M-103 has passed. And what today has changed for the better?

[Wikiy]

Endus lacks the gull to claim that he himself knows the Muslim community from within, so in another attempt (of countless) to utilize his low-level grasp of lawyerspeak he states "many of us" despite his apparent desire to appear as an authority on the subject (or any given topic that he involves himself with). Nor does he give us any indication as to why we should believe even his umbrella claim. Tying with that, he will endeavor to redefine anything that doesn't suit his narrative. This sort of tactics are his bread and butter.

Who are you exactly? The narrator? The match commentator?

[Wewlad]

Who are you exactly? The narrator? The match commentator?

ROUND 1...ARGUE!

Anyway, I am commenting, yes. Conveying some of my observations of Endus. I find it amusing when he is taken down a notch or several from his self-awarded pedestal.

Did you have anything else to ask?

[Minikin]

Honestly this doesnt do anything besides promote more dialogue. Canadian news (I am a canadian) has been kind of dull lately, besides the usual multiple car collision on the 401 and drug raid on some house in Mississauga. So this just spiced it up for a day. Honestly I am muslim and live in the heart of the GTA and had no idea what this thing was until I read about it here lol. I told my family and some extended friends and they were similarly "M-103 what?"

[Wikiy]

ROUND 1...ARGUE!

Anyway, I am commenting, yes. Conveying some of my observations of Endus. I find it amusing when he is taken down a notch or several from his self-awarded pedestal.

Did you have anything else to ask?

Only that you contribute to the discussion in some useful way.

[Wewlad]

Only that you contribute to the discussion in some useful way.

Useful to you is what was meant.

[Mormolyce]

People querying why you brought up something irrelevant is not an indication they are not calm, more that they are confused by your random reference to race.

Man you just can't even make a joke these days without some SJW trying to turn it into a shitty argument.

[Kalis]

Man you just can't even make a joke these days without some SJW trying to turn it into a shitty argument.

Then do not start shitty arguments over jokes.

If you need any more advice, I charge per topic.

[Nemrod]

yes of course, why not read the surahs before and after to get what it is actually saying. Just pick whatever fits your agenda. GG.

We should treat these books as what they really are. Works of literature. Written in ancient times.
You can pick you favorite quotes and lines from them, and on the other hand do away with those ancient believes like woman are objects or homosexuality is a crime.

I saw a good comparison on youtube recently about the religious wars. Image people would fight over what is the better "book" of Shakespeare, Hamlet or Othello. Two very large groups of people would exist and they would kill each other over what book is better. Like catholics and protestants did. Wouldn't you say they are bat-shit crazy? Why do we give those religious nutjobs so much power over their stupid books?

[Mormolyce]

Then do not start shitty arguments over jokes.

I make a joke, you get your knickers in a twist because I used the word "white", now you're accusing me of starting shitty arguments.

What else should I expect from a regressive SJW?

[Nitros14]

The whole point of the motion (which it was very successful at by the way) was to send the Conservatives into paroxysms and make them argue amongst themselves and generally look bad.

[Kalis]

I make a joke, you get your knickers in a twist because I used the word "white", now you're accusing me of starting shitty arguments.

What else should I expect from a regressive SJW?

Except it was not a joke (unless the joke was "Look how clueless Mormolyce is", then I suppose you succeeded), nobody got their knickers in a twist (they just asked what the fuck you were talking about) and attempting to suggest I am a "regressive SJW" is a weak attempt to flip an insult typically labelled at the likes of you, which as an insult works in your case.

For future reference, when trying to tell a joke, try to make is at least mildly funny and avoid this...

[Minikin]

We should treat these books as what they really are. Works of literature. Written in ancient times.
You can pick you favorite quotes and lines from them, and on the other hand do away with those ancient believes like woman are objects or homosexuality is a crime.

I saw a good comparison on youtube recently about the religious wars. Image people would fight over what is the better "book" of Shakespeare, Hamlet or Othello. Two very large groups of people would exist and they would kill each other over what book is better. Like catholics and protestants did. Wouldn't you say they are bat-shit crazy? Why do we give those religious nutjobs so much power over their stupid books?

that is an interesting comparison.

the reason nutjobs get away with so much is take for example a moderate muslim in say pakistan. Lives life, busy such and such. then this band of people shows up (seen this happen). claiming he is not practicing to his full extent. needs more devotion. and if he doesnt get his act together its the axe. so dude tries to adhere but also plans on leaving to get away from all the crazy. dude is successful gets over here to the west. band back home causes shit at home and also in the west. dude gets attacked for the crimes of those idiots and has to either apologise or spend his time explaining how he is not one of them. basically now playing the opposite role of "they arent true muslims I am". which is pretty much exactly what they tell him when he goes back, "u arent a true muslim, you dont hate the infidels!"

In the end its a big shit fest of people just not minding their own damn business.

My father taught me (im muslim) that before anything else, your religion is your own thing. You do not go waving at stick at others condemning them, not just because its not right, but also because why? some wierd superiority complex? be busy fixing yourself the world will fix or not fix itself. If in our grand end we are responsible for our own deeds and will be questioned about them, why should we be so concerned what everyone else is doing? Some dude is marrying another dude. Sure freedom of speech allows you to disagree, but that does not mean you become a hinderance to that dude or start sabotaging them. Some guy is praying every sunday at church? We can have disagreeing opinions but outright opressing that person from their religion so that they stop makes us no better an ISIS.

Unfortunately nowadays people are not content living simple quiet lives. They want to put their noses in everyone elses business. They want to control what other people do. And most of all, they want to be hurtful and damaging to others because somehow in some wierd sense freedom of speech has been morphed into this sword to attack with and a shield to take cover behind when an argument does come their way.

People just need to be nice to each other.

[Mormolyce]

Except it was not a joke (unless the joke was "Look how clueless Mormolyce is", then I suppose you succeeded), nobody got their knickers in a twist (they just asked what the fuck you were talking about) and attempting to suggest I am a "regressive SJW" is a weak attempt to flip an insult typically labelled at the likes of you, which as an insult works in your case.

For future reference, when trying to tell a joke, try to make is at least mildly funny and avoid this...

Jesus man I'm sorry I offended you so much already.

[Alakallanar]

You're really not gonna context away despicable passages like those. The only thing that's gonna make it go away is cherry-picking, which is the art of the modern non-skeptic, of any sort.

They might not be less despicable, but one might notice that the same stuff is also in the bible. E.g. the second quote is from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah...

If you are also critical of Christianity (which you are if I remember correctly) thats fine. But all those argueing pro-christianity but anti-islam ("USA is a christian nation", "the constitution is based on christian principles", etc.) really shouldn't use holy book quotes as an argument.

[lostIrish]

I have no issue with article, but I am looking forward to the 10+ page thread about how Canada is no longer secular and is under sharia law.. ironically enough mostly from americans who have politicians who are currently passing legislation on the fact that god has a plan....

I think most people would agree that discrimination against someone because of their religious beliefs , should be against the law , once those religious views do not advocate actions that would be against the civil laws of that country . But passing a motion (which could then be railroaded through the Canadian parliament) making it a crime to be able to question someone on their religious views , or the views expressed in there religious texts , would be a major blow to the rights of free and informed speech .The motion should have no chance of passing because of the word ''Islamophobia'' having such a broad meaning . Here's section 319 of the Canadian criminal code
Under section 319, an accused is not guilty: (a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true; (b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text; (c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or (d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.