Islamophobia in Canada

[drummindiver]

"Muslims" in general are not "waging jihad" at all.

They are living their lives, raising their families, praying and leading normal lives in their communities, just like Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists and agnostics.

Suicidal/homicidal extremist terrorists are waging war, mostly on peaceful mainstream Muslims who want nothing to do with such criminal extremism.

Criminal extremism and violence has nothing to do with religion.

Anybody can yell "Allahu akbar" "God is great" "Jesus is lord" "Jesus saves" "Nonbelievers must die" "Peanut butter is god's gift" "All hail the jelly bean" "I am the hand of god" or any other crazy thing, while murdering and committing heinous crimes.

It's a reflection of their mentally warped state of mind.

It is not a religious act.

Their demented crimes have nothing to do with all Muslims, all Christians or all peanut butter and jelly bean lovers.

.

Wow. Ok. Then why are so many muslims so mentally ill?

If that is your assertion, wouldn't us dropping some type of anti depressant on the ME fix the whole shooting match?

[jacee]

Wow. Ok. Then why are so many muslims so mentally ill?

Why are so many Christians mentally ill and killing people at clinics? In churches?

Christianity certainly is a violent religion that teaches killing innocent people!

.

[eyeball]

That is a very powerful statement, one that brings up the question, do you think we as Canadians are ready to sacrifice all of that. We have already given up many of our traditions all in the name of political correctness, i agree that sometimes change is necessary to move forward, but in the process we lose, some of WHO we were...sometimes this is a good thing sometimes not....

I think Ottawa sold out a lot more when it stood by and watched and then joined our allies in the vandalization and looting of the ME region. I don't recall being asked if I was ready to sacrifice our honour and principles. As I understand it, from listening to posters in this forum, we actually never had these things.

[eyeball]

Christianity has evolved.....while Islam is making up for lost time....

And a bunch of countries built on advanced Christian principles interfered with that evolution. It's going to take a hundred years just to put Islam back on it's feet while the West taps its toes in impatience.

Priceless.

[eyeball]

Let's face reality here. The main focus is really people's discomfort with the value system of religious Muslims and its often hateful and intolerant attitude towards others, most particularly women and gays. If the government was bringing over 25,000 Syrian Christians there simply wouldn't be the same level of concern.

I'm more concerned about the hateful intolerance of Canadians. It's on the rise in Europe too and we've all seen where that can lead.

[eyeball]

I said nothing specifically about you. Merely noted this as an aspect of the usual conversational back and forth on this site and in politics in general. I understand how you would not want to described as being on the Left notwithstanding that virtually everyone on this web site would not hesitate to place you there given your stated views.

I don't know why anyone would say that given how much power Micheal is prepared to allow the state to have over that of an individual.

[Argus]

Why are so many Christians mentally ill and killing people at clinics? In churches?

Christianity certainly is a violent religion that teaches killing innocent people!

.

According to the news 11 killed at clinics over the past forty years. Not sure about churches, but I'm gonna bet more people died in Paris last month than have died in church attacks in the last forty years too. Unless you count the churches attacked by Muslims.

[drummindiver]

Why are so many Christians mentally ill and killing people at clinics? In churches?

Christianity certainly is a violent religion that teaches killing innocent people!

.

I agree.

But still, why are so many muslims killing if not for their religion?

[drummindiver]

I'm more concerned about the hateful intolerance of Canadians. It's on the rise in Europe too and we've all seen where that can lead.

You are possibly the only person in the history of the world concerned about the "hateful intolerance of Canadians"

This is pure hyperbole.

[drummindiver]

I think Ottawa sold out a lot more when it stood by and watched and then joined our allies in the vandalization and looting of the ME region. I don't recall being asked if I was ready to sacrifice our honour and principles. As I understand it, from listening to posters in this forum, we actually never had these things.

Vandalization and looting of the ME.

How are we doing this exactly?

What are we looting? Sand castles?

[jacee]

According to the news 11 killed at clinics over the past forty years. Not sure about churches, but I'm gonna bet more people died in Paris last month than have died in church attacks in the last forty years too. Unless you count the churches attacked by Muslims.

My mistake. Churches are not the issue.

Racists terrorizing and targetting black people is the issue.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/24/minneapolis-protesters-shot-terrorize-black-people

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0T11CC20151113

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/fires-at-black-churches-ignite-fear-of-racist-backlash-in-u-s-south-after-charleston-shooting

Edited November 29, 2015 by jacee

[eyeball]

Vandalization and looting of the ME.

How are we doing this exactly?

With dictators mostly.

What are we looting? Sand castles?

Oil.

There's an inter-generational aspect to this vandalism and looting as well that will probably make inter-generational theft look like petty crime in comparison.

[dialamah]

I don't remember seeing any of this. Only someone with their heads in the sand would say that pedophilia hasn't been a problem among Roman Catholic clergy in the last 50 years.

From this thread, two different posters:

“Pedophilia in the Catholic Church isn't as widespread as you want it to be”

”There is no widespread pedophilia in the Catholic church, and there never was. The incidents of child sexual exploitation featuring Catholic clergy overwhelmingly had adolescent boys as victims. Pedophiles are largely uninterested in adolescents. Further, while the incidents were greatly publicized, and shameful, the percentage of Catholic clergy involved in molestation was never any higher than that of the general population, or of other clergy or professions.”

Same with FGM being cultural. It so happens it's more common among those cultures that have Islam as the predominant religion, but I'm certainly okay with calling FGM a barbaric "cultural" practice, and looking down on those cultures that practice it.

It is barbaric, and it is cultural, and just because the region in which it’s practiced is predominantly Muslim does not make it a ‘Muslim practice’. Denying it’s practiced by people of other religions is absolutely an attempt by some to demonize Islam and whitewash Christianity, as this person (despite claiming to be an atheist) wants to do:

“with your ridiculous claims about the Jews and Christians as bigtime FGM'ers”

In the region of the world where FGM is common, it is as common among Christians as it is among Muslims, and even some Jewish populations.

FGM is practiced among some adherents of the Muslim, Christian, andJewish faiths. FGM is also practiced among some animists, who believe in the existence of individual spirits and supernatural forces. It is erroneously linked to religion, is not particular to any religious faith, and predates Christianity and Islam

https://www.hrw.org/news/2010/06/16/qa-female-genital-mutilation

I've never heard anyone say this: "They aren't really Christians, because that's not what Christianity teaches". about an act that was inspired by Christian doctrine, unless those who said it were trying to excuse the religion in the same manner as many try to do for Islam. Still utter BS, regardless of the religion.

You yourself disputed someone claiming that some particular group wasn't Christian, even though the group themselves called themselves Christian.

“Catholics do whatever they do, they do not speak for Christianity as a whole. A LOT of their teachings are extra-biblical.”

“ People who engage in terror and violence are being disobedient to Jesus. The KKK's actions are in direct opposition to what Christ taught and how he lived. Christians do not have to take any account for the KKK's behaviour, because their behaviour is categorically anti-christian.”

I've never heard it said that ISIS represent the majority of Muslims. And, it's not the conservative (christian) white guy from a Western country that says it's Islam.

From this thread:

"These people, collectively, are a danger to our societies."

"he people that showed up here and built the place ,came here to get away from the BS. Now we are bringing that here."

"What fuels the distrust and dislike of Muslims is the fact that most Islamic countries are ruled by Islamic law which ignores equality and human rights"

"There are many parts of the Koran which call upon Muslims to treat non-believers badly, and they have over the years answered those calls time and time again."

"Islam is at war with the rest of the world."

"Aside from the superficial, like opening a shawarma stand in your town, what do Middle Eastern immigrants have to offer? Gay bashing, gang rape, hate speech, synagogue arson, stone-age attitudes... what's the upside?"

"I think the biggest difference between the Bible and the Quran is that most followers of the former reject the more heinous aspects of that text, while many followers of the latter clearly don't."

