Nice... Some politicians are starting to take a stand against the cockroaches. Hussein would have bent over and shown flexibility. Le Pen told them to stuff it and canceled the meeting.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/02/21/le-pen-forgoes-meeting-with-grand-mufti-rather-than-wear-islamic-veil/
QuoteThe leader of France's National Front, Marine Le Pen, has opted to cancel a meeting with Lebanon's Grand Mufti rather than wear an Islamic veil.
Ms Le Pen is in the country to meet its leaders ahead of the first round of voting in France's Presidential elections in April, in which she is expected to top the polls. But when offered a scarf to wear to a scheduled meeting with the Sunni religious leader, the Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Latif Derian, she declined.
"I met the grand mufti of Al-Azhar," she told reporters, referring to a 2015 visit to Cairo's historical centre of Islamic learning. "The highest Sunni authority didn't have this requirement, but it doesn't matter.
"You can pass on my respects to the grand mufti, but I will not cover myself up," she said.
WTF is wrong with people? "I won't talk to women unless they are wearing a pillow case"?
Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 21, 2017, 06:58:55 PM
WTF is wrong with people? "I won't talk to women unless they are wearing a pillow case"?
It's just so not to anger them and force them to start rioting and burning things. They're very peaceful.
Quote from: taxed on February 21, 2017, 07:00:01 PM
It's just so not to anger them and force them to start rioting and burning things. They're very peaceful.
If they are not burning things they are raping things. Islam is basically the religion of arson and genitals. Odd combination.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 21, 2017, 07:12:21 PM
If they are not burning things they are raping things. Islam is basically the religion of arson and genitals. Odd combination.
Boo Man: I'm not a Muslim and believe it to be a false religion. But your comment offends even me. The article was about someone who took a stand not to cow down to political pressure and cover herself. Not a call for Boo Man Jihad against the entire Muslim community. You might have strong reasons for your bigotry, but we're trying to get behind our republic, aren't we?
Freedom of Religion ... I think that was somewhere in the Constitution / First Amendment / Bill of Rights that this site and our republic supports:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
But I agree that there are some followers of Islam that act as though their religion is of arson and genitals. There are bad actors in all religions - bad actors in all groups that I've witnessed that mean well for that matter. But most are peaceful in their beliefs.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 10:13:09 AM
Boo Man: I'm not a Muslim and believe it to be a false religion. But your comment offends even me. The article was about someone who took a stand not to cow down to political pressure and cover herself. Not a call for Boo Man Jihad against the entire Muslim community. You might have strong reasons for your bigotry, but we're trying to get behind our republic, aren't we?
Freedom of Religion ... I think that was somewhere in the Constitution / First Amendment / Bill of Rights that this site and our republic supports:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
But I agree that there are some followers of Islam that act as though their religion is of arson and genitals. There are bad actors in all religions - bad actors in all groups that I've witnessed that mean well for that matter. But most are peaceful in their beliefs.
Show me the open outrage over this from even 1/3 of the Islam religion actors.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 10:13:09 AM
Boo Man: I'm not a Muslim and believe it to be a false religion. But your comment offends even me.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're offended? Did he intentionally target you? Your entire line screams liberal snowflake.
QuoteThe article was about someone who took a stand not to cow down to political pressure and cover herself. Not a call for Boo Man Jihad against the entire Muslim community. You might have strong reasons for your bigotry, but we're trying to get behind our republic, aren't we?
Do you even know what a bigot is? Look up the tenets of Islum, and you'll have a clear understanding of what bigot means.
QuoteFreedom of Religion ... I think that was somewhere in the Constitution / First Amendment / Bill of Rights that this site and our republic supports:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Where did he mention anything about using govt to control Islum?
QuoteBut I agree that there are some followers of Islam that act as though their religion is of arson and genitals. There are bad actors in all religions - bad actors in all groups that I've witnessed that mean well for that matter. But most are peaceful in their beliefs.
No other religion condones beheading people in the name of their God, nor do its followers remain silent as the followers that make excuses for bad behavior.
I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
Quote from: walkstall on February 22, 2017, 10:39:32 AM
Show me the open outrage over this from even 1/3 of the Islam religion actors.
I don't know the details of that religion or the violence that their text calls for. But I do know that, even if the texts call for it, those I've talked with don't believe that it's calling for them to rape and destroy the property of others. They want good lives for themselves and their families.
Terrorism: The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
So you can't even classify most if it as terrorism because much of their rapes and attacks are done just to satisfy some kind of blood lust as I understand it. And why aren't the people more outraged? I would guess mostly because they don't want to draw attention to themselves as the radicals will kill then, their children, their families. It's a lot easier to be outraged when the only risk is that someone may not agree with you.
What is confusing is that I don't see the outrage from those in our nation who can speak and act freely against it. But distance makes it easier to say things and harder for it to be effective.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 10:13:09 AM
Boo Man: I'm not a Muslim and believe it to be a false religion. But your comment offends even me. The article was about someone who took a stand not to cow down to political pressure and cover herself. Not a call for Boo Man Jihad against the entire Muslim community. You might have strong reasons for your bigotry, but we're trying to get behind our republic, aren't we?
