hot enough Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, bcsapper said: If that were the case the word would see a lot less use. It's the never say anything substantive guy never saying anything substantive two posts in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 3 hours ago, drummindiver said: 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. He is well aware of your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 2 hours 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. The drivel you're citing, like Oftenwrong, was nothing compared to what is happening now. 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. Speaking of moron. What I said is and I repeat you don't arbitrarily get to decide when Islamophobia started in any sense. That is your fabrication. Its a meaningless time line you made up. Next if you can't tell the difference between Islam and perceptions as to people's secondary physical characteristics it further evidences what a moron you are. Next you invent as you go along based on your subjective and limited focus on what you read on the internet. You are no historian, theologian or geneticist. What you are is some asswipe who thinks the world begins and ends with what you state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 3 hours ago, GostHacked said: Asking questions is trolling? I guess in your eyes it is. Must be sad to play the victim all the time. I've been banned for a week because I took Dog's shitpostiung to task. I guess I'll get banned again addressing your shit posting. Or the mods will simply delete this thread, but keep up your thread telling me to cut my dick off. So are you for male circumcision? Your posts were not clear however you did make the statement that you oppose any genital mutilation. The exact quote is " I have zero tolerance for body mutilation of genitalia". So what is it Rue? Either you are against all of it, or for all of it. I understand the difference between male and female circumcision, but I am sure both are just as traumatic for a child. You just had to come back hmmm. Foreskin is not and has never been a reproductive organ. Cutting it off does not prevent reproduction. Its not a reproductive organ. Its not genitilia. It may be attached to genitilia but removing it in no way compromises the penis or mutilates it or decreases sexual pleasure. You are well aware foreskin is skin and cutting off foreskin and mutilating clitorises are not even close in consequence or nature. Your pathetic attempt to suggest cutting foreskin off is genitilia mutilation speaks to one thing and one thing only-your pathetic attempt and obsession with trying to show me up. It was pathetic Now like I said if you can't tell the difference between cutting off your foreskin or cutting off your dick then do both. Use a chain saw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 3 hours ago, dialamah said: And I wasn't asked to explain the motivation behind the crime, was I? I was asked why it was still being done if it is illegal. The rest of your post is interesting, though, I shall have to try to take a closer look at it later since my dogs are crossing their legs. Lol stop that. No Di on the first one, and forgive my snot tone its not meant to be when I am responding to you I sound like a snot face, what I am saying is how do we answer why crimes are done without analyzing their motive...that's the point I and others are making. The others have said the same thing. Now I tell you what. If I ever have the audacity to compare my removal of foreskin to a mutilated clitoris I deserve to have you kick me in the testes. That said I am trying to be careful here. I am well aware its not just practiced by Muslims and for that matter I do not claim its wide spread all over the Muslim world although I am aware of its practice in Northern Africa and Somalia. I did believe it or not go to a conference on such practices as part of training in the job I was in. Abusive practices are brought with people based on their culture and religion. We all know that. The issue I have is if the message we give them is an unrealistic one about adjusting such practices once they get to Canada, they will persist. Its about cultural and religious values that continue to motivate people's behaviour and actions that clash with Canadian laws. In Israel the family laws allow Muslims and Jews and Christians to opt out to their own religious courts. Because of that certain kinds of domestic violence and discrimination against women over property rights disputes arise with existing Israeli family laws for non religious citizens which is the majority of Israeli Jews in Israel. This opt out system has made it easier for certain kinds of abusive behaviour against children and women to continue to placate orthodox religious beliefs of all 3 religions. Let me give you another example. When I do a group session some men will justify their hitting or pushing their wife saying in their religion/culture that's how its done. They openly question our criminal and family laws and see no need to change to conform to them. I hear it. I listen to it. I have to challenge it and tell these men, you aint in Pakistan, youy aint in India, you aint in....whatever. To deny their is no correlation or over look the cause and effect of such values being brought over is not logical in understanding and trying to contain such behaviours. In the Somali community in Canada its still being done back in Somalia and in Canada and by untrained women. I've seen the girls when they are done with them. Many of them hemmorage so bad they are lucky to live. Others grow up mutilated with horrendous scars. Its all done in the name of their religion. I am not talking cosmetic surgery. Tell that to the ignoramus Ghost. This is not about ear piercings or removing skin. Its about deliberately mutilating genitilia to prevent women from any vaginal sensation. The fact I even have to explain that on this forum to Ghost is ridiculous. Is it the same as the Burka. Well no. Wearing a Burka does not mutilate anything but its part and parcel of a value system I don't agree with and its not just in Islam as I have said. I reject absolutely the Orthodox Jewish concept that sex should not be pleasurable and you only do it to reproduce. I have a problem with many religions that teach the body is evil and sex is evil. I also think absolutely mainstream Islam and Orthodox Judaism have values I reject out in the open about sex and women and why-because if someone did that to my daughter I would kill them. You know I am always gonna be honest with you with these topics and say it like it is which is what I am doing. I just think sometimes you are a bit soft on certain things Islam can lead to in terms of behaviour. I get you on not unfairly stereotyping I really do, but on this kind of stuff, uh I make no bones in saying some things I am not going to respect or show tolerance for. I don't claim to be a liberal. I try be respectful but hell no not on specific religious practices like female circumcision. By the way knowing what I know about cervical rates of cancer in women and the correlation to a reduction in it with circumcised males, I would do it even if I was not Jewish. Also lol, I do not believe in ear piercings and tattoos for basic personal reasons. I don't impose that on anyone. Hell people diddle with their bodies. Who cares. Lol I had a great friend who was an English teacher and he pierced his breasts and his magic wand and when I was in the shower with him and others after a work out I had everyone laughing because I was repeating to him over and over, "that's just wrong son, its just wrong wrong wrong take those damn things out before you get them caught in yer zipper. I am sorry Dialamah but turning one's ding a long into a shower curtain rod is just wrong you know? You better be friggin laughing. This topic has gone to the dogs and Besty is probably gonna wash my mouth out with soap. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted October 8, 2017 Report Share Posted October 8, 2017 (edited) Honestly, you can't make this shit up. "The Islamic Society of B.C. is a federally-registered charity. Its lawyer declined to comment on the website. Bahr, listed as the site administrator, is currently imprisoned for sexually assaulting a woman in the mosque building." htwtps://globalnews.ca/news/3787500/b-c-mosque-removes-link-anti-semitic-website-following-questions/amp/ Edited October 8, 2017 by drummindiver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 13, 2017 Report Share Posted October 13, 2017 On 2017-10-03 at 8:32 PM, Goddess said: Well, I guess I am the monster you think I am, then. I'm a "maybe" on a burka ban, mainly for security reasons in this day and age. There was a burka'ed lady who used it to hide a giant knife in a Canadian Tire store here recently so she could stab people. And being a frequent traveller, I've noticed burka'ed ladies do not get searched before getting on the airplane, barely questioned or even looked at, which is disturbing to me. The hijab - I don't care for the messages inherent in it (political support of Islam, denigration of women, "I'm modest while other women are whores", I have to hide my filthy female body because men can't control themselves, etc) but I suppose if those are their beliefs and they're proud of them, it's their choice. Ban the hijab and you've got to ban all head coverings. It's not a practical or sensible idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted October 13, 2017 Report Share Posted October 13, 2017 22 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said: Ban the hijab and you've got to ban all head coverings. Not if you understand the reason why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 13, 2017 Report Share Posted October 13, 2017 6 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: Not if you understand the reason why. Think of the legal gobbledygook involved in distinguishing between hijabs and headscarves. You're not going to tell me a woman can't wear a headscarf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted October 13, 2017 Report Share Posted October 13, 2017 (edited) 38 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said: Think of the legal gobbledygook involved in distinguishing between hijabs and headscarves. You're not going to tell me a woman can't wear a headscarf. Perhaps not scarf but there should be a ban on Burka and Niqab, which cover the whole face. Other countries have already done things like this. The Islamic veil across Europe The veil issue is part of a wider debate about multiculturalism in Europe, as many politicians argue that there needs to be a greater effort to assimilate ethnic and religious minorities. Keep in mind Europe sees this problem more directly than us, having to deal with a much bigger influx of refugees and illegal migrants as a consequence of geography. They are ahead of us, both in recognizing the problem and seeking a solution. We would do well to take heed. Edited October 13, 2017 by OftenWrong 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 18, 2017 Report Share Posted October 18, 2017 Islamophobia is in canada, because Islam is in canada. It is very simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 18, 2017 Report Share Posted October 18, 2017 Now I have no idea why that came out so big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 On 10/12/2017 at 8:22 PM, SpankyMcFarland said: Think of the legal gobbledygook involved in distinguishing between hijabs and headscarves. You're not going to tell me a woman can't wear a headscarf. What about the surgical masks people seem to wearing with more frequency these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 1 hour ago, eyeball said: What about the surgical masks people seem to wearing with more frequency these days? Surgical masks don't cover the entire face just nose and mouth. Someone correct me if I am wrong but I think this is talking about a full covering or one where only eyes show. That said how about Halloween masks? From a practical perspective how many bus drivers will refuse to drive their bus and call the police to remove Muslim women from buses? Would the police even answer the calls? It brings up some ugly possibilities for sure and subjective ones. The reality is the law will be challenged and thrown out as violating the charter and specifically religious freedoms and freedom of speech/expression. Its an example of catering to what is perceived as popular sentiment in Quebec. The PQ say it does not go far enough. The NDP that traditionally has depended on PQ voters voting for them federally which led to the down-fall of the Bloc Quebecois will lose that vote now they have a visible minority leader opposed to this kind of legislated prohibition against certain religious attire. I have argued I feel someone getting their driver's license or stopped by the police while driving or swearing an oath in court, or testifying in court or making a pledge of allegiance for citizenship should be required to show their face but I don't agree with this law. Its application is broad, not specific, and it is not for security reasons. Its an attempt to cater to a specific political popular belief in Quebec at this time. I disagree with the PQ demanding signs in French bigger than English not insisting on signs being French as well as any other language. I do not see what this has to do with protecting Quebec culture. This is the irony. People argue of Muslims become the majority they will pass laws imposing their beliefs on others. Maybe those of us who fear that should understand we do it too maybe intentionally, may be unintentionally. Where that middle ground of tolerance is I don't claim to know at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 8 minutes ago, Rue said: This is the irony. People argue of Muslims become the majority they will pass laws imposing their beliefs on others. Maybe those of us who fear that should understand we do it too maybe intentionally, may be unintentionally. We pass laws imposing Canadian beliefs on Canadians, no? I guess if we allow as much immigration as Liberals want Muslims will become the majority, then they will pass laws based on their beliefs, because that will have been the Canada we voted for and allowed. I'm sure you won't find that happening in Muslim countries however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 9 minutes ago, drummindiver said: We pass laws imposing Canadian beliefs on Canadians, no? No we usually pass laws imposing Canadian reasoning - something logical and sensible in other words. Beliefs normally fall way short of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 5 minutes ago, eyeball said: No we usually pass laws imposing Canadian reasoning - something logical and sensible in other words. Beliefs normally fall way short of this. Deft response. I don't know if I could have come up with this response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 21 minutes ago, eyeball said: No we usually pass laws imposing Canadian reasoning - something logical and sensible in other words. Beliefs normally fall way short of this. There is nothing that is done by our politically correct politicians that show any common sense or logic or that is sensible anymore. They just enjoy f'n things up, and than start wasting taxpayer's tax dollars trying to pretend that they are going to try and fix up the mess that they already created. We are being led by the ring thru our noses by a bunch of