"No, I'm one of those who thinks Islam is an ideology that incorporates politics, religion, law, land acquisition, and perpetrates terror for any and all these reasons. And more. Kidnapping young ladies and forcing them to become sexual slaves is for personal gratification."

It's the Muslims who self identify who say it's Islam.

And again, that's a matter of interpretation, isn't it. As an ex-Christian, I believe the bible can easily be used to justify all kinds of nasty behavior, and that some leaders take advantage of this to encourage racist, homophobic behavior as well as justifying kidnapping, raping and enslaving people. That I believe Christianity can be perverted to support these things doesn't mean that all or even most Christians agree with or do those things.

Sure, but do we consider numbers or ignore them? Is it just, the act exists on both sides, so both sides are equally bad?

Assault, rape, kidnapping, torture, murder, enslavement etc., are wrong regardless of who does them. Who does them *more* is irrelevant.

In any case, we in the West are treated to a biased focus: If a Christian in the States shoots up a Planned Parenthood office and kills a couple of people, it's understood that his crime was 'religiously' motivated, but we also understand that it's not what the majority of Christians condone, and we assume the guy had other issues.

If a Canadian-born Muslim with mental illness and drug addiction shoots a soldier, his connection to Islam - however tenuous - is examined closely, remembered and taken as 'proof' that Islam is a violent religion; the influence of mental illness and drug addiction are minimized.

If drones and bomb strikes kill 150 innocent, non-combatants in the Middle East, we don't even hear about it. - so much so that people don't even believe it happens. If a group of Muslims kill 150 people in France, we hear about nothing else. For weeks.

Islam is not worse that Christianity because both are abstracts until Humans make them real. There are far more rotten Muslims in the world today that there are rotten Christians, though. Would you say that statement is innaccurate?

I agree that both Islam and Christianity are abstracts until Humans make them real. I don't agree there are far more rotten Muslims in the world today than there are rotten Christians. I think Christians in the States and Canada would be just as happy to limit our current personal freedoms to be in line with the bible as do Muslim countries, but are prevented from doing so because our laws do not allow it. Most Islamic countries are slowly moving toward more personal freedoms, not less - because overall, Muslims are becoming (slowly) more progressive.

I don't think date rape is mild, and I don't believe the figures. But let's say they are true. I would be thoroughly disgusted to think that 30% of men think that rape is okay, even if that could be reasonably extrapolated from your post.

"Date rape" in the sense that it's not usually accompanied by threats of death and extreme physical violence is 'mild'.

As for the 30% figure, here are some references: https://sapac.umich.edu/article/196

http://www.oneinfourusa.org/statistics.php

What is your view of the Muslims who hold that their religion should provide the basis for law above any secular considerations? I don't know the percentage who do, but I would be willing to bet that it would be comparable, or greater.

I think they are entitled to their view, and that there are many countries in which they can have that. They cannot come to Canada and have that, but I'm inclined to think that they know that when they arrive and are essentially ok with it.

The belief that Muslims are determined to bring in Sharia law is, in my opinion, simply hysteria. In Canada, many things that *used* to be laws were based on biblical teachings, and even though certain segments of our society might like a return to that, it's not going to happen. And it's not going to happen in Canada or Europe either, regardless of how many Islamphobe sites and you-tube videos are put out there. If someone - Christian or Muslim - wanted to make abortion illegal, can you imagine the outcry? Harper wouldn't even let one of his MPs bring up the discussion. How likely is it that making homosexuality illegal, or flogging or stoning legal punishments for crimes would be even considered, let alone a possibility, even if we brought in a million more Muslims?

I don't want to speak for anyone else, but what I want to with Muslims is use the minority to define the minority. I want to be able to describe disgusting medieval attitudes without being told I am somehow referring to those who don't hold them. Why would I want to discuss those who don't? I might as well bring up Norwegians or New Zealanders. Who would want to argue about that?

