Immigration of religious fanatics

dialamah · March 5, 2017

1 hour ago, Argus said:

What if chickens were roosting in her hair? Nothing Leitch has proposed would have had any impact on this woman entering Canada. What she is proposing is to keep the kind of people who prevented her from having facial expressions from coming here and increasing in size and influence.

Try again. My question was essentially, what if this woman tried to enter under the authority of her family, and was refused due to her parents' beliefs.

Argus · March 6, 2017

19 hours ago, dialamah said:

Try again. My question was essentially, what if this woman tried to enter under the authority of her family, and was refused due to her parents' beliefs.

So what? Our immigration system is not designed as a social program for the world's poor or downtrodden. It's supposed to be designed to do what is in the interest of Canada, and that's it.

dialamah · March 7, 2017

7 hours ago, Argus said:

So what? Our immigration system is not designed as a social program for the world's poor or downtrodden. It's supposed to be designed to do what is in the interest of Canada, and that's it.

I disagree that the *only* reason for newcomers to Canada is to benefit Canada. We also do it for humanitarian reasons, aka refugees. The "Me First" attitude amongst so many conservatives is not a Canadian value, imo.

Argus · March 7, 2017

26 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I disagree that the *only* reason for newcomers to Canada is to benefit Canada. We also do it for humanitarian reasons, aka refugees. The "Me First" attitude amongst so many conservatives is not a Canadian value, imo.

The only value progressives show is their generosity with other people's money. If you want to open your door to newcomers and pay for all their bills, including health care, be my guest. I think there should be a special voluntary tax for refugees, and only those who ask for it pay it. How many refugees we take in will be guided by how much money is voluntarily given to the government for that purpose.

How much do you think that will be?

dialamah · March 7, 2017

47 minutes ago, Argus said:

The only value progressives show is their generosity with other people's money. If you want to open your door to newcomers and pay for all their bills, including health care, be my guest. I think there should be a special voluntary tax for refugees, and only those who ask for it pay it. How many refugees we take in will be guided by how much money is voluntarily given to the government for that purpose.

How much do you think that will be?

Other people's money? Taxes are "everybody's" money, not just yours. I'm proud of the way Canada makes the world a better place by helping a few people escape horrific situations. So far, more Canadians than not agree with me and so we continue to help a few people every year.

If and when enough people agree with you that Canada should not accept refugees and elect a Canadian Trump, you'll have your wish.

cannuck · March 7, 2017

53 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I disagree that the *only* reason for newcomers to Canada is to benefit Canada. We also do it for humanitarian reasons, aka refugees. The "Me First" attitude amongst so many conservatives is not a Canadian value, imo.

The issue is so complex, it does not easily break down into black and white, left and right, etc.

Canada has a long history of being exclusive in immigration. Few seem to remember the head tax and exclusion act barring virtually ALL Chinese immigration, and the fact that it was still nearly impossible for Chinese Canadians to get their families together until 1956 (one of my best friends and his Mother managed to get here in 1954 to join with her Canadian citizen husband - a rare exception). We mimicked the Americans in detaining Japanese families and stealing their possessions in WWII. One might remember that we didn't exactly accommodate aboriginal Canadians very gracefully either.

Since then, we have welcomed people from just about everywhere in the world, with a few exceptions, but always those immigrants managed to fit in with what we seem to recognize as some sort of "Canadian values" the just grew here along the same lines as most of the rest of the Western world.

If we really mean to do justice for displaced people, we should be funding camps for them to be able to return to their homes when conflict ends. We should be promoting birth control for starving Africans and helping them to develop sustainable agriculture and a host of other things. The only people (IMNO) who should be coming here are genuine refugees - who can not return to their homes for many good reasons. What we seem to have instead is a great deal of economic refugees who are using every excuse to come to the front of the line that we normally have in selecting those who have access. To add to that, those fleeing one brand of theocracy are dragging with them the very thing that they are leaving for one increment in a range of values that are very, very different from what we have come to accept - since it is Canadians collectively that have evolved the status quo as it stands.

It may be abhorrent to the politically correct but this is still supposed to be a democracy. The question of who/what/how/how many immigrants get into Canada and how they are to be received is so important, it is something that should be decided by the public. I would only be satisfied if this was made a plebicite or some other process of direct democracy. I don't care WHAT party is in power, the politicos can only seem to be slaves of their partisan dogma. This is about the very definition of what we want Canada to be, and it should be the actual words of the people that are being heard.

dialamah · March 7, 2017

10 hours ago, cannuck said:

The issue is so complex, it does not easily break down into black and white, left and right, etc.

I agree.

Yup, people have been intolerant and exclusionist, or protectionist, throughout history - including Canadians. This to me is the root of the evil within Islam (and many other religions, less famous at the moment) - intolerant, exclusionist - though some factions have certainly taken it to an extreme. At least we only interred Japanese, we didn't (as far as I know) torture or kill them.

10 hours ago, cannuck said:

If we really mean to do justice for displaced people, we should be funding camps for them to be able to return to their homes when conflict ends. We should be promoting birth control for starving Africans and helping them to develop sustainable agriculture and a host of other things.

I certainly agree with birth control, although I saw a news story recently that said birth control was illegal in some countries, which means that abortion is the option many women are forced to if they do not feel capable of raising that child. That's sad.

I have heard of the idea of funding camps, and it sounds good. I've also read a couple of articles that make a case that funding for refugee camps doesn't work because the money is misappropriated and there isn't enough to significantly improve conditions for these people. It's also difficult to get commitment for an unknown amount of time, given the reasons people are often in refugee camps. As you said it's complicated.

10 hours ago, cannuck said:

To add to that, those fleeing one brand of theocracy are dragging with them the very thing that they are leaving for one increment in a range of values that are very, very different from what we have come to accept - since it is Canadians collectively that have evolved the status quo as it stands.

It's true that people tend to bring their culture and religion with them, I agree. But it's also true that the majority of immigrants/refugees become indistinguishable from Canadians with a few generations. Even those who live within a community of their own ethnic group become more 'Canadianized' over time.

Many of the objections to Muslims are the same objections I heard to Sikhs/Hindus and to Chinese decades ago. Yet, we still remain Canadian, despite the fears of having our culture and legal system 'changed' to suit these newcomers.

10 hours ago, cannuck said:

The question of who/what/how/how many immigrants get into Canada and how they are to be received is so important, it is something that should be decided by the public. I would only be satisfied if this was made a plebicite or some other process of direct democracy. I don't care WHAT party is in power, the politicos can only seem to be slaves of their partisan dogma. This is about the very definition of what we want Canada to be, and it should be the actual words of the people that are being heard.

True, but at the same time what are 'the words of the people' based on? We have a surprising number of people who think a motion for a study is the same as a bill proposing legislation. How can we trust people this unaware to be able to make a knowledgeable decision about immigration or how to best help refugees? It's true that politicians are pretty much 'slaves of their political dogma', but I still think that in many cases they have information and knowledge of facts that the vast majority of people are either unaware of or believe in some outlier philosophy. Consider someone who believes that 'only white people' should live in Canada because all other races are inferior. Or people who are convinced that immigrants add to crime, or are criminally inclined when statistics and studies suggest just the opposite. Do we really want people like that deciding our immigration/refugee policy? I sure don't.

As you said, it's complicated.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

The more Islam Canada imports, the more Islam ALL CANADIANS will get...like it or not.

If you disagree with Islamification of Canada, you're a greasy Islamophobe and a racist...as Islam is now a skin colour.

eyeball · March 7, 2017

2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

The more Islam Canada imports, the more Islam ALL CANADIANS will get...like it or not.

If you disagree with Islamification of Canada, you're a greasy Islamophobe and a racist...as Islam is now a skin colour.

Ideology is morphing into that as well.

That said a way to tell lefties from the righties would make the civil war developing between them a lot easier to fight. It would suck if combatants had to just hope they were actually hitting their targets. Oh well, I guess that's why war is hell.

Argus · March 7, 2017

14 hours ago, dialamah said:

Other people's money? Taxes are "everybody's" money, not just yours.

And here is the fundamental disconnect between the Left and Right.

Taxes are money forcibly taken from citizens against their will in order to serve the community. As such, it is immoral and unethical to spend them on anything else, or to waste them, or to spend them on something which isn't necessary for the community. I have no complaint when taxes are properly spent on health care, on roads and highways, on border control or defense, on pensions and environmental safety.

Taking my money and giving it to foreigners is quite another thing. I'm willing to make exceptions in the case of legitimate refugees, but 90% of those we let in under the refugee program are not, in my opinion, legitimate refugees. They're economic migrants. The CBC itself reports on people who are now making their way to Mexico for the purpose of getting into the US so they can cross that country and come to Canada to claim refugee status. These are NOT refugees of any kind and if you want to spend your money on them, presuming you have any, that's fine. Leave mine alone.

14 hours ago, dialamah said:

I'm proud of the way Canada makes the world a better place by helping a few people escape horrific situations.

Then spend your money on it, not mine.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

9 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Ideology is morphing into that as well.

That said a way to tell lefties from the righties would make the civil war developing between them a lot easier to fight. It would suck if combatants had to just hope they were actually hitting their targets. Oh well, I guess that's why war is hell.

You're free to support Islam over Western Civilization. I kind of expect it of you.

?Impact · March 7, 2017

1 minute ago, Argus said:

Taxes are money forcibly taken from citizens against their will in order to serve the community

Money is nothing but standardized accounting within the community, it holds zero intrinsic value. Nothing was taken from you because you had nothing to begin with.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

1 minute ago, ?Impact said:

Money is nothing but standardized accounting within the community, it holds zero intrinsic value. Nothing was taken from you because you had nothing to begin with.

Alright...give me all your money.

Argus · March 7, 2017

1 minute ago, ?Impact said:

Money is nothing but standardized accounting within the community, it holds zero intrinsic value. Nothing was taken from you because you had nothing to begin with.

If you feel that way, then please send me all your money. It has no intrinsic value to you so I'm sure you won't miss it.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

Just now, Argus said:

If you feel that way, then please send me all your money. It has no intrinsic value to you so I'm sure you won't miss it.

LOL!!

eyeball · March 7, 2017

3 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

You're free to support Islam over Western Civilization. I kind of expect it of you.

I know, I'm just more interested in not supporting western civilization, something that irks you even more I suspect.

?Impact · March 7, 2017

1 minute ago, Argus said:

If you feel that way, then please send me all your money. It has no intrinsic value to you so I'm sure you won't miss it.

No problem, lets replace the accounting/economic model, I have been advocating that forever.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

I know, I'm just more interested in not supporting western civilization, something that irks you even more I suspect.

So when is the stoning of adulterers happening? That should be fun, eh?

eyeball · March 7, 2017

Just now, DogOnPorch said:

So when is the stoning of adulterers happening? That should be fun, eh?

Whatever turns your crank chief.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Whatever turns your crank chief.

Islam is your friend.

eyeball · March 7, 2017

That's just silly, Islam is no more an individual than it is a race.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

That's just silly, Islam is no more an individual than it is a race.

That's racist.

eyeball · March 7, 2017

Whatever you say chief. You're the Islamic know-it-all around here.

DogOnPorch · March 7, 2017

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Whatever you say chief. You're the Islamic know-it-all around here.

Muslims are Islamic know-it-alls, too.

BillyBeaver · March 8, 2017

A lot of the recommendations made by the http://secularalliance.ca/ make a lot of sense in order to preserve harmony for future generations.

We need to push sooner than later to make our religious culture more private and end theocratic aims in service of antiquated control systems.

I don't care what you believe as long as you keep it to yourself and don't push it on me in my daily life and follow secular law in observing your faith.

90% of residential school abuses were committed at either Anglican or Catholic-run schools. They've caused far more harm to native canadians than muslims.

Sikhs are responsible for the biggest terror attack in Canadian history.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/reyat-parole-air-india-analysis-1.3421505

While we are at it, can we end foreign funding of religious schools and public funding of Catholics?

School is the great equalizer for our youth and we should be promoting homogeneity early on through our school system so all our children share similar values regardless of parents. Of course there will still be cultural drift, but allowing communities to segregate and isolate is not good for Canada. Why not a faiths class where kids learn about all religions and are encouraged to speak about their own.

personally I didn't fully understand the difference between sunni and shi'a / sikh and muslim / until i was an adult. Far too many misconceptions for too long. Education and positive indoctrination is the only way to promote much needed homogeneity in a cultural mosaic. Our diversity is our strength, but it can also be our weakness.

That being said, Islam in its current form is broken and they are in dire need of a reformation similar to Martin Luther.. A return to Zoroastrian roots maybe? Some sources I've read said that Catholics created Islam. Would make sense for the most genocidal religion in history to spawn one that is essentially a militaristic, misogynistic, death cult.

Edited March 8, 2017 by BillyBeaver