Yet more problematic stuff

[Brian Peacock]

Yeah, but try telling that to the Pope.

[Cunt]

Yeah, but try telling that to the Pope.

The world is beginning to.

Still pretty damned silent about other religious nuttery, though.

It seems that the browner someone is, the more respect is given to their backward, stupid religions.

By nearly everyone. Look at how many will leap to say 'not all muslims' but remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory.

[Brian Peacock]

...
Look at how many will leap to say 'not all muslims' but remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory.

How many is that, roughly?

[Cunt]

...
Look at how many will leap to say 'not all muslims' but remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory.

How many is that, roughly?

I don't know. It's hard to say, with so many people being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws.

Why don't you devise an experiment which would satisfy your question.

Unless you are just focusing on me again. Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

[Seabass]

Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

You've admitted to trolling, so why shouldn't people accuse you of trolling? It's what you do. I'm not bothered by your trolling, personally, but don't go trolling and then bitch about being called out for trolling...

[Cunt]

Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

You've admitted to trolling, so why shouldn't people accuse you of trolling? It's what you do. I'm not bothered by your trolling, personally, but don't go trolling and then bitch about being called out for trolling...

Everyone here is trolling.

Unless of course, you have a definition which doesn't include everyone.

It's good to see how hard you work to make the Democrats look bad though. I enjoy it almost as much as Tero's incoherent babble, or Brian Peacocks predictable focus on the arguer, rather than the argument.

[Brian Peacock]

...
Look at how many will leap to say 'not all muslims' but remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory.

How many is that, roughly?

I don't know. It's hard to say, with so many people being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws.

How many people are "being bound by 'Islamaphobia' [sic] laws", roughly? What are these laws and in what jurisdictions do they apply?

Why don't you devise an experiment which would satisfy your question.

Nah. I'll wait for you to support your own claims, and if you don't I'll just assume they're faux facts pulled straight from where the sun don't shine.

Unless you are just focusing on me again. Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

As I've suggested before, if you want to make broad and unsupported statements without people remarking upon them go and get yourself a blog, and don't forget to disable comments while you're at it.

[Cunt]

...
Look at how many will leap to say 'not all muslims' but remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory.

How many is that, roughly?

I don't know. It's hard to say, with so many people being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws.

How many people are "being bound by 'Islamaphobia' [sic] laws", roughly? What are these laws and in what jurisdictions do they apply?

If you don't know, then that explains your ignorant opinions on the matter.

Did you need help googling islamaphobia laws? Or sharia appearing in non-muslim countries? Or do you think it would be better to go ask at your local mosque?

Why don't you devise an experiment which would satisfy your question.

Nah. I'll wait for you to support your own claims, and if you don't I'll just assume they're faux facts pulled straight from where the sun don't shine.

Wow, you sure are smart, to show how I invented 'islamophobia laws'...you must be SO proud!

You should boast to your local imam about your success here! He might even invite you to join up

Unless you are just focusing on me again. Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

As I've suggested before, if you want to make broad and unsupported statements without people remarking upon them go and get yourself a blog, and don't forget to disable comments while you're at it.

I can't actually disagree too enthusiastically, if I don't let you keep the upper hand, one of us will likely get suspended for it.

I'm glad you admit not knowing about islamophobia laws though. Showing your raging ignorance makes it more entertaining to read your 'questions' lol

[Brian Peacock]

...
Look at how many will leap to say 'not all muslims' but remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory.

How many is that, roughly?

I don't know. It's hard to say, with so many people being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws.

How many people are "being bound by 'Islamaphobia' [sic] laws", roughly? What are these laws and in what jurisdictions do they apply?

If you don't know, then that explains your ignorant opinions on the matter.

Did you need help googling islamaphobia laws? Or sharia appearing in non-muslim countries? Or do you think it would be better to go ask at your local mosque?

You can banish my ignorance easily enough by supporting your own claims. In the meantime I'll continue to assume you're confusing made up anecdotes for facts.

Why don't you devise an experiment which would satisfy your question.

Nah. I'll wait for you to support your own claims, and if you don't I'll just assume they're faux facts pulled straight from where the sun don't shine.

Wow, you sure are smart, to show how I invented 'islamophobia laws'...you must be SO proud!

