"Shut up and fit in"

[Argus]

del

Edited September 29, 2007 by Argus

[Argus]

the Filipinos are dishonest people, and their country Philipine is a real craphole, I mean, no wonder, isn't it ?

Is there a particular reason you inserted this into a conversation which had nothing to do with the Philippines?

[Argus]

So this is a place people come to to disrespect the group of their choice??

I suspect the reference is intended to provoke Betsy, who is an immigrant from the Phillipines.

Rogue state is one of yours, after all, and the Left are known for their bigotry.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Argus

[jefferiah]

As a Catholic, you need to recognize that your religion was enshrined in this country in spite of the wishes of protestant

I am a Catholic? That's news to me.

Edited September 29, 2007 by jefferiah

[Argus]

maybe not so much a removal of all religious symbols, which is kind of like state sanctioned atheism... maybe another way is to give equality in representation to all religious symbolism, same as we attempt to do with other things in so-called political correctness. maybe it would even help to promote greater understanding and tolerance amongst different peoples, through learning about diverse cultures.

What makes you think that familiarity with "diverse cultures" would promote tolerance? The more I learn about other cultures the more contempt I feel for many of them.

As an example, we were at a party the other day, and a Muslim woman in her bedsheet was bemoaning the bad press Muslims get, and that many people look askance at Muslims now because of an unfair focus on what she called "political violence" in some nations. A young woman, a very attractive blonde, as it happens, boldly stated that she didn't like Muslims, and it had nothing to do with their habit of blowing people up. She was about 20, and she said that since she hit puberty she had encountered numerous Muslim boys and then men, at school, at dances, at parties, in college, at bars and clubs. Muslim men were virtually always crude and pushy in their demands and near insistence that western women were put on Earth to serve their sexual needs. Muslims by and large think Western women are cheap, worthless sluts. Muslim men in Canada believe Canadian women are always available, and grow angry when rejected, tending to react to rejection with verbal or physical abuse or both. So here we have a woman who has some familiarity with Muslims, and shockingly, it has not bred tolerance for their "culture".

Edited September 29, 2007 by Argus

[Renegade]

This is very simple to say. But it ignores the fact that our history intertwined religion, culture and government for centuries. By now trying to cast out references to and symbols of religion what the Left are doing is cutting away many cultural and historical icons which help to maintain our ties with our ancestors, and which tie us together as a people. In response to such things, of course, the Left simply sneers at the idea that there is anything called a Canadian. To the Left, Canadians are nothing other than a legal construct, and anyone who has the proper legal papers is a Canadian. They rejoice and celebrate the rich history of other peoples but sneer and pour contempt on ours, wanting us to desist in any such celebrations lest it offend immigrants.

Of course the separation of state and religion can become tricky in practice. We can't change history. You are no doubt correct that in much of our history religion and culture has been intertwined with government and public institutions, however we are not the same society as we were decades or centuries ago. Attituides and expectations have changed as has the expectation of the separation of church and state. I don't think anyone expects that we ignore the fact of influence of religion or culture in the past, however I don't see it as necessary to maintain that same connection for the present or the future.

[Renegade]

maybe not so much a removal of all religious symbols, which is kind of like state sanctioned atheism...

Not at all. It is more like state sanctioned agnosticism, which is exactly how it should be. IOW, the state should not presume it has the "right" religious answer, and should stay silent on the issue.

[geoffrey]

Not at all. It is more like state sanctioned agnosticism, which is exactly how it should be. IOW, the state should not presume it has the "right" religious answer, and should stay silent on the issue.

The State shouldn't even be agnostic. Why even have the State involved in religion whatsoever? Do people not have confidence in there abilities to decide morals for themselves or do they need the government to hold their hand? Sheesh.

If the objects or what not have historical significance, they should remain. Otherwise, why is the State hanging out with religion. It's bad for the religious.

Edited September 29, 2007 by geoffrey

[trex]

What makes you think that familiarity with "diverse cultures" would promote tolerance? The more I learn about other cultures the more contempt I feel for many of them.

As an example, we were at a party the other day, and a Muslim woman in her bedsheet was bemoaning the bad press Muslims get, and that many people look askance at Muslims now because of an unfair focus on what she called "political violence" in some nations. A young woman, a very attractive blonde, as it happens, boldly stated that she didn't like Muslims, and it had nothing to do with their habit of blowing people up. She was about 20, and she said that since she hit puberty she had encountered numerous Muslim boys and then men, at school, at dances, at parties, in college, at bars and clubs. Muslim men were virtually always crude and pushy in their demands and near insistence that western women were put on Earth to serve their sexual needs. Muslims by and large think Western women are cheap, worthless sluts. Muslim men in Canada believe Canadian women are always available, and grow angry when rejected, tending to react to rejection with verbal or physical abuse or both. So here we have a woman who has some familiarity with Muslims, and shockingly, it has not bred tolerance for their "culture".

"in her bedsheet "

this shows you already have the problem in you, cultural bias and misunderstanding.

"a very attractive blonde,"

same problem,

i dont deny the rest of your comments about those muslim men. all the more reason for increasing cultural dialog, they need to learn from us about respect for women.

[Argus]

"in her bedsheet "

this shows you already have the problem in you, cultural bias and misunderstanding.

"a very attractive blonde,"

same problem,

i dont deny the rest of your comments about those muslim men. all the more reason for increasing cultural dialog, they need to learn from us about respect for women.

Someone once said that Prejudice means to prejudge. But in reference to Muslims he said "I'm not pre-judging them - I'm judging them".

I don't have a misunderstanding about women being forced by their culture, to wear the equivalent of a bedsheet, to cover themselves lest men be overcome by lust and commit violence. I think the very idea is ludicrous, and anyone who advocates it is a moron. That culture is sadly backward and primitive.

As for "attractive blonde" I think we all know one when we see one, and Muslims seem to have a particular problem with blonde women. I know. I've heard such things about Muslim men from other women and it seems you cannot find a blonde who doesn't have stories to tell about Muslim men. Yes, they need to learn respect for women, but they don't get that learning from people who say we must respect their culture and beliefs and not judge them.

[jefferiah]

"a very attractive blonde,"

same problem,

What is wrong with this, Tbud? There is no such thing as an attractive blonde?

[Renegade]

The State shouldn't even be agnostic. Why even have the State involved in religion whatsoever? Do people not have confidence in there abilities to decide morals for themselves or do they need the government to hold their hand? Sheesh.

If the objects or what not have historical significance, they should remain. Otherwise, why is the State hanging out with religion. It's bad for the religious.

"Agnostic" is about as non-religious a term as I can think of. It does not specify any god nor does it presume one. If you have a better term, let's hear it.

[Leafless]

Do people not have confidence in there abilities to decide morals for themselves or do they need the government to hold their hand?

Obviously if some Canadian citizens cannot even feed their own children properly, yes by all means they need the government to hold their hand as they also can't have a clue what constitutes morals.

Without morals, cities will rapidly decay similar to Toronto.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Leafless

[geoffrey]

Toronto is a wonderful place. I visited this summer, stayed downtown for a few days. Nice place. Pollution sucks. But otherwise it's nice.

What's the problem with it, exactly?

[Canuck E Stan]

Toronto is a wonderful place. I visited this summer, stayed downtown for a few days. Nice place. Pollution sucks. But otherwise it's nice.

What's the problem with it, exactly?

Let's All Hate Toronto-The Movie

Only city I know that has a movie about people hating it.

[Leafless]

Toronto is a wonderful place. I visited this summer, stayed downtown for a few days. Nice place. Pollution sucks. But otherwise it's nice.

What's the problem with it, exactly?

I will say one thing.

It is diverse and all the nice things associated with that diversity, including incompatible immoral lifestyles coupled with a high disregard for law and order, breeds a crime invested city.

Glad you thought it was a nice city.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Leafless

[geoffrey]

It is diverse and all the nice things associated with that diversity, including incompatible immoral lifestyles coupled with a high disregard for law and order, breeds a crime invested city.

Incompatable immoral lifestyles? Welcome to the reality of the entire world. You may feel at home in Vatican City, but that's about it. And even there you'd probably be uncomfortable with some of the indescressions.

Everywhere in the world is like that now. You want to see imcompatible lifestyles? Take a look at Detriot or L.A.. Miami. Even in Calgary, your poster child for a nearly pure white, evangelical Christian city (the public school I went to had 3 people of minorities when I graduated, out of 1600 students). We are plauged by the problems of Vietnamese and Philipino gang wars. Chinese people are in seen in office buildings everywhere.

It's just the reality of life. People move to Canada because of opportunity, and most take it. There are a few people here to exploit the system and be trouble, but very few.

Multiculturalism isn't the main problem. Mumbai is much more violent, as is Sao Paulo or how about Glasgow? With or without it, the same problems exist, diverse or not.

[Visionseeker]

I am a Catholic? That's news to me.

Huh, I thought that I read in one of your exchanges with Xul that you professed to be a Catholic, my mistake. Please let me take this opportunity to apologize to Catholics everywhere for any offense I may have caused.

[Visionseeker]

Visionseeker

Are you daft? Navy wears helmets quite often. I dare you to walk the deck of a carrier without one. Try fitting one of the helmets a pilot of CF-18 over a turban. Not happening. The helmet is essential when being an air force pilot or a navy pilot/personelle. The helmet is linked in with the plane to give you other information. Try outfitting a visor or something to a Turban. Helmets are fitted pretty tight on a pilots head. When they are not wearing a helmet, they are either on downtime, or they are not on the deck. It is not about decorative adornment in this case. It simply shows that a turban or any other headdress cannot fit under a military helmet.

I said generally. And I believe I alluded to occasions where safety would require specific headgear. No matter, the point of the post seems lost on you so I'll not place anymore effort into clarifications.

Want to be an RCMP? Wear the damn f***ing hat. Part of the long standing initial tradition in the RCMP. And why did you bring up kilts? Kilts are part of the Military culture as well, has been for decades, perhaps centuries. Many Scotts, Irish and English settled in Canada and help form those long standing traditions.

I see, our institutions must be shaped solely by cultural influences stemming from our immigration patterns of 150 years ago. Their must be no evolution to such “long-standing traditions”.

Well, this would lend credence to those who say there is no Canadian culture, for it died long ago from a failure to evolve.

[Argus]

Toronto is a wonderful place. I visited this summer, stayed downtown for a few days. Nice place. Pollution sucks. But otherwise it's nice.

What's the problem with it, exactly?

Too much crime, too many gangs, too much dirt, too much crowding and traffic, too may foreigners (more than half the population are foreign born) speaking too many horribly garbled and heavily accented versions of English - if they speak it at all.

[geoffrey]

too may foreigners (more than half the population are foreign born)

The rest are all problems in every other major city in the world. You've got to do better than that.

Do you have a citation that more than 50% of Torontonians are foreign born?

[ScottSA]

in other words, celebration of the differences, not repression. not mono-culture. away with the melting pot! those are the old ideas of empire, and canada was created as an experiment, a new idea. a mosaic of culture. canada can show the world that it is possible for people to live in peace but it can only work if we defend the idea and make it work, so that it wont erode back to monoculture.

oy vey. You must be under 25, eh?

[ScottSA]

Multiculturalism isn't the main problem. Mumbai is much more violent, as is Sao Paulo or how about Glasgow? With or without it, the same problems exist, diverse or not.

Actually, it is the problem insofar as homogenous western culture rejects criminality, while several other cultures don't or are acclimatised to it, to wit, Jamaica among others. A solid rejection of gangs and gang warfare tends to keep it marginalized. On top of that, in this multicult nightmare race based gangs are more accepted by the like community, to the extent that they are often hidden and protected by it. Finally, the racial aspects of those gangs makes life a whole lot more vicious in practise.

Incidently, wtf are you talking about with "Glasgow?" Mumbai's violence has a whole whack to do with Muslims, and Sao Paolo can hardly be compared to Canada.

[Leafless]

Do you have a citation that more than 50% of Torontonians are foreign born?

I have two.

The city of Toronto harbours 2.5 million residents.

We are not talking GTA.

Toronto is one of the world's most diverse cities, as about 49 percent of the population were born outside of Canada.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto

----------------------------------------------------------

73 per cent of immigrants who came to Canada in the 1990s live in Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal, with only only six per cent choosing to live in areas outside of major urban centres;

Of 1.8 million immigrants who arrived between 1991-2001, 58 per cent were from Asia, 20 per cent from Europe, 11 per cent from the Caribbean, Central and South America, eight per cent from Africa and three per cent from the United States;

So, Geoffrey for Toronto's population to be 50% foreign born we are talking roughly Toronto taking in 1.25 million immigrants.

We know Montreal did not accept any large number nor B.C., so I think it is a reasonable calculation that out of 1.8 million immigrants between 1991 and 2001 and we are not including the number of immigrants from 2001 to 2007, that the majority settled in Toronto.

This would prove Toronto's population to be close to 50% immigrants born outside of Canada or maybe even more but have to wait until the 2001-2007 stats are in to verify this.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/01/21/...ants030121.html

Edited September 29, 2007 by Leafless

[Leafless]

Incompatable immoral lifestyles? Welcome to the reality of the entire world. You may feel at home in Vatican City, but that's about it. And even there you'd probably be uncomfortable with some of the indescressions.

Are you saying Canada freely chooses its third world visible minority, incompatible immigrants to provide Canada with a level of degradation to form a basis for criminal activity.

Everywhere in the world is like that now. You want to see imcompatible lifestyles? Take a look at Detriot or L.A.. Miami.

Is that the way you want to live?

To condition yourself to accept high levels of criminal activity, mind your business and do your thing.

I read a report where a girl was being raped on a crowded main street, in broad daylight, in New York whereas no one even bothered to look or intervene.

It's just the reality of life. People move to Canada because of opportunity, and most take it. There are a few people here to exploit the system and be trouble, but very few.

This is not true and you know it.

People come to Canada because it is the easiest country to get into, with plenty of fringe benefits and provides access to the U.S. and a Canadian Charter that over accomodates them.

And there are plenty of hoards immigrant troublemakers who also segregate themselves from mainstream Canada and don't integrate, taking over previously White public housing complexes.

Multiculturalism isn't the main problem. Mumbai is much more violent, as is Sao Paulo or how about Glasgow? With or without it, the same problems exist, diverse or not.

Canada does not have to invite these types of problems upon itself and can wisely choose compatible immigrants and really question 'do we actually need this level of immigration' or is it simply all hype to feed the greedy ever complaining 'corporate Canada' and keeping their investors well padded.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Leafless