Canada anti-islamophobia motion M103

[psychoslice]

Many seem very similar to what we see in the Bible, both OT and NT. So, can you pick out a couple/few passages that really strike you as evil? I would enjoy discussing them with you, but the list you provided isn't helpful for that.

But, just as a starting point:
They who disbelieve, and deny Our revelations, such are rightful Peoples of the Fire. They will abide therein." 2:39
- The Bible says the same thing of those who don't believe and aren't "saved".

You just don't get it do you ?, how many Christians stone their children to death if they don't obey, or kill homosexuals, and all the rest of the evil in the bible ?. The whole thing is many Muslims are still in the past, they still adhere to their evil writings, and if you cannot see that then you must be blind, we as the Western countries have in many ways become civilized, we don't do the evil things we once did, of course there is always going to be evil, I for one do not want my country turned into a Muslim country, I enjoy my freedom, I don't need or want to ever see a public execution happening everyday, I don't know, maybe you would like to give up your freedom ?.

 

[psychoslice]

Wake up, before it too late.

 

[icehorse]

This seems absurd to me. Having read the Quran and done some outside research on my own, it seems clear that Muhammad demanded tolerance of other religions. In actuality, he made it very very clear that there could not be compulsion in religion in any way. Don't get me wrong, there are a ton of crazy fundamentalists out there who go against Muhammad, demanding that people convert to their brand of Islam, but they are the ones who have gotten Islam wrong.

Having read the Quran myself, I remember that verse, and there are other verses that conflict. And these internal inconsistencies are common within the book.

 

[psychoslice]

This what is happening around the world, our freedom is slowing dying.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't doubt it. But we should never forget the degree of cognitive dissonance and mental gymnastics they have to endure / perform to maintain that perspective.

I doubt they have any.

Perhaps not directly, but ultimately it was.

You have failed to prove this. Without any evidence, why should I believe your claim.

You just don't get it do you ?, how many Christians stone their children to death if they don't obey, or kill homosexuals, and all the rest of the evil in the bible ?.

That is entirely irrelevant. The facts are there have been many blood thirsty and viciously violent Christians over the past 2000 years, and there are still some nasty, hateful, and even violent ones today. But that is not the point. The point is, both Christianity and Muslims turn to a book that is filled with justifications for heinous cruelty, severe punishments, and death and destruction for the non-believers.

Wake up, before it too late.

Who da thunk it? There are so Muslims here, yet that has not happened..

 

[psychoslice]

I doubt they have any.

You have failed to prove this. Without any evidence, why should I believe your claim.

That is entirely irrelevant. The facts are there have been many blood thirsty and viciously violent Christians over the past 2000 years, and there are still some nasty, hateful, and even violent ones today. But that is not the point. The point is, both Christianity and Muslims turn to a book that is filled with justifications for heinous cruelty, severe punishments, and death and destruction for the non-believers.

Who da thunk it? There are so Muslims here, yet that has not happened..

Doh, of course they do, but who are the ones today causing the most problems around the world, we are talking about Canada of today you know.

 

[icehorse]

You have failed to prove this. Without any evidence, why should I believe your claim.

If not a Muslim, then an apologist. Do you imagine that the folks who crafted this motion were careless? I guarantee you, such motions are carefully constructed, and every word is put there for a purpose. As has been stated many times in this thread, Canada already has anti-discrimination laws in effect. Why would this motion single out Islam - from all other religions - to merit a special mention, using a fundamentally (and I think intentionally), misleading word? What plausible reason would the drafters have to conflate discrimination with criticism?

 

[leibowde84]

You just don't get it do you ?, how many Christians stone their children to death if they don't obey, or kill homosexuals, and all the rest of the evil in the bible ?

Where does the Quran demand that you stone your children to death if they don't obey you? Maybe I missed that part. Can you point to that passage?

I agree, there aren't many Christians who still follow the orders in the Bible to kill homosexuals or kill those who participate in premarital sex. But, there also aren't many Muslims who do this either. There are certainly many "old-school" Muslims in parts of the world that are undeveloped. They are living in the past because they were born at an incredible disadvantage, living in places without roads, schools, running water, etc. in many instances.

But, the fact is, the vast majority of Muslims throughout the world do not stone their children to death, kill homosexuals, etc.

And, certainly the vast majority of Muslims do not want to rob you of any of your freedoms or culture. Beyond extremist groups, which are a drop in the bucket of the 1.6 billion muslims in the world, Muslims are mostly peaceful, respectful people.

It is "evil", imho, to judge Muslims according to a strict interpretation of the Quran without judging Christians by a strict interpretation of the Bible. Most of them are no different than you and me in most respects.

The small group of Muslim extremists in the world are no worse than Christian extremist groups like the Westboro Baptist Church. They are merely in areas without stable government or rule of law, so they get away with a lot more. If the WBC were in an area where they could take control, you can bet they would be just as "evil".

 

[leibowde84]

Wake up, before it too late.

This is just propaganda, trying to equate Muslims with a historical figure who lived nearly 1500 years ago. I would be careful trusting an author who obviously holds animosity towards Muslims in general. Try to find more objective sources, like historians who don't already hold a grudge.

 

[leibowde84]

Having read the Quran myself, I remember that verse, and there are other verses that conflict. And these internal inconsistencies are common within the book.

Just like another book I've read ... oh yeah, the Bible. People should not be judged by these ancient religious texts. Only judge them by their actions. The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful, respectful people. It is wrong to assume you know what they actually believe just because there is some claim in the Quran. Maybe they don't interpret the text in the same way you do.

 

[psychoslice]

Where does the Quran demand that you stone your children to death if they don't obey you? Maybe I missed that part. Can you point to that passage?

I agree, there aren't many Christians who still follow the orders in the Bible to kill homosexuals or kill those who participate in premarital sex. But, there also aren't many Muslims who do this either. There are certainly many "old-school" Muslims in parts of the world that are undeveloped. They are living in the past because they were born at an incredible disadvantage, living in places without roads, schools, running water, etc. in many instances.

But, the fact is, the vast majority of Muslims throughout the world do not stone their children to death, kill homosexuals, etc.

And, certainly the vast majority of Muslims do not want to rob you of any of your freedoms or culture. Beyond extremist groups, which are a drop in the bucket of the 1.6 billion muslims in the world, Muslims are mostly peaceful, respectful people.

It is "evil", imho, to judge Muslims according to a strict interpretation of the Quran without judging Christians by a strict interpretation of the Bible. Most of them are no different than you and me in most respects.

The small group of Muslim extremists in the world are no worse than Christian extremist groups like the Westboro Baptist Church. They are merely in areas without stable government or rule of law, so they get away with a lot more. If the WBC were in an area where they could take control, you can bet they would be just as "evil".

I said Christian don't stone their children anymore, yes there are many Muslims who don't practice their teachings, but there are so many of them, that to say only the minority is like talking about millions of them, the whole point it they are not mixing very well with civilized countries, they should be taught how we live and if they agree with our ways, then they can come, its simple.

 

[idav]

Maybe they don't interpret the text in the same way you do.

Some of those extremists claiming to be Islam haven't read the Quran or they wouldn't be fighting against most everyone, even people who profess belief in Allah.

 

[psychoslice]

This is just propaganda, trying to equate Muslims with a historical figure who lived nearly 1500 years ago. I would be careful trusting an author who obviously holds animosity towards Muslims in general. Try to find more objective sources, like historians who don't already hold a grudge.

You have as I have made your mind up, so there is no use in continuing this discussion, the proof is all around you and you refuse to see it, I hope for the good of the world that you are right.

 

[icehorse]

Just like another book I've read ... oh yeah, the Bible. People should not be judged by these ancient religious texts. Only judge them by their actions. The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful, respectful people. It is wrong to assume you know what they actually believe just because there is some claim in the Quran. Maybe they don't interpret the text in the same way you do.

How about if we consider their societies when we assess the faith? Or will you tell me that no assessments can ever made be made because "many factors" ?

 

[Augustus]

If not a Muslim, then an apologist. Do you imagine that the folks who crafted this motion were careless? I guarantee you, such motions are carefully constructed, and every word is put there for a purpose. As has been stated many times in this thread, Canada already has anti-discrimination laws in effect. Why would this motion single out Islam - from all other religions - to merit a special mention, using a fundamentally (and I think intentionally), misleading word? What plausible reason would the drafters have to conflate discrimination with criticism?

Regardless of your animosity towards Islam and any other event in the world, this is a giant storm in a tea cup.

It was a private member's motion, literally an individual putting his thoughts on the record in a way that has zero legislative consequences. None. Nothing. Not even a study unless the government later chooses to hold one (in a technically unconnected process).

It's not the first time they have mentioned other religions either, but don't let that get in the way of your paranoia.

Several previous motions in the House of Commons have singled out individual religions in a similar manner (for example, asking MPs to condemn anti-Semitism).[9] Conservative MP Michael Chong pointed out that the House of Commons had previously passed motions that denounced hatred against Jews (on February 22, 2016), Yazidis (on October 25, 2016) and Coptic Christians (on October 17, 2011).

 

[icehorse]

It's not the first time they have mentioned other religions either, but don't let that get in the way of your paranoia.

I'll keep track of our liberties for both of us, so that you can bask in your naivete

 

[Augustus]

I'll keep track of our liberties for both of us, so that you can bask in your naivete

Or you can keep crying wolf about some global conspiracy so when there are issues that may be of actual relevance you have lost your credibility or primed those who might potentially be on your side to automatically think you are just on another 'sky is falling' mission.

(btw I live in the "Muslim world" in a country with real blasphemy laws so I wouldn't put my disagreement down to naivety )

 

[UpperLimits]

Exactly. Not yet. When a blasphemy law comes up for a vote, I would wholeheartedly be against it, no matter what religion it claimed to protect.

Agreed. But as Icehorse has pointed out, these things essentially take place as "death by a thousand cuts." By the time it actually does come to a vote on the matter, the country would have been so indoctrinated as to simply accept it as the next logical step.

 

[icehorse]

Or you can keep crying wolf about some global conspiracy so when there are issues that may be of actual relevance you have lost your credibility or primed those who might potentially be on your side to automatically think you are just on another 'sky is falling' mission.

(btw I live in the "Muslim world" in a country with real blasphemy laws so I wouldn't put my disagreement down to naivety )

Global conspiracy?

 

[UpperLimits]

This doesn't relate to what I said.

On the contrary, it relates directly to what you said.

I understand you're using a technicality of language to put forth the idea that Canadians are OK with this because it was a Canadian who put forth the idea. Generally however - We're NOT "OK" with it!!. This motion is being put forth by a small minority. But since it was cooked up by the Liberals and the Liberal party has a majority in the Parliament, we're stuck with having it crammed down our throats regardless of how the general populace feels about it.

But what do the people of Canada know anyways? We're all just a bunch of low IQ, white, bigoted, zenophobes, who need to be instructed on how to live our lives by a pot smoking drama school teacher who's never ran a business in his life - let alone a country - and if actually left to fend for himself would barely have the qualifications to flip burgers at McDonalds! Get with the program - Canadians DON'T want this.