Because it's 2016

[Argus]

And you are the one who biatched because the PM gave jobs to women - "how can that be?", you whined, "they must have been less qualified because if they were qualified, they'd be men".

Your claim to be so concerned about women's equality is laughable.

Why? Because I disagree with you? You're not any kind of feminist. Nothing you have ever written gives me any thought that you have the slightest concern for women's rights or equality.

[Smallc]

I don't know why you insist on denying all the evidence, including what Muslims say in polls and surveys, which shows that unlike some of the others Muslims actually believe very, very strongly in theirs and are willing to kill and die, or at least, have others killed, because of what's written.

First - no, most Muslims are not willing to kill and die. Second, I didn't deny that some were.

Nuance. Get some.

[Smallc]

Certainly there is a difference between requirements imposed on religious officials and requirements imposed on the whole congregation.

No - it's all superstitious nonsense.

[eyeball]

Personally I don't trust people that put religion 1st.

Is that why you hate our Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

[dialamah]

Yep, nothing second-class here! Separate-but-equal!

-k

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/vandenbeld-mps-should-visit-mosques-and-other-places-of-worship-too

On Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau observed Eid al-Adha at a mosque in Ottawa, accompanied by a number of Ottawa area MPs. I was one of them. I did not enter through a side door – none of us did – despite claims made in coverage by the Citizen and some others. In the past, I have visited this mosque for community events, addressed the worshippers at Friday prayers, and attended funerals and celebrations. On many of these occasions, genders were not separated. In fact, I have only seen that to be the case during prayers.

I chose to wear the headscarf out of politeness. It was my choice. In the past, I have personally witnessed female guests attend that mosque without a headscarf, and without being criticized for it.

Please note - genders are not always separated, headscarf wearing is a choice.

I know, you'll immediately jump on the genders separated only during prayer, to support your argument that this proves women are treated as second class citizens - but according to this website, even that's not always the case:

The article also highlights that the mosque is gender segregated with is inaccurate. Most mosques have men and women praying in different spaces depending on the size of the gathering-for a large gathering like Eid or Friday prayers for example, but often during other prayers, women may pray on the main floor. Even during prayers movement between spaces for women is pretty fluid at OMA

I have no doubt that many Muslims follow very conservative gender roles, both at home and in their Mosque, and I certainly would encourage them to join the 21st Century. But this particular incident seems more like a witchhunt to discredit Trudeau than an honest appraisal of this particular mosque's practices in regards to women.

[DogOnPorch]

Guys, this thread is not about translations the Quran, or Sharia law, or the state of women's apparel in Turkey.

This thread is about Trudeau's visit to a specific mosque, and the policies of that specific mosque.

DoP, please stop. Everybody else, please stop responding to off-topic nonsense.

-k

That's wonderful and we've discussed both the mosque and its owner. Folks generally don't have a problem with Imam al-Qaradawi and his Jew/Homosexual killing-suggestions. Part of our rich diversity in Canada that I'll just have to get used to. I'm sure gays and Jews feel the same way.

However, one member linked the discussion to the Quran by claiming no such passage as the one quoted exists. It, of course, does. So in such a situation, what's the plan? Let members make such claims? Allow members to describe me as a liar? Discussing Islam and not being able to reference the Quran is a bit of a disadvantage...IMO.

[kimmy]

So in such a situation, what's the plan? Let members make such claims? Allow members to describe me as a liar? Discussing Islam and not being able to reference the Quran is a bit of a disadvantage...IMO.

I think your point has been made and it is not necessary for the thread to be sidetracked any further.

-k

[kimmy]

I know, you'll immediately jump on the genders separated only during prayer, to support your argument that this proves women are treated as second class citizens - but according to this website, even that's not always the case:

I have no doubt that many Muslims follow very conservative gender roles, both at home and in their Mosque, and I certainly would encourage them to join the 21st Century. But this particular incident seems more like a witchhunt to discredit Trudeau than an honest appraisal of this particular mosque's practices in regards to women.

For a while with just the mosque's photo to go from, I was trying to figure out if the claim of a balcony was false, and whether by Trudeau's phrase "the sisters upstairs" perhaps the main worship floor was a couple of steps down from the back row where some women were shown taking pictures.

