Goddess

I "get" where you're trying to go with this. If a religion has a main teaching that says, "If you sacrifice your life to our God while engaging in jihad, you get to rape 72 virgins in the afterlife for doing it" and then that religion fails to clearly define what "jihad" is and just lets each person define it on their own according to their own interpretations, then yes....they are responsible for how their adherents behave. They don't get to just sit back and say, "Hey, not our fault." With pedophiles in the priesthood, did the entire Christian world just sit back and say, "Those priests don't represent Christianity." and do nothing about it? No, it was exposed, it was dealt with - by the religion that was responsible for it - and it was done publicly so all could see. If you can't see how Islam's teachings on jihad, the denigration of women and their attitudes towards non-Muslims have contributed to the free-for-all devastation they are wreaking upon the world right now, I can't help you. If you can't see that what's going on has been set in place by ideological dogma, which is now the vehicle used to express themselves, I can't help you. To stick by your position that Islamists have nothing whatsoever to do with Islam is just absurd. You want to stifle any conversation about the connection between Islamic ideology and Muslim intolerance and violence, in the name of political correctness. Obfuscating like you do does nothing except protect Muslims from having to grapple with this issue. When a person devotes themselves fully to the extreme versions of Islam and states his religious reasons for doing so and confesses his certainty about martyrdom on video before he blows himself up, you don't consider this as evidence that the religion's dogma is responsible. But if he said he did it because he's full of despair and revulsion for the West, you'd accept it at face value. The religion is exonerated. Any criticism of Islam is met with accusations of bigotry, Islamophobia and racism. You want to hold hands with extremists by defending medieval cultural aspects of the religion, "Because it's their culture and we have to protect it!!", then you are throwing feminist Muslims, gay Muslims and ex-Muslims under the bus. These are the very people who need us to speak up. By stifling this discussion, you think you're doing them a favour, but all you're really doing is making the idiotic right wing the loudest voice in this and No, I don't agree with their extreme views of "all Muslims are this way or that way." I've had nothing but bad experiences with Muslims and I don't even think that's the way they ALL are. But enough of them are to make the world pretty miserable right now. They are in desperate need of reform and they are fighting it tooth and nail.

I think this is where some of us differ - I believe it IS the responsibility of Islam as to how it's adherents behave, since they behave according to what they are taught. I don't believe there would be as many child brides, if it were not for the teachings of Islam.

There are no child brides then?

Arrest is made: http://www.630ched.com/2017/03/09/man-arrested-in-edmonton-crow-bar-road-rage-incident-that-left-woman-with-broken-arms/?sc_ref=l.facebook.com

I don't understand why we can't discuss these issues like adults instead of children trying to justify bad actions with "But....but....but.....So-and-So did the same thing !!!"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1264729/Child-bride-13-dies-internal-injuries-days-arranged-marriage-Yemen.html I would think that this going on in the Muslim world would be more offensive to Altai than Canada's laws, but I guess not.

Google pictures of Muslim child brides. There's tons.

All of our choices affect our lives. No matter what age we are. I don't understand how you believe it's NOT okay to allow a 15 year old to make a life choice (for which she will have to live with the consequences of her own choice) but it's OKAY to force 6 year olds to marry......

I know someone who married at age 15. Her parents had many discussions with her about it, and finally agreed to sign the papers to allow her to marry. 28 years later, they are still married and happy. Granted, it doesn't always work out like that but do you understand that it was her CHOICE and that our laws provide protections in such cases?

It's very difficult to explain allowing others the freedom to choose, to someone who doesn't agree with that freedom. There is no contradiction in my statements.

So these are actually adult women who are making the choice to marry these men?

Baloney.

No. What we agree with is allowing others to make their own decisions. This is why there are protections under the law if you CHOOSE to marry before 16 - your parents would need to sign papers and you would be questioned as to whether you are doing this of your own free will or not.

Sharia is different in that it legislates all aspects of life, not just in the religious sphere. It covers things like: how you are supposed to greet others, what you should say before having sex and which foot is supposed to enter the washroom first.

The difference here is that Canadian laws do not FORCE anyone to marry at 16 (or any other age). I don't believe marrying a 6 year old or a 9 year old would even be legal here, as it is in many Sharia complicit countries.

OK. How am I ruled by Sharia?

I've been curious about it, too. I wonder if my experiences have mostly been with NEWER immigrants, the town I was in had a high Muslim population and my neighborhood was where a lot of them settled. Or perhaps they were mostly from countries where there has been NO progress in the areas of human/women's rights. I dont' know if it's culture or the religion or a combination of both. But I do know, to a person, they treated Westerners with absolute and utter contempt. I don't think there was one who would've peed on me if I was on fire. Others had similar experiences where I lived. My freind, a female warehouse manager, was introduced to a new employee, a Muslim man, who refused to look at her, shake her hand or acknowledge her when she spoke. She worried that if there was ever an accident in the warehouse, this man would not help her in any way. This is the issue I have with Trudeau - he is not the one who has to live with these attitudes and deal with them every day. His wife will never screamed at, slapped or assaulted. He is not the one who has to live with such backwardness and just plain inhumane-ness. (Is that a word, or did I just invent it? Ha!) I don't believe that they will adapt to life in Canada with attitudes such as this, or with do-gooders refusing to challenge them and just "going along" with them in the name of tolerance. But this is why I believe your estimates of it only being a TINY minority with these attitudes is waaaay off.

I would hope this goes both ways. Because I've been screamed at, shouted at, slapped, assaulted (Yes, it went to court), lied to and treated as a sub-human by Muslim immigrants because I am a white woman. I watched in horror as a group of them attacked an Israeli girl on lline, outlining all the barbaric ways they wanted her and her family to die. To a person, every one of the Muslims I have met and interacted with have been angry, unhappy, violent - both verbally and physically. Edit to add: I really never gave much thought to Muslims until I lived amongst them and had to figure out WTF is wrong with these people?

One point from the book I found interesting:

Yes, that's the guy. I'm reading about that in the book - what policies he wants to see impemented in Western societies to curb radicalization. So far, I understand what he's getting at and the reasons for it.

Just an interesting sidenote: This guy who dialogues with Sam Harris in the book, Maajid Nawaz, founded this group called Quilliam: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilliam_(think_tank) I think he's onto something.

I HOPE it will reform the more violent and misogynist views it has......I will admit that I am doubtful it will happen. Not in my lifetime, for sure. The reason being - the violent and misogynistic beliefs are working for them and anyone who disagrees with them is a "racist" and an Islamophobe, why would they change their views?

Secularism is nothing more than a commitment to keeping religion and politics separate. You can be a secularist and still be an off-the-wall religious nutjob.

I don't believe most people think name-calling leads to reform. It's nothing more than a way for small-minded people to vent frustration.

In the book I'm reading right now, (see my above comment to Hal) Nawaz estimates that 25% of Muslims worldwide agree with violent jihad and that we shouldn't expect much help from "conservative Muslims", since they do not agree with the violent jihad, but will fully support and fight against any gender equality, etc.