Jagmeet Singh is a hypocrite

ZulFiqar786

Electoral Member
Sep 12, 2017
233
0
16
Brampton ON
Some will argue that immigration hurts the economy more than benefits it. Firstly, research shows otherwise. Secondly, if cost were a legitimate concern, then no one would object to Svalbard-style open borders which simply grant visa-free access to work but not social services. Those that oppose that have no economic leg to stand on.




I rather like the idea of open borders and no social services. In fact, social services should be at a minimum for naturalized citizens too. Libertarianism is actually the most positive with regard to the immigration issue. If I hire someone from another country to come work on my property, why should the government interfere and prevent that? I can invite whoever I want on to my property. Immigrants need two basic things; housing and jobs. The private sector provides both. So immigration need not be a burden to public services at all. If there is a demand for immigrants, which I assure you there is and will continue to be, then we must let them come with minimum fuss. Those who say local people can’t find jobs due to immigration don’t know what they are talking about. There are plenty of jobs, but people just aren’t willing to do them, either because of the nature of the job or the wages. Go to any factory here in Ontario, they are filled with immigrant, newly arrived labor and temporary workers. You’d be hard pressed to find local people working the actual assembly lines. Come here to Brampton where I live, you will be bombarded by agencies begging you to take a job.

 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Yes it's the best place for you, a country full of useless losers and you would fit right in. It has everything you want.

N America will always be a White Christian country, and you don't fit in. Plus we don't want losers like you here trying to make this country a loser like India.
Hey Idiot: North America isn't a country.
 

AMKiller

Electoral Member
Sep 11, 2017
241
0
16
Burlington
What makes you say multiculturalism doesn’t work? It works very well, it is essential for any nation to grow and be socially cohesive into the 21st century. Why do you think there are much worse social problems in the United States and Europe? Because none of them have adapted the policy of multiculturalism that originated in Trudeau’s era here in Canada. The U.S. is a land of race riots, and Europe is falling into the clutch of extremely far-Right White nationalist parties, because none of those places have genuine multiculturalism, with the exception of California, New York, Chicago, Boston and similar major urban centers. But you will find that those places are the most prosperous and best places in America precisely because of cosmopolitanism or multiculturalism.

If not multiculturalism, then what do you propose? Please be specific.
Bullcrap!!! In Europe they bend over backwards for Muslims yet Muslims don't want to assimilate to western culture but instead force their ideology onto others, form their own enclaves and preach hatred towards Jews and Christians in the mosques. Islamophobia is a bullcrap term and nobody in their right mind believes in it. If anything Islamic countries and many Muslims are westernphobic.

Also, don't give me the line that I don't know any Muslims, I know a ton, and even the more moderate ones share more radical views.

Why don't Saudis make their nation including Mecca and Medina, multicultural? If multiculturalism is so great.
 

ZulFiqar786

Electoral Member
Sep 12, 2017
233
0
16
Brampton ON
Bullcrap!!! In Europe they bend over backwards for Muslims yet Muslims don't want to assimilate to western culture but instead force their ideology onto others, form their own enclaves and preach hatred towards Jews and Christians in the mosques. Islamophobia is a bullcrap term and nobody in their right mind believes in it. If anything Islamic countries and many Muslims are westernphobic.

Also, don't give me the line that I don't know any Muslims, I know a ton, and even the more moderate ones share more radical views.

Why don't Saudis make their nation including Mecca and Medina, multicultural? If multiculturalism is so great.




Wrong, Europe systematically discriminates against Muslims and treats them like 2nd class citizens. Muslims are discriminated in services and employment. France bans Muslim ladies from observing the veil, nothing but blatant discrimination and violation of religious freedom. Muslims are faced with extreme difficulties in building mosques due to deliberate government policies and opposition from Islamophobic locals. There is increased talk about banning circumcision, Halal meat, mosques and even deporting all Muslims from Europe, even though Muslims have been living there for generations and have no other place to go back to.




