Muslim Call to Prayer in Regina (split from Liberal Gov't 2025 - ???)

[mariomike]

channel 7 in buffalo?

Irv Weinstein.

 

[YZT580]

Irv Weinstein.

if that wasn't google, your memory is amazing

 

[mariomike]

if that wasn't google, your memory is amazing

No. I remember Eyewitness News like it was yesterday. I watched it for the fires. We didn't have conflagrations like that in Toronto.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I'd love to know where the US State Department, who obviously had an ax to grind (i.e. you look at religious freedom only during an extraordinary event - COVID), got their facts: No mass gatherings for sports (or other functions) were permitted. In fact, I am sure we all recall hockey games being played between Canadian teams only until the playoffs, with players restricted to their hotel or home between games and playing in front of near empty arenas because no crowd was permitted.

Wonder who was president in those days and if that had anything to do with the interpretation of the available information?

The idea that we can let all things be tolerated is noble, but it can't be accommodated at the very expense of those values themselves.

If we aren't willing to say our tolerance has a limit we will vanish into history.

You're right - tough juggle. That said ...

... We know that the fundamentalists in Tehran and Riyadh have stated that their intention is to dominate any country that allows them the freedom to do so ...

Does freedom of expression and religion also provide those freedoms to people that seek to subjugate or destroy these very same freedoms and rights and our liberal democracies as a whole ?

Any evidence of the mosque in Regina in question wanting to do this? Or any of the mosques in Regina? I'm open to consider anything anyone has to share on this front.

 

[YZT580]

Wonder who was president in those days and if that had anything to do with the interpretation of the available information?

You're right - tough juggle. That said ...


Any evidence of the mosque in Regina in question wanting to do this? Or any of the mosques in Regina? I'm open to consider anything anyone has to share on this front.

to answer that one would have to identify the particular sect in attendance and of equal importance the background of the Iman doing the preaching. If you encounter one of the attending families and the wife rides in the back seat and the daughters are in full black and neither attends the mosque you can be reasonably certain they would love for Regina to become Riyadh on the Wascana

 

[Jarnhamar]

to answer that one would have to identify the particular sect in attendance and of equal importance the background of the Iman doing the preaching. If you encounter one of the attending families and the wife rides in the back seat and the daughters are in full black and neither attends the mosque you can be reasonably certain they would love for Regina to become Riyadh on the Wascana

It's entirely possible the mosque in Regina is progressive and banned speaking passages such as Quran 9:33, Quran 8:39, and Quran 9:29.

 

[Halifax Tar]

It's entirely possible the mosque in Regina is progressive and banned speaking passages such as Quran 9:33, Quran 8:39, and Quran 9:29.

That would be a pleasant surprise.

 

[The Bread Guy]

It's entirely possible the mosque in Regina is progressive and banned speaking passages such as Quran 9:33, Quran 8:39, and Quran 9:29.

Just as likely that churches out there have banned saying things like wives should submit to husbands as to the Lord, women should just STFU, kill all those non-believers, and kill any opponents or folks trying to take us over - but keep the virgins for yourselves?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Just as likely that churches out there have banned saying things like..

There's no denying I'm clearly biased here.

I feel one of these religions largely moved on from adherence to Medieval aged rules, and one largely hasn't. One seems to have become more oppressive since the 1970's.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Just as likely that churches out there have banned saying things like wives should submit to husbands as to the Lord, women should just STFU, kill all those non-believers, and kill any opponents or folks trying to take us over - but keep the virgins for yourselves?

Are you just trying to obstreperous ?

Because we are a secular country. The problem is Islam cannot seem disconnect itself from politics.

 

[The Bread Guy]

... I feel one of these religions largely moved on from adherence to Medieval aged rules, and one largely hasn't. One seems to have become more oppressive since the 1970's.

You're not the first saying Islam needs some kind of Reformation - and I can't disagree.

Remember, though, that one of the fuels of opposition/extremism is, "See? Told you you'd get fucked over by x - that's why OUR brand is better." Yeah, one has to be careful, but maybe there's a titch of middle ground between "fuck 'em - not a peep from you" and "go ahead and take over our way of life."

Are you just trying to obstreperous ?

Not at all - someone pointed out stuff in religious texts worth of note, suggesting they should be banned because it's not part of our secular society (and I stand to be corrected if the OP didn't mean that), and I pointed out others passages from religious texts worthy of note. Gotta be careful when using religious texts, one way or another, given that a lot of strife even within religions comes from different people "reading" the written word differently.

 

[Jarnhamar]

You're not the first saying Islam needs some kind of Reformation - and I can't disagree.

Remember, though, that one of the fuels of opposition/extremism is, "See? Told you you'd get fucked over by x - that's why OUR brand is better." Yeah, one has to be careful, but maybe there's a titch of middle ground between "fuck 'em - not a peep from you" and "go ahead and take over our way of life."

Not a fan of ideologies that are incompatible with western democratic values in Canada, regardless of where they come from.

Indiscriminate hostility is counterproductive and can reinforce extremist narratives, absolutely. But the opposite extreme, treating any criticism of religious doctrine or ideology as off-limits, is just as harmful.

Healthy societies have to be able to openly examine and debate religious ideas.

Problem is not all religions are equally compatible with western democratic values (can easily swap religion with culture here). That messes with people who have been repeatedly told they need to accept everyone and everything otherwise they're bigots.

 

[YZT580]

You're not the first saying Islam needs some kind of Reformation - and I can't disagree.

Remember, though, that one of the fuels of opposition/extremism is, "See? Told you you'd get fucked over by x - that's why OUR brand is better." Yeah, one has to be careful, but maybe there's a titch of middle ground between "fuck 'em - not a peep from you" and "go ahead and take over our way of life."

Not at all - someone pointed out stuff in religious texts worth of note, suggesting they should be banned because it's not part of our secular society (and I stand to be corrected if the OP didn't mean that), and I pointed out others passages from religious texts worthy of note. Gotta be careful when using religious texts, one way or another, given that a lot of strife even within religions comes from different people "reading" the written word differently.

and all those things that are quoted showing Christianity are a bad thing come from the Old Testament Jewish law. Basically it was how the Jews were to govern themselves and should be taken in context regarding what was going on around them at the time. The laws were given so that the Jews would display an example that surrounding nations would emulate. The rules were just that: rules that if followed created a just and peaceful society. Today we shudder at the punishments attached to those laws but in all seriousness they were simply a part of those times when the law was written. Up the road you were encouraged to offer your first borne to be sacrificed to one of the gods to ensure that your family would prosper. So execution for adultery wasn't an outlier. And that wasn't administered in all cases. As Jesus put it, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. And all those screaming for blood faded away. Also there is no command to other nations around them to apply Jewish law in their societies word for word so they weren't a universal command.