|
|
|
- Thread starter Richard White
- Start date
Westey
Active Member
I suppose some do believe this. Mostly those who think we live in divided and dangerous times. And in divided and dangerous times, the key is to abandon everything that has made Canada great. It is so divided and dangerous times, and only safe place for Carney's family is the USA, which is the source of the divided and dangerous times. Although we say that Canada has the best trading deal with USA of all countries in the world, we know that that trading relationship is divided and dangerous and we all know that Canada becoming more prosperous would lead to more divided and dangerous times. We must support Iran on the UN Human Rights Committee in these divided and dangerous times, because to upset the model country would add to the divided and dangerous times. In these divided and dangerous times, the only country that can be truly trusted is China, who 5 years ago kidnapped our citizens and a year ago was Canada's greatest threat. But in these divided and dangerous times, they now became our greatest security partner. Carney's goal in these divided and dangerous times is to rally countries behind China to counter the USA, but we are in such divided and dangerous times that other democracies are afraid to follow our lead. These divided and dangerous times will likely continue until all conservative governments are removed from power, because nothing contributes to divided and dangerous times as a conservative government. We also must bring in more migrant criminals and not deport the criminals, because doing so would contribute to the divided and dangerous times. So as long as these divided and dangerous times continue, we must follow everything that Carney says, and look away on all moral and ethical failings of the government, because any criticism of the government will increase the divided and dangerous times,
Full Metal Junkie
Senior Member
You can cherry-pick the news items all you want to support your questionable argument. My only question is: do you not understand how incredibly racist your post reads? As in, in response to another post discussing how BIPOC community may experience disproportionate criminal prosecution, you come back with a post that insinuates that the entire BIPOC community consists of criminals?? Dude, wtf?
Lennox970
Active Member
What if my argument flows from evidence, not vice versa? This case was in the news, and the (unjust IMO) leniency being granted is appalling.
How anyone can support reducing the sentence for this crime, I don't know. This case epitomizes the madness of IRCA: BAME offender, but also victim. And the victim is at the centre of the criminal justice system. Right?
Full Metal Junkie
Senior Member
Umm... I believe the actual job title is "invisible sky wizard", thank you very much.
picard102
Senior Member
Justice isn't revenge.
I suppose some do believe this. Mostly those who might as well move to America if they think it's so great and the thing that made Canada great, instead of Canada being the reason Canada is great.
America ended the relationship, Canada should honour their wishes and move our business and allyship elsewhere.
picard102
Senior Member
You're still avoiding the question, we know why obviously, but do tell us which migrant communities. Italians? Methodists? The Irish?
zang
Senior Member
Mihairokov
Senior Member
Which ones in Canada?
We can't read your mind. Which one?
Source?
How would you define "western society"? Do you consider indigenous populations in this country as having assimilated, for example?
Which religion?
Do you take issue with the religion you refuse to name or with a specific culture? Your original post said:
Which is it?
I thought like this when I was in my teens but the older i've gotten and more people I've lost in my life the more I understand the idea of religion and faith and belief. Before my father passed he used to say "there's no atheists on a sinking ship" - I scoffed at it when I was 16 but I think there's something to it in the end. You might not be religious but I personally think it's nice to have some sort of grounding ideology of what happens to us in the afterlife, as well as providing some kind of moral grounding to guide us through our lives. You can do it however you like in your own personal time without the need of joining a fundamentalist or extremist group, as many Canadians do as they contribute to our society each and every day.
I'm assuming you can't really explain any difference between the Abrahamic religions and others, or why they're all named and grouped under Abraham, nor about the similarities between the mystery religion you won't name and Christianity/Judaism (Muslims refer to this grouping as "People of the Book" which I think sounds very cool) but I don't think it's necessary to be as hateful and spiteful as you are and seem to be. It seems clear you've committed to biting into the conservative fearmongering which is too bad. I can only hope you can eventually come around and find it within yourself to ask yourself why you are so disdainful of this mystery religion you've yet to name but are happy to demonize here.
Some cultures simply refuse to assimilate into western society. Shame.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
I imagine neither thinks the system works for them.
T3G
Senior Member
What, and other religions aren't guilty of weaponizing their beliefs? The very existence of political Zionism ("a land without a people for a people without a land") is nothing but colonialism and ethnic cleansing justified by their belief in a religion. Take away the divine warrant for a holy land and that slogan sounds suspiciously similar to lebensraum.
What about Ireland?
Last edited:
urbanclient
Active Member
It's technically true, honour killing through out history and even today does cross cultures and religions, however this misses the bigger picture. And the ones pushing this narrative that "honour killing is done by everyone" seem to not understand what honour culture is, and why it's unsurprising that honour killings tend to take place in said honour cultures.
Not that long ago US vice presidents were duelling each other for honour. Does that mean the US is predominantly an honour culture today? No.
No country is entirely one type, but some countries can be predominantly honour-based. If you read about the differences between honour, dignity, face, you'll find that the tripartite culture is heavily influenced by socioeconomic development.
Honour = weak state institutions, higher need to defend one's reputation with force because institutional enforcement is weak, associated with pastoral and agrarian economies
Face = hierarchical collectivist society, need to preserve social standing and avoid shame as order is maintained through reputation and dense relationship networks, associated with high population density, stable communities
Dignity = strong state institutions, individualistic, self-worth is intrinsic to everyone, ease of making and breaking relationships, associated with advanced economies
As an aside, I'll say that dignity cultures tend to value people looking after themselves, consent to help is more prevalent. It can be as simple as wheelchair users refusing help opening a door, or as odd as the (outdated?) Swedish stereotype of awkwardly watching your friend's family eat without you because they didn't cook for you. In honour and face cultures, you're much more likely to have people get up in your face trying to help you (and feed you), especially in a host-guest relationship.
------------------------------------------------------------
Back to the topic, we linked the wikipedia article for y'all to read because if we named any specific regions, countries, etc. as y'all were baiting us to do, we would likely be accused of racism or xenophobia.
The bigger picture, the general trend is that honour killings happen in less developed countries and regions within countries of the world, which also happen to be honour cultures.
This also harkens back to what I said about paradox of tolerance. A couple of us are saying we should not tolerate intolerant behaviours more associated with honour cultures. The other side is accusing us of being intolerant because we do not want to tolerate the intolerant.
There is also the outright denial of trends.... Not all x, y, z do honour killings, therefore there is no correlation, and whatabout a, b, c? This is logically fallacious on many levels. I can only assume this is rooted in moral grandstanding to feel good about yourself, because I doubt you would take a bicycle tour of the Middle East https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45026752 or camp in the Moroccan wilderness without a local guide https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-49029505
We treat people as individuals and avoid prejudging on immutable characteristics. That's what being anti-racism and non-discrimination is about. Not outright denials that honour cultures are associated with honour killings or whataboutisms that miss the obvious trend, a trend that is heavily influenced by socioeconomic development.
Defending one's honour in medieval Europe was certainly a thing, when Europe was in a much earlier stage of development.
This whataboutism doesn't prove anything as it's well established that the Mafia and southern Italy tend to be honour cultures. And I'll add that criminal organizations from street gangs to more organized crime throughout the world tend to be honour cultures. Honour cultures tend to commit honour killings, this is an established fact.
The optics here are awful too, you two are lumping billions of people from honour-based societies in with the Mafia. You're basically associating them with criminals.
Mostly agree, however, sometimes custodial sentencing isn't to punish those convicted, but to protect society from individuals capable of wreaking havoc to people's health and financial wellbeing.
Case in point, neo-Nazi Anders Breivik, who is likely to stay in prison for the rest of his life in rehabilitative justice-heavy Norway.
On first and second read, it doesn't seem that they're implying the entire BIPOC community consists of criminals. I don't know where you got that from. Crime disproportionately impacting marginalized communities is a well-documented thing, that's why in many communities heavily impacted by crime, there was no grassroots "defund the police" movement in the States. Police reform is sorely needed, but knee-jerk defunding is not what any of the impacted communities actually want.
The topic was honour killings, and yes heavily religious, theocratic societies ----> tend to be less developed ---> tend to be honour cultures, hence more honour killings.
I don't want to make the wrong assumption, what does Ireland have to do with this?
This sounds like you're implying western liberals are to the right of you on the political spectrum, and therefore morally less than you, regressive even. Not that fearmongering and demonization was right, but the way you frame this is odd. More common to say it was right-wing fearmongering and demonizing Muslims.
Last edited:
Full Metal Junkie
Senior Member
I can see how I may have misunderstood the post.
T3G
Senior Member
It was not very long ago that Ireland was also bogged down in religious violence, committed against other religious people by religious people. There is no mainstream religion that in recent history isn't guilty of committing atrocities, is my point.
81-717
Active Member
Murder of Aqsa Parvez - Wikipedia
Here ya go.
Canada has made efforts to make amends through legislation, affirmative action, as well as land acknowledgement. I'm curious what the Indigenous people would think of this, however.
Nice try. Just because people's primal survival instincts (hardwired through evolution) kick in on a sinking ship doesn't mean all of them suddenly become religious. And why tf should anyone worship the same sky wizard who allegedly made the ship sink in the first place?? Thanks to the existence of MAiD, some people have the luxury to die peacefully on their own terms, without worrying about those pesky reptilian survival instincts kicking in (sucks it's not more widely available, hopefully that'll change in the future). There is ZERO logic for the existence of an afterlife for humans but not all other lifeforms, or why there HAS to be an afterlife when there are no past lives. And ever occurred to you that the very notion of any kind of afterlife is abhorrent to anyone who understands what "forever" means?? At the very least, even if there is something in the end, it's almost certainly a dream/hallucination (anything can happen in a dream, doesn't make it real) and almost certainly not what any of the Abrahamic religions made up (which are, indeed, essentially different versions of the same story), nor any other religions. So whatever religion you choose to convert to, chances are you're wrong, because there are too many to choose from, and they can't all be right. And believe it or not, not everyone needs the threat of eternal punishment to scare them into not committing crimes (nevermind that anything a human can do, even the worst of the worst, like the violence committed by religious fanatics, is finite and deserves finite punishment, not infinite eternal punishment).
It's hardly fearmongering when the same ideology has been responsible for the majority of the attacks mentioned above (against the general population, not just against rival factions).
They can be, and some certainly were in the past, but the majority have long since moved past that. The point is that while extremism & fundamentalism can exist in any religion, it is overwhelmingly more prevalent in 1 of them in the present era.
Yeah, about that...
Last edited: