Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I find it hard to see any distinction between islam and Roman Catholicism.

I think about a thousand years should do it.

Edit> I forgot the Spanish Inquisition.  Call it 500 years.

Edited by bcsapper
Posted
2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I think about a thousand years should do it.

I forgot the Spanish Inqisition.  Call it 500 years.

The Spanish Inquisition only killed a few thousand people. How many have been killed in Syria or Iraq or Iran or Sudan or Yemen or Bangladesh or Libya by Islamists?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
Just now, Argus said:

The Spanish Inquisition only killed a few thousand people. How many have been killed in Syria or Iraq or Iran or Sudan or Yemen or Bangladesh or Libya by Islamists?

I'm nothing if not generous in my comparisons.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I find it hard to see any distinction between islam and Roman Catholicism. 

Really? You have a pope who speaks of loving homosexuals even if they are sinners and then you have Islamic scholars who demand gays be killed. You don't see a distinction there?

  • Like 2

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I think about a thousand years should do it.

Edit> I forgot the Spanish Inquisition.  Call it 500 years.

Try the 1970's to the 1980's. Tell it to the young Catholic girl who comforted a British soldier as he lay dying in the street. Gerry Adams had her tortured and murdered. Tell it to the families who lost loved ones in pub bombings.

A Conservative stands for God, King and Country

Posted
4 minutes ago, Argus said:

The Spanish Inquisition only killed a few thousand people. How many have been killed in Syria or Iraq or Iran or Sudan or Yemen or Bangladesh or Libya by Islamists?

 

The Inquisition was ultimately the result of the Islamic invasion. The Jews got the worst from both sides...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Converso

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Try the 1970's to the 1980's. Tell it to the young Catholic girl who comforted a British soldier as he lay dying in the street. Gerry Adams had her tortured and murdered. Tell it to the families who lost loved ones in pub bombings.

The IRA were more about fighting the British than spreading the Catholic faith to the Unbeliever...by force if needed.

Posted
Just now, Queenmandy85 said:

Try the 1970's to the 1980's. Tell it to the young Catholic girl who comforted a British soldier as he lay dying in the street. Gerry Adams had her tortured and murdered. Tell it to the families who lost loved ones in pub bombings.

None of which had much of anything to do with religion. The fact the native Irish were Catholics and the invading British were Protestants didn't make the dispute religious in nature. Perhaps it was a justification centuries ago, on he part of the Protestants, though, and perhaps that was their justification for the oppression against the native Irish, but by the 1970s it was a dispute between two tribes over territory and power, not religion. Hell, the IRA were Marxists. 

  • Like 1

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

I also find it strange that we use treatment of homosexual people as s a yardstick, when we were persecuting them legally a generation ago, and still do in many Western countries.

Why? Would you rather we be more consistent with Islam?

Posted
2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I also find it strange that we use treatment of homosexual people as s a yardstick, when we were persecuting them legally a generation ago, and still do in many Western countries.

We do it with Women too.

Should we not?

Posted
8 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Try the 1970's to the 1980's. Tell it to the young Catholic girl who comforted a British soldier as he lay dying in the street. Gerry Adams had her tortured and murdered. Tell it to the families who lost loved ones in pub bombings.

I find this to be an extreme stretch.  I don't think you have any credibility comparing the Troubles in Ulster to today's Islamists.  The goal of a United Ireland was certainly set out along sectarian lines, but religion was not a factor.  If you came upon an illegal vehicle checkpoint in Ireland in the seventies, they weren't going to worry about whether or not you were a Catholic.  They wanted to know whether or not you were a Republican.

The girl you mention was not killed for any religious reason.  Nor were the pub bombing victims.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I also find it strange that we use treatment of homosexual people as s a yardstick, when we were persecuting them legally a generation ago, and still do in many Western countries.

It's the canary in the coal mine. And I doubt you would disagree if we were talking about a white western man.  That is, if we knew a white western man hated gays and thought they should all be locked up, we could fairly reliably determine what other social and political views he held. For example, he would likely be anti-abortion, in favour of the death penalty, and almost certainly highly prejudiced towards other minorities.