Saudi Arabia doesn’t claim to be secular, whereas Europe does. If European countries initially claimed to be White Christian countries and not secular, Muslims wouldn’t have immigrated there. Muslims only began to settle in Europe when the latter was recognized as secular and egalitarian. But now Europe is becoming more xenophobic and anti-Muslim. Saudi Arabia is our equivalent of the Vatican, do you see any mosques in the Vatican? Saudi Arabia is our holy land, but why not give the example of many other Muslim countries where Christians reside without any discrimination, like Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Bangladesh etc.?

 

AMKiller

Electoral Member
Sep 11, 2017
241
0
16
Burlington
Yes it's the best place for you, a country full of useless losers and you would fit right in. It has everything you want.

N America will always be a White Christian country, and you don't fit in. Plus we don't want losers like you here trying to make this country a loser like India.
You're out of line, sir.
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
Another argument against immigration is crime. Research shows others, and again, a simple solution if it were a problem would be what a friend of mine is proposing in a book she's writing and that I've had a chance to preview and advise on. Make anyone entering the country without a visa and without legitimate refugee status sign a teetotaler contract prohibiting that person from consuming alcohol, gambling, even fornicating, etc. etc. etc. or face a fine for doing so with the fine doubling for each repetition of the offence for fornication. This way, the prosecution would not need to prove drinking and driving, but merely drinking to at least make the person pay a fine. No need to prove that he's operating an illegal gambling den. he'd pay a fine just for gambling money. No need to prove paying or taking money for sex or sexual assault. just the act of fornication itself would make him pay a fine. etc.

In short, if he wants to be free to consume alcohol, etc. he'll need to get a visa. Otherwise, he just needs to sign a teetotaler contract. The choice would be his. Bingo. No more legitimate argument about crime as if there ever was one to begin with.

You're out of line, sir.

I pity the fool.
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36


Wrong, Europe systematically discriminates against Muslims and treats them like 2nd class citizens. Muslims are discriminated in services and employment. France bans Muslim ladies from observing the veil, nothing but blatant discrimination and violation of religious freedom. Muslims are faced with extreme difficulties in building mosques due to deliberate government policies and opposition from Islamophobic locals. There is increased talk about banning circumcision, Halal meat, mosques and even deporting all Muslims from Europe, even though Muslims have been living there for generations and have no other place to go back to.




Saudi Arabia doesn’t claim to be secular, whereas Europe does. If European countries initially claimed to be White Christian countries and not secular, Muslims wouldn’t have immigrated there. Muslims only began to settle in Europe when the latter was recognized as secular and egalitarian. But now Europe is becoming more xenophobic and anti-Muslim. Saudi Arabia is our equivalent of the Vatican, do you see any mosques in the Vatican? Saudi Arabia is our holy land, but why not give the example of many other Muslim countries where Christians reside without any discrimination, like Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Bangladesh etc.?


I don't profess Islam, but I've read the Qur'an. I can say that few Muslim states truly embody Muslim thought. Just to take one of many example. Qur'an 4:3 states that a man can have up to 4 wives on the condition that he treat them equally, yet 4:129 states that he cannot treat them equally. Logic forces us to conclude that the Qur'an therefore enjoins monogamy. Yet in spite of that, Tunisia is the only Muslim state (Turkey doesn't count since it's technically a secular state) that prohibits the contracting of a polygamous marriage on its soil precisely on the basis of 4:3 and 4:129. All other Muslim states seem to downplay it by suggesting the Qur'an just intended to discourage polygamy, not ban it outright. Sorry, but the Qur'an says what the Qur'an says.
 

ZulFiqar786

Electoral Member
Sep 12, 2017
233
0
16
Brampton ON
Another argument against immigration is crime. Research shows others, and again, a simple solution if it were a problem would be what a friend of mine is proposing in a book she's writing and that I've had a chance to preview and advise on. Make anyone entering the country without a visa and without legitimate refugee status sign a teetotaler contract prohibiting that person from consuming alcohol, gambling, even fornicating, etc. etc. etc. or face a fine for doing so with the fine doubling for each repetition of the offence for fornication. This way, the prosecution would not need to prove drinking and driving, but merely drinking to at least make the person pay a fine. No need to prove that he's operating an illegal gambling den. he'd pay a fine just for gambling money. No need to prove paying or taking money for sex or sexual assault. just the act of fornication itself would make him pay a fine. etc.

