• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Canada anti-islamophobia motion M103

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
If you're terrified by a word, you've already lost.

How about we dispense with the strawmanning?

I would hope you'd agree that propaganda can be a powerful tactic (strategy?)? The term "islamophobia" is a term used as propaganda. We should not allow propaganda - especially propaganda aimed at eroding civil liberties - to gain traction.
 

Wirey

Fartist
How about we dispense with the strawmanning?

I would hope you'd agree that propaganda can be a powerful tactic (strategy?)? The term "islamophobia" is a term used as propaganda. We should not allow propaganda - especially propaganda aimed at eroding civil liberties - to gain traction.

Islamophobia is not propaganda, it's a fact of life. And exactly what civil liberties do you fear will be eroded? The ability to state you think Islam is evil? C'mon, man, shake your head. Even when you are told that M103 is powerless, and that people are still tearing up Korans, you run around with a false "they's trying to shut us up" narrative that is obviously and patently false. If this was the first step towards silencing criticism, the guy who ripped up that Koran would be in jail. Instead, he's at home waving his bible at people he hates while he screams at brown people.

And claiming that a non-binding motion is law is also propaganda, FYI. Just sayin'.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Islamophobia is not propaganda, it's a fact of life

I disagree. I believe that discrimination against Muslims exists, absolutely.

But apologists use the term Islamophobia to conflate discrimination and criticism. This is a deliberate bit of misdirection by the propagandist in order to stifle speech. Now I understand that not everyone who uses the term is in league with the propagandists. But those who use the term are unwittingly furthering the propagandists' agenda.

So probably the politician who started this motion used the term innocently. But we need to stamp out the term - it is fundamentally dishonest. It is ultimately a way to attack free speech.
 

UpperLimits

Active Member
Do you have a source backing up this claim?
Do I really need one?

This is a simple math problem. There are 338 MP seats in the Canadian Parliament. The Liberals have 183 of them. All the other parties combined can only come up with 155 votes. If the Liberals decide they want to push something through, it is impossible to stop them. Period. That's WHY it's called a "majority!"
 
Last edited:

Wirey

Fartist
I disagree. I believe that discrimination against Muslims exists, absolutely.

But apologists use the term Islamophobia to conflate discrimination and criticism. This is a deliberate bit of misdirection by the propagandist in order to stifle speech. Now I understand that not everyone who uses the term is in league with the propagandists. But those who use the term are unwittingly furthering the propagandists' agenda.

So probably the politician who started this motion used the term innocently. But we need to stamp out the term - it is fundamentally dishonest. It is ultimately a way to attack free speech.

I don't mean this to sound insulting, but it probably will, so I apologize for it in advance. You sound like a paranoid zealot when you write stuff like that.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
I don't mean this to sound insulting, but it probably will, so I apologize for it in advance. You sound like a paranoid zealot when you write stuff like that.

I'm happy to be a free speech zealot. As for paranoia, my guess is that your mind is already made up, but I'll give you some data points in good faith:

- Estimates vary, but somewhere between 1/3 to a 1/2 of the world's Muslims are "Islamists". The definition of "Islamist" I hear most often is a Muslims who wants Sharia to be the law of the land.
- The OIC (the largest block of nations in the U.N. with 57 members), has been trying relentlessly, since 1999, to introduce international blasphemy laws into the U.N. In other words, this HUGE organization is dead set on the idea that criticism of Islam should be a crime.
- Think of vocal critics of Islam like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Mark Steyn, and on and on. Do you think any of these people have ever discriminated against Muslims? Of course not. But they have all been labeled "Islamophobes". Ask yourself why.
- We know that all minorities can be victims of discrimination, correct? But there is no "Hispanicophobia" or "Jewophobia" or "Mormonophobia" or any other danged minority-phobia. Why is there "Islamophobia", because Islamists want to forcefully stifle criticism of Islam.

Let me ask you this, what evidence would you need to have in order to conclude that there is a large block of Muslims in the west and everywhere, who have stifling of criticism as their goal?
 

The Emperor of Mankind

Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Do I really need one?

Yes. You said the Liberals are "hell-bent on passing this motion into law" but I haven't seen any indicators at all that the Canadian Parliament intends to turn this motion into an enforceable law. I'll admit that because my exposure to Canadian politics is huge but if they were truly planning something like this then it'd more than likely have been reported on by now.

This is a simple math problem. There are 338 MP seats in the Canadian Parliament. The Liberals have 183 of them. All the other parties combined can only come up with 155 votes. If the Liberals decide they want to push something through, it is impossible to stop them. Period. That's WHY it's called a "majority!"

And there's the operative word: "if". You've gone from saying the Liberals are going to turn this motion into a law to saying if they turn it into a law. Just because they have the option of doing something like this doesn't mean they necessarily will.
 

UpperLimits

Active Member
Yes. You said the Liberals are "hell-bent on passing this motion into law" but I haven't seen any indicators at all that the Canadian Parliament intends to turn this motion into an enforceable law. I'll admit that because my exposure to Canadian politics is huge but if they were truly planning something like this then it'd more than likely have been reported on by now.



And there's the operative word: "if". You've gone from saying the Liberals are going to turn this motion into a law to saying if they turn it into a law. Just because they have the option of doing something like this doesn't mean they necessarily will.
Please don't conflate a general statement with a specific one.

IF the Liberals are going to turn this (any) motion into a law, they can't be stopped. That's general.

"Liberals are "hell-bent on passing this motion into law" That's specific. And I haven't changed my position. M103 will soon be law.

There's a lot more going on in Canada that just this one story which brings me to this conclusion. For instance, the vote on M103 was initially scheduled for late April, and was then suddenly moved to March 23. Some sources claim this was done at Iqra Khalid's request. But that's neither here, nor there.... Isn't it interesting that this date just happens to coincide with the 77th anniversary of the creation of Pakistan. Significant? (I believe so.)

Then there's the matter of moving the Immigration Case Processing Center from a small rural Alberta town (destroying the local work force and economy in the process) to a Liberal controlled riding in Edmonton. Although any "connection" is just simply one of pure speculation, a number of Syrian migrants were recently settled in this riding. One has to wonder if they'll be offered the new jobs as well.

The local officials of that small town had sent a delegation to Ottawa earlier this year and were told by Liberal officials that their impact studies "were all wrong." When they asked to see the studies that the Federal government had done - they discovered that there weren't any. The decision was being made from the top - down.

When they told federal officials that the town would be devastated by the move, the Liberal governments response to the delegation was; "Get used to being poor."

It's this kind of BS by this current Liberal government that leads me to have perfect faith that M103 will soon be the law of the land. JT is demanding it for his friends.

But this isn't the first incursion of the Canadian government into the arena of free speech. And I seriously doubt it will be the last, either.

"An interesting spanner was thrown into the works with the release of an Angus Reid Institute survey that morning. It asked Canadians how they’d vote if they were MPs. A plurality of 42% said they’d vote against it. While only 29% would give it the go ahead.


The rest opted for “don’t know / abstain.”

Anthony Furey, Toronto Sun Columnist
 

UpperLimits

Active Member
So, fast forward a week since the last post and in the interim we have a Catholic Church in Ontario getting torched on Easter Sunday.

While I have sympathy for the Islamic's who were murdered (which sparked this whole motion 103 thing in the first place), I couldn't help but notice the sound of crickets on account of all the left wingers on this current issue. Frankly, it's disgusting when any house of worship gets attacked - regardless of the faith. It cuts to the heart of any community.

So, in light of this new event, (Attacking a Christian Church on the Highest Holy Day of the year.) where are all the cries for "Christophobia" to now be included in this legislation? There wont be any. M103 is for the provision of specific state sanctioned protection for Muslims.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
So, fast forward a week since the last post and in the interim we have a Catholic Church in Ontario getting torched on Easter Sunday.

While I have sympathy for the Islamic's who were murdered (which sparked this whole motion 103 thing in the first place), I couldn't help but notice the sound of crickets on account of all the left wingers on this current issue. Frankly, it's disgusting when any house of worship gets attacked - regardless of the faith. It cuts to the heart of any community.

So, in light of this new event, (Attacking a Christian Church on the Highest Holy Day of the year.) where are all the cries for "Christophobia" to now be included in this legislation? There wont be any. M103 is for the provision of specific state sanctioned protection for Muslims.
Wait a minute. Do you know the motives of the person who carried it out? I don't see anything about that in the news articles on it.

Police identify suspect in Easter Sunday fire at Roman Catholic church
 

UpperLimits

Active Member
Wait a minute. Do you know the motives of the person who carried it out? I don't see anything about that in the news articles on it.

Police weren't releasing a motive at the time.But here's the issue....

1) A guy throws an incendiary device into a Catholic church.
2) A guy throws an incendiary device into a mosque.
4) A guy throws an incendiary device into a Hindu temple.

Does it really matter why? To quote myself. "Frankly, it's disgusting when any house of worship gets attacked - regardless of the faith. It cuts to the heart of any community."

If the motive is "X," does it really make that much of a difference whether it's done to group A, B, or C? That's why I disagree with (so called) "Islamophobia" (Whatever the heck that word's even supposed to mean this week....) being singled out and hi-lighted in this legislation. 99% of the opposition to this motion (That's likely a bit hyperbolic.) could probably be overcome simply by removing this single word from the conversation.
 
Last edited:

UpperLimits

Active Member
One has to wonder where all the liberals have gone. Seems they have nothing to say....

And it still gets worse. This is a little lengthy, but informative.

 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
And it still gets worse. This is a little lengthy, but informative.

Thanks for the link. Scary as all get-out but important.

I gotta say, I've heard Hitchens and Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Douglas Murray, and many others warn about the spread of Sharia. But something about the arrest of Kevin Johnston in Canada, apparently for criticizing Islam, hits close to home!!!

This feels seriously real to me. This feels like one small step away from blasphemy laws. This is a BIG FRIGGIN' DEAL folks!!
 

Notanumber

A Free Man
Thanks for the link. Scary as all get-out but important.

I gotta say, I've heard Hitchens and Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Douglas Murray, and many others warn about the spread of Sharia. But something about the arrest of Kevin Johnston in Canada, apparently for criticizing Islam, hits close to home!!!

This feels seriously real to me. This feels like one small step away from blasphemy laws. This is a BIG FRIGGIN' DEAL folks!!

It has been happening in The UK for quite some time.
 
Top