House of Commons passes anti-Islamophobia motion

[moneyfight]

Muslims claim Islam is "perfect", yet they do everything in their power to prohibit criticism of this "perfect" religion. They're too fucking stupid to see the contradiction.

As a Canadian this makes me sick to my stomach.

The future of Canada

 

[BrianFantana]

Will do, right after you point me in the direction of other such motions aimed at investigating anyone opposed to other ideologies.

Please read the remainder of this thread and then turn off your computer and go to sleep.

 

[AviatorShades]

Don't herp your derp too hard, bud. Would you be the guy saying "being a workaholic isn't a real thing because workahol isn't a thing?"

The nature of language is fluid. Terms used in a non-medical context do not need to meet a strict medical standard in order to be linguistically accurate or relevant. The term has developed over decades and is common usage. You're being an idiot.

Many pseudoscientific "-phobia" terms are in widespread usage among supporters and sympathizers of whatever movement they pertain to. It doesn't grant them any legitimacy on a medical nor logical basis. It's a predictable method for marginalizing resistance.

Islam is an ideology revolving around core tenets of subjugation and expansionism, it's undergoing a demographic explosion, the world's largest ongoing genocides are motivated by Islamic sectarianism and those sects are the world's leading source of terrorism. To condemn "Islamophobia" on a national level is to imply that being concerned about one of the most prominent threats to the civilized world is emotionally illegitimate, that irrational anxiety and panic are prerequisite. The politicians who voted 'yes' should be condemned.

I firmly believe that anyone who uses the term "islamophobia" should live in an Islamic theocracy for a year. You have no idea what the outside world is like or what your world will be like for your children due to your own cowardice.

 

[ripskater]

apparently, this is canada

Listen people listen.
Canada, Canada. What happened to you?

 

[Slippery Kantus]

Many pseudoscientific "-phobia" terms are in widespread usage among supporters and sympathizers of whatever movement they pertain to. It doesn't grant them any legitimacy on a medical nor logical basis. It's a predictable method for marginalizing resistance.

Islam is an ideology revolving around core tenets of subjugation and expansionism, it's undergoing a demographic explosion, the world's largest ongoing genocides are motivated by Islamic sectarianism and those sects are the world's leading source of terrorism. To condemn "Islamophobia" on a national level is to imply that being concerned about one of the most prominent threats to the civilized world is emotionally illegitimate, that irrational anxiety and panic are prerequisite. The politicians who voted 'yes' should be condemned.

I firmly believe that anyone who uses the term "islamophobia" should live in an Islamic theocracy for a year. You have no idea what the outside world is like or what your world will be like for your children due to your own cowardice. It does come down ultimately to cowardice.

 

[Bald1]

Please read the remainder of this thread and then turn off your computer and go to sleep.

So no citations?

 

[BrianFantana]

Many pseudoscientific "-phobia" terms are in widespread usage among supporters and sympathizers of whatever movement they pertain to. It doesn't grant them any legitimacy on a medical nor logical basis. It's a predictable method for marginalizing resistance.

Islam is an ideology revolving around core tenets of subjugation and expansionism, it's undergoing a demographic explosion, the world's largest ongoing genocides are motivated by Islamic sectarianism and those sects are the world's leading source of terrorism. To condemn "Islamophobia" on a national level is to imply that being concerned about one of the most prominent threats to the civilized world is emotionally illegitimate, that irrational anxiety and panic are a prerequisite. The politicians who voted 'yes' should be condemned.

I firmly believe that anyone who uses the term "islamophobia" should live in an Islamic theocracy for a year. You have no idea what the outside world is like or what your world will be like for your children due to your own cowardice.

Sources:

1. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...shooting-what-we-know-so-far/article33826078/
2. https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-11...t-ablaze-funds-restore-it-were-raised-unknown
3. http://news.nationalpost.com/toront...lim-woman-near-school-on-monday-as-hate-crime
4. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...irs-after-attack-in-flemingdon-park-1.3325130

I could go on, but I'm sure after not reading these you will not get the point.