In short, if he wants to be free to consume alcohol, etc. he'll need to get a visa. Otherwise, he just needs to sign a teetotaler contract. The choice would be his. Bingo. No more legitimate argument about crime as if there ever was one to begin with.




Crime has drastically fallen and continues to fall. There is no correlation between crime and immigration. Most of the immigrants who come to Canada are highly skilled, education and even quite wealthy. They are the cream of the apple of their source countries and only serve to further enrichen and strengthen Canada.

 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
Damn you like to be ruled.... Are you into whips and chains too?

Nah, just chastity cages :)



Crime has drastically fallen and continues to fall. There is no correlation between crime and immigration. Most of the immigrants who come to Canada are highly skilled, education and even quite wealthy. They are the cream of the apple of their source countries and only serve to further enrichen and strengthen Canada.


I agree. I'm just saying though that if concern for crime is the argument (which is already an illegitimate argument to begin with), then a teetotaler contract would solve that problem. The real reason for such arguments is simply prejudice. They just don't want immigrants in Canada and so search for a problem to be solved and insist that closing the border must be the solution. Totally unscientific and illogical.
 

AMKiller

Electoral Member
Sep 11, 2017
241
0
16
Burlington


Wrong, Europe systematically discriminates against Muslims and treats them like 2nd class citizens. Muslims are discriminated in services and employment. France bans Muslim ladies from observing the veil, nothing but blatant discrimination and violation of religious freedom. Muslims are faced with extreme difficulties in building mosques due to deliberate government policies and opposition from Islamophobic locals. There is increased talk about banning circumcision, Halal meat, mosques and even deporting all Muslims from Europe, even though Muslims have been living there for generations and have no other place to go back to.




Saudi Arabia doesn’t claim to be secular, whereas Europe does. If European countries initially claimed to be White Christian countries and not secular, Muslims wouldn’t have immigrated there. Muslims only began to settle in Europe when the latter was recognized as secular and egalitarian. But now Europe is becoming more xenophobic and anti-Muslim. Saudi Arabia is our equivalent of the Vatican, do you see any mosques in the Vatican? Saudi Arabia is our holy land, but why not give the example of many other Muslim countries where Christians reside without any discrimination, like Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Bangladesh etc.?

That's another load of crap. Keep on playing the victim when you aren't one. If Muslims are treated so badly in Europe then why do they stay in Europe?

Past Muslim incursions of conquest into Europe and India is evidence Muslims don't give a crap if it's Christian or Hindu. And past Muslim atrocities in Armenia, India and most recently Christians in the Middle East is evidence of their intolerance of other religions.

Islam is not a religion but a backwards, fascistic ideology that does not tolerate criticism, apostasy, treats women like 2nd class citizens not worthy enough for an identity, is intolerant of gay people and free speech. Islam is not compatible with western culture. Letting too many in will only hasten the demise of western values.

As for the niqab. It is proof that many Muslims don't feel the need to assimilate. I wonder why they wouldn't be happier in a culture that accepts hiding a woman's face instead of being in countries that don't like it?
 

ZulFiqar786

Electoral Member
Sep 12, 2017
233
0
16
Brampton ON
I don't profess Islam, but I've read the Qur'an. I can say that few Muslim states truly embody Muslim thought. Just to take one of many example. Qur'an 4:3 states that a man can have up to 4 wives on the condition that he treat them equally, yet 4:129 states that he cannot treat them equally. Logic forces us to conclude that the Qur'an therefore enjoins monogamy. Yet in spite of that, Tunisia is the only Muslim state (Turkey doesn't count since it's technically a secular state) that prohibits the contracting of a polygamous marriage on its soil precisely on the basis of 4:3 and 4:129. All other Muslim states seem to downplay it by suggesting the Qur'an just intended to discourage polygamy, not ban it outright. Sorry, but the Qur'an says what the Qur'an says.




