Islamophobia in Canada

[Scotty]

This is why the word "bigot" come up. You post the very worse aspects of Sharia law, as if that was the *only* thing Sharia law. I point out that is a lot of latitude and you come back and still insist that "it's all just the same one (bad) thing". That is bigotted thinking.

My brother-in-law does not pay interest on any loans he has outstanding. He had to sign a multi-page marriage contract that protected my sister when they married, including her right to seek divorce and her right to property. He is obligated to care for his wife (or wives if he had more than one), his children, his parents, his family; as the eldest son, this requirement that he take care of younger siblings is taken very seriously. He is obligated to help those less fortunate than he is, regardless of their religion. He is not allowed to force his religion on others, he is not allowed to beat his wife, he is not allowed to harm innocents or non-believers. That all derives from the Sharia law he follows.

Under sharia's civil code, a woman's testimony is worth half of a man's. A man can divorce his wife by repudiation, whereas a woman must give justifications, some of which are difficult to prove. Child custody reverts to the father at a preset age; women who remarry lose custody of their children even before then; and sons inherit twice the share of daughters.

An example of the kind of decision that is contrary to UK law and public policy is the custody of children. Under British law, the child's best interest is the court's paramount consideration. In a sharia court the custody of children reverts to the father at a preset age regardless of the circumstances. In divorce proceedings, too, civil law takes into account the merits of the case and divides assets based on the needs and intentions of both parties. Under sharia law, only men have the right to unilateral divorce. If a woman manages to obtain a divorce without her husband's consent, she will lose the sum of money (or dowry) that was agreed to at the time of marriage.

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jul/05/sharia-law-religious-courts

[Guest]

No that does not make them Muslim just like Fred Phelps and his followers are not Christians.

Yes they are. They are just pretty dodgy Christians, is all.

[-1=e^ipi]

No that does not make them Muslim just like Fred Phelps and his followers are not Christians.

Fred Phelps is Christian. He believes in God and the holy trinity.

And belief in the Shahada is the basis for being muslim. That's why ISIS and Saudi Arabia have it on their flags.

[dialamah]

You said they wouldn't charge interest on a loan.

If you are a young girl forced to marry, and apostate or gay man killed, do you really care about saving some interest on a loan?

Can you really compare theses tenests, honestly?

No, I wouldn't care about interest on a loan, obviously.

My brother-in-law would also NOT force a young girl to marry, nor would he kill an apostate or a gay man, because his version of Sharia specifically forbids it. Nor would his government, which bases some of its law on Sharia - they do not force or allow young girls to marry, nor do they kill homosexuals.

In his country, the LEGAL age for marriage is 18 - same as in Canada. Girls being married at much younger ages still does happen in poor, rural areas, but the incidence of such marriages has been declining for years. In Canada, girls as young as 16 can be married with parental and/or judge's consent.

Although, I knew of a girl who, at 13, was flown to a country outside of Canada to marry the 19-year-old who got her pregnant. This was a white, Canadian family of Christian origin, though non-practicing.

The point is, Sharia law is not entirely composed of the horrific things you've posted. And, even for the horrific things you've posted, the majority of Muslim countries and majority of Muslim people do not accept them as part of their version of Sharia law You are assuming just the opposite.

[GostHacked]

Fred Phelps is Christian. He believes in God and the holy trinity.

And belief in the Shahada is the basis for being muslim. That's why ISIS and Saudi Arabia have it on their flags.

Yes they are. They are just pretty dodgy Christians, is all.

No, they are not Christians. They are fundamentalist extremists. And because Phelps and his crew exists does not mean they are right, and it does not mean all Christians are like Phelps and his followers. This is the same approach you must take to radicalized Muslims, they are no longer Muslims. Even Muslims will tell you that if you care to listen at all.

But if you think Phelps is a Christian, then that is more a problem with how you view things. If I go with the argument that all Muslims support Sharia, then all Christians support Phelps' views, which we know is not the case. Why even make this argument?

[Guest]

No, they are not Christians. They are fundamentalist extremists. And because Phelps and his crew exists does not mean they are right, and it does not mean all Christians are like Phelps and his followers. This is the same approach you must take to radicalized Muslims, they are no longer Muslims. Even Muslims will tell you that if you care to listen at all.

But if you think Phelps is a Christian, then that is more a problem with how you view things. If I go with the argument that all Muslims support Sharia, then all Christians support Phelps' views, which we know is not the case. Why even make this argument?

They are Christians. They get to decide that, not you. It's the same with Muslims. Any Muslim who thinks the death penalty is a suitable punishment for blasphemy thinks that because he is a Muslim, and he thinks that's what Muslims believe. You don't get to tell him he's not a Muslim. You only get to tell him he's wrong.

Same with Phelp's crowd. They don't come by their beliefs from the back of a cereal box, no matter how much they differ from mainstream Christian beliefs.

Such is the problem with religious beliefs.

Edited November 22, 2015 by bcsapper

[drummindiver]

No, they are not Christians. They are fundamentalist extremists. And because Phelps and his crew exists does not mean they are right, and it does not mean all Christians are like Phelps and his followers. This is the same approach you must take to radicalized Muslims, they are no longer Muslims. Even Muslims will tell you that if you care to listen at all.

But if you think Phelps is a Christian, then that is more a problem with how you view things. If I go with the argument that all Muslims support Sharia, then all Christians support Phelps' views, which we know is not the case. Why even make this argument?

That would be sweet, and nice, but there is one Phelps family and a small contingent of fellow loonies.

There is an estimated 500,000,000 radical muslims.

Teensy bit of difference.

[GostHacked]

That would be sweet, and nice, but there is one Phelps family and a small contingent of fellow loonies.

There is an estimated 500,000,000 radical muslims.

Teensy bit of difference.

Estimated by you. Got any real stats to show me?

[Big Guy]

I state views on here I state in everyday life.

You are whatever you believe you are. It only changes if you care what others think.

If you want to test your views, write some letters to the editor to a few newspapers (you have to identify yourself or they will not publish it) testing what others think. Quite possibly, the publication may refuse to publish your views. If they do publish, subsequent letters and or phone calls will let you know how your views have been received.

Personally, I have no problem with what you think and how you see things. That is you - you have that right. I suspect that different people have different views and sensibilities. I do not agree with your views (and a few others) and opine as such when I feel that you (they) may be crossing a line without realizing it. If you ignore my opinion then I stop. I have no intention of trying to change your mind, demean what you have to say or insult you.

We obviously have very different views towards immigration, refugees. Islam and Muslims.

So be it.

[Bryan]

Sorry, wrong Testament? I'm not up on that stuff.

Basically. The Old Testament is important history for Christians to learn, but for the most part it does not apply to them instructionally. Jesus came to fulfil the old law. He laid down his own life as the final sacrifice for humanity. All of his teaching strictly forbid enforcing the old laws on your own accord. Vengeance is the strict purview of God and God alone, humans are not to carry out ANY form of enforcement.

[GostHacked]

They are Christians. They get to decide that, not you. It's the same with Muslims. Any Muslim who thinks the death penalty is a suitable punishment for blasphemy thinks that because he is a Muslim, and he thinks that's what Muslims believe. You don't get to tell him he's not a Muslim. You only get to tell him he's wrong.

Same with Phelp's crowd. They don't come by their beliefs from the back of a cereal box, no matter how much they differ from mainstream Christian beliefs.

Such is the problem with religious beliefs.

I can definitely tell them they are not a Muslim or a Christian and tell them they are wrong at the same time. It's not like they have to believe me.

[Guest]

I can definitely tell them they are not a Muslim or a Christian and tell them they are wrong at the same time. It's not like they have to believe me.

Well, sure, that's not what I meant. You can tell them they are marshmallows if you want.

[dialamah]

That would be sweet, and nice, but there is one Phelps family and a small contingent of fellow loonies.

There is an estimated 500,000,000 radical muslims.

Teensy bit of difference.

Yeah, funny how you took that 500,000,000 from a post I made in which I said "1 Billion Muslims, give or take". Nice to know you accept me as an 'expert' - albeit only when it suits you.

If that's not the case, then please - show some actual statistics, real numbers, etc., which prove 500,000,000 radical Muslims - radical meaning they'd remove hands for theft, kill non-believers, stone adulters and murder homosexuals, or who belief that a Caliphate has been already established in Syria.

Radical does not mean they believe that homosexuality is wrong, or that gay marriages should not be allowed; there are plenty of Christians who believe the same thing. Even child marriage is common enough among Christians to take it out of the 'radical Islam' definition.

So please - prove what you are saying.

[-1=e^ipi]

No, they are not Christians. They are fundamentalist extremists.

They are both.

Even Muslims will tell you that if you care to listen at all.

Some Muslims will also tell me that Mohamed ascended to heaven on a flying horse. That doesn't make it true.

Also, some non-extremist muslims think that ISIS are muslim, such as Tarek Fatah.

ISIS are muslim. They believe in the shahada. It's that simple. Yet religious apologists like you keep trying to label all these extremists as non-religious, which puts blame on non-religious people and doesn't help deal with the issue of the creation of religious extremists.

[Bryan]

Same with Phelp's crowd. They don't come by their beliefs from the back of a cereal box, no matter how much they differ from mainstream Christian beliefs.

For the most part, they do. They differ from mainstream Christianity specifically because what they do is not how Jesus taught his followers to behave.

Even if you did include them as an example of the worse that Christianity has to offer, you should actually make the direct comparison: When Christian extremists are called to action, they make a sign. When Islamic extremists are called to action, they kill people.

[ReeferMadness]

Basically. The Old Testament is important history for Christians to learn, but for the most part it does not apply to them instructionally. Jesus came to fulfil the old law. He laid down his own life as the final sacrifice for humanity. All of his teaching strictly forbid enforcing the old laws on your own accord. Vengeance is the strict purview of God and God alone, humans are not to carry out ANY form of enforcement.

Oh. So the ten commandments don't apply anymore? And all those "pretend Christians" who oppose homosexuality and believe in the death penalty aren't really Christians at all?

And if humans are not to carry out any form of enforcement, "real" Christians don't believe in the rule of law?

Are there any actual Christians (by your definition) out there?

[-1=e^ipi]

Any Muslim who thinks the death penalty is a suitable punishment for blasphemy thinks that because he is a Muslim, and he thinks that's what Muslims believe. You don't get to tell him he's not a Muslim. You only get to tell him he's wrong.

Why are you using male pronouns here?

Seems like a microaggression against men and a denial of female agency.

Edited November 22, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[Bryan]

Oh. So the ten commandments don't apply anymore?

Only in the broad sense that they are a good guideline by which to live your life. For the most part, they are good guideline for anyone, regardless of their faith (or lack thereof).

And all those "pretend Christians" who oppose homosexuality and believe in the death penalty aren't really Christians at all?

Nothing pretend about it. Any real Christian would be opposed to homosexuality. They're just not supposed to dish out punishments for it. Love the sinner, hate the sin.

And if humans are not to carry out any form of enforcement, "real" Christians don't believe in the rule of law?

Absolutely, Christians believe in the rule of law. The authorities decide upon and carry out the punishments, not the citizens on the street.

Are there any actual Christians (by your definition) out there?

Millions of them.

[ReeferMadness]

Only in the broad sense that they are a good guideline by which to live your life. For the most part, they are good guideline for anyone, regardless of their faith (or lack thereof).

And do you have a an authoritative Christian source that says that the ten commandments are only a "good guideline" rather than God's commandments? Or did you just invent your own branch of Christianity?

Nothing pretend about it. Any real Christian would be opposed to homosexuality.

So, please quote me the gospel where Jesus said that homosexuality is a sin.

Absolutely, Christians believe in the rule of law. The authorities decide upon and carry out the punishments, not the citizens on the street.

But you said yourself that "humans are not to carry out ANY form of enforcement." Or do you think that the courts are not human?

[Bryan]

And do you have a an authoritative Christian source that says that the ten commandments are only a "good guideline" rather than God's commandments? Or did you just invent your own branch of Christianity?

It's the only type of Christianity that there is: Jesus came to fullfil the law. The OT no longer applies as "law" for followers of Christ.

So, please quote me the gospel where Jesus said that homosexuality is a sin.

All of the Gospels have quite a bit on this really. If you want to save some time, just read Matthew. In multiple instances, he says that marriage is between a man and a woman (only), and that any sexual behaviour of any kind outside of marriage is a sin. Nope, he doesn't get into the gory details, my hetero sin is equally as bad and in need of repentance as the other guy's gay sin.

But you said yourself that "humans are not to carry out ANY form of enforcement." Or do you think that the courts are not human?

Enforcement of God's laws. Carrying out punishments in God's name. Courts can make their own laws, and yes, we are supposed to follow them.

[ReeferMadness]

It's the only type of Christianity that there is: Jesus came to fullfil the law. The OT no longer applies as "law" for followers of Christ.

I asked for an authoritative Christian source that says the OT no longer applies. Unless you're really the pope, you are not an authoritative source.

All of the Gospels have quite a bit on this really. If you want to save some time, just read Matthew. In multiple instances, he says that marriage is between a man and a woman (only), and that any sexual behaviour of any kind outside of marriage is a sin. Nope, he doesn't get into the gory details, my hetero sin is equally as bad and in need of repentance as the other guy's gay sin.

OK, I'm not a biblical expert - but you don't appear to be either. I'd just like to see the quote so we can judge for ourselves.

Enforcement of God's laws. Carrying out punishments in God's name. Courts can make their own laws, and yes, we are supposed to follow them.

Soooo, we can make a law which happens to be the same as God's law and enforce it but we can't enforce God's laws. Funny, that almost sounds like separation of church and state. Which is funny because I've been saying all along that the main difference between Christianity and Islam is that there are no Christian theocracies anymore. And when there were Christian theocracies, some of them were every bit as nasty as ISIS.

[GostHacked]

They are both.

Some Muslims will also tell me that Mohamed ascended to heaven on a flying horse. That doesn't make it true.

Also, some non-extremist muslims think that ISIS are muslim, such as Tarek Fatah.

ISIS are muslim. They believe in the shahada. It's that simple. Yet religious apologists like you keep trying to label all these extremists as non-religious, which puts blame on non-religious people and doesn't help deal with the issue of the creation of religious extremists.

I am no apologist for extremism or terrorism. I don't care what religion one decides to wear. Once they engage in terrorism, they are no longer engaging in spirituality or religion. They THINK they are religious, but they are not.

[Guest]

I am no apologist for extremism or terrorism. I don't care what religion one decides to wear. Once they engage in terrorism, they are no longer engaging in spirituality or religion. They THINK they are religious, but they are not.

Unfortunately, that they think they are religious matters a lot more than you thinking they are not.

[GostHacked]

Unfortunately, that they think they are religious matters a lot more than you thinking they are not.

They are not religious. What they are promoting is not religion, it is tyranny and extremism. It does matter what we think. Because if we think they are Islam, then we start to think ALL of them are like this. Ditch the generalizations and we can star to have a real conversation about all of this.

Don't forget, what we see today is a result of western intervention some years ago... let me recap for you... take it from these people ...

Let's take it from the words of another extremist.

What changed?

Religion or geo-politics?

[Bryan]

I asked for an authoritative Christian source that says the OT no longer applies. Unless you're really the pope, you are not an authoritative source.

The authoritative source is the new testament. Jesus came to fulfil the law. Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. The Pope is not an authority on anything. Catholics do whatever they do, they do not speak for Christianity as a whole. A LOT of their teachings are extra-biblical.

OK, I'm not a biblical expert - but you don't appear to be either. I'd just like to see the quote so we can judge for ourselves.

I would not consider myself an expert, but I have read it cover to cover many times. Unlike you, I actually do know what's in it, and more importantly, I understand the context under which each book was written.

Soooo, we can make a law which happens to be the same as God's law and enforce it but we can't enforce God's laws.

The rules themselves might overlap, but context matters. Enforcing biblical prescription in God's name is not for citizens to take upon themselves. That does not in any way affect what laws governments might choose to enact or enforce.

Funny, that almost sounds like separation of church and state.

Separation of Church and State is definitely a Christian principle. Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.

Which is funny because I've been saying all along that the main difference between Christianity and Islam is that there are no Christian theocracies anymore. And when there were Christian theocracies, some of them were every bit as nasty as ISIS.

There never were any "Christian" theocracies. The Romans took advantage of the fact that their citizens couldn't read, and led them into all kinds of things by claiming it was God's work. Once the Bible was actually available for the people to read, they couldn't get away with that anymore.