• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kennesaw City Council rejects mosque proposal

No. I'm for the right of communities to suppress practices that go against their social system, subject to the higher law of God. Religious freedom is a bad principle.



I'm not sure what you're going on about.

USA is not a theocracy.

Move to Saudia Arabia...they do theocracy well.
 
USA is not a theocracy.

Move to Saudia Arabia...they do theocracy well.

Saudi Arabia is not a theocracy. Nor do I support theocracy. Saudi Arabia is a confessional state, which is as it should be, but not confessing Islam.
 
No one cares about your sky dad, dude. You want to make out with Jesus, do it in your own time.
 
No one cares about your sky dad, dude. You want to make out with Jesus, do it in your own time.

Congratulations, you've managed to be a worse poster than the person you're insulting.
 
If the good people of Kennasaw wish to exclude Islamic worship, that is their right.

I don't think you're familiar with this document we call the United States Constitution.
 
No, it is not

Yes it is.

I don't think you're familiar with this document we call the United States Constitution.

I'm familiar with it. I'd point out it actually doesn't say anything like that a local government should treat all religions equally, but even if it did, the principles of sound government should prevail over it.
 
Yes it is.



I'm familiar with it. I'd point out it actually doesn't say anything like that a local government should treat all religions equally, but even if it did, the principles of sound government should prevail over it.
lmfao
 
This is an infringement on religious freedom. I don't see a rational reason why their request should be denied given the information presented.

On the surface I would agree with those who view the rejection as counter to religious freedom. But let me remind the liberals how frequently they talk about the constitution being obsolete in the 21st century. In other words don't tread on the freedoms I like, just those that are inconvenient.
 
The people express concern over Sharia Law being established in their neighborhood. Even you would bitch about that.

Georgia town bans mosque in controversial vote


This is still another instance that shows us those who hate and fear the 'others' because they believe they know all that is necessary about those 'others'. An extremely observant Muslim doesn't need a mosque in which to pray, nor does that person need an imam to follow Shariah law. As with Christianity there are many sects within Islam, ranging from the extremists of al Qaeda and ISIL to the far more moderate Nizari Ismaili sect led by the Aga Khan. It is the extremists and their atrocities who get all the publicity but the vast majority of Muslims are like the vast majority of Christians.

A bit off topic but an illustration of the political scene in Kennesaw Georgia is the town ordinance that was passed a few years ago: Georgia Town's New Law Says You Must Have a Gun - ABC News
 
On the surface I would agree with those who view the rejection as counter to religious freedom. But let me remind the liberals how frequently they talk about the constitution being obsolete in the 21st century. In other words don't tread on the freedoms I like, just those that are inconvenient.

For some reason a bit of Googling brings up a couple of conservative efforts to repeal Amendments they don't care for

Changing the 14th Amendment 'worth considering' Boehner says

Rethinking the 17th Amendment
A number of Republican politicians and conservative commentators are calling for repeal of the 17th Amendment. Ratified in 1913, it gave voters the power to elect U.S. senators directly.
 
Yes it is.



I'm familiar with it. I'd point out it actually doesn't say anything like that a local government should treat all religions equally, but even if it did, the principles of sound government should prevail over it.

You might wish to do a bit of reading about "religious freedom" cases decided by the SCOTUS, perhaps the most relevant to your claim would be City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997)
Congress' power under § 5, however, extends only to "enforc[ing]" the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court has described this power as "remedial." The design of the Amendment and the text of § 5 are inconsistent with the suggestion that Congress has the power to decree the substance of the Fourteenth Amendment's restrictions on the States. Legislation which alters the meaning of the Free Exercise Clause cannot be said to be enforcing the Clause. Congress does not enforce a constitutional right by changing what the right is. It has been given the power "to enforce," not the power to determine what constitutes a constitutional violation. Were it not so, what Congress would be enforcing would no longer be, in any meaningful sense, the "provisions of [the Fourteenth Amendment]."
 
You might wish to do a bit of reading about "religious freedom" cases decided by the SCOTUS, perhaps the most relevant to your claim would be City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997)

That X is the current law here does not make X right.
 
I guess in the town center there is also no day care where parents are in and out at all hours, no tobacco or liquor stores where people are in and out all day, no restaurants where you get rushes multiples times during the day, or really any kind of business that might expect people coming and going and might disturb the silent other businesses who have no customers.

Not to mention that most moslems dont make all five prayer times on Friday, let alone other days of the week.

Unless the mosque has an espescially devout congregation, it is going to be a mix of active and the "easter and christmas", "buried and married" types- just like many churches are. In short, the odds of there being a prayer rush five times daily are very slim.

I truly sympathize with these moslems. I went through the same experience with a church in California. Wealthy liberals used every possible pretense not to give a building permit (environmental "impacts" - of course nearby homes were totally green, traffic flow "problems", "rushes" etc.)

Like the moslems, our first amendment rights got buried under a blizzard of paper for years.
 
This is still another instance that shows us those who hate and fear the 'others' because they believe they know all that is necessary about those 'others'. An extremely observant Muslim doesn't need a mosque in which to pray, nor does that person need an imam to follow Shariah law. As with Christianity there are many sects within Islam, ranging from the extremists of al Qaeda and ISIL to the far more moderate Nizari Ismaili sect led by the Aga Khan. It is the extremists and their atrocities who get all the publicity but the vast majority of Muslims are like the vast majority of Christians.

A bit off topic but an illustration of the political scene in Kennesaw Georgia is the town ordinance that was passed a few years ago: Georgia Town's New Law Says You Must Have a Gun - ABC News

These others have a bad track record all the way back to the creation of this country and beyond. If the good citizens feel safer not having a mosque in their community
and everyone owning a gun, power to them.
 
I don't think you're familiar with this document we call the United States Constitution.

You need to understand that the constitution only restricts the activities of the federal government. State and local constitutions would do the same for state and local governments. You may want to read those constitutions to determine whether or not the people in Kennesaw are doing something constitutional. Personally I have no idea. I just know that the U.S. constitution has nothing to do with the issue.
 
You need to understand that the constitution only restricts the activities of the federal government. State and local constitutions would do the same for state and local governments. You may want to read those constitutions to determine whether or not the people in Kennesaw are doing something constitutional. Personally I have no idea. I just know that the U.S. constitution has nothing to do with the issue.

Not correct. This is how you wish it was, not how it is.

Additionally, this action violates the Georgia State Constitution as well.

http://sos.ga.gov/admin/files/Constitution_2013_Final_Printed.pdf
 
Back
Top Bottom