Argus Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 13 hours ago, dialamah said: No, it wasn't. People do things that are illegal and to ask why FGM is happening in Canada "if it's illegal" is a stupid question. The push to make "Muslim" crime a special category all it's own is just more of the anti-Islamic rhetoric. I don't want to make 'muslim' a crime. I do want to stop bringing in tens of thousands of them from hotbeds of islamism every year and encourage the ones here to reform and assimilate, though. "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
Argus Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, dialamah said: What has culture to do with illegal practices? Are they more illegal if they're "cultural"? No, just more universal. "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
Guest Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, dialamah said: Yes, I know - simplicity is your byword. But it would mean that successive governments since 1996 or so are 'weak-kneed' all alike, which of course shoots the leftist/liberals/JT detractors down. Ok, stop talking now ... I HAVE TO GO! 1985, and yes, it would. Think of your animals. This site isn't going anywhere. Edited October 7, 2017 by bcsapper
Goddess Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, dialamah said: You are right; Canada could do a lot more to address the issue of FGM within Canada. But that still doesn't change the answer to the question "Why do people still perform FGM if it's illegal". People do illegal things because they want to do them regardless of what the law says. When people break the law and commit crimes for non-religious reasons, they know what they're doing is wrong. (Barring mental illness.) When I speed or jaywalk, I am well aware that what I'm doing is wrong/illegal and I accept that if I get caught, there will be consequences, justly deserved. I know WHY these things are wrong/illegal and I agree they should be, even if I occasionally speed or jaywalk. That is not the case when breaking the law is done for religious reasons. When people break the law for religious reasons they are putting their religious beliefs above the law, they are saying, they do not agree with the law and are saying they don't agree it should be illegal. They don't agree it is wrong and they don't care about the consequences because in their mind, they've done the RIGHT thing. When those religious beliefs are based on stone age interpretations of ancient books written by people who had no knowledge of modern advancements in medicine, this is especially egregious. As Sapper as said before, it is especially a waste of humanity. This is why many make the distinction between crime and religiously motivated crime. You see no difference. You feel religious rights are a nobler reason to break the law and many feel it is the worst reason to break the law, especially non-religious type people. I can understand someone who steals to feed their family if they are in dire straights. I don't understand someone who breaks the law because a religion tells them to. This is a lot more preventable. Its just sad and pathetic. 1 "There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe." ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~
drummindiver Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, dialamah said: What has culture to do with illegal practices? Are they more illegal if they're "cultural"? You are the one that equated fgm, a cultural practice, to these incongruous acts. Fgm is defended by culture making it a norm of society. Murder et al is not.
Rue Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 9 minutes ago, dialamah said: That is a good question, then, isn't it? Because clearly it is not being prosecuted nearly enough. I suppose someone will say "It's because our weak-kneed government is scared of offending Muslims", but I tend to doubt that - sounds too much like a simplistic thought processes that can't coordinate more than one concept at a time. I am guessing the lack is a combination of resources and intelligence from within the community itself, and perhaps a failure of how the law is written. I would like to look into that right now, but since it's already 10 am in my little corner of the world and I have yet to get dressed nor take my little furbabies out to pee, I shall have to try to get to it later. No its not that its not prosecuted enough. Its that people feel their own personal religious or cultural views take precedent over pre-existing Canadian laws. Its the same reason some men come to Canada and beat their wives and then say in their religion or cultural that is acceptable. People bring values with them that are not compatible with pre-existing Canadian ones. If we teach them their cultures are just fine, come to Canada and retain all your values and religious beliefs you bring with you, if they get that message, they are not going to feel the need to change and assimilate to certain Canadian values. Why skirt this friggin issue. Its obvious. People are not stupid. When they come to Canada if they are given the message they don't have to change, they can be whatever they want, Canada tolerates everything. then it means we will tolerate female circumcision. You think Justin Trudeau is standing at the airport or borders welcoming in the wave of people coming saying " Uh people, uh now u remember uh, no female circum uh cission uh when you are uh in Can uh duh u h. Can we stop skirting around the issue of this message we send that we are all things to anyone coming to Canada. The fact is the liberal message Trudeau presents is a lie. He's setting up people coming to Canada to fail in understanding what our values are. he's not willing to honestly discuss the limits of democracy and what we will NOT tolerate. No liberal wants to photo op himself saying anything that isn't feel good. Now how hard is it to admit certain religious or cultural practices are not compatible in a democratic progressive society? Its very hard on this board because when its done its called Islalophiobia. Is it always? Am I islamophobic because I challenge and call out Muslims whose religious practices condone it as being criminals? Am I an Islamophobe because I don't believe in multiple wives, defining women as subordinate or challenging the concept of a kafir (kuffar) in Islamic religion? Why is it when people challenge Islamic beliefs contrary to democratic values we hold as laws and basic rights in this country its Islamophobic. I am not an anti-Semite because I disagree with Ultra-Orthodox Jews that wear black bear hats or insist their wives cover their real head of hair in public. I don't think such values are conducive to a modern democratic society thank you. I don't agree with the Catholic Church's concept that women can not be Priests and Priests can not get married. It doesn't make me a Christianaphobe thank you. If someone murders someone because of a religious motive, yes I want to know.
drummindiver Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 46 minutes ago, GostHacked said: Rue, what's your take on male circumcision? What's the point? Fgm s only purpose is to reduce sexual pleasure for women....quite different than for men. Another tool to keep women under your thumb if that's your thing. 1
Argus Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 44 minutes ago, GostHacked said: Rue, what's your take on male circumcision? The principal differences between male and female circumcision are the reasons and results. The perceived reason for male circumcision is hygienic. And it results in no dysfunction and no reduced pleasure from the act of sex. The reason for female circumcision is specifically to prevent girls/women from obtaining pleasure, which it is quite successful at. It is done out of a belief that females are whores if left to their own devices, and so their sexuality and everything about their bodies must be strictly controlled by the man of the family. By removing the clitoris the female will have much less interest in fornication and adultery and so will present less danger of dishonor to her family and will focus herself on her duties. 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
Goddess Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 26 minutes ago, GostHacked said: And with males is it done with anesthetic? So why don't we just use anesthetic on girls then? If you accept one you accept both. Or you denounce both. Which I am doing here, denouncing both. Your questions show that you dont understand the differences in the procedures. Male circumcision removes skin and is done with the idea of "cleanliness in mind. Female circumcision removes an organ from the body. An organ that is vitally important to a women enjoying sex. A circumcised male can still orgasm. A circumcised female will have no enjoyment from sex. It is not done for cleanliness, it is done to control women and their sexuality. For women, it's also done much later in life with no anaesthetic, so much more of a trauma. Maybe a little research is in order. And Yes, I'm aware there is lesser forms of FGM where not so much is cut away. Doesn't change the motivation for a useless, painful, humiliating, dangerous procedure. I'm against both, as elective procedures. Sometimes the male one needs to be done for medical reasons. "There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe." ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~
hot enough Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Rue said: Why is it when people challenge Islamic beliefs contrary to democratic values we hold as laws and basic rights in this country its Islamophobic. Because the focus is on Muslims. That focus has come to be because of the lies of the US/UK/... and even the Israeli government, which is a close partner of the war criminal/terrorist USA. All these criminal governments falsely accusing others of crimes they didn't commit. All these folks here rant only about things Muslims do that many others also do. I've given the examples many times - Amish, Hutterites, Mennonites, ... . Dollars to donuts, there is no thread about any of these above mentioned groups who have much the same "issues" that don't get the Islamaphobes all riled up.
Guest Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 23 minutes ago, hot enough said: Because the focus is on Muslims. That focus has come to be because of the lies of the US/UK/... and even the Israeli government, which is a close partner of the war criminal/terrorist USA. All these criminal governments falsely accusing others of crimes they didn't commit. All these folks here rant only about things Muslims do that many others also do. I've given the examples many times - Amish, Hutterites, Mennonites, ... . Dollars to donuts, there is no thread about any of these above mentioned groups who have much the same "issues" that don't get the Islamaphobes all riled up. i started a thread about the Amish driving one of their buggies into a skyscraper in New York but no one seemed interested. Probably because the oats never ignited. I never bothered after that. Edited October 7, 2017 by bcsapper
eyeball Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Rue said: I am no sure why I bother to respond to such drivel but I will. The fact that Eye makes a Royal proclamation that he believes discriminatory views about the Islamic religion began after 9-11 That's not what I said you fricken moron. What I said is; Islamophobia in the modern racist sense didn't start until shortly after 9/11. The drivel you're citing, like Oftenwrong, was nothing compared to what is happening now. Quote There is no time line because Eye ball decides to arbitrarily draw one after 9-11. No that's not what I've done at all. What I've done is underscore the period of time you and lying racists have very deliberately, studiously ignored. Everything you write and say in the absence of that is drivel. Edited October 7, 2017 by eyeball A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
hot enough Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Goddess said: That is not the case when breaking the law is done for religious reasons. When people break the law for religious reasons they are putting their religious beliefs above the law, they are saying, they do not agree with the law and are saying they don't agree it should be illegal. You can pretend all you want that you are being evenhanded, Goddess. Your posts, overall, don't convey that at all.
hot enough Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 15 minutes ago, bcsapper said: i started a thread about the Amish driving one of their buggies into a skyscraper in New York but no one seemed interested. I never bothered after that. Probably because the oats never ignited. How not even droll. And to boot you highlight how you can't address things intellectually. Edited October 7, 2017 by hot enough
hot enough Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 17 minutes ago, eyeball said: That's not what I said you fricken moron. What I said is; Islamophobia in the modern racist sense didn't start until shortly after 9/11. And you are completely accurate in that assessment.
Guest Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, hot enough said: How not even droll. And to boot you highlight how you can't address things intellectually. The post I responded to in the case above might have been one of the most egregious examples of intellectual cowardice on record here, if it weren't so obvious a troll.
Guest Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, eyeball said: What I said is; Islamophobia in the modern racist sense didn't start until shortly after 9/11. Justifiable horror at the religion and its excesses was probably brought into focus at that point, it is true. After that, the left needed a word to deflect from such focus. Islamophobia, in the modern, racist sense, was born, yes. Edited October 7, 2017 by bcsapper
eyeball Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, bcsapper said: Justifiable horror at the religion and its excesses was probably brought into focus at that point, it is true. No. These were brought out by our actions. Quote After that, the left needed a word to deflect from such focus. Islamophobia, in the modern, racist sense, was born, yes. No the left needed something into which the noses of the assholes who appear to think provoking Islam was a good idea could be rubbed. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Guest Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 Just now, eyeball said: No. These were brought out by our actions. No the left needed something into which the noses of the assholes who appear to think provoking Islam was a good idea could be rubbed. Basic disagreement here then. I think the left needed something that those assholes who refuse to acknowledge barbarity in someone who doesn't look just like them could hide behind.
dialamah Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Goddess said: 1) This is why many make the distinction between crime and religiously motivated crime. You see no difference. 2) You feel religious rights are a nobler reason to break the law 3) and many feel it is the worst reason to break the law, especially non-religious type people. 4) I can understand someone who steals to feed their family if they are in dire straights. 5) I don't understand someone who breaks the law because a religion tells them to. 6) This is a lot more preventable. Its just sad and pathetic. At the skytrain waiting for sister so may end this abruptly, but: 1) True. 2) False. 3) True 4) Me too. 5) I don't understand anyone who deliberately hurts another person, for any reason other than self defense or family defense. I can characterize some crimes as more horrific than others, but between crimes of similar barbarity, the motives seem equally stupid and incomprehensible. 6) Agree. Edited October 7, 2017 by dialamah
hot enough Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 36 minutes ago, bcsapper said: The post I responded to in the case above might have been one of the most egregious examples of intellectual cowardice on record here, if it weren't so obvious a troll. But you, bcsapper, accusing me of intellectual cowardice, found yourself completely unable to address that in any intellectual fashion. Rather you went to a typical say nothing post, not even droll humor. You didn't even quote the post that has gotten you so upset. Do you even know the meaning of 'might'? What has got your knickers in such a twist, the fact that you are terrible at humor or that you aren't very intellectually up front/brave?
eyeball Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: Basic disagreement here then. I think the left needed something that those assholes who refuse to acknowledge barbarity in someone who doesn't look just like them could hide behind. What isn't there to acknowledge? Islam has some very barbaric ways about it. Terrorism is barbaric too. It's just that lefties, at least this one, are convinced that democracies that sic dictatorships and warlords on people are the lowest form of organized barbarians on the planet bar none. What we did is worse, especially in light of the shit-storm it's caused. People who pretend we're innocent as lambs are just plain old fashioned assholes. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Guest Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, hot enough said: But you, bcsapper, accusing me of intellectual cowardice, found yourself completely unable to address that in any intellectual fashion. Rather you went to a typical say nothing post, not even droll humor. You didn't even quote the post that has gotten you so upset. Do you even know the meaning of 'might'? What has got your knickers in such a twist, the fact that you are terrible at humor or that you aren't very intellectually up front/brave? It's because I didn't think you were serious. I didn't think you were joking, necessarily, more just trolling for the sake of it. Now that I know you were actually comparing the actions of the Amish to those of Muslims I'm tempted just to take a couple of steps backwards, while watching you for any sudden moves.
Guest Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, eyeball said: What isn't there to acknowledge? Islam has some very barbaric ways about it. Terrorism is barbaric too. It's just that lefties, at least this one, are convinced that democracies that sic dictatorships and warlords on people are the lowest form of organized barbarians on the planet bar none. What we did is worse, especially in light of the shit-storm it's caused. People who pretend we're innocent as lambs are just plain old fashioned assholes. If that were the case the word would see a lot less use.
hot enough Posted October 7, 2017 Report Posted October 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, bcsapper said: It's because I didn't think you were serious. I didn't think you were joking, necessarily, more just trolling for the sake of it. Now that I know you were actually comparing the actions of the Amish to those of Muslims I'm tempted just to take a couple of steps backwards, while watching you for any sudden moves. The never say anything substantive guy strikes again.
Recommended Posts