that what happened was generations ago and "they should be over it" by now.

What was the alternative? What if no support or stimulus package? More homeless people? More unemployed people? More failed businesses? More dead people? The money spent kept people in their homes, kept people employed, kept businesses open. The owner of the sandwich shop near my work work has said as much - without that government money, to be paid back over time, he'd have had to close his doors and let two people go. Do you consider that a better option? Taxes are a fact of life. Claiming it's some huge hardship for coming generations to pay taxes is a false argument. If governments hadn't been willing to burden coming generations with taxes to fight the first and second world where would we be today? If you want to worry about the welfare of future generations, consider what they're going to have to pay for climate change mitigation or even survival. Corporate interest in low wages and no benefits and fiscal conservatives refusal to stand up to corporatist means there isn't going to be a middle class.

Why would a "loving", all powerful and all-knowing God choose to torture his beloved creation for all eternity? What point would it make, and what purpose would it serve? Most humans would not choose to do that, and supposedly we're made in God's image so this makes no sense. Are humans more loving, forgiving, humane than God?

Kinda like Europeans and Native North Americans; we were stronger and more advanced, so of course we'd take over, as you've explained previously. This is as natural as the tribalism that results in persecution of minorities, which you also support. So why hate on Islam for doing exactly what you praise and support for Europeans?

It's been fun guys, but this is supposed to be about immigration generally, not Muslims in particular. Plus I have a life that doesn't include hours on forums, so I shall bid you adieu for now. As to topic at hand, I still don't have a strong opinion on whether Canada needs more immigrants or less. I have a stronger opinion on how Canada should support immigrants who come to our country; in my opinion, this is where we fail. If we are bringing in health care professionals, engineers, etc., there should be an easy and inexpensive way for them to upgrade their certifications to Canadian standards. Otherwise, they are underemployed and whatever benefit they may be to the society and the economy is undermined.

Heck, I reject our "Judeo-Christian" culture, mostly because the "Christians" and conservatives (whether calling themselves liberal or conservative) have fought against virtually every progressive policy that Canada has tried to implement. But once its done, it's pretty funny to then have them take pride in our progressive country, while slamming Muslims and others who come from countries they don't like for believing exactly the same as they did 20 or 40 years ago. And seriously, thinking what someone wears means they reject an entire society is ridiculous. If even you thought that was true, you'd object to Nuns wearing habits, Mennonite women and girls wearing long dresses and sunhats, or Buddhists wearing those robes they like. The claim that a hijab-wearing woman is rejecting Canadian cultures is just one more excuse to hate-on Muslims.

Where have I ever said they "immediately" abandon their cultural beliefs? I repeat, endlessly, *over time*, about 3 generations. Can you at least try some honesty, now and then? Or would that break your bubble too hard?

I believe I've already noted that I prefer your version of Christianity over that prevalent in Africa or the Middle East. But just to clear something up, I don't like Islam either. As far as I am concerned, religion is problematic in creating a society of equality, tolerance and acceptance. Nonetheless, I have friends who are religious, very devoutly religious. My personal feelings about religion in general do not translate to disliking every religious person in the world. The religious friends I have are tolerant and they do not insist that everyone else in the world must believe as they do. They are accepting of different views and opinions, even mine. I don't know about you particularly, but many people do that with Muslims. They say "they are all the same" and fail to differentiate. Is that ok with you?

Are you sure about that? Having female Muslim relatives and friends, that does not seem to be the case for them. Now sure, there are no doubt Muslim men who expect that women give them sex on demand and become violent if denied; there are also Christian men and non-religious men who do the same. As a matter of fact, that attitude seems pretty common among men of every color and creed. Even in Canada marital rape was legal until 1983; as recently as 2017 the courts failed to hold a man who raped his wife accountable.  

I agree. If a Muslim/Christian/animist subjects their daughter to FGM - in country or not - they should be arrested, charged and go to jail. If a Muslim/Christian/atheist engages in incest, pedophilia or an honor killing, they should be arrested, charged and go to jail. Etc.

Well, that's not really what I'm alleging, but whatever. The vast majority of Muslims deny that terrorism is an acceptable part of Islam. The vast majority of Muslims deny that murder is an acceptable part of Islam, whether murdering a non-believer, a gay person or a disobedient daughter. Still, people around the world, mostly non-Muslims, insist that it is part of Islam. You can claim that "biblical Christianity" doesn't allow for things Christians in Africa do, and I'm happy to believe you. Still, the people in Africa who follow Christianity find support in their scripture for whatever it is they do that you disagree with. You all have the same label, and as a non-believer, I can prefer your version of Christianity - but you all believe in the same God and use the same book to define your religion, so you are all Christians. Christians and Muslims, btw, believe in the same prophets - other than Mohammed. Islam gives less importance to JC, but he is still among their top personages. Both Christians and Muslims believe (and practice to varying degrees) in female submission to male. Modest dress, honoring of parents, disapproval of homosexuality, abortion and divorce are all mainstays of both Islam and Christianity. The degree to which any of that is practiced is dictated by many things, including the society in which an individual lives. You live in a secular country; consequently, your Christianity is watered down considerably from the extremism of, for example, burning witches and torturing and killing non-believers or heretics. Most Muslims live in areas that are still very religious and so they do, of course, have more fundamental beliefs - with some of them taking it to extremes through murder. The progression of the world to more rights, freedoms and safety for everyone comes about through secularism, not religion.

Thanks for that. She is apparently getting her information from Professor Ruud Koopmans, so I clicked on that link. In the interview, Professor Koopmans puts the emphasize on religiosity, not specifically Islam, as making it more difficult for a group to assimilate; given that Muslims are pretty religious and are moving in significant numbers into Western countries, his comments focus on them. He also points out that it is the radicals who are in the news, and that their activity in demanding ever more "rights" actually harms their group. Nowhere in the interview did he mention Lebanese Christians vs. Lebanese, but maybe that's in the book which I did not read. Anyway, I agree with much of what he says. The reason is I can agree with him in his criticism of Islam/Muslims is that nowhere in the interview (or presumably in the book) does he broad brush Muslims as being barbaric and unfit for Western countries. He points out the following: Oh, and in my opinion, Ms. Ali is playing her own version of the "Misunderstanding Game". But I'm happy to have made the acquaintance of Professor Koopman.

From a Harvard study examining how well Muslims integrate into Western culture: Several factors determine Muslim integration. This study was carried out in the Netherlands and compares Dutch attitudes to second generation Turks and Moroccans in regards to gender roles, marriage and homosexuality. The study notes that: Anyway, there have been plenty of studies done and the overall conclusion is that even Muslim migrants gradually take on the values of their host country. Is that the same study where you claimed that someone going to Mosque more and/or wearing a hijab meant they were extremists, and rejected the finding in the study that 2nd gen and beyond were less conservative then their parents, more accepting of gays, and supported gender equality? So, only accepting the part of the study that supported your pre-conceived notion? You know, finding the part of the chamber that would echo back to you what you already believe.

You've mentioned this before, and this time I tried to find out if its true. But it didn't show up in my Google search. Do you have a cite?

In Christian majority countries in Africa, polygamy, honor killings and persecution of gays is also practiced. In those countries where Muslims are the minority, should we blame Christians for Muslims who marry 4 women, kill disobedient daughters and jail (or kill) gays? These people aren't so different, no matter how fondly you believe that changing a label from Muslim to Christian removes centuries of shared history and cultural belief.

There've been many long-term studies of immigrants; all of them find that by the third generation, the immigrants have overwhelmingly taken on the cultural norms of their host countries. Some even start disliking immigrants, and object to bringing more in, even if it's from their grandparent's country of origin. This is true of all immigrant groups, including Muslims. And sure, there are a few holdouts that insist on keeping to the "old ways", but humans are nothing if not diverse in their attitudes.

The idea of female purity and resistance to sexual temptation isn't limited to Muslims. NGL, it frustrates me when people act as if a behavior that is practiced by everyone is assumed to be a Muslim-only issue. In Egypt, Christian Coptic women usually do not wear headscarves in public. However, 50% of Christian Coptic women have indergone FGM. Christian Copts are anti-gay, and practice honor killings. Christian Coptics frown on marriages outside their faith, and fathers have killed daughters with Muslim boyfriends. In other countries in Africa and the ME, along with FGM, Christians practice polygamy with the support of their Christian leaders, practice honor killings, persecute and kill gay people. If people object to Muslims bringing these kind of anti-Canadian values to Canada, then they should also be objecting to Christians bringing those values to Canada. But they don't because the goal isn't to protect Canada from anti-Canadian values, its to demonize Muslims.

I agree with that; tribalism and religion do have a lot of common elements. Given your support for humanity's natural tribalism, I'm surprised you'd criticize racism and bigotry in other countries.

So? Let's say there is a town with 1000 people; 950 of those people call themselves Christian and 50 of them call themselves Muslim. 90% of the population believes that women should be subservient to their husbands. Does that make it a 'Christian-only' practice? Should only Christians be complimented (or criticized, depending on your POV) for this practice? Should the Muslims in the town be ignored for believing and practicing the same be ignored? If 74% of Christian Copts in Egypt think FGM is a requirement, that's 74% of 10 million people - 740,000. Half of which (more or less) will likely be women - ~370,000. Do we just pretend those 370,000 women/girls aren't at risk because they're "Christian"? Or do we realize that FGM isn't limited by religion and eliminate the practice for both Christians and Muslims, especially for those who come to Canada? And ask yourself, why is it so important to you to make FGM a "Muslim-only" problem?

I agree. Being ignorant and culturally indoctrinated, I had my son circumcised 40+ years ago. Makes me sad now, but at the time, how was I to know any different? It was as automatic as putting a band on the wrist with Baby ____ on it. I still find female circumcision to be worse.

1. From the website Stop FGM, In the regions where FGM is practiced, it's usually more common among Muslim populations than Christians but the difference often isn't much. And in some places, it's more common among Christians than Muslims. In Uganda, more Christians than Muslims practice FGM; in Niger, 2% of Muslim women had been circumcised, while 55% of Christian woman had been. In many regions of the world, Muslims do not practice FGM at all. 2. American Christian Girl suffered FGM; 3-year old American girl has clitoris removed to prevent masturbation. Who knows how many more, in the States or Canada? Understanding this as a cultural practice rather than a religious one allows us to identify all the girls who might be at risk. 3. FGM predates both Christianity and Islam None of this is intended to excuse Muslims because "Christians do it to"; FGM is a horrific practice, no matter who does it. But if we are to help these girls and women, we need to understand who may be affected; focusing on the problem is belonging to Muslims means we will miss the risk in other populations.

If I were dumb, you wouldn't respond to me.

1. FGM is illegal in Canada, whether one has it done in country or out-of-country. Canadian authorities could do a much better job at enforcing it, I believe. On the other hand, I have no information about how many Canadian females have had that done to them. 2. FGM is not a Muslim issue; it's a cultural issue. It always comes up when Muslims are identified as "not wanted in Canada", but Christians (and others) also practice FGM if they come from a region of the world where FGM is practiced. If the argument were ever "We don't want people whose culture condones FGM", it would at least not be islamophobic. 3. Many cultures practice arranged marriages, including Chinese and Japanese cultures; it's not limited to Muslims (or South Asians). Some cultures are are more supportive of "forced" marriage, which might be what you are referring to rather than arranged marriages. Neither Islam, nor Muslim culture forces marriage; if a woman (or man) does not want the union selected by the parents, then they don't have to marry. Of course, one can find examples of Muslim girls being forced to marry, but that is not representative of the culture, just as a shotgun wedding carried out in rural America does not represent American culture.

There's a million+ Muslims in Canada. How many have gone rabid and attacked people in the last .. oh 25 years? Can you demonstrate that it is any higher than random non-Muslims Canadians going rabid and attacking people in the same time period? Unless you can show that, your continued insistence that Muslims are inherently more violent than non-Muslims is merely islamophobic misinformation.