Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 So let's put this in context. Say you were going to buy a car, and found out 90% of those cars blow up when they hit a curb. Would you just say to yourself "Well I have no intention of discriminating against this particular car just because 90% of this model blows up when it hits a curb. I'm buying it! Sure, that other model there costs the same and never blows up, but I can't just assume this is one of the ones that blows up for that would be discrimination! I couldn't hurt the car, could I?
Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) So let's put this in context. Say you were going to buy a car, and found out 90% of those cars blow up when they hit a curb. Would you just say to yourself "Well I have no intention of discriminating against this particular car just because 90% of this model blows up when it hits a curb. I'm buying it! Sure, that other model there costs the same and never blows up, but I can't just assume this is one of the ones that blows up for that would be discrimination! I don't think 'indiscriminate fear and hatred' is acceptable. That doesn't mean I don't think wariness and doubt are unacceptable. When the polls tell us 88% of Egyptians feel anyone who dares to try to leave Islam should be executed I feel this is sufficient cause for me to doubt the sophistication and tolerance of your average Egyptian. Wait a minute... Edited December 17, 2015 by bcsapper
On Guard for Thee Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 So let's put this in context. Say you were going to buy a car, and found out 90% of those cars blow up when they hit a curb. Would you just say to yourself "Well I have no intention of discriminating against this particular car just because 90% of this model blows up when it hits a curb. I'm buying it! Sure, that other model there costs the same and never blows up, but I can't just assume this is one of the ones that blows up for that would be discrimination! No, I believe the context was to do with indiscriminate fear of something. Your little car story, while funny, is a totally different context.
Argus Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 I couldn't hurt the car, could I? The car could certainly hurt you. "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 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 Wait a minute... Consider the words 'indiscriminate' as well as 'fear' and 'hate'. "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 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 No, I believe the context was to do with indiscriminate fear of something. Your little car story, while funny, is a totally different context. Logic is logic. Out of a million and a half Ford Pintos, how many actually blew up and killed their owners? Only a couple of thousand! So by refusing to discriminate you'd have gone out and bought a Ford Pinto without a second thought. Using my logic, on the other hand, I'd be like, uhm, I'm not buying one of those. "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 December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 Consider the words 'indiscriminate' as well as 'fear' and 'hate'. I did. I said this: Indiscriminate hate and fear is only acceptable at 100% And you said this: I don't think 'indiscriminate fear and hatred' is acceptable. I think we're in agreement. Cars notwithstanding. Hence my confusion.
On Guard for Thee Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 Logic is logic. Out of a million and a half Ford Pintos, how many actually blew up and killed their owners? Only a couple of thousand! So by refusing to discriminate you'd have gone out and bought a Ford Pinto without a second thought. Using my logic, on the other hand, I'd be like, uhm, I'm not buying one of those. Logic is logic. Pintos had a flaw built into their design making them all susceptible to blowing up if rear ended. I'm scratching my head as to how you apply that to a group of people, without being indiscriminant.
Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 The car could certainly hurt you. A 1960 Chevy Corvette could hurt me. I'd still have one.
Argus Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) A 1960 Chevy Corvette could hurt me. I'd still have one. If there is an advantage that is worth the risk then it's worth the risk. I can't think of an advantage to importing tens or hundreds of thousands of new Canadians from the Middle East as opposed to almost anywhere else, while I can definitely think of disadvantages. Edited December 17, 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
Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 If there is an advantage that is worth the risk then it's worth the risk. I can't think of an advantage to importing tens or hundreds of thousands of new Canadians from the Middle East as opposed to almost anywhere else, while I can definitely think of disadvantages. I just can't see discriminating against an individual without a reason. If they say they are going to let x amount of people in, so be it. They let me in. I have no objection to kicking them out again at the first sign of bad behavior, but I have to ask how I would have felt if they had denied me entry back in 1984 because I was a soccer fan and there were some pretty dodgy English soccer fans around at the time.
kimmy Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 I just don't want chunks of Canada to end up like Malmo, Sweden or Birmingham England. -k (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
drummindiver Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) I just don't want chunks of Canada to end up like Malmo, Sweden or Birmingham England. -k Didn't MSM tell you that is all a hoax? Edited December 17, 2015 by drummindiver
Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 I just don't want chunks of Canada to end up like Malmo, Sweden or Birmingham England. -k Me neither (I was born and raised in Bradford, England), but it is unavoidable. Everyone in the world who can travel to make their life better will come this way, not go the other way. And they will bring their religion and culture with them. The trick is to make sure that they know what is acceptable and what is not, and bar/eject those who don't agree.
