You're right, let's do that. I'm not as eloquent as you. This guy explains it far better than I can.
Paradox of tolerance - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Italy: Muslims recite Qur’an aloud among Christians celebrating Christmas
- Thread starter Bucktee
- Start date
en.m.wikipedia.org
There are enough non-Muslim immigrants in the world that Canada can decide not to import any more Muslims.
I think you overestimate Canada's attractiveness to immigrants. I think it's also pretty clear that most of those that aren't Muslim are from the far East or the Indian subcontinent, and a quick perusal of these forums shows the people who don't want Muslims don't want them either. The days of the Irish and Italians fleeing in large numbers have passed.
"That guy" is a publically editable page that has multiple contributors, but ok. What do you propose? What exactly would satisfy you? Do you want a ban on Muslims reciting the Qur'an at non-Muslim public gatherings? How would you define those terms? Would you oppose banning all religious speech at rallies not of that religion? Would you carve out exceptions for government-sponsored events to enable right to protest?You're right, let's do that. I'm not as eloquent as you. This guy explains it far better than I can.
Paradox of tolerance - Wikipedia
You've made it clear what you don't like and you have invoked autocrats/dictators and criminal syndicate violence already. You haven't really explained if you want those in Western society or if you think they are good things, or how you would balance them to keep them in check. Now you mention the paradox of tolerance. But can you speak out exactly what it is you want? Like, if your ideal politician is elected tomorrow, which law do they propose that makes you happy to resolve this situation to your satisfaction?
No I would not. This is a good start. Leave people alone to practice their religion in peace.
Would you make exceptions for any religion? The issue I see with this is it shuts down the right to speak out against religions. For example cults would be protected too, especially if atheism was recognized as a religion. Or I can imagine a Rebel News comic draws a picture of Muhammed and a religious gathering of Muslims is formed to protest that, now no one can show up to counter in support if we pass this bad. Would you be ok with that?
I'd argue this basically puts freedom of religion on a higher footing than freedom of speech, I'm not sure I'm comfortable sending that message. Do you disagree or are you just ok with that?
No it does not. You proposed:
banning all religious speech at rallies not of that religion
Speaking out against a religion is not religious speech. And it can be done at non-relgious events. I was agreeing with your narrow definition as stated.
When members of religion X, Y or Z are practicing their religion, members of religion A can't show up to disrupt it. Members of religion A can protest religion X, Y or Z at non-religious events, but they'd better be okay with reciprocity.
The trouble is, we have a religion A that loves disrupting other religions, but goes postal whenever anyone mocks their religion. You can figure out who this is for yourself. It ain't the Buddhists.
How are you defining "religious speech" then?
I certainly see no shortage of people of several religions being very vocal about how upset they are when they are mocked. You think it's only one religion that has this problem?
I think it's only one religion in the 21st century that kills people for mocking/criticizing it.
Charlie Hebdo shooting - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Murder of Samuel Paty - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Stabbing of Salman Rushdie - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
They should play christmas carols outside this fuckers mosque every friday until he agrees to step offMeet Brother Ilias (from Morocco) Milano
When the demographics change enough, you won't be allowed to celebrate Christmas anymore. Mark my words.
As if there aren't way too many carols and christmas music around already.
But that doesn't count as religious?
A good start might be to look into murders and deaths in Pakistan and India of people who mock Hinduism. And you yourself wanted the Mafia to do something about the case this thread is about. So there's 2 examples of different religions already. It might be more commonly Muslims in the west and/or reported in Western media more often recently, but have you considered there may be reasons for that? You seemed to be admiring how Saudi Arabia handles foreigners who disrespect their official religion, but I'd argue that they are a big reason why radical Islam is the way it is, and copying their example is both a bad idea and unchristian. The Sermon on the Mount establishes that I think. But there's also the Samaritan Woman at the Well and the Roman Centurion's Servant to base that on. Frankly, I don't care what impact it has on the price of oil, we should've stopped being their allies and sanctioned them as hard as we are sanctioning Russia long ago.I think it's only one religion in the 21st century that kills people for mocking/criticizing it.
Charlie Hebdo shooting - Wikipedia
Murder of Samuel Paty - Wikipedia
Remind me, when were Monty Python killed by Christians? Or the South Park guys by Mormons? Or Woody Allen by Jews?Stabbing of Salman Rushdie - Wikipedia
In any case, you never said how we could define religious speech to ensure we only banned the type of behavior you wanted banned. You said you were using my "narrow definition" but I didn't define anything and clearly it needs to be side I obviously didn't understand correctly what you meant. But this is kind of leading me to my point. It's going to be difficult to define and as a result there will be unintended consequences, it's possible they will cause worse problems. Which takes me back to the other question you didn't answer: should freedom of religion trump freedom of speech or freedom of assembly?
I think it's important to think about these questions, because anyone can criticize and say "We should just ... ", but when you actually have to reason it out, you realize it's not so straightforward. I enjoy playing devil's advocate for that very reason. Often taking the position against what I believe helps me refine my thoughts.
Not all are religious, but why go to a place where people are celebrating a holiday they observe just to shit on it?
TLDR. How many people have Hindus killed in the West for mocking their religion?
Where in Canada can you escape christmas?
I'd like way less christmas music everywhere.
If I may interject, I'd define it as when discussing the scriptures of that religion and how those scriptures should be interpreted by followers of that religion on an individual basis, i.e. how individuals should conduct themselves.
That would not include how to deal with outside groups. That is when it starts becoming political and not religious.
