• 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

Grim17 said:
Denying them to lease a building for a mosque, is not denying them the right to practice their religion.

Is that better?
Click to expand...

It isn't? Preventing a religious group from opening a meeting place where the adherents can meet to share their beliefs "is not denying them the right to practice their religion"? A strange definition you have there of religion
 
Somerville said:
It isn't? Preventing a religious group from opening a meeting place where the adherents can meet to share their beliefs "is not denying them the right to practice their religion"? A strange definition you have there of religion
Click to expand...

Of course it isn't. Nobody is preventing them from meeting at a house, a park, a bar or a hotel conference room.
 
Doppelgangirl said:
Yet I don't see you having the same issue with other religious establishments.

Why? Because you "agree" with them?

Are you not concerned that by treating others this way, you invite that same treatment yourself? From others that don't agree with your faith?
Click to expand...

No. I advocate the right of communities to suppress false religions. That in no way encourages the suppression of the true religion, any more than making it illegal to poison people encourages making it illegal not to poison people.
 
WCH said:
This image probably continues in people's nightmares....reason enough, IMO

september-9-11-attacks-anniversary-ground-zero-world-trade-center-pentagon-flight-93-second-airplane-wtc_39997_600x450.jpg
Click to expand...

Reason enough... controlled demolition?
 
Paleocon said:
No. I advocate the right of communities to suppress false religions. That in no way encourages the suppression of the true religion, any more than making it illegal to poison people encourages making it illegal not to poison people.
Click to expand...

So all it takes is to get a few people of like mind together to decide what is a real religion and what is a false religion? Interesting take on justifying oppression.
 
digsbe said:
This is an infringement on religious freedom. I don't see a rational reason why their request should be denied given the information presented.
Click to expand...

Agreed, a Christian was allowed to do the same thing. Those people are bigots.
 
It's fun to watch self proclaimed atheists who spend their time trolling Christians defend Islam in today's climate as though freedom of religion really means anything to them to begin with.
 
Somerville said:
It isn't? Preventing a religious group from opening a meeting place where the adherents can meet to share their beliefs "is not denying them the right to practice their religion"? A strange definition you have there of religion
Click to expand...

Don't misunderstand me... I think it's a dumbass move on their part to deny them the lease, but it doesn't violate their constitutional right to worship the god of their choice.

Like I said, if the town tries to make Islamic beliefs illegal, then get back to me.

btw, I really love it when socialists like yourself defend Muslims, because it proves true exactly what I have believed for a long time.. That the distain harbored by both socialists and those on the far left isn't toward religion in general, it's a hatred that's focused exclusively on Christianity.
 
Bodhisattva said:
So all it takes is to get a few people of like mind together to decide what is a real religion and what is a false religion? Interesting take on justifying oppression.
Click to expand...

No. It takes a lawful government to decide to what extent false religions should be repressed.
 
Grim17 said:
Don't misunderstand me... I think it's a dumbass move on their part to deny them the lease, but it doesn't violate their constitutional right to worship the god of their choice.

Like I said, if the town tries to make Islamic beliefs illegal, then get back to me.

btw, I really love it when socialists like yourself defend Muslims, because it proves true exactly what I have believed for a long time.. That the distain harbored by both socialists and those on the far left isn't toward religion in general, it's a hatred that's focused exclusively on Christianity.
Click to expand...

Yep, defending the right of one group to gather in worship must mean I really really hate some other group. What's that old saying about making assumptions?

The funny part for those of us on the outside is the similarity of positions held by fundamentalists of Muslim and Christian stripe, yet the two claim they are so different.

Anti-womens rights: Check

Anti "sodomy": Check

Anti abortion: Check

Patriarchal dominance: Check

Anti pornography: Check

I'm sure there are more that others can add to the list
 
WCH said:
As they have found in other countries, some of these mosques are nothing but breeding ground for terrorists.

If the people thought that was a possiblity, why let them in?
Click to expand...

D'ya think maybe meetings held in barns and homes might be richer breeding grounds? Is your America a place where people aren't free to worship according to their beliefs?
 
Paleocon said:
No. I advocate the right of communities to suppress false religions. That in no way encourages the suppression of the true religion, any more than making it illegal to poison people encourages making it illegal not to poison people.
Click to expand...

Do you advocate the right of government to decide what is a false and what a true religion? Damn, you really are conservative.
 
Grand Mal said:
Do you advocate the right of government to decide what is a false and what a true religion? Damn, you really are conservative.
Click to expand...

No. God already revealed which religion is true, so the government has discretion to decide to what degree false religions will be suppressed.
 
Roadvirus said:
Can't blame people for not wanting a potential Jihadist recruiting center in their city.
Click to expand...

Sure you can, such people are un-American with their disregard for our constitutional right to freedom of religion and to be considered innocent unless found guilty of a crime after a fair trial. They are stupidly bigoted and/or ignorant if they think all two billion of the world's Muslims are a threat.
 
Paleocon said:
No. God already revealed which religion is true, so the government has discretion to decide to what degree false religions will be suppressed.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true conservative. Being liberal, I want the government out of my life and everyone else's as much as it can be, but vive la difference.
 
clownboy said:
Never heard the call to prayer broadcast have you. It's not the same as street noise.
Click to expand...

Reasonable, equally applied restrictions on the sound level and times of day allowed for bell ringing and calls to prayer are legitimate and constitutional.
 
Paleocon said:
No. God already revealed which religion is true, so the government has discretion to decide to what degree false religions will be suppressed.
Click to expand...

The one true religion???

I didn't get the memo...:roll:

Don't you believe in freedom of religion? Make no mistake... The religion those fallible, very human folks in your town might suppress is your very own.

Then what?
 
Doppelgangirl said:
The one true religion???

I didn't get the memo...:roll:
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm guessing you got the memo but just won't accept it.

Don't you believe in freedom of religion?
Click to expand...

No, why would I believe in such a ridiculous idea? Different ways of doing things should only be treated equally if they are in fact equal. The belief in religious freedom proceeds from the implicit idea that they are equal.

Make no mistake... The religion those fallible, very human folks in your town might suppress is your very own.
Click to expand...

All the more reason for the government to officially recognize the true religion as such, so that local people in error won't be able to do that.

Then what?
Click to expand...

Then I continue observing the true religion, albeit likely clandestinely.
 
youngturk said:
Frankly, it all starts with a mosque.

10-15 years ago Turkish secularists were accused of being intolerant bigots.Now we came to a point where we have mandatory religion classes for 4 year-old kids, segregation in schools, more than 20 mosques in a single neighborhood. I'm sorry but this is the truth.Their demands and self-victimization never end.
Click to expand...

It doesn't start with mosques, the USA has had some for decades. It starts with government's failure to protect everyone's freedom of religion and the violation of the principal of secular and religiously neutral government.

That just points out important it is to keep government secular and religions as free as possible. However, there need to be limits to the power of any religion, faction or interest group, which is why religions should not be free to take complete control of the government, even if their followers are the majority. Protecting the freedom of all religions requires preventing one (or more] religion from controlling schools or other governmental functions.

Many (but not most] Christians in the USA also claim to be victims of intolerant secularist bigots when they try to seize control of the government also. Until Supreme Court decisions effectively began enforcement of our first amendment right to freedom of religion for the first time in the early 1960s, the USA also had mandatory religious instruction, prayer and gender segregation in public schools.
 
Last edited:
Hard Truth said:
Reasonable, equally applied restrictions on the sound level and times of day allowed for bell ringing and calls to prayer are legitimate and constitutional.
Click to expand...

I'm a military brat, and spent most of high school in a Muslim country. The call to prayer, after awhile, became like any other "normal" day-to-day, white-type noise. Assuming you could hear it *over* the normal hustle and bustle.

I would be very surprised if they were trying to do the public, 5x prayer call at all in Kennesaw.

That being said... I can understand the noise concern, especially for those who haven't experienced it.

Although I got used to it for the most part, that freakin' call did wake me a lot at the butt crack of dawn on weekends! At the age of 16, that was a giant party foul. :mrgreen:
 
Grim17 said:
Don't misunderstand me... I think it's a dumbass move on their part to deny them the lease, but it doesn't violate their constitutional right to worship the god of their choice.

Like I said, if the town tries to make Islamic beliefs illegal, then get back to me.

btw, I really love it when socialists like yourself defend Muslims, because it proves true exactly what I have believed for a long time.. That the distain harbored by both socialists and those on the far left isn't toward religion in general, it's a hatred that's focused exclusively on Christianity.
Click to expand...

Re: Bolded Boy oh boy Grim, you're logic really sucks. Please prove socialists and the far left have hatred for Christianity.
 
Paleocon said:
Yes, I'm guessing you got the memo but just won't accept it.



No, why would I believe in such a ridiculous idea? Different ways of doing things should only be treated equally if they are in fact equal. The belief in religious freedom proceeds from the implicit idea that they are equal.



All the more reason for the government to officially recognize the true religion as such, so that local people in error won't be able to do that.



Then I continue observing the true religion, albeit likely clandestinely.
Click to expand...


Interesting...

I don't necessarily agree, but to each their own, I reckon... :shrug:

Such is the nature of freedom.

Thanks for the honesty. It explains your responses in the thread well.
 
WCH said:
Those "rights" you so freely extend to any groups that wants them can get people killed and your children radicalized.

So yes, I thought about it.
Click to expand...

Anything the government is allowed to do to one particular group of people, it can do to me and my friends later. I choose to keep my freedom and take the minimal risk.* Thanks.

*Besides, it is oppressed people who most often feel that they need to resort to violence to be heard.
 
Papa bull said:
Why did the Kennesaw city council get petitioned if this wasn't their decision to make? And if it was their decision to make, then why all the bitching about them making the decision that was theirs to make? Like with everything else in this country.... if you don't think the government is acting right, sue 'em.
Click to expand...

They probably will get sued.

Governments have restrictions on the criteria they can legally use to enforce laws or settle disputes, similar to the way judges are required to follow the laws they are enforcing and the applicable case law. Zoning decisions can not be legally justified if the sect of the religion is the deciding factor rather than the law itself and the observable impact of the new use of the location.
 
Paleocon said:
No. It takes a lawful government to decide to what extent false religions should be repressed.
Click to expand...

That is what I just said... and that being said, no religions may be oppressed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom