|
Post by Gene on Jan 10, 2014 22:34:26 GMT -5
You do what?
You mean that you "willingly deny" that elves, unicorns, fairies, little green men on Mars exist? I deny they exist to the exclusion of God. Ah, so we're finally getting somewhere! So you believe that elves, fairies, unicorns et. al. COEXIST with God?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jan 10, 2014 22:46:31 GMT -5
They certainly exist within the imaginations of our minds, without which God would be hard-pressed for canvass.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jan 10, 2014 22:47:29 GMT -5
Or not. Maybe we're peripheral and the whale is king.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jan 10, 2014 22:57:18 GMT -5
They certainly exist within the imaginations of our minds, without which God would be hard-pressed for canvass. Finally, you're making sense. Elves, fairies, unicorns and God coexist within the imaginations of our minds. Glad to know we finally agree on something.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jan 10, 2014 23:28:33 GMT -5
They certainly exist within the imaginations of our minds, without which God would be hard-pressed for canvass. Finally, you're making sense. Elves, fairies, unicorns and God coexist within the imaginations of our minds. Glad to know we finally agree on something. I think our behaviors reveal we believe God is more than our imagination.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 10, 2014 23:53:53 GMT -5
Aren't we getting a head of ourselves here?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2014 1:12:50 GMT -5
I'm not involved in that dispute, so I have made no decision about it that would require my reasoning. However, I can imagine a few non-academic reasons why the professor refused the request: (1) Perhaps he was the kind of professor who is offended when a student asks for an alternate assignment .. it offends his concept of his superiority and authority as a professor. (2) Perhaps he has a special hatred of the religion of the student, so he (a) gave an assignment he knew would offend the student, and/or he wanted to make a public statement about his prejudices. (3) Perhaps he just doesn't want those people in his classes, so he uses abrasive tactics to get them to drop the course. (4) Perhaps he's just kind of a lunatic. We don't even know how this professor decided ( his reasoning) an alternate assignment would make it look like he (the professor) was condoning sexism. York University is a public university, and it cannot allow its professors to make unprofessional or illegal decisions about students according to their own preferences. The professor may have good grounds to stand on IF the course involved communications, societal interactions, gender studies ... or anything of that nature. If you're not willing to interact with the people the course addresses, you shouldn't be there. But if it were, say, Math, or some course where it didn't matter what the gender of students you're partnered up with, what excuse would the professor have for not accommodating him? It may just be a notice to professors who teach courses where interaction between the genders is expected ... to list it in the course requirements so such a student would not have the excuse that he/she was not misled. That kind of notice is used all the time in college courses. It was a sociology course. I applaud Dr Grayson's decision as a victory for women's right to be treated as equal human beings - something that is denied them in many primitive countries where oppressive religious law rules. This is the outcome: So the original posting about the event was incorrect ... the Dean did NOT override the professor's ultimatum. I knew there was something wrong with what you shared with us.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2014 1:14:10 GMT -5
It says: the right to his opinion. Why's that a right? First Amendment to the 10 Commandments.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2014 1:22:08 GMT -5
It was a sociology course. I applaud Dr Grayson's decision as a victory for women's right to be treated as equal human beings - something that is denied them in many primitive countries where oppressive religious law rules. Excuse me -- what woman was threatened by the student's request? The only person threatened, it turns out, was the student himself, and it turned out that even the administration didn't back him up. You're not making much of a case for the oppression of Canadians by Muslim immigrants. It seems the student learned his lesson about Canadian society. Do you still think he should return to where he came from?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2014 1:31:23 GMT -5
The quiet reverential style by which many Muslims live. Take Syria, Egypt, and Iraq for example. And the brutality against women in Christian American communities, don't forget. You've already told us many Muslim men treat their women well -- why compare the worst of Muslims only with the best of Christians. CSA and date rape and spousal battery and emotional bondage are not uniquely typical of Muslim or Christian societies -- they're typical of ignorant people in all communities of human beings.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2014 1:33:17 GMT -5
Well, why you aren't willing to grant human rights to Muslims, insisting they have to conform to your way of life? Is that because you feel they don't grant such rights, so therefore you don't have to either? I think we should have the kind of open societies in the West that allow people of every persuasion to live as they best see fit. As far as why some countries don't implement human rights, I really can't speak for each of the other 205 countries around the world, and why should I? I don't expect you to speak for other countries, but I think its important that we appreciate the freedom we have and ensure that its not endangered by immigrants who despise our laws. Its an interesting experiment to welcome seemingly incompatible cultures into western countries and hope that they'll come to respect our appreciation of human rights over time. It may work, but only time will tell. I don't have a problem with alien cultures as long as they respect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations: www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/Where do you live, fixit? I hope it's not in the U.S.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2014 1:38:00 GMT -5