Why? I'm assuming the practices you are referring to are against the law in Canada, and they'll be against the law for Muslims that come here. If a Muslim comes to Canada and does something illegal, they'll suffer the consequences, as they should. I honestly fail to see how this has anything to do with Islamphobia - which appears to be based on a belief that bringing in Muslims means we're going to lose "Canadian" traditions and that every Muslim is out to convert us to Sharia law and/or perpetrate an attack against us. Islamaphobes seem determined to belief the worst, regardless of what the evidence shows - namely, that our already large immigrant Muslim population hasn't imposed Sharia law on us, subjected us to terrorist attacks or even taken away Christmas. Generally, they've quietly lived their Muslim life in the community, much like any other Canadian.

In this discussion, I've acknowledged that Sharia law includes some pretty horrific things, that its likely Muslim refugees will have a more conservative lifestyle, and that Europe has a problem with the refugees, but more because there are so many and its much easier for them to get there, than here. I've heard the reports of serious cultural differences resulting in a disproportionate number of rapes by Muslim men, but nobody's provided any credible links to this supposed fact (or maybe I missed them, I'm sure I've missed more than a few posts). My acknowledgements of and willingness to discuss what I agree are valid concerns go unnoticed and undiscussed, so hey - 'lack of hearing' isn't limited to us gullible Liberal types.

[Guest]

You yourself disputed someone claiming that some particular group wasn't Christian, even though the group themselves called themselves Christian.

“Catholics do whatever they do, they do not speak for Christianity as a whole. A LOT of their teachings are extra-biblical.”

“ People who engage in terror and violence are being disobedient to Jesus. The KKK's actions are in direct opposition to what Christ taught and how he lived. Christians do not have to take any account for the KKK's behaviour, because their behaviour is categorically anti-christian.”

Okay, you win.

The bit I quoted here though, are you sure you're referring to me? I don't remember making either of those quotes. It doesn't sound like something I would write.

Edit> Actually, I feel I should apologize for my response here. I didn't mean for it to sound so dismissive. There comes a time, though, when posts just get too long to deal with.

Edited November 29, 2015 by bcsapper

[drummindiver]

With dictators mostly.

Oil.

There's an inter-generational aspect to this vandalism and looting as well that will probably make inter-generational theft look like petty crime in comparison.

Looting means to take without paying.

Pretty sure all those ME types aren't driving around the desert in Lamborghinis cause we looted their oil

loot

[loot]

Synonyms

Examples

Word Origin

noun

1.

spoils or plunder taken by pillaging, as in war.

2.

anything taken by dishonesty, force, stealth, etc.:

a burglar's loot.

3.

a collection of valued objects:

The children shouted and laughed as they opened their Christmas loot.

4.

Slang. money:

You'll have a fine time spending all that loot.

5.

act of looting or plundering:

to take part in the loot of a conquered city.

verb (used with object)

6.

to carry off or take (something) as loot:

to loot a nation's art treasures.

7.

to despoil by taking loot; plunder or pillage (a city, house, etc.), as in war.

8.

to rob, as by burglary or corrupt activity in public office:

to loot the public treasury.

verb (used without object)

9.

to take loot; plunder:

The conquerors looted and robbed.

[Argus]

My mistake. Churches are not the issue.

Racists terrorizing and targetting black people is the issue.

Actually, the issue is distrust of Muslims. It says so right at the top of the topic. If you would like to talk about racism feel free to start another topic.

[drummindiver]

From this thread, two different posters:

“Pedophilia in the Catholic Church isn't as widespread as you want it to be”

”There is no widespread pedophilia in the Catholic church, and there never was. The incidents of child sexual exploitation featuring Catholic clergy overwhelmingly had adolescent boys as victims. Pedophiles are largely uninterested in adolescents. Further, while the incidents were greatly publicized, and shameful, the percentage of Catholic clergy involved in molestation was never any higher than that of the general population, or of other clergy or professions.”

It is barbaric, and it is cultural, and just because the region in which it’s practiced is predominantly Muslim does not make it a ‘Muslim practice’. Denying it’s practiced by people of other religions is absolutely an attempt by some to demonize Islam and whitewash Christianity, as this person (despite claiming to be an atheist) wants to do:

“with your ridiculous claims about the Jews and Christians as bigtime FGM'ers”

In the region of the world where FGM is common, it is as common among Christians as it is among Muslims, and even some Jewish populations.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2010/06/16/qa-female-genital-mutilation

You yourself disputed someone claiming that some particular group wasn't Christian, even though the group themselves called themselves Christian.

“Catholics do whatever they do, they do not speak for Christianity as a whole. A LOT of their teachings are extra-biblical.”

“ People who engage in terror and violence are being disobedient to Jesus. The KKK's actions are in direct opposition to what Christ taught and how he lived. Christians do not have to take any account for the KKK's behaviour, because their behaviour is categorically anti-christian.”

From this thread:

"These people, collectively, are a danger to our societies."

"he people that showed up here and built the place ,came here to get away from the BS. Now we are bringing that here."

"What fuels the distrust and dislike of Muslims is the fact that most Islamic countries are ruled by Islamic law which ignores equality and human rights"

"There are many parts of the Koran which call upon Muslims to treat non-believers badly, and they have over the years answered those calls time and time again."

"Islam is at war with the rest of the world."

"Aside from the superficial, like opening a shawarma stand in your town, what do Middle Eastern immigrants have to offer? Gay bashing, gang rape, hate speech, synagogue arson, stone-age attitudes... what's the upside?"

"I think the biggest difference between the Bible and the Quran is that most followers of the former reject the more heinous aspects of that text, while many followers of the latter clearly don't."

"No, I'm one of those who thinks Islam is an ideology that incorporates politics, religion, law, land acquisition, and perpetrates terror for any and all these reasons. And more. Kidnapping young ladies and forcing them to become sexual slaves is for personal gratification."

And again, that's a matter of interpretation, isn't it. As an ex-Christian, I believe the bible can easily be used to justify all kinds of nasty behavior, and that some leaders take advantage of this to encourage racist, homophobic behavior as well as justifying kidnapping, raping and enslaving people. That I believe Christianity can be perverted to support these things doesn't mean that all or even most Christians agree with or do those things.

Assault, rape, kidnapping, torture, murder, enslavement etc., are wrong regardless of who does them. Who does them *more* is irrelevant.

In any case, we in the West are treated to a biased focus: If a Christian in the States shoots up a Planned Parenthood office and kills a couple of people, it's understood that his crime was 'religiously' motivated, but we also understand that it's not what the majority of Christians condone, and we assume the guy had other issues.

If a Canadian-born Muslim with mental illness and drug addiction shoots a soldier, his connection to Islam - however tenuous - is examined closely, remembered and taken as 'proof' that Islam is a violent religion; the influence of mental illness and drug addiction are minimized.

If drones and bomb strikes kill 150 innocent, non-combatants in the Middle East, we don't even hear about it. - so much so that people don't even believe it happens. If a group of Muslims kill 150 people in France, we hear about nothing else. For weeks.

I agree that both Islam and Christianity are abstracts until Humans make them real. I don't agree there are far more rotten Muslims in the world today than there are rotten Christians. I think Christians in the States and Canada would be just as happy to limit our current personal freedoms to be in line with the bible as do Muslim countries, but are prevented from doing so because our laws do not allow it. Most Islamic countries are slowly moving toward more personal freedoms, not less - because overall, Muslims are becoming (slowly) more progressive.

"Date rape" in the sense that it's not usually accompanied by threats of death and extreme physical violence is 'mild'.

As for the 30% figure, here are some references: https://sapac.umich.edu/article/196

http://www.oneinfourusa.org/statistics.php

I think they are entitled to their view, and that there are many countries in which they can have that. They cannot come to Canada and have that, but I'm inclined to think that they know that when they arrive and are essentially ok with it.