Only a dumb person would say that I thought you invented the idea of Islamophobia laws. The question was directed to your statement that so many people are "being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws". How many is that again (or do you just mean 'some')? And where do those laws apply (or do you just mean 'somewhere-or-other because I think I might have read it somewhere or heard someone say something like that sometime')?

You should boast to your local imam about your success here! He might even invite you to join up

Why would he do that Cunt? Why would I for that matter? Seriously, how do you get to there from what I said? Any ideas? Do you think asking you a simple, straightforward question in response to a pretty broad statement automatically makes me a swallower of Allah's unholy sausage?

Unless you are just focusing on me again. Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

As I've suggested before, if you want to make broad and unsupported statements without people remarking upon them go and get yourself a blog, and don't forget to disable comments while you're at it.

I can't actually disagree too enthusiastically, if I don't let you keep the upper hand, one of us will likely get suspended for it.

You're safe with me, unless you start ascribing views to me which I don't hold and have never expressed and/or start personally attacking me on the basis of that strawman.

I'm glad you admit not knowing about islamophobia laws though. Showing your raging ignorance makes it more entertaining to read your 'questions' lol

You can have that one for free. Now, if you'd just care to point me in the direction of some "islamaphobia [sic] laws" and let me know roughly how many people are "begin bound" by them, then finally we might get to the bottom of how many ('so many') people "will remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory".

[JimC]

...
I have a strong suspicion that a huge swath of the Muslim populations would be in favor a less pluralist, less secular society, as there percentage of the population goes up...

I have a strong suspicion that you don't know many Muslims and probably don't have any Muslim friends.

Bron has a strong distaste for Islam, which sometimes gets a little too general. The funny thing is that she will readily admit that all the muslim parents (many refugees) that she met when teaching were lovely people...

[JimC]

I presume you mean fundamentalist/jihadist Islam...

Yes, in part. By 'Islamicism' I mean anything that advocates and/or agitates for or on behalf of Islam as a political ideology.

And that set pretty well intersects with the fundamentalists. Moderate muslims living in the west accept that the political system they are living under is pluralist and secular.

I agree with the first sentence. Not so sure you have the data to back up the second sentence.

I suspect you are defining "moderate" there in the sense of someone who necessarily accepts that political systems should be pluralist and secular. If that is part of your definition of moderation, then the question becomes "how many Muslims in the west are, in fact, "moderate," when you include that as part of the definition.

And, while many may accept that the political systems ARE pluralist and secular now - I have a strong suspicion that a huge swath of the Muslim populations would be in favor a less pluralist, less secular society, as there percentage of the population goes up. I have no trust that either Christians or Muslims are to be trusted to support separation of church/mosque and state. Not by a longshot. As long as religion is defanged, as it has been in most of the West, the religious groups talk nice. Let their teeth grow back, and they'll growl again.

There is perhaps a grain of truth here, in that my comments were a little circular. However, I still think it very likely that a large majority of Muslims, at least here in Oz, are in that category of practising their religion as a personal thing without wanting their religion to become a political entity. I'm aware that this is not true in many countries, and that Islamic political parties (unfortunately) are a very real thing.

Let's not forget, however, the strong behind-the-scenes push by conservative Christians to push their agenda within conservative political parties in most western countries...

[JimC]

Islam appears to be a political movement.

They may also have religious beliefs, but that is mostly nonsensical, bullshit stuff (similar to any religion)

Their political clout makes them look a bit like an oppressed minority. Like the Christians, or the Feminists.

Brian Peacock wrote:

Christianity appears to be a political movement.

They may also have religious beliefs, but that is mostly nonsensical, bullshit stuff (similar to any religion)

Their political clout makes them look a bit like an elite. Like the corporations, or those with inherited unearned income.

[Cunt]

Only a dumb person would say that I thought you invented the idea of Islamophobia laws. The question was directed to your statement that so many people are "being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws". How many is that again (or do you just mean 'some')? And where do those laws apply (or do you just mean 'somewhere-or-other because I think I might have read it somewhere or heard someone say something like that sometime')?

My mistake. The ignorance of your post was FAR deeper than I imagined.

It is really simple. If a law exists in your country, you are 'bound by it'.

So the answer to your question is 'everyone', with the 'who lives in a country with those laws' being implied.

You should boast to your local imam about your success here! He might even invite you to join up

Why would he do that Cunt? Why would I for that matter? Seriously, how do you get to there from what I said? Any ideas? Do you think asking you a simple, straightforward question in response to a pretty broad statement automatically makes me a swallower of Allah's unholy sausage?

unholy pork sausage.

Who is bound by laws? I mean ANY laws?

We got 'here' because you decided to pretend that you don't know who is bound by laws, or something.

You seem to confuse easily.

Unless you are just focusing on me again. Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

As I've suggested before, if you want to make broad and unsupported statements without people remarking upon them go and get yourself a blog, and don't forget to disable comments while you're at it.

I can't actually disagree too enthusiastically, if I don't let you keep the upper hand, one of us will likely get suspended for it.

You're safe with me, unless you start ascribing views to me which I don't hold and have never expressed and/or start personally attacking me on the basis of that strawman.

I'm glad you admit not knowing about islamophobia laws though. Showing your raging ignorance makes it more entertaining to read your 'questions' lol

You can have that one for free. Now, if you'd just care to point me in the direction of some "islamaphobia [sic] laws" and let me know roughly how many people are "begin bound" by them, then finally we might get to the bottom of how many ('so many') people "will remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory".

Geez, it must have been hard to google. Is buzzfeed good enough?

In fact, when this piece is published, it may be the first media piece talking about Canada's successful anti-Islamophobia motion.

While you won't find any coverage of the anti-Islamophobia motion that passed on Oct. 26, you will find articles about a similar motion that was defeated on Oct. 6.

Personally, I find it curious that a motion condemning Islamophobia that fails is news, while an identical motion that passes is not.

Just remember, if I stop answering you, it might be because you have been suspended for trolling. I can't tell you if you have, because I think announcing such a suspension is considered trolling, so if I miss a question, it might be that. Or I forgot.

[Brian Peacock]

Only a dumb person would say that I thought you invented the idea of Islamophobia laws. The question was directed to your statement that so many people are "being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws". How many is that again (or do you just mean 'some')? And where do those laws apply (or do you just mean 'somewhere-or-other because I think I might have read it somewhere or heard someone say something like that sometime')?

My mistake. The ignorance of your post was FAR deeper than I imagined.

It is really simple. If a law exists in your country, you are 'bound by it'.

Where do these "islamaphobic laws" exist, and how many people in total, roughly, are "being bound" by them, and how does the existence of these laws - if and where they exist - mean we can't know how many ('so many') people "remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory"?

So the answer to your question is 'everyone', with the 'who lives in a country with those laws' being implied.

So where are these laws again, and how many people do they effect, and how do they make people "remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory"?

You should boast to your local imam about your success here! He might even invite you to join up

Why would he do that Cunt? Why would I for that matter? Seriously, how do you get to there from what I said? Any ideas? Do you think asking you a simple, straightforward question in response to a pretty broad statement automatically makes me a swallower of Allah's unholy sausage?

unholy pork sausage.

Who is bound by laws? I mean ANY laws?

You were talking about laws in a specific sense, in the sense of 'islamaphobia laws', not merely ruminating on the philosophical implications of being a law-abiding citizen. So, again, accepting that people are bound by laws wherever they exist, where do these "islamaphobic laws" exist and what do they say?

We got 'here' because you decided to pretend that you don't know who is bound by laws, or something.

Nonsense. We got here when you said, "Look at how many will leap to say 'not all muslims' but remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory," and I asked, "How many is that, roughly?" You then replied to that question by saying, "I don't know. It's hard to say, with so many people being bound by 'Islamaphobia' laws." That's how we got here Cunt. Your silly baiting about me cozying up to the local Imam was just your way of dodging the fact that I challenged you trying to pass an opinion off as some kind of self-evident fact - that the people who stay silent about Catholic institutional sexual abuse of minors give Muslims a free pass.

You seem to confuse easily.

Whereas you just seem to be exhibiting a deficit in your short-term memory?

Unless you are just focusing on me again. Then you should be satisfied by accusing me of trolling...

As I've suggested before, if you want to make broad and unsupported statements without people remarking upon them go and get yourself a blog, and don't forget to disable comments while you're at it.

I can't actually disagree too enthusiastically, if I don't let you keep the upper hand, one of us will likely get suspended for it.

You're safe with me, unless you start ascribing views to me which I don't hold and have never expressed and/or start personally attacking me on the basis of that strawman.

I'm glad you admit not knowing about islamophobia laws though. Showing your raging ignorance makes it more entertaining to read your 'questions' lol

You can have that one for free. Now, if you'd just care to point me in the direction of some "islamaphobia [sic] laws" and let me know roughly how many people are "begin bound" by them, then finally we might get to the bottom of how many ('so many') people "will remain silent when told that the Catholic church is a front for a pedophile factory".

Geez, it must have been hard to google. Is buzzfeed good enough?

In fact, when this piece is published, it may be the first media piece talking about Canada's successful anti-Islamophobia motion.

While you won't find any coverage of the anti-Islamophobia motion that passed on Oct. 26, you will find articles about a similar motion that was defeated on Oct. 6.

Personally, I find it curious that a motion condemning Islamophobia that fails is news, while an identical motion that passes is not.

I think you need to read the whole of the blog post you quoted there, then explain why you think it should be legal for Canadians to be Islamophobic in the way it's defined in the motion. Then you can tell us something about how, in your view, the motion represents, or places upon the citizen, an undue legal obligation. After than we might have something to talk about. And after all that you can further explain how the 'anti-Islamophobia motion' stops people from calling the Catholic church a paedophile sex cult.

Just remember, if I stop answering you, it might be because you have been suspended for trolling. I can't tell you if you have, because I think announcing such a suspension is considered trolling, so if I miss a question, it might be that. Or I forgot.

As you know, members only really have a problem with malicious trolling here - like ascribing views and opinions to people they don't have and have never expressed, and then personally attacking them on the basis of that strawman. But if you want to avoid a robust discussion by playing the oppressed snowflake card that's fine too - just keep in mind that everything you post here is a matter of public record.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Might as well post the relevant petition in full:

Whereas:

• Islam is a religion of over 1.5 billion people worldwide. Since its founding more than 1400 years ago, Muslims have contributed, and continue to contribute, to the positive development of human civilization. This encompasses all areas of human endeavors including the arts, culture, science, medicine, literature, and much more;
• Recently an infinitesimally small number of extremist individuals have conducted terrorist activities while claiming to speak for the religion of Islam. Their actions have been used as a pretext for a notable rise of anti-Muslim sentiments in Canada; and
• These violent individuals do not reflect in any way the values or the teachings of the religion of Islam. In fact, they misrepresent the religion. We categorically reject all their activities. They in no way represent the religion, the beliefs and the desire of Muslims to co-exist in peace with all peoples of the world.

We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.

The full text of the motion passed on October 26, 2016:

By unanimous consent, it was resolved, — That the House join the more than 69 742 Canadian supporters of House of Commons petition e-411 in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.

Perhaps in a muddled way our Great Slave Lake correspondent was attempting to refer to Motion 103. Common right-wing talking points about that are dealt with in the linked Wikipedia article, but The Star rubbishes the 'free speech' baloney rather effectively:

'Transparent double standard on freedom of speech'

Opponents of M103 — a non-binding motion asking the Canadian government to condemn and study Islamophobia and other forms of racism — are trying to pass themselves off as brave defenders of free speech.

At a rally organized by Rebel Media last Wednesday against M103, for instance, several Conservative leadership candidates (Kellie Leitch, Brad Trost, Chris Alexander, and Pierre Lemieux) sounded the alarm. Trost told the hundreds-strong crowd that the motion is an instrument of the “thought police in Ottawa.” “This is ground zero ... for freedom of speech, not just in Canada ... but for the world today,” declaimed Alexander, the former Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

M103 is a symbolic declaration with no legal force or effect, similar to the motion against anti-Semitism passed by Parliament in 2015. It does not denounce (much less prohibit) all criticism of Islam — only unfounded fear and hatred of Muslims, which is the definition of Islamophobia. “There is no rational argument that M103 ... restricts or constrains” freedom of expression, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association points out.

The contention that this constitutes a global “ground zero” in some battle against the “thought police” is wildly overblown. Six Muslims were killed in a hate attack on a Quebec mosque three weeks ago, but the anti-M103 movement seems more concerned about a concocted threat to free speech than the demonstrated threat to Muslim lives.

This would-be crusade for free speech is also disingenuous, since many of its most prominent proponents have previously embraced measures undermining speech rights in Canada. The same politicians now treating freedom of expression like a sacred cow have been perfectly happy to sacrifice it in the very recent past.