Freedom of Religion ... I think that was somewhere in the Constitution / First Amendment / Bill of Rights that this site and our republic supports:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
But I agree that there are some followers of Islam that act as though their religion is of arson and genitals. There are bad actors in all religions - bad actors in all groups that I've witnessed that mean well for that matter. But most are peaceful in their beliefs.
I'm very sorry you were offended. Is there anything we can do to make your stay more comfortable?
Quote from: Solar on February 22, 2017, 12:54:20 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're offended? Did he intentionally target you? Your entire line screams liberal snowflake.
Thanks for the name-call ... not a liberal and not a snowflake. I thought we were past that.
Fuck'n liberals with their panzy ass, pin-headed whining about Trump doing something.
There - does that help you feel better? I thought this site was about thinking through all the crap going on together and coming up with reasoned conclusions that align with the conservative aspects as we each believe them. Then to take these ideas with the reasons to those around us so that they can help the republic move in a good way. If that's not what all this is for, then why are we bothering? What's the fucking point.
The other night, the Mexican Wall came up at our dinner table with my parents who came over to my house for dinner (before you start thinking I live with my parents). There was a lot of divergence in the discussion and I brought up some of the numbers from this forum. My folks are more convinced that the Wall should go up. Ok - they're only two people. But that's how we move minds in the right direction.
So, a snowflake is someone who is easily offended. I did say offended ... made an easy target. It's not the right word, okay. I was trying to convey that I thought we were better than this. I know Boo Man has been posting for a long time (a Hero level) and I want him to work forward with the rest of the conservative force that's here. I just called him out on what I thought was over the line. I want to see if he's rationale or not - or will just defend his position even if he's off-point.
Does anyone agree with me that this was over the line? Or is it that only about five people contribute, or that the members agree with Boo Man's position on Muslims. This site has a poll - maybe I'll put one together. :-)
I thought this was a lightning rod. But I expected you to at least look at both viewpoints - not just throw me under the bus. I had valid support and Boo Man only vented emotion over an entire people-group that was only valid for a subset.
Quote
Do you even know what a bigot is? Look up the tenets of Islum, and you'll have a clear understanding of what bigot means. Where did he mention anything about using govt to control Islum?
Bigot defined above - is actually not a very meaningful term. It needs more definition to hold meaning. Boo Man was saying that those who follow Islam either burn things or rape women. I know (hope) he was only giving an extreme characterization of his thought, but I'll avoid the term bigot and just say he was characterizing a whole people-group by the fraction that acts as anarchists and/or dictators who lead in terrorizing the peaceful into silence.
Quote
No other religion condones beheading people in the name of their God, nor do its followers remain silent as the followers that make excuses for bad behavior.
I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
Does the religious text condone beheadings? I don't know - never looked. I'll trust that you have and that it does. But even so, I do know that all Muslims that I've met haven't tried to behead those around them. So the idea may be systemic but is not carried out in practice. Yes - I have issues with the inconsistency, but this discussion is about what people are doing as much as what their religion espouses.
Quote from: taxed on February 22, 2017, 01:08:48 PM
I'm very sorry you were offended. Is there anything we can do to make your stay more comfortable?
Asshole. :-) I'll no better than to use that word ever again. I've taken my beatings - can we move on?
All-in-all, the Arab culture is in great contrast to our republic. It has been like it is for a long, long time (maybe 8000 years or so?).
It's incompatible with our republic and if Islamists come here they need to fall under our republic. That means they accept our Constitution and it's laws. They will experience a great culture shift. And when the extremists try to flex their muscles, I hope we'll have the guts to kill the bastards. And hopefully the people near them won't cow to them because the good guys will take losses.
There's an interesting parallel in some of (any of) our cities. The gangs are like the extremists and the people cow to them so that they can survive. An interesting question is how do we remove those predators - how do we exterminate the gangs that cause so much damage. Now that's worth discussing. Maybe you already have.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 01:33:32 PM
Thanks for the name-call ... not a liberal and not a snowflake. I thought we were past that.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi800.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fyy285%2Fbronx1957%2Flaughing-chimp_51581.gif&hash=9f74688bfe4bbf64b789da56d36f5a52510340d4)
[/quote]
C'MON MAN....!
You call a person a "bigot" that you don't even know then you get upset because someone called you a "snowflake".
Quote from: taxed on February 22, 2017, 01:08:48 PM
I'm very sorry you were offended. Is there anything we can do to make your stay more comfortable?
Maybe a nice back rub, and mints on the pillow.
Quote from: Bronx on February 22, 2017, 01:44:13 PM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi800.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fyy285%2Fbronx1957%2Flaughing-chimp_51581.gif&hash=9f74688bfe4bbf64b789da56d36f5a52510340d4)
C'MON MAN....!
You call a person a "bigot" that you don't even know then you get upset because someone called you a "snowflake".
He could be called a whole lot worse for defending the false religion which killed so many Americans on 9/11/2001.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crtrgsrgwtsfwkbgxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fbskdqqwdgxbsgbrssfgxbsbqfkqtd%2F1%2F1595431%2F14141318%2Fno-vi.jpg&hash=c01964b4ffd6b7aa6487394422ce7c850e89bb74)
Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 21, 2017, 07:12:21 PM
If they are not burning things they are raping things. Islam is basically the religion of arson and genitals. Odd combination.
Summed it up very well, people need to find out every disgusting aspect of this religion.
Quote from: quiller on February 22, 2017, 01:50:14 PM
He could be called a whole lot worse for defending the false religion which killed so many Americans on 9/11/2001.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crtrgsrgwtsfwkbgxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fbskdqqwdgxbsgbrssfgxbsbqfkqtd%2F1%2F1595431%2F14141318%2Fno-vi.jpg&hash=c01964b4ffd6b7aa6487394422ce7c850e89bb74)
Fast and loose Quiller. Radical Islam Extremists killed our people in 911. Maybe it won't impose too much on your sensitive position to let me be offended that you think I somehow defended them. And the radicals claimed to be under that religion no doubt - but do they represent the entire group.
What I defended is the Constitutional principle that people can choose their religion. And also that all people in this republic must submit to the rule of our laws. Apparently some of you don't believe in that - so maybe you dictators and anarchists should go to another site. Or at least you should think about what you say before it flies out of your ass. I meant that most respectfully.
Quote from: s3779m on February 22, 2017, 02:01:02 PM
Summed it up very well, people need to find out every disgusting aspect of this religion.
Religion???? Make that Political Cult!
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 01:33:32 PM
Thanks for the name-call ... not a liberal and not a snowflake. I thought we were past that.
Fuck'n liberals with their panzy ass, pin-headed whining about Trump doing something.
There - does that help you feel better? I thought this site was about thinking through all the crap going on together and coming up with reasoned conclusions that align with the conservative aspects as we each believe them. Then to take these ideas with the reasons to those around us so that they can help the republic move in a good way. If that's not what all this is for, then why are we bothering? What's the fucking point.
Feel better? That's a fuckin emotion, I do not "FEEL" anything. I think through everything with critical thought, that's what makes us Conservatives.
QuoteThe other night, the Mexican Wall came up at our dinner table with my parents who came over to my house for dinner (before you start thinking I live with my parents). There was a lot of divergence in the discussion and I brought up some of the numbers from this forum. My folks are more convinced that the Wall should go up. Ok - they're only two people. But that's how we move minds in the right direction.
Well good for you.... This is one of the purposes behind the forum, teaching the Conservative perspective and backing it up with facts, not emotions.
QuoteSo, a snowflake is someone who is easily offended. I did say offended ... made an easy target. It's not the right word, okay. I was trying to convey that I thought we were better than this. I know Boo Man has been posting for a long time (a Hero level) and I want him to work forward with the rest of the conservative force that's here. I just called him out on what I thought was over the line. I want to see if he's rationale or not - or will just defend his position even if he's off-point.
The funny thing about being offended, is someone has to direct an offense at you personally for it to have effect. Being offended by something someone said, that had no intention of offending anyone, exposes a serious character flaw in the individual that took offense to what they perceived as offensive.
QuoteDoes anyone agree with me that this was over the line? Or is it that only about five people contribute, or that the members agree with Boo Man's position on Muslims. This site has a poll - maybe I'll put one together. :-)
I think it's safe to say not a single person saw it over the line, but then, most of us respect Boo's opinion on the subject being a Brit living in the US.
He tends to have a unique perspective on things, as well as insightful.
QuoteI thought this was a lightning rod. But I expected you to at least look at both viewpoints - not just throw me under the bus. I had valid support and Boo Man only vented emotion over an entire people-group that was only valid for a subset.
No one threw you under the bus and you are the one that invoked emotion, not Boo.
QuoteBigot defined above - is actually not a very meaningful term. It needs more definition to hold meaning. Boo Man was saying that those who follow Islam either burn things or rape women. I know (hope) he was only giving an extreme characterization of his thought, but I'll avoid the term bigot and just say he was characterizing a whole people-group by the fraction that acts as anarchists and/or dictators who lead in terrorizing the peaceful into silence.
Does the religious text condone beheadings? I don't know - never looked. I'll trust that you have and that it does. But even so, I do know that all Muslims that I've met haven't tried to behead those around them. So the idea may be systemic but is not carried out in practice. Yes - I have issues with the inconsistency, but this discussion is about what people are doing as much as what their religion espouses.
When you have an entire continent run by radicals espousing "Death to America", torturing, raping and killing in the name of religion and no one calls them on it, I'd say Boo's description is pretty accurate.
You do realize, their so called religion is in direct opposition to our culture, Constitution and very way of life, right?
For us to actually get along with these people, we are the ones that must concede ground, do away with our Bill of Rights simply because their "Religion" Political system will not allow them to live under our style of govt unless they work to overthrow it, as we're witnessing in Europe today.
QuoteDoes the religious text condone beheadings? I don't know - never looked.
You see, your ignorance is what got you into this mess, because you insulted someone that has read the Koran, as have many here, and know for a fact, not only does it condone it, it spells out punishment for those that don't kill in the name of Islum.
Look it up yourself. Here's a site if you want to cut through the PC BS, then dive right in.
http://pamelageller.com/.
Such a sweet preschool teacher. :rolleyes:
https://www.algemeiner.com/2017/02/15/covert-campus-watchdog-stuff-jews-in-the-oven-type-of-social-media-post-flooding-pages-of-former-current-u-of-texas-arlington-students/
Quote from: walkstall on February 22, 2017, 02:08:56 PM
Religion???? Make that Political Cult!
Yeah, you nailed it. I can not understand the blind eye people turn towards this cult and TRY TO PUT THEM ON OUR LEVEL. It is NOT just another religion.
Ok. Let me try another angle.
Our Constitution / Bill of Rights / First Amendment provides for freedom of religion.
We have Muslims that live in our country legally as citizens.
I read some of the posts to say that, somehow, Islam is NOT a religion. That we should disqualify it as a religion and identify Muslims as enemies of our nation. That we should not allow Muslims live in our country based on the horrendous events that we've witnessed by some.
That's the implication of some of the posts. How do you defend that position based on an understanding of our awesome US Republic?
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 03:11:15 PM
Ok. Let me try another angle.
Our Constitution / Bill of Rights / First Amendment provides for freedom of religion.
We have Muslims that live in our country legally as citizens.
I read some of the posts to say that, somehow, Islam is NOT a religion. That we should disqualify it as a religion and identify Muslims as enemies of our nation. That we should not allow Muslims live in our country based on the horrendous events that we've witnessed by some.
That's the implication of some of the posts. How do you defend that position based on an understanding of our awesome US Republic?
It's true, it's a political system disguised as a religion, namely Sharia, which is in direct opposition to our Republic.
Their political system should be renounced if they want to live in this country, they are, however, allowed to practice their religion, as long as they drop it's so called law.
Just imagine if the Christian religion ran this nation and installed its own system of laws?
That's what Sharia is to Islum, that's why the two are incompatible with our Republic/Bill of Rights as in the 1st Amendment.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 03:11:15 PM
Ok. Let me try another angle.
Our Constitution / Bill of Rights / First Amendment provides for freedom of religion.
We have Muslims that live in our country legally as citizens.
I read some of the posts to say that, somehow, Islam is NOT a religion. That we should disqualify it as a religion and identify Muslims as enemies of our nation. That we should not allow Muslims live in our country based on the horrendous events that we've witnessed by some.
That's the implication of some of the posts. How do you defend that position based on an understanding of our awesome US Republic?
It's not a religion. It's a cult. Why can't you grasp that?
Quote from: Solar on February 22, 2017, 03:17:46 PM
It's true, it's a political system disguised as a religion, namely Sharia, which is in direct opposition to our Republic.
Their political system should be renounced if they want to live in this country, they are, however, allowed to practice their religion, as long as they drop it's so called law.
Just imagine if the Christian religion ran this nation and installed its own system of laws?
That's what Sharia is to Islum, that's why the two are incompatible with our Republic/Bill of Rights as in the 1st Amendment.
Totally agree that those US citizens who choose to practice as a Muslim must do so under the Constitutional law and are subject to punishment where their actions violate these laws. I'm also in agreement that their culture and history has such great differences from what we have in the US that they will find it difficult, at best, to line up with the US laws.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 03:27:31 PM
Totally agree that those US citizens who choose to practice as a Muslim must do so under the Constitutional law and are subject to punishment where their actions violate these laws. I'm also in agreement that their culture and history has such great differences from what we have in the US that they will find it difficult, at best, to line up with the US laws.
Then why would they wish to sublimate their "religion" in order to take up life in a civilized nation? Let them remain where they are, mired in their 7th century barbarism.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 01:43:52 PM
All-in-all, the Arab culture is in great contrast to our republic. It has been like it is for a long, long time (maybe 8000 years or so?).
It's incompatible with our republic and if Islamists come here they need to fall under our republic. That means they accept our Constitution and it's laws. They will experience a great culture shift. And when the extremists try to flex their muscles, I hope we'll have the guts to kill the bastards. And hopefully the people near them won't cow to them because the good guys will take losses.
There's an interesting parallel in some of (any of) our cities. The gangs are like the extremists and the people cow to them so that they can survive. An interesting question is how do we remove those predators - how do we exterminate the gangs that cause so much damage. Now that's worth discussing. Maybe you already have.
Someone needs to kick the crap out of your math teacher or your history teacher. Better yet both.
If the muslims cult came 700 years
after the Christians and Christianity is only about 2000 years old how the hell do you come up with 8000 years...?