4: 129 says you cannot treat your wives with absolute justice *even if you keenly desire to do so*


This is pointing to a universal truth about human nature that we are flawed and imperfect that cannot be completely fair, just and objective, even when we intend to try our best. It can no way be construed as a ban on polygamy. Similarly, it is human nature that parents, despite their best effort, cannot treat all of their kids the same, and there will always be some element of favoritism, perhaps for the first born, which is again due to human nature. Does this mean that people should be forbidden from having multiple children? No that would be absurd. Polygamy is actually necessary at times, especially when there is a great sex ratio imbalance, due to war or other factors. Many times there is an excess of women and not enough men for each woman to find a husband to marry. Women who remain unmarried despite wanting to experience a healthy family life become depressed and suffer from all sorts of psychological problems. This results in many social problems. Polygamy is the only solution. Furthermore, polygamy is the natural state of the male mind which prefers multiple partners to having a single one for the rest of one’s life. According to the Bible, King Solomon had hundreds of wives, but Islam has limited it to four wives for practical considerations.

 

AMKiller

Electoral Member
Sep 11, 2017
241
0
16
Burlington
I don't profess Islam, but I've read the Qur'an. I can say that few Muslim states truly embody Muslim thought. Just to take one of many example. Qur'an 4:3 states that a man can have up to 4 wives on the condition that he treat them equally, yet 4:129 states that he cannot treat them equally. Logic forces us to conclude that the Qur'an therefore enjoins monogamy. Yet in spite of that, Tunisia is the only Muslim state (Turkey doesn't count since it's technically a secular state) that prohibits the contracting of a polygamous marriage on its soil precisely on the basis of 4:3 and 4:129. All other Muslim states seem to downplay it by suggesting the Qur'an just intended to discourage polygamy, not ban it outright. Sorry, but the Qur'an says what the Qur'an says.
The Quran is a dangerous book along the line of Mein Kampf. The passages in the Quran are ambiguous enough to be translated however Muslims decide.

Take for instance the passage that states: "If you kill a human being it is like killing all of humanity", followed by "unless they commit mischief in the land". What does mischief entail? Criticism, apostasy, homosexuality?



Crime has drastically fallen and continues to fall. There is no correlation between crime and immigration. Most of the immigrants who come to Canada are highly skilled, education and even quite wealthy. They are the cream of the apple of their source countries and only serve to further enrichen and strengthen Canada.

I agree, except for Muslim immigrants. Most are unskilled taxi drivers, or work at Tim Horton's or collect welfare. Lots of Muslim men have a wife in Canada and another in the U.S., each one collecting welfare for their brood of children.



4: 129 says you cannot treat your wives with absolute justice *even if you keenly desire to do so*


This is pointing to a universal truth about human nature that we are flawed and imperfect that cannot be completely fair, just and objective, even when we intend to try our best. It can no way be construed as a ban on polygamy. Similarly, it is human nature that parents, despite their best effort, cannot treat all of their kids the same, and there will always be some element of favoritism, perhaps for the first born, which is again due to human nature. Does this mean that people should be forbidden from having multiple children? No that would be absurd. Polygamy is actually necessary at times, especially when there is a great sex ratio imbalance, due to war or other factors. Many times there is an excess of women and not enough men for each woman to find a husband to marry. Women who remain unmarried despite wanting to experience a healthy family life become depressed and suffer from all sorts of psychological problems. This results in many social problems. Polygamy is the only solution. Furthermore, polygamy is the natural state of the male mind which prefers multiple partners to having a single one for the rest of one’s life. According to the Bible, King Solomon had hundreds of wives, but Islam has limited it to four wives for practical considerations.

You guys just can't help yourself and control your urges. Just like your prophet Mohammad, may piss be upon him.
 

ZulFiqar786

Electoral Member
Sep 12, 2017
233
0
16
Brampton ON
That's another load of crap. Keep on playing the victim when you aren't one. If Muslims are treated so badly in Europe then why do they stay in Europe?

Past Muslim incursions of conquest into Europe and India is evidence Muslims don't give a crap if it's Christian or Hindu. And past Muslim atrocities in Armenia, India and most recently Christians in the Middle East is evidence of their intolerance of other religions.

Islam is not a religion but a backwards, fascistic ideology that does not tolerate criticism, apostasy, treats women like 2nd class citizens not worthy enough for an identity, is intolerant of gay people and free speech. Islam is not compatible with western culture. Letting too many in will only hasten the demise of western values.

As for the niqab. It is proof that many Muslims don't feel the need to assimilate. I wonder why they wouldn't be happier in a culture that accepts hiding a woman's face instead of being in countries that don't like it?




Why only mention the so-called Muslim ‘atrocities’? The fact of the matter is that other civilizations have committed much greater atrocities in terms of scale. On another entry on this forum I mentioned how the Anglo-Saxons ethnically cleansed the Britons beginning in the 5th century. Don’t forget the Crusades and the massacres of Muslims, Jews and even other streams of Christianity. The Crusaders massacred the inhabitants of Jerusalem when they conquered it. The Spanish massacred many Muslims and Jews during their ‘Reconquista’ of southern Spain. They also wiped out millions of Indigenous peoples in the Americas beginning in 1492. What about the atrocities in World War 2, like the Holocaust of Jews and Roma people by the Nazi Germans, and the genocidal acts of the imperialist Japanese in southeast Asia. What about the trans-Atlantic slave trade which enslaved millions of Africans in the worst manner possible? What about the Golden Horde of Mongols who massacred Muslims, including the butchery that occurred when the Mongols conquered Baghdad? What about the Serbs who ethnically cleansed the Bosnian Muslims in the 1990s, and then the Albanian Muslims of Kosovo? What about the ongoing genocide of Rohingya Muslims in Burma happening right now? These and many more genocides and atrocities committed by Christians and other religions like Buddhists. Christians by far have committed the worst atrocities in the history of humanity, Muslims don’t even come close to matching that.



And why should Muslims be expected to assimilate? Is assimilation a good thing? Should we all become like the Borg? Diversity is superior to assimilation which is boring and denies the vibrancy of the human race.

 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36


4: 129 says you cannot treat your wives with absolute justice *even if you keenly desire to do so*


This is pointing to a universal truth about human nature that we are flawed and imperfect that cannot be completely fair, just and objective, even when we intend to try our best. It can no way be construed as a ban on polygamy. Similarly, it is human nature that parents, despite their best effort, cannot treat all of their kids the same, and there will always be some element of favoritism, perhaps for the first born, which is again due to human nature. Does this mean that people should be forbidden from having multiple children? No that would be absurd. Polygamy is actually necessary at times, especially when there is a great sex ratio imbalance, due to war or other factors. Many times there is an excess of women and not enough men for each woman to find a husband to marry. Women who remain unmarried despite wanting to experience a healthy family life become depressed and suffer from all sorts of psychological problems. This results in many social problems. Polygamy is the only solution. Furthermore, polygamy is the natural state of the male mind which prefers multiple partners to having a single one for the rest of one’s life. According to the Bible, King Solomon had hundreds of wives, but Islam has limited it to four wives for practical considerations.


And what does Qur'an 4:3 impose as a precondition for taking more than one wife? Where does the Qur'an impose a similar precondition on having more than one child?



Why only mention the so-called Muslim ‘atrocities’? The fact of the matter is that other civilizations have committed much greater atrocities in terms of scale. On another entry on this forum I mentioned how the Anglo-Saxons ethnically cleansed the Britons beginning in the 5th century. Don’t forget the Crusades and the massacres of Muslims, Jews and even other streams of Christianity. The Crusaders massacred the inhabitants of Jerusalem when they conquered it. The Spanish massacred many Muslims and Jews during their ‘Reconquista’ of southern Spain. They also wiped out millions of Indigenous peoples in the Americas beginning in 1492. What about the atrocities in World War 2, like the Holocaust of Jews and Roma people by the Nazi Germans, and the genocidal acts of the imperialist Japanese in southeast Asia. What about the trans-Atlantic slave trade which enslaved millions of Africans in the worst manner possible? What about the Golden Horde of Mongols who massacred Muslims, including the butchery that occurred when the Mongols conquered Baghdad? What about the Serbs who ethnically cleansed the Bosnian Muslims in the 1990s, and then the Albanian Muslims of Kosovo? What about the ongoing genocide of Rohingya Muslims in Burma happening right now? These and many more genocides and atrocities committed by Christians and other religions like Buddhists. Christians by far have committed the worst atrocities in the history of humanity, Muslims don’t even come close to matching that.



And why should Muslims be expected to assimilate? Is assimilation a good thing? Should we all become like the Borg? Diversity is superior to assimilation which is boring and denies the vibrancy of the human race.


I don't profess the Christian Faith either, yet I would actually support teaching the Gospel as literature in public schools. Not to force anyone to believe in it, but rather just to make them know what it teaches. Same with the Qur'an by the way. That said, we should never impose an interpretation.
 

ZulFiqar786

Electoral Member
Sep 12, 2017
233
0
16
Brampton ON
And what does Qur'an 4:3 impose as a precondition for taking more than one wife? Where does the Qur'an impose a similar precondition on having more than one child?




The pre-condition is “if you fear you will not be able to treat them justly”, i.e., a genuine fear that you won’t be able to be relatively just to all your wives, in which case stick to monogamy. This is not the same thing as the Qur’an saying that even when you desire to treat your wives equally you are ultimately unable to practice perfect justice because that’s simply beyond human capacity. Two distinct things. If I married multiple women I’m not afraid that I will treat them unjustly, because I know that ultimately I’m a fair and just person, nevertheless, the Qur’an informs me that ultimately no one can be perfectly just no matter how hard they try, but that cannot be construed as prohibiting polygamy, only revealing a universal truth about the human condition.



We Sunni Muslims acquire our understanding of the Holy Qur’an from the practical implementation and interpretation of it by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), known as his Sunna, from whence the ascriptive name Sunni is derived. The Prophet himself not only married multiple women, but didn’t object to his companions and disciples marrying multiple women either, which is decisive in making us understand that Islam does not prohibit polygamy. After all, who can better understand the meaning and purpose of the text of the Holy Qur’an than the Prophet to whom it was revealed directly and through whose agency we received it?
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
12,338
1,318
113
60
Alberta
Typical of these brown people, they like to call racism against Whites, but when Browns do it, it seems to be perfectly acceptable with these Brown types.

Canadians have always given these minorities a lot of slack and often overlooked their faults only because Canadians felt they were disadvantaged in some respect.

But these Browns have taken full advantage of the good nature of Canadians and now they feel they are entitled to benefits other Canadians are held to account for.

Time to call a spade a spade and call this Brown dude a racist.

Oh, those goddamned Browns! Where the F_ck do they come off being brown to begin with? Why can't they be white, like Durry? And ignorant, like Durry? And intolerant, like Durry? They're just taking full advantage of being Brown, so that whites like Durry will have to pay more taxes?

F_cking Browns, anyway.
 

AMKiller

Electoral Member
Sep 11, 2017
241
0
16
Burlington


Why only mention the so-called Muslim ‘atrocities’? The fact of the matter is that other civilizations have committed much greater atrocities in terms of scale. On another entry on this forum I mentioned how the Anglo-Saxons ethnically cleansed the Britons beginning in the 5th century. Don’t forget the Crusades and the massacres of Muslims, Jews and even other streams of Christianity. The Crusaders massacred the inhabitants of Jerusalem when they conquered it. The Spanish massacred many Muslims and Jews during their ‘Reconquista’ of southern Spain. They also wiped out millions of Indigenous peoples in the Americas beginning in 1492. What about the atrocities in World War 2, like the Holocaust of Jews and Roma people by the Nazi Germans, and the genocidal acts of the imperialist Japanese in southeast Asia. What about the trans-Atlantic slave trade which enslaved millions of Africans in the worst manner possible? What about the Golden Horde of Mongols who massacred Muslims, including the butchery that occurred when the Mongols conquered Baghdad? What about the Serbs who ethnically cleansed the Bosnian Muslims in the 1990s, and then the Albanian Muslims of Kosovo? What about the ongoing genocide of Rohingya Muslims in Burma happening right now? These and many more genocides and atrocities committed by Christians and other religions like Buddhists. Christians by far have committed the worst atrocities in the history of humanity, Muslims don’t even come close to matching that.