The belief that Muslims are determined to bring in Sharia law is, in my opinion, simply hysteria. In Canada, many things that *used* to be laws were based on biblical teachings, and even though certain segments of our society might like a return to that, it's not going to happen. And it's not going to happen in Canada or Europe either, regardless of how many Islamphobe sites and you-tube videos are put out there. If someone - Christian or Muslim - wanted to make abortion illegal, can you imagine the outcry? Harper wouldn't even let one of his MPs bring up the discussion. How likely is it that making homosexuality illegal, or flogging or stoning legal punishments for crimes would be even considered, let alone a possibility, even if we brought in a million more Muslims?

Why? I'm assuming the practices you are referring to are against the law in Canada, and they'll be against the law for Muslims that come here. If a Muslim comes to Canada and does something illegal, they'll suffer the consequences, as they should. I honestly fail to see how this has anything to do with Islamphobia - which appears to be based on a belief that bringing in Muslims means we're going to lose "Canadian" traditions and that every Muslim is out to convert us to Sharia law and/or perpetrate an attack against us. Islamaphobes seem determined to belief the worst, regardless of what the evidence shows - namely, that our already large immigrant Muslim population hasn't imposed Sharia law on us, subjected us to terrorist attacks or even taken away Christmas. Generally, they've quietly lived their Muslim life in the community, much like any other Canadian.

In this discussion, I've acknowledged that Sharia law includes some pretty horrific things, that its likely Muslim refugees will have a more conservative lifestyle, and that Europe has a problem with the refugees, but more because there are so many and its much easier for them to get there, than here. I've heard the reports of serious cultural differences resulting in a disproportionate number of rapes by Muslim men, but nobody's provided any credible links to this supposed fact (or maybe I missed them, I'm sure I've missed more than a few posts). My acknowledgements of and willingness to discuss what I agree are valid concerns go unnoticed and undiscussed, so hey - 'lack of hearing' isn't limited to us gullible Liberal types.

Is your defense really that Catholic priests only like twelve year old boys?

These are the ppl you entrust with your salvation. Not me personally, cause I think religion is bullshit, but when you are leading the flock it behooves you not to bugger them, and I mean that both figuratively and metaphorically.

"The belief that Muslims are determined to bring in Sharia law is, in my opinion, simply hysteria"

Remember that video I posted for you to watch which at first you assumed was just muslim bashing till you realized she was actually on the side of tolerance?

If you really had watched it, at the 21 minute mark the young intellectual she interviewed quite clearly stated that all muslims believe in sharia, and that sharia was there (England) whether you liked it or not.

I guess he was just hysterical when he said it.

"No, I'm one of those who thinks Islam is an ideology that incorporates politics, religion, law, land acquisition, and perpetrates terror for any and all these reasons. And more. Kidnapping young ladies and forcing them to become sexual slaves is for personal gratification."

I wrote that statement and stand by it. I won't post any of the literally thousands upon thousands of stories showing this to be true, but an article about sex slavery and how it is allowed in the Qu'ran. I'm taking for granted you are educated in Islam to know it is indeed an ideology and not "just" a religion, so I won't respond to that particular aspect of the quote, okay?

The Quran in Sura 23:5-6 says:

5 [Most certainly true believers] . . . guard their private parts scrupulously, 6 except with regard to their wives and those who are legally in their possession, for in that case they shall not be blameworthy. (Sayyid Abul A’La Maududi, The Meaning of the Quran, vol. 3, p. 237)

The key words are "those who are legally in their possession.

It's ok to rape and pillage, btw

Quran in Sura 4:24 says:

And forbidden to you are wedded wives of other people except those who have fallen in your hands (as prisoners of war) . . . (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 319). (See also Suras 4:3 and 33:50)

[eyeball]

Looting means to take without paying.

I never said we didn't pay our accomplices.

[dialamah]

Many points you make are not relevant to the Muslim situation.

You seem to be saying that because Christians were savages centuries ago it is alright for Muslims to be savages now.

I'm saying it's not all right for anyone to be savages, in the past, now or then.

You say that there are Christians in our society who oppose gay marriage. Yes but they aren't killing them, are they?

They still do from time to time, but I would agree that in Canada and the States, it is illegal to do so and if they are caught, they are punished.

