Jump to content

Trudeau hires some lefty loon to combat "Islamophobia" (whatever that means)


West

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

it can disqualify them if they are fanatic muslims or those muslims who do not believe in freedom and democracy and equality of women and respect for religions.

Sounds reasonable but how does immigration Canada tell who is a fanatic and doesn't believe in those things?  Of course they are going to say they are not fanatics and believe in freedom, democracy and equality.  The fanatics who would immigrate are not that dumb.

Its like asking the fox if he eats chicken before letting him into the henhouse.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Sounds reasonable but how does immigration Canada tell who is a fanatic and doesn't believe in those things?  Of course they are going to say they are not fanatics and believe in freedom, democracy and equality.  The fanatics who would immigrate are not that dumb.

Its like asking the fox if he eats chicken before letting him into the henhouse.

Get them to sign a document that says they can believe whatever they want, but if they act on any that aren't acceptable in Canada they will be deported immediately.  Call it "The Primitive Societal Traditions" document, or something like that.

Tell them their wives and children will be allowed (and encouraged) to stay.

Apply it to any and all immigrants. I wouldn't have minded signing that. 

Edit>  I suppose I should change "wives" to "spouses".  I forgot Magachuds can be female too.

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Get them to sign a document that says they can believe whatever they want

Once in Canada, Canada will have no control over them.  It is impossible to monitor every individual that gets here.  In addition, there are countless lawyers and judges, courts and the Supreme Court who will automatically defend their right to be here without question.  Once they are here, there is almost nothing the government, authorities or anyone can do.  We have seen that playbook over and over.  Remember the guy who fought for al Qaiada and received 10.5 million dollars.  Canada is a very weak impotent country when it comes to terrorists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Once in Canada, Canada will have no control over them.  It is impossible to monitor every individual that gets here.  In addition, there are countless lawyers and judges, courts and the Supreme Court who will automatically defend their right to be here without question.  Once they are here, there is almost nothing the government, authorities or anyone can do.  We have seen that playbook over and over.  Remember the guy who fought for al Qaiada and received 10.5 million dollars.  Canada is a very weak impotent country when it comes to terrorists.

You're probably right, but what the hell, I'd like to at least try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

You're probably right, but what the hell, I'd like to at least try.

About 25 or 30 years ago I once wrote a letter to the federal Minister of Justice to ask why a criminal in Canada who was wanted for the murder of multiple people in the U.S. was still here after years of the U.S. trying to extradite him.   He actually sent a letter back to me.  He said the guy has been appealing the extradition and everyone has a right to appeal in Canada.  (I think it had been going on for about five years).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

So you blow past the facts of the matter and ask me that?

The fact that there are no-go zones in Germany doesn't matter as much as how many muslim friends I have?

Dude, friends and acquaintances are like anecdotes. A few friends doesn't constitute a worthwhile statistic. And you're talking about people living in a country where they don't have the option of being religious bigots. If they lived in Iran would they let your wife go out without a hijab? Would the support her choice? 

 

How many times in your life have you heard stupid shit like "He's a Hell's Angel but he's a nice guy."

"Nice guy"? That nice guy makes a living by distributing heroine, meth, crack, etc. If you sell some weed without his permission you'll get beaten within an inch of death. That guy is a psychopath and a cancer on society and he only cares about himself or he wouldn't be in his line of work. But he's nice, right?

BS. Anyone can be 'nice' when it's convenient. The only measure of a person's character is what they do when they're in a position of power over you. Go to Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, etc and get your wife to stroll around without a hijab. See how many friends you can make. 

Is wearing a hijab in Canada 'nice'? Do you know what it represents dude? It's cute to you because over here it's a symbol of Canada's inclusivity and religious tolerance, but in the ME it's a symbol of misogyny and a tool for enforcing religious bigotry. Why support that? Why gloss over it? The hijab is a terrible thing. 

If you had to give it a proper name it's the universal symbol of systemic genocidal rape. You can't keep your women safe in the ME if they doesn't wear that. It's a matter of time before they're beaten or raped, legally. You have to cave. You have to submit. Or you're at risk of death. 

Who the f would support that?

FYI anyone who wears that thing is supporting misogyny and religious bigotry, period. You just don't understand it because your world view is in first-person mode only. The whole world exists in front of your nose and there's nothing else. You don't ever think of the view from 50,000 feet.  

You're the one who started flinging anecdotes about non-Muslim friends from the ME.

The niqab and the burka are terrible things.  The hijab is just a scarf that covers the hair.  Christian nuns literally wear them.  Jewish men wear caps to cover their heads under God.  Its not a big deal.

