I wasn't sure if this should go in the religion forum or here.
On Tuesday, federal judge Patrick J. Duggan dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought by Christian evangelists who were violently assaulted by a hostile Muslim mob while preaching at an Arab festival last year in Dearborn, Mich., the American Freedom Law Center said.
The AFLC filed the lawsuit against Wayne County, the Wayne County Sheriff, and two Wayne County Deputy Chiefs alleging authorities refused to protect the Christians while threatening to arrest them.
Judge Duggan, sitting in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, granted Wayne County's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the lawsuit, AFLC said.
"The court finds that the actual demonstration of violence here provided the requisite justification for [the Wayne County sheriffs'] intervention, even if the officials acted as they did because of the effect the speech had on the crowd," the judge said in his ruling.
"The First Amendment was dealt a severe blow today as a result of this ruling. Indeed, this ruling effectively empowers Muslims to silence Christian speech that they deem offensive by engaging in violence. And pursuant to this ruling, the Christian speakers are now subject to arrest for engaging in disorderly conduct on account of the Muslim hecklers' violent response to their speech," said Robert Muise, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel.
"In short," he added, "this ruling turns the First Amendment on its head."
http://www.examiner.com/article/attorney-ruling-by-michigan-judge-lets-muslims-silence-christians-with-violence (http://www.examiner.com/article/attorney-ruling-by-michigan-judge-lets-muslims-silence-christians-with-violence)
yet the left continues to claim that Sharia and/or Muslim leaning law is not happening.
Huh? Are we talikg about the same thing? Here's what the Detroit Free Press Said recently:
QuoteThe City of Dearborn will publicly apologize and pay an undisclosed amount of money to a group of Christian missionaries arrested three years ago while proselytizing at the annual Arab International Festival, according to a settlement reached in a lawsuit against the city.
The American Freedom Law Center, a conservative legal group cofounded by an Ann Arbor attorney, had filed the lawsuit on behalf of a group of Christian missionaries called Acts 17 Apologetics who said their rights were violated when they were arrested by police in June 2010 at the festival on charges of disturbing the peace. The missionaries were there to try to convert Muslims to Christianity. A jury acquitted the missionaries of most of the charges against them. http://www.freep.com/article/20130506/NEWS05/305060101/Dearborn-to-pay-christian-evangelists-to-settle-lawsuit (http://www.freep.com/article/20130506/NEWS05/305060101/Dearborn-to-pay-christian-evangelists-to-settle-lawsuit)
Quote from: Yawn on May 24, 2013, 04:27:29 PM
Huh? Are we talikg about the same thing? Here's what the Detroit Free Press Said recently:
Can we be reasonable here?
These morons from Acts 17 Apologetics had no damned business invading that Arab Festival! They were looking for a confrontation and they got one!
How would they like it if a bunch of Muslims invaded a Christian Church picnic and started preaching the Koran and trying to convert Christians to Islam?
In my opinion, if the article Yawn quoted is correct, the Acts 17 group got much better than they deserved!
-Darth
Sometimes I think you're a carefully crafted troll, buddy.
You're really announcing that beating somebody's ass for talking is A-OK ? Charges should be dismissed ?
We know that liberals do think this, about conservative speech.
I also don't know any conservatives who think anybody should be able to attack liberals for being a-holes.
Only liberals can't figure out that freedom of ALL speech is guaranteed ALL people, other than proven damages from speech. And even then.....you sue or call police.
No, it was on the
PUBLIC streets. It was a PUBLIC event. We don't hold church picnics in the STREETS of Dearborn. We also don't make special allowances for every religion other than Christianity. This was NOT a PRIVATE event. They may "own" Dearbornistan, but they don't OWN it. Our AMERICAN Constitution still applies--even in Dearbornistan.
If you read the Freep article, you'd see that they found a solution:
Quote
Because of the tensions, the City of Dearborn has decided to move this year's festival away from its traditional location on Warren Avenue to a park, where admission will be more controlled.
Freedom of speech is mostly for that which makes people mad. Specifically what makes the govt mad.
Speaking only what makes everybody happy doesn't require freedom of speech. Or hiding in silence if others are beating people for speech.
Only liberals can't figure this out.....about conservative speech.
And only muslims are killing for speech these days. Libs can't even grasp that.
Quote from: AndyJackson on May 24, 2013, 05:08:34 PM
Sometimes I think you're a carefully crafted troll, buddy.
You're really announcing that beating somebody's ass for talking is A-OK ? Charges should be dismissed ?
We know that liberals do think this, about conservative speech.
I also don't know any conservatives who think anybody should be able to attack liberals for being a-holes.
Only liberals can't figure out that freedom of ALL speech is guaranteed ALL people, other than proven damages from speech. And even then.....you sue or call police.
Actually, if you read the article (doubtful) it was Act 17 Apolotetics who were "suing the police". That, is what the suit was all about.
What I'm talking about (and which you apparently are lacking) is simple mutual respect and common sense.
If it were a group of Neo-NAZI marching into a predominately Jewish neighborhood (as happened in Skokie IL) that got their asses kicked, you'd be on the side of the Jews (as would I).
But since this has to do with those "evil" Muslims, you automatically take the side of the "Christian", who were, in fact, the agitators!
It doesn't take a whole lot of brains to realize that you don't go preaching the Gospel of Christ at a festival for Muslims.
The Acts 17 group is just a bunch of trouble makers looking to make headlines for themselves.
-Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 24, 2013, 05:18:22 PM
What I'm talking about (and which you apparently are lacking) is simple mutual respect and common sense.
If it were a group of Neo-NAZI marching into a predominately Jewish neighborhood (as happened in Skokie IL) that got their asses kicked, you'd be on the side of the Jews (as would I).
You do know that it was the MUSLIMS that did the physical ASSAULTS don't you? On the one hand you talk ab out the Nazis invading Jewish areas and attacking Jews. For youre silly argument to hold up, the Christians PREACHING is equal to an ASSAULT on Muslims? But the actual ASSAULT on Christians isn't really assault?
Or, the KKK showing up to burn a cross at a Harlem block party?
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 24, 2013, 05:18:22 PM
Actually, if you read the article (doubtful) it was Act 17 Apolotetics who were "suing the police". That, is what the suit was all about.
