Goddess

I guess my issue with this Islamophobia study/motion is that if you're going to go out looking for Islamophobia in Canada, you're going to find it. We alreay know that. The same as if you go out looking for prejudice against Natives, you're going to find it. The same as if you're going to go looking for anti-Semitism, you're going to find it. The same as if you are going to go looking for prejudice against blacks, you're going to find it. We already know there are Islamophobes in Canada. We already know there's prejudice and discrimination against all these groups, which is why we have hate crime laws. So what is the "study" going to show? That there's Islamophobia in Canada? Great. My concern is what is the solution to all these phobias and prejudices? Of course Muslims don't want anyone pointing out the backwardness of their religion. I get that. So do we want a law saying no one can discuss the problems in Islam? Trudeau came out today in his UN speech about Natives in Canada and said this: I doubt the study will make any kind of recommendations FOR MUSLIMS to rethink how they "represent and organize themselves". Obviously there will be recommendations on how Canada approaches Muslims, but will there be any recommendations on how Muslims approach Canada? My fear is that it will do nothing but absolve Muslims of any repsonsibility they have to integrate with Canadians. It will not address "Infidelophobia", which I see as contributing factor to Islamophobia.

I was referring to the fact that she keeps popping up here to use the motion to accuse people here of violating the law by inciting hatred against Muslims by engaging in this conversation. While at the same time saying that Muslims should not be allowed to question their own religious beliefs because if they joined a religion that limits their free speech, it's their own tough luck. Which is why I asked her why she's not reporting this conversation to the RCMP if she feels this conversation is a violation of the law, due to the motion.

Of course the irony here is that Jacee is doing exactly what many have said - the motion will be used by idiots to stifle any discussion about Islam.

Oh. So you're just going to sit there and watch a hate crime in progress and do nothing about it?

If you're so concerned about this conversation, why haven't you gone to the RCMP?

Actually pretty accurate. Except I can shave my legs when it's not hockey season.

I see.

That's my point. Neither side can insist that the other judge their intentions as always good, while at the same time always attributing bad intentions to the other side. I still say the West needs to stop interferring because we just have no idea how deep the culture and the religion go, nor do we understand all the nuances of it. If that means declining to help even when we are specifically asked to intervene, then so be it. Better to not get blamed when things don't go as expected.

Ya, it bothers me that we brought over all the Syrians, but said a big "F*&%$K You!" to the Yazidis.

i never said that. I just am saying that they cannot be blaming the West 100%. I agree the West should stay out much more than they have. But I also feel that some of the "bungles" attributed to the West were not so much a result of bad intentions on the part of the West, as they just grossly underestimated the extent of religious fanaticism in those countries.

Do you suppose it depends on how and when the word is applied? And to whom it is applied? When "Altai" says he/she/it applies it to herself as a slave of Allah, it's being used in one way. When it is used as a derogatory term and applied to others, it's being used in another way. "Altai" is being disingenuous in saying it is only applied one way. Even the article you posted says it is usually used as a derogatory term.

Coolio. I actually cried when he died. The only other celebrity that affected me that way was Princess Di.

One of my favourite Canadians:

Getting rid of the victim mentality and not blaming the West for all their problems would be another factor in how well any reform goes in Islam.

LOL No, it's still obvious to me that the religion needs reform badly and there is a lot of resistance to this, and not enough moderates speaking out. But I'm not going to knock Tunisia for trying to make some strides. As I said, I hope they continue down the path, and not backslide when and if a different government takes over.

It will take time to change people's views. Time and a concerted effort by moderate Muslims. I really feel moderates need to speak up more. This is the time. I understand about this, because I'm considered an "apostate" in my former religion. When I found out it was all bull$hit, it was such a relief. Throwing off the physical shackles of it is the easier part, IMO. The harder part is getting mentally free of it - it takes a concerted effort to train your mind to think along different lines, create new neural pathways in your brain and not continue down the thought patterns of previous beliefs.

It seems they are off to a good start with making some reforms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Tunisia Reading the above, I understand a bit better how difficult these changes will be and the time it takes to change people's views. If the country truly desires modernization and reform of Islam, I hope they continue to work on this. If it's only being done out of political necessity, the reforms already underway will likely be repealed when they are no longer serving the political party in power. I hope they continue in the direction they are going. Thanks, Dia

It's a conundrum. Muslims need the freedom the West provides in order to practice non-fundamentalist Islam. Yet the West is villified in Islam.

But you include execution as a punishment for anyone who rejects your own "facts". Whether you decide to execute someone as a first step or as a second step or as a third step is irrelevant. FACT: You stated that you believe anyone who rejects your own personal "facts" should be executed. You will not be able to dodge your way out of that one.

It sounds like a wonderful religion to join.

Anyone who rejects your "facts" should be executed? **blink blink**

The Arabic language is as tribal as the culture that created it. Each word has a trail of relatives with the same 3 letter cluster of consonants as its root. Use any word in Arabic and a host of uninvited meanings barge into the conversation. For example: One of the words for "woman" is hormah. It comes from the same root as the words for "holy" and "sacrosanct". But also the root words for "sinful" and "forbidden". See the problem? The word for "mother", umm, is the root words for "source", "nation", "rich harvest". But it is also the root word for "stupid", "illiterate", weak of character" and "without opinion". Words in Arabic are wonderfully ambiguous. See the problem?

The authentic and original teachings of any religion can be found by looking at their books. What does the book say? What did the founder do? What did the first followers do?

I agree it's not JUST the book. So I wouldn't go so far as to say it should be banned. But I agree with the article that a large part of it is.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali disagrees with you. http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/09/islam-is-a-religion-of-violence-ayaan-hirsi-ali-debate-islamic-state/ She seperates Muslims into 3 different types: Which group will come out on top?: