Guest Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Then have your preacher put the word into you sunday morning sermon if you like. It will have no valuable effect in a government pamphlet. Nurder is illegal in this country and has been for quite some time. I suspect most immigrants know that. How many honor killings do you actually think there are here? Hint...about 1 a year. And they are prosecuted just like a drunk white guy who beats the old lady to death because she screwed around on him. Only 1 person a year is offended then. Not a worry as far as I can see. Drunk white guy? Wow, good job I'm not offended by such things or that would be two this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 It's pretty bad when you're arguing against calling honour killing barbaric. it's pretty bad when you resort to a strawman... to making shyte up! Are you yet another guy who just dropped into this thread... at the end of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 They are exactly the same thing and my point is as Waldo pointed out is that honour killing is attached to Muslims when in reality, it should be called domestic violence. Domestic violence or honour killings should be attached to the perpetrators not a culture. which, of course, was the point Trudeau was making in the first place in terms of the culture attachment... as you certainly know. Again, as I pointed out in post #2... the first reply to the nonsense OP, the actual clause in question reads, "barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, “honour killings,” female genital mutilation, forced marriage or other gender-based violence". It doesn't say "barbaric practices"... it says, "barbaric cultural practices". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Is it like a marathon? You're not allowed to join in whenever you feel like it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Is it like a marathon? You're not allowed to join in whenever you feel like it? I'll humour you! Join in any thread, at any time... just don't presume to know what's gone on in the thread... what's been stated in the thread... what positions people hold... before the time you decide to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Is it like a marathon? You're not allowed to join in whenever you feel like it? Yes you can, but you have even admitted yourself that most times you don't read the OP or the posts because you are too lazy and you just like to weigh in on the latest posts. It's hard to offer an informative post with that attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) I'll humour you! Join in any thread, at any time... just don't presume to know what's gone on in the thread... what's been stated in the thread... what positions people hold... before the time you decide to do so. I don't. How can one read six or eight pages (or more) before joining , or rejoining a thread? Sometimes I apologise for coming late but this is one that has been around for a while, as opposed to one that was started and went into multiple pages today. And let's face it, there are no surprising positions on there. No shocks to be taken into account before posting. Edit> Basing that on the subject matter. Wouldn't want you to think I went back and read more of it. Edited September 9, 2015 by bcsapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I don't. How can one read six or eight pages (or more) before joining , or rejoining a thread? Sometimes I apologise for coming late but this is one that has been around for a while, as opposed to one that was started and went into multiple pages today. And let's face it, there are no surprising positions on there. No shocks to be taken into account before posting. Indeed.....we can join whenever we feel like it. It's a web forum, not the Toronto Public Library. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Yes you can, but you have even admitted yourself that most times you don't read the OP or the posts because you are too lazy and you just like to weigh in on the latest posts. It's hard to offer an informative post with that attitude. Did I say "lazy" ? I must have been having a low self esteem day. Usually it's just time or interest that's the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I don't. How can one read six or eight pages (or more) before joining , or rejoining a thread? Sometimes I apologise for coming late but this is one that has been around for a while, as opposed to one that was started and went into multiple pages today. And let's face it, there are no surprising positions on there. No shocks to be taken into account before posting. and I clearly and pointedly responded to your drop-in post... drawing highlighted distinction to the fact your comment focused on 'the acts' wasn't the appropriate emphasis that was attached to the original Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet wording - an emphasis that wasn't on the acts; an emphasis that was improperly attached to a culture. Surely you would want someone to properly advise you if you're just deciding to join a long-standing/running thread - surely! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) and I clearly and pointedly responded to your drop-in post... drawing highlighted distinction to the fact your comment focused on 'the acts' wasn't the appropriate emphasis that was attached to the original Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet wording - an emphasis that wasn't on the acts; an emphasis that was improperly attached to a culture. Surely you would want someone to properly advise you if you're just deciding to join a long-standing/running thread - surely! I do appreciate that, but I don't have to agree it's relevant every time. These are barbaric cultural practices. I have no problem with them being described as such, and I can't imagine anyone who agrees with me about the practices having a problem with the description just because they are from the culture where they seem most prevelant. I would imagine they would be trying to get away from such things, and would welcome such a warning to those who might seek to bring them with them. I would. Edit> Does anyone know who complained loudest about this? I do not, so I ask out of genuine curiosity. Edited September 9, 2015 by bcsapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 it's pretty bad when you resort to a strawman... to making shyte up! Are you yet another guy who just dropped into this thread... at the end of it? I'll drop in whenever I like, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I'll drop in whenever I like, thanks. and when you do so... with nothing more than the intent to falsely portray my statements/position, as you did... I will certainly respond to you, in kind, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 and when you do so... with nothing more than the intent to falsely portray my statements/position, as you did... I will certainly respond to you, in kind, thanks! It's a simple matter really - everyone should be against honour killings. There shouldn't need to be a qualification, or a reach for some kind, any kind of excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 It's a simple matter really - everyone should be against honour killings. There shouldn't need to be a qualification, or a reach for some kind, any kind of excuse. Which is what Trudeau was suggesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Which is what Trudeau was suggesting. I didn't know I was talking to Trudeau when I was asking for a simple denunciation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I didn't know I was talking to Trudeau when I was asking for a simple denunciation. Well it is his name in the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 It's a simple matter really - everyone should be against honour killings. There shouldn't need to be a qualification, or a reach for some kind, any kind of excuse. yeesh! Cause... this thread is full of pro-honour killing statements/positions, right? Oh wait... you only singled me out in that regard, right? When you make a statement like you did to me, this statement, "It's pretty bad when you're arguing against calling honour killing barbaric."... ya, I'm going to respond to your BS exactly as I did! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Well it is his name in the OP. I didn't comment on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 yeesh! Cause... this thread is full of pro-honour killing statements/positions, right? What is your position on honour killings? We can move on from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 What is your position on honour killings? We can move on from there. you know where you can stuff your strawman, hey! Let me ply my own: why are you attaching barbarism to a culture rather than to the acts stated within that statement from the Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet? Why are you doing that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 you know where you can stuff your strawman, hey! So you can't answer the question in a way that will be endearing to you, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 So you can't answer the question in a way that will be endearing to you, then? rightBackAtCha... so you can't answer the question in a way that will be endearing to you, then... endearing, or otherwise! Again: why are you attaching barbarism to a culture rather than to the acts stated within that statement from the Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet? Why are you doing that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I can speak out against honour killings and all forms of domestic violence without qualification. I'll now await your clear, unequivocal position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 He does not want to call barbaric practices , barbaric ,he does not want to bomb the most evil of the bunch and he has secret meetings with them, I wonder what he has promised them. Sharia law here we come? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts