You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Religion’ category.
In recent years, Toronto, Canada, has witnessed a disturbing trend where adherents of the Islamic faith have organized large, unauthorized gatherings—such as the Eid al-Adha prayers in July 2023 near Nathan Phillips Square—that spill onto public streets, shutting them down without permits or regard for the broader community. These events, where hundreds gather and block traffic for hours, are often cloaked as religious expression, but they flout the basic expectation that all Canadians, regardless of faith, must adhere to the same rules governing public spaces. This isn’t just a minor inconvenience; it’s a direct challenge to the Canadian value of order and fairness, where no group gets a free pass to disrupt the lives of others under the guise of cultural practice.
The glaring absence of robust policing and arrests during these incidents is nothing short of a betrayal of Canada’s commitment to the rule of law. Toronto police, present at events like the 2023 Eid gathering, have chosen to stand by and redirect traffic rather than enforce bylaws that would see any other unpermitted group—be it protesters or revelers—swiftly fined or dispersed. This cowardice in the face of religious optics sends a dangerous message: that some communities can act with impunity, while others are held to account. Canadian values demand equality before the law, not selective enforcement that bends to avoid offending specific groups. When police fail to act decisively, they undermine the very principles of justice and accountability that have long defined this nation.
This growing pattern of leniency threatens to unravel the fabric of Canadian society, where respect for shared rules has been a cornerstone of our strength. If authorities continue to prioritize appeasement over impartial governance, they invite chaos—emboldening any group, religious or otherwise, to trample on public order without consequence. Canada’s pride in multiculturalism cannot come at the cost of surrendering our streets to lawlessness. The rule of law isn’t negotiable; it’s the bedrock of our freedom and security. Toronto must reclaim its resolve, enforce its regulations without hesitation, and send a clear signal that Canadian values—order, equality, and accountability—will not be compromised, no matter who tests them. Anything less is a surrender of what makes this country worth defending.
This is Ameneh Bahrami. She was attacked with acid after rejecting a marriage proposal from a classmate.
You never know how brutal and Barbaric Islam is unless you are a Muslim woman.
Ameneh Bahrami, an Iranian woman, became a symbol of resilience after a horrific acid attack in 2004 in Tehran. The attack was perpetrated by Majid Movahedi, a former classmate, who threw acid in her face after she rejected his marriage proposal. This act of violence left Bahrami blind, disfigured, and requiring over a dozen reconstructive surgeries in Spain. The incident gained international attention, highlighting the severe sex-based violence faced by women in Iran, often linked to societal pressures and conservative interpretations of Islamic norms that punish women for asserting autonomy.
The legal and cultural context in Iran further complicated Bahrami’s pursuit of justice. Under Iran’s Islamic penal code, victims of such crimes can seek “qisas” (retribution in kind), and Bahrami initially demanded that Movahedi be blinded with acid, a right upheld by Iranian law. However, in 2011, she forgave him at the last moment, influenced by personal, legal, and societal pressures, including a pardon reportedly from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This case underscores the broader issue of acid attacks in Iran, such as the 2014 Isfahan incidents, where women were targeted for not adhering to strict dress codes, often tied to vigilante enforcement of conservative Islamic values.
The story also reflects systemic sex-based violence in Iran, where women face physical, legal, and social oppression. Acid attacks, though not explicitly endorsed by Islamic texts, are frequently associated with patriarchal interpretations of Islamic law and culture that devalue women’s autonomy. Bahrami’s experience, alongside other cases, sparked protests and legal reforms, like the 2019 law increasing penalties for acid attacks, yet the root causes—misogyny and cultural norms—persist, perpetuating such brutality against women.
The Kamloops grave hoax, sparked by the 2021 announcement from the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc First Nation claiming the discovery of 215 unmarked graves at the former Kamloops Indian Residential School, ignited a firestorm of outrage across Canada. This claim, based on preliminary ground-penetrating radar findings and later proven to lack physical evidence of human remains, fueled a wave of anti-Christian sentiment that resulted in the burning or vandalism of over 85 churches, predominantly Catholic, between 2021 and 2024. These acts of arson and destruction were not random; they were a direct response to a narrative that falsely accused the Church of mass atrocities, a narrative amplified by political leaders and media without rigorous verification. The churches, many of which were historic and served as community pillars, were reduced to ashes, leaving congregations devastated and their sacred spaces irreparably lost.
The case for reparations for these destroyed churches rests on the principle of justice for the innocent. The Canadian government and media played a significant role in perpetuating the hoax, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau lowering flags and offering statements that fanned the flames of retribution, while outlets like the CBC reported the claims as fact without evidence. This reckless endorsement led to millions of dollars in damages and the loss of cultural heritage, all based on a falsehood that has yet to yield a single confirmed body despite nearly $8 million spent on investigations. The churches and their parishioners, who were not complicit in the alleged crimes, bore the brunt of this misinformation campaign. Reparations—whether through government funding or community restitution—would acknowledge this wrong, providing resources to rebuild and heal the wounds inflicted on these faith communities.
Moreover, reparations align with the broader call for truth and reconciliation, ironically the very framework used to justify the initial outrage. If reconciliation is to be genuine, it must extend to all victims, including those unjustly targeted in the fallout of the Kamloops narrative. The destruction of churches did not uncover hidden graves or bring closure to Indigenous communities; instead, it deepened division and punished the blameless. By offering reparations, Canada could demonstrate a commitment to correcting the record and supporting the restoration of these sacred spaces, many of which had served both Indigenous and non-Indigenous congregants. This act would not erase the painful history of residential schools but would rectify a modern injustice born of haste and falsehood, ensuring that the pursuit of truth does not leave new victims in its wake.
The term “Islamophobia” is bunk because it conflates legitimate criticism of ideas with irrational hatred of people, muddling discourse and shielding a religion from scrutiny. Islam, like any ideology, isn’t immune to critique—its texts and practices have inspired both beauty and brutality, from poetry to jihadist violence. Calling out the latter, like the 7th-century conquests or modern extremism, isn’t a phobia; it’s reason. Yet, the label gets weaponized to silence dissent, branding skeptics as bigots instead of engaging their arguments. This isn’t about fear—it’s about clarity. Smearing it as “Islamophobia” cheapens real prejudice, like anti-Muslim hate crimes, which deserve condemnation without dragging ideology into the mix.
It’s cancer for Western societies because it erodes free speech, the bedrock of open debate. The term’s vagueness—covering everything from mosque vandalism to Quran critiques—lets activists and governments police thought, as seen in Europe’s hate speech laws or campus cancel culture. In 2023, a UK teacher was suspended for showing a Muhammad cartoon, not out of malice but context; “Islamophobia” was the cudgel. This stifles honest discussion about integration, values, or security—like the 2015 Paris attacks tied to Islamist ideology—pushing problems underground where they fester. Fear of the label paralyzes policymakers, leaving societies less cohesive and more brittle.
Worse, it fuels division by infantilizing Muslims and alienating everyone else. Painting criticism as phobia assumes Muslims can’t handle tough questions, which is patronizing nonsense—many critique their own faith internally. Meanwhile, it drives a wedge in pluralistic nations, making non-Muslims resentful of a double standard: Christianity gets roasted daily, but Islam’s off-limits? The West thrives on challenging sacred cows, not coddling them. “Islamophobia” isn’t just a flawed concept—it’s a self-inflicted wound, rotting the guts of societies that prize reason over dogma.
The concern about any ideology or religion overpowering a culture stems from a natural desire to preserve what feels foundational to a society. Some worry that Islam, through immigration, higher birth rates, or assertive community-building, can gradually shift cultural norms, as seen in certain European neighborhoods where local traditions seem overshadowed. Critics argue this isn’t just integration but a slow replacement—pointing to historical examples like the Islamization of Persia or the Ottoman expansion, where distinct cultures were reshaped over centuries. The fear is that Canada, with its mosaic of identities, risks losing its core values if such a pattern takes hold unchecked.
However, it’s worth stepping back to consider what’s really at stake. Canada’s strength lies in its ability to blend diverse influences while holding fast to principles like individual freedom, secular governance, and mutual respect. The worry about “infiltration” often exaggerates the intent and influence of Muslim communities, many of whom are here to build better lives, not to conquer. Still, there’s a grain of truth in the concern: unchecked cultural shifts can erode cohesion if not balanced with a firm commitment to shared ideals. The challenge isn’t Islam itself but ensuring that no single worldview—religious or otherwise—overrides the pluralistic spirit that keeps Canada resilient.
Rather than fear an overthrow, the focus should be on reinforcing what makes Canada distinct—its openness, yes, but also its backbone. This means fostering honest dialogue, not stifling it with accusations of bigotry, and encouraging integration that respects differences without surrendering core liberties. If we let paranoia drive us, we risk becoming the very thing we fear: a fractured society. Canada can welcome many voices while standing firm on its identity—we’ve done it before with countless waves of newcomers, and we can do it again without losing ourselves.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…