And why should Muslims be expected to assimilate? Is assimilation a good thing? Should we all become like the Borg? Diversity is superior to assimilation which is boring and denies the vibrancy of the human race.

The Crusades and Spanish Inquisition were in response to Muslim incursions into Spain, France, Syria, Egypt, Jordan and Jerusalem. It affected Jews also because of their submission to Islam.

There is no greater genocide than the Moghul Empire of India that killed 400 million Hindus in 800 years of rule.

Muslims profited from the Atlantic slave trade and to this day many still keep slaves, while white men abolished it in the western world.

The Mongol Horde massacred Muslims because when Genghis Khan sent messengers to declare a peace treaty with the Shah the messengers were killed, an act of war.

The Serbs, Albanian massacre of Muslims was because 100 years earlier the Ottoman's were doing the same shit to them.

Robingya Muslims are persecuted because of Islamic terrorist activities that have been occurring there for quite some time.

Muslims should learn that payback's a bitch.

Assimilation is a part of a good multicultural society, right? My parents are Italian and only brought recipes with them to Canada while leaving their customs in Italy.

Why don't you answer the rest of my post above? Am I right on about Islam's intolerance?

Why doesn't Islam tolerate criticism, apostasy, homosexuality. Why are Muslim women that don't wear the hijab ridiculed and labeled whores?



The pre-condition is “if you fear you will not be able to treat them justly”, i.e., a genuine fear that you won’t be able to be relatively just to all your wives, in which case stick to monogamy. This is not the same thing as the Qur’an saying that even when you desire to treat your wives equally you are ultimately unable to practice perfect justice because that’s simply beyond human capacity. Two distinct things. If I married multiple women I’m not afraid that I will treat them unjustly, because I know that ultimately I’m a fair and just person, nevertheless, the Qur’an informs me that ultimately no one can be perfectly just no matter how hard they try, but that cannot be construed as prohibiting polygamy, only revealing a universal truth about the human condition.



We Sunni Muslims acquire our understanding of the Holy Qur’an from the practical implementation and interpretation of it by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), known as his Sunna, from whence the ascriptive name Sunni is derived. The Prophet himself not only married multiple women, but didn’t object to his companions and disciples marrying multiple women either, which is decisive in making us understand that Islam does not prohibit polygamy. After all, who can better understand the meaning and purpose of the text of the Holy Qur’an than the Prophet to whom it was revealed directly and through whose agency we received it?
Mohammad (may piss be upon him) was also a lustful pedophile, war-mongering maniac.
 
Last edited:

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36


The pre-condition is “if you fear you will not be able to treat them justly”, i.e., a genuine fear that you won’t be able to be relatively just to all your wives, in which case stick to monogamy. This is not the same thing as the Qur’an saying that even when you desire to treat your wives equally you are ultimately unable to practice perfect justice because that’s simply beyond human capacity. Two distinct things. If I married multiple women I’m not afraid that I will treat them unjustly, because I know that ultimately I’m a fair and just person, nevertheless, the Qur’an informs me that ultimately no one can be perfectly just no matter how hard they try, but that cannot be construed as prohibiting polygamy, only revealing a universal truth about the human condition.



We Sunni Muslims acquire our understanding of the Holy Qur’an from the practical implementation and interpretation of it by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), known as his Sunna, from whence the ascriptive name Sunni is derived. The Prophet himself not only married multiple women, but didn’t object to his companions and disciples marrying multiple women either, which is decisive in making us understand that Islam does not prohibit polygamy. After all, who can better understand the meaning and purpose of the text of the Holy Qur’an than the Prophet to whom it was revealed directly and through whose agency we received it?

The prophet also had more than four wives. So, do we go by the Qur'an that states no more than four, or the sunnah that allows for more. Whatever rules God imposed on Muhammad, the rules he imposed on the Muslim community are in the Qur'an and the Ahadith.