But after finding the reporter's photo of the event it turns out that there is a balcony and that most of the sisters were indeed upstairs.

I think it's telling that the mosque's PR article about the event used a photo taken from an angle that doesn't show the balcony. When you look at the reporter's photo, things certainly don't look as "sunny", do they. If you look at the reporters' photo and tell me you still don't think those women were treated as second-class citizens, I have to conclude that you're either completely disconnected from reality, or a shill willing to say anything to push an angle. I don't get it. You really don't get why people would look at that balcony and find that upsetting?

Trying to soft-peddle it by saying "well it's not during all events, just major ones" isn't exactly reassuring either. What message doe it send those women that they have to get out of sight during major events? That little boy sitting with his dad in the picture-- what message does it give that little guy that his mother and his sisters get sent away when something important is going on? Is that a good message to be teaching a little boy about women?

-k

[DogOnPorch]

I think your point has been made and it is not necessary for the thread to be sidetracked any further.

-k

I agree, ultimately. Once one accepts our PM endorsing such a mosque as al-Qaradawi's, all bets are off. You don't pull the mask off the ol' Lone Ranger...I have a family to protect...and such.

[?Impact]

Is that a good message to be teaching a little boy about women?

What does that have to do with the topic of the OP? Start your own topic on religion, and we can compare Orthodox Jews to Muslims if you want to, because they have the same practices. If you want to bring politics into it, then is far worse to be spending tens of millions of Canadian taxpayer money to haul a bunch of Orthodox Jewish rabbis half way around the world and serenade them in a big love fest than it is to accept an invite to speak at a local Ottawa event.

[eyeball]

What message doe it send those women that they have to get out of sight during major events? That little boy sitting with his dad in the picture-- what message does it give that little guy that his mother and his sisters get sent away when something important is going on?

The message I get is that conservatism rules. Orthodoxy and tradition above all else.

Is that a good message to be teaching a little boy about women?

-k

Hello...CONSERVATISM rules...geez Louise get with the program.

Edited September 21, 2016 by eyeball

[dialamah]

Trying to soft-peddle it by saying "well it's not during all events, just major ones" isn't exactly reassuring either. What message doe it send those women that they have to get out of sight during major events? That little boy sitting with his dad in the picture-- what message does it give that little guy that his mother and his sisters get sent away when something important is going on? Is that a good message to be teaching a little boy about women?

-k

I think virtually all religions treat women as second class citizens. I don't think this is a story because "women aren't equal", I think it's a story because "a mosque is involved". JT is a Catholic; he was raised a Catholic, attended Catholic youth rallies, married in a Catholic church and still calls himself a Catholic. Catholicism is one of the most anti-women Christian churches going, but there's not a peep from anyone about his support for this institution. Why isn't the press following him to Easter Mass, demanding to know why he's supporting a religion that is anti-gay, anti-choice and prohibits women from serving as Deacons? Why isn't anyone objecting to such a flagrant undermining of women's rights by our oh-so-feminist PM? I think it's because this is a "Christian" Church, and people automatically understand that going to a particular Church does not mean you support everything that Church does or believes. People only assume such wholesale support happens if it's a Mosque, apparently.

Edited September 21, 2016 by dialamah

[cybercoma]

What does that have to do with the topic of the OP? Start your own topic on religion, and we can compare Orthodox Jews to Muslims if you want to, because they have the same practices. If you want to bring politics into it, then is far worse to be spending tens of millions of Canadian taxpayer money to haul a bunch of Orthodox Jewish rabbis half way around the world and serenade them in a big love fest than it is to accept an invite to speak at a local Ottawa event.

And it's not even necessarily a religious mantra. There's plenty of social conservatives who believe society is being damaged by mothers being out of the home and working jobs. You don't have to go to mosques and synagogues to find people who women's place is the private sphere, while men's place is the public sphere.

Reading the text of what Trudeau presented on this day, I'm being generous to call it a stretch for people to say he's advocating for that or anything even remotely like that.

​We have yet another thread for people to exercise their paranoia and prejudiced misconceptions about Muslims. They talk about headscarves and prayer services without ever referring to the words of Muslim women themselves. Look at the citizenship ceremony thread, where a Muslim woman chose to wear the veil against her family's wishes​ because it was a way for her to feel connected to her faith. Instead, we have a group of posters that want to impose themselves upon people who haven't asked to be saved or protected, who don't see themselves as victims.

​If people want to harshly criticize the barbaric laws of foreign nations that will stone a woman to death because a man who isn't her husband raped her, then that's fine. But even in those conversations, it's no longer about the grave injustice of murdering a victim that's the crux of their argument. It's that Muslims​ are animals and barbarians or to quote Argus "third-world illiterate goat-herding trash." I don't have to show you example after example that it's not the acts that are condemned but the entire people.

​And here we are again. A thread for people to demonstrate their ignorance about Muslims and climb up on that soapbox to tout their cultural superiority over those "Islamic mongrels." Nevermind that the lies have been thoroughly exposed. That doesn't for a minute get bigots to re-evaluate their positions because everything is biased through a lens of ethnocentric superiority. Veils are disgusting oppression, even though nuns wear them and many Muslim women choose to wear them against their family's wishes in order to stand up for their cultural identity. Women weren't allowed on the main floor, nevermind that they're actually there. This mosque is misogynistic and radical, nevermind that they've had prominent women and homosexuals speak there in the past. Women have to enter through the side door, nevermind that the MPs said no such thing happened. Facts don't matter when your entire view is predicted on a smug sense of superiority.

[cybercoma]

I think virtually all religions treat women as second class citizens. I don't think this is a story because "women aren't equal", I think it's a story because "a mosque is involved". JT is a Catholic; he was raised a Catholic, attended Catholic youth rallies, married in a Catholic church and still calls himself a Catholic. Catholicism is one of the most anti-women Christian churches going, but there's not a peep from anyone about his support for this institution. Why isn't the press following him to Easter Mass, demanding to know why he's supporting a religion that is anti-gay, anti-choice and prohibits women from serving as Deacons? Why isn't anyone objecting to such a flagrant undermining of women's rights by our oh-so-feminist PM? I think it's because this is a "Christian" Church, and people automatically understand that going to a particular Church does not mean you support everything that Church does or believes. People only assume such wholesale support happens if it's a Mosque, apparently.

Women's rights is just another transparent façade for bigots to express their hate for Muslims. They don't criticize Catholicism because they literally don't give a crap about women's rights. Some of them even claim to care about women's rights while blaming victims of rape for their abuse and denying women the right to bodily autonomy through reproductive choice and freedom. Some of these people even call single mothers "welfare Queens" and showed utter disdain for the mere suggestion that there should be a federal debate covering "women's issues."

​Yet, when their lies about the treatment of women at the mosque are exposed, they simply double down on it.

[DogOnPorch]

Women's rights is just another transparent façade for bigots to express their hate for Muslims. They don't criticize Catholicism because they literally don't give a crap about women's rights. Some of them even claim to care about women's rights while blaming victims of rape for their abuse and denying women the right to bodily autonomy through reproductive choice and freedom. Some of these people even call single mothers "welfare Queens" and showed utter disdain for the mere suggestion that there should be a federal debate covering "women's issues."

​Yet, when their lies about the treatment of women at the mosque are exposed, they simply double down on it.

I think it's the part where a 'good' Muslim goes 'crazy' suddenly and shoots-up the mall that has the 'bigots' all worried about Islam rather than Catholics. Just a hunch, mind-you.

[eyeball]

The problem is that the bigots are ignoring the real reasons for the craziness and pretending religion is the only root cause.

15 years this problem has been with us now and there's still no end in sight.

[DogOnPorch]

The problem is that the bigots are ignoring the real reasons for the craziness and pretending religion is the only root cause.

15 years this problem has been with us now and there's still no end in sight.

The problem with your diagnosis is that Islam was conducting terrorist attacks well before Iraq. Ask Israel.

