Man charged after ‘multiple sexual assaults’ at West Edmonton Mall waterpark

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

1. Relatively speaking? Mormons don't kill people for insulting Mormonism.

2. There's a big difference between asking whether homosexuality should be "accepted by society", and whether you should be thrown in jail for who you are.

1. If "they don't kill people" is your only good thing, consider me underwhelmed.

2. I disagree. Maybe there's a vast difference to you, but it looks a whole lot like semantics to me. I don't see a huge difference in "homosexuals should be jailed" and "homosexuals shouldnt be accepted." If homosexuality was deemed "unacceptable" by the whole of society then how do you think it would be treated? Any guesses?

The whole "but the book of mormon" thing is great, but that's my point. We joke around and normalise the whole thing and laugh about it when most mormons still just go on... being terrible... but hey... we made a play about them and they didn't kill us so it's fine. There are plenty of artistic mockeries of the KKK and white nationalism without direct violent recourse. Is that really the measuring stick?

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Here a Syrian refugee sexually assaults 6 or more girls and two thirds of this thread are trying to rationalize this man's behavior instead of calling out this complete piece of human garbage for what he is.

Maybe you ought to re-read the thread, I don't see anyone rationalizing him being a gross pervert. Except for Cliff, maybe. But certainly nobody excused it.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

That is such utter racist junk.

What you're worried about is that white people are declining. You should be more worried about Chinese as the religion thing is merely a red herring. What if we're all eating rice in the future?

First of all. Please explain the racism? not agreeing or wanting anything to do with a religion that study's show at least 500 million followers preach and practice the following.

1) “But that whoever would not seek the Lord ... should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman.”

2) “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help.”

3) “Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death.”

4) “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death.”

5) “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.”

6) “Men are in charge of women.”

7) “All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense.”

8) “Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death.”

9) “For if a woman is not veiled, let her hair be cut off; but if it is a shame to a woman to have her hair cut off, let her be veiled.”

10) “Say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments [veil]; this will be more proper, that they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble.”

11) “A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death.”

12) “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”

13) “Do you commit immorality while you are seeing? Do you indeed approach men with desire instead of women? Rather, you are a people behaving ignorantly.”

14) “Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death.”

15) “Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all — old and young, girls and women and little children.”

16) “And when the forbidden months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them and take them prisoners, and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush.”

17) “If even then you remain hostile toward me and refuse to obey, I will inflict you with seven more disasters for your sins. I will release wild animals that will kill your children and destroy your cattle, so your numbers will dwindle and your roads will be deserted.”

18) “If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.”

Secondly, I'm not white and actually could care less about what race or color a person is. the only importance to me is how one acts and interacts with society.

If you like call me a bigot for not wanting my grandchildren to have to live with Sharia law but it has nothing to do with racism at all.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

1. If "they don't kill people" is your only good thing, consider me underwhelmed.

2. I disagree. Maybe there's a vast difference to you, but it looks a whole lot like semantics to me. I don't see a huge difference in "homosexuals should be jailed" and "homosexuals shouldnt be accepted." If homosexuality was deemed "unacceptable" by the whole of society then how do you think it would be treated? Any guesses?

It's semantics whether half of the population has private misgivings about the morality of homosexuality, and whether 90 per cent would make it illegal, and impose their beliefs with violent force? It's semantics whether your neighbour disapproves of your lifestyle but you can carry on with it anyway, or whether your neighbour can call the police on you for your private behaviour, and the police will drag you into prison where you will be beaten and flogged?

Homosexuality was decriminalized in most Western countries decades before most people thought it just as morally acceptable as heterosexuality. That's the whole idea of pluralism - people with different beliefs get along without trying to impose their beliefs on others. You seem to be wanting and expecting a world where everyone agrees in their heart about all issues of morality. Short of a totalitarian regime employing gene therapy in vitro, your utopia will never come to pass.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

First of all. Please explain the racism? not agreeing or wanting anything to do with a religion that study's show at least 500 million followers preach and practice the following.


Secondly, I'm not white and actually could care less about what race or color a person is. the only importance to me is how one acts and interacts with society.

If you like call me a bigot for not wanting my grandchildren to have to live with Sharia law but it has nothing to do with racism at all.

Is this Leviticus or the Koran?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

You're right we do already have conservative religions here, and quite frankly they get bashed and ostracized in mainstream conversation all of the time without fail. Case in point is the boys who were maimed or killed in the COP luge track accident. There was one or two quotes about how faith is helping the survivors come to terms with what happened and we have basically 90% of CP mocking their beliefs.

Here a Syrian refugee sexually assaults 6 or more girls and two thirds of this thread are trying to rationalize this man's behavior instead of calling out this complete piece of human garbage for what he is. Maybe if he were a Canadian born Morman we could all agree that what he did was wrong and that the real victims here are the 6 or more girls who were inappropriately touched.