That, in your opinion "Islam is an ideology revolving around core tenets of subjugation and expansionism" is irrelevant. The same thing could be said of Christianity, and has been, because those are actually the tenets espoused in the Bible. Religion, and specifically monotheistic religions, are premised on subjugation to God, and expansion of the religion to increase power, influence, and money. It's not new, it's not unique to Islam, and it's not relevant here.

To condemn "Islamophobia" is to condemn attacks like those detailed above. Grown-ass men beating the shit out of women for being Muslim. There are legitimate concerns about Islam in respect of radicalization, abuses against women and children, and all of those are welcome to be explored. Those are, however, not "Islamophobia" as considered here, and are not what is covered by this, again, non-binding motion.

And as to your final, pointless paragraph, I don't even know what to say other than you should try harder to sound tough.

 

[mbinder]

Now we're onto something. That shooting was, in severity, isolated. But hate crimes against Muslims in Canada are not. The purpose of this bill is to investigate why primarily white men are doing things like: assaulting young Muslim women on buses; desecrating mosques; shouting vulgar and racist abuse at young Muslim women; etc. Those things are, generally, termed "Islamophobia".

Legitimate questions or criticisms of Islam are not in any way what is considered by this motion.

Well said. I'll admit I mostly just read the headline then posted. I could have done with actually digging into what the motion was all about. So I appreciate you spelling it out for me.

Still, I suppose my issue is this -- why can't the people that commit these hate crimes against Muslims simply be lumped in with the other assholes that commit hate crimes against other minority groups? As far as I know, there aren't any motions specifically investigating "blackophobia" or "Indianphobia" (I admit I might be completely wrong about this).

 

[BrianFantana]

So no citations?

Apparently you need it explained to you that this is a reactionary motion brought in respect of actual horrible acts of violence committed against an identifiable group of people, specifically targeted for being members of that group. Perhaps, if this was currently taking place against other identifiable groups your point would be relevant, but as of now, it is not.

So no, I cannot point you towards things that do not exist in respect of crimes that are not occurring.

Go to sleep.

 

[BrianFantana]

Well said. I'll admit I mostly just read the headline then posted. I could have done with actually digging into what the motion was all about. So I appreciate you spelling it out for me.

Still, I suppose my issue is this -- why can't the people that commit these hate crimes against Muslims simply be lumped in with the other assholes that commit hate crimes against other minority groups? As far as I know, there aren't any motions specifically investigating "blackophobia" or "Indianphobia" (I admit I might be completely wrong about this).

I think people may actually underestimate how common these types of motions are. There have been motions over the years to investigate domestic violence and other abuses. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in the last few years concluded its report on the abuses of Aboriginals in residential schools. The Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women Commission is currently underway.

The fact is that there are not many reported hate crimes against the groups you identify in your post. That's not to say the government isn't responsive to spates of hate crimes, though.

 

[mbinder]

I think people may actually underestimate how common these types of motions are. There have been motions over the years to investigate domestic violence and other abuses. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in the last few years concluded its report on the abuses of Aboriginals in residential schools. The Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women Commission is currently underway.

The fact is that there are not many reported hate crimes against the groups you identify in your post. That's not to say the government isn't responsive to spates of hate crimes, though.

Again, well said. I imagine we disagree about a lot, but you're good people. I just feel like this is giving special protection to a specific ideology. It seems like an extension of the prevailing trend in the west that Islam should be defended at all costs.

Still, people should be free to be Muslim and practice Islam without fear of being attacked or slandered.

 

[Bald1]

Apparently you need it explained to you that this is a reactionary motion brought in respect of actual horrible acts of violence committed against an identifiable group of people, specifically targeted for being members of that group. Perhaps, if this was currently taking place against other identifiable groups your point would be relevant, but as of now, it is not.

So no, I cannot point you towards things that do not exist in respect of crimes that are not occurring.

Go to sleep.

4 links of 3 crimes in a year and a half period warrants special attention because they were against an identifiable group of people. Got it. But thats not considered special status given to one particular ideology. Got it. You want me to go to sleep because you're grasping at straws. Got it.

 

[AviatorShades]

Sources:

1. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...shooting-what-we-know-so-far/article33826078/
2. https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-11...t-ablaze-funds-restore-it-were-raised-unknown
3. http://news.nationalpost.com/toront...lim-woman-near-school-on-monday-as-hate-crime
4. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...irs-after-attack-in-flemingdon-park-1.3325130

I could go on, but I'm sure after not reading these you will not get the point.

Are you being a Francophobe by expressing concern about the Quebec mosque shooting? Or are you rationally concerned about the violence resulting from an unnecessary demographic collision?

You rejected medical and linguistic semantics (which is strange considering that it's a symbolic motion to endorse a term for an imaginary phobia) and now you are rejecting logic and causation. The primitive solutions attempted by these men does nothing to suggest that fear of islamification was irrational. If anything they help to illustrate one of the inevitable reactionary symptoms of islamification.

That, in your opinion "Islam is an ideology revolving around core tenets of subjugation and expansionism" is irrelevant. The same thing could be said of Christianity, and has been, because those are actually the tenets espoused in the Bible. Religion, and specifically monotheistic religions, are premised on subjugation to God, and expansion of the religion to increase power, influence, and money. It's not new, it's not unique to Islam, and it's not relevant here.

There is no opinion involved in my definition of islam. I did not mean subjugation to God, I meant the subjugation of humans and territorial expansionism are core tenets. I understand your television-derived intuition that I'm a white christian and expected this moral relativist slop. Wrong.

 

[BrianFantana]

4 links of 3 crimes in a year and a half period warrants special attention because they were against an identifiable group of people. Got it. But thats not considered special status given to one particular ideology. Got it. You want me to go to sleep because you're grasping at straws. Got it.

Six people murdered in cold blood while praying. A mosque burned to the ground. Several women assaulted. I just chose a few; there are many, many more reports. If you deflect the onus of educating yourself onto other people you're never going to learn anything. If you're going to rely on my only posting a few articles as some sort of argument that those are all the crimes committed, I can't save you.

And beyond that, it is important not only that these acts were committed against an identifiable group, but that they were attacked as a result of being members of that identifiable group. Murdering people in a mosque isn't just a horrible (at least six) crime(s), it's a symbolic crime. Burning down a mosque is also a symbolic crime. And the symbolism is clear: hatred towards Muslims, or Islam, or both.

This is not "giving special status" to an ideology. If anyone actually took the time to read the NON-BINDING MOTION (not a bill, not a law, not a proposed bill, not a proposed law), it is a request to investigate the reasons underlying these attacks.

I want you to go to sleep because I'm tired of reading your mis- or un-informed opinions that are grounded in nothing but ideological nonsense.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

LOL at anyone defending Canada in the realm of Islamophobia

not like a recent refugee molested five separate women at the biggest waterpark there, and then the media all but omitted his background in the initial reporting...

oh wait

keep buying that CBC ish my dude

 

[BrianFantana]

Exactly how many Muslims have been physically assaulted and injured in any major way from year to year in Canada by non-Muslims? I would argue relatively few and certainly much less than the amount of Muslims who commit crime, violence, sexual assaults and other crimes in Canada every year against non-Muslims and yet how come none of this is considered 'hate crimes' or Muslims being Westernphobic?

Frankly, whitebelt, no one gives a shit about what you would "argue" when there is factual evidence that you're wrong.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

'where is this coming from' is that an honest, serious question?

no clue, perhaps the prime minister touting the shit of muslims/refugees (my bad, Mooslims), coupled with the carbon tax and huge hit to the one of the largest industries in canada that employs a decent amount of workers (oil) is causing resentment among those wondering why canadian citizens aren't getting love from the government?

 

[AviatorShades]

You know you throatfucked someone when they ignore the irrefutable content of your post and resort to attacking the color of your cartoon karate belt.

Nice work John Gage. Fantana is your bitch for life. I wonder if he's even a muslim or just a c-word.

 

[Ayin]

Anyone have a link to the specific definition of "Islamophobia" being used by the government for this motion?

 

[ShadowRun]

Crazy and to think of all the Naziphobia people out there.