Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Goddess said:

If you don't give a shit, then why did you disagree with the statement?

Just to bug you Israeli agents. B)

Edited by jacee
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Goddess said:

I think trolling is more like when someone comes onto a thread and loudly disagrees with something, calls people trolls, Islamophobes and not Canadians and then refuses to answer questions as to why they disagree with a statement.

What do you think?

 

I think trolling is Israeli agents trying to promote and incite hatred against Muslims.

It's also a crime in Canada.

Are you in Canada?

Edited by jacee
  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 minute ago, jacee said:

Just to bug you Israeli agents. B)

Ahhhhh, I see.  You are trolling.

Now I see why so many have you on ignore.

  • Like 2

"There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe."

~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~

Posted
3 minutes ago, jacee said:

I think trolling is Israeli agents trying to promote and incite hatred against Muslims.

It's also a crime in Canada.

Are you in Canada?

Funny how trolls are always fishing for personal information from other posters.........

"There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe."

~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~

Posted
2 hours ago, capricorn said:

You were mocking PIK and I called you out on it. What's weird is you did not defend your words to PIK so I take it I was right. You may now continue with your vociferous defence of Muslims and Islam.

You let pass PIK's declaration that Muslims getting attacked and killed wasn't a problem because "We don't want Islam in Canada".  I guess you agree with him since didn't say anything when I called you out on it.

Not so much a defense of Islam, as standing up against bigotry.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Argus said:

That's a false rationalization. You're asking for perfection, and through numerous postings on the subject you're attitude appears to be that no matter how bad the Muslim world is we can't judge since we're not perfect. It's like you telling someone who criticizes a child rapist "Well, you're one to talk since you like looking at eighteen year olds in bikinis. Pervert!"

 

It"s kinda the same thing that has happened to me.   I have said that life in Egypt isn't the hellhole for women some here assume it is, and that there are efforts in Muslim majority countries to improve the situation for women (and gays) and in return I get "prove that life in Muslim Majority countries is great for women".   Because really, saying anything at all positive about Muslims or Muslim majority countries is absolutely not acceptable around here.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Goddess said:

So which is it?  Do these countries have issues?  Or is it, as you assert, that it is NOT true that Muslim countries discriminate against women to a larger degree than Western countries?  

Cite please.

Posted
7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Cite please.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2016-03-10/the-10-worst-countries-for-gender-equality-ranked-by-perception

 

Quote

 

Of the 10 countries perceived to be the worst in terms of gender equality – based on data from the 2016 Best Countries rankings that evaluated 60 countries – eight are Muslim-majority nations. Islamic Sharia law often plays a large role in the governance of personal matters like marriage, divorce and inheritance among Muslim populations.

Cultural traditions can dictate different interpretations of the code, but common gender-based discrimination includes stipulations that women cannot pass citizenship to their children, spousal rape is not illegal, two women are equal to one man in court and women cannot divorce their husbands.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/25/ben-carson/ben-carson-do-any-muslim-countries-have-womens-rig/

Quote

 

To assess women’s rights in these countries, we turned to the World Economic Forum’s 2014 Global Gender Gap Index, as well as the 2014 Social Institutions and Gender Index report published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or OECD.

The Gender Gap Index ranks 142 countries based on gender disparities within each nation, including economic opportunity, educational attainment, political empowerment and health. The United States is No. 20, while Iceland is No. 1.

By this measure, the 34 Muslim countries on this list don’t have a solid record on gender equality. Just eight crack the top 100 -- Kazakhstan (43), Kyrgyzstan (67), Bangladesh (68), Senegal (77), Albania (83), Azerbaijan (94), Indonesia (97) and Brunei (98).

 

There's just 2 for you.  

"There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe."

~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~

Posted
2 hours ago, Rue said:

I would argue Eye-Ghost-Hudson Jones-Altai-Kactus-Marcus, believe "they" know what his intent was and carry on their  forum jihad for him.  I say that with sheer ignorance.

 

 

FIFY

I am  not about to read the excrement from Ghost, Eye, Kactus, et al on this thread. They demonstrate thre very bigotry against Jews they claim should not be done to Muslims.

Liar.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
2 hours ago, jacee said:

That's going to be an interesting court case.

One significant fact: He posted a reward for people to invade the school and try to record students "spewing hate speech" during prayers. The school went into lockdown, of course, and called police.

That sets this case apart: threatening the safety of a specific group of children, imo.

He is charged with one count of wilful promotion of hatred.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-319.html

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

  • (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

  • (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

No, he posted a reward for others spewing hate speech. That is not hate speech.

"Though he carried on fights with various public figures (and even ran for mayor of Mississauga in 2014) he focused much of his attention on schools, which he accused of “indoctrinating” students with Islamic ideology. In one video, he offered a bounty — first $1,000, later increased to $2,500 — to anyone who filmed a Muslim student in a Mississauga school “spewing hate speech during Friday prayers".

Posted
37 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Sorry, I meant a cite where I have said Muslim majority countries do not discriminate against women more than Western countries.  My bad, I was not clear.

Posted
2 hours ago, kactus said:

Are sixty  percent of muslims taking the words literally to kill non muslims or non believers. If so that would translate into 1billion muslims. 

Don't play word games with me. The only possible rebuttal to what I wrote was "Why no, that's not true." Because accepting it's true and then still going on to sneer at those concerned about bringing in hundreds of thousands more Muslims would seem like the height or insanity to me.