You're making a lot of assumptions about my beliefs.  Yes i'm aware of how misogynistic Islam is.  Its a religion designed by abusive husbands in part to control their wives and daughters.  It is easily one of the worst belief systems in the world.  Our accommodation for their beliefs should be limited when they oppose our western and cultural values and laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

 

You're making a lot of assumptions about my beliefs.  Yes i'm aware of how misogynistic Islam is.  Its a religion designed by abusive husbands in part to control their wives and daughters.  It is easily one of the worst belief systems in the world.  Our accommodation for their beliefs should be limited when they oppose our western and cultural values and laws.

What assumptions?!!, Just look at the ACTIONS of a bunch of Islamic clergy in Iran and their Muslim followers. Oppression, discriminations against women, disrespects of others, torture and murder of opponents and other believers, rape of women prisoners, corruption, dictatorship and I can go on forever.. Not to mention history books are clear as how this so called religion was spread at the first place from Arabia. By sword. By military invasion.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly the victors were the brutal invading Muslim Arabs and victims were civilized advanced nations such as Persians. If you wish to deny all the historic facts and events and  close your eyes and claim that earth is flat then this is your choice but you don't need to refer to history to witness violence of this so called religion. Just read the news coming from Iran about violence against women and children and brutal actions of an Islamic regime or the neighboring Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia .

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Do you look back in history to cast judgement on a people as a PRINCIPLE?  Because that will take you to some bad places....

What sins are in your bloodlines?

What on earth is that supposed to mean?. Yes I look back to history to pass judgement on their actions. I look back to 90 years ago to condemn the Nazis for their barbaric actions against the Jews and other nations and condemn the ideology which caused them  and I look back to history 1400 years  to condemn Arab Muslims for their invasion. imposition of their beliefs by the force of the swords, the rape of women in captured territories and many atrocities they committed against captured citizens and condemn the ideology which caused them. Especially when atrocities and violence against women and children continues to this day by the second group.

No sins by my  ancestors.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

condemn Arab Muslims for their invasion. imposition of their beliefs by the force of the swords, the rape of women in captured territories and many atrocities they committed against captured citizens

Virtually every conquering army does this.  

38 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

No sins by my  ancestors.

You haven't looked closely enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2023 at 11:15 AM, CITIZEN_2015 said:

I was just giving examples to clarify my point not that they are widely used.

No I believe people can believe in what they wish. This is freedom of thought. I don't agree with them and I won't socialize with them but I don't believe they should be punished for what they believe in. We stand for it. However, if they try to act on that belief then there is a big problem and in my view they should be punished according to the severity of their act.

ps - Please don't use Iran in the same sentence as Islamic Republic. The hated murderous Islamic Republic does not represent Iran or Iranians or many claim they don't even represent those who still remain Muslim in Iran. They are a regime imposed by coup and the nation of Iran is united in their goal to get rid of this barbaric regime with barbaric ideology in a women-led revolution currently in progress,

I agree there's a big difference in belief and actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The hijab is just a scarf that covers the hair.  Christian nuns literally wear them. 

Is it legal to harass, spit on, beat or rape women for not dressing like a nun here? Can you remember a time when it was? 

Quote

Jewish men wear caps to cover their heads under God.  Its not a big deal.

If you take off your cap in Israel do you get whipped and sent to jail?

Quote

Yes i'm aware of how misogynistic Islam is.  Its a religion designed by abusive husbands in part to control their wives and daughters.  It is easily one of the worst belief systems in the world.  

So why are you defending it then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Is it legal to harass, spit on, beat or rape women for not dressing like a nun here? Can you remember a time when it was?

If you take off your cap in Israel do you get whipped and sent to jail?

Laws in foreign countries surrounding dressing in hijabs is a different topic than the moral validity of wearing a hijab itself.

If someone is forcing you to wear a hijab I don't agree with that.  I've known very strong, feminist women who wear it by choice.

49 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

So why are you defending it then? 

Because there's a big difference in your average moderate Christians vs fundamentalist Christian loons, and the same with Muslims and Islam.  The world isn't black and white, there is nuance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barbaric treatment of women is being defended by the same self-hating radical left voices that are responsible for tearing down the foundational principles of our country in the name of fighting “colonialism” or some other rewriting of history that refuses to see the non-European and non-“settler” injustices wrought by Indigenous who kept slaves, blacks who traded slaves, and the various totalitarian systems of Asian theocracy.  All of that truth is to be suppressed because the game now is that up is down, democratic freedom is slavery, and so on.

This is the age of enslavement by ideologues who have given a pass to Islamic Republic because they are from a non-European country, which gives them indulgences Eurocentric Canadians can’t have due to our privilege.  Right Hardner, Dialamah, Moonbox, et al?

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, dialamah said:

Virtually every conquering army does this.  

But they did it on a massive scale BECAUSE the religion they were spreading by the force of invasion was encouraging them to rape. The religion says once the Islam soldiers captured a city all the women in that city belongs to them!!!!!. If it was a religion ordering them to respect women as equals and their right of choice as every Godly religion should be then that wouldn't happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

My ancestors freed Jews from Egyptian slavery and brought in the very first Charter of Human Rights in the world.

https://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/brief-history/#:~:text=Known today as the Cyrus,Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Ok.... and to follow the principles you set out... the Inquisition, Colonialism, and so on are all the "fault" of Christianity ?

Do you see where this goes ?

I actually appreciate this approach because it's so wrong-headed that it provides a perfect explanation as to why culture-blaming is stupid.  We are not our ancestors.  We can acknowledge the wrongs of the past, especially if their effects linger.

How do we help people now, today ?

People are blaming Canadians for the actions of Muslims hundreds of years ago and unhinged people are murdering innocents.  The response from people like you is "hey, that's freedom of speech".

My freedom of speech says you should shut up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ok.... and to follow the principles you set out... the Inquisition, Colonialism, and so on are all the "fault" of Christianity ?

Do you see where this goes ?

I actually appreciate this approach because it's so wrong-headed that it provides a perfect explanation as to why culture-blaming is stupid.  We are not our ancestors.  We can acknowledge the wrongs of the past, especially if their effects linger.

How do we help people now, today ?

People are blaming Canadians for the actions of Muslims hundreds of years ago and unhinged people are murdering innocents.  The response from people like you is "hey, that's freedom of speech".

My freedom of speech says you should shut up.

Citizen is referring to an ancient Persian culture that was more tolerant of people practicing different religions than today’s Islamic Republic.  Why is that a controversial opinion, Mike?  Why is it that you refuse to acknowledge that some regimes have been much more brutal than others?   Or do you actually think that Canada’s treatment of citizens and the Islamic Republic’s treatment of its citizens are morally equivalent?  Let me guess, you’ll reference the Crusades or conjectures about the causes of child deaths at residential schools.  In fact, Canada is probably a worse country than Iran because, because…

This is why we’re losing our moral authority as a country. We no longer call out injustice unless there’s an ulterior motive. Canada will do nothing on Iran. We will, however, lecture Canadians about Islamophobia..

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. Why is that a controversial opinion, Mike?  
2. Why is it that you refuse to acknowledge that some regimes have been much more brutal than others?  
3. Or do you actually think that Canada’s treatment of citizens and the Islamic Republic’s treatment of its citizens are morally equivalent?  
4. Let me guess, you’ll reference the Crusades or conjectures about the causes of child deaths at residential schools.  In fact, Canada is probably a worse country than Iran because, because…
5. This is why we’re losing our moral authority as a country.  

1. I don't think it is.
2. I don't think I have.
3. I do not.  The principle you and others are employing is to tie ancient historical events to present day adherents of the Islamic religion.  It's pointless and unhelpful.
4. You seem to think that tying things to historical wrongs from this century is ridiculous and yet defend some blather about Ancient Persians as relevant to today's Muslims.
5. On the contrary, intellectual dishonesty and unprincipled points of view are the death of moral dialogue.  You want to blame people for things that happened in Medieval times and exonerate Christian nationalists from killing worshippers it seems to me.

You need to gain some context IMO.
 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Laws in foreign countries surrounding dressing in hijabs is a different topic than the moral validity of wearing a hijab itself.

A hijab is a tool for religious bigotry and always has been. Anyone who wears it here is showing support for what's happening to women in Iran.

Quote

If someone is forcing you to wear a hijab I don't agree with that.  I've known very strong, feminist women who wear it by choice.

And by wearing it they're choosing to support the Iranian regime, among others. 

Quote

Because there's a big difference in your average moderate Christians vs fundamentalist Christian loons, and the same with Muslims and Islam.  The world isn't black and white, there is nuance.

The difference is where "violent religious bigot" falls in the bell curve.

Christians who are willing to spit on women and beat women for not wearing a cross are ten standards of deviation from the mean. You don't know any and you live in a country which is majority Christian. For muslims it's one at most. That's why it's standard practice to beat women into submission in the countries where the majority of the population are muslims. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I don't think it is.
2. I don't think I have.
3. I do not.  The principle you and others are employing is to tie ancient historical events to present day adherents of the Islamic religion.  It's pointless and unhelpful.
4. You seem to think that tying things to historical wrongs from this century is ridiculous and yet defend some blather about Ancient Persians as relevant to today's Muslims.
5. On the contrary, intellectual dishonesty and unprincipled points of view are the death of moral dialogue.  You want to blame people for things that happened in Medieval times and exonerate Christian nationalists from killing worshippers it seems to me.

You need to gain some context IMO.
 

Now you’re making things up.  At what point did I reference “adherents of the Muslim religion”.  I referred to the government of the Islamic Republic.  Not once did I “exonerate Christian nationalists from killing worshippers.”

You’re lumping people together unjustifiably and making all sorts of assumptions about what people think.  It’s very irresponsible.  Poor moderation, if that’s what you’re still attempting to do.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...