Similarly, a religious Muslim who feels gays should be in prison certainly supports a whole host of other anti-social viewpoints.

I might add that our 'persecution' of gays was pretty mild compared to what happens to them in the Muslim world today.

  • Like 1

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's sanctimonious to think ourselves so much better than others, when we haven't actually accepted homosexuality IMO.

I'm better, because I have.  I assume you are too.  So are all the Muslims who have. 

My country is much better than those that have laws that punish them.

My culture is much better than those cultures that persecute them.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's sanctimonious to think ourselves so much better than others, when we haven't actually accepted homosexuality IMO.

We haven't?  I'm willing to bet most progressives think themselves to be much better than, say, a gun-totin, pro-life, bible thumping Alabama Trump supporter who sneers at Jew S A, and thinks faggots ought to be run out of town on a rail. 

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
16 hours ago, dialamah said:

It's true that some Muslim *countries* impose jail or even death on homosexuals, but that's no more the fault of Islam than it is the fault of Christianity when it happens in Christian countries.    

Many of our immigrants come from places where hatred, imprisonment, and even public execution for gay people are considered the cultural norm. I have a hard time buying that people who have grown up in such cultures will magically transform into open-minded, tolerant, kind-hearted people when they hit our shores.

Hypothetically, if you found yourself relocated to a country where women are expected to stay in the home and not speak in public, would you embrace that new philosophy? I doubt your values are so malleable, and I doubt that people who arrive from places where puritan morality is paramount over individual freedoms are so malleable either.

At this point we're reaching an age where a large portion of Canada's puritan bigots are dying of old age... I'm not sure why people are in a rush to replace them with younger puritan bigots.

 

Regardless, I feel that a comparison of Islam vs Catholicism (or whatever else) is beside the point.

The important point is the right to criticize.  If somebody wants to write about the Catholic church's role in the sex abuse scandals that we saw over many years, they may do so without being accused of peddling hatred. If someone wants to write about the role of Catholic ideology in limiting reproductive options for women in Catholic 3rd world countries, they can discuss that issue without being accused of peddling hatred.  This is, as @carepov put it, valid criticism. We must make sure that valid criticism is never oppressed, either by law or by intimidation.

Right now, and long before the house motion condemning Islamophobia, people in the media treated the subject with kid-gloves. They walked on egg-shells, afraid to make any criticism of any issue involving Islam. 

 -k

  • Like 2

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ノ(° -°ノ)

Posted
20 minutes ago, kimmy said:

Many of our immigrants come from places where hatred, imprisonment, and even public execution for gay people are considered the cultural norm. I have a hard time buying that people who have grown up in such cultures will magically transform into open-minded, tolerant, kind-hearted people when they hit our shores.

And a lot of those people 'hit our shores" to escape the type of culture you speak of, so they don't want to recreate it here. Surveys have shown that, and integration typically improves generationally with whatever the culture of origin.  

Posted
1 minute ago, Omni said:

And a lot of those people 'hit our shores" to escape the type of culture you speak of, so they don't want to recreate it here. Surveys have shown that, and integration typically improves generationally with whatever the culture of origin.  

Bull.

Posted
2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Bull.

Sorry if you're having trouble digesting the information previously provided. I suggest back to your porch for some reading.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Omni said:

And a lot of those people 'hit our shores" to escape the type of culture you speak of, so they don't want to recreate it here. Surveys have shown that, and integration typically improves generationally with whatever the culture of origin.  

Those you are talking about, fine.  Those Kimmy is talking about, not fine.  It's not rocket science.

Posted
12 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Those you are talking about, fine.  Those Kimmy is talking about, not fine.  It's not rocket science.

Every culture has it's rotten apples. It's not rocket science.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,903
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    LinkSoul60
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Barquentine went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dave L earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Ana Silva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Scott75 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Political Smash went up a rank
      Rising Star
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...