Democrats Shift Dramatically Towards Obama On The Eve Of Super Tuesday

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by ericschand

"Tried to impose Sharia law" is a gross distortion. They did nothing of
the sort.

The second article you post answers some of the questions and
provides hints:
- "...in Ontario Orthodox Jews are able to settle their civil disputes in religious courts."

- "It could even be a Canadian contribution to an Islamic reformation."

- "[Marion Boyd] hinted strongly to me that the government could not allow Jewish courts and forbid Muslim ones; that would be discrimination."

I believe that aborignal people have their own court/justice system that,
if all participants are willing, can be used. I would imagine that this would
follow in the same way, not that you must use it.

Now, whether people could, or would, be pressured into using it, that
would be interesting to see in the Jewish system.

ers

Well, you're just splitting hairs here. By trying to "bring about Sharia Law as a form of dispute resolution" you are "imposing Sharia law" because women are not considered persons under it, and they would have little choice but be drawn into it by religious code.

As well, due to ruling out Sharia as dispute resolution, the other religious tribunals were blocked out too, which is a good thing, even though the other tribunals were not as discriminatory. Religions did provide much basis to our laws, but we have already taken what is good from them and cast off the rest... we surely don't need the original, outdated texts to fall back on.

I think a lot of people realized that "Canadian contribution" nonsense was pie in the sky, and would not happen that way.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I think Szarkozy being elected in France was somewhat of a public outcry...he has a pretty hardline stance on these types of matters.

Cars set on fire will do that. The heat was turned on way too much and the frog noticed.

BTW I was surprised that the French showed some sense and elected Sarkozy, and not that fluffy left wing princess Segolene Royal. Good on them.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Cars set on fire will do that. The heat was turned on way too much and the frog noticed.

BTW I was surprised that the French showed some sense and elected Sarkozy, and not that fluffy left wing princess Segolene Royal. Good on them.

Don't google Segolene Royal bikini - yikes.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...-20050909.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...nt/3599264.stm

It was a pretty big debate. Fortunately it was quashed, but that doesn't mean the movement was quashed.

Very fortunate.

I think a common worry will always be....how long are we going to quash this movement?

How long until it becomes politically incorrect to say no to these people?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Very fortunate.

I think a common worry will always be....how long are we going to quash this movement?

How long until it becomes politically incorrect to say no to these people?

Never.

We've got a hell of a lot more Christians who have a lot more money and are far better organized and they don't have a hope in getting their religious frippery into mainstream society, let alone make it a law.

Do you really think these people, whoever they are, can pull it off?

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Never.

We've got a hell of a lot more Christians who have a lot more money and are far better organized and they don't have a hope in getting their religious frippery into mainstream society, let alone make it a law.

Do you really think these people, whoever they are, can pull it off?

With the help of multiculti left, they have a chance.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Never.

We've got a hell of a lot more Christians who have a lot more money and are far better organized and they don't have a hope in getting their religious frippery into mainstream society, let alone make it a law.

Do you really think these people, whoever they are, can pull it off?

Look at the US....look at how much of a role religion plays down there.

We're fortunate that our government doesn't dispose of the separation between church and state like the US does at times.

I'm just hoping we'll always be that fortunate. Religion in government, or religious laws in general, tend to cloud your judgement. So you go from the point of recognizing that there 'should' be a separation between church and state, to grudgingly accepting it, like the US has done, to now, where its a common conception in the election, in everything the government does.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Azure

Look at the US....look at how much of a role religion plays down there.

We're fortunate that our government doesn't dispose of the separation between church and state like the US does at times.

I'm just hoping we'll always be that fortunate. Religion in government, or religious laws in general, tend to cloud your judgement. So you go from the point of recognizing that there 'should' be a separation between church and state, to grudgingly accepting it, like the US has done, to now, where its a common conception in the election, in everything the government does.

We don't even have an official separation of Church and State in Canada. Ever heard of the residential schools?

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by troutman

Don't google Segolene Royal bikini - yikes.

I've seen a lot worse for a 55 year old.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

With the help of multiculti left, they have a chance.

I don't know how much time you spend with the "the left" in Canada, but I can assure you that "the left" is not interested in living with any religious laws. Believe me. If anything, "the left" wants less religion, not more.

As Azure pointed out, down south they have a lot more religion mixed with their politics than we do, and they've got a pretty powerful movement to get even more superstition into the rulebooks.

Do you blame that on "the left"?

In fact, "the left" gets all sorts of blame for being against religion in the schools and courthouses and whatnot. Do you think "the left" is going to suddenly decide to switch, and become wide-open to the idea of Islamic law?

[Table 5]

Very well stated, Rouge.

[Flame Of Liberty]

The way I see it is that traditionaly the left oposses all things christian (conservative) rather than the religion per se. The motto is "enemy of my enemy is my friend" so if christians and islamists clash, the left will side with islamists (see Palestine, Danish cartoons, the whole multicultural agenda etc.)

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

The way I see it is that traditionaly the left oposses all things christian (conservative) rather than the religion per se. The motto is "enemy of my enemy is my friend" so if christians and islamists clash, the left will side with islamists (see Palestine, Danish cartoons, the whole multicultural agenda etc.)

Traditionally liberals tend to value freedom and choice (ie being able to DRAW a cartoon even if it is in poor taste). Sharia Law restricts freedoms, not liberates......why would anyone be for that?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

The way I see it is that traditionaly the left oposses all things christian (conservative) rather than the religion per se. The motto is "enemy of my enemy is my friend" so if christians and islamists clash, the left will side with islamists (see Palestine, Danish cartoons, the whole multicultural agenda etc.)

Well I hope you don't mind me saying so, but I think you see it wrong.

First of all, "the left" doesn't oppose all things Christian. "The left" opposes certain things that are done in the name of Christianity. Idiotic theories of creation in the classroom, for example. No other religion has popped up with their crazy theories and tried to get them into our schools, but they'd get the same reaction. What is the creation myth in Islam? I don't know, but do you think "the left" would be happy to have it taught in science classes in Canadian public schools? The answer is no.

Do you think feminists (generally a pretty left-wing bunch) are going to support a law that sees them and their daughters wearing a blanket over their head and giving up their driver's license?

If any other religion comes along and tries to force their ideals on us, "the left" will react negatively and just as loudly as they do about this Christianity stuff.

"The left" won't accept it. "The right" won't accept it either. Who will have it? Nobody.

"Christian" does not equal "conservative", btw.

That "the enemy of my enemy..." business doesn't play a role here. Conservatives and Christians aren't my enemy. Religious fanatics would fit the bill though.

And the "multicultural agenda" isn't really about seeing one religion, in this case Islam, taking over, which is what you suggested.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

The way I see it is that traditionaly the left oposses all things christian (conservative) rather than the religion per se. The motto is "enemy of my enemy is my friend" so if christians and islamists clash, the left will side with islamists (see Palestine, Danish cartoons, the whole multicultural agenda etc.)

Funny. You do realize that Jyllands-Posten, the paper that published the Danish cartoons, is a liberal, secular publication? They'd be very surprised to learn that as leftists, they were actually supposed to be against the cartoons that they published. And you do realize that there are many christian, conservative communities in canada that are very pro-multiculture, and are infact made up of immigrants? The sooner you realize that the groups that oppose the christian conservative standpoint are not one big, organized group, but a complicated mix of viewpoints and interests that often side with conservatives and oppose one another, the sooner you'll understand there is no big threat to the prevailing rights and freedoms that we currently enjoy.

[Thunderball]

The question Rouge, is whether these people see it as A. "something cultural that doesn't concern us" or as B. "a religious dogma threatening to conquer our lifestyle."

If the left sees it as A, they're liable to support it under the auspices of multiculturalism, tolerance and of all things, libertarianism. If they see it as B, they'll fight harder against it than the right, and they'll be fighting it hard regardless.

Either way, I don't see the lunatic fringe of Islam rising up and declaring the Canadian caliphate anytime soon. However, I will not be surprised to see a continued attack on free speech by using existing measures, such as the Human Rights Commission to further their agenda. But their agenda as it stands is completely unpalatable to a vast and overwhelming majority... including a sizable percentage of muslims.

[Itse]

Meh, the "big muslim scare" is just as overblown as the fear of leftist revolution in the seventies and the fear of the resurging far right in the nineties. (At least the lefties had a real big backer.)

What the current democratic system of the western states is best at is castrating political movements of any hint of true ideology. The post WWII track record of either assimilating or marginalizing any movement which has had the scent of radicalism in it is 100%.

Over time, all parties are essentially slight variations of the same central-conservative party, no matter the roots. (Or one of the many "official nutcases" who are faithfully given their turn in the public forums every once in a while, and just as faithfully ignored when decisions are actually made.)

Fear not, bureaucracy and lobbyists will save you.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Itse

Meh, the "big muslim scare" is just as overblown as the fear of leftist revolution in the seventies and the fear of the resurging far right in the nineties. (At least the lefties had a real big backer.)

What the current democratic system of the western states is best at is castrating political movements of any hint of true ideology. The post WWII track record of either assimilating or marginalizing any movement which has had the scent of radicalism in it is 100%.

Over time, all parties are essentially slight variations of the same central-conservative party, no matter the roots. (Or one of the many "official nutcases" who are faithfully given their turn in the public forums every once in a while, and just as faithfully ignored when decisions are actually made.)

Fear not, bureaucracy and lobbyists will save you.

You watch Yes, Minister... don't you?

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

You watch Yes, Minister... don't you?

Not since it first aired, and I was around 10 I think when it ended, so not really no.

I just follow the real thing, and continue to be amazed.