The muslim cult was created in the 7th century.
This is how people fall for the global warming scam. They don't do their homework and listen to every Tom, Dick, and Harry.
Quote from: PeterR on February 22, 2017, 04:17:55 PM
Then why would they wish to sublimate their "religion" in order to take up life in a civilized nation? Let them remain where they are, mired in their 7th century barbarism.
Because, like democratic Christians, the promise of free stuff is more important that their quality of afterlife.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 01:35:24 PM
Asshole. :-) I'll no better than to use that word ever again. I've taken my beatings - can we move on?
I just want to make sure you're able to post in a safe space. Maybe you can submit some forum rules that we should all abide by? That way, we'll be forced to do it your way.
Quote from: taxed on February 21, 2017, 06:42:26 PM
Nice... Some politicians are starting to take a stand against the cockroaches. Hussein would have bent over and shown flexibility. Le Pen told them to stuff it and canceled the meeting.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/02/21/le-pen-forgoes-meeting-with-grand-mufti-rather-than-wear-islamic-veil/
<B>SHE MUST WIN !!!</B>
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 10:13:09 AM
Boo Man: I'm not a Muslim and believe it to be a false religion. But your comment offends even me. The article was about someone who took a stand not to cow down to political pressure and cover herself. Not a call for Boo Man Jihad against the entire Muslim community. You might have strong reasons for your bigotry, but we're trying to get behind our republic, aren't we?
Freedom of Religion ... I think that was somewhere in the Constitution / First Amendment / Bill of Rights that this site and our republic supports:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
But I agree that there are some followers of Islam that act as though their religion is of arson and genitals. There are bad actors in all religions - bad actors in all groups that I've witnessed that mean well for that matter. But most are peaceful in their beliefs.
You come to the wrong place if you are offended by this. BTW Boo man has a RIGHT to speak his mind no matter who it offends. You might consider that the next time you try to council someone on the bill of rights.
And since we are talking about what offend people I'M offended by the asinine posters of Women wearing a Hijab with the outline of an American flag. OUR FLAG IS NOT TO BE USED AS A GARMENT, and most certainly a Hijab, which is a symbol of female repression, subsuveince should not be used to convey the ideals OUR FLAG represents. Liberty and justice for all.
Quote from: Bronx on February 22, 2017, 04:52:04 PM
Someone needs to kick the crap out of your math teacher or your history teacher. Better yet both.
If the muslims cult came 700 years after the Christians and Christianity is only about 2000 years old how the hell do you come up with 8000 years...?
The muslim cult was created in the 7th century.
This is how people fall for the global warming scam. They don't do their homework and listen to every Tom, Dick, and Harry.
Yes - showing my ignorance of the religious history. That wasn't the point but thanks for the lesson.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 10:13:09 AM
Boo Man: I'm not a Muslim and believe it to be a false religion. But your comment offends even me. The article was about someone who took a stand not to cow down to political pressure and cover herself. Not a call for Boo Man Jihad against the entire Muslim community. You might have strong reasons for your bigotry, but we're trying to get behind our republic, aren't we?
Freedom of Religion ... I think that was somewhere in the Constitution / First Amendment / Bill of Rights that this site and our republic supports:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
But I agree that there are some followers of Islam that act as though their religion is of arson and genitals. There are bad actors in all religions - bad actors in all groups that I've witnessed that mean well for that matter. But most are peaceful in their beliefs.
Have you read the Koran?
The problem with Islam is Islam. The only people that can truly stop the Muslim extremists are the moderate Muslims but they choose not to stand up. Aside from that a large percentage of so called moderate Muslims support Sharia and they may not commit acts of terror they empathize with the terrorists.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 22, 2017, 06:12:04 PM
Have you read the Koran?
The problem with Islam is Islam. The only people that can truly stop the Muslim extremists are the moderate Muslims but they choose not to stand up. Aside from that a large percentage of so called moderate Muslims support Sharia and they may not commit acts of terror they empathize with the terrorists.
No, I haven't read the Koran yet - admitted that earlier. Your statement asks a great question and I can't support it either way. Here are three categories to examine:
1) Moderate Muslims under tyrannical rule of radicals who don't react for fear of retaliation?
Or ...
2) Moderate who, as you said, support Sharia and empathize with those who do but don't commit acts of terror themselves.
Or ...
3) Moderates who neither fear radicals nor empathize or commit acts of terror.
I'll bet it's a mix of categories 1) and 2) for the moderates who don't live in the US with the exception of those who have stood to fight against the extreme Islamists and a mix of all three categories for those living in the US.
But I wonder what the mix is? Seems like a Conservative group would attempt to find a way to estimate this across the US. It should be used to help shape policy if the leadership would take it seriously. Trump is trying to take a minor step to address it and has met great resistance from the Dims and media in his attempt - but I think he's going to win this first victory. But it seems like an obvious step - but way too small.
