Quote:
Originally Posted by clone19  ANYTHING can be taken out of context. Al Qaeda is doing just that. Terrorists are doing just that! I'm not trying to defame anyone, my fellow theists least of all, im just trying to defend my religion from what seems to be a sea of Hijackers.
|
That is a noble goal. I hope it succeeds. It may take decades, and the problem is that it is a normal human reaction for people who would otherwise respect a faith to disrespect a faith when a religion is hijacked by terrorists. Hopefully, something can be done before we get nuked by a “Muslim” terrorist while some Democratic atheist feminist president is on the rag; remember, Democrats are the only people that have ever nuked anyone. I know you may not believe it, but I would rather not see you guys praying toward a glass pit. I still have some hope that we can find some peace, but before we get there I believe Muslim peoples in their lands are going to have to get violent against terrorists and their sponsors.
Palestinians forming a unity government with Hamas, like the domestic enemy Carter wants, is never going to get peace.
Hopefully you will not stop reading with this paragraph; try not to get insulted. I do not want this country to ever get a majority of Muslims, I prefer my religion or even a lack of one in government (I can always pray in my closet), as we have had enough problems with “Christians” wearing sheets in violation of clear English translations of verses in the Bible that should stop them; call me a bigot, as I don‘t care. I would rather us not have factions, especially a “Muslim” one that says, “Praise be to Allah, who revealed the Book, controls the clouds, defeats factionalism,” because they go boom:
“The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.
All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.” (Washington's Farewell Address 1796)
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm
You are right, “ANYTHING can be taken out of context,” and that is why I was asking the “Muslim” Taliban defender to explain things on August 30, 2001:
Quote:
Also if I see an article about Christians being put on trial in a certain country for just simply spreading the word, carrying out their religion, and the accusers themselves make no accusation of the Christians using force, oppression or persecution I will have to look in the Koran to see what it says about forcing religion on others. I would like to know where in the Koran it says that Christians can’t practice their religion, which requires the spreading (not by force) of the word, because if Islam is afraid of the Christian word then Islam is insecure in it‘s beliefs? By understanding the word I can know whether the Islamic country allegedly doing the persecution is following their religion, which can’t be a true religion if it must be forced (a faith is not a faith if it must be forced), and whether those being persecuted were violating their social contract, and then can judge how my country should respond if it‘s citizens are involved.
This “compulsion” word may not be translating into English properly, I consider it as “force” and the link above is a site where it is also discussed and it seems from other parts of the Koran as I will quote below that there appears to be the force of a threat to the belief, although I may be misinterpreting and taking out of context, which can happen in my faith. It certainly makes no since to me, if a religion is true there would be no need to force it, because if we don’t have free will then no one can turn away from the god, but if we do have free will then we can if we choose, but if we must be forced to believe in the god then we have no free will and the god is being ridiculous by wasting our time with free will. I guess that must make no since to you either? I’ll have to think on that one.
|
{bold emphasis added}
The Taliban defender’s subsequent explanation of the no compulsion in religion verse was incompatible with our Constitution, so in my opinion such a person should not be allowed citizenship or even the right to visit. {Sorry, the web page the explanation was on was erased by the webmaster without warning, before I could copy it.} It is almost impossible to see us asking that question of every potential citizen, and it would be a shame to have to do it.
You answered the question thusly:
Quote:
"there is no compulsion in religion" - that basically sums up my argument. There is NO COMPULSION in religion, phyiscal or otherwise. ANY act of violence, or any other kind of 'compulsion' cannot be associated in any way with religion. You cannot force someone to accept Islam. Waging war is allowed by Islam, but it cannot be for any religious reason. Muslims are allowed to wage war only when their is a legitimate threat.
Now Al Qaeda will spin the Quran in a different way. When you come right down to it, everything depends on your interpretation.
|
Our security as a nation depends upon knowing how someone interprets their religion, and we need the ability to bring our children up as we would have them go, especially when our own domestic enemies consider that terrorism is not an enemy:
Quote:
Sunday, March 25, 2007:
“The ‘war on terror‘ has created a culture of fear in America. The Bush administration's elevation of these three words into a national mantra since the horrific events of 9/11 has had a pernicious impact on American democracy, on America's psyche and on U.S. standing in the world. Using this phrase has actually undermined our ability to effectively confront the real challenges we face from fanatics who may use terrorism against us.
The damage these three words have done -- a classic self-inflicted wound -- is infinitely greater than any wild dreams entertained by the fanatical perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks when they were plotting against us in distant Afghan caves. The phrase itself is meaningless. It defines neither a geographic context nor our presumed enemies. Terrorism is not an enemy but a technique of warfare -- political intimidation through the killing of unarmed non-combatants.” (Zbigniew Brzezinski) {bold emphasis mine}
Terrorized by 'War on Terror' - washingtonpost.com.
|
You know our own response to terrorism domestically has not been all that great, and you wonder why we still have terrorist groups. Just look at the quote above of the Democrat from the Carter Administration again, and remember the Southern Democrats. Like Carter Southern Democrats became racially progressive, and I know “Republicans” that switched parties just to keep getting elected (they are snakes in the grass). If terrorism is not an enemy, and the wrong kind of morality gets elected, Mecca could become a glass pit with a civilian airliner painted to look like Air France; just a “technique of warfare,” to get two birds with one stone:
Air France is so nice.
“Glory be to the Bomb, and to the Holy Fallout. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. World without end. Amen.”
{Sorry, I just love that picture. I hope I didn‘t give the domestic enemies any ideas. I think, the French are our friends again.}
http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/kkk.htm
The Klan attacked our property when I was doorknob high because my parents let it be known that they would not discriminate against blacks. Most of it was garbage dumped in the engine compartment of the car, pushing it down the street, minor stuff like that…then one day I woke up one morning and my parents were running around like chickens with their heads cut off, and wouldn‘t let me go outside. I saw the burn spot later.
The West has had their problems too, for a very long time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Divine_Comedy
Let’s just hope that it doesn’t take too long for the 1.2 billion Muslims to catch the Al Quacka leaders. Having seen verses that seem to say Muslims can‘t wage war against Muslims, I would rather Muslims catch Al Quacka. The terrorist "J.B." Stoner turned himself in, after walking around for weeks looking like Colonel Sanders; I don’t expect the Al Quacka leaders to do that. If our troops did catch or kill the Al Quacka leaders (which is highly unlikely), someone would call them “martyrs” and it would do nothing toward finding common ground and respect.
Re: Clone19; Islam, a religion of peace? 
Linear Mode
Main
Extras
