[Thanos]

Response to the insanity of Islamic religious violence? GET RID OF CHRISTMAS AND EASTER!



Jesus fuckin' Christ, Andy. Is there anything in our society and culture that you won't sell out to make your point?

$1:

Liberals have really failed on the topic of theocracy. They'll criticize white theocracy, they'll criticize Christians, they'll still get agitated over the abortion clinic bombing that happened in 1984, but when you want to talk about the treatment of women and homosexuals and free thinkers and public intellectuals in the Muslim world, I would argue that liberals have failed us. The crucial point of confusion is that we have been sold this meme of Islamophobia where every criticism of the doctrine of Islam gets conflated with bigotry toward Muslims as people, and that is intellectually ridiculous.

- Sam Harris, atheist heavyweight, Real Time With Bill Maher Oct 3 2014

And I have nothing at all against Ben Affleck, other that it's bloody pathetic to see him twist himself in circles to attack other much-more sensible liberals as they're trying to defend what liberalism is really supposed to be all about. And a reminder to anyone who wants to remember it, because The Sum Of All Fears was such a horrible movie, but Ben Affleck and the producers of that film deliberately changed the villains from Muslim terrorists to white male neo-Nazis just because they didn't want to offend Muslims. That is how far some people who call themselves liberals these days are willing to go to ignore the obvious. There isn't a single stand against the worst theocracy one could ever imagine existing that they won't willingly sell out in order to defend the politically correct house of straw they've been building for the last forty to fifty years.

[andyt]

Check with your buddy Maher, or Harris for that matter how keen they are on maintaining Christianity in the public sphere. You might find that your little strawman that removing christianity from govt = tolerating Islam in govt doesn't fly. This is a response to threats of theocracy no matter what religion it is based on, has nothing to do with responding to Islamist violence, which is a whole different kettle of fish. But you, conflation boy, (why would you be any different than anybody else) can't tell the diff. This was a discussion around muslim immigration and any attempt to bring in sharia law. Hard to tell them no when we were so happy to accommodate the Jews and insist on keeping our religion in govt. Turns the charter against us.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

Finally a sane post by you. "The vast majority of Muslims coming to Canada want the same things every immigrant wants" It would be good for the hyperventilators on this forum, including yourself, to kee this in mind. Yes, we should be doing more to to confront the Islamists. We do this best by allaying with the vast majority, not driving them into the arms of the Islamists, as feeding paranoia and rassenhass will do.

You're an idiot. You don't understand what Fatah is saying. It's consistent with what I and others have been saying all along.

You useful idiot apologists are as much a part of the eventual danger as the already arrived phenomena of things like the Oklahoma beheader. In fact the danger from Muslim orthodoxy couldn't exist without you.

You think you understand Fatah, because he is an actual moderate, and you believe that's what you're supporting. But to you he's saying the same thing CAIR is. The depths of your inner moron cannot be measured.

Watch the Bill Whittle vid. That's the one you need to understand, but seem incapable of.

[grainfedprairieboy]

andyt andyt:

I don't think that way. why 20%? why not 100% orthodox Jews?

Because if every Jew on the planet moved here it would constitute about 20% of our population, that's why not 100%.

But there are a billion Muslims.

It isn't a hard question. Stop dancing around it and answer with a number which in your opinion; what percentage of the Canadian population should be Muslim?

[Thanos]

andyt andyt:

Check with your buddy Maher, or Harris for that matter how keen they are on maintaining Christianity in the public sphere. You might find that your little strawman that removing christianity from govt = tolerating Islam in govt doesn't fly. This is a response to threats of theocracy no matter what religion it is based on, has nothing to do with responding to Islamist violence, which is a whole different kettle of fish. But you, conflation boy, (why would you be any different than anybody else) can't tell the diff. This was a discussion around muslim immigration and any attempt to bring in sharia law. Hard to tell them no when we were so happy to accommodate the Jews and insist on keeping our religion in govt. Turns the charter against us.

Too dumb, didn't read.

You've got an agenda to push therefore you can't be reached.

[andyt]

Great. why don't you start off that way, don't read what I post, don't respond, instead of flinging out your agenda and then weaseling out when it's challenged.

[Thanos]

I tend to leave the boards for hours on end, mostly from sheer frustration at the pap that guys like you churn out. It's not weaseling, it's more having to retreat to vomit somewhere in private thanks to being exposed to the toxic relativist shit people like you leave behind you.

[grainfedprairieboy]

andyt andyt:

Great. why don't you start off that way, don't read what I post, don't respond, instead of flinging out your agenda and then weaseling out when it's challenged.

Speaking of weaseling from a challenge.............this is my fourth request in this thread asking you to stand up and tell me what % of the Canadian population should be Muslim in your opinion.

[andyt]

I've answered you repeatedly. I don't think that way, I don't have quotas in mind for various religions. I've also said that I don't care about the religion of people, as long as they keep it in the private sphere. Which is why I wan't us to make sure our constitution is very clear on the secular nature of our government. As for immigration, again, no quotas for religions. We should only be taking people who have the specific skills we need, and then only if they can apply those skills as soon as they arrive, ie can speak English, the skills are recognized, etc. And we should be putting immigrants thru some kind of cultural vetting process, were we make it clear what our fundamental values are and ascertain that they are able to live with and accept those values. What their actual religion is would not be relevant.

[Jabberwalker]

I don't have quotas in mind for various religions.

I do. We need more Hare Krishna around for our amusement and more Jehovah's Witnesses for the amusement of our mastiffs.

[grainfedprairieboy]

andyt andyt:

I've answered you repeatedly. I don't think that way, I don't have quotas in mind for various religions.

I'm not talking about quotas. I am not asking you about what type of immigrants Canada should or shouldn't accept, I am not asking about skills or your opinion on whether governments should be secular or religious or whether cultural vetting should take place. I am asking none of that.

I am asking you directly what percentage of Canada's population in your opinion should be Islamic and I don't care if your number represents people who just arrived here or are third generation.

Take a moment to put the same effort into considering the question as you do to evading it.

[grainfedprairieboy]

Thanos video pretty much mirrors the debate in this thread.