Goddess

I've been on a few forums and MLW has sort of a "pet peeve" about getting off-topic, handled quite militantly. Other forums I've been on allow the one who started the thread to direct it, bring it back on topic if they choose to. I kind of like the free-flowing conversational nature of threads, it's more like real-life - no conversations between groups of people stay strictly on topic and a bit of humour can sometimes lighten the mood of a serious thread. We used to call it "fluff".....and yes, sometimes there would be several pages of "fluff" to wade through before a thread got back on topic, but the "fluff" was still fun and interesting and served a purpose. But I do think there is one person here who is deliberately abrasive and insulting on every thread. I consider that trolling, more so than getting a bit off- topic.

This is a truism I have learned in life too. I have known people who would not be judged "beautiful" by most standards, but when you get to know their souls - they are kind, compassionate, forgiving, non-judgmental - they become very beautiful in my eyes. I've also known some very good-looking people who, when they open their mouths and spout hatred and vitriol, are unkind and uncompassionate, threaten and debase others.....well, you're correct - they look very ugly indeed.

I'm wondering WHY you are on a Canadian political forum. You clearly hate Canadians and hate everything about how our country is run. You contradict yourself constantly - in one thread you are totally against land ownership, in another thread you outline a plan for world domination and in this thread (and others) you advocate all Canadians leaving the country to give it back to the natives (saying they own the land, which you previously state no one owns ....). My grandchild is now 7th generation Canadian. Where exactly would you have us all go to?

OK

One of my favourite movies. You need to watch it a few times to notice everything. Have you seen Snowpiercer? Also good.

Your "communication level" is on par for your stated age. I've been your age. You've never been my age. I understand much more than you think I do. *wink*

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/proposed-‘muslim-suburb-has-quebec-politicians-in-an-uproar/ar-AAkneks?li=AAggFp5 And it begins.

My comment had nothing to do with sex. (??)

I thought you didn't believe in land ownership?

It's that slippery slope that bothers me, too....and watching other countries slide around on it.

I get what you're saying, that there are instances of all these things in the Christian world, too. However, I disagree with your statement above. The whole basis of Islam is imposing Sharia law, which includes the killing of gays and denial of women's rights. Google the myth of the tiny muslim minority and you'll see what I mean. The stats from Egypt may interest you.

I'm pretty sure Aqsa Parvez' father said those exact words. Didn't stop him. As I said, I don't know how you vett these kinds of motivations.

Polls from Muslim and non-Muslim countries show they agree with and want death for gays, honour killings, female subordination, etc. Even if they live in countries where the laws do not agree. Some Christians may argue for those same things but it would be interesting to see how many Christians would agree with and go along with the whole-sale slaughter of gays, female subordination etc. I don't think it would be as high.

Perhaps they do. But Christians are generally waiting for Jesus to come back and fix all the "problems". Christians are directed to follow the laws of the land but keep their viewpoints on gays/abortions etc. Islam directs its' followers to do the killings etc. themselves.

People are free to protest gay marriage, abortion, etc. Protesting these things is not illegal and in general people will not act on their feelings to the point of murdering others, because they respect the law in Canada and don't wish to go to jail for their extreme views. The difference is that those who support Sharia law view it as ABOVE Canadian law. ABOVE any country's laws. I do believe we need to screen for views on Sharia. Just not sure how to go about that - it's not like anyone is going to say "Yes, I fully intend to abide by Sharia law and murder my daughter if she refuses to wear the hijab in Canada". "Yes, I fully intend to not allow my wives out of the house at any time." "Yes, I'm going to take my Canadian born daughters and have them mutilated in another country". They know something like honour-killing is illegal in Canada, but when Sharia law trumps Canadian law in their view, now it's a problem.

I'm reading Kushiel's Dart on your recommendation and quite enjoying it. Thank you!

Yes. I worked for a private doctor for 2 years in a predominently Muslim area and we had a lot of women coming in with issues from constant covering of the face and head - a lot of alopecia, included. The doc would tell them to get outside in the sunshine without the headcovers, but they all wanted to wear it constantly for fear their husbands would "make them". But they also wanted their hair loss cured. Can't have it both ways.

https://islamqa.info/en/146329 They have an answer for that.

I thought fatwas were binding? No?

Actually, the entire section on "Women's Clothing" on that site is frightening.

https://islamqa.info/en/159926 From the article: Is it permissible for women to go to swimming pools? I am a Muslim woman aged twenty-eight years, and I want to go swimming so that I can lose some weight. Can I go swimming in a swimming pool wearing clothes that cover me from the top of my head to the bottom of my feet? There are special clothes for Muslim women who want to swim and they cover the entire body, but they cling to the body when wet. What does Islam have to say about this? What if I wear a towel over these clothes and cover myself beforehand and straight after coming out of the pool? Is it permissible for me to swim in this case? Is it permissible for me to swim if there are some men present? Now I'm confused....why are they asking for something in Canada that is expressly forbidden by Islam?

I wasn't saying that YOU felt the burkini is a saviour for Muslim women. I just was giving my opinion that it is certainly not a boon to Muslim women anywhere. Sorry if you thought I was putting words in your mouth. I was just agreeing with you.

Ugh. Don't get me started on the burkini...... While I didn't agree with France banning it, I don't think that it should be elevated to some kind of saviour for Muslim women.....it most certainly is not.

This kind of makes me re-think things a bit......why do they still have to wear the gear when there's no men around? if they're going to wear it anyways, then why do they need their own swim times?

I think he's asking because he explained that "seize" control of everything has a very negative connotation. You said that's not what you mean, but you keep using the word 'seize" control.