Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Women Who Cover Their Faces Shouldn't Be accepted To Enter Canada!


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Argus said:

What, everything? Should we respect virgin sacrifice? How about slavery? Chicken sex? Do we have to respect chicken sex, and those who practice it?

The topic here is people wearing hats.  Now you are speaking of murder, slavery and bestiality.

 

I am not laughing at you, just near you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 862
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is not true.  A large portion of it deals with kafirs and how to treat them.  How to get non-Muslims to submit to Islamic preferences.  Thus, demands for prayer rooms and time for prayers at work

What a childish response.  This issue is not about you and your "tits". It is about values that clash with essential and fundamental democratic values the people who built this country and fought hard

I now have time to respond to this.  Hahahahahahahahahah. That was hilarious. Wow. O.k. let me break it you, Sit. Mainstream Jews and Christians do not dress as in the above. Mainstream Musl

Posted Images

48 minutes ago, Argus said:

There is no way to get rid of Canadian born child molesters, criminals, or whatnot, so clearly the idea of getting rid of Canadian born bigots, as dear as that might be to the hearts of those who get furious at the thoughts of deporting foreign born terrorists, is simply not subject to discussion.

And what you consistently ignore is the difference between those born and raised here and those raised in the mainly backward cultures of most of our immigrants. Namely.

 

Canadian homophobic. Frowns on gay marriage, frowns at gays holding hands in street. Mutters epithets under his breath.

Middle east homophobic. Thinks gays should be killed, or at least imprisoned. Wants them to be beaten to death.

Regretfully, I think you actually believe this bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

We have our own set of laws that demand submission. It just looks different.  Are you above the law?

I think though that Islamic laws are far worse and archaic than Canada's laws are. For instance, in Canada we don't stone women to death because they were raped or throw gays of rooftops blindfolded. But hey, let's just over look that little tid bit because I certainly don't want to get into trouble with Canada's new hate law. You know that law or soon to be law where I am now in violation of Motion 103 for daring to point some of the evils of Islam and it's archaic beliefs. That law is one of the reasons why Canada is not so great anymore where one can go to jail for daring to ask certain questions. Canada is fast becoming a tyrannical communist country to live in these days. Freedom of speech is about to be abolished very soon in Canada. Oops, maybe it is already? Hey, you never know.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, overthere said:

I see.  Do you also equate a womans choice of headgear as equivalent to murder, slavery and bestaoality?

No.  That would be unreasonable.  

Sort of like equating women forced to wear burkas, to a person's choice to wear a hat.

Edited by Goddess
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, overthere said:

Regretfully, I think you actually believe this bullshit.

And you don't?  How old are you anyway? Are you one of those grade five students who are told by their teachers to believe that Islam is good and they all have love for us infidels? If you believe that bull chit than so be it but I certainly won't. Islam is an archaic religion that needs to be updated or deleted. Just saying.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, overthere said:

The topic here is people wearing hats.  Now you are speaking of murder, slavery and bestiality.

You are saying I must respect those who are themselves so deeply intolerant they want gays killed, would like to see laws imposed on me to restrict my religious beliefs or compel their beliefs on me, and who want women to be virtual chattel, and not only respect them but welcome them into my community. That is not tolerance but idiocy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, overthere said:

I see.  Do you also equate a womans choice of headgear as equivalent to murder, slavery and bestaoality?

Would you judge a person ill if they wore Nazi regalia? What about the uniform of the Ku Klux Klan? Would you think, seeing them in those outfits, you had a pretty good idea of what their beliefs are?


A burqua is not a fashion statement. It is a religious statement.

Edited by Argus
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, overthere said:

Regretfully, I think you actually believe this bullshit.

So you're another of those people who think Muslims don't believe in Islam, I take it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am all for free speech but there is always a limited to any free speech and that is as long as it doesn't harm the society and individuals. I think speaking negatively about something in a debate and in civilized manner should be allowed in a free society and should not be banned or we will be moving towards a dictatorship. Inciting to hatred and violence should be banned though in any democracy. I think we are taking the political correctness too far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, overthere said:

I see.  Do you also equate a womans choice of headgear as equivalent to murder, slavery and bestaoality?

Why do you pose the question to assume that all women who completely cover their face do so out of free choice. What fantasy world do you live in? Its not head gear. For phacks sake its not  a hockey or football helmet. We are talking about a costume from head to toe including only a slit for eyes.

He also did not equate it to murder, slavery or bestiality you in fact are trying to suggest he did. He and I and others equate the uniform we challenge for what it is a symbol of attitude towards the female gender we find archaic and fundamentally in conflict with how our society defines women.

 

Edited by Rue
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rue said:

He and I and others equate the uniform we challenge for what it is a symbol of attitude towards the female gender we find archaic and fundamentally in conflict with how our society defines women as equal to men.