One way to fix the problem is to deport all of the Muslims. But, as mentioned earlier, that's not aligned with our Republic. So we need to find a way to get the Muslim population in the US to identify the radicals so we can get rid of them. And if they don't we need to do something severe to the whole group so they fear the punishment more than the radicals. I don't know what else you can do? Open to other suggestions for the sake of discussion.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 06:37:20 PM
No, I haven't read the Koran yet - admitted that earlier. Your statement asks a great question and I can't support it either way. Here are three categories to examine:
How did you come up with these three categories?
Quote1) Moderate Muslims under tyrannical rule of radicals who don't react for fear of retaliation?
Examples?
Quote2) Moderate who, as you said, support Sharia and empathize with those who do but don't commit acts of terror themselves.
Examples?
Quote3) Moderates who neither fear radicals nor empathize or commit acts of terror.
Again examples?
Name countries.QuoteI'll bet it's a mix of categories 1) and 2) for the moderates who don't live in the US with the exception of those who have stood to fight against the extHave a look at Saudi Arabia. They are moderate. Look at how they treat their women.
But I wonder what the mix is? Seems like a Conservative group would attempt to find a way to estimate this across the US. It should be used to help shape policy if the leadership would take it seriously. Trump is trying to take a minor step to address it and has met great resistance from the Dims and media in his attempt - but I think he's going to win this first victory. But it seems like an obvious step - but way too small.
I have no idea what any of this means.
QuoteOne way to fix the problem is to deport all of the Muslims.
This is one of the dumbest things I have read since during a filibuster John Kerry read "How to Read Portuguese" in Portuguese.
QuoteBut, as mentioned earlier, that's not aligned with our Republic. So we need to find a way to get the Muslim population in the US to identify the radicals so we can get rid of them. And if they don't we need to do something severe to the whole group so they fear the punishment more than the radicals. I don't know what else you can do? Open to other suggestions for the sake of discussion.
You just made my point and I am still trying to figure out how I triggered you.
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 02:05:38 PM
Or at least you should think about what you say before it flies out of your ass. I meant that most respectfully.
The hell you did, Mussie-lover.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 22, 2017, 11:20:29 PM
I have no idea what any of this means.
Neither does he, so you're even.... :wink:
Quote from: topside on February 22, 2017, 03:11:15 PM
Ok. Let me try another angle.
Our Constitution / Bill of Rights / First Amendment provides for freedom of religion.
We have Muslims that live in our country legally as citizens.
I read some of the posts to say that, somehow, Islam is NOT a religion. That we should disqualify it as a religion and identify Muslims as enemies of our nation. That we should not allow Muslims live in our country based on the horrendous events that we've witnessed by some.
That's the implication of some of the posts. How do you defend that position based on an understanding of our awesome US Republic?
Matthew 22:20-22King James Version (KJV)20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.Mohammed was first and foremost a political leader, giving political decisions; according to the "religion" that he had "received". Sharia covers far more that religious observance and rules; but also social, political and economic rules. Our First Amendment on religion presupposes that in return for religious freedom, any given religion will allow other religions ro peacefully practice theirs. Islam can't abide by that belief.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 22, 2017, 11:20:29 PM
How did you come up with these three categories?
Examples?
Examples?
Again examples? Name countries.
I have no idea what any of this means.
This is one of the dumbest things I have read since during a filibuster John Kerry read "How to Read Portuguese" in Portuguese.
You just made my point and I am still trying to figure out how I triggered you.
I was trying to partition the category of Muslims into classes that supported important distinctions. Then to analyze mostly those in the US that likely partition into all three categories. In invented it ... not always just copying others. Maybe you have better partitions. Your original post had a single partition but I think there are more distinctions that matter. That the whole point of this thread.
Quote from: quiller on February 23, 2017, 12:56:00 AM
The hell you did, Mussie-lover.
Sticks and stones - name calling can be effective but is a child's defense. It just makes it more difficult to reason.
Yes, just to illustrate a point I resorted to it too and used profanity in this instance just to show inflating emotion is meaningless and not helpful - it's the content that matters. And yes, I support the First Amendment - I expected it to be used for emphasis sometimes but not to deride others - I was wrong about that.
I said it before and will say it again - I believe that Islam is a false religion but, if practiced peaceably, it is protected under the First Amendment. I guess that makes me a Republic Bigot - opposed / biased against anyone against our republic foundation.
Calm down Boo Man. There's a lot of common ground between us. You probably disagree but I'm certainly willing to see what comes over time.
Solar posted this in another thread and I wanted to address it in this one:
" Therein lies the problem. Case in point, you were offended by something Boo said, (no judgment here, just a descriptor), then suddenly the forum is on you. Not because they necessarily agree with Boo, but rather his right to express his opinion (most agreed with anyway).
But the point is, your claim of offense is a form of censorship in guilting one into submission, as the left does daily.
For example, when Pamela Geller decided to promote a "Draw Muhamed Day' in Texas, the left called it inflammatory and an "exercise in bigotry". "
So, I was NOT trying to stop Boo from stating his opinion - that would be counterproductive. The point was that I didn't agree with it and wanted it not to represent me for someone looking at the site. It's up to Boo to decide if he wants to change his position. So it wasn't intended as an attempt at censorship but rather to offer another viewpoint.
When anyone makes a strong statement like Boo did and others disagree, shouldn't we call it? The forum certainly held nothing back in coming at me when they disagreed.
Your point is well taken - it seems many don't disagree with Boo but many do agree with the approach I took. I'll certainly attempt to improve ... the next time.
Quote from: topside on February 23, 2017, 08:13:36 AM
Solar posted this in another thread and I wanted to address it in this one:
" Therein lies the problem. Case in point, you were offended by something Boo said, (no judgment here, just a descriptor), then suddenly the forum is on you. Not because they necessarily agree with Boo, but rather his right to express his opinion (most agreed with anyway).
But the point is, your claim of offense is a form of censorship in guilting one into submission, as the left does daily.
For example, when Pamela Geller decided to promote a "Draw Muhamed Day' in Texas, the left called it inflammatory and an "exercise in bigotry". "
So, I was NOT trying to stop Boo from stating his opinion - that would be counterproductive. The point was that I didn't agree with it and wanted it not to represent me for someone looking at the site. It's up to Boo to decide if he wants to change his position. So it wasn't intended as an attempt at censorship but rather to offer another viewpoint.
When anyone makes a strong statement like Boo did and others disagree, shouldn't we call it? The forum certainly held nothing back in coming at me when they disagreed.
Your point is well taken - it seems many don't disagree with Boo but many do agree with the approach I took. I'll certainly attempt to improve ... the next time.
Regardless of your intent, that was the end result. Just as I demonstrated with the NY Times article in qualifying certain speech as bigoted hate speech.
It's one thing to disagree, but another to claim one is bigoted in their views, when it's your very own bigotry making judgments.
Quote from: topside on February 23, 2017, 08:13:36 AM
Solar posted this in another thread and I wanted to address it in this one:
" Therein lies the problem. Case in point, you were offended by something Boo said, (no judgment here, just a descriptor), then suddenly the forum is on you. Not because they necessarily agree with Boo, but rather his right to express his opinion (most agreed with anyway).
But the point is, your claim of offense is a form of censorship in guilting one into submission, as the left does daily.
For example, when Pamela Geller decided to promote a "Draw Muhamed Day' in Texas, the left called it inflammatory and an "exercise in bigotry". "
So, I was NOT trying to stop Boo from stating his opinion - that would be counterproductive. The point was that I didn't agree with it and wanted it not to represent me for someone looking at the site. It's up to Boo to decide if he wants to change his position. So it wasn't intended as an attempt at censorship but rather to offer another viewpoint.
When anyone makes a strong statement like Boo did and others disagree, shouldn't we call it? The forum certainly held nothing back in coming at me when they disagreed.
Your point is well taken - it seems many don't disagree with Boo but many do agree with the approach I took. I'll certainly attempt to improve ... the next time.
I myself did not see that in the thread. I find saying "many do" is liken to saying we in hopes of getting a pass.
Quote from: walkstall on February 23, 2017, 08:38:53 AM
I myself did not see that in the thread. I find saying "many do" is liken to saying we in hopes of getting a pass.
Ahhh ... that was a miss-type. What I meant (updated) was, "Your point is well taken - it seems many agree with Boo and many do disagree with the approach I took. I'll certainly attempt to improve ... the next time. "
Quote from: topside on February 23, 2017, 07:52:40 AM
Calm down Boo Man. There's a lot of common ground between us. You probably disagree but I'm certainly willing to see what comes over time.
Free with advice for people not present in the post you reply to. Har, har, har.......
The main reason why we have "moderate" Muslims in this country is because we are a stable republic and have laws regarding civil rights. We value equality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXzqxdXfl1M
Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 23, 2017, 05:43:01 PM
The main reason why we have "moderate" Muslims in this country is because we are a stable republic and have laws regarding civil rights. We value equality.
I'm almost afraid to respond to this Boo, but it's just input from a snowflake so don't sweat it. :cool: Your statement is very well said. Some subset of the Muslim population in the US is moderate and any Muslim can choose to be moderate if they want to because of the stable republic.
Those in the US that don't choose to be moderate have to face a harsh and swift justice under the law or we'll end up with a growing problem like BO gave us in his legacy. Heck with Obamacare - OB's legacy is that non-moderate Muslims and illegal aliens feel at liberty to do as they wish in our republic.
Quote from: topside on February 24, 2017, 05:47:03 AM
I'm almost afraid to respond to this Boo, but it's just input from a snowflake so don't sweat it. :cool: Your statement is very well said. Some subset of the Muslim population in the US is moderate and any Muslim can choose to be moderate if they want to because of the stable republic.
Those in the US that don't choose to be moderate have to face a harsh and swift justice under the law or we'll end up with a growing problem like BO gave us in his legacy. Heck with Obamacare - OB's legacy is that non-moderate Muslims and illegal aliens feel at liberty to do as they wish in our republic.