In other parts of the world, however, there are Christians who believe it is their duty to kill homosexuals, and rape and kill lesbians, and this practice is not discouraged by their government. That is no more acceptable to me than Islamic countries who kill homosexuals.

The point is that a privately held belief, whether by a rifle-toting Alberta rancher who'd "kill any guy who tried anything" to a Muslim who believes homosexuality is punishable by death are both subject to the law in Canada which says that killing someone else is a criminal act. The Alberta rancher is no better or worse than the Muslim for their lethal thoughts about gays.

The shooter in Colorado is a crazy person. We have crazy persons here who do these things, not a whole nation of them.

White extremist terrorism is a larger problem in the States than Islamic terrorism, but it's glossed over in just this way "oh, but he was a single crazy person out of a bunch of not-crazy people". The majority of Americans/Canadians do not condone violence, but there are a few who do. In the same way, the vast majority of Muslims do not condone violence, but some do. You choose to focus on the minority, and then project that on to the majority.

There are some groups from that region of the world who do perpetrate violence, extreme violence, against anyone who disagrees with them. That's a problem. Those are the same people the refugees are trying to get away from, and instead of realizing this, you prefer to belief that these escapees from violence want to perpetrate it over here. Thats just not logical. The refugees may indeed have different beliefs and be more conservative than you or I, but that doesn't by default make them violent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html?_r=0

You talk about rapes committed here in this country. Again, it is against the law and punishable when the perpetrator is caught. In Muslim culture it is fine to rape. Women are not worthy of respect or protection.

In India as well, if recent news reports are anything to go by. Yet, rape in India is illegal but unfortunately there hasn't been the political will in India to enforce those laws. Has the incidence of rape in Canada been changed by our large South Asian population? Rape is illegal in every country that I know of, including Islamic ones. The problem is in the prosecution of it -- too many countries blame the victim, and victims tend not to report, and too many men get off scott free.

In Canada, rape is illegal - but it still happens. And, it is punishable by law - yet, there's still work to be done to ensure that punishment actually happens. It's still a problem in this country for blaming the victim, and using her behavior to make her at fault. Too many women don't report because they know that they'll be doubted and that the men will get off scott free.

This isn't to say that Canada is as 'bad' as these other countries, because we are ahead of India, or Egypt, or Yemen and most other countries. But the assumption that we're *so* different and *so* much more advanced in every way is wrong.

People are not singling Muslims out from every other religion. They are simply noting the Muslim culture that is not compatible with our society and which they refuse to abandon in accordance with our laws. It is more likely this refusal to compromise and assimilate that makes things like the holocaust and genocide possible.

Third generation European-descended Canadians who rape women, murder gays, molest children - are they from a culture that is 'not compatible' with our society, and are refusing to abandon in accordance with our laws, as well? Or is it only Muslims who are 'culturally incompatible' if they rape, murder or indulge in pedophilia?

I do not hate Muslims. If they want to be Muslims that is their business - in their own countries. I just don't see how they will be good for Canada as long as they continue to bring their religion and their culture here. I love our laws and our freedoms and any influence that opposes those laws and freedoms is not something I will welcome.

On your logic, every law that anyone breaks in Canada 'opposes' our laws and freedoms, whether that person is Muslim or otherwise. Muslim people are not a specific threat to our freedoms, regardless of what personal beliefs they bring with them. Laws maintain our freedom; people who break the laws suffer consequences and that goes for Muslims as well as South Asians, Asians, Germans, Australians, Japanese, Chinese, Hindus, Christians, Catholics, Sikhs, Buddhists, agnostics and atheists.

You think we are ignorant and intolerant? We have researched, at least I have and I have found that throughout history Muslims have been troublemakers everywhere they go. Have you read any of the books written by Muslims who have immigrated to western countries and told of their lives under Islamic law? Those people are not lying. You don't see books published by Canadians who emigrate and write about how cruel and barbaric Canada is. People don't make up things like that.

I have an uncle who hated Canada so much that he went to the States as soon as he could get the money together. He had nothing good to say about Canada, lots good to say about the States.

My sister converted to Islam, then met her husband and moved to Egypt where she's lived for the last 10 years. She acknowledges things about Egypt and about Islam that are difficult for her to understand, but also sees things that she thinks would be a benefit for Canadians and Canadian society.

So don't preach at me about 'facts'. Take a look at the facts yourself.

I like balance; I don't see any balance in your 'facts'. If it's anti-Islam, then it must be 'true', and thus Muslims are not welcome in your Canada.

I'm certainly aware of the patriarchal society Islam supports, and that the extremists are very extreme and very violent. I just don't see this huge divide between conservative Muslims and conservative Christians, and I don't see that people anywhere in the world behave much differently, given any excuse. We are lucky to live in Canada, to have a society which is rich and safe enough that we easily afford freedoms to everyone, that the law is advanced in terms of human rights, that we value the rights of individuals as much as we do. Intolerance can destroy all that, but the intolerance isn't just from outside the country, it can come just as easily from Canadians.

Also, it's a fact that in order to hurt/kill other people, the killer has to remove their humanity. Part of that involves defining them as not-worthy, putting them into a category where they an be devalued. It works on an individual level as well as a group level. Defining a group as "stone-age", "barbaric", "backward" etc., and ourselves as "culturally advanced", "more deserving" is part of that process. Presumably, we won't progress to actual killing, except for the odd 'crazy person', but I for one am not going to let such intolerant remarks pass unchallenged.

[dialamah]

Okay, you win.

The bit I quoted here though, are you sure you're referring to me? I don't remember making either of those quotes. It doesn't sound like something I would write.

Edit> Actually, I feel I should apologize for my response here. I didn't mean for it to sound so dismissive. There comes a time, though, when posts just get too long to deal with.

Yes, it's hard to respond to long posts and actualy, you responded to the quotes I included saying 'they have defined themselves as Christians, therefore they are Christians, even if you don't like what they do". I missed that portion in my response, so my bad for lack of clarity.

Mostly I find your comments reasonable and clear-headed, although I think we differ a bit on just how much of a problem Syrian refugees might be.

[Argus]

I never said we didn't pay our accomplices.

And our accomplices are them.

[Bryan]

Christianity certainly is a violent religion that teaches killing innocent people!

.

Mohammed taught his followers to kill and he led by example. Jesus taught his followers not to kill and he led by example.

[drummindiver]

I never said we didn't pay our accomplices.

.

Looting is free, which we didn't do but paid our accomplices in not looting which is free but we paid them to do though we don't agree with looting for free or pay.

So, I'm assuming the accomplices we didn't pay to not loot would be the Americans and English, among others, who were there not looting as well.Were they paid for not looting, or, unlike us, did they get money not to loot.

Clearly, many MEers were looting. I don't think they were being paid to loot except of course for the loot itself.

[dialamah]

An article discussing Sufism, as an antidote to ISIS.

Only Sufis have the religious tools, intellectual skills, and political cunning to dismantle ISIS. That is precisely why they are excommunicated by ISIS, seen as far more of a threat than Christians, Alawites, and Muslim Shiites. Warplanes and smart bombs alone will never succeed at eradicating ISIS and nor will God-loving Sufi clerics armed with nothing but religious hymns, chants, and copies of the Holy Quran. Hand-in-hand, however, military might and spiritual Sufism might--just might--spell out the physical and ideological destruction of ISIS.

Sufism proves false statements claiming or implying that violence is the only relevant teaching of Islam, such as this statement:

Mohammed taught his followers to kill and he led by example.

[drummindiver]

There's an inter-generational aspect to this vandalism and looting as well that will probably make inter-generational theft look like petty crime in comparison.

Sorry, what?

So inter generational vandalization and looting will make inter generational theft look like petty crime.

Not to be facetious, but

Young and old foxes vandalized and looted what we don't know, but it will make what the old and young coots stole seem like peanuts in comparison.

Man, it's Sunday, I've had a few, and even after dumbing this down I still don't know what you talkin bout willis.