Even if the motion made it illegal to use anti-Islamic speech and actions, I think it would be a necessary step. That it doesn't is even better, but my point is its a current sensitive issue that needs immediate remedy, and time can take care of the imperfections of the motion when it's less of a hot button issue.

(February 25, 2017 at 6:13 pm)Exian Wrote: That it doesn't is even better, but my point is its a current sensitive issue that needs immediate remedy, and time can take care of the imperfections of the motion when it's less of a hot button issue.

The issue needs every attention it can possibly get. Rightwingers in Europe as well as the Americas have singled out muslims to be the new scapegoats. This has to be adressed before it gets as ugly as it was in the 1940ies.

I really can testify to the fact that they're even using the old slogans. They just replaced the word jew with muslim. Apart from that it's the same Nazis used back then. And I hate them, I hate them with a vengeance even if the likes of me aren't on the receiving end this time. The only thing I'm not sure of is who I hate more. The ones coming up with the scapegoating or the ones falling for the narrative. Lowlifes the lot of them.

And this is another example of the many blurred lines I've seen very recently. Like MTL, I don't religion, but I stop short of being an anti-theist. Still though, this tests how serious we are about hating the game and not the player. It's easy to differentiate yourself from an atheist spewing hateful/fearful anti-muslim ideals, but it's a little harder to see a level headed atheist who doesn't know when to give a little. Like MTL says, it gets confused with racism, but at the same time you gotta know when to use tact.

(February 25, 2017 at 6:29 pm)Exian Wrote: Like MTL says, it gets confused with racism, but at the same time you gotta know when to use tact.

It bigotry, plain and simple. Racism is only the son of bigotry. If you broad brush any group, you're a bigot. That can be about religion or it can be as simple as not liking cyclists.

There are political forces at work, pretty successful political forces, that single out muslims. Personally I don't care about religion, but I also not condemn it just because. Fact is, these pople are presented as the source of all evil, better to get rid off, to keep off ones borders, even if persecuted in their place of origin. That's exactly what has been done to jews. No, it's not racism, but that's just a cheap argument to wiggle out when the stone is turned and the ugliness reveiled. It's as ugly as if it was racism. It's broad brushing a group of people to be the same. Open season for harassment or in it's extreme, to be killed. As it happened in Canada recently.

Didn't some self described Trump supporter murder several Muslims in a Mosque because of their religion?

Have people already forgotten?

Some of you (you know who you are) are fucking disappointing. You instinctively bitched about Islam when this is a legislative reassurance to a recently terrorized group that they are citizens and have contributed irrecoverably to the country's health and history.

Various terror attacks have often resulted in resolutions of support and recognition, especially when it seems like a nation's values are under attack.

I'd say someone murdering people because of their religion for a political motive is an attack on Western values.

As I said earlier, I hated the Christian religion I was raised with, long before I even knew the names for other religions,
and I don't see anything wrong with my Anti-Theism views (and I don't object to Deism)

....but Religion, to me, is evil....and some more than others.

Christianity didn't stand up to scrutiny,
but the people who wanted to convert me to Christianity would get hurt or angry
....if I countered their efforts to convert me....
with challenges to their religion that they couldn't answer.

The other part that bothered me was the lack of accountability that religion took for its actions;
(and I'm not even talking about the big obvious ones, like rampant pedophilia or centuries of war)

What I refer to is the way  religion...especially Christianity and Islam...is so codependent in its nature;
believers so often need for non-believers to believe, to justify their own belief;

basically they want the RIGHT to harass you,
but whenever I exercise my RIGHT to OBJECT TO THAT HARASSMENT,
they act like I'm the one who is stepping all over their "right to their religion".

JoHo's coming to the door is perfect example.

They don't see any harm in simply knocking on someone's door,
but what they are doing, is, to me, noxious.

Not only do they NOT take 'no' for an answer,
and keep coming back,
and act like their RIGHT TO PROSELYTIZE has been infringed upon,
because I exercise my RIGHT TO BE LEFT ALONE, ESPECIALLY IN MY OWN HOME;

but, IMO, even one visit is too many,
because they are peddling an idea I consider to be unfounded and therefore irresponsible.

It's like false advertising.

I don't like door-to-door sales, either,
but at least the salesman is actually offering a product or service;
whereas, like all religions, the Mormons and JoHos are offering an unsubstantiated fairytale AS IF IT IS FACT,
and that angers me.

I don't care how good their intentions are.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I am not similarly codependent on my side:

I am not out to convince anyone that God does NOT exist;
as I said, I'm fine with Deism.

I don't even particularly to object to people taking their mere belief in God to the next level,
and applying a "belief structure" to it;
giving God a name and attributes...
...as long as they keep it to themselves, and their belief structure doesn't hurt anyone.

But it reaches full fruition, and becomes a RELIGION, when they pass it off as TRUTH to other people.

That is the part I take issue with, and rightly so.

The only time I challenge an individual on their religion
is either when they personally try to convert me, first;

or when they want to be free to publicly proselytize their views,
but object to opposing views being publicly proselytized
(IE:  there was a huge public uproar from the religious communities in Toronto when an Atheist ad campaign
tried to rent out advertising space on the side of buses and streetcars)

or when they try to make encroachments upon civil rights...especially in my country.

Like practicing Sharia law.

or, when that fails, trying to slowly make it SOCIALLY UNACCEPTABLE to criticize Islam,
without risk of being accused of racism.

THAT is my problem with the mere USE of the word "Islamophobia",
nevermind passing a law, or a bill, or even a mere motion,
in a formal, legal, political forum.

I want the distinction drawn between what criticism of a religion is,
versus plain old mindless racism.

If people mean "Arabphobia" then that's what they should say.

I don't know how many times I have to say it:

I have far more respect for the Arab risking his life for the sake of his Apostasy in an Islamic country,
than I do for a white, western Christian.

Because once you make it SOCIALLY UNACCEPTABLE to criticize Islam,
(without risk of being accused of racism)
then installing other changes to that society,
such as Sharia law,
become much easier.

So, in summary,

I have always found racism to be, more than anything else, mindless.
I will continue to call it so.

I find Religion irresponsible, damaging, harassing, and controlling,
and will continue to vocally oppose it whenever I catch it being such.

I think it's good for a community and a government to condemn violence
and work to stamp it out, together.

But what I object to is the reckless and undefined use of the term Islamophobia,
especially in a legal or political context,
and the growing inclination to label anyone who criticizes Islam as being racist,

because THE ABILITY TO CRITICIZE A RELIGION MUST NOT BECOME SOCIALLY UNACCEPTABLE

---

---

(February 25, 2017 at 6:37 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 25, 2017 at 6:29 pm)Exian Wrote: Like MTL says, it gets confused with racism, but at the same time you gotta know when to use tact.

It bigotry, plain and simple. Racism is only the son of bigotry. If you broad brush any group, you're a bigot. That can be about religion or it can be as simple as not liking cyclists.

There are political forces at work, pretty successful political forces, that single out muslims. Personally I don't care about religion, but I also not condemn it just because. Fact is, these pople are presented as the source of all evil, better to get rid off, to keep off ones borders, even if persecuted in their place of origin. That's exactly what has been done to jews. No, it's not racism, but that's just a cheap argument to wiggle out when the stone is turned and the ugliness reveiled. It's as ugly as if it was racism. It's broad brushing a group of people to be the same. Open season for harassment or in it's extreme, to be killed. As it happened in Canada recently.

Um......no.

It is not that simple.

Yes, there is a political agenda against Islam.

There is also a demonstrable political agenda working FOR Islam....certainly here in Ontario.

But it wasn't a political agenda by Trump that made a group of Islamic extremists shoot up a kosher grocery in Paris, or shoot up the Bataclan Theatre.

Maybe there's a political agenda by Trump to silence all the OTHER attacks being carried out by Buddhists and Hindus and Wiccans, around the world, in an effort to make Islam look worse than it is.

Look, abaris, by no stretch do I believe for one second that all muslims are extremists.

But to say that Islam is being targeted purely through political agenda, due to racism, is absurd.

This is NOT a chicken-and-egg situation,
Republicans didn't "create" the threat of extremist Islam
.....we know which came first.