What I'm talking about (and which you apparently are lacking) is simple mutual respect and common sense.
If it were a group of Neo-NAZI marching into a predominately Jewish neighborhood (as happened in Skokie IL) that got their asses kicked, you'd be on the side of the Jews (as would I).
But since this has to do with those "evil" Muslims, you automatically take the side of the "Christian", who were, in fact, the agitators!
It doesn't take a whole lot of brains to realize that you don't go preaching the Gospel of Christ at a festival for Muslims.
The Acts 17 group is just a bunch of trouble makers looking to make headlines for themselves.
-Darth
You're digging that liberal hole deeper and deeper.
First the juvenile fake comparison....Nazis invading Jews, yeah, that's a perfect comparison.
Then the whiny victimhood......"evil muslims" which nobody said.
Did you miss the part about calling the cops and having them arrested for disturbing the peace ?
I'm sure you'd take the exact same position for Christians pounding on muslims....yeah, uh-huh, sure.
lol, I guess you also missed that Theo Van Gogh thing, and the mayhem for cartoons or videos.......and the fact that nobody gets hurt for putting a crucifix in piss, or dung on Mary. Yup, we're all picking on the muslims for no reason.
I smell a stealth muslim, or at least a stealth surrenderer.
Quote from: PeterR on May 24, 2013, 05:28:02 PM
Or, the KKK showing up to burn a cross at a Harlem block party?
Same principle applies. You attack or kill them you go to jail. The law doesn't get suspended because a special victim group gets offended.
Laughable that you can't grasp this.
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 24, 2013, 05:18:22 PM
The Acts 17 group is just a bunch of trouble makers looking to make headlines for themselves.
-Darth
The Acts 17 group was entirely PEACEFUL. The Muslims didn't like their WORDS. You may be thinking of the other group that brought a pigs head. I disagree with that, and I also ONCE thought, "why not just let them have their day." But after watching the attack (by the Muslims), I realized that THIS is how it begins. THIS is how you get "No-Go zones" in our own country. THIS is how local government begin to let Muslim groups "self-regulate", that is, begin to apply de facto Sharia Law within areas of the United States. THIS is how WE begin to become afraid to speak out in our own land. If you haven't heard
Glenn Beck's monolog (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/24/i-will-never-forget-the-sheep-in-the-streets-of-london-becks-scathing-rebuke-of-londoners-who-stood-by-during-terror-attack/) today about the Mad London Muslim, and the sheep-men of England who did NOTHING, it would be well worth hearing.
This just in....muslims approved for no-fault assault......still illegal for everyone else.
I've had many an argument with liberals who just revel and wallow in their illogic and lack of honesty.
Not with many people portraying conservatives, though.
Quote from: PeterR on May 24, 2013, 05:28:02 PM
Or, the KKK showing up to burn a cross at a Harlem block party?
Apples and oranges, not even in the same context.
Quote from: Yawn on May 24, 2013, 04:27:29 PM
Huh? Are we talikg about the same thing? Here's what the Detroit Free Press Said recently:
:lol: I'm quoting myself, and then answering myself :lol:
NOW I see the problem. Your artile is from June 2012. It's since been appealed, and the Christians won (Praise Allah!)
Christians stoned by American Muslims in Dearborn as police watch June 26, 2012 By: Joe Newby
Quote from: Solar on May 24, 2013, 05:52:48 PM
Apples and oranges, not even in the same context.
Actions have consequences. Good sense would dictate the KKK not go there (even to exercize their Consitutionally guanteed Rights). No doubt appropriate arrests would (or certainly should) be made.
Quote from: Yawn on May 24, 2013, 06:11:55 PM
:lol: I'm quoting myself, and then answering myself :lol:
NOW I see the problem. Your artile is from June 2012. It's since been appealed, and the Christians won (Praise Allah!)
Christians stoned by American Muslims in Dearborn as police watch
June 26, 2012
By: Joe Newby
My article says May 15, 2013 when I click the link :blink: Now I am beginning to wonder if the article I posted about was the "other group" mentioned in your article that was going to court in Detriot later??? Not sure, they don't mention a name, but if it was resolved, AMEN.
As an aside, I DO NOT agree with baiting Muslims (like the boars head) but I don't think the police should allow the Muslims to stone those they don't agree with because of it.
Quote from: Yawn on May 24, 2013, 06:11:55 PM
:lol: I'm quoting myself, and then answering myself :lol:
NOW I see the problem. Your artile is from June 2012. It's since been appealed, and the Christians won (Praise Allah!)
Christians stoned by American Muslims in Dearborn as police watch
June 26, 2012
By: Joe Newby
'
So are you trying to equate Christians as KKK?
See how ludicrous that sounds...
Quote from: Solar on May 24, 2013, 06:51:52 PM
'
So are you trying to equate Christians as KKK?
See how ludicrous that sounds...
No. Why would you say that?
I was referring to JustKari's original post and my immediate response.
1) Her article said the Christian group lost.
2) I responded by posting an article from the Detroit Free Press which said the Christian group WON and was awarded a large sum of money by the City of Dearborn.
3) The discrepancy was due to the fact that
JustKari's article was a year old. Mine was CURRENT.
Nothing I posted has anything to do with the KKK. I'm at a loss as to how you reached that conclusion.
Quote from: JustKari on May 24, 2013, 06:49:48 PM
As an aside, I DO NOT agree with baiting Muslims (like the boars head) but I don't think the police should allow the Muslims to stone those they don't agree with because of it.
I agree in principle, and it's NOT the "Christian thing to do," but we live in a country where we are told that burning the American flag is protected free speech. Muslims do it everywhere and we're told they have that right. If that's true, we are doing them a disservice if we don't treat them equally. If they burn our flag and our Bible, they can't complain if we burn their Koran (it deserves to be burned) or show up with a pig's head (I would never do that out of respect for the pig--and I'm serious). I think it is morally wrong to antagonize and intentionally provoke any group (proselytizing doesn't count) but it's NOT illegal. Stoning someone over
words is.
Quote from: Yawn on May 24, 2013, 07:05:36 PM
No. Why would you say that?
I was referring to JustKari's original post and my immediate response.
1) Her article said the Christian group lost.
2) I responded by posting an article from the Detroit Free Press which said the Christian group WON and was awarded a large sum of money by the City of Dearborn.
3) The discrepancy was due to the fact that JustKari's article was a year old. Mine was CURRENT.
Nothing I posted has anything to do with the KKK. I'm at a loss as to how you reached that conclusion.
My bad, I was responding to Peter.
QuoteActions have consequences. Good sense would dictate the KKK not go there (even to exercize their Consitutionally guanteed Rights). No doubt appropriate arrests would (or certainly should) be made.
Quote from: AndyJackson on May 24, 2013, 05:31:19 PM
You're digging that liberal hole deeper and deeper.
First the juvenile fake comparison....Nazis invading Jews, yeah, that's a perfect comparison.
Then the whiny victimhood......"evil muslims" which nobody said.
Did you miss the part about calling the cops and having them arrested for disturbing the peace ?
I'm sure you'd take the exact same position for Christians pounding on muslims....yeah, uh-huh, sure.
lol, I guess you also missed that Theo Van Gogh thing, and the mayhem for cartoons or videos.......and the fact that nobody gets hurt for putting a crucifix in piss, or dung on Mary. Yup, we're all picking on the muslims for no reason.
I smell a stealth muslim, or at least a stealth surrenderer.
First, where did I ever say that it was okay for Muslim to pound on Christians? And yes, I would (and have) taken the same position when Muslims have committed acts of violence against Christians (and atheists for that matter). You might be unfamiliar with the term but it is called being consistent.
If (and that is a big word, if) there were any acts of violence committed against the Acts 17 morons, I would be 100% them in filing criminal and civil charges against anyone who committed those assaults. The fact that there were 1) no criminal charges filed and 2) the only charges filed were civil ones against the police and the city tipped me off that there was more to this story than was being reported.
Here is an excerpt from the police report of the incident:
While inside the command trailer during Arabfest, Sgt Mrowka, Ofc Smith and I were notified by Roger Williams (festival volunteer) that he had just been harassed by a film crew and Amal Alslami had witnessed the incident.Williams stated a film crew began recording him doing his festival duties. He advised the subjects (later identified as Negeen Mayel, Nabeel Qureshi, David Wood, and Paul Rezkalla) that he did not want to be filmed and told them to stop. Williams stated that they did not stop and instead, began to surround him. He added that he felt extremely uncomfortable and thought he could not leave although he attempted to several times. They continued to pester him and badger him with questions and continued filming. Williams again told them to stop filming. Qureshi and Wood, as well as Rezkalla, finally put down the microphone and camcorder to speak with him, but he noticed Mayel still filming within hearing distance. He radioed to security for assistance and the parties soon left. He advised Alslami that he wished to make a formal complaint with the police.I relayed the information to Sgt Mrowka and he advised us to arrest all parties involved for Breach of Peace. Ofc Micallef, Ofc Ballard, Ofc Smith, and I located Qureshi, Wood, and Rezkalla in the center of another large crowd in the middle of the two tents. When we advised them to turn their camcorders off and they were under arrest for Breach of Peace, they were hesitant but eventually complied.En route to the station, Qureshi, Wood and Rezkalla asked me about the allegations. I explained they were under arrest for breach of peace and explained the allegation against them. Without questioning, they stated that they never "surrounded" Williams.They weren't "pounded on by Muslims".
They weren't "arrested for preaching the Gospel to Muslims".
The were arrested for disturbing the peace, because that is exactly what they were doing! If I were there and I was a cop, I would have arrested them myself!
They were arrested for being jerks!
It is simple-minded, uninformed bigots like you who are the source of so much needless hatred in this world.
-Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 24, 2013, 05:18:22 PM
The Acts 17 group is just a bunch of trouble makers looking to make headlines for themselves.
-Darth
Muslims are just a bunch of trouble makers looking to make headlines for themselves in the name of Islam.
This is the truth of the matter regardless of what you think or say.
Common sense should tell you that Muslims continuously make news around the world with their habitual violence (including bombings, public be-headings, and other barbaric acts). Just a glance at the news will prove this on just about any given day.
The fact is that Muslims love violence. This is what their perverted "religion" is all about: violence, violence, and more violence.
Muslims become violent when someone says something they dislike.
Muslims become violent when women attempt to recognize their equal rights has human beings.
Muslims become violent if people attempt to shun their barbaric and violent religion.
Muslims react with violence when their women "allow" themselves to be raped by a male outside of their family (this, in and of itself, might explain exactly why these people are so strange...).
Muslims become violent over any excuse on the planet.
Meanwhile, civilized cultures and religions abandoned such barbaric behavior at the end of the Dark Ages.
Civilized people, cultures, and religions do not react with violence over non-violent verbal actions of others.
Quote from: Telmark on May 25, 2013, 04:22:09 AM
Muslims are just a bunch of trouble makers looking to make headlines for themselves in the name of Islam.
This is the truth of the matter regardless of what you think or say.
Common sense should tell you that Muslims continuously make news around the world with their habitual violence (including bombings, public be-headings, and other barbaric acts). Just a glance at the news will prove this on just about any given day.
The fact is that Muslims love violence. This is what their perverted "religion" is all about: violence, violence, and more violence.
Muslims become violent when someone says something they dislike.
Muslims become violent when women attempt to recognize their equal rights has human beings.
Muslims become violent if people attempt to shun their barbaric and violent religion.
Muslims react with violence when their women "allow" themselves to be raped by a male outside of their family (this, in and of itself, might explain exactly why these people are so strange...).
Muslims become violent over any excuse on the planet.
Meanwhile, civilized cultures and religions abandoned such barbaric behavior at the end of the Dark Ages.
Civilized people, cultures, and religions do not react with violence over non-violent verbal actions of others.
Judging the actions of peaceful Muslims in America based on the actions of Radical Muslims in the Middle East is like judging the actions of mainstream Christians in America based on the actions of the members of the Westboro Baptist Church.
I based by assessment of this incident on the official report made by the non-Muslim officers on the scene.
What are you basing your assessment of it on?
-Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 25, 2013, 03:45:09 AM
First, where did I ever say that it was okay for Muslim to pound on Christians? And yes, I would (and have) taken the same position when Muslims have committed acts of violence against Christians (and atheists for that matter). You might be unfamiliar with the term but it is called being consistent.
If (and that is a big word, if) there were any acts of violence committed against the Acts 17 morons, I would be 100% them in filing criminal and civil charges against anyone who committed those assaults. The fact that there were 1) no criminal charges filed and 2) the only charges filed were civil ones against the police and the city tipped me off that there was more to this story than was being reported.
Here is an excerpt from the police report of the incident:
While inside the command trailer during Arabfest, Sgt Mrowka, Ofc Smith and I were notified by Roger Williams (festival volunteer) that he had just been harassed by a film crew and Amal Alslami had witnessed the incident.
Williams stated a film crew began recording him doing his festival duties. He advised the subjects (later identified as Negeen Mayel, Nabeel Qureshi, David Wood, and Paul Rezkalla) that he did not want to be filmed and told them to stop. Williams stated that they did not stop and instead, began to surround him. He added that he felt extremely uncomfortable and thought he could not leave although he attempted to several times. They continued to pester him and badger him with questions and continued filming. Williams again told them to stop filming. Qureshi and Wood, as well as Rezkalla, finally put down the microphone and camcorder to speak with him, but he noticed Mayel still filming within hearing distance. He radioed to security for assistance and the parties soon left. He advised Alslami that he wished to make a formal complaint with the police.
I relayed the information to Sgt Mrowka and he advised us to arrest all parties involved for Breach of Peace. Ofc Micallef, Ofc Ballard, Ofc Smith, and I located Qureshi, Wood, and Rezkalla in the center of another large crowd in the middle of the two tents. When we advised them to turn their camcorders off and they were under arrest for Breach of Peace, they were hesitant but eventually complied.
En route to the station, Qureshi, Wood and Rezkalla asked me about the allegations. I explained they were under arrest for breach of peace and explained the allegation against them. Without questioning, they stated that they never "surrounded" Williams.
They weren't "pounded on by Muslims".
They weren't "arrested for preaching the Gospel to Muslims".
The were arrested for disturbing the peace, because that is exactly what they were doing! If I were there and I was a cop, I would have arrested them myself!
They were arrested for being jerks!
It is simple-minded, uninformed bigots like you who are the source of so much needless hatred in this world.
-Darth
Watch the video and show me those peaceful Muscum you claim live here in America.
http://www.examiner.com/video/american-muslims-stone-christians-dearborn-mi-original-edit (http://www.examiner.com/video/american-muslims-stone-christians-dearborn-mi-original-edit)
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 25, 2013, 05:26:14 AM
Judging the actions of peaceful Muslims in America based on the actions of Radical Muslims in the Middle East is like judging the actions of mainstream Christians in America based on the actions of the members of the Westboro Baptist Church.
I based by assessment of this incident on the official report made by the non-Muslim officers on the scene.
What are you basing your assessment of it on?
-Darth
Probably the
STONING and the
VIOLENCE of the Muslim MOB against the Christians because they didn't like the WORDS of the Christians in "Muslim Land" (Dearborn). Wake up man! You clearly didn't watch the video.
Arab Festival 2010: David Wood's Arrest in Dearborn (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID1_Sc7lZ2w#ws)
I see some eggs, nerf frisbees and some empty water bottles taking to the air, but I don't see anyone getting "stoned" by Muslims. Considering the in-your-face attitude of the "Street Preachers", and the disgusting things they were saying, I thought the crowd was remarkable well behaved.
However, I would like to thank you for confirming my suspicions about this Acts 17 Apologetics group of losers. They, apparently are cut from the same cloth as the Westboro Baptist Church.
-Darth
You didn't have time to watch the video I posted before you reacted. You call any Christian sharing his faith, a TROUBLE MAKER?The Arab Christian TALKING to the young Arab boys gives a response here:
Nabeel Qureshi on Arab Festival 2010: Response to Mayor of Dearborn (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X319T75kOkw#)
Funny how you see "VIOLENCE" in a Christian man SHARING his faith with nonbelievers! You make HIM a bad guy, while you defend stone throwing Muslims!
Now make excuses for the mad London Muslim and tell us he was "provoked" by the existence of Westerners in London! That seems to be your mindset!
Quote from: Yawn on May 25, 2013, 06:24:50 AM
You didn't have time to watch the video I posted before you reacted. You call any Christian sharing his faith, a TROUBLE MAKER?
Now, this may come as a surprise to you, but there are some people who just don't want to hear your "Christian" message! And just for the record, I didn't watch your video, I watched the one posted by Solar.
BTW did you miss the part where the cop told the guy that since he had the incident on tape, he was welcome to file a complaint and they would arrest the suspect?
Did they file a complaint?
No.
One wonders why not?
-Darth
Of course, if it were me, when people started throwing things at me, I'd leave. I'm kind of funny that way...
"Why are the always people who bring eggs and tomatoes to speeches?"
-The Penguin - Batman Returns
-Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 25, 2013, 06:40:00 AM
Now, this may come as a surprise to you, but there are some people who just don't want to hear your "Christian" message! And just for the record, I didn't watch your video, I watched the one posted by Solar.
I don't recall anywhere in the law of the land where it says Darth Fife has a specific right not to be offended. Where anyone who says things he doesn't want to here, should be silenced by "right thinking" mobs.
Quote from: mdgiles on May 25, 2013, 10:27:43 AM
I don't recall anywhere in the law of the land where it says Darth Fife has a specific right not to be offended. Where anyone who says things he doesn't want to here, should be silenced by "right thinking" mobs.
Um, where did I say I was offended?
For myself, I love listening to street preachers! Their understanding of the Gospels they are preaching is usually a mile wide...
and a foot deep!
-Darth
Man we wandered all over the map on this one. We have free speech but when we get in someones face they may decide you are too close and push back. Westboro Baptist are so far out of line, in my opinion, for what they do at funerals but don't deserved to be assualted However have said that, when you come on my property the right you have are the one I chose to let you have. Don't mess with me on a bad day.
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 25, 2013, 10:38:21 AM
Um, where did I say I was offended?
For myself, I love listening to street preachers! Their understanding of the Gospels they are preaching is usually a mile wide...
and a foot deep!