GostHacked Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 So let's put this in context. Say you were going to buy a car, and found out 90% of those cars blow up when they hit a curb. Would you just say to yourself "Well I have no intention of discriminating against this particular car just because 90% of this model blows up when it hits a curb. I'm buying it! Sure, that other model there costs the same and never blows up, but I can't just assume this is one of the ones that blows up for that would be discrimination! I would suggest using 95% for a more fake dramatic attempt at saying the majority of Muslims are defective.
GostHacked Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 I just don't want chunks of Canada to end up like Malmo, Sweden or Birmingham England. -k That's already happened. There are section of Ottawa carved out for certain groups. We have an area well known for Somalians, then there is China town, Little Italy, and some of the lower income large apartment buildings have a high concentration of Muslims. Vancouver is mostly Asian, Toronto has large black communities. We are already somewhat segregated. When people are settled here, they are settled with people that can relate to them.
DogOnPorch Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 I would suggest using 95% for a more fake dramatic attempt at saying the majority of Muslims are defective. Islam is defective. It's akin to fascism. Anything else that preached this sort of superiority and violence would be against the law. But Islam happens to be a religion... Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
cybercoma Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) So let's put this in context. Say you were going to buy a car, and found out 90% of those cars blow up when they hit a curb.If 90% of the 1,500,000,000 Muslims in the world were going to kill you, then you would be dead already. Edited December 17, 2015 by cybercoma
cybercoma Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 A lot of Muslim scholars here making grand claims about people they've probably never met in their lives.
DogOnPorch Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 A lot of Muslim scholars here making grand claims about people they've probably never met in their lives. Islam IS the Religion of Peace, after-all. Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 Islam is defective. It's akin to fascism. Anything else that preached this sort of superiority and violence would be against the law. But Islam happens to be a religion... I grow tired of your rhetoric. Actually I was tired with it before you took a year hiatus. So what made you return to spew the same hatred as before? Never mind I know your answer. But it's nice that you and Argus can trot out that kind of stuff without ever bringing a solution to the table, while absolving our constant meddling in the M.E as part of the reason the place is so messed up, and placing the blame solely on ALL Muslims. Most of us suggested the bombing stop. This way we can rebuild (hahah like Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya) their nation and have them live there instead of leaving a war torn area we share responsibility on making their way of life absolute shit. Remember Mission Accomplished was to make Iraq a peaceful place in order to not be a hot bed of terrorism. That did not work out so well. And the expectation is that once Assad is gone Syria will turn around into peace. The track record does not support that line of thinking. Sure there are some bad Muslims (which I claim are not true or real Muslims, but then I get beat back with the statement 'how could you', kind of confusing). But we are not going after the bad ones. The main goal of ousting Assad has not been accomplished yet. And we have not made a dent in ISIS because of the Saudi backing for the group which makes our stance against Islamic terrorism 100% two faced. We support it in one area and denounce it in another area. We are not consistent in the approach and execution of this war against terror. If you have a plan to solve the crisis in the M.E. I'd love to hear it. I know you can reach back into the annals of history to support your argument but you fail to have enough foresight to see where all this is heading. I know I know, screw it, there is no sense in even making this post.
On Guard for Thee Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 If 90% of the 1,500,000,000 Muslims in the world were going to kill you, then you would be dead already. Yeah but pulling wacky numbers out of thin air, if that's all one has, can I suppose, be convincing to some.
cybercoma Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 Islam IS the Religion of Peace, after-all.let's face it, as a vocal anti-theist, you don't care that it's Islam. You're happy to show disdain for anyone holding religious beliefs.
GostHacked Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 Yeah but pulling wacky numbers out of thin air, if that's all one has, can I suppose, be convincing to some. And things like this recent Trans Pacific Partnership are more devastating to Canada than Islamic terrorism could ever be.
cybercoma Posted December 17, 2015 Report Posted December 17, 2015 And things like this recent Trans Pacific Partnership are more devastating to Canada than Islamic terrorism could ever be.yeah, but it's hard to be racist against paper when it's also white.
Recommended Posts