Religious minorities face fight-or-flight choice as Quebec values charter released

[Khayr]

Tallaabo;977663 wrote:

It is such a naked hypocrisy when Muslims deny non-Muslims the right to wear the clothes of their choice or build churches and temples in Muslim majority countries but complain and cry about their rights when the shoe is on the other foot.

What hypo-cry-u-say is this? Islam never claimed liberalism nor pluralism.

I don't know what reality you live in, but in your world of hypocryusay - their is still a blatant racial and caste system!

You can't be for democratic liberalism, when everything that is horse fed to you is selective manure (Grade A).

You only regurgitate what you are fed - hate for anything religious.

[Hobbesian_Brute]

Khayr;977876 wrote:

What hypo-cry-u-say is this?

Islam never claimed liberalism nor pluralism.

I don't know what reality you live in, but in your world of hypocryusay - their is still a blatant racial and caste system!

You can't be for democratic liberalism, when everything that is horse fed to you is selective manure (Grade A).

You only regurgitate what you are fed - hate for anything religious.

.....so it can prosecute and mistreat other faiths because it never claimed liberalism nor pluralism. do you know how brain dead your argument is ?

[Khayr]

You know reer fraannces should stop sipping on wine.

It does hinder their judgement and makes them think that there noses

are longer and better then others.

Hypocryusay, where did you study logic? That Professor should be fired.

Now go on and kick rocks!

[burahadeer]

Why those who defend radical islam tend to be shortsighted ,always mad and hurl curses around!

never able to send their point across civily.

[Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiyaar]

Waxa loogu dan leeyahay waala wada ogyahay, waana Muslimiinta. Waxa kale ay ku daba gambanaayaan igu daranba. Runta maala isku sheego, siiba when those below images are found right in the centre of their identities. And this proposed law won't affect them because they are considered an inherent "heritage."

 

 

Inside Quebec parliament (or National Assembly as they call it). There is this huge cross right in the centre of their parliament. This proposed law won't remove it because it is considered a "heritage" and part and parcel of Quebec identity. Yea, yea.

 

 

And Montreal has this big cross overlooking the city. The proposed law won't remove this either.

 

And oh, yes, their national flag. How can one forget it. It has no less than five crosses on it.

 

 

All those are considered "heritages."

[Hobbesian_Brute]

Duh! its their country, how thick is your argument. ever heard of the somali saying: Rag tag lama dhaho, wuxuu ku tago ayaa la tusaa!. its a nudge sxb to let you know you have overstayed your welcome and your stay will no longer be tolerated.

[Safferz]

Hobbesian_Brute;977970 wrote:

Duh! its their country, how thick is your argument. ever heard of the somali saying:

Rag tag lama dhaho, wuxuu ku tago ayaa la tusaa!

. its a nudge sxb to let you know you have overstayed your welcome and your stay will no longer be tolerated.

Canada is not a Christian country, and freedom of religion and minority rights are built into our political system and protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Quebecois racism and xenophobia will not hold up in the Supreme Court of Canada, because undermining religious freedoms under the guise of "secularism" is against our constitution.

[N.O.R.F]

So the french side of Canada is still a colony that wishes to go back to pre enlightenment times (reverse effect).

[Johnny B]

Thank to secularism that made the idea of religious coexistence possible.

Religious Theocracy has no room for tolerance, as god accepts only one way of living.

[N.O.R.F]

^There was no religious coexistence before secularism miya?

 

Is this proposed ban in line with secularism Johnny?

[Haatu]

burahadeer;977652 wrote:

Let us see churches in Riyad,Hargeisa or Mogadishu of today,don't complain when not eager to reciprocate.It's always one way street for some! Even primary children can't wear shorts in Somalia.

Where I come from kids play in virtually shorts and nothing else so cut out this crap.

[Khayr]

N.O.R.F;977987 wrote:

^There was no religious coexistence before secularism miya?

 

Is this proposed ban in line with secularism Johnny?

You know Johnny Boy and his ilk have this idea of secuarlism giving birth to a more tolerant world.

In fact, secuarlism rejects what is not inline with it - religion.

It was the french enlightenment period headed by the likes of Rossaeu that brought this idea to the forefront.

Religion is a home or closed door set of rituals - secularism's statement. l

Leave God indoors, as they say.

 

Anyways, if push came to shove, most muslims would drop their deen in a minute. Sad but true!

[Haatu]

As for this law, I'm not surprised. It is their country after all and they are free to do what they want. As the Brute seems to be using a lot of sayings, I throw one of my own:

Heybad waxaad ku leedahay dhulkaaga hooyo.

[Safferz]

^ It's not "their country," and no one is free to do whatever they want if it infringes on the rights of others (in this instance, freedom of religion). That's the law of the land.

[RedSea]

Tallaabo;977663 wrote:

It is such a naked hypocrisy when Muslims deny non-Muslims the right to wear the clothes of their choice or build churches and temples in Muslim majority countries but complain and cry about their rights when the shoe is on the other foot.

Are you not Muslim? Why are you passing judgement sxb.