Yet you completely glossed over the point of the video. Go back and start at 2:30 seconds, where they explain that there is no such thing as a moderate Muscum, simply because to be a Muscum, you must accept Sharia, and to accept sharia means to accept violence as a way of life in protecting its tenets.
Quote from: Solar on February 24, 2017, 05:59:17 AM
Yet you completely glossed over the point of the video. Go back and start at 2:30 seconds, where they explain that there is no such thing as a moderate Muscum, simply because to be a Muscum, you must accept Sharia, and to accept sharia means to accept violence as a way of life in protecting its tenets.
No. That the opinion of one Muslim. I know other US citizens that have behaved as moderate Muslims and as any other citizen of our country. I disagree that there are no moderate Muslims and because I have experience with a few. Probably most Muslims in the US are moderates - although I can only nominally support the position. Now, some might claim that these aren't devote Muslims - that's a slippery slope.
Quote from: topside on February 24, 2017, 06:30:10 AM
No. That the opinion of one Muslim. I know other US citizens that have behaved as moderate Muslims and as any other citizen of our country. I disagree that there are no moderate Muslims and because I have experience with a few. Probably most Muslims in the US are moderates - although I can only nominally support the position. Now, some might claim that these aren't devote Muslims - that's a slippery slope.
Uhh no, it wasn't one muscum, it was everyone he interviewed.
I know a bunch of these people as well, and their views are mirrored with what these people are saying.
One thing they all agree with is the cutting off of appendages, be it a hand or a finger for stealing, they see it as a way of quelling violence in black neighborhoods.
Oh, I get why they agree with it, they want the violence to stop, at the cost of using more violence to bring an end to violence in the black community.
This is not an American view, this is the view of all these fools that follow this so called religion, and no, there is no separating sharia from the religion.
Quote from: Solar on February 24, 2017, 07:03:01 AM
Uhh no, it wasn't one muscum, it was everyone he interviewed.
I know a bunch of these people as well, and their views are mirrored with what these people are saying.
One thing they all agree with is the cutting off of appendages, be it a hand or a finger for stealing, they see it as a way of quelling violence in black neighborhoods.
Oh, I get why they agree with it, they want the violence to stop, at the cost of using more violence to bring an end to violence in the black community.
This is not an American view, this is the view of all these fools that follow this so called religion, and no, there is no separating sharia from the religion.
... yeah, mistype ... meant "the opinion of one group of Muslims" - it's obviously not just one Muslim's opinion in the video. This is a small sample, maybe from one area which may be biased - but maybe not. The question is whether that's representative of the moderate Muslim population - meaning Muslims that are not extremists.
For this group they basically agreed that it's easy to be a Muslim in the US which I expected. What I didn't expect is that they would say that they prefer Sharia law, and that they would rather live in their Muslim countries. Not sure what's stopping them?
There is no problem practicing Sharia law where it is not in conflict with US law. But if they violate our laws then they should face the consequences. It's like there is no problem for Jews to practice Old Testament law as long as it doesn't violate US law. An eye for an eye is also in the Old Testament.
However, I'm not sure that's a broad sentiment, but I've never ask these questions of the Muslims that I know.
Quote from: topside on February 24, 2017, 12:46:43 PM
... yeah, mistype ... meant "the opinion of one group of Muslims" - it's obviously not just one Muslim's opinion in the video. This is a small sample, maybe from one area which may be biased - but maybe not. The question is whether that's representative of the moderate Muslim population - meaning Muslims that are not extremists.
For this group they basically agreed that it's easy to be a Muslim in the US which I expected. What I didn't expect is that they would say that they prefer Sharia law, and that they would rather live in their Muslim countries. Not sure what's stopping them?
There is no problem practicing Sharia law where it is not in conflict with US law. But if they violate our laws then they should face the consequences. It's like there is no problem for Jews to practice Old Testament law as long as it doesn't violate US law. An eye for an eye is also in the Old Testament.
However, I'm not sure that's a broad sentiment, but I've never ask these questions of the Muslims that I know.
That's the problem Sharia law does conflict with US LAWS. Pull you head out of the sand. Muslim are allowed to lie and get 7 virgins when they die for it.
Quote from: topside on February 24, 2017, 05:47:03 AM
I'm almost afraid to respond to this Boo, but it's just input from a snowflake so don't sweat it. :cool:
That's a bit dramatic.
QuoteYour statement is very well said. Some subset of the Muslim population in the US is moderate and any Muslim can choose to be moderate if they want to because of the stable republic.
Those in the US that don't choose to be moderate have to face a harsh and swift justice under the law or we'll end up with a growing problem like BO gave us in his legacy. Heck with Obamacare - OB's legacy is that non-moderate Muslims and illegal aliens feel at liberty to do as they wish in our republic.
You are missing the point. They are "moderate" not because they choose to be but because they have no choice. And these are the only ones that can stop the terrorists. It's going to be hard for them to do that when they want the same thing as the terrorists.