 

Lets call it for what it is. It is a symbol of repression and oppression of women as many are forced to wear these at home or they will be attacked, beaten, arrested, or even worse. Yes agree with second statement. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

I am all for free speech but there is always a limited to any free speech and that is as long as it doesn't harm the society and individuals. I think speaking negatively about something in a debate and in civilized manner should be allowed in a free society and should not be banned or we will be moving towards a dictatorship. Inciting to hatred and violence should be banned though in any democracy. I think we are taking the political correctness too far.

Agreed. 100%. That means because I l live in a democracy I challenge the full covering but no I would not harm any individual who insists on wearing such garb for the same reason, and I appreciate that as well.

I doubt any of the liberals on this thread live in a neighbourhood with fundamentalist extremist Muslims except the fundamentalist Muslim ones posing as liberals. Oh just call it a hunch.

That said free speech has its limits yes. I think welcoming fascist symbols erodes basic principles of democracy that's why I challenge them. No I don't respect what the full cover  stands for at all and will say so but it gives me no right to abuse or ridicule someone challenging such symbols. Its a fine line which I get is your point and I defer to that point you make..

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Lets call it for what it is. It is a symbol of repression and oppression of women as many are forced to wear these at home or they will be attacked, beaten, arrested, or even worse. Yes agree with second statement. 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rue said:

I doubt any of the liberals on this thread live in a neighbourhood with fundamentalist extremist Muslims except the fundamentalist Muslim ones posing as liberals. Oh just call it a hunch.

Do the conservatives?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dialamah said:

Do the conservatives?

Yes this one. Your pt. is taken though. Let's just say I prefer someone to tell me what they really think of me. I know the phony

smile when I see it. All us minorities do. Give me someone who is upfront about his biases and does not mince his/her words.

I find most people who smile come at me with a knife.  What can I say. It has affected moi..

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, taxme said:

I think though that Islamic laws are far worse and archaic than Canada's laws are. For instance, in Canada we don't stone women to death because they were raped or throw gays of rooftops blindfolded. But hey, let's just over look that little tid bit because I certainly don't want to get into trouble with Canada's new hate law. You know that law or soon to be law where I am now in violation of Motion 103 for daring to point some of the evils of Islam and it's archaic beliefs. That law is one of the reasons why Canada is not so great anymore where one can go to jail for daring to ask certain questions. Canada is fast becoming a tyrannical communist country to live in these days. Freedom of speech is about to be abolished very soon in Canada. Oops, maybe it is already? Hey, you never know.  

Sure it looks different  but the notion is the same, there are rules we follow, we submit to them because to us, those rules make sense. And in many cases they are there for a really good reason.  And as for the slow decline, I defer to Jordan Peterson who has great explanations and insight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, GostHacked said:

We have our own set of laws that demand submission. It just looks different.  Are you above the law?

 

You're quite free to support Islam. Islam mean submission. Not peace or anything else we are told. It's your rear in the air five times a day...and more!

Now, expecting the REST of us infidels to support a crazy child molesting death cult is asking a bit much. We don't want Islam's barbaric Laws where gays are executed and rape victims punished. As much as one might find homosexuals personally distasteful or feel children appropriate marriage partners, many infidels are going to fight back against such a cult in their midst. Especially when Islam wants preferred treatment everywhere it manifests itself. The new law of the land.

M-103 is just the start.

Edited by DogOnPorch
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

You're quite free to support Islam. Islam mean submission. Not peace or anything else we are told. It's your rear in the air five times a day...and more!

 

One last time for the trolls out there. I do not support Islam.   Got it poochy??

You still submit to laws, willingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

One last time for the trolls out there. I do not support Islam.   Got it poochy??

You still submit to laws, willingly.

That doesn't work.  If you aren't scared of Islam and Muslims, then you support terrorism and acts of brutal barbarity.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, dialamah said:

That doesn't work.  If you aren't scared of Islam and Muslims, then you support terrorism and acts of brutal barbarity.  

 

You can always set me straight on your preferred cult and show me where Islam is working out jus' fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

One last time for the trolls out there. I do not support Islam.   Got it poochy??

You still submit to laws, willingly.

 

You're free to want Sharia to rule Canada. Folks like myself WILL push back against such efforts. No matter what names you call them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Sure it looks different  but the notion is the same, there are rules we follow, we submit to them because to us, those rules make sense. 

But we try, in this culture, to keep the laws somewhat fair and just. And even then we don't always subscribe to them or submit to them willingly. And even if we did both how does that suggest we should not express our extreme disapproval of laws which are patently unjust and have brutal punishments?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dialamah said:

That doesn't work.  If you aren't scared of Islam and Muslims, then you support terrorism and acts of brutal barbarity.  

I'm not scared of Islam and Muslims. However, I disapprove of the way Muslims in the world have adopted Islamic laws written a thousand years ago into their cultural value system, and therefore do not wish more of them to come and live here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...