The Ottoman empire was suppressing the rights of non-muslims long before 9/11.

There are groups of MUSLIM IMMIGRANT WOMEN here in Ontario who have actively been opposing Sharia law being allowed here...saying that is what they came to Canada to try and get away from.

And I support those muslim women.

In the UK, there are grown Muslim women coming forth to expose the FGM being done on young muslim girls in the UK, in great numbers.

Unless this political agenda you mention is silencing reports of just as many similar incidents in other religions,
it is ludicrous to suggest that all this fear of Islam is entirely unfounded and purely political.

And I'm sorry....it is entirely possible that I'm ignorant...you compare the treatment of Islam today to the way Jews were once treated in Europe.....what similar events did Extremist Jews engage in, prior to WWII?  Were the Jews shooting up theatres, engaging in honour-killings of their own women, or flying planes into skyscrapers?  What were they doing that made Germans so Jewphobic, other than merely existing, practicing their religion amongst themselves, not seeking to recruit new members on the street, and prospering in business, thus contributing to the economy?

---

And I have another important point to make:


When people criticize "Islamophobia",
one of the reasons they often cite is that when you tar all Muslims with the same brush,
you ostracize the otherwise-moderate, non-extremist Muslims out there,
and may actually be sowing the seeds to create more alienated, persecuted, extremist mindset in those
otherwise moderate Muslims.


Well, then,


isn't the reverse true?


If you want to tar all critics of Islam with the same brush,
and say anyone who criticizes Islam might be a racist,
then aren't you also ostracizing the otherwise non-racist non-muslims,
and making them feel unwarranted shame for their criticism of religion,
tarring them instead as the very racists whom they also despise?
Don't you possibly create more inner conflict and outrage in them,
thus possibly fanning the fires of more extremist thinking than they were originally guilty of?


Just a thought.

WTF was that?

Muslim Derangement Syndrome.

Seriously the "they do this", tenor and persecution complex is grade AAA MDS.

I fully believe after reading his rant that he perceives the choice to be "Support this resolution of support for Muslim citizens and be forced to convert to Islam" or "Oppose this resolution and not have to be muslim".

Which makes no sense because a resolution of support in no way has a causal linkage to Sharia law.

Futhermore, the blather on "alienating" non-muslims by doing this (rather toothless) resolution that doesn't add new legislation illustrates a world view where any support (even kind words) is somehow giving aid and comfort to a competing group which is perceived as the enemy.

I've only seen such behavior from Stormfront. Of course, we know Islam isn't a race but a religion. However, mindless bigotry and persecution complexes, key components of racism, are present.

Don't trust the Canadian Government to do the right thing when it comes to religion. We are so tolerant that we are fully prepared to tolerate intolerance.
Here is what I mean.
 
In Canada “hate speech” is against the law… UNLESS IT IS RELIGIOUSLY MOTIVATED!
Here is the relevant section in Bill C250 (Hate propaganda law) that discusses hate crimes:
3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)  (the section on Hate crimes)
(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;
(b) if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;
 
 
So, in Canada if you go around saying that gays are evil and should be executed… that is against the law and a hate crime. If you say “god told me… gays are evil and should be executed” that is perfectly legal.
 
This is exactly how religion gets a free pass and what bothers me about this issue is that liberal atheists constantly conflate race and religion and they are in part responsible for the above travesty.

(February 27, 2017 at 3:50 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: Muslim Derangement Syndrome.

Seriously the "they do this", tenor and persecution complex is grade AAA MDS.

I fully believe after reading his rant that he perceives the choice to be "Support this resolution of support for Muslim citizens and be forced to convert to Islam" or "Oppose this resolution and not have to be muslim".

Which makes no sense because a resolution of support in no way has a causal linkage to Sharia law.

Futhermore, the blather on "alienating" non-muslims by doing this (rather toothless) resolution that doesn't add new legislation illustrates a world view where any support (even kind words) is somehow giving aid and comfort to a competing group which is perceived as the enemy.

I've only seen such behavior from Stormfront. Of course, we know Islam isn't a race but a religion. However, mindless bigotry and persecution complexes, key components of racism, are present.