Marocc

Inspire yourself if that's what you need. Oh there are unifying threats, but some people refuse to accept they aren't invincible and might have to actually fight one day to survive.

A lot of countries have done excellent job with that....across the West. By that I don't mean US.

How do you test that?

No what? Who doesn't have a relative that went to war? What does that have to do with what I said?

If I'm understanding,....for your own sake for it is natural for man. The subject here, I think, is whether it is suffient to say those few words or not. How can anyone be happy with either of those? Can you actually not have desire to better yourself? Isn't that almost like death? BBC is reasonably reliable regarding what happens in UK or USA. Unfortunately they also make news articles regarding lots of other countries and those are not accurate in general, imo.

I don't see why one would have to lead to the other. I have confronted many horrible truths, but I do not recall ever having been forced to spread a negative attitude. I understand how that may happen though, to someone who suffers of a low self esteem, for instance. Some people like to spread a negative attitude. One typical thing such people have in common is an incessant need to gossip. I think the Chinese collect every bit of information. When I talk about the influence you may have, I do not of course refer only to the particular people your writing here could affect. I'm talking precisely of the negative attitude you spread.

That's not a good thing. You need to develop both your thinking and the way you express yourself. I'm referring to the statistical situation. How many percent of the posters understand what you think you make clear? I don't care at all — just pointing out how it can be defined whether you do express your points as you say or whether you do not. I accept the definition of Merriam-Webster and I try not to give English words a definition on my own. bigotry 1 : obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance I see. But can you trust mere news articles to inform you of all the details about a person and/or acts of a person that are necessary for you to judge that person? I think not. Yet if you try, you would certainly have to go through the articles carefully. Otherwise your judgment will be more questionable than the Taliban court.

DoP saw Nazis on tv. The idea is still cool — talking against what no longer exists because other people died and killed for it, is almost like being a warrior of a kind. The defender of all that is good.

Thank you. Glad we got that over with.

I just don't care about your comparisons.

It's certainly worth thinking about, what leads into this type of thing. Who has been spreading a negative attitude against Islam and Muslims? Have you been? Do you not think it influences anything or anyone? Don't you have any sense of responsibility?

Correct answer to the final exam: DoP has had nothing new to add to the topic for at least several months now — the most likely rational conclusion is that DoP will not have anything new to add to the topic for the next several months.

Maybe.....but I doubt it. You realize an expression is usually understood to be something that reaches the target audience? It may be I am the only one not seeing it — wherefore the 'fault' would be in me, but if people in general aren't seeing it, then there is a 'fault' in your expression, or alternatively, you are confused about the message your words and tone send forward. It isn't. Your harangues aren't entirely consistent. Your tone appears to me, to go back and forth between moderate intolerance and fundamental bigotry. Good— I don't get it. Are you saying that all Muslims are evil? I'd think not, but that's the only way I can understand that phrase. Those are the kind you know, the kind you judge and/or the kind you consider 'evil' (with evil not entirely fitting as a word)? What is? You mean murder them or just lend one to them? I don't think killing a person makes one evil. Depends on the society and the definition of wrong. The problem may not be the hair that is shown, but what it signifies. I don't think they need defending. To make somethings clearer— — homosexuality is not an act. — sodomy is unlawful regardless of gender. — fornication and adultery are unlawful regardless of gender Apostasy includes warring against the ummah. Blasphemy, I think, also includes other crimes such as treason, in order to be punishable by law. It cannot be wrong to say what women — or men should wear. Forcing women to wear something and advising them on what they should wear are two entirely different things. If I tell someone they should put on a thicker coat, am I forcing them to put on a thicker coat?

What are you talking about?

I have noticed. It sounds.... Malicious. It isn't enough to say a few words if they don't express themselves in your thinking in general. If I was you with all those 'evil' Muslims you know, I'd either go and confront them or forget about it. Here you are talking about some other Muslims. You talk about some vague group of certain kind of (but vaguely described by you) people who call themselves Muslims or who have an Arab sounding name or who come from a Muslim majority country. It does seem like it is those you judge with your 'harsh' judgement. Am I wrong? What use is your 'harsh' judgement to the world?

Since the situation in India is escalating quickly, here is a new thread for it. As for today, during a rally in Ballari, MLA (member of legislative assembly), Somashekhara Reddy of Karnataka, as a warning to Muslims, said, “I want to caution those who are protesting… This (the crowd at the pro-CAA rally) is just 5%. If your antics grow, if 100% people come, just imagine what your situation will be.” “Bewakoofs (idiots) from Congress are lying to you,”, “and you’re believing them and coming out onto the streets. Hey, we’re the 80%! You’re just 17%. If we turn against you what will your situation be?” Then he said to TNM, “I have not stated anything against anybody. I just said we Hindus are 80% and if the 20% Muslim population damages our property, we cannot just stand by and watch." He further said, "Caution, tread with caution. This is our country. You have to live in our country. This is my country. My country,” “If you want to live in this country… the Australian Prime Minister had given a statement once. You know what she said? “If you want to stay in this country, you have to live as per our customs. Caution. If you don’t, I will send you back to your country.” Make sure that you don’t bring such a situation in this country," [it looks like the Australian PM has not said that in reality] https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/we-re-80-you-re-17-karnataka-mla-warns-muslims-against-anti-caa-protests-115305

And? it doesn't matter whether you want it or not.

So if 200 Saudi Arabian people in Saudi Arabia were holding up an illegal business of selling randomly exploding refrigerators, would it be ethical to judge 'harshly' all Saudi Arabians in Saudi Arabia? For all you know it may be it is mainly the Saudi arabians buying these exploding refrigerators!

Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: Whoever calls to guidance will have a reward similar to those who follow him, without detracting from their rewards at all. Whoever calls to misguidance will have sin upon him similar to those who follow him, without detracting from their sins at all. Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2674, Grade: Sahih https://abuaminaelias.com/forty-hadith-on-knowledge/ How many are the ones you judge?

No. Surah Abasa 34. That Day shall a man flee from his own brother, 35. And from his mother and his father, 36. And from his wife and his children. 37. Each one of them, that Day, will have enough concern (of his own) to make him indifferent to the others. How many of them have you met? Yes. (With possible exceptions regarding certain spoken statements that may express clear disbelief.) The Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) dispatched Usāmah ibn Zayd in a detachment to Al-Huraqah, a sub-tribe of Juhaynah. When they reached the idolaters and overtook them, a man from the idolaters escaped. Usāmah and a man from the Ansār chased him in order to kill him, and when they reached him, the man said: "There is no god but Allah." The Ansasri man left him when he said that. Usāmah, on the other hand, killed him. When they returned to Madīnah, and the news reached the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) he asked Usāmah: "Did you kill him after he had said There is no god but Allah?" Usāmah said: "Yes, O Messenger of Allah, He only said it to save himself from being killed." The Prophet repeated the question: "Did you kill him after he had said There is no god but Allah?" Usāmah said: "Yes, he only said it to save himself from being killed. He brought harm to the Muslims and killed so and so of them." The Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said to him: "Did you split open his heart to verify his intention? What would you do with (his statement) 'there is no god but Allah' when it comes on the Day of Judgment? Who will intercede for you, speak on your behalf and argue your case when the word of monotheism is brought and it is said to you: 'How could you kill someone who proclaimed it?'" Usāmah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "I wished I had not embraced Islam before that day", because if he were a disbeliever who had just embraced Islam, Allah would pardon him. However he committed this act while he was a Muslim. https://hadeethenc.com/en/browse/hadith/4816 I mean sympathetic to those being oppressed.

Now, if you're truly passionate about debate you know you will find the debate. You don't just sit around and expect it to come to you. There are plenty of people who defend China. If you had a particular problem with them you'd find the people who do defend China. The Chinese must seem very distant to you. It may be you'll only begin to care when they invade Canada and ask you to pay for a Chinese passport.

If it isn't racism or prejudice, it is certainly stupidity. Adult people behaving with other people like three-year-olds behave at a dinner table. No, you do not have the freedom to choose who goes to the same supermarket as you do or who rides the same bus as you do. And no, you were never meant to have that freedom. If the realization makes you unhappy, then you were unhappy already to begin with. Which society, supposedly? Because they all 'come from the same society',...... Supposedly. Some people think their own country is the size of the universe with infinite different communities and opportunities while the countries on the other side of the world are the size of Monaco and the people therein incapable of individual judgment or problem solving. Brexiters want the Mula, that is all.

You can't have everything that you want. You can't expect everyone to care what you want. Your complaint here is incredibly childish.

No, but because you appeared to object to talking about the situation in China since you have expressed sympathetic opinions regarding it in the past. You have expressed sympathy to people and groups mistreated by some Muslims also, but feel no urge whatsoever, to stop talking about it. That is hypocritical. To me there is no difference whether a Muslim mistreats a Muslim or a non-Muslim, but this type of topic tends to put Muslims into categories. I cannot accuse anyone of something out of suspicion. if you say (a) Muslim(s) somehow mistreated (a) non-Muslim(s), and I have no way of knowing if it is true or not — or finding out is too time consuming — I won't say anything to it. It doesn't mean I haven't seen it, acknowledged it and noted for myself it may have happened, but I can neither deny it nor affirm it with no knowledge of the facts. I thought that was obvious. No, no one has a right to do that. What comment? I have never said that. Muslims are not allowed to say someone is not a Muslim if they say they are a Muslim. It depends on the context and the categories. Not understanding it will limit your ability to understand things connected to it, which might be harmless if you were honest about what you know and what you don't know. I might misunderstand and say something that isn't true or be misunderstood, which may lead to someone being led astray because of me, or to someone acquiring false information from me. Or I might accidentally place Muslims into categories and be wrong. I fear to have such deeds with me on the Day of Judgment.

It doesn't have much to do directly with the operation of the government. It is an expression that, not only acknowledges the existence of God, but also acknowledges that the nation, the government, the population and each individual depends on Him. This should do you no harm, except for the expression possibly attacking your pride. There is no need to make that a problem of the whole nation though. I'm sure Trudeau doesn't expect to receive questions one is supposed to ask from professors in universities. So long as they keep saying it's 'for the common good'. Turth is the word doesn't matter. What matters is doing right. Let's remove fear of karma from the people. Even more fun. Then the church can take over again. It doesn't matter if they were or were not. The point is much of the religious law is good and natural for people. For some reason you are insulted by the insinuation that it wasn't the pure wisdom of man that created them out of nothing? Between who? No, it doesn't. Would words assure it stays that way? You demand too much. What can you give?