  • 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
2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The counter-claim would be that there is an effect, or even a cause.  But there's no proving that either way.  The most practical motivation for holding up holy books for examination is vilification, IMO.

We have a religion which has become notorious for religiously motivated violence against others. And we have a religion where the majority of its texts concern the ill-treatment of unbelievers. Do you believe these are unrelated?

"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
4 minutes ago, Argus said:

We have a religion which has become notorious for religiously motivated violence against others. And we have a religion where the majority of its texts concern the ill-treatment of unbelievers. Do you believe these are unrelated?

Nice try.  I already explained it in the statement you replied to.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Nice try.  I already explained it in the statement you replied to.

No, you gave your opinion. You said the most common reason to hold up a religious text was for vilification. You've nothing to base that on. Most examinations of religious texts are done out of curiosity or seeking knowledge or understanding. As to 'cause or affect'. Does it matter if the culture from the middle ages in Arabia caused the religion or the religion caused the culture? The religion itself has been static in its interpretation for centuries since the last great round of scholarly interpretation was declared perfect, and any variation or deviation was blaspheme.

When you say "This is the final and perfect and godly interpretation of the scriptures, and anyone who disagrees is a blasphemer" and blaspheme is punishable by death, that pretty much precludes any opportunity for internal change, or even dialogue.

And to suggest cultures aren't influenced by their religion is silly. Ours most certainly has been, and still is today despite our secular mindset.

"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 (edited)
13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You keep tripping on your shoelaces.   Here's what I said:

"The most practical motivation..."  Try again.

Your statement is synonymous with my paraphrasing of it. And largely irrelevant anyway.

Edited by Argus

"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
3 hours ago, jacee said:

You can criticize any religion you want, especially your own. 

But you cannot incite or promote hatred against Muslims or any other identifiable group. 

 

It's pretty tricky to define, though.  If I told you and someone else something bad about Islam, let's say that incident where the religious police in Saudi Arabia wouldn't let schoolgirls leave a burning building because they were in their jammies and therefore not properly attired, you might not hate Islam because of it, but the someone else might.  Whose opinion matters?

Posted
10 hours ago, dialamah said:

You also assert that the parts of those studies that do not support your claim are wrong and/or the respondents are lying about those parts, but not the parts that support what you believe.  

 

8 hours ago, Argus said:

No, I don't.

In regards to the Environics survey, which you use to demonstrate that Muslims are more religious, more women are wearing hijab, you also denied that part of the survey demonstrating that Muslims are proud of Canada because of it's freedoms and diversity, and that Muslims, especially young Muslims, are becoming more 'mainstream' in terms of their social values.  

Your exact words:

Gee, maybe because it's really easy to lie to a survey? Maybe because regardless of how conservative their religious beliefs are they know better than to tell a survey "Why, yes, I do think those faggots should all be killed."

And:

They see no reason to lie about whether they wear a hijab or not. They're proud to wear a hijab. Why would they lie about that, or about attending mosque?
But they know enough, from exposure to our culture, to know that expressing hatred towards gays, or a belief that women are inferior and must at all times obey men, will not go over very well among infidels. And, after all, their religion gives them permission to lie to infidels.

 

Posted
On 9/12/2017 at 1:25 PM, dialamah said:

Of course, your preferred religion gets a pass because you think all Christians around the world are exactly like the Christians you are used to here.  Truth is that if a Nigerian Christian comes to Canada, they are just as likely to believe in and practice FGM as a Nigerian Muslim.  If there is a cultural tradition of FGM, the religion doesn't matter.  Which is why using religion to screen people is a mistake.

The Heritage committee in Parliament apparently starts studying the motion on Islamophobia today.  Ezra on The Rebel Media thinks they will come out with a law to try to stop "Islamophobia" in all federal government departments including the Armed Forces.  What exactly that will mean remains to be seen because the word Islamophobia seems to mean fear of Isalm.  How do you outlaw or ban a fear of Islam?  We will see what they come out with.

Posted
10 hours ago, Argus said:

Does it matter if the culture from the middle ages in Arabia caused the religion or the religion caused the culture?

It does matter, because the case is made that members from that culture are effectively irredeemable because there is something different from other cultures.  The tracing back to the text is part of a circular explanation that is made on here repeatedly.  

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, dialamah said:

 

In regards to the Environics survey, which you use to demonstrate that Muslims are more religious, more women are wearing hijab, you also denied that part of the survey demonstrating that Muslims are proud of Canada because of it's freedoms and diversity, and that Muslims, especially young Muslims, are becoming more 'mainstream' in terms of their social values.  

Your exact words:

Gee, maybe because it's really easy to lie to a survey? Maybe because regardless of how conservative their religious beliefs are they know better than to tell a survey "Why, yes, I do think those faggots should all be killed."

And:

They see no reason to lie about whether they wear a hijab or not. They're proud to wear a hijab. Why would they lie about that, or about attending mosque?
But they know enough, from exposure to our culture, to know that expressing hatred towards gays, or a belief that women are inferior and must at all times obey men, will not go over very well among infidels. And, after all, their religion gives them permission to lie to infidels.

Well, that is true, that their religion does give them permission to lie to infidels. And it IS true that in the context of Canada a lot of them would realize that saying "I hate infidels' probably wouldn't go over very well. But mostly I would think they would find 'diversity' a code word for 'we can do whatever we want and not assimilate', as opposed to 'of course I respect Hindus and SIkhs!'

Edited by Argus
  • 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

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
      10,907
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    derek848
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Benz earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • stindles earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stindles earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

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