Progressives and Islam

[dre]

Well, exactly. That's why I don't understand the effort by those who might be regarded as progressives to support such regressive notions as those espoused by religious extremism.

Edit> You do have to wonder if maybe they themselves think they are progressives?

I think its more of a libertarian thing. People that really believe in personal liberty believe you should be allowed to think or say or believe whatever you want as individuals even if you think or say awful things. And they reject the idea of being held accountable for things other people did, or the concept of guilt by association. And so they object to the broad characterization of ethnic, political, or religious groups as a whole and instead see them as large collections of individuals.

[dre]

Every day that goes by where you could've donated blood, bone marrow, or a kidney and you don't is a day that you kill someone apparently,

Jerking off is murder too. All those little sperms could have been someone really special if you didn't waste them.

[Bonam]

Every day that goes by where you could've donated blood, bone marrow, or a kidney and you don't is a day that you kill someone apparently,

I'm a mass murderer on par with Genghis Khan~

[Pateris]

Why didn't you report those imams and teachers to the authorities and press?

Funny that. I did contact the RCMP. The response I got was essentially "we don't investigate these claims because we might be seen as discriminating"

[cybercoma]

Funny that. I did contact the RCMP. The response I got was essentially "we don't investigate these claims because we might be seen as discriminating"

BS. The RCMP would roasted on a spit if it came out that someone contacted them about a true​ terrorist threat and they said to the informant that "we don't investigate these claims because we might be seen as discriminating." You're just making crap up now.

Chances are if you did contact the RCMP, which I highly doubt you did, and they didn't do anything, it's because you didn't have any credible​ information to give them.

Edited August 24, 2016 by cybercoma

[Pateris]

The issue is that they said teaching these things is not a crime. Therefore, nothing to see here. Unless I had evidence of an IMMINENT terrorist act, there is nothing they can do. The fact these schools are creating a generation of potential terrorists is perfectly legal in Canada.

[Guest]

I think its more of a libertarian thing. People that really believe in personal liberty believe you should be allowed to think or say or believe whatever you want as individuals even if you think or say awful things. And they reject the idea of being held accountable for things other people did, or the concept of guilt by association. And so they object to the broad characterization of ethnic, political, or religious groups as a whole and instead see them as large collections of individuals.

Exactly. I could have written that myself. I would never restrict anyone from doing whatever they want to themselves, regardless of what I think of their beliefs or actions. It's only when they affect others that I take issue with it.

Edited August 24, 2016 by bcsapper

[Guest]

This quote perfectly sums up my thoughts about those who want to force their own cultural practices on others under the smokescreen of ethics like battling misogyny.

"When, as happened recently in France, an attempt is made to coerce women out of the burqa rather than creating a situation in which a woman can choose what she wishes to do, it’s not about liberating her, but about unclothing her.

It becomes an act of humiliation and cultural imperialism. It’s not about the burqa. It’s about the coercion.

Coercing a woman out of a burqa is as bad as coercing her into one." - Arundhati Roy

Edited August 24, 2016 by Guest

[Argus]

So if these barbarians are not stoning anyone we need to protest that they are thinking that stoning is proper. Should they protest that they realize stoning is unacceptable in Canada we should really get in their face.

We need to get in their face if they say boys and girls can't play together or have swim classes together, too.

[Argus]

Really? What inhumane aspects of Islam have western countries chosen to codify?

She said governments choose inhumane aspects of their religion to codify. Islam isn't a western religion.

But carry on. I know that nothing in life matters more to you than encouraging and defending the spread of Islam and ensuring its brutal social values are unchallenged.

Edited August 24, 2016 by Argus

[Argus]

Modern western cultures are not ruled by Sharia law, nor are they ruled by Christian law. We have secular law in our countries.

Our laws are whatever we decide we want them to be. If 'we' change, and become much more religious and hostile to liberal values, the laws will inevitably change to reflect this.

[Argus]

When I say we should aggressively profile, I mean we should concentrate our efforts to identify extremists on more likely individuals. I'm not concerned about the social views of applicants as our culture leads more people towards secular, humanist morals every generation.

Not Muslims. Studies have shown second generation Muslims are actually MORE religious than their immigrant parents.

Canada is importing religious devotion.

Young and middle-aged immigrants to Canada, most of them from Asia, are countering the trend that sees homegrown Canadians becoming more secular.

http://vancouversun.com/news/staff-blogs/young-immigrants-2-5-times-more-likely-to-be-religious-than-canadian-born

Then, again, maybe we should look into how they're being raised.