-Darth
The people you're attacking in Dearborn are NOTHING like the SHOUTING street preachers you're talking about now. And even less like the Westboro kooks. If you would ever take 10 minutes and listen to the videos you obviously haven't watched, you'd see they were
talking to the Muslim Arabs, not SHOUTING in the street.
There can be no conversation when you won't listen but only condemn what you clearly didn't see or hear.
All this energy you're wasting attacking the Christians for TALKING and no condemnation for the angry Muslim mob and their ASSAULT is what I'm seeing with you. Why so much HATE for peaceful Christians and so much empathy for those who'd be happy to slice your throat?
Ahem...
If you watched the video that Solar put up, which is the one I was watching at 1:19 it has a caption where the guy is talking to the cop. The caption says, Ruben Israel, Officialstreetpreachers (and the rest finishes off a URL which I wont post so as not to run a foul of forum rules)
If you look closely in the background, you will see a sign that says something about "The Lake of Fire".
Look these Arab/Muslims weren't bothering anybody. They were minding there own business. But theses moron felt that they just had to insert themselves into the event and ruin the day for everybody. Again. I don't think you would take it very kindly if you church was having a picnic in a public park and a bunch of self righteous Muslims crashed the party with cameras and started filming everybody and telling you how you were all going to go to hell because you don't believe in Mohammed and the Koran!
As I have said before, if anyone of the Acts 17 Apologetics street preachers wants to file criminal charges, I believe they have every right to do so.
However, even though the have video evidence on their side, they chose not to file criminal charges. They chose to file civil charges and against who? Not the Arab/Muslims who were holding the fair, but the cops and the city!
Now why do you think that is?
Because the police department and the city have "deeper pockets"! They can just dip in to the taxpayer's pocket to pay whatever judgement they end up with!
They were looking for an incident, so they could file a law suit - and they got it.
They are no better than the Westboro Baptist Church.
-Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 24, 2013, 05:03:19 PM
Can we be reasonable here?
These morons from Acts 17 Apologetics had no damned business invading that Arab Festival! They were looking for a confrontation and they got one!
How would they like it if a bunch of Muslims invaded a Christian Church picnic and started preaching the Koran and trying to convert Christians to Islam?
In my opinion, if the article Yawn quoted is correct, the Acts 17 group got much better than they deserved!
-Darth
Yes lets be reasonable here, and point out that it is whooly unreasonable to sit back attempting to justify mob violence perpetuated by mooooslims because they disagree with or otherwise don't like the message of another group.
I"m just curious here, but when was our first amendment changed to reflect violent sequestration as an acceptable means of discourse in this nation and not assault?
Quote from: daidalos on May 25, 2013, 06:49:03 PM
Yes lets be reasonable here, and point out that it is whooly unreasonable to sit back attempting to justify mob violence perpetuated by mooooslims because they disagree with or otherwise don't like the message of another group.
I"m just curious here, but when was our first amendment changed to reflect violent sequestration as an acceptable means of discourse in this nation and not assault?
Okay, junior!
The next time you and your family go for an outing in the park, I and a couple of my friends will show up with signs that say your are GOING TO HELL if you don't convert to Islam (I"m not a muslim, BTW, just using it as an example) Well will push our cameras and microphones in your face and when you try to leave, we will surround you and keep filming you when you tell us to stop.
We'll keep doing that until somebody calls the cops and then when the cops show up and arrest us, we will sue the city for violating our civil rights!
-Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 25, 2013, 07:00:05 PM
Okay, junior!
The next time you and your family go for an outing in the park, I and a couple of my friends will show up with signs that say your are GOING TO HELL if you don't convert to Islam (I"m not a muslim, BTW, just using it as an example) Well will push our cameras and microphones in your face and when you try to leave, we will surround you and keep filming you when you tell us to stop.
We'll keep doing that until somebody calls the cops and then when the cops show up and arrest us, we will sue the city for violating our civil rights!
-Darth
After reading through this thread, I still don't get your point, other than it's OK for a group that hates our culture, that has no interest is assimilating, or following our laws.
So you're advocating hate over dialogue, is that what you're saying?
Keep in mind, this is an public event on a public street open to everyone, not just the enemy, an enemy hell bent on destroying our culture.
Is your hatred of Christians so strong, that you are actually willing to take the side of THE ENEMY?
Quote from: Solar on May 27, 2013, 07:16:12 AM
After reading through this thread, I still don't get your point, other than it's OK for a group that hates our culture, that has no interest is assimilating, or following our laws.
So you're advocating hate over dialogue, is that what you're saying?
Keep in mind, this is an public event on a public street open to everyone, not just the enemy, an enemy hell bent on destroying our culture.
Is your hatred of Christians so strong, that you are actually willing to take the side of THE ENEMY?
I don't hate Christian, you should know me better than that.
What I do hate are people who use Christianity as a shield for acting in a way that would otherwise be considered obnoxious and disgusting. The Acts 17 Apologetics where not concerned about preaching the word of God to Muslims, they were all about intentionally causing an incident that they could exploit to their own benefit.
This Arab Festival was no different than any other of the many ethnic festivals held across the country - Greek Festivals, Italian Festivals, Jewish Festivals.
These Muslims were not bothering anybody - they were minding their own business. If the Acts 17 Apologetics had done the same thing, there would have been no problem at all - but that didn't fit with the Acts 17 morons agenda!
Again, would you be as outraged if a bunch of Neo-NAZIs had invaded a Jewish Heritage street festival preaching the "Good News" of Uncle Adolf?
Did you even read any of the police report I posted? These guys were acting like assholes! They went around sticking video cameras, and microphones in peoples faces. They refused to stop filming when they were asked to and kept badgering private individals about how Islam was a false religion and if they didn't convert they were all going to Hell!
Hell! If someone did that to me, I'd start throwing things at them too!
Now, tell me, honestly, if Muslims did that to you and your family on a public outing, would you have at least called the cops?
I know damned well I would!
-Darth
Where was all this 'freedom of speech' and first amendment stuff when the Muslim Mosque was being built a few blocks away from ground zero ?
Absolutely no consistency.
:lol: " Them Christians just don't know their place! They gotta quit
talking about their faith to non-christians 'cause that bothers me!"
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 27, 2013, 07:37:43 AM
I don't hate Christian, you should know me better than that.
What I do hate are people who use Christianity as a shield for acting in a way that would otherwise be considered obnoxious and disgusting. The Acts 17 Apologetics where not concerned about preaching the word of God to Muslims, they were all about intentionally causing an incident that they could exploit to their own benefit.
This Arab Festival was no different than any other of the many ethnic festivals held across the country - Greek Festivals, Italian Festivals, Jewish Festivals.
These Muslims were not bothering anybody - they were minding their own business. If the Acts 17 Apologetics had done the same thing, there would have been no problem at all - but that didn't fit with the Acts 17 morons agenda!
Again, would you be as outraged if a bunch of Neo-NAZIs had invaded a Jewish Heritage street festival preaching the "Good News" of Uncle Adolf?
Did you even read any of the police report I posted? These guys were acting like assholes! They went around sticking video cameras, and microphones in peoples faces. They refused to stop filming when they were asked to and kept badgering private individals about how Islam was a false religion and if they didn't convert they were all going to Hell!
Hell! If someone did that to me, I'd start throwing things at them too!
Now, tell me, honestly, if Muslims did that to you and your family on a public outing, would you have at least called the cops?
I know damned well I would!
-Darth
QuoteDid you even read any of the police report I posted? These guys were acting like assholes!
According to the COURTS, the cops weren't being honest. It was obvious to the rest of us from the videos.
Quote from: redlom xof on May 27, 2013, 07:49:39 AM
Where was all this 'freedom of speech' and first amendment stuff when the Muslim Mosque was being built a few blocks away from ground zero ?
Absolutely no consistency.
Building a mosque is a zoning issue. Not free speech. I may not be able to build a church in your residential neighborhood. I do wonder if the Founders would agree with the Left or the Libertarian that Freedom of religion applies to any religion that advocates the murder of those who refuse to convert.
The Founders (specifically TJ) had to deal with these barbarians. That is the origin of the Marines.
So are you saying that Muslims shouldn't get the protection of the 1st amendment ? ( I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, I'm really asking)
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 25, 2013, 06:40:49 PM
Ahem...
If you watched the video that Solar put up, which is the one I was watching at 1:19 it has a caption where the guy is talking to the cop. The caption says, Ruben Israel, Officialstreetpreachers (and the rest finishes off a URL which I wont post so as not to run a foul of forum rules)
If you look closely in the background, you will see a sign that says something about "The Lake of Fire".
Huh? Is that the best you have? Someone is offended that someone else says "REPENT, or face the Lake of Fire" and that justifies VIOLENCE in your mind??
In other words, Free Speech is okay as long as you don't offend anyone. Well guess what? Your words offend me.
To be honest, I quit reading your responses ("I know what spirit you're of") because you're so damn predictable. I started reading a few today. It's an eye-opener!
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 27, 2013, 07:37:43 AM
I don't hate Christian, you should know me better than that.
What I do hate are people who use Christianity as a shield for acting in a way that would otherwise be considered obnoxious and disgusting. The Acts 17 Apologetics where not concerned about preaching the word of God to Muslims, they were all about intentionally causing an incident that they could exploit to their own benefit.
This Arab Festival was no different than any other of the many ethnic festivals held across the country - Greek Festivals, Italian Festivals, Jewish Festivals.
These Muslims were not bothering anybody - they were minding their own business. If the Acts 17 Apologetics had done the same thing, there would have been no problem at all - but that didn't fit with the Acts 17 morons agenda!
Again, would you be as outraged if a bunch of Neo-NAZIs had invaded a Jewish Heritage street festival preaching the "Good News" of Uncle Adolf?
Did you even read any of the police report I posted? These guys were acting like assholes! They went around sticking video cameras, and microphones in peoples faces. They refused to stop filming when they were asked to and kept badgering private individals about how Islam was a false religion and if they didn't convert they were all going to Hell!
Hell! If someone did that to me, I'd start throwing things at them too!
Now, tell me, honestly, if Muslims did that to you and your family on a public outing, would you have at least called the cops?
I know damned well I would!
-Darth
Regardless, either you back the use of our First, or you allow the enemy to further corrode it's meaning.
This group had every Right to proselytize under 1st Amendment Rights, whether in good taste or not, it's still a Right afforded under the Constitution.
The Scum had no right to get physical because they didn't like the message, that's the law.
Why is this point going over your head?
Quote from: redlom xof on May 27, 2013, 08:01:04 AM
So are you saying that Muslims shouldn't get the protection of the 1st amendment ? ( I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, I'm really asking)
Actually, I'm wondering if the Founders would agree that THIS religion deserves First Amendment protection. Personally, I don't think ANY of them belong here. They do NOT assimilate with our culture. Those who seem to only do so because they are 1 in 1,000.
As their percentages increase in any Western culture they begin to segregate and violence ALWAYS increases. Self-rule also increases.
Kind of a joke, but isn't it interesting that when they bow to Mecca, they are mooning the West? :lol: I always thought that was funny:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F56GX8gX.jpg&hash=5cc5699b8f5428d3b632747b9c7464fc345f057a)
Well what the hell is the point of having a constitution that protects individuals and religions from persecution if you can just say " that particular group doesn't fall under the protection of the first amendment ".
You set a very dangerous precedent.
Again, I'm saying I wonder what the Founders think. I can post many of their words. They sound like me, but there wasn't mass immigration by these barbarians so they didn't have to deal with these people here.
Now PERSONALLY, I have no problem with ANYONE'S religious beliefs. THAT should be protected. The problem comes when you have a cult that openly advocates VIOLENCE against any who won't willingly convert.
In Christianity, "Jesus" (Yeshua) was/is the perfect Man
In Islam, Mohammad was the perfect man and the example they are to follow.
The two can't be compared. They are nothing alike.
PERSONALLY, a cult that advocates personal violence against unbelievers is a cult that doesn't have First Amendment protection.
QuoteIbn Khaldoun makes it clear that holy war is the duty of every Muslim. From his most famous work, Muqaddimah:
In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. http://pjmedia.com/blog/no-professor-ahmed-the-founders-were-not-so-fond-of-islam/2/ (http://pjmedia.com/blog/no-professor-ahmed-the-founders-were-not-so-fond-of-islam/2/)
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christandpopculture/2013/05/muslims-stoning-christians-in-michigan-not-quite-updated/ (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christandpopculture/2013/05/muslims-stoning-christians-in-michigan-not-quite-updated/)
This article sheds a little light on this subject in a relatively unbiased manner, I realize that it is a blog, but he has really done his homework on this case. Also, if you take a look at the few comments on the bottom, you begin to see why there is such a disconnect in this thread, there were two separate cases, one with an "evangelist" intentionally attempting to incite the Muslims, another with a passive group. The aggressive video is apparently highly edited.
Solar, I am sorry for posting the link to a blog, but I could not find a more balanced article.
Thanks for posting that. I started watching the short version when it caused my computer to freeze up (too many programs running) so I had to restart. I'll watch both versions.
And no, they are not the same group that won the settlement. They are the group parading the pigs head (it's vulgar to treat an innocent animal that way).
I have seen THEIR "edited" version, and while I have not
yet watched what's supposed to be the "unedited" version,
NOTHING justifies the behaviour of these Muslim 'kids." NOTHING makes it okay. The only appropriate reaction is to ignore these "christians." First Amendment may not apply in this case, but it is morally wrong and unchristian.
Quote from: JustKari on May 27, 2013, 12:41:56 PM
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christandpopculture/2013/05/muslims-stoning-christians-in-michigan-not-quite-updated/ (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christandpopculture/2013/05/muslims-stoning-christians-in-michigan-not-quite-updated/)
This article sheds a little light on this subject in a relatively unbiased manner, I realize that it is a blog, but he has really done his homework on this case. Also, if you take a look at the few comments on the bottom, you begin to see why there is such a disconnect in this thread, there were two separate cases, one with an "evangelist" intentionally attempting to incite the Muslims, another with a passive group. The aggressive video is apparently highly edited.
Solar, I am sorry for posting the link to a blog, but I could not find a more balanced article.
Quote from: Yawn on May 27, 2013, 01:54:30 PM
Thanks for posting that. I started watching the short version when it caused my computer to freeze up (too many programs running) so I had to restart. I'll watch both versions.
And no, they are not the same group that won the settlement. They are the group parading the pigs head (it's vulgar to treat an innocent animal that way).
I have seen THEIR "edited" version, and while I have not yet watched what's supposed to be the "unedited" version, NOTHING justifies the behaviour of these Muslim 'kids." NOTHING makes it okay. The only appropriate reaction is to ignore these "christians." First Amendment may not apply in this case, but it is morally wrong and unchristian.
I am in complete agreement with that, speech and action are wholly different.
A case could be made (and I probably agree) that this group was there to incite a riot. This is the group that lost their lawsuit?
The megaphone was a bit much. The other group was ASSAULTED for their words. If you saw the Arab Christian in the video I posted, he had a completely different spirit, and they were right to award them the $300k
Quote from: Yawn on May 27, 2013, 02:20:38 PM
A case could be made (and I probably agree) that this group was there to incite a riot. This is the group that lost their lawsuit?
The megaphone was a bit much. The other group was ASSAULTED for their words. If you saw the Arab Christian in the video I posted, he had a completely different spirit, and they were right to award them the $300k
I agree, that is why I wondered if (perhaps) you, Solar, and I were posting about different groups, perhaps even from different years? I am not sure, but this is how I feel about it:
1. While taunting and inciting a group to act may be protected, it is stupid. And reacting in a physical way to words may be understandable human behaviour, but it is not protected.
2. In the case of the peaceful group that was arrested for talking, perhaps the festival should look into a non-publicly owned space for their festival if they do not wish for public interaction.
Quote from: Solar on May 27, 2013, 08:06:42 AM
Regardless, either you back the use of our First, or you allow the enemy to further corrode it's meaning.
This group had every Right to proselytize under 1st Amendment Rights, whether in good taste or not, it's still a Right afforded under the Constitution.
The Scum had no right to get physical because they didn't like the message, that's the law.
Why is this point going over your head?
So, you support the Westboro Baptist Church protesting at soldier's funerals and all of the other sick things they do?
-Darth
Yes. We (Darth and I) were talking OVER each other about two different groups. I don't like these "christians," and I personally don't think the First Amendment protects your "right" to disrupt a public event. Going in as a Christian and
TALKING to Muslims, as in the videos I posted, IS -- 100%.
They are planning to move the festival to a park (private, or public, I don't know) where it can be better controlled. Megaphones and disrupting any public event is wrong.
A few years ago, there was a parade in Cleveland (MLK Day, I think). A white guy drove up and unfurled a Confederate flag, just to piss off the group. A few of the black guys chased him down in their cars and beat him up. The police charged the white guy with inciting a riot. The black guys weren't charged! I don't agree with that, but if that applied there, that's what they should charge these guys with (maybe).
Quote from: JustKari on May 27, 2013, 02:36:49 PM
I agree, that is why I wondered if (perhaps) you, Solar, and I were posting about different groups, perhaps even from different years? I am not sure, but this is how I feel about it:
1. While taunting and inciting a group to act may be protected, it is stupid. And reacting in a physical way to words may be understandable human behaviour, but it is not protecte
2. In the case of the peaceful group that was arrested for talking, perhaps the festival should look into a non-publicly owned space for their festival if they do not wish for public interaction.
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 27, 2013, 02:41:15 PM
So, you support the Westboro Baptist Church protesting at soldier's funerals and all of the other sick things they do?
-Darth
You can not only protect speech that is good and right. If we decide the WBC is vile and should lose their rights, where do we draw the line? We all know what happens when the government begins to restrict freedom because of the "greater good", eventually that greater good gets big enough to bite
you where it counts. While what they preach may be hateful and horrible and completely wrong, we must defend their right to say it lest we be silenced someday.
A megaphone at a private event (a funeral) is a good place to start. Same reason but they are even more disruptive.
Quote from: JustKari on May 27, 2013, 03:14:59 PM
You can not only protect speech that is good and right. If we decide the WBC is vile and should lose their rights, where do we draw the line? We all know what happens when the government begins to restrict freedom because of the "greater good", eventually that greater good gets big enough to bite you where it counts. While what they preach may be hateful and horrible and completely wrong, we must defend their right to say it lest we be silenced someday.
