Muslims in Toronto preaching disturbing things.

[Michael Hardner]

... there is a problem that needs dealing with.

And yet we have a thread called 'the way forward' with posters saying 'don't treat them differently'.

I understand the law and order mentality to a degree, but not the lack of imagination so much.

At least, I see a lot of Muslim names involved in street crimes, despite their low numbers, far more than I do, say, Asian names.

Ok. Different group, different problems.

[Freddy]

So it's even weaker to tie it to Canadians then. Ok.

Canada has strong immigration from some of those countries.

For someone who doesn't understand lack of imagination. You sure aren't using it right now.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Freddy

[Michael Hardner]

For someone who doesn't understand lack of imagination. You sure aren't using it right now.

That sentence is hard to read. If I have to imagine something that you say is a fact then it's probably not true

[dre]

your looking for a smoking gun?. Female genital mutilation,

So at the end of the day, all you have is a idiot that's very naive and lives in denial in his made up virtual world that isn't at all the reality

Im not looking for a smoking gun really. But my perception is that immigrants (including muslims) to Canada for the most part behave themselves and obey our laws.

Also... youre not really supposed to call me an idiot... Especially since I have a higher IQ than the last 3 generations of your entire family combined. But I wont report you because youre funny in a whimsical sorta way. In any case, you appear to want a change in policy... and you should continue to advocate for that. But if all you have is what you posted here, dont be suprised when you get laughed at.

[dre]

Since we determinedly do not keep crime statistics based on religion there is no way anyone could show you this. But you know that.

Thats true but we DO know that even with our current immigration policy crime in almost every category is down. It seems to me that a "law and order" argument against muslim immigrants is not very compelling. My guess is these people will make decent Canadians, and their children will do even better.

[dre]

We cannot fix the problem if we're going to keep our heads in the sand and pretend i isn't happening because some people might have their feelings hurt. They are murdering our people, slaughtering us everyday and we won't do anything about it because of political correctness. I think that's awful.

Slaughtering us every day? Theres muslim immigrants in my town, and I still go through every day completely unslaughtered. Go figure.

[Freddy]

Thats true but we DO know that even with our current immigration policy crime in almost every category is down. It seems to me that a "law and order" argument against muslim immigrants is not very compelling. My guess is these people will make decent Canadians, and their children will do even better.

So they will obey our laws out of accountability, not because they feel they are right moral choices, Until they can grow large enough to gain a majority and change our laws to better suit their idealology.

You have no vision. All that IQ and yet so limited in your understanding of reality. Shortsightedness.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Freddy

[Freddy]

Look at French and English. We have been living together for over 150 years in this country and we still hate the hell out of one a other. You think it's going to be any better when the Muslim's start having the ability with a big enough population to gain power to make "language" laws, & Shari law?

Obeying a law because we do not want to face accountability for breaking it, is not the same as believing it's the right way to act. The two may have similar results, but to confuse the two as the same based on that similaritie is foolish.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Freddy

[Michael Hardner]

Look at French and English. We have been living together for over 150 years in this country and we still hate the hell out of one a other.

Hate the hell out of one another ? Quebec just had an election where they punted a well-loved leader, a separatist.

You think it's going to be any better when the Muslim's start having the ability with a big enough population to gain power to make "language" laws, & Shari law?

You don't understand how our legal system works. Firstly, it would take years to get a 'big enough population' and secondly it wouldn't withstand a court challenge to put in 'Shari' [sic] law.

[Argus]

And yet we have a thread called 'the way forward' with posters saying 'don't treat them differently'.

No one has said natives should be instantly integrated into society and the Indian act removed. Your snarkiness is uncalled for, as is the intrusion of another topic into this one.

I understand the law and order mentality to a degree, but not the lack of imagination so much.

I think what you fail to understand is the perspective of people who care about Canada, since you don't. You've already stated that to you would prefer this to simply be an open space in which anyone and everyone from around the world would be able come and set up their tents.

[Freddy]

Hate the hell out of one another ? Quebec just had an election where they punted a well-loved leader, a separatist. You don't understand how our legal system works. Firstly, it would take years to get a 'big enough population' and secondly it wouldn't withstand a court challenge to put in 'Shari' [sic] law.

English still hate the French , and vise versa. Who they voted for has no change on that.

It won't take as long as you believe. And it is a fundamental part of Their religion to convert aggressively until everyone is Muslim. Shari law is the only law.

That is thought to them repeatedly since they are little children.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Freddy

[Michael Hardner]

No one has said natives should be instantly integrated into society and the Indian act removed. Your snarkiness is uncalled for, as is the intrusion of another topic into this one.

I meant no snark.

I think what you fail to understand is the perspective of people who care about Canada, since you don't. You've already stated that to you would prefer this to simply be an open space in which anyone and everyone from around the world would be able come and set up their tents.

I care about our people, and our country as long as it exists.

[Michael Hardner]

English still hate the French , and vise versa. Who they voted for has no change on that.

Based on what though? I gave you an example of why separatism is declining, and you just come back saying that doesn't mean anything. Do you have anything to back it up or not ?

And you ignored the rest of my post too. If you have anything besides repeating your own opinions with nothing to back it up over and over again, then that's not a discussion really.

Study Argus' posts to find out how to make points, and answer questions.

[Argus]

I care about our people, and our country as long as it exists.

That does not mean you care about it continuing to exist. I get the feeling that if millions and millions of people move here and there's bomb explosions on the street, mass poverty, and riots every Tuesday and Thursday, all you'd care about was that there'd be more delightfully quaint ethnic restaurants to go to.

[Argus]

You don't understand how our legal system works. Firstly, it would take years to get a 'big enough population' and secondly it wouldn't withstand a court challenge to put in 'Shari' [sic] law.

How big a population do you need? Not anything like a majority, certainly. Politicians curry favour with ethnic groups all the time. The Liberals refused to declare the Tamil Tigers as terrorists because they didn't want to upset Tamil voters, for example. I can easily see a shallow leader like a Justin Trudeau agreeing to implement Sharia law for Muslims, on a voluntary (ha!) basis. They've done as much in the UK, after all. And, if you continue to see politically correct laws put in place (a certainty under an NDP government), I can see a time when a Muslim would be able to choose to have their criminal case, or even a case involving a disagreement with a non-Muslim business or individual arbitrated under their own laws, whether the other party wanted to or not. Such things don't happen overnight, of course, but are the result of little nudges over time, changing the face of law. Natives can get their crimes judged by a native sentencing circle, so why not Muslims?

As for our Supreme Court, which under Mister Trudeau, would be appointed primarily on the basis of their bilingualism, gender, and loyalty to liberalism, I don't think they'd find much of an issue.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

I get the feeling that if millions and millions of people move here and there's bomb explosions on the street, mass poverty, and riots every Tuesday and Thursday, all you'd care about was that there'd be more delightfully quaint ethnic restaurants to go to.

That's not accurate or fair. I think nationalism is an artificial construct that is generally bad for humanity. You have twisted that into me not caring about people.

[Michael Hardner]

How big a population do you need? Not anything like a majority, certainly.

In the US, you have a huge Christian majority and with influence in all aspects of life, but the courts still uphold separation of church and state. I think that's the model to consider.

I can see a time when a Muslim would be able to choose to have their criminal case, or even a case involving a disagreement with a non-Muslim business or individual arbitrated under their own laws, whether the other party wanted to or not. Such things don't happen overnight, of course, but are the result of little nudges over time, changing the face of law. Natives can get their crimes judged by a native sentencing circle, so why not Muslims?

That will just never happen. It's a dystopic vision of unreality.

[Argus]

That's not accurate or fair. I think nationalism is an artificial construct that is generally bad for humanity. You have twisted that into me not caring about people.

You have stated a wish for uncontrolled immigration. Given that would completely change the political, ethnic, racial, religious and economic makeup of Canada, and given the vast majority of the newcomers would come from cultures which are far more socially primitive than ours, and would be far and away more religious (mostly Muslims, Hindus and SIkhs), and mostly illiterate, with all the violence attached to that, I don't think I'm really being unfair when i assess the likely results of you getting your wish.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

In the US, you have a huge Christian majority and with influence in all aspects of life, but the courts still uphold separation of church and state. I think that's the model to consider.

There is an official, constitutional separation of church and state in the US. There is no such thing here.

That will just never happen. It's a dystopic vision of unreality.

Happened in the UK under a Labour government, at least, the Sharia part. And we do have a different type of sentencing for natives. Why would it be unimaginable here that a pm in need of shoring up ethnic support would grant a similar special status to Muslims? Especially he all he cared about was pandering to an ethnic group for votes? Look at what Harper did this year, raising our immigration numbers to pander to immigrants and ethnics.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Argus

[Freddy]

Based on what though? I gave you an example of why separatism is declining, and you just come back saying that doesn't mean anything. Do you have anything to back it up or not ?And you ignored the rest of my post too. If you have anything besides repeating your own opinions with nothing to back it up over and over again, then that's not a discussion really.Study Argus' posts to find out how to make points, and answer questions.

All of what you just said is all based on your opinion. I answered everyone 's questions but based on your opinion I didn't.

A discussion is a discussion, Different options of what a discussion is, is irrelevant. You seem to be hindering discussion more then helping it.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Freddy

[Freddy]

That's not accurate or fair. I think nationalism is an artificial construct that is generally bad for humanity. You have twisted that into me not caring about people.

I believe it's a natural love for your own family and those who are from the same tribe. It's essential to our survival as a species.

Muslims have a very high level of it.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Freddy

[Michael Hardner]

You have stated a wish for uncontrolled immigration.

No, I have never said that. As long as we have countries, we will have immigration. I even support some of your ideas around screening for immigrants. My wish for a borderless world is an ideal, a future state that would come about gradually and certainly not without 'control'.

There is an official, constitutional separation of church and state in the US. There is no such thing here.

I think that the constitution protects us from freedom of religion, too, but I'll admit I'm not enough of a scholar to tell you exactly how.

[Michael Hardner]

All of what you just said is all based on your opinion. I answered everyone 's questions but based on your opinion I didn't.

No, I gave you a FACT about Quebec and you waved it away by saying it doesn't matter there is still hate (?). Hate's a strong word, and yet you don't have a fact to back it up.

[Freddy]

No, I gave you a FACT about Quebec and you waved it away by saying it doesn't matter there is still hate (?). Hate's a strong word, and yet you don't have a fact to back it up.

Based on the hate I witness everyday living and working in Ottawa in the construction industry for the past 20 years

Not a day goes by without hate being verbally expressed, from both sides.

I have not witnessed any change in the level of hate from both sides since this election you are speaking about.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Freddy

[dre]

There is an official, constitutional separation of church and state in the US. There is no such thing here.

Not really.... Theres one line in the US constitution that says the government cant establish a state religion. Thats it. In reality the Canadian constitution offers more protection.

"freedom of conscience and religion" is a fundamental right.

Edited June 17, 2015 by dre