Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just curious - how long do you intend to go back and forth with someone who obviously doesn't engage in good faith and is driven to conflate Islamic fundamentalism/radicalism with Islam-at-large while drawing false delineations between culture and religion as they pertain to shaping society?

again, the bad faith and conflation of, as you say, 'radical Islam/Islam-at-large'... is yours; on full display in the opening post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 354
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It is a cultural practice. And it's barbaric. Doesn't mean it's an assessment of the entire culture.

This is really getting tedious. If it wasn't a cultural practice you'd be fine calling it barbaric?

why do you continue to avoid answering the simple request asking you to list the cultures you're projecting upon... and the communities within those cultures... and how you differentiate barbarism for persons living within those communities... since you choose to project that barbarism upon the entire culture, upon the entire communities within those cultures, upon the entire populace within those communities? Perhaps you should take a permanent break from your tedium, hey!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you do it and ban reporters and will not talk about why what was said or promised, it makes people wonder. It shows not just Justin but the party itself is not ready.

Do you honestly think there's some secret plot where Trudeau supports Islamism? This is one of the most insane things I've heard on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you seriously suggesting the CBA isn't a left-wing organization, and that lawyers aren't an overwhelmingly left-wing bunch?

I'm quite satisfied to read your reactions... to see how you wigged out... to see you bite as I let the line out! I did not know the "overwhelmingly leftist" bench, prosecution, defense and academia fall into your sights!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you honestly think there's some secret plot where Trudeau supports Islamism? This is one of the most insane things I've heard on this forum.

the media weren't allowed in... who knows what secret plot was being hatched... in member PIK's imagination!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you honestly think there's some secret plot where Trudeau supports Islamism? This is one of the most insane things I've heard on this forum.

Trudeau clearly panders to Islamism. He has chastised Harper for describing "Islamicism" as a national security threat. He panders to, and (insincerely) prays with radical Muslims, and is courting their support. He has defended the wearing of niqabs and suggested that calling for their banning under certain circumstances amounts to a sort of "War on Women".

Nobody is pushing a Manchurian Candidate Narrative about him being a secret agent of the Muslim Brotherhood, so spare us the straw man argumentation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

why do you continue to avoid answering the simple request asking you to list the cultures you're projecting upon... and the communities within those cultures... and how you differentiate barbarism for persons living within those communities... since you choose to project that barbarism upon the entire culture, upon the entire communities within those cultures, upon the entire populace within those communities? Perhaps you should take a permanent break from your tedium, hey!

What don't you get about us saying that the act is barbaric? It's not a projection on the culture and/or religion of people who do these things. If a Canadian WASP practiced this it would be equally barbaric. It just so happens that in some cultures around the world that these things are culturally acceptable.

In Canada it's not, In Canada many see it as barbaric. The pamphlet is highlighting such things. Could "unacceptable" be more a more tactful approach? perhaps.

But I reject the implications or racism when a government says that mutilating a woman's genitals or killing a woman for dishonouring her family is abhorrent and barbaric behaviour.

Edited by Boges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What don't you get about us saying that the act is barbaric? It's not a projection on the culture and/or religion of people who do these things. If a Canadian WASP practiced this it would be equally barbaric. It just so happens that in some cultures around the world that these things are culturally acceptable.

hey! How did this thread get resurrected... you're not member Shady... it was his status update! In any case, I'd suggest you re-read the thread as you've apparently (certainly not purposely... uhhh, right) laid down a rather all too obvious strawman! No one (including the Liberal leader) disputed the acts as being 'barbaric'... perhaps you should start with my first reply to the OP where the clear distinction is drawn to the wording within that Harper Conservative government brochure/pamphlet. Most definitely the acts are not the focus of that wording/statement... the raised concerns are to how the association is made to culture. Since you have now stated, "it's not a projection (sic) on the culture and/or religion", then you and JT are in clear agreement! Good on ya, member 'Boges'... good on ya!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sure you did... you attempted to play it off against culture! Your comment is there... I quoted it... and replied to it. Would you like me to re-quote it?

Hey Waldo, do you think honor killing and female circumcision are barbaric?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They most definitely are barbaric.

I can't imagine, for the life of me, why anyone would want to spare the feelings of those who don't think so.

it doesn't help the merits of your comment if you're going to simply drop in without having actually followed the thread. The emphasis, per the original Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet wording, has never been on the acts... the emphasis has always been on how the word was improperly attached to a culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it doesn't help the merits of your comment if you're going to simply drop in without having actually followed the thread. The emphasis, per the original Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet wording, has never been on the acts... the emphasis has always been on how the word was improperly attached to a culture.

It was attached to the acts. Period. End of story. The politically correct became affronted as THEY attached it to a culture. Unless you're saying that such acts are the common culture of mideast Muslims, of course...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it doesn't help the merits of your comment if you're going to simply drop in without having actually followed the thread. The emphasis, per the original Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet wording, has never been on the acts... the emphasis has always been on how the word was improperly attached to a culture.

I always do that. I work. If they identified a culture they could simply reword it to say "anyone at all". But keep the barbaric. After all, it is barbaric.

And really, anyone at all who does it is barbaric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it doesn't help the merits of your comment if you're going to simply drop in without having actually followed the thread. The emphasis, per the original Harper Conservative brochure/pamphlet wording, has never been on the acts... the emphasis has always been on how the word was improperly attached to a culture.

It's pretty bad when you're arguing against calling honour killing barbaric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honour killing is called domestic violence in the western part of this world. There is no difference and Canada has plenty of marital killings.

Yeah and we don't often celebrate those either, do we (and no, they aren't the same thing)? What's your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah and we don't often celebrate those either, do we (and no, they aren't the same thing)? What's your point?

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Honour killings have a specific set of motivational requirements that are not present in the overarching term domestic violence (which no one here is trumpeting).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honour killings have a specific set of motivational requirements that are not present in the overarching term domestic violence (which no one here is trumpeting).

Requirements? Ok, here we go:

a) man snuffs out partner because she had an affair

B) man snuffs out partner because she wants a divorce

Would you call these honour killings or domestic violence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think of it however suits you just don't use that language in a document you will hand to all immigrants.

Why not? It will only offend those who don't deserve not to be offended.

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Requirements? Ok, here we go:

a) man snuffs out partner because she had an affair

B) man snuffs out partner because she wants a divorce

Would you call these honour killings or domestic violence?

I'd call them barbaric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already stated my case o this. It's offensive language to put into a government document, for no tangible effective purpose.

But the tangible effective purpose is to show people that we think such behaviour is barbaric! Such a purpose can only be achieved by stating such.

Unacceptable sounds like, spitting, or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the tangible effective purpose is to show people that we think such behaviour is barbaric! Such a purpose can only be achieved by stating such.

Unacceptable sounds like, spitting, or something.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...