Let me play Devils Advocate, if you'll excuse the expression. :wink:
There are, maybe, 30 members of the WBC who believe that protesting at funerals is a good idea. There are over 300 million other Americans who would never think of doing such a horrendous thing. By any objective standard you might care to employ, protesting at a funeral is a bad thing to do - some would say "evil" thing to do.
Should we not do away with evil and stand up for what is right?
I don't believe our Founders meant for Freedom of Speech (and Freedom of Religion, for that matter) to be an absolute. I believe we not only have a right, but a duty to limit both for the good of society.
As the old saying goes,
You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything!
-Darth
The 10 Amendment were added because the states refused to go along with the Constitution UNTIL these Amendmets were added as a PROMISE that the Federal government would not violate these basic human rights. So no, these rights cannot now have limits as long as they are WORDS and BELIEFS. Disrupting an event isn't covered under the First. You have a right to SPEAK. You don't have a right to force others to LISTEN.
That's where this group, and the Westboro group err.
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 27, 2013, 03:58:15 PM
Let me play Devils Advocate, if you'll excuse the expression. :wink:
There are, maybe, 30 members of the WBC who believe that protesting at funerals is a good idea. There are over 300 million other Americans who would never think of doing such a horrendous thing. By any objective standard you might care to employ, protesting at a funeral is a bad thing to do - some would say "evil" thing to do.
Should we not do away with evil and stand up for what is right?
I don't believe our Founders meant for Freedom of Speech (and Freedom of Religion, for that matter) to be an absolute. I believe we not only have a right, but a duty to limit both for the good of society.
As the old saying goes, You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything!
-Darth
You are setting a precedent. And nice try, I am standing for free speech.
QuoteFreedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away,
the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins.
Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates;
this privilege in all ages has been, and always will be abused. The best of men could not escape the censure and envy of the times they lived in.
Yet this evil is not so great as it may appear at first site.
http://books.google.de/books?id=HptPAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA431&lpg=PA431&dq=Freedom+of+speech+is+a+principal+pillar+of+a+free+government;
+when+this+support+is+taken+away,+the+constitution+of+a+free+society+is+dissolved,+and+tyranny+is+erected+on+its+ruins.&source=bl&ots=
0q9H1vbS9z&sig=JGhD4KSK_PbPldhlNlo1_R78MQI&hl=de&sa=X&ei=hLgfUYWHLtCN4gTSlYCQBw&ved=0CHIQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Freedom%20o
f%20speech%20is%20a%20principal%20pillar%20of%20a%20free%20government%3B%20when%20this%20support%20is%20taken%20away%
2C%20the%20constitution%20of%20a%20free%20society%20is%20dissolved%2C%20and%20tyranny%20is%20erected%20on%20its%20ruins.&f=true (http://books.google.de/books?id=HptPAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA431&lpg=PA431&dq=Freedom+of+speech+is+a+principal+pillar+of+a+free+government;%3Cbr%20/%3E+when+this+support+is+taken+away,+the+constitution+of+a+free+society+is+dissolved,+and+tyranny+is+erected+on+its+ruins.&source=bl&ots=%3Cbr%20/%3E0q9H1vbS9z&sig=JGhD4KSK_PbPldhlNlo1_R78MQI&hl=de&sa=X&ei=hLgfUYWHLtCN4gTSlYCQBw&ved=0CHIQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Freedom%20o%3Cbr%20/%3Ef%20speech%20is%20a%20principal%20pillar%20of%20a%20free%20government%3B%20when%20this%20support%20is%20taken%20away%%3Cbr%20/%3E2C%20the%20constitution%20of%20a%20free%20society%20is%20dissolved%2C%20and%20tyranny%20is%20erected%20on%20its%20ruins.&f=true)
Quote from: JustKari on May 27, 2013, 04:33:05 PM
You are setting a precedent. And nice try, I am standing for free speech.
Then, I should be allowed to yell, "Fire" in a crowded movie theater?
I should be allowed to practice polygamy?
I should be allowed to preach the glories of Uncle Adolph in front of a synagog?
I should be able to protest abortions in front of a "women's health" clinic?
-Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 27, 2013, 02:41:15 PM
So, you support the Westboro Baptist Church protesting at soldier's funerals and all of the other sick things they do?
-Darth
The problem isn't the group, but a failure of laws protecting funerals as a sacred event, one that should be granted some privacy.
Actually it's not so much supporting their right, but my right to intervene on behalf of the family to keep the nuts at bay.
But the bigger question is, are you willing to throw away the First because of people like Westboro?
Sharia Law has arrived in Tennessee--We no longer have a 1at Amendment.
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/tennessee-us-attorney-fbi-to-lecture-americans-to-submit-to-islam/ (http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/tennessee-us-attorney-fbi-to-lecture-americans-to-submit-to-islam/)
That website doesn't look bias or hyperbolic at all.
"Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media." What law is that ?
Quote from: Telmark on May 25, 2013, 04:22:09 AM
Muslims are just a bunch of trouble makers looking to make headlines for themselves in the name of Islam.
This is the truth of the matter regardless of what you think or say.
Common sense should tell you that Muslims continuously make news around the world with their habitual violence (including bombings, public be-headings, and other barbaric acts). Just a glance at the news will prove this on just about any given day.
The fact is that Muslims love violence. This is what their perverted "religion" is all about: violence, violence, and more violence.
Muslims become violent when someone says something they dislike.
Muslims become violent when women attempt to recognize their equal rights has human beings.
Muslims become violent if people attempt to shun their barbaric and violent religion.
Muslims react with violence when their women "allow" themselves to be raped by a male outside of their family (this, in and of itself, might explain exactly why these people are so strange...).
Muslims become violent over any excuse on the planet.
Meanwhile, civilized cultures and religions abandoned such barbaric behavior at the end of the Dark Ages.
Civilized people, cultures, and religions do not react with violence over non-violent verbal actions of others.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
You are absolutely, one hundred percent correct. That so-called religion was based on rape and pillage, beheadings, slavery and has not changed since the glorious seventh century.