Outside of him being a priest if he was white his religion wouldn't have been mentioned in the article. I agree with you the issue here is people somehow blaming the religion and fearing those who have a similar religion for his actions rather than treating this guy like your run of the mill sex offender.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

First of all. Please explain the racism? not agreeing or wanting anything to do with a religion that study's show at least 500 million followers preach and practice the following.


Secondly, I'm not white and actually could care less about what race or color a person is. the only importance to me is how one acts and interacts with society.

If you like call me a bigot for not wanting my grandchildren to have to live with Sharia law but it has nothing to do with racism at all.

Really, we're going to be subjugated by bronze age nomads? So many bed wetters in the free world these days.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

2. I disagree. Maybe there's a vast difference to you, but it looks a whole lot like semantics to me. I don't see a huge difference in "homosexuals should be jailed" and "homosexuals shouldnt be accepted." If homosexuality was deemed "unacceptable" by the whole of society then how do you think it would be treated? Any guesses?

This is just so dumb. It's just baffling to me that someone can actually believe this total garbage hahaha. One takes away freedom, or just kills you, and one feels to themselves that the lifestyle is wrong, and probably pushes for others to think like them. SEMANTICS THOUGH!

[RichKlit]

The mental gymnastics that some are performing in this thread are incredible! It's like it's physically impossible to admit that culture has major issues, issues such as murder for the wrong sexuality, women rights and privileges or lack there of etc. Our culture is by no means perfect but to read this thread you would think it was the stone ages in Canada and everywhere else is so much more enlightened. It's ridiculous.

[PepsiFree]

Maybe Cliff and nik should look up what happened when homosexuality was, in fact, unacceptable to society. It wasn't even that long ago relatively speaking.

Go ahead and get back to me on how vanilla and harmless it was. I'll wait.

The point here is not about some bizarre utopian society (who is mentioning that??), it's that there are things that are important and worth criticising Islam for, but call me unimpressed when you trot out a stat showing a high percentage of them in Britain think homosexuality should be illegal. This is the same place where it was criminal for two men to get together only 50 years ago (30 if you look at Scotland and Ireland). The same place where you had to be over 21 to be gay (while heterosexual age of consent was 16) up until 94, and the two didn't match until 2001. This is long after society started to accept homosexuality, so to question the severity of the whole of society thinking it's unacceptable again? Go ahead.

I just don't find it all that different than "they should be jailed," because that is historically what has happened when even a high percentage of society finds it unacceptable, not to mention society as a whole. So yeah, it's not dumb, it's semantics.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Maybe Cliff and nik should look up what happened when homosexuality was, in fact, unacceptable to society. It wasn't even that long ago relatively speaking.

Go ahead and get back to me on how vanilla and harmless it was. I'll wait.

was

You are so desperate to put a civilization that's not perfect at par with one that still has some pretty horrendous values. It's sad.

[RichKlit]

How is this even a debate it's truly ridiculous, one culture is striving to be better in every regard albiet not without warts and hiccups the other seems to be rooted in the past with barbaric values and philosophies. One of these things is not like the other. It's pretty clear to me which one is at least stumbling in the right direction.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

Outside of him being a priest if he was white his religion wouldn't have been mentioned in the article. I agree with you the issue here is people somehow blaming the religion and fearing those who have a similar religion for his actions rather than treating this guy like your run of the mill sex offender.

It's not religious, it's cultural. There are cultures that are decades or even centuries behind Canada in the treatment of women. It baffles me why that's considered a controversial observation.

Have you ever been to a country in the Middle East or North Africa? Outside a few tourist sites or liberal enclaves, a Western woman will be routinely creeped by local men. Oggled. Leered at. Manueovered into positions so men can look up their skirt. Often groped. In many conservative cultures around the world, Western women are considered shameless sluts. Their revealing clothes. The fact they go out in the presence of single men without a chaperone or family member. A drunk woman is regarded as little more than a prostitute.

Of course there will be problems when men raised in cultures like that encounter our progressive liberality. In countries like Germany and Denmark it isn't unusual for women to sunbath in public parks wearing bras, or go topless at beaches. That's changing. Today, women report being uncomfortable going partially clothed in public because of the leering or dirty looks from men recently arrived from much more conservative cultures.

The clash of civilization narrative is alarmist nonsense. The Islamic world isn't at war with the West for the future of the world. But there is very much a clash of cultures where the extraordinarily liberal cultures of the West come into contact with far more traditional and misogynist cultures from other parts of the world. It's wilfully naive to pretend otherwise.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It's not religious, it's cultural. There are cultures that are decades or even centuries behind Canada in the treatment of women. It baffles me why that's considered a controversial observation.

Have you ever been to a country in the Middle East or North Africa? Outside a few tourist sites or liberal enclaves, a Western woman will be routinely creeped by local men. Oggled. Leered at. Manueovered into positions so men can look up their skirt. Sometimes groped. In many conservative cultures around the world, Western women are considered shameless sluts. Their revealing clothes. The fact they go out in the presence of single men without a chaperone or family member. A drunk woman is regarded as little more than a prostitute.

Of course there will be problems when men raised in cultures like that encounter our progressive liberality. In countries like Germany and Denmark it isn't unusual for women to sunbath in public parks wearing bras, or go topless at beaches. Not anymore. Today, women report being less comfortable going partially clothed in public because of the leering or dirty looks from men from much more conservative cultures.

The clash of civilization narrative is alarmist nonsense. The Islamic world isn't at war with the West for the future of the world. But there is very much a clash of cultures where the extraordinarily liberal cultures of the West come into contact with far more traditional and misogynist cultures from other parts of the world. It's wilfully naive to pretend otherwise.

I've been to several countries in the Middle East, where have you been? Your entire post is nonsense.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

I've been to several countries in the Middle East, where have you been? Your entire post is nonsense.

Turkey. Morocco. Egypt.

Which ones have you been to? Did you travel with women? Did you get out of the tourist hotels?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Turkey. Morocco. Egypt.

Which ones have you been to? Did you travel with women? Did you get out of the tourist hotels?

If memory serves I believe Calgaryblood is Lebanese.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by nik-

was

You are so desperate to put a civilization that's not perfect at par with one that still has some pretty horrendous values. It's sad.

It's not about that at all, but you can stop the "you're desperate and sad" stuff whenever, it's a bad look for you.

Homosexuality is not illegal. So when you're complaining about the use of semantics between people who think it should be illegal, or those who think it shouldn't be acceptable, I'm going to point to an extremely recent point in history to show you what happened when it wasn't acceptable so you understand what that means.

The fact is, we have ideologically dangerous religious movements in our own backyard. It doesn't make Islam as a whole ok or excuse the poll numbers, but excuse me when I'm not as shocked as you over certain opinion polls.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It's not about that at all, but you can stop the "you're desperate and sad" stuff whenever, it's a bad look for you.

Homosexuality is not illegal. So when you're complaining about the use of semantics between people who think it should be illegal, or those who think it shouldn't be acceptable, I'm going to point to an extremely recent point in history to show you what happened when it wasn't acceptable so you understand what that means.

The fact is, we have ideologically dangerous religious movements in our own backyard. It doesn't make Islam as a whole ok or excuse the poll numbers, but excuse me when I'm not as shocked as you over certain opinion polls.

Ideologically dangerous religious movements that basically get no traction as a result of historical progress in a mostly secular society.

Bad looks are something you're just killing right now. So I'll keep pointing out the sad attempts at equalising two things that aren't remotely equal and be ok with whatever you want to think about it.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by nik-

Ideologically dangerous religious movements that basically get no traction as a result of historical progress in a mostly secular society.

Bad looks are something you're just killing right now. So I'll keep pointing out the sad attempts at equalising two things that aren't remotely equal and be ok with whatever you want to think about it.

I didn't catch the part where the opinion of some Muslims in Britain was getting laws reversed. Aren't they a mostly secular society? Their historical progress seems unphased by the tractionless sentiment of a percentage of Muslims, what point are you making?

You know we're talking about Muslims in western society, correct? How many of elements of sharia law do you see gaining traction here?

EDIT: in fact, the US elected probably the most anti-immigration and anti-Muslim president they realistically could have... and by association the most anti-gay VP possible... but I guess that's a big win for the fight against dangerous ideologies?

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Turkey. Morocco. Egypt.

Which ones have you been to? Did you travel with women? Did you get out of the tourist hotels?

I've also been to Turkey, Lebanon Syria and a few others and I still say your post is nonsense and fear mongering.

I've never stayed in a hotel there and travelled with a woman. Turkey and Lebanon are by far the most liberal countries with women dressing the way they want without fear of anything. Turkey is changing a bit from that but your post is still nonsense.

I know an openly gay guy in Lebanon not in a touristy location and guess what? He's Christian and lives among Muslims and hasn't had his head cut off yet and cuts most of their hair.

Your post is offensive that Middle East men can't control themselves and sexually harass and assault women because of what they're wearing.

Your judging the actions of a few and painting millions of men with the same brush. Im not denying there aren't perverts/pigs who harass and assault women in the Middle East but it's no more than what happens in the western world where rape and sexual assault/harassment is common.

Heck Calgary is having its own problem with sexual harassment in its own police force and recently the 911 call center. Which label should we attach to those individuals? Do you represent what they stand for?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I didn't catch the part where the opinion of some Muslims in Britain was getting laws reversed. Aren't they a mostly secular society? Their historical progress seems unphased by the tractionless sentiment of a percentage of Muslims, what point are you making?

You know we're talking about Muslims in western society, correct? How many of elements of sharia law do you see gaining traction here?

You're pretty much agreeing with the overarching point of a lot of the arguments in here in order to counter one portion of one of my posts. So yes, we agree. Strangle those movements in the crib.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

EDIT: in fact, the US elected probably the most anti-immigration and anti-Muslim president they realistically could have... and by association the most anti-gay VP possible... but I guess that's a big win for the fight against dangerous ideologies?

Climate versus weather. No one said it was perfect, but to try and make them equal or say "it's just semantics" is patently dishonest.