Islamophobia in Canada

[kimmy]

Guys! The causes of the Crusades and WWII really has nothing at all to do with the topic at hand.

-k

[On Guard for Thee]

On Guard in 3207 you supposedly provided a list of elected Muslim women but the majority were not elected.

As well the original reference was from Cyber suggesting as perhaps you and Hudson Jones have tried, that Muslim women get elected to leadership positions in the Muslim world as do women in the West.

Well to start with aside from Golda Maer (oh my Goid she's a Zionist), Indira Ghandi, Mrs. Mrs. Merkel, the Danish PM, Icelandic PM's, etc., and Maggie Thatcher, we could all agree that in the West at one point women were not allowed to vote and their entry into politics took some time. Now we have Canada with half the cabinet, women.

Its not the point. The point was in Islamic society today women are still treated as inferior. Trotting out some names of Queens or two former Premiers doesn't change that and its ridiculous to suggest it can be used to suggest criticizing Islamic society for its views on women is unjustified.

Its a pretty flimsy attempt to try talk away Islamic religious treatment of women by trotting out the name of some Queens and most important, the Middle East has none and will probably not have women leaders for the considerable future. If you think Iran and Saudi Arabia and the puppet satellite Muslim states they control are going to put women in positions of power, you are in complete and utter denial.

Once again, the reference was to Muslim women as leaders in the world. Not specifically the ME. You seem to think the ME is the only place Muslims live. Here's a hint, Arab countries make up about 20% of Muslims worldwide.

[Boges]

Once again, the reference was to Muslim women as leaders in the world. Not specifically the ME. You seem to think the ME is the only place Muslims live. Here's a hint, Arab countries make up about 20% of Muslims worldwide.

That's the part of the world where we see problems and large scale conflicts that are exclusively religious conflicts.

[On Guard for Thee]

That's the part of the world where we see problems and large scale conflicts that are exclusively religious conflicts.

That may be true, but beside the point here.

[Hal 9000]

Do you really think WW2 was a religious conflict. Sure the Nazi's hated the Jews but Axis and Allies weren't fighting each other because they believed it's what God wanted.

The current conflict in Syria/Iraq is 100% a sectarian conflict. Which is why I'm hesitant to put too much blame on the West. They just relieved the Sunni's in Iraq of power so the Shiites too over leading to the Sunni movement ISIS. It's a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

A more contemporary Western comparison would be the troubles in Ireland. But I don't think the Irish were blaming other parts of the world for their religious squabbles.

Yeah, it's been the Sunni's vs. the Shiite's in a religious war since...well, just after Mohammed's time. And to compare a war for political reasons to a religious war like this is naive for sure - even sheer ignorance.

[cybercoma]

Do you really think WW2 was a religious conflict.

Qualifiers now? It has to be a "religious" conflict, as though religion and politics aren't inseparably tied in much of the Islamosphere. Now it has to be exclusively a "religious" conflict. Nevermind, religion being used to get impressionable young men on boats to sail into the unknown and occupy territories in the colonial era. Nevermind, religious dogma being the reason for many wars in the occident for centuries and the murder of scientists for their "radical" ideas. Hell, if it wasn't for Muslims hundreds of years ago, a good deal of our modern scientific knowledge may have never come to pass. It's almost exclusively because of Muslims that we know anything about Aristotle.

Look, saying the Middle East has been at war for the last 1400 years is meaningless drivel. That's my point. The West has been at war for the last 1400 years as well. Murdering people to colonize their lands, murdering people because they won't accept the Christian god, Murdering people because they're Jews or gay or disabled, enslaving people to this day for capitalist ends, these are the sins of the West. To say that the Middle East has been at war for 1400 as though that's somehow different than us shows a laughably ignorant view of history.

[cybercoma]

Yeah, it's been the Sunni's vs. the Shiite's in a religious war since...well, just after Mohammed's time. And to compare a war for political reasons to a religious war like this is naive for sure - even sheer ignorance.

Sure. I guess we'll just ignore the car bombs in Ireland. The Muslims are special. Their violence is somehow more violent.

[Keepitsimple]

What a stupid topic. There is no more "phobia" attached to Islam or Muslims than there is to the supposed LBG "Homophobia". Very, very few people have an irrational fear (that's what a phobia is) of Muslims or Gays. Attaching "phobia" to Islam, Muslims, or Gays serves as a hammer to silence anyone who dares to be "politically incorrect" by holding views that don't align with theirs - no matter your personal values or their personal values - or the political situation or cost. Ironically, those who spew "phobia" insults tend to be the most exclusionary - refusing to accept rational arguments as to why people might hold differing views.

[cybercoma]

Of course there's phobia, it's been shown here and in other threads that people hold Muslims and Muslim nations to a different, higher standard than they hold the West and westerners. People are more afraid of the same or similar things done by Muslims and done in the Muslim world than they are of those things being done here. You get people rallying behind women's rights and rights for gay people, when they clearly in other threads have crapped all over those ideals as PC garbage, the purview of "bleeding heart liberals" and "social justice warriors." Yet, suddenly it's important to these people when it's an issue in the Muslim world. The phobia of all things Muslim is very clear on this forum.

[Boges]

Of course there's phobia, it's been shown here and in other threads that people hold Muslims and Muslim nations to a different, higher standard than they hold the West and westerners. People are more afraid of the same or similar things done by Muslims and done in the Muslim world than they are of those things being done here. You get people rallying behind women's rights and rights for gay people, when they clearly in other threads have crapped all over those ideals as PC garbage, the purview of "bleeding heart liberals" and "social justice warriors." Yet, suddenly it's important to these people when it's an issue in the Muslim world. The phobia of all things Muslim is very clear on this forum.

No it's a false moral comparison. No nation is perfect in regards to civil rights or social justice. But it's not phobic to see that in other parts of the world you can be executed for your sexual preference and women have to hide their face because they say so, and be offended by those practices.

Defending those practices by saying, well yeah but Gay marriage was only legalized in Canada a decade ago so Canadians can't say shit about countries that still say it's illegal and/or is a capital crime is insane.

A Western Country has a pay gap so people can't say anything another country that bans women from driving or wearing anything but a mask in public is archaic.

It's not phobia to point out that these practices are appalling.

Now it is phobia to insist that all people within this identifiable group are all the same and should be treated as such. But that's certainly not what I'm doing.

Edited February 1, 2016 by Boges

[waldo]

What a stupid topic. There is no more "phobia" attached to Islam or Muslims than there is to the supposed LBG "Homophobia". Very, very few people have an irrational fear (that's what a phobia is) of Muslims or Gays. Attaching "phobia" to Islam, Muslims, or Gays serves as a hammer to silence anyone who dares to be "politically incorrect" by holding views that don't align with theirs - no matter your personal values or their personal values - or the political situation or cost. Ironically, those who spew "phobia" insults tend to be the most exclusionary - refusing to accept rational arguments as to why people might hold differing views.

or perhaps... as one of the textbook definitions of phobia is simply 'an aversion to', the degree of that aversion is what may or may not manifest into (degrees of) anxiety and fear... and further extensions on severity and impact on life from there. Perhaps to some the crux of challenging the name/label/definition is the rationale behind the aversion... as in, is it rational? In this particular context, this thread, for those concerned over a word 'phobia', they should be more focused particularly pointed back inward with practical extension and application, to Canada... and attempt to actually explain how their aversion is... rational!

Edited February 1, 2016 by waldo

[Big Guy]

....

Those people who burned that village in Nigeria today were Muslim. They were also male, and African. Those are all pretty large groups, but it would be pointless identifying them as male and/or African, because that's not why they burned the village. It doesn't mean all Muslims burned the village.

Interesting. "taxi drivers have been raping young girls". Joe is a taxi driver therefore Joe rapes young girls.

Is that the logic?

Or - Those people who burned that village in Nigeria today were Muslim. They were also male, and African. Therefore, African males who are Muslim burn villages in Nigeria. WRONG!

Collectively, all members of a group do not do the same thing. That is where the racism and bigotry begins. Because of a prejudicial view of a group, one member of a group does something that you do not like then you attribute the same negative behavior to all members of the group. That is wrong. That is prejudice, racism (if based on race) and bigotry.

[On Guard for Thee]

No it's a false moral comparison. No nation is perfect in regards to civil rights or social justice. But it's not phobic to see that in other parts of the world you can be executed for your sexual preference and women have to hide their face because they say so, and be offended by those practices.

Defending those practices by saying, well yeah but Gay marriage was only legalized in Canada a decade ago so Canadians can't say shit about countries that still say it's illegal and/or is a capital crime is insane.

A Western Country has a pay gap so people can't say anything another country that bans women from driving or wearing anything but a mask in public is archaic.

It's not phobia to point out that these practices are appalling.

Now it is phobia to insist that all people within this identifiable group are all the same and should be treated as such. But that's certainly not what I'm doing.

It kinda sounds like you are trying to identify all Muslims as equal to the relative few who live in Saudi. That's the phobia seeping back in I'd say.

[Boges]

It kinda sounds like you are trying to identify all Muslims as equal to the relative few who live in Saudi. That's the phobia seeping back in I'd say.

When in my post did I say "all"? I made a point in my post to say it isn't all Muslims and any claim that it is, is phobia.

That's the game you guys play. You accuse any critiques of certain elements of Islam as a blanket condemnation.

I think the practices I highlight are more common than just in one country but how common, I can't say. But to ignore this behaviour as an rogue element within the religion is of folly IMHO, it's clearly more common than that.

Edited February 1, 2016 by Boges

[cybercoma]

It's not phobia to point out that these practices are appalling.

Of course it's not.

Now it is phobia to insist that all people within this identifiable group are all the same and should be treated as such. But that's certainly not what I'm doing.

Maybe you're not, but there certainly are people who are. Those people would also deny tooth and nail that they're doing this when it's pointed out plain as day.

[cybercoma]

Interesting. "taxi drivers have been raping young girls". Joe is a taxi driver therefore Joe rapes young girls.

Is that the logic?

Or - Those people who burned that village in Nigeria today were Muslim. They were also male, and African. Therefore, African males who are Muslim burn villages in Nigeria. WRONG!

Collectively, all members of a group do not do the same thing. That is where the racism and bigotry begins. Because of a prejudicial view of a group, one member of a group does something that you do not like then you attribute the same negative behavior to all members of the group. That is wrong. That is prejudice, racism (if based on race) and bigotry.

And to use your examples, why are we not addressing the burning of the village. Condemning that in particular instead of the religion or ethnicity of the perpetrators?

[Hal 9000]

Of course there's phobia, it's been shown here and in other threads that people hold Muslims and Muslim nations to a different, higher standard than they hold the West and westerners. People are more afraid of the same or similar things done by Muslims and done in the Muslim world than they are of those things being done here. You get people rallying behind women's rights and rights for gay people, when they clearly in other threads have crapped all over those ideals as PC garbage, the purview of "bleeding heart liberals" and "social justice warriors." Yet, suddenly it's important to these people when it's an issue in the Muslim world. The phobia of all things Muslim is very clear on this forum.

I just want to point out that my views about gay and women's right have not changed. If I use that in an argument, it's in amazement that you people can rally around these issues for western people, but seem to care not for those struggling with even harsher circumstances in muslim countries.

If we challenge the gender pay gap, or wether the taxpayers should foot the bill for a gay pride parade or build a wedding cake, you'll run around with hair on fire screaming bigotry, but when girls are getting stoned to death and gays getting executed, you'll defend the perpetrators with everything you've got. So, where is the real hypocrisy?

[Big Guy]

Catholics, especially members of the Opus Dei, practice the mortification of their flesh as part of their religion. I do not see too many Catholics flogging themselves with whips. But some of them do and that must be part of their religious practice.

[cybercoma]

seem to care not for those struggling with even harsher circumstances in muslim countries.

The problem is you don't realize that people DO care about those problems for others, as well as at home. You're just disappointed that many of those people won't join you in the bash Islam mantra, which is neither constructive nor intelligent. The problems are much deeper than Islam alone, as there are millions of Muslims with more moderate views.

[Hal 9000]

The problem is you don't realize that people DO care about those problems for others, as well as at home. You're just disappointed that many of those people won't join you in the bash Islam mantra, which is neither constructive nor intelligent. The problems are much deeper than Islam alone, as there are millions of Muslims with more moderate views.

Yes, they're not ALL bad - we get it. Problem is, most of the leaders and Imans are...and even the minority who do believe in harsh Sharia Law number in the tens of millions - maybe hundreds of millions...if you believe credible stats.

[cybercoma]

I mean sure, let me make up a bunch of numbers to say the opposite. But let's take your spitballing is truth.

What are we to do? Patriarchal overthrow of their political and religious institutions? Force our systems on them? Or do we support the oppressed in those countries (also Muslims, mind you) and help them create the change they would like to see? The difference is between lumping the victims in with the oppressors and supporting the victims in their own endeavours to be free from oppression. A lot...and I mean a ton of the arguments here appear to promote either isolationism (screw teh victims, keep everyone out) or ethnocentric colonialist ideals (we know what's best for you). There's a clash between those ideals and the ideals of those who believe in supporting victims, promoting their autonomy, and respecting their cultures. We can be harshly critical of the brutality in the Middle East without being disrespectful to Muslims or their culture. This should be patently obvious when you consider that we are at war to protect Muslims from other Muslims.

Edit: words

Edited February 1, 2016 by cybercoma

[Guest]

Interesting. "taxi drivers have been raping young girls". Joe is a taxi driver therefore Joe rapes young girls.

Is that the logic?

Or - Those people who burned that village in Nigeria today were Muslim. They were also male, and African. Therefore, African males who are Muslim burn villages in Nigeria. WRONG!

Collectively, all members of a group do not do the same thing. That is where the racism and bigotry begins. Because of a prejudicial view of a group, one member of a group does something that you do not like then you attribute the same negative behavior to all members of the group. That is wrong. That is prejudice, racism (if based on race) and bigotry.

Yes, you seem to be in complete agreement with me. I think. I don't see where we differ.

[waldo]

The problem is you don't realize that people DO care about those problems for others, as well as at home. You're just disappointed that many of those people won't join you in the bash Islam mantra, which is neither constructive nor intelligent. The problems are much deeper than Islam alone, as there are millions of Muslims with more moderate views.

Yes, they're not ALL bad - we get it. Problem is, most of the leaders and Imans are...and even the minority who do believe in harsh Sharia Law number in the tens of millions - maybe hundreds of millions...if you believe credible stats.

and in Canada... through an analysis of a now long buried post (2 pages deep in short order) I took the time to actually go beyond the relay of "some blogs" presentation of the survey preseted... as offered by MLW member Argus... such "harsh Sharia" interpretations there, hey!

.

[Hal 9000]

The only thing that we can do that makes any sort of difference, is to fight ISIL with everything we've got and hope that the good muslims build/rebuild or stand up for themselves. Inviting them to Canada solves nothing - absolutely nothing, well, it gives us a warm feeling but the picture or the bucket is way too big at this point.

In all honesty, if you connect the dots, it's all ready too late for the anglos to help anyone including themselves. The radical muslims know they'll take over, it's only a matter of what group comes out on top.

[Argus]

Once again, the reference was to Muslim women as leaders in the world. Not specifically the ME. You seem to think the ME is the only place Muslims live. Here's a hint, Arab countries make up about 20% of Muslims worldwide.

So the rest of the Muslim world is peaceful, without Islamist violence and agitation? And women and homosexuals and religious minorities are respected and given equal rights? Is that what you're saying?