The study, titled “The Lovers of Death? — Islamist Extremism in Our Mosques, Schools and Libraries”, says what worried them was not the presence of extremist literature in Ottawa school and mosque libraries, but that they found only such writings.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canadian-muslim-leaders-slam-study-on-prevalence-of-extremist-writing-as-attempt-to-vilify-community

Comments like this lead me to believe you are fine with religious prejudices, provided they are your own. It is actually the progressives who have been leading the charge to combat racism, sexism, homophobia and equal opportunity while dragging conservatives like an anchor into the current century.

I'm not particularly religious. and conservatives are those who's motto could be 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it'. That doesn't mean we won't embrace change, if we are convinced that this change is good.

Progressive are those who's motto could be "Ooooh, look! Shiny!", and embrace change for the sake of change, convinced it must be good. They never consider complications but always go for sweeping, simplistic solutions to problems even when nobody has demonstrated the problem actually exist. Progressives are, in many ways, like immature adolescents, who get desperately upset and emotional at things adults don't. They really hate being argued with, too, because they presume a moral superiority to whatever they believe, and so instantly accuse those opposing it of moral deficiencies.

As for the current discussion, it's amply clear that while progressives like to tout themselves as uniquely opposed to things like racism, sexism and homophobia, all they really are is those who embrace fads and fashion. Because when we see a religion and political ideology which is clearly and violently sexist and homophobic, not only do progressive refuse to attack or challenge it but rush to defend it.

Edited August 24, 2016 by Argus

[eyeball]

Coercing a woman out of a burqa is as bad as coercing her into one." - Arundhati Roy

Men who order women what to do under the guise of protecting them from men ordering them what to do makes us all look like idiots.

This is why I think it would be better to ask that men who can't control themselves wear blinders.

[Argus]

I think its more of a libertarian thing. People that really believe in personal liberty believe you should be allowed to think or say or believe whatever you want as individuals even if you think or say awful things. And they reject the idea of being held accountable for things other people did, or the concept of guilt by association. And so they object to the broad characterization of ethnic, political, or religious groups as a whole and instead see them as large collections of individuals.

Unfortunately, when you're talking about groups, as in hundreds of thousands of people we bring into the country, you need to consider the whole.

[Argus]

It becomes an act of humiliation and cultural imperialism. It’s not about the burqa. It’s about the coercion.

Cultural imperialism would be forcing our culture on people in other lands. This is our land. Newcomers should embrace our culture or go home. Newcomers who come here in ever greater numbers and insist on retaining their culture are the real cultural imperialists.

[Argus]

The issue is that they said teaching these things is not a crime. Therefore, nothing to see here. Unless I had evidence of an IMMINENT terrorist act, there is nothing they can do. The fact these schools are creating a generation of potential terrorists is perfectly legal in Canada.

As in the study done recently of Ottawa mosques and schools.

The study, titled “The Lovers of Death? — Islamist Extremism in Our Mosques, Schools and Libraries”, says what worried them was not the presence of extremist literature in Ottawa school and mosque libraries, but that they found only such writings.

[cybercoma]

As in the study done recently of Ottawa mosques and schools.

The study, titled “The Lovers of Death? — Islamist Extremism in Our Mosques, Schools and Libraries”, says what worried them was not the presence of extremist literature in Ottawa school and mosque libraries, but that they found only such writings.

Oh yeah, about that.....

Here is the "study" in question: http://secondstarpublishing.com/product/product1/

​Now, I know there's no title protection on the term study but typically when I say study I mean something that has gone through the process of scientific peer review to be accepted in a journal. That process ensures that at the very least the methodology is sound.

​Second Star Publishing is a self-publisher. Literally, anyone can publish anything​ through them.

​One of the authors' previous works include a book on how to profit from electronic media. The other author claims to be an expert because he testified before the Senate on C-51. You know what other experts testified at that hearing? Tarek Fatah, an opinion columnist from The Sun.

​As if their utter lack of credibility wasn't enough, toss these guys $7 for their "monograph" and let's take a look at their methods and findings in this study.

​They snuck into a handful of Mosques and schools and took pictures of bookshelves. By handful, I mean less than you can count on one hand. That's it​. Despite their claims as to how young Muslims perceive these writings, they didn't interview a single person. They even destroy their own argument by noting that Western universities and libraries often carry controversial titles like Mein Kampf​ on the shelves.

​They call respected institutions like al-Azhar University in Cairo an "extremist organization."

One of their other assertions is that the Ontario Public School Board (that's right, nothing to do with Islam) is "re-enforcing the inferiority of women." (The irony that the guy who started a thread about public schools teaching the superiority of women shouldn't be lost on anyone.)

​Finally, Stephanie Carvin, who holds a PhD from The London School of Economics and specializes in intarnational relations, particularly security, terrorism, and technology at The Norman Patterson School of International Affairs in Carleton University, said that this is nothing more than "two guys in a basement reading Breitbart."