I am content to be truthful (to the best of my ability) about what I believe in this moment. I consider my beliefs works in progress, subject to revision. I am also reasonably comfortable with ambiguity and change and that I will probably never know the answers to many questions I might ask. Philosophy books have been filled by people trying to answer the question, "What makes something true?". I thought philosophy books were primarily filled with the objectification of truth. That its a concept at all is an admission we're all touching something transcendent. Maybe before you get into transcendent matters, you should try a good philosophy course....to see what philosophy is really about. I know you'd find it interesting.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2014 1:46:27 GMT -5
I don't expect you to speak for other countries, but I think its important that we appreciate the freedom we have and ensure that its not endangered by immigrants who despise our laws. Its an interesting experiment to welcome seemingly incompatible cultures into western countries and hope that they'll come to respect our appreciation of human rights over time. It may work, but only time will tell. I don't have a problem with alien cultures as long as they respect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations: www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/I don't believe human rights in our country are endangered by Muslim immigrants, period. One reason is that first generation immigrants typically have little say or ability to upset the status quo. For one thing, most of them are far too busy learning the ropes of a new country, including a new language and things like where to catch the bus, not to mention working a menial, low paying job to have much time for politics. Also, in those sensational stories you are fond of trotting out, you'll find that in the final analysis the status quo always prevails. The second generation of immigrant cultures invariably come to understand the most important aspects of our way of life, and embrace them, perhaps even moreso than more established cultures who tend to be somewhat lazy and apathetic about what they've got. Long story, made short: immigrants are the lifeblood of our country, and we still accept several hundred thousand new Canadians every year as we have for decades. I'm an immigrant myself, having come as a child in the postwar migration from post WWII Europe with my extended family. In the 1970s I observed the thrust of immigration move from western Europe to visible minorities from countries like Jamaica and India. There was a great deal of concern at the time about dropping the colour barrier, but guess what. It's worked out just the same for these immigrants as it did for us. The younger people embrace the freedom and also the responsibilities that go with living in this country. Sure there are pockets of problems, but I know that in the main it's going to be the same for any culture, any people that come to live in Canada. That's because people everywhere are fundamentally the same. All it takes for a seed to grow is the right kind of soil, which maybe doesn't exist in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, but it does exist here. And Canada has a long history of welcoming incompatible cultures, so this is not "an interesting experiment". Chief justice Beverly Maclachlan famously said that in Canada the majority of the people belong to a minority. That's the way it has always been, and still is today. I read a most interesting research article on how immigrants assimilate into Canadian culture, and the one thing that was pointed out is that fully 70% of all grandchildren of immigrants have "relative connections" with people outside their grandparents' culture/race. Don't you have any ghettos up there to keep them in?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 11, 2014 4:30:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 11, 2014 15:50:39 GMT -5
I don't believe human rights in our country are endangered by Muslim immigrants, period. One reason is that first generation immigrants typically have little say or ability to upset the status quo. For one thing, most of them are far too busy learning the ropes of a new country, including a new language and things like where to catch the bus, not to mention working a menial, low paying job to have much time for politics. Also, in those sensational stories you are fond of trotting out, you'll find that in the final analysis the status quo always prevails. The second generation of immigrant cultures invariably come to understand the most important aspects of our way of life, and embrace them, perhaps even moreso than more established cultures who tend to be somewhat lazy and apathetic about what they've got. Long story, made short: immigrants are the lifeblood of our country, and we still accept several hundred thousand new Canadians every year as we have for decades. I'm an immigrant myself, having come as a child in the postwar migration from post WWII Europe with my extended family. In the 1970s I observed the thrust of immigration move from western Europe to visible minorities from countries like Jamaica and India. There was a great deal of concern at the time about dropping the colour barrier, but guess what. It's worked out just the same for these immigrants as it did for us. The younger people embrace the freedom and also the responsibilities that go with living in this country. Sure there are pockets of problems, but I know that in the main it's going to be the same for any culture, any people that come to live in Canada. That's because people everywhere are fundamentally the same. All it takes for a seed to grow is the right kind of soil, which maybe doesn't exist in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, but it does exist here. And Canada has a long history of welcoming incompatible cultures, so this is not "an interesting experiment". Chief justice Beverly Maclachlan famously said that in Canada the majority of the people belong to a minority. That's the way it has always been, and still is today. I read a most interesting research article on how immigrants assimilate into Canadian culture, and the one thing that was pointed out is that fully 70% of all grandchildren of immigrants have "relative connections" with people outside their grandparents' culture/race. Don't you have any ghettos up there to keep them in? Most Canadian cities explicitly zone so that income distribution is spread in patchwork fashion. So, in a neighourhood of several hundred residences you'll find a mix of apartments, semi-detached, low income housing and detached homes. Not exactly your question but it does keep things slightly scattered. There is concern that some ethnicities will stick together to too great an extent especially in the metro areas. I'm not sure what is done to offset that problem.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 11, 2014 15:58:08 GMT -5
Your comment sparked a bit of thinking about this over the last 24 hours. We certainly don't want terrorists emigrating to our country. We also don't want radical imams influencing impressionable young Canadian men, as happened in this case. But as far as allowing Muslims into the country, I see no other choice. Islam is going through the same kind of transformation that Christianity has gone through in the last couple of centuries. Contact with Western countries and in particular, with human rights and democratic processes in those countries is important to catalyze that transformation. Don't you think that that is what is going on in Syria, Libya, Tunisia and Egypt right now? So we really have no choice on this as far as I'm concerned, although that does create certain risks ... but far preferable to a clash of civilizations along national lines which could happen if we cut off contact and concede the battle to fundamental Islamists.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 11, 2014 23:00:52 GMT -5
Your comment sparked a bit of thinking about this over the last 24 hours. We certainly don't want terrorists emigrating to our country. We also don't want radical imams influencing impressionable young Canadian men, as happened in this case. But as far as allowing Muslims into the country, I see no other choice. Islam is going through the same kind of transformation that Christianity has gone through in the last couple of centuries. Contact with Western countries and in particular, with human rights and democratic processes in those countries is important to catalyze that transformation. Don't you think that that is what is going on in Syria, Libya, Tunisia and Egypt right now? So we really have no choice on this as far as I'm concerned, although that does create certain risks ... but far preferable to a clash of civilizations along national lines which could happen if we cut off contact and concede the battle to fundamental Islamists. Yes, I think there's a balance to be struck between allowing Islamic cultures exposure to our values in human rights and democratic processes, while restricting as best we can the extremist element that despises our freedoms. I hope you're right that Islam is in fact going through the same kind of transformation that Christianity went through in the last few centuries. Perhaps some catastrophic wars between Sunni and Shia Islam will be necessary before the Islamic masses will realize their extremist religious views are doing them no favors and a more moderate form of Islam will emerge? Its hard for us in the west to stand by while there is such widespread suffering but clearly our intervention is not welcome. It seems that fighting to resolve issues is necessary at times. There were more American deaths in the Civil War than any other war - more deaths in fact than both World Wars combined.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 12, 2014 1:39:31 GMT -5
The Qur'an offered women more in the 7th century ... as it did to society in general. I'm surprised you even recognize that fact. Following the reasoning that the corruption of the Qur'an's message in Islam makes Islam evil, how come the corruption of the New Testament message in Christianity makes Christianity even better?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 12, 2014 1:48:47 GMT -5
I read a most interesting research article on how immigrants assimilate into Canadian culture, and the one thing that was pointed out is that fully 70% of all grandchildren of immigrants have "relative connections" with people outside their grandparents' culture/race. Don't you have any ghettos up there to keep them in? Most Canadian cities explicitly zone so that income distribution is spread in patchwork fashion. So, in a neighourhood of several hundred residences you'll find a mix of apartments, semi-detached, low income housing and detached homes. Not exactly your question but it does keep things slightly scattered. There is concern that some ethnicities will stick together to too great an extent especially in the metro areas. I'm not sure what is done to offset that problem. I was asking that question tongue in cheek. I knew the answer. There is always a concern by majority people when minorities want to hang out with each other. We all know why -- people are afraid of what they might do all huddled in there together. But the answer to the problem, if indeed it is a problem, lies in how the rest of the country treats them when they make moves to move to communities they can better afford to live in. You have to remember that a 70% assimilation rate in 2 generations means there are going to be a lot of grandparents who will not be speaking the language of their grandchildren. That just doesn't happen where minorities are not treated well.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 12, 2014 1:52:17 GMT -5
Your comment sparked a bit of thinking about this over the last 24 hours. We certainly don't want terrorists emigrating to our country. We also don't want radical imams influencing impressionable young Canadian men, as happened in this case. But as far as allowing Muslims into the country, I see no other choice. Islam is going through the same kind of transformation that Christianity has gone through in the last couple of centuries. Contact with Western countries and in particular, with human rights and democratic processes in those countries is important to catalyze that transformation. Don't you think that that is what is going on in Syria, Libya, Tunisia and Egypt right now? So we really have no choice on this as far as I'm concerned, although that does create certain risks ... but far preferable to a clash of civilizations along national lines which could happen if we cut off contact and concede the battle to fundamental Islamists. When you think about it, we have a far greater risk of dying in a car crash than as the result of a terrorist attack. Or if you live in Texas, the risk of dying from Christian gunshot exceeds the risk of dying in a car wreck!!!
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 13, 2014 10:28:56 GMT -5
Your comment sparked a bit of thinking about this over the last 24 hours. We certainly don't want terrorists emigrating to our country. We also don't want radical imams influencing impressionable young Canadian men, as happened in this case. But as far as allowing Muslims into the country, I see no other choice. Islam is going through the same kind of transformation that Christianity has gone through in the last couple of centuries. Contact with Western countries and in particular, with human rights and democratic processes in those countries is important to catalyze that transformation. Don't you think that that is what is going on in Syria, Libya, Tunisia and Egypt right now? So we really have no choice on this as far as I'm concerned, although that does create certain risks ... but far preferable to a clash of civilizations along national lines which could happen if we cut off contact and concede the battle to fundamental Islamists. Yes, I think there's a balance to be struck between allowing Islamic cultures exposure to our values in human rights and democratic processes, while restricting as best we can the extremist element that despises our freedoms. I hope you're right that Islam is in fact going through the same kind of transformation that Christianity went through in the last few centuries. Perhaps some catastrophic wars between Sunni and Shia Islam will be necessary before the Islamic masses will realize their extremist religious views are doing them no favors and a more moderate form of Islam will emerge? Its hard for us in the west to stand by while there is such widespread suffering but clearly our intervention is not welcome. It seems that fighting to resolve issues is necessary at times. There were more American deaths in the Civil War than any other war - more deaths in fact than both World Wars combined. Here is a column in today's Globe and Mail written by a young Muslim columnist. www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/what-york-university-forgot-gender-equality-is-not-negotiable/article16278726/#dashboard/follows/This is what gives some cause for optimism. There was also another short piece by an Iranian exile who lamented that she had left Iran to escape such nonsense. For certain, there will be conflict in the Arab world itself for some time. Muslim women who write along these lines often put themselves in harm's way, and if you have followed the life story of Ayaan Hirsi Ali you can see how perilous speaking out can be.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 13, 2014 12:29:53 GMT -5
That was a good article. I did experience the aspects of not talking to a woman and if they did, they did not look at me. I was rather high up in the Admissions department and knew the answers to questions that even the director hadn't learned yet because I had been there longer than him. If he couldn't answer a question he brought me to the front counter to answer it. Many times the men would object and when told I was the one who knew, then asked their questions with their back turned to me. I answered them and then left. They would then turn back around and continue the conversation with the man. In our society where women fought hard for equality, I don't think we should allow that freedom to slip. The author of the article is right when they say that women and men interacted much more freely in early Islam and the things we see now have a lot to do with the Wahhabi sect of Islam, not the Quran or what Muhammad allowed in his time. That kind of disrespect does bother me. Here is one way to handle this, although perhaps not the recommended approach: The clip appears to be German dubbed over top of the original Norwegian and English, but it's pretty clear what is going on. It's from a show called Lilyhammer which Mrs. Hat and I have been following lately.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 27, 2014 16:35:49 GMT -5
Should international donors continue to pour money into societies that persist in trampling on human rights?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 16:38:41 GMT -5
no we shouldn't...
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 27, 2014 17:27:58 GMT -5
How could we get the US to stop doing that?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 27, 2014 17:37:58 GMT -5
How could we get the US to stop doing that? Convince the US Government that backward societies won't provide safe havens for fanatics that try to destroy our civilization.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 27, 2014 17:40:05 GMT -5
How could we get the US to stop doing that? Convince the US Government that backward societies won't provide safe havens for fanatics that try to destroy our civilization. How? The people have voted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 18:07:30 GMT -5
How could we get the US to stop doing that? a complete change of congress and the white house would be a start, but that ain't gonna happen anytime soon...
|
|