The Devil allows freedom of all false religions but not the true one.

[Link]

We have already seen.

Societal health indexes are a thing.
The higher the religiosity of a country, especially when it's state imposed through theocracy, the lower the societal health.

I don't know where these stats are from, but doesn't Iran have a lot less mental health problems statistically? Maybe you can help me in this research because I have heard the opposite so far.

 

[Link]

Still arguing a red herring.
Still ignoring the point made.
Still putting your own religion above all others.

Still exposing your hypocrisy when you speak about "freedom of religion".

I am not ignoring it at all. I'm saying according to my view, it's a human right and modesty should be enforced, and sexual corruption forbidden for the reasons I explained. If you want to convince the society to govern otherwise, you convince the majority.

Although I believe in it, if Muslims remain a minority in Canada, I don't believe in enforcing the human right. But if majority accept it and believe in it, then we can enforce it.

If you want to do the homosexual sacred thing, just convince majority it's okay. If majority accept, then they will allow it. If not, then they have right to reject it and ban it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The sometimes, is actually, the norm now isn't it not?

No.

Employers cannot enforce a total ban on all displays and expressions of religious belief within their company. However, they are allowed to restrict religious freedom, provided that such restrictions are justified by the specific nature of the employee’s duties and that they are proportionate to the objective sought (Code du travail art. L. 1121-1).


Therefore, corporate bylaws can include restrictions on expressions of religious belief, provided that this twofold condition of justification and proportionality is met (Code du travail art. L. 1321-3, 2°).

Yes. And don't forget to not ignore the part I emphasized.

This is what it says... but people are doing it on Hijaab or am I wrong in this?

On all religious symbolism.
Read the article again. If it targets just ONE religion, then it is illegal since that would be discrimination.

Opinion polls suggest the public are overwhelmingly in favour of a ban on religious symbols at work – some 84 percent according to a 2014 poll.

Opinions aren't laws, nor do they override laws.

This is from: French firms told they can ban staff from wearing Muslim headscarves at work - The Local

Here's the actual european court ruling:

“An internal rule of an undertaking [firm] which prohibits the visible wearing of any political, philosophical or religious sign does not constitute direct discrimination,” the court said.

So, to call that a "hijab" ban, is just plain dishonest.

 

[Link]

Okay, I will research what has happening with majority of work places. But why not allow in public work places and schools?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't know where these stats are from, but doesn't Iran have a lot less mental health problems statistically? Maybe you can help me in this research because I have heard the opposite so far.

You probably read it on a site like the one you linked in the OP.

Any UN reports will do.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I am not ignoring it at all. I'm saying according to my view, it's a human right and modesty should be enforced, and sexual corruption forbidden for the reasons I explained. If you want to convince the society to govern otherwise, you convince the majority.

Although I believe in it, if Muslims remain a minority in Canada, I don't believe in enforcing the human right. But if majority accept it and believe in it, then we can enforce it.

If you want to do the homosexual sacred thing, just convince majority it's okay. If majority accept, then they will allow it. If not, then they have right to reject it and ban it.

Right, so just like I said, your bluster about freedom of religion was just that: bluster.

You didn't actually mean it. What you really mean is "everything is fine as long as it complies with, and submits to, MY religion".

Talk about "freedom of religion" is pretty empty and void while at the same time you try to stuff a specific religion down the throat of society.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Okay, I will research what has happening with majority of work places. But why not allow in public work places and schools?

Because it is grounds for extreme division and conflict, which gets in the way of the actual purpose of school. That's why.

As for work places, once more: there is no such law. It is internal affairs of companies.
I was in France a couple weeks ago for work. Went to a supermarket for a salad for lunch.
At the register, I was served by a muslim woman wearing a hijab.

 

[Quagmire]

I don't support terrorism. You taking my statements way of out context, but you guys put everyone into one basket, and define terrorism in a way, that anyone who opposes you must be a terrorist. Even Nelson Mandela was on your list when he was active and alive.

Sorry, but thats not even sort-of true, and it looks like you're the one lumping people into baskets.

Mandela may have been considered a terrorist by the Reagan administration in the 80s (and who wasn't?) and certain hyper-vigilant Western intelligence agencies prior to that, but his perception among the American populace as a whole has been positive from the begining.

I can tell you from personal experience that you wouldnt have been able to walk on to a college campus anywhere in the United States in the 1970s or 80s without seeing "Free Mandela" posted all over the place.

Mandela was an iconic figure to American activism pretty much from the moment we became aware of his existence and what he stood for. His plight and his cause inspired countless campaigns, presentations, demonstrations, and protests across the US for decades.

To many if not most Americans he's always been considered a hero.

Alternately, if you were to go on to a college campus today and ask for people's perception of Hamas or Hezbollah, or any of the militant organizations that your government is sponsoring, I would guess that the most sympathetic response you could hope for would be something along the lines of, "Well they may be monsters, but they're monsters that we helped create".

Not really the same thing is it?

 

[Link]

Yeah, it's not. Generation that can see US should not decide who is a terrorist and who is not with Mendala is gone. They have some insights. We are left with a generation that just believes all the propaganda by their government and takes their side in the most oppressive issues. This generation has been duped by your media.

 

[Quagmire]

Yeah, it's not. Generation that can see US should not decide who is a terrorist and who is not with Mendala is gone. They have some insights. We are left with a generation that just believes all the propaganda by their government and takes their side in the most oppressive issues. This generation has been duped by your media.

Well, if you think there's another side to be presented maybe you should get busy with that instead of shaking a stick at some evil, monolithic "You" and saying "You are going to get yours".

I don't think You cares.

 

[Link]

Well, if you think there's another side to be presented maybe you should get busy with that instead of shaking a stick at some evil, monolithic "You" and saying "You are going to get yours".

I don't think You cares.

No I care about this and you are right in what you said.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yeah, it's not. Generation that can see US should not decide who is a terrorist and who is not with Mendala is gone. They have some insights. We are left with a generation that just believes all the propaganda by their government and takes their side in the most oppressive issues. This generation has been duped by your media.

Right, right, right

All them terrorist attacks commited by "allahu akbar" screaming folks, who spoke about the west using much the same language like you are using here, where they blow themselves up or set of bombs or go on kalashnikov killing sprees in western cities...

None of that ever happened.
Nope.

It's all "media invention".

 

[Link]

Right, right, right

All them terrorist attacks commited by "allahu akbar" screaming folks, who spoke about the west using much the same language like you are using here, where they blow themselves up or set of bombs or go on kalashnikov killing sprees in western cities...

None of that ever happened.
Nope.

It's all "media invention".

I posted this in two threads but it pertains to here well:

It also said if they would cease their hostility, not only will Prophet forgive them and not fight them anymore, but that God would forgive them.

This all Quran asks of humans who are non-Muslim, not to become hostile and seek to cover the truth. Kaffer is translated sometimes as disbeliever, but it can also as one who seeks to cover (the truth), and I believe the latter is the true interpretation in light of the verses I shared.

And it doesn't mean cover in the heart, it means active opposition to the truth, if people cease that, and say let's study in peace, God would not punish them. This is why the destroyed nations, Quran emphasizes they tried to force the believers out of their creed.

Today people who are not against Muslims having their own government and ruling themselves, I don't believe are disbelievers. I believe it's the people who gone to haywire in secularism, and are trying to force us out of our creed of theocracy that are the disbelievers. It's they who see the best people as the worse when Quran talks about the people of hell not being to count any of the humans who they counted as the worse of humans, and according to hadiths, this is regarding the followers of Ahlulbayt (a) and so those who show no hostility towards us - they like the other thread I showed are people of paradise.

But people who support oppressors, oppressors themselves, and those who are silent in watching all of it, I do believe are condemned in Quran. Apathy is also in this case silent approval "go ahead and oppress" and is due to hatred.

If people seek justice and stop their leaders from oppressing believers and don't seek to oppress believers, they would go to paradise.

 

[F1fan]

Bro by the time we done with you, people are going to believe God is the King of America and the world, as he is, and will submit to the Mahdi.

I guess you guys need to get to work doing it, because your God is terrible at setting things straight itself. Doesn't seem very powerful if it has to rely on fallible mortals to do it's work.

So what's your plan, mass murder of any American who doesn't agree with you, or else? Some of your fellow Muslims tried that on 9/11/2001 and it only kicked a hornets nest. All those involved ended up getting killed and America continued on.

We gone past that line long ago, we don't acknowledge authority other then God's. Everything else is about practicality.

Its too bad your God doesn't makes itself known to humans personally so we can know it's directing things, and not just fallible humans like yourself.

 

[McBell]

I posted this in two threads but it pertains to here well:

It also said if they would cease their hostility, not only will Prophet forgive them and not fight them anymore, but that God would forgive them.

This all Quran asks of humans who are non-Muslim, not to become hostile and seek to cover the truth. Kaffer is translated sometimes as disbeliever, but it can also as one who seeks to cover (the truth), and I believe the latter is the true interpretation in light of the verses I shared.

And it doesn't mean cover in the heart, it means active opposition to the truth, if people cease that, and say let's study in peace, God would not punish them. This is why the destroyed nations, Quran emphasizes they tried to force the believers out of their creed.

Today people who are not against Muslims having their own government and ruling themselves, I don't believe are disbelievers. I believe it's the people who gone to haywire in secularism, and are trying to force us out of our creed of theocracy that are the disbelievers. It's they who see the best people as the worse when Quran talks about the people of hell not being to count any of the humans who they counted as the worse of humans, and according to hadiths, this is regarding the followers of Ahlulbayt (a) and so those who show no hostility towards us - they like the other thread I showed are people of paradise.

But people who support oppressors, oppressors themselves, and those who are silent in watching all of it, I do believe are condemned in Quran. Apathy is also in this case silent approval "go ahead and oppress" and is due to hatred.

If people seek justice and stop their leaders from oppressing believers and don't seek to oppress believers, they would go to paradise.

I strongly suspect your will be singing a different tune once you are able to be the oppressor.

You know, like your two toned terrorism tune....

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I posted this in two threads but it pertains to here well:

It also said if they would cease their hostility, not only will Prophet forgive them and not fight them anymore, but that God would forgive them.

This all Quran asks of humans who are non-Muslim, not to become hostile and seek to cover the truth. Kaffer is translated sometimes as disbeliever, but it can also as one who seeks to cover (the truth), and I believe the latter is the true interpretation in light of the verses I shared.

And it doesn't mean cover in the heart, it means active opposition to the truth, if people cease that, and say let's study in peace, God would not punish them. This is why the destroyed nations, Quran emphasizes they tried to force the believers out of their creed.

Today people who are not against Muslims having their own government and ruling themselves, I don't believe are disbelievers. I believe it's the people who gone to haywire in secularism, and are trying to force us out of our creed of theocracy that are the disbelievers. It's they who see the best people as the worse when Quran talks about the people of hell not being to count any of the humans who they counted as the worse of humans, and according to hadiths, this is regarding the followers of Ahlulbayt (a) and so those who show no hostility towards us - they like the other thread I showed are people of paradise.

But people who support oppressors, oppressors themselves, and those who are silent in watching all of it, I do believe are condemned in Quran. Apathy is also in this case silent approval "go ahead and oppress" and is due to hatred.

If people seek justice and stop their leaders from oppressing believers and don't seek to oppress believers, they would go to paradise.

Sounds like an elaborate way for you to express support and / or sympathy for those terrorists who carried out such attacks in western cities and thereby killing droves of innocents.

Is that correct?

If that is not what you are saying, then I have no clue what you are saying.

 

[Colt]

The American Regime Seizes Many Shia Religious & Political Websites In Most Aggressive Crackdown On Content Opposed To ZOG Yet – Redpilled Reality

Meh, truth won't be stopped by such silly behavior.

Belief in a "Devil God" is a false teaching on its own. Its a strange thing, the same people who preach ONE God also imply at other times that Satan or the Devil is a God.???

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

It will change I’m sure because the us doesn’t like supporting oppressive dictators

Actually it’s a popular US sport.

 

[Revoltingest]

Actually it’s a popular US sport.

Voters here are often blind to the fact that policies
they decry have resulted from voting choices.
We elect war mongers...we get war.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Sexual corruption is not allowed in public

Let's just say that many of us are wary of what religious zealots consider sexual corruption. A bare wrist? Lipstick? A visible face?

I just saw this. Look at what he calls vulgar and fit to be shunned:

Guy Says “Vulgar” Women Are Damaged And Men Should Stay Away From Them – Gets Laughed At In The Comments

My hatred is for the sake of God

Religious zealots that hate are an existential threat to the rest of us.

Hijaab is obligation per Quran for women to wear and matter of what God considers modesty per Quran.

Then if they choose to live in a society where their religious imperatives are prohibited, they've pretty much painted themselves into a corner. The solution is not for the host culture to adapt to foreign preferences, and demands that they do are unrealistic. Why would they?