[cybercoma]

There's no such thing as "good Muslims" to you, so what does it matter? We have "good Christians" going crazy and shooting up movie theatres and we look to all sorts of other excuses and don't use these incidents to indict everyone else. We don't worry about the white dude who's going to snap and go on a mass murder rampage, despite the fact that this routinely happens. And we sure as hell don't then presume that all white men are mass murderers. But gang violence in black communities makes every black man a suspect and violence by Jihadists makes all Muslims suspect. You can't get over this bias, so a conversation can't be had because you can't even agree in principle that there are millions of peaceful Muslims and plenty who condemn violence even though they shouldn't have to. Nobody ever asked someone because they were a white man to condemn the actions of James Holmes lest the white man himself be implicated in the violence. That's the bias you're working with because you said you believe that ISIS has the one true interpretation of Islam and that all Muslims must follow that code. I guess you just don't understand the fact that they're butchering other Muslims ​because they're facing resistance ​in their quest for geopolitical domination. If it wasn't Islam, it would be some other window dressing because make no mistake about it.....it's about political power and control over millions of people.

[DogOnPorch]

There's no such thing as "good Muslims" to you, so what does it matter? We have "good Christians" going crazy and shooting up movie theatres and we look to all sorts of other excuses and don't use these incidents to indict everyone else. We don't worry about the white dude who's going to snap and go on a mass murder rampage, despite the fact that this routinely happens. And we sure as hell don't then presume that all white men are mass murderers. But gang violence in black communities makes every black man a suspect and violence by Jihadists makes all Muslims suspect. You can't get over this bias, so a conversation can't be had because you can't even agree in principle that there are millions of peaceful Muslims and plenty who condemn violence even though they shouldn't have to. Nobody ever asked someone because they were a white man to condemn the actions of James Holmes lest the white man himself be implicated in the violence. That's the bias you're working with because you said you believe that ISIS has the one true interpretation of Islam and that all Muslims must follow that code. I guess you just don't understand the fact that they're butchering other Muslims ​because they're facing resistance ​in their quest for geopolitical domination. If it wasn't Islam, it would be some other window dressing because make no mistake about it.....it's about political power and control over millions of people.

Which Muslims are the good ones? Which ones won't go crazy and shoot-up the mall?

Islam has nothing to do with skin colour.

Edited September 21, 2016 by DogOnPorch

[kimmy]

What does that have to do with the topic of the OP?

Because our Prime Minister graced this mosque with his presence and was present when this photo was taken.

Start your own topic on religion, and we can compare Orthodox Jews to Muslims if you want to, because they have the same practices. If you want to bring politics into it, then is far worse to be spending tens of millions of Canadian taxpayer money to haul a bunch of Orthodox Jewish rabbis half way around the world and serenade them in a big love fest than it is to accept an invite to speak at a local Ottawa event.

I don't disagree at all, as I mentioned in my response to your previous post.

-k

[cybercoma]

Which Muslims are the good ones? Which ones won't go crazy and shoot-up the mall?

I can't be sure YOU won't go crazy and shoot up a mall. You ever see the movie ​Minority Report?

[DogOnPorch]

Jewish rabbis are an issue. Were they calling for the death of homosexuals or something horrific like that?

I can't be sure YOU won't go crazy and shoot up a mall. You ever see the movie ​Minority Report?

So you can't answer. Thus the problem. Which Muslims are the good ones?

[cybercoma]

So you can't answer. Thus the problem. Which Muslims are the good ones?

I answered your question by demonstrating how stupid it was. I can't understand things for you. That's up to you.

​Let me provide you another example:

When did you stop beating your wife?

[DogOnPorch]

I answered your question by demonstrating how stupid it was. I can't understand things for you. That's up to you.

​Let me provide you another example:

When did you stop beating your wife?

You didn't answer anything, unfortunately. There is no way to know which Muslim will suddenly feel the need to become a Martyr for Allah. You don't know....can't know.

But, since this cult has a billion members...we'll respect it and its murderous ways. Tell ourselves all sorts of things to rationalize the negative....like you do.

[kimmy]

I'm not even going to respond to people suggesting that I'm talking about this because I hate Muslims and not because I care about women. And I'm not going to respond to people suggesting that I wouldn't give Christians the same criticism.

I've been on this board for a very long time and I think my track record on both issues speaks for itself. I doubt anybody on the forum has offered more criticism of Christians than I have over the years.

-k