Muslims and other religions extremist are they RACIST in Canada and Quebec?

Muslims and other religions extremist

Are they Racist?

In 2011, the Canadian federal government passed a law to force immigrants to show their faces when lending their citizenship oath. Directive seemed obvious.

It was however challenged by ZuneraI shaq,an immigrant from Pakistan who refuses to raise her niqab when oath and accusing Ottawa to bully his fundamental rights.

In 2011, the Canadian federal government passed regulation to force immigrants to show their faces when lending their citizenship oath.

In mid-February, the Federal Court ruled in his favor. Such a settlement would be discriminatory. Religious freedom would be met. The Canadian government will bring the case before the Supreme Court,the highest court in the land, hoping to prove the validity of the regulations, which confirms once again the decommissioning of Parliamentary sovereignty by the government -this judges called judiciarisassions policy.

The ideology of multiculturalism unfolds like a fundamentalism of human rights which denies the common culture. We are witnessing the reversal the integration duty.

This Pakistani arrival in Canada in 2008 to join her husband who sponsored the plans to become a citizen, but on its own terms. It shows no gratitude to the country hosting. It is for him to turn to her. This is the logic of reasonable accommodation.

The combat Zunera Ishaq is supported by one of the major opposition parties in Ottawa, the Liberal Party (PLC), Justin Trudeau,defender of orthodoxy Canadian multiculturalism.

The PLC sets Canada strictly as an association of armored individuals in their rights and considers every significant cultural norm in the heart of citizenship as the manifestation of an odious tyranny of the majority to dismantle urgently.

The New Democratic Party, Thomas Mulcair,which forms the official opposition has taken a few days later that position by denouncing the stigmatization of Muslim women.

This dispute comes as in Quebec, the debate takes around religious fundamentalism that wishes Philippe Couillard.In late January, the public was concerned about the case of Imam Hamza  terrorist, Chaoui,wanting to establish an Islamic center in Montreal to preach a speech radically hostile in the host society, its culture cursing, vomiting and women homosexuals.

How to explain to this man that he was not welcome? It is very easy to extradited with his family and did not have the right to set foot in Canada, persona non grata.

Our societies which want to open all the differences they finally find that certain identities are incompatible with them?

But we must return to this notion of fundamentalism. Certainly it reflects the search for a vocabulary of lyricism delivered live set-theoretical. It is now seeking to appoint unacceptable. How to name some practices cultural incompatible with Western societies?Our companies that want to open all the differences they finally find that certain identities are incompatible with them?  

They are barbarians, not democratised still living in the stone age through their self-proclaimed imams and their problems to accept an intelligent and non-animal sexuality not. We all wonder why Justin Trudeau and Thomas Mulcair support them and endorse their doctrines against the Canadian people. Are they real Canadians or politicians usurpers?

The basis of the human being, sexuality is to reproduce, but for them the reproduction, but they are not currently living on planet earth, they live for die as soon aspossible.But if that is their goal, why not we go back from where they come. They can build a wall around their country, their culture and peacefully practice their religion.

Therefore, they can blowthemselves.They will be martyrs and God will give them the maximumblank.You see virgin sex is exactly the same.

The absolute refusal to recognize their sexuality, even had sex with children. Always wanting to be persons subject to the tyranny of their leaders. We can say that democracy does not mean anything to them because they are religious fundamentalists sadomasochistic.

No one on this planet has seen any God can also get shagged to death, no blank , no penis, no pleasures but hell they have sown on earth.

But this also serves as a mask.They say fundamentalism if not Islamism, as we talk about radicalization not to speak of Islamic fundamentalism and fanatics not to name the fools of Allah. Certainly, all religions can experience radical excesses. But in this case, the reference to fundamentalism in general serves primarily to censor the difficulties of integration of Islam in particular.

Moreover, the media system puts the matter by coupling to that of Islamophobia. In itself, the massive arrival of Islam would not cause any problem in the West. The only problem would be that radical of all kinds refusing diversity. Unfortunately, these Islamic radicals are superior in numbers to destroy us all. Fundamentalism thus appears as atemptation regressivei mpeding modernity,as Islamophobia fall under the isolationism and closed at the other.

Certainly was reason to want to stay away from the hypothesis of the clash of civilizations but it would be wrong to think you can deny the existence of cultures and tensions they may experience when they live together despite themselves. What stands out well here is the fundamental inability of Western societies to circumscribe their own historical identity, because our elites and political leaders are selling to the highest bidder regardless of our democracy and our values, they are couch potatoes perverse and therefore, to recognize what crops are compatible with them, and which ones are not.

The contemporary immigration does not only moving individuals but often peoples and cultures hearing preserve a safe distance with the host society.

The majority of them do not hear them integrate culturally posture sacred by those who repeat loop that diversity is wealth. This causes a sense of dispossession among natives who are ostracized by these people, we now present as a community among others.

But that feeling barely speak because Western societies do know more than through the only language of universalism. If the founding values ​​of modernity have a universal pretensions, they do not distinguish between the nations, and they do not exhaust the Western heritage.

The universalism and multiculturalism radicalized grow deculturation and disembodiment of nations, as they are more successful in naming.

This universalism radicalized grows deculturation and disembodiment of nations, as they can no longer be called.

And when they hear defend their identity, they have to multiply the theoretical and legal contortions to do " discriminate"person. The story is sacrificed in the way of too heavy heritage and culture, treated as a stock arbitrary prejudices. We see it with the immense difficulty surrounding the headscarf ban and more, the full veil, justified by tortuous security reasons, then we should just remember the old formula.

in Rome, do as the Romans

for.answer the question, is that Muslim fundamentalists like other fundamentalist communities are they RACIST?  The answer is YES.

http://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/societe/2015/03/02/31003-20150302ARTFIG00253-l-affaire-du-voile-integral-qui-divise-le-quebec.php#xtor=AL-155-[Facebook