REVscene Automotive Forum

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - Motion M-103 (https://www.revscene.net/forums/711734-motion-m-103-a.html)

Iqra Khalid - Private Members' Motions - Current Session (Filtered Results)

Quote:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear; (b) condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination and take note of House of Commons’ petition e-411 and the issues raised by it; and (c) request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study on how the government could (i) develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia, in Canada, while ensuring a community-centered focus with a holistic response through evidence-based policy-making, (ii) collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities, and that the Committee should present its findings and recommendations to the House no later than 240 calendar days from the adoption of this motion, provided that in its report, the Committee should make recommendations that the government may use to better reflect the enshrined rights and freedoms in the Constitution Acts, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Proposed by Liberal MP Iqra Khalid

Latest from CBC:

Liberal MP won't remove Islamophobia reference from motion condemning discrimination - Politics - CBC News

I think the TL;DR is she wants protection for religious freedoms but wants to add Islamophobia in there which would stifle speaking out against Islam (such as referencing Islamic Terrorism).

Is she going too far in her motion? There's already penal consequences for discrimination against religion (anything beyond free speech) so I'm not sure what the point of this motion is? I mean, there's no law against Homophobia but there is a hate-crime law against assaulting someone who is Homosexual. Could this motion set up more laws that would stifle free speech?

I'm just asking questions.

Personally, doesn't make sense to me in a pluralistic society. Every religion should have the protection of 'phobia', why not Jewishphobia (especially in light of recent threats in Vancouver Jewish community centers), why not Hinduphobia, etc.? That's why I thought another MP's amendment, to include all major world religions was a good solution.

If OP is right and this includes not able to speak up or protest against radical Muslim terrorism as something that is evil ... hmmmm, again, that doesn't make sense to me.

It's a non-binding motion that will now result in setting up a committee to research and discuss topics surrounding islamaphobia and systemic racism, not a bill or a law ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by whitev70r (Post 8830994)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Protocol

Anti-Islam Protesters Rip Qur'an At Ontario School Board Meeting

No one had a problem with the christian club that meet during lunch at my high school. Most people did not even know about it.

I am of the all or nothing opinion: either all religious practices are allowed at a secular public school, or none of it is allowed. I prefer the latter as when you give an inch to religious groups in these situations, they tend to take a mile. Supposedly secular schools with bible groups and the like, start to blur the lines with the passing out of religious materials to classrooms (a practice recently up for debate in Abbotsford public schools). Or students in these groups form exclusionary cliches and begin bullying students about their practices or morals. Students feel pressured to fit in.

The act of destroying a religious text is not an issue for me. It is just paper and ink, an inanimate object. If someone is so resolute in their beliefs, they should have nothing to worry about as their god will take care of this offender. If they do take issue, they need to reevaluate their beliefs. Unfortunately, these acts, under the current political culture, will be interpreted as Islamophobia, no matter what the true motives behind the act.

Since I do not have audio atm, I can only go on the one quote from protesters at the school board meeting:

Quote:

"Islam will kill you," a man shouts at one point.

What is he saying that is incorrect or offensive? Are there not passages in the quran which discuss killing infidels or hypocrites who refuse to take up the fight against them? Sure, allowing religious practices in public schools is a big leap to killing infidels, but he should have the right to question bad ideas and practices at his child's school. Again, criticizing a religion is going to be seen as Islamophobia, but I disagree with the term all together.

Ultimately, a school board meeting should be a place for civil discussion. These acts should have been put into a calm, coherent argument. Labeling anyone who disagrees with Islam as Islamophobic, only serves to further shut down civil discussion. Neither side is right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bouncing Bettys (Post 8831139)

I am glad you have read the Koran but have you read the Bible?

Toronto has the largest public Catholic school board in the world. Public as in government funded. Do you think it should be shut down?

If some kids want to pray during lunch whats the big deal?

Well Torontoians have tried to shut down TCSB one way or the other since late 1800s... It is not they haven't tried before.

Also TCSB admits students of any creed at the discretion of the principle / teacher.. when I was growing up you get a huge mix.. Jewish, Sikhs etc you name it. Everyone gets along just fine.. all just want to have a good education and a place to belong.

Honestly education about respect and plurality is more important, but hey who have time for that these days? When punishment one size fits all solution works great.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 8831158)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jmac (Post 8831026)

It's a non-binding motion that will now result in setting up a committee to research and discuss topics surrounding islamaphobia and systemic racism, not a bill or a law ...

An update to this discussion:

Quote:

Ottawa unveils anti-racism strategy, which includes definition of IslamophobiaThe three-year strategy fulfils key recommendations from a parliamentary committee study that arose from a controversial anti-Islamophobia motion, M-103

OTTAWA — The federal government has released a new anti-racism strategy that promises $45 million to fight systemic discrimination through community programs, public education campaigns and combating online hate.

The three-year strategy, unveiled in Toronto on Tuesday by Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez, fulfils key recommendations from a parliamentary committee study that arose from a controversial anti-Islamophobia motion, M-103, which concluded last year.

The new plan, first announced in Budget 2019, includes a definition of Islamophobia taken from the Ontario Human Rights Commission, but otherwise seldom names individual minority groups that are frequent targets of discrimination, instead referring more broadly to “racialized communities” and “religious minorities.”

“While we take pride in being a welcoming and inclusive country, we know that racism and discrimination are still a reality for many Canadians across the country,” Rodriguez said in a statement. “This national anti-racism strategy is an essential first step in building a more inclusive country, where all Canadians can participate equally.”

The strategy promises $4.6 million to establish an anti-racism secretariat within the federal Heritage department that would “lead a whole-of-government approach in addressing racism” and would report publicly on its results.

It commits another $30 million to community-based projects focused on reducing barriers to employment and participation in sport, arts and culture. It promises further investments in a national awareness campaign and to improve data collection regarding racism and discrimination.

The government is also pledging $5 million for civic literacy programs that “address online disinformation and hate speech.” The document points out that Canada joined the Christchurch Call to Action, a pledge to fight violent extremism online, following the March shootings at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.

The government’s anti-racism strategy comes more than a year after the House of Commons heritage committee released the results of its study of systemic racism and religious discrimination, born of the Liberals’ controversial anti-Islamophobia motion, M-103, which called on the government to condemn Islamophobia and all forms of racism. Though M-103 was a motion, not a piece of legislation, and thus did not create any new laws, it ignited a political firestorm, with Conservatives arguing it would stifle free speech as, they claimed, the term Islamophobia was poorly defined.

Ultimately, the heritage committee recommended the government update its national action plan against racism and create a directorate to implement the plan — recommendations Ottawa has now fulfilled.

The federal government has also chosen a definition of Islamophobia. It defines Islamophobia as “Includ(ing) racism, stereotypes, prejudice, fear or acts of hostility directed towards individual Muslims or followers of Islam in general. In addition to individual acts of intolerance and racial proﬁling, Islamophobia can lead to viewing and treating Muslims as a greater security threat on an institutional, systemic and societal level.”

The definition is the same as the one used by the Ontario government in its own anti-racism plan, released in 2017 by the former Liberal government. But while the Ontario plan includes a section on the “urgent” need to target Islamophobia, with specific commitments, the federal plan takes a broader approach, rarely making explicit reference to Islamophobia.

Jasmin Zine, a professor of sociology and Muslim studies at Wilfrid Laurier University, said she’s disappointed the document “barely acknowledges” Islamophobia, noting it only once references the 2017 shooting at a mosque in Quebec City that left six men dead. “The lack of political will to address or even acknowledge Islamophobia is an affront to those who were murdered in the QC massacre in an act of terror inspired by white nationalism as well as to all Canadian Muslims,” Zine said in an email.

Though the document names individual groups infrequently, it does include a section on discrimination against Indigenous peoples. It says the government is working to implement the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and is developing an action plan to respond to the final report of the national inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women.

The federal government’s definition of anti-Semitism is taken from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, which defines it as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The anti-racism strategy was developed following 22 consultation sessions between October 2018 and March 2019, where the government heard from about 600 people.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...f-islamophobia

Canada's goal is to outlaw people who criticize isreal.
https://www.revscene.net/forums/6829...ml#post8212375

Think about it... How is it that such magnificent bridges were built and Chinese killed for every mile to put a train through and around the largest of mountains but they couldnt draw the Canadian flag right?

Spoiler!