Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 51

Thread: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by The Rev Kros View Post

    According to this article, Herman Cain Says U.S. Communities 'Have the Right' to Ban Mosques - FoxNews.com, his reasoning is that Islam is not just a religion. It is a religion with built in Shariah law.

    I may not agree with him here, but I fail to see how it would violate the first amendment. The right to free speech and assembly does not also mean you can erect a building where you please. Communities do control zoning. They should be able to change the zoning of the particular site.
    Zoning is one thing, refusing a particular religion from constructing a house of worship in an area zoned for churches is another.

  2. #32
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Wait a minute....

    Any community has the right to block any construction what so ever, if it does not live up to safety standards, local planning laws and so on. It does not matter if it is a freaking church or mosque, if the local planning laws state no building must be higher than 2 stories, then throwing up a 4 story church tower or minaret is illegal period and hence the community can stop that part of the construction. If the religious institution buys a piece of land that is zoned as industrial, then it is not allowed to build its building there unless it is some sort of industrial building.... that is the law.

    Did Cain say anything about restricting the size of a building or did he say something about restricting the building of mosques period? For some reason I believe he thinks construction of it should be blocked even if it was just one story high,




    Now I can agree on the idea that a community can not ban a building just because it is a church or mosque or whatever religious building.. that is wrong and illegal.

    But to have an rule that states "No community has the right to block the construction of any religious building" is idiotic and frankly spits in the face of the rule of law and puts religion ABOVE the law, which is certainly not what you meant.... right?
    No community can ban religious buildings because it blatantly spits in the face of the US constitution. That is why I mean.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post

    Most of these people booing Cain have the same attitude he has but regarding the 2nd amendment.They have no room to bitch that Cain wants to restrict the building of mosques.
    Exactly what is the connection between the thread topic and the Second Amendment?

  4. #34
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    Exactly what is the connection between the thread topic and the Second Amendment?
    If you support the infringement or restriction of one right that explicitly says shall not infringe then you have no room what so ever regarding another right that basically says the government shall not restrict or infringe on.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  5. #35
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,089

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    No community can ban religious buildings because it blatantly spits in the face of the US constitution. That is why I mean.
    So if the local zoning law says no building higher than 2 stories and someone wants to build a 4 story church, then they should be allowed to break the law just because it is a religious building?
    PeteEU

  6. #36
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    So if the local zoning law says no building higher than 2 stories and someone wants to build a 4 story church, then they should be allowed to break the law just because it is a religious building?
    Reasonable zoning laws are ok. There are other factors too, codes and such for buildings. If the mosque or church satisfies these requirements, they should be allowed to build. You can't justly stop the construction of a religious building based solely on the type of religion it represents.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #37
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,089

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Reasonable zoning laws are ok. There are other factors too, codes and such for buildings. If the mosque or church satisfies these requirements, they should be allowed to build. You can't justly stop the construction of a religious building based solely on the type of religion it represents.
    I fully agree with what you wrote.

    And that is what I am trying to get out of jamesrage.. but all he has stated so far is that any religious building should be allowed to be built.... but what if the building breaks the law?
    PeteEU

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post

    If you support the infringement or restriction of one right that explicitly says shall not infringe then you have no room what so ever regarding another right that basically says the government shall not restrict or infringe on.
    I think a key difference lies in those who disagree with Cain on First Amendment rights do so because what he is saying clearly goes against this...

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

    ...whereas those against the Second Amendment voice the complaint that it is a single comma delimited sentence which gives the people the right to bear arms for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated militia...

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  9. #39
    Advisor Polotick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    08-17-11 @ 10:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    374

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    I think a key difference lies in those who disagree with Cain on First Amendment rights do so because what he is saying clearly goes against this...

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

    ...whereas those against the Second Amendment voice the complaint that it is a single comma delimited sentence which gives the people the right to bear arms for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated militia...

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    Let's look at exactly militia meant when that was written.

    The history of militia in the United States dates from the colonial era, such as in the American Revolutionary War.[38] Based on the British system, colonial militias were drawn from the body of adult male citizens of a community, town, or local region. Because there were usually few British regulars garrisoned in North America, colonial militia served a vital role in local conflicts, particularly in the French and Indian Wars. Before shooting began in the American War of Independence, American revolutionaries took control of the militia system, reinvigorating training and excluding men with Loyalist inclinations.[39] Regulation of the militia was codified by the Second Continental Congress with the Articles of Confederation. The revolutionaries also created a full-time regular army—the Continental Army—but because of manpower shortages the militia provided short-term support to the regulars in the field throughout the war.

    In colonial era Anglo-American usage, militia service was distinguished from military service in that the latter was normally a commitment for a fixed period of time of at least a year, for a salary, whereas militia was only to meet a threat, or prepare to meet a threat, for periods of time expected to be short. Militia persons were normally expected to provide their own weapons, equipment, or supplies, although they may later be compensated for losses or expenditures.[40]

    So without an armed population there would have been no militias. The Founders knew exactly what they were saying.

  10. #40
    Advisor SlackMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Last Seen
    02-02-12 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    598

    Re: Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    If you support the infringement or restriction of one right that explicitly says shall not infringe then you have no room what so ever regarding another right that basically says the government shall not restrict or infringe on.
    I fail to see the hypocrisy in supporting gun restrictions and supporting the first amendment.

    The second amendment says that people will have the right to bear arms, not ANY KIND of arm.

    Would it be okay for a private citizen to have a tomahawk missile? What about weapons grade plutonium?

    There's a sliding scale. "Arms" could mean anything from slingshot to nuclear weapon. I think most people only disagree on what kinds of weapons and ammo private citizens can own and what they have to go through to get them.

    Even if someone was for abolishing the second amendment, they can still be in favor of free speech.

    Back to the topic at hand though... If there is no secular reason for banning the building of a church, then one can only assume that the reason is due to religious bias/hate/bigotry.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •