carepov Posted May 4, 2017 Report Posted May 4, 2017 1 minute ago, Argus said: I don't know. Their views on men being the boss in the family was nearly identical to that of Canadian Muslims. But in any event, my point was that THESE Muslims expressed great pride in being British. That did not stop them from rejecting liberal views. Thus the fact Canadian Muslims are proud to be Canadian does not suggest that they embrace liberal views, either. How many Canadians think homosexuality should be illegal? No one has had the balls to ask. OK fine. Acceptance of homosexuality and perhaps patriarchy is behind the times - probably in line with Canadian values 30-40 years ago. Both attitudes are improving according to the Canadian survey. So what then? Does this make Islam in Canada a political ideology? Does Canada have a problem with Islamism?
Omni Posted May 4, 2017 Report Posted May 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, Argus said: On the contrary, your bias is pretty blatantly obvious. I don't automatically assume Muslim women are lying in an interview when it doesn't fit my pre-conceived notion of them.
Omni Posted May 4, 2017 Report Posted May 4, 2017 51 minutes ago, Argus said: Quote There are many reasons for Canadian Muslim women choose to wear the hijab. You are the one that started the claim about Canadian women being forced to wear head coverings. The burden of proof is on you. I never said any such thing. Oh yes you did. As far as I'm concerned the fact increasing numbers of Muslim Canadian women, now more than half, feel that they must wear head coverings, or even full face coverings indicates a much stronger belief in the dictates of political Islam. The need for women to cover up goes hand in hand with the belief in the moral failings and inferiority of women, which is supported by Sharia laws which allow women to be beaten, which discard their value in testimony in trials, and which require active discrimination against them.
Guest Posted May 4, 2017 Report Posted May 4, 2017 8 hours ago, eyeball said: No, they're simply racists all dressed up in concern. Or the concerned being dressed up as racists. Whatever. Depends on your POV I guess.
Argus Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Omni said: Oh yes you did. As far as I'm concerned the fact increasing numbers of Muslim Canadian women, now more than half, feel that they must wear head coverings, or even full face coverings indicates a much stronger belief in the dictates of political Islam. The need for women to cover up goes hand in hand with the belief in the moral failings and inferiority of women, which is supported by Sharia laws which allow women to be beaten, which discard their value in testimony in trials, and which require active discrimination against them. You have a reading comprehension problem. I did not say all women were forced to wear them, as in some man will beat them if they 'don't. Though I am certain some are. The above passage simply says that the fact more of them feel they have to wear head coverings is an indication of the growing religious conservatism of the Muslim Canadian population. Their own conservative religious beliefs are what make them feel they must wear them. Edited May 5, 2017 by Argus 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
Guest Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, carepov said: Islam in Canada is just a religion it is not a political movement. First, who says "every day"? There are many reasons for Canadian Muslim women choose to wear the hijab. You are the one that started the claim about Canadian women being forced to wear head coverings. The burden of proof is on you. I understand that people are devoted to Islam but in in Canada, Muslims do not stand for Islamism. Do you judge people's political beliefs based on their tattoos and piercings too? A couple of questions: Do you think there are women who are forced to wear any head coverings? Do you need their names, addresses and a notarized affadavit before you would believe it? Given your requirement for proof, and your statement that "in Canada, Muslims do not stand for Islamism", do you have names, addresses and affadavits for all of them? Edited May 5, 2017 by bcsapper
Omni Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 1 hour ago, Argus said: You have a reading comprehension problem. I did not say all women were forced to wear them, as in some man will beat them if they 'don't. Though I am certain some are. The above passage simply says that the fact more of them feel they have to wear head coverings is an indication of the growing religious conservatism of the Muslim Canadian population. Their own conservative religious beliefs are what make them feel they must wear them. Oh I think we all can read between your lines quite easily. You simply hedged against saying "they are forced to" by saying they have to. My reading is every bit as good as yours Sir.
carepov Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 12 hours ago, bcsapper said: A couple of questions: Do you think there are women who are forced to wear any head coverings? Do you need their names, addresses and a notarized affadavit before you would believe it? Given your requirement for proof, and your statement that "in Canada, Muslims do not stand for Islamism", do you have names, addresses and affadavits for all of them? Yes, I do think that there are some Canadian women that are forced to wear head coverings. And yes there are some Islamists in Canada. On both questions, I did not mean to suggest otherwise.
DogOnPorch Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 1 hour ago, carepov said: Yes, I do think that there are some Canadian women that are forced to wear head coverings. And yes there are some Islamists in Canada. On both questions, I did not mean to suggest otherwise. This is known as: The Acceptable Casualties Argument. It insist Islam is ultimately good and the few bad apples that murdered your family in the latest terror attack are just a one-off...poor you. You're really unlucky. 1 Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Michael Hardner Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 32 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: This is known as: The Acceptable Casualties Argument. It insist Islam is ultimately good and the few bad apples that murdered your family in the latest terror attack are just a one-off...poor you. You're really unlucky. If you applied the standard of disallowing entry based on violence perpetrated by members of a group, no one would be allowed in. Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
DogOnPorch Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 Just now, Michael Hardner said: If you applied the standard of disallowing entry based on violence perpetrated by members of a group, no one would be allowed in. That's your excuse for Islam? Excellent. Let the death cult in because...well...aren't they ALL death cults deep down?? 1 Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Argus Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 13 hours ago, Omni said: Oh I think we all can read between your lines quite easily. Ah that's your problem. Try reading the actual characters and not the blank space between them where you imagine words exist. 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
Argus Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 32 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: If you applied the standard of disallowing entry based on violence perpetrated by members of a group, no one would be allowed in. The possibility of them blowing stuff up is not the main reason to be wary of importing large numbers of Muslims from areas of the world where Islam is extreme in its conservatism. Rather, it is as was stated in the New York Times cite: Trevor Phillips, the former chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, analyzed the results for Channel 4 and said in a statement that they showed Britain faced a threat of “the establishment of a nation within our nation.” 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
eyeball Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 16 hours ago, bcsapper said: Or the concerned being dressed up as racists. Whatever. Depends on your POV I guess. Racists by any measure. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Guest Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 (edited) 1 minute ago, eyeball said: Racists by any measure. Like I said, POV. There are those who see racism in any criticism of someone who doesn't look like them, regardless of justification. Edited May 5, 2017 by bcsapper
DogOnPorch Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 2 minutes ago, bcsapper said: Like I said, POV. There are those who see racism in any criticism of someone who doesn't look like them, regardless of justification. Attaching race to Islam is assuming it is the religion of brown people. In reality, all these cults come from the same f------ desert. Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 9 minutes ago, eyeball said: Racists by any measure. I'm curious. Given my obvious disgust at the more barbaric aspects of Islamic behaviour, what criteria would I have to meet that you do not that would make me a racist? I assume you are equally disgusted at the more barbaric aspects of Islamic behaviour. The only difference I can see so far is that I don't have a problem acknowledging it.
Michael Hardner Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said: That's your excuse for Islam? Excellent. Let the death cult in because...well...aren't they ALL death cults deep down?? You set the standard of zero acceptable losses. Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
carepov Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 1 hour ago, Argus said: The possibility of them blowing stuff up is not the main reason to be wary of importing large numbers of Muslims from areas of the world where Islam is extreme in its conservatism. Rather, it is as was stated in the New York Times cite: Trevor Phillips, the former chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, analyzed the results for Channel 4 and said in a statement that they showed Britain faced a threat of “the establishment of a nation within our nation.” My interpretation of the Canadian Muslim survey shows that there is no evidence of the existence of a Muslim nation within our nation, and even less concern for a future development of such a nation. Besides, Canada already has multiple "nations within our nation", while this poses challenges it is not a threat.
DogOnPorch Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 26 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: You set the standard of zero acceptable losses. Islam's apologists think otherwise...go figure. What's a few corpses next to that awesome Islamic diversity reward?? The dead are only Infidels, anyways...Muslims are allowed to kill those untermensch if they're causing Fitnah and Fasad. Not a crime... Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Omni Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 37 minutes ago, carepov said: My interpretation of the Canadian Muslim survey shows that there is no evidence of the existence of a Muslim nation within our nation, and even less concern for a future development of such a nation. Besides, Canada already has multiple "nations within our nation", while this poses challenges it is not a threat. True. As a matter of fact it shows that Muslim's express more pride in being Canadian, than many of us who were born here. However there seem to be people who have such a strong preconception of immigrants no amount of evidence to the contrary will sway them.
eyeball Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said: Attaching race to Islam is assuming it is the religion of brown people. In reality, all these cults come from the same f------ desert. We'll, if Jewophobia were the topic of discussion there'd be no confusion about what constituted a racist. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, eyeball said: We'll, if Jewophobia were the topic of discussion there'd be no confusion about what constituted a racist. Most Jews are Caucasian. Judaism is a religion. Unlike Islam, it's non-proselytizing. However...folks Sammy Davis Jr, Lenny Kravitz, etc make mush of your racism. Even YOU could become a Jew if you pestered them enough and jumped through all the hoops. But they'd rather you not...generally. Edited May 5, 2017 by DogOnPorch Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 Yes, but unlike right wing critics of Islam left wing critics of Judaism are racist by default. Something you righties usually make mush of. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted May 5, 2017 Report Posted May 5, 2017 Just now, eyeball said: Yes, but unlike right wing critics of Islam left wing critics of Judaism are racist by default. Something you righties usually make mush of. Judaism isn't conducting a global terror campaign against the Infidel. Islam, however... Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Recommended Posts