fools who have no clue as to how to run a country. If they did know what they were doing than Canada and Canadians would not be in the mess that we are in today. Most laws past does not have to mean that they were good laws. Some laws programs and agendas created make no sense at all. They just blow tax dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 37 minutes ago, eyeball said: No we usually pass laws imposing Canadian reasoning - something logical and sensible in other words. Beliefs normally fall way short of this. And I think our law makers tend to arm themselves with a reasonable understanding of our constitution/charter before they put pen to paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 2 hours ago, eyeball said: No we usually pass laws imposing Canadian reasoning - something logical and sensible in other words. Beliefs normally fall way short of this. Read Bill 62. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Deft response. I don't know if I could have come up with this response. Put you in the no Canadian values column. Please explain Canadian reasoning as opposed to Canadian beliefs. Semantics in a leftist circle jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 19, 2017 Report Share Posted October 19, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, eyeball said: No we usually pass laws imposing Canadian reasoning - something logical and sensible in other words. Beliefs normally fall way short of this. Except for "aboriginals" in Canada..."Canadian reasoning" was/is just swell, right ? Maybe they should convert to Islam to get far more protection from "Canadian reasoning". Edited October 19, 2017 by bush_cheney2004 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 20, 2017 Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 19 hours ago, drummindiver said: Read Bill 62. Notice where I said normally? 19 hours ago, drummindiver said: Put you in the no Canadian values column. Please explain Canadian reasoning as opposed to Canadian beliefs. Semantics in a leftist circle jerk. Quote rea·son·ing ˈrēz(ə)niNG/Submit noun the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way. "he explained the reasoning behind his decision at a media conference" synonyms Quote be·lief bəˈlēf/Submit noun 1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists. "his belief in the value of hard work" 2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something. "a belief in democratic politics" synonyms: faith, trust, reliance, confidence, credence "belief in the value of hard work" synonyms Perhaps you''d like to propose a different dictionary and thesaurus. Quote se·man·tics səˈman(t)iks/Submit noun the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning. the meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text. plural noun: semantics"such quibbling over semantics may seem petty stuff" Did you carefully consider the meaning of the word semantics before you chose to use it like you knew what you were talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted October 20, 2017 Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 27 minutes ago, eyeball said: Perhaps you''d like to propose a different dictionary and thesaurus. Did you carefully consider the meaning of the word semantics before you chose to use it like you knew what you were talking about? Sure. Mirriam-Webster is well respected. https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/Reason I know what semantics means and is the appropriate word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 20, 2017 Report Share Posted October 20, 2017 (edited) 33 minutes ago, drummindiver said: Sure. Mirriam-Webster is well respected. https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/Reason We were comparing the words reasoning and belief not reasoning and reason but now you've changed the goalposts. How typical. Did you even check to see if your dictionary deals with these two words separately before implying there is no difference? You should've, but too late now I guess. Quote I know what semantics means and is the appropriate word. Quibbling is the appropriate word to describe what you're doing with semantics. Perhaps its context that escapes you. You mentioned something about Canadian values before you started quibbling over the plain english I was using. Quote Description[edit] A 2013 Statistics Canada survey found that an "overwhelming majority" of Canadians shared the values of human rights (with 92% of respondents agreeing that they are a shared Canadian value), respect for the law (92%) and gender equality (91%). There was considerably less agreement among Canadians over whether ethnic and cultural diversity, linguistic duality, and respect for aboriginal culture were also shared Canadian values.[14] According to the Canadian Index of Well Being at the University of Waterloo, Canadian values include: fairnesss inclusion democracy economic security safety sustainability diversity equity health[15] Wiki Perhaps the reason we don't see semantic quibbling on this index of Canadian values is that it's a conservative value. Edited October 20, 2017 by eyeball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts