Bryan Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 There's nothing phobic about opposing an ideology that preaches death and violence.
eyeball Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 Usually it's Christians and the 11th century or so, used by boneheads trying to excuse 21st Century Muslims. (Not all of them, of course. But then, I don't suppose all Christians were in favour of the Crusades) It's usually conservative right-wingers. The excuse for today's chaos is either the fault of the last mission and the lefty who cocked it up or the Dark Ages. Anything in between, especially the last 60 years, is pretty much verboten. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
On Guard for Thee Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 There's nothing phobic about opposing an ideology that preaches death and violence. Japanese is a nationality. Why were they locked up?
eyeball Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 I guess if there's an upside to Islamophobia it would have to be all the heart-warming concern and humanity towards homosexuals that conservatives appear to have been imbued with. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
On Guard for Thee Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 I guess if there's an upside to Islamophobia it would have to be all the heart-warming concern and humanity towards homosexuals that conservatives appear to have been imbued with. Really, where did that come from I wonder? Deflection?
eyeball Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 As I said, appear to have been imbued with. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) Japanese is a nationality. Why were they locked up? Why were they? Edited December 8, 2015 by DogOnPorch Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Big Guy Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) There's nothing phobic about opposing an ideology that preaches death and violence. If what you are saying is that Islam is a religion and ideology that preaches death and violence then I thank you for making your position clear. That does explain your unique reaction to many of the issues discussed here. Thank you for being honest and candid. You have the right to your views but they certainly do not reflect the views of the vast majority of Canadians in my Canada. I trust that those views are expressed only under the protection of anonymity do indicate your reluctance to take any responsibility for them. I find it sad that in this day and age that there are still people in Canada who are as misinformed and uninformed as you appear to be. There are currently a little over one million Muslims in Canada. Do you really believe that there are over a million people in Canada who are faithful to a religion that preachers death and violence? Can you safely leave your house at any time? Edited December 8, 2015 by Big Guy Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Black Dog Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 There is a substantial difference. Nope. Presumption of collective guilt based on shared group characteristics (race/ethnicity in one case, religion in the other). Same shit, different pile.
waldo Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) There's nothing phobic about opposing an ideology that preaches death and violence. this video casts that stated "phobia" in a fine light... shows it for exactly what it is: link to video Edited December 8, 2015 by Michael Hardner added video link
DogOnPorch Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) Nope. Presumption of collective guilt based on shared group characteristics (race/ethnicity in one case, religion in the other). Same shit, different pile. Agreed. During WW2, Japan showed everybody that they were certainly not a threat to world peace. Edited December 8, 2015 by DogOnPorch Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Argus Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 You maybe right, however, we helped some nations crush said Arab Spring (Qatar, Bahrain) while we assisted the rise in other nations (Libya, Syria). How did "we" help Qatar or Bahrain do anything at all? "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 December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 There's nothing even remotely xenophobic about it. It's an informed, intelligent assessment of the situation. Like everything else Trump says it uses a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel. It's impossible and unconstitutional. His suggestion of some kind of registry for Muslims is even dafter. Mind you, I believe immigration from Muslim countries, especially the middle east and western Asia, should be drastically reduced. Stats show that immigrants from those areas do not perform well economically as a group, and I don't believe they can be integrated nearly as easily as those from other regions. The threat of terrorism is just the icing on he cake. Still, to suggest an absolute ban, even on business or tourism visitors is over the top. "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 December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 And yet the vast majority of islamic people do no such thing. The reality is, Islam is no more violent than Christianity. It's followers are just largely relegated to the stone age. Yes, the stone age, where violence for those who offend God was common... "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 December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 Naziism isn't a religion - it's a political ideology. I'm sure we have our fair share. And the problem with Islam is it contains a political ideology, as well. Not all Germans or even all Nazis supported the gas chambers, or even knew about them. But without the support of a vast bulk of people for the broad, general outlines of Nazism, the gas chambers would not have been possible. "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
Smallc Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 Mind you, I believe immigration from Muslim countries, especially the middle east and western Asia, should be drastically reduced. I believe that we should only be bringing over immigrants for the economic benefit of Canada. Where they happen to be from is immaterial. I am not in favour of refugees or the majority of family class immigrants.
Argus Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 If what you are saying is that Islam is a religion and ideology that preaches death and violence then I thank you for making your position clear. That does explain your unique reaction to many of the issues discussed here. It's a weary old cliche of internet flaming to pretend ones own views are representative of a generally accepted societal view while ones opponent is 'unique' in being so out of step. It's invariably based on no actual evidence. "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 December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 Nope. Presumption of collective guilt based on shared group characteristics (race/ethnicity in one case, religion in the other). Same shit, different pile. So you'd have no problem buying a Yugo? I mean, some of them worked... "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 December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) I believe that we should only be bringing over immigrants for the economic benefit of Canada. Where they happen to be from is immaterial. I am not in favour of refugees or the majority of family class immigrants. And were our immigration bureaucrats capable of discerning just which among the potential applicants would be economically successful I might agree. Unfortunately, many years of evidence have shown their fail level is unacceptably high. They might think some guy from Islamabad will do well because he has a degree and speaks English (after a fashion) but his degree might not be accepted here for good and just reasons, and his English unacceptable given the types of jobs he might seek with that degree. His wife is unlikely to be a work force participant, and thus he will be far less likely to achieve the status of actual taxpayer than, say, a professional young couple from Turin or a tradesman and his wife from Lisbon. In fact, now that I think of it, a couple who both have a profession would be considerably better economically, for Canada, in most cases, than a couple where only one has a profession and the other has never worked outside the home and never plans to. Edited December 8, 2015 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
WestCanMan Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 What does that have to do with North America?So you can't connect the dots? You don't see patterns from over there taking shape over here, or in Northern Europe? If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. Bug-juice is the new Kool-aid. Ex-Canadian since April 2025
Smallc Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 So you can't connect the dots? You don't see patterns from over there taking shape over here No, do you?
Guest Posted December 9, 2015 Report Posted December 9, 2015 I guess if there's an upside to Islamophobia it would have to be all the heart-warming concern and humanity towards homosexuals that conservatives appear to have been imbued with. Maybe they took it from the liberals. They certainly don't seem to need their concern and humanity towards homosexuals when it comes to their treatment by Muslims (just the bad ones, of course).
Argus Posted December 9, 2015 Report Posted December 9, 2015 I guess if there's an upside to Islamophobia it would have to be all the heart-warming concern and humanity towards homosexuals that conservatives appear to have been imbued with. I think this view is derived from the typical leftist black and white view of the world. If you agree on every single point of gay rights without exception or equivocation you're okay. If you have the slightest shred of doubt or discomfort about anything whatsoever then you're basically in the same box as Hitler and the KKK. There is no room for wavering in the progressive mind. You are either with them 100% or you are the enemy. A lot of conservatives, esp social conservatives have problems with the gay lifestyle with its often flamboyant, open sexuality and multiple partners. Others believe marriage is a religious thing, and have both a religious and cultural problem with gays marrying or at least, calling their unions marriage. Myself, I never liked how gay rights were pushed by the media culture, which portrayed any doubt as basically caveman stuff, and then were pushed by the unelected courts. What they do in their own time, tho, is not my business. All to say there are shades of gray in this, but none of it is dead black like you have from fundamentalist Islam which says homosexuals need to be killed. I don't think you'd find even the more religious social conservatives in Canada ever supporting anything remotely like that. So it's no wonder that Muslim feelings about gays are mentioned. And of course it's a handy way to show the hypocrisy of the "progressive" position on Muslims, which exempts Muslim world social beliefs from the same intense scrutiny the Left applies to everyone else. If you're a white Christian and don't think gays should marry you're an evil bigot. If you're a Muslim and think gays should be executed, well, that's not something progressives are going to bother over, just like they won't care about the regressive social beliefs about gender equality which are commonplace throughout the Muslim world. "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
Smeelious Posted December 9, 2015 Report Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) My black and white conviction is that leftists have black and white opinions! I have no grey area where their grey area is concerned! Edited December 9, 2015 by Smeelious
Recommended Posts