?Impact

I think you mean plurality or relative majority. Just under 40% of Canadians have been baptized in the Catholic church, although how that translates into practicing/belief has never really been determined. The statistics are swayed by French Canada, with about 75% in Quebec and 50% in New Brunswick. The rest of Canada is about 20-30%, Ontario is at 30%. I think it is easier today for non-Catholics to get their children into the Catholic school board in Ontario. Sometimes there is an elitism associated with it, as it is not the lowest common denominator as the secular public school. I believe children can be exempt from certain religious education in the schools, and just stand silently for morning prayer. I don't really understand that however, if you want to go through the trouble of getting a child into the program then how could you demand they be excused from that portion.

America put the donkey before the cart

Which is irrelevant to the example, I too am pro choice. I am going to your home to imply you are a baby killer because I want to protect free speech. I expect many of the Muslims in the mosque are also free speech, and from some new reports they were saying that.

A phobia is by definition irrational. People carrying around signs saying No to Islam is irrational. If their signs said No to Religion then it would rational. Does this same group have a similar rally planned for a Catholic church with signs that say No to Christ?

Right on #1 #2 is peoples opinions being easily swayed and mislead through a propaganda campaign by the biggest liar in history

If I wanted to promote free speech, would you be fine if I got a bunch of my friends together in front of your doorway with megaphones and placards that said pro-life and screamed baby killer?

Since I am unaware of any benign religion, a little fear/caution is always appropriate. Irrational fear however is not healthy. I know I have a mild claustrophobia, but it is under control and hasn't prevented me from enjoying activities like spelunking; if it were more serious then maybe I would seek out professional help. The problem with a rise in Islamophobia on a large scale is that it often leads to other more serious problems, where people are trying to violate the rights and safety of others. The canary in the coal mine if you want.

That would be an interesting topic, Not just the differences between the US and Canada but what the rights of non-citizens should be. I also wonder if what you say is true or not, at least technically and meeting international obligations. If Canada wants to deport an immigrant, I don't think the situation you are talking about would occur. What I do see happening is trying to deport refugees, and then we (and the US) are obligated by international treaties to address certain refugee rights.

Yes we do, and we need to clean them up. Hopefully we can do it faster than America that has 51 sets of books with stupid laws (probably more, but I don't really know how the territories work).

No they are not mutually exclusive. But as I pointed out they were clearly not there promoting free speech. I don't see why you think Islamophobia is open to interpretation. I think it is well understood by the majority.

I'm not sure I follow, but sorry for the confusion. Let me try to be clear. 1. I have no problem with people saying No to Islam, they are exercising their right to free speech but it does qualify as Islamophobia 2. If you want to protest against bill M-103, then your placard should be about M-103 and not about Islam 3. Yes, you can protest anywhere in public 4. If you are carrying a sign that says No to Islam in front of a mosque, than any reasonable person would understand that you are an Islamophobe and not a free speech advocate. These protestors went out of their way to be at the mosque and not at their MPs office, the Liberal party office, the office of the MP in Mississauga that introduced the legislation, Ottawa, or any other place that signified they were about free speech and M-103

Now that is an important topic, and one that is certainly related to immigration & citizenship. Perhaps we need to be clearer in the Constitution about the separation of powers, and make sure that is understood by immigrants and new citizens. I don't think the Americans did much better a job either. Although Thomas Jefferson wrote: "thus building a wall of separation between Church & State" when originally discussing the first amendment, that part of the text never made it into it. Article 6 of the US Constitution does talk about no religious requirements for government office holders but that is a secondary issue. What really troubles me about America is the practice of US politicians to always say "God Bless America", which certainly implies a supreme being. Of course our own Constitution recognizes the supremacy of God, so we are no better.

Where did I say that? In fact I stated earlier today that I don't consider that hate speech. What I said is if you are protesting M-103, then go to the appropriate place and give the appropriate message.

With the most common sign being Say No to Islam, this did scream of Islamophobia and not about free speech. If they wanted to debate free speech, then show up in Ottawa or their local MPs office and complain about M-103 (which has nothing to do with free speech, but that appears to be what some think).

This debate was forced on Parliament by the people. I believe only 100,000 signatures are needed, and they managed to get 1,850,000.

If you were going to church on Sunday with your kids, and there was a large crowd blocking the entrance with signs that said "No to Christianity" and others that talked about pedophilia, etc. and they had megaphones and were shouting insults, would you be all sunshine and lollipops? Again we don't have an investigation so we don't know the specifics. The police won't investigate until your Minister launches a formal complaint, most likely costing your church thousands in legal expenses.

The police received many complaints, but they are awaiting a formal complaint from the mosque in order to begin a formal investigation. I guess many phone calls don't constitute a formal complaint, the police only work on a written (preferably from an expensive lawyer) complaint.

Yes, those were certainly the main printed signs from the organized part of the protest. I agree that is not hate speech. It was the other hand written signs, and what was verbally shouted that is in issue. Were people blocked from attending the mosque or not. We need more answers from the investigation.

Yes, the google statistics are interesting to follow. Too bad we don't have google statistics dating back to 1938. The Trump peak in the google stats was the week of the election in November. There was a much smaller peak on the day of Inauguration (about 1/3 the election peak). Today it seems to be fairly flat, about 20% of his peak. There is a daily up/down pattern that peaks in the evening and drops off overnight, again rising throughout the next day to peak in the evening. If you contrast Trump to Obama, you get the exact same curve. The big starting point is the primaries, with a peak at election and smaller peak at inauguration and then flattening out (Obama had another peak during 2012 election season but smaller). The absolute numbers for Trump are higher than Obama, but it is not clear what percentage of that trend has to do with the person and what percentage with the evolving technology. We may have had google in 2008, but we didn't have the proliferation of handheld devices.

Nor does it have to do with this topic, perhaps you and taxme need to take this conversion offline.

I believe that was covered in the thread on the Quebec city mosque, let's not derail this one.

Yes, that is a good article and worth reading. It explains why the statistics are higher in Sweden than other jurisdictions, and yes have absolutely nothing to do with recent immigrants/refugees.

The fake Presidential alternative facts (ie. lying) administration makes up shyte, and the lemmings believe this 'fake media' crap. After the obvious lie from Trump the other night, Sweden responded with the real fact that crime has been essentially flat for the past decade. They called the bullshyter out. The Swedish media took it one stop further and are lampooning him with all the mundane traffic problems and other significant 'criminal' activity that occurred when Trump claimed otherwise.

I'm surprised, you missed the big one that outstrips all of the ones you mentioned by a wide margin. The legal industry.

The title is quite wide open, but the OP does narrow the subject some. I agree that my last 2 posts were a bit outside the scope of this topic, so I posted another one in a status update but it appears nobody caught on to it (ski vacation). Neither of the 2 other threads that Charles suggested however are appropriate for the posts either, so perhaps we need a thread on Trump the man(?) and another on the Trump Empire.