Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 183

Thread: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

  1. #171
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Since the property is legally purchased and within all zoning and city laws, then you are most certainly infringing upon freedom of religion and property rights.
    There is no right to build whatever you want, whenever you want, at any time that you want.

    The fact that you don't see this speaks volumes.
    Yes, that I understand the law and you don't.

    You claim society with it's values can infringe upon the rights of others. Yet when someone gave you an example of this you said "Nu uh...that's not what I meant".
    No I didn't. That's just more of your deranged ranting.

    Trying to dodge the fact that it was exactly your argument used in a different setting.
    No, it was not the same argument. Try reading.

    So what we have here is an endorsement to infringe upon the rights of someone because you don't like the color of their jib.
    There is no right to build whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want. No rights are being infringed upon.

    Plenty of people are insensitive jerks. Hell, I think that's the requirement to live in New York City. There's no right to not be offended, there is right to religion and property.
    They can keep their property and their religion. No one is infringing upon that. There is no right to build whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want.

    And apparently you needed the refresh, because you talk about how Muslims apparently declared war on this country and toppled two towers.
    I never said "muslims". I said a sect of Muslims. Try actually ****ing reading once in a while.

    Remember that?
    No, because it never happened.

    So you try to dismiss 9/11 in that latest post of yours, but evoked it earlier and seem now to want to distance yourself from that.
    Again, try to ****ing read once in a while. I have not distanced myself at all from my discussion of 9-11. In fact, it is central to my argument.

    Interesting. So you have a claim that Muslims had declared war somehow,
    No, try reading. I claimed a sect declared war in the name of Islam. There is a difference.

    while blacks did not. Yet there was death and violence perpetuated partly by the African-American community against others in many instances to incited fear which happened before, during, and after the Civil Rights movement (of course, white folk had done the same for far longer). But they didn't declare war? Why cause a few black people didn't fly a plane into a building? That's what it takes? Some Muslims flew a plane into our building and accidentally knocked it down, so Muslims declared war on us? And that's why you're able to infringe upon their rights in this case but you would not agree you could do the same with black people?
    I don't what ****ing planet you are from, but I never made any such claims except the part where blacks didn't declare war. I don't know whats so difficult for you to understand about the difference between isolated violence incited by groups of people and a massive attack in the middle of our financial hub with our own planes, while simultaneous attacks hit the pentagon and attempted to hit the white house.

    Actually, I do understand why you can't see the difference. Nevermind.

    Your argument is incoherent and does not stand up to rational questions or argument.
    No, your perception is deranged and warped.

    It's set very flimsily on a certain set of conditions which cannot be used universally, and thus is why the argument is incoherent and illogical.
    No, your perceptions are warped and try to make certain conditions fit where they do not. They do not take into account the differences in historical contexts you keep trying to use and try to fit a square peg in a round hole. It's stupidity of the highest order dressed up as objectivity when it simply is not.

    Just because a community may not like certain folk does not mean that you can legitimately or justly infringe upon their rights when they have not infringed upon the rights of others. And that's the bottom line. Take it or leave it, but it's a fundamental of America.
    There is no right to build what you want, whenever you want, wherever you want. No rights are being infringed upon. And further, I can't believe I am having to repeat myself for probably the 10th time, I AM NOT ****ING ADVOCATING HAVING THE GOVERNMENT STEP IN AND STOP THESE PEOPLE. I don't know how much more ****ing clear I need to make it. And no, accepting insult and salt on a wound is not a fundament of America.

    You don't hate America.....do you?
    Oh jesus ****ing christ. No, what I hate is PC pansies who will accept an insult against this country just to feign some moral and ethical superiority to deflect from their spineless failure to acknowledge the insult.

  2. #172
    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: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    There is no right to build whatever you want, whenever you want, at any time that you want.
    Which is why there are zoning laws and such, of which they have passed. Meaning they are well within their rights to build the building. I don't know what's so tough about understanding this. Yes, there are limits on what and where you can build, but they are within those limits. As such, they are free to use their property in that manner.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Yes, that I understand the law and you don't.
    No, it's that you apparently think you can infringe upon the rights of others so long as it fits your world view and that you have little concern for the actual rights of the individual.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    No I didn't. That's just more of your deranged ranting.
    This is all you ever have. You can't address points, you must just use insulting deflection tactics to avoid reality. But in reality you have said that society can infringe upon rights if it's within their values, but when shown a particular usage of that argument you had to run and stumble and try to find a reason why it wasn't the case. It's essentially "nu-uh". If you don't like it, don't do the behavior. But sitting there and just saying "this is your deranged ranting" is intellectually weak and nothing more than a pathetic attempt to deflect away.

    [QUOTE=jallman;1058872130]No, it was not the same argument. Try reading.[/qoute]

    In fact it is the same argument, you should try thinking.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    There is no right to build whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want. No rights are being infringed upon.
    Rights are being infringed upon because the owners of the property have met all requirements for the building. It's their property, they met zoning laws, etc. they are free to build it. Stopping them when they have legitimately and legally purchased the property and permits and met the requirements is an infringement upon their property rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    They can keep their property and their religion. No one is infringing upon that. There is no right to build whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want.
    You keep saying this with no understanding of what you are saying. It's their property, if someone owns property and meets all the legal requirements for a structure; then it is their right as property owner to be able to put that structure on their property. You have no legitimate or just cause to stop it. It's their right as it is their property and they have met all legal requirements.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I never said "muslims". I said a sect of Muslims. Try actually ****ing reading once in a while.
    You had said "not these particular muslims" referring to the individuals. Not "this sect of muslims". You should follow your own advice.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    No, because it never happened.
    No? you didn't say "One, black people never declared war on this country and toppled two towers with our own planes." That's not a reference to 9/11? Or are you just being a liar now and trying to deflect away? Black people didn't declare war on this country...then who did? It's different because black people didn't declare war, that means that for your insistence that these Muslims shouldn't be allowed to build a building even though they are well within their rights to do so and have legally purchased the land and met all requirements is based on that difference. So if black people didn't declare war, and that's the difference in this case between black people and Muslims...that Muslims declared war. You know for all your bitching about reading, you sure as hell do a poor job with English comprehension. Maybe you should quit trying to throw those stones when you're standing so close to your glass house.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Again, try to ****ing read once in a while. I have not distanced myself at all from my discussion of 9-11. In fact, it is central to my argument.
    Oh? So you didn't say "Secondly, whether the building was brought down or not is beside the point. People were killed and there have been other terrorist attacks where people were killed on US soil. We have our own fair share of homegrown terrorists." This isn't saying that the attack was central to your argument. In fact, this is a statement distancing your argument from 9/11. So what is it. I mean if you're going to contradict yourself ever other post, this is going to become impossible to have a rational and logical argument. For all your bitching about reading, it's rather ironic that you don't seem to read your own arguments.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    No, try reading. I claimed a sect declared war in the name of Islam. There is a difference.
    No you didn't. What you've done is argue that the society which has values against the establishment of a mosque should be allowed to legally enforce that "value" against the rights of others. And that this is a different situation from race because black people didn't declare war on America. That even those these particular Muslims were not part of that group, it doesn't factor in because as a whole Muslims apparently declared war on us. Though I have not seen that official declaration. But whatever. That's what you've said, there was now "sect" in any of that. Why don't you try reading your own arguments. You're looking the part of the fool currently.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I don't what ****ing planet you are from, but I never made any such claims except the part where blacks didn't declare war. I don't know whats so difficult for you to understand about the difference between isolated violence incited by groups of people and a massive attack in the middle of our financial hub with our own planes, while simultaneous attacks hit the pentagon and attempted to hit the white house.

    Actually, I do understand why you can't see the difference. Nevermind.
    You most certainly imply it with your rhetoric. You can run as much as you can from what you said, but you're either lying or are ignorant on the English language to such a scale as you don't know what it was that you actually wrote. But you made a difference between folk running these Muslims out of town vs. folk running black people out of town because black people didn't declare war on America, which implies that Muslims did. And nowhere did you use sect, nowhere did you make the distinctions you are now trying to insert into your argument. So why don't you sit down and write out coherently your argument in such a way as to make your rhetoric and position clear? Can you do that? Or are you going to use another deflection argument?

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    No, your perception is deranged and warped.
    Deflection is the sign of a weak mind

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    No, your perceptions are warped and try to make certain conditions fit where they do not. They do not take into account the differences in historical contexts you keep trying to use and try to fit a square peg in a round hole. It's stupidity of the highest order dressed up as objectivity when it simply is not.
    Oh, but that I did. And this deflection doesn't do anything for your argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    There is no right to build what you want, whenever you want, wherever you want. No rights are being infringed upon. And further, I can't believe I am having to repeat myself for probably the 10th time, I AM NOT ****ING ADVOCATING HAVING THE GOVERNMENT STEP IN AND STOP THESE PEOPLE. I don't know how much more ****ing clear I need to make it. And no, accepting insult and salt on a wound is not a fundament of America.
    You can say you don't advocate it, but when your arguments advocate it there isn't much else to say. You keep saying that the society has legitimate ability to stop a person from exercising their rights should that exercise be counter to the values of the society. "Societal cohesion" I believe you called it. And how is that done? That is accomplished through government force. Either through laws or the court systems; that's the only way to do it. So in short, you are saying that society has the power to use government to infringe upon rights should the exercise of those rights be counter to its "values"

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Oh jesus ****ing christ. No, what I hate is PC pansies who will accept an insult against this country just to feign some moral and ethical superiority to deflect from their spineless failure to acknowledge the insult.
    And what I hate is prejudice and intolerance used against the rights and liberties of the individual.
    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."

  3. #173
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    There is no right to build whatever you want, whenever you want, at any time that you want.
    If the zoning permits a religious church to be built and the permit is approved for that, it is in fact against the consitution to not allow it simply because they are Muslims and you don't like their religion.

  4. #174
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Blah blah blah, insert more uninformed, illiterate deranged ranting here, blah blah blah.

  5. #175
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    If the zoning permits a religious church to be built and the permit is approved for that, it is in fact against the consitution to not allow it simply because they are Muslims and you don't like their religion.
    It has nothing to do with not liking their religion. Also, zoning laws are changed all the time to block buildings that the community doesn't want.

  6. #176
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Would you be cool with the KKK building a monument to fallen Klansmen, a few blocks from the 16th Street Church in Brimingham?
    You mean the Robert Byrd Memorial?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  7. #177
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    You know, actually, Ikari...here's the deal. I am just gonna leave you to it. You are normally a reasonable and interesting poster but occasionally you devolve into what we're seeing right here. I don't know what causes it and I don't rightly care, to be honest. But it's clear to me and anyone reading this thread that you are on a mission to twist, misrepresent, and outright lie about what's been posted...creating your own arguments to attack instead of the ones actually being presented. It's obvious that you don't need an opponent to discuss this issue with because you are quite capable of fabricating both sides of the debate all by your lonesome. And when you get bored with that, you hurl insults and unfounded charges all rising from the fantasies you create about the arguments that were never made.

    And the sad thing is, I've allowed you to pull me down into it again despite knowing better than to deal with you when you devolve to this pitiful state. So, if you want to have a reasonable discussion about this at some point when you've climbed up out of this slavering mess you've made of yourself in this thread, I'll be happy to do so then. But I will not sit here and have you lie and misrepresent what I have stated, call me a fascist/bigot or prejudiced when I have given no indication of that, or continue to attribute arguments to me that I have not made at all despite it having been pointed out to you by others that I wasn't making those arguments. Get your mind right, get your thoughts together, read the thread again and let me know if you want to discuss it rationally. Until then, I am cleaning myself of this mess. I hope you climb out of this gutter you dragged us to wallow in, too.
    Last edited by jallman; 07-22-10 at 03:53 PM.

  8. #178
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    It has nothing to do with not liking their religion. Also, zoning laws are changed all the time to block buildings that the community doesn't want.
    Sure it does have something to do with hating the religion. There are people here who have said they would allow any other religious building to be built if it were Christians, Catholics, buddists, but because it is Muslim they are against it.

    Sorry but yes, that is indeed an infringement on first amendment rights to allow another religion to build but not allow Muslims to build.

  9. #179
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Sure it does have something to do with hating the religion.
    Well if you can show me where I have made anything close to a disparaging comment about Islam during the course of this conversation, then we have something to discuss. Otherwise, I can simply dismiss your complaint as you having not read the thread and trying to create an argument to challenge rather than the ones actually presented.

  10. #180
    Wrinkly member
    Manc Skipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Southern England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    23,239

    Re: Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

    "The trouble with Twitter, the instantness of it – too many twits might make a twat." David Cameron UK PM.
    Don't work out, work in.

    Never eat anything that's served in a bucket.

Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 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
  •