​But that still won't stop Argus from believing that this report is true because it confirms his biases. There's no need for thinking critically about your sources when they tell you what you want to hear.

Edited August 24, 2016 by cybercoma

[Guest]

Men who order women what to do under the guise of protecting them from men ordering them what to do makes us all look like idiots.

This is why I think it would be better to ask that men who can't control themselves wear blinders.

Which men? Those who order women what to do under the guise of protecting them from men ordering them what to do or the men ordering them what to do.

I personally believe that a woman should be allowed to wear what she wants. A burka in Paris, a bikini in Mecca, it doesn't matter to me. I'm just not dumb enough to believe that the women wearing that stuff are all doing so because they choose to.

But as I can't differentiate between those who do and those who don't but are forced to anyway, I default to the choice, or appearance thereof.

Edited August 24, 2016 by bcsapper

[Big Guy]

Which men? Those who order women what to do under the guise of protecting them from men ordering them what to do or the men ordering them what to do.

I personally believe that a woman should be allowed to wear what she wants. A burka in Paris, a bikini in Mecca, it doesn't matter to me. I'm just not dumb enough to believe that the women wearing that stuff are all doing so because they choose to.

But as I can't differentiate between those who do and those who don't but are forced to anyway, I default to the choice, or appearance thereof.

So you think there are some women dress the way their spouses order them to?

[Guest]

So you think there are some women dress the way their spouses order them to?

I do. I also think there are some women who dress a certain way because they are terrified of what might happen if they don't, regardless of the views of their spouses. I also think there are some women who dress a certain way because it is just easier to do so, to avoid the fuss.

Edited August 25, 2016 by bcsapper

[Big Guy]

I do. I also think there are some women who dress a certain way because they are terrified of what might happen if they don't, regardless of the views of their spouses. I also think there are some women who dress a certain way because it is just easier to do so, to avoid the fuss.

It is accepted that there are probably some women of the Muslim faith who dress the way they do to satisfy their faith or their husbands wishes or both. But there are women of all kinds of faiths whose husbands dictate how they dress, where they go and who they see. There many women who will check with their husbands that their choice of wear for an event is appropriate.

There are very many instances where Muslim women, when asked, say that what they wear is their choice. Do you not believe them?

What do you find offensive or a problem with women wearing a hajib or other clothing in public?

[Guest]

It is accepted that there are probably some women of the Muslim faith who dress the way they do to satisfy their faith or their husbands wishes or both. But there are women of all kinds of faiths whose husbands dictate how they dress, where they go and who they see. There many women who will check with their husbands that their choice of wear for an event is appropriate.

There are very many instances where Muslim women, when asked, say that what they wear is their choice. Do you not believe them?

What do you find offensive or a problem with women wearing a hajib or other clothing in public?

I neither believe them nor disbelieve them. As I don't know, I default to the choice. I'm pro choice.

I don't find anything offensive about anything women choose to wear, or not wear, in public or in private, anywhere in the world. I just think that the fact that they might not choose it should not be something we are afraid to mention. You just mentioned that many women will check with their husbands that their choice of wear for an event is appropriate. What's wrong with mentioning that many women will wear clothing out of fear for what might happen if they dont?

[Big Guy]

I neither believe them nor disbelieve them. As I don't know, I default to the choice. I'm pro choice.

I don't find anything offensive about anything women choose to wear, or not wear, in public or in private, anywhere in the world. I just think that the fact that they might not choose it should not be something we are afraid to mention. You just mentioned that many women will check with their husbands that their choice of wear for an event is appropriate. What's wrong with mentioning that many women will wear clothing out of fear for what might happen if they dont?

It happens all the time. Visit a woman's shelter and you will find how prevalent the practice continues in all parts of Canada - and especially rural communities. What evidence do you have that it is more prevalent in Canadian Muslims than it is in the rest of the Canadian population?

Edited August 25, 2016 by Big Guy

[Guest]

It happens all the time. Visit a woman's shelter and you will find how prevalent the practice continues in all parts of Canada - and especially rural communities. What evidence do you have that it is more prevalent in Canadian Muslims than it is in the rest of the Canadian population?

None whatsoever. What evidence do you have that I said it was?

[Guest]

I personally believe that a woman should be allowed to wear what she wants. A burka in Paris, a bikini in Mecca, it doesn't matter to me. I'm just not dumb enough to believe that the women wearing that stuff are all doing so because they choose to.

But as I can't differentiate between those who do and those who don't but are forced to anyway, I default to the choice, or appearance thereof.

Agreed. Forcing someone out of a burqa or niqab isn't any better than forcing someone into one.