• 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!

Landmark commission hearing may determine future of ground zero mosque

j-mac said:
Really? Tell me incognito liberal with the soldier avatar, who is it found to have carried out any given terror attack pretty much anywhere around the world right now?
Click to expand...

First of all. I don't prescribe to your dogmatic narrow viewpoint. I'm not a liberal or a conservative. And I'm not a fan of either ideas, I'm a fan of good ideas. And if those ideas happen to fall under those two labels based upon your dogmatic narrow viewpoint then I guess I'm guilty as charged.

Is it Christians? How about Catholics? The Cardinals planting IED's are they? hmmm? How about Buddhists? the Monks in an uproar?

Islamophobe...HA! Get the hell out of here with that tripe! Not knowing who your enemy is leads to defeat by your enemy...However that may just be the goal eh?

j-mac
Click to expand...


An excellent point. Not knowing your enemy does lead to defeat.

So you must be hell bent on defeat. If you think your enemy is all Islam, then you don't know your enemy at all.

Look at what scare mongers like you have done, you have driven people to such heights of fear they have given up civil liberties and are now willing to circumvent the law because they've been led to believe that all Islam means terror.

One day you'll look around and realize that the country and principles you thought you were defending, no longer exist. The patriot act will eventually be turned on the people and made permanent, and the terrorists won't have had to do anything, you did all the work for them, because you were afraid.
 
ric27 said:
Christ Jesus' taught us to love our enemies and to turn the other cheek.
Click to expand...

That's good advice, but I gotta wonder when are you going to start following it?
 
dim
 
Whoever owns the property has the right to build whatever they want. At least they should be able to. Private property rights should be protected. If the government can stop this than what's to stop them from taking more civil liberties?

"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin


That's what's happening in America today.
 
I think it's safe to say ric27 is a troll. The way he talks is meant specifically to incite anger and outrage, so don't even bother with him.
 
BCR said:
Landmark commission hearing may determine future of ground zero mosque - CNN.com


I think what they are doing is in somewhat poor taste but they have every right to do so. It's called religious freedom and the people who oppose these seem to be borderline hysterical about Islam, as if every Muslim has dynamite strapped to him somewhere on his body.

I think it is kind of wrong to label mainstream Islam with 9/11, It was fundamentalist Muslims who carried out 9/11. Just like Mormons don't like to be labeled with polygamy and Christians don't like to be labeled with the creationists and extreme homophobes.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, the first amendment of the constitution doesn’t provide protection for a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination. Sure Islam is a religion too but it is also a very radical form of totalitarianism as well. Hence, you can’t dissect Islam and take only a tiny part of it, while at the same time you ignore the greatest part of it to circumvent the constitution. You must take Islam in totality for what it really is, a totalitarian theo-political ideology with the main goal and sole purpose of subjugating the world via the imposition of Sharia, and no such system is protected under the first amendment of the constitution or any other amendment for that matter. The constitution is many things, but a suicide pact isn’t one of them.

Moreover, Islam in stark contrast to faith-based religions is also the only religion of submission in the world, whereby all Muslims must submit to the will of Allah, i.e., Sharia, the divine will of Allah, and Sharia is a harsh totalitarian legal system that institutionalizes discrimination against females and non-Muslims and that also incorporates a system of draconian punishments such as stonings, amputations, and beheadings.

Not only that, but the religion of Islam also forbids the freedom of conscience under the pain of death. Hence, a Muslim can’t leave the religion of Islam, as that is murtaad (apostasy), which is a very serious offense in Islam that is punishable under the pain of death. Furthermore, a Muslim can’t even question the tenets of their religion, as that is blasphemy, an offense in Islam also punishable under the pain of death.

Hence, even if Islam was a religion alone and not also a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination, I seriously doubt it would be protected under the first amendment of the constitution because you will never convince me that the founders would have intended to protect such a religion that is so antithetical to every American ideal and is so adversarial to everything they stood for and were trying to do.

Therefore, I oppose the building of the ground zero supremacist mega mosque not only because it is a symbol of Islamic supremacism and an indignation to the victims of 9/11, but also because Islam is a totalitarian theo-political ideology that seeks world domination, and therefore Islam and the practice there of should be outlawed altogether from the USA.
 
Jetboogieman said:
An excellent point. Not knowing your enemy does lead to defeat.

So you must be hell bent on defeat. If you think your enemy is all Islam, then you don't know your enemy at all.
Click to expand...

I have a different viewpoint on that. I can think of a few others, too... No matter what high-ground argument is made, I, and others.... Islam is a "religion" of terror and abuse and sociopathy.

Many people forget, too soon, about the horrors the Muslims have perpetrated

nickbergexecution2.jpg


wtc911.jpg
 
ObamaYoMoma said:
With all due respect, the first amendment of the constitution doesn’t provide protection for a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination. Sure Islam is a religion too but it is also a very radical form of totalitarianism as well. Hence, you can’t dissect Islam and take only a tiny part of it, while at the same time you ignore the greatest part of it to circumvent the constitution. You must take Islam in totality for what it really is, a totalitarian theo-political ideology with the main goal and sole purpose of subjugating the world via the imposition of Sharia, and no such system is protected under the first amendment of the constitution or any other amendment for that matter. The constitution is many things, but a suicide pact isn’t one of them.

Moreover, Islam in stark contrast to faith-based religions is also the only religion of submission in the world, whereby all Muslims must submit to the will of Allah, i.e., Sharia, the divine will of Allah, and Sharia is a harsh totalitarian legal system that institutionalizes discrimination against females and non-Muslims and that also incorporates a system of draconian punishments such as stonings, amputations, and beheadings.

Not only that, but the religion of Islam also forbids the freedom of conscience under the pain of death. Hence, a Muslim can’t leave the religion of Islam, as that is murtaad (apostasy), which is a very serious offense in Islam that is punishable under the pain of death. Furthermore, a Muslim can’t even question the tenets of their religion, as that is blasphemy, an offense in Islam also punishable under the pain of death.

Hence, even if Islam was a religion alone and not also a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination, I seriously doubt it would be protected under the first amendment of the constitution because you will never convince me that the founders would have intended to protect such a religion that is so antithetical to every American ideal and is so adversarial to everything they stood for and were trying to do.

Therefore, I oppose the building of the ground zero supremacist mega mosque not only because it is a symbol of Islamic supremacism and an indignation to the victims of 9/11, but also because Islam is a totalitarian theo-political ideology that seeks world domination, and therefore Islam and the practice there of should be outlawed altogether from the USA.
Click to expand...

Would you suggest we ban Islam all together? Because the first amendment not only protects Muslims the right to practice their religion, but also protects everyone else from it. So they can't do what you are saying they want to do.
 
ObamaYoMoma said:
With all due respect, the first amendment of the constitution doesn’t provide protection for a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination. Sure Islam is a religion too but it is also a very radical form of totalitarianism as well. Hence, you can’t dissect Islam and take only a tiny part of it, while at the same time you ignore the greatest part of it to circumvent the constitution. You must take Islam in totality for what it really is, a totalitarian theo-political ideology with the main goal and sole purpose of subjugating the world via the imposition of Sharia, and no such system is protected under the first amendment of the constitution or any other amendment for that matter. The constitution is many things, but a suicide pact isn’t one of them.
Click to expand...

As I've said elsewhere, there is no one Islam. Islam is not a centralized religion in the same way that the Roman Catholic Church is, and it's not even a confederation of like-minded congregations like the Protestants.

Islam is a religion that, typically, is laid over the existing culture of a region like a bedsheet. When you look at a sheet, you see the sheet, but its shape is altered by the shape of the bed it is lying on.

That's why Muslims in Switzerland are as secular as they are, whereas in other parts of the world they're more orthadox.

ObamaYoMoma said:
Moreover, Islam in stark contrast to faith-based religions is also the only religion of submission in the world, whereby all Muslims must submit to the will of Allah, i.e., Sharia, the divine will of Allah, and Sharia is a harsh totalitarian legal system that institutionalizes discrimination against females and non-Muslims and that also incorporates a system of draconian punishments such as stonings, amputations, and beheadings.
Click to expand...

In case you haven't read your Bible lately, Christianity is also a religion of submission.

ObamaYoMoma said:
Not only that, but the religion of Islam also forbids the freedom of conscience under the pain of death. Hence, a Muslim can’t leave the religion of Islam, as that is murtaad (apostasy), which is a very serious offense in Islam that is punishable under the pain of death. Furthermore, a Muslim can’t even question the tenets of their religion, as that is blasphemy, an offense in Islam also punishable under the pain of death.
Click to expand...

Only in certain parts of the world. Again, there is no one Islam.

ObamaYoMoma said:
Hence, even if Islam was a religion alone and not also a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination, I seriously doubt it would be protected under the first amendment of the constitution because you will never convince me that the founders would have intended to protect such a religion that is so antithetical to every American ideal and is so adversarial to everything they stood for and were trying to do.
Click to expand...

Islam isn't what is protected by the First Amendment. What is protected is the individual's right to practice Islam insofar as that practice -- not the tenets of the religion, but how they are practiced -- does not violate the rights of others.
 
BCR said:
and The Bible isn't? This is a double edged sword.
Click to expand...

The New Testament teaches Christians to turn the other cheek and to prayer for the salvation their enemies. It most certainly doesn’t advocate violence in any way, shape, or form. Now in the Old Testaments there are some violent passages, but those passages were referring to a specific people, in a specific place, and at a specific time and in no way were open-ended commands good for all time like the violent verses contained in the Koran.

In any event, it wouldn’t matter, because Christianity underwent a reformation and an enlightenment. Hence, you can’t morally equate modern day Christianity with modern day Islam, since Islam had never undergone such a similar process and for all intents and purposes is still practiced the very same way it was when Muhammad was still rampaging, pillaging, raping, and slaughtering kafir infidels across the Arabian Peninsular almost 1400 years ago.

Hence, what do you mean by a double edge sword? Indeed, Western civilization’s entire system of values is based on Christian/Judeo teachings.
 
Your Star said:
Would you suggest we ban Islam all together? Because the first amendment not only protects Muslims the right to practice their religion, but also protects everyone else from it. So they can't do what you are saying they want to do.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, the first amendment of the constitution protects the freedom of religion. However, it does not accord such protection for a totalitarian theo-political ideology that seeks world domination. Hence, like I said you can’t dissect Islam and take only a tiny part of it, while at the same time you ignore the greatest part of it to circumvent the constitution. You must take Islam in totality for what it really is, a totalitarian theo-political ideology with the main goal and sole purpose of subjugating the world via the imposition of Sharia, and no such system is protected under the first amendment of the constitution or any other amendment for that matter.

I mean if Islam was a faith based religion only it would be protected, but because Islam is a religion of submission that forbids the freedom of conscience under the pain of death and also a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination, it clearly isn’t protected under the constitution because like I said, our constitution isn’t a suicide pact.
 
ObamaYoMoma said:
The New Testament teaches Christians to turn the other cheek and to prayer for the salvation their enemies. It most certainly doesn’t advocate violence in any way, shape, or form. Now in the Old Testaments there are some violent passages, but those passages were referring to a specific people, in a specific place, and at a specific time and in no way were open-ended commands good for all time like the violent verses contained in the Koran.

In any event, it wouldn’t matter, because Christianity underwent a reformation and an enlightenment. Hence, you can’t morally equate modern day Christianity with modern day Islam, since Islam had never undergone such a similar process and for all intents and purposes is still practiced the very same way it was when Muhammad was still rampaging, pillaging, raping, and slaughtering kafir infidels across the Arabian Peninsular almost 1400 years ago.

Hence, what do you mean by a double edge sword? Indeed, Western civilization’s entire system of values is based on Christian/Judeo teachings.
Click to expand...
You are thinking that the evil and immoral laws of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, perhaps you should read where Jesus makes it perfectly clear

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)
 
ric27 said:
I have a different viewpoint on that. I can think of a few others, too... No matter what high-ground argument is made, I, and others.... Islam is a "religion" of terror and abuse and sociopathy.

Many people forget, too soon, about the horrors the Muslims have perpetrated

nickbergexecution2.jpg


wtc911.jpg
Click to expand...

Same old tired. Fearful argument.

I have plenty of Muslim friends and they have no intention of cutting my head off.

The radical elements of Islam are a perversion of the Islam.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
In case you haven't read your Bible lately, Christianity is also a religion of submission.
Click to expand...

Don’t be absurd; in stark contrast to Islam, which is a religion of submission that forbids the freedom of conscience under the pain of death, Christianity like other religions is a faith-based religion. For instance, in Christianity as opposed to Islam, a Christian can freely choose what it is he or she will adhere to and what it is he or she will reject, and they can also freely choose to leave the religion if they so desire. However, in Islam, on the other hand, a Muslim can’t question the strictures of the religion because that is blasphemy and blasphemy in Islam is a serious offense that is punishable under the pain of death. Likewise, once a Muslims always a Muslim, as a Muslim can’t leave Islam as that is murtaad (apostasy), which is also a very serious offense in Islam punishable under the pain of death.

Only in certain parts of the world. Again, there is no one Islam.
Click to expand...

Wishful thinking? You couldn’t be any more mistaken. There isn’t one Islam and one Koran for radicals and another one with its own separate Koran for so-called moderates. In Islam there is only one Islam and one Koran, and in fact the Koran is believed to be the uncreated divine word of God and as such is immutable and good for all time.

Moreover, the jihad ideology, which calls for the subjugation of all unbelievers via the imposition of Sharia, in Islam couldn’t be more mainstream as all sects and divisions within Islam and all schools of schools of Islamic jurisprudence actively teach and preach it.

Islam isn't what is protected by the First Amendment. What is protected is the individual's right to practice Islam insofar as that practice -- not the tenets of the religion, but how they are practiced -- does not violate the rights of others.
Click to expand...

Because Islam is a totalitarian theo-political ideology whose main goal and sole purpose is the subjugation of all unbelievers, all religions, and all governments under a very totalitarian legal system called Sharia, it violates the rights of others (unbelievers) by definition. Indeed, Islam seeks to replace the constitution with the Koran.
 
ObamaYoMoma said:
The New Testament teaches Christians to turn the other cheek and to prayer for the salvation their enemies. It most certainly doesn’t advocate violence in any way, shape, or form. Now in the Old Testaments there are some violent passages, but those passages were referring to a specific people, in a specific place, and at a specific time and in no way were open-ended commands good for all time like the violent verses contained in the Koran.
Click to expand...

You have an excellent point -- except that whenever a Christian wants to dictate morality to someone else, like on the subject of homosexuality, they point to the Old Testament.

It's not honest to point to the Old Testament when it supports your argument, and then say "well, Jesus said" when it doesn't.

ObamaYoMoma said:
In any event, it wouldn’t matter, because Christianity underwent a reformation and an enlightenment.
Click to expand...

Yes, in large part because there was a hierarchical structure to resist, whereas Islam has none. Islam is so localized that it can't and won't happen in the same way.

ObamaYoMoma said:
Hence, you can’t morally equate modern day Christianity with modern day Islam, since Islam had never undergone such a similar process and for all intents and purposes is still practiced the very same way it was when Muhammad was still rampaging, pillaging, raping, and slaughtering kafir infidels across the Arabian Peninsular almost 1400 years ago.
Click to expand...

Actually, yes you can, since so many Muslims are peaceful, and in many parts of the world are as secular as their infadel neighbors.
 
ObamaYoMoma said:
With all due respect, the first amendment of the constitution protects the freedom of religion. However, it does not accord such protection for a totalitarian theo-political ideology that seeks world domination. Hence, like I said you can’t dissect Islam and take only a tiny part of it, while at the same time you ignore the greatest part of it to circumvent the constitution. You must take Islam in totality for what it really is, a totalitarian theo-political ideology with the main goal and sole purpose of subjugating the world via the imposition of Sharia, and no such system is protected under the first amendment of the constitution or any other amendment for that matter.
Click to expand...

The First Amendment also doesn't give us the authority to prosecute the peaceful Muslims in the US for the offenses of Muslims committed in other parts of the world.
 
ObamaYoMoma said:
Don’t be absurd; in stark contrast to Islam, which is a religion of submission that forbids the freedom of conscience under the pain of death, Christianity like other religions is a faith-based religion. For instance, in Christianity as opposed to Islam, a Christian can freely choose what it is he or she will adhere to and what it is he or she will reject, and they can also freely choose to leave the religion if they so desire. However, in Islam, on the other hand, a Muslim can’t question the strictures of the religion because that is blasphemy and blasphemy in Islam is a serious offense that is punishable under the pain of death. Likewise, once a Muslims always a Muslim, as a Muslim can’t leave Islam as that is murtaad (apostasy), which is also a very serious offense in Islam punishable under the pain of death.
Click to expand...

As I've said, in certain parts of the world.

ObamaYoMoma said:
Wishful thinking? You couldn’t be any more mistaken. There isn’t one Islam and one Koran for radicals and another one with its own separate Koran for so-called moderates. In Islam there is only one Islam and one Koran, and in fact the Koran is believed to be the uncreated divine word of God and as such is immutable and good for all time.
Click to expand...

Well then, point me to the unified Islamic church and I'll concede your point.

There may be only one Koran, but there is no one authority for interpreting it telling the masses to kill infadels. That's why so many Muslims live peaceful lives without having a crisis of faith over it.

ObamaYoMoma said:
Because Islam is a totalitarian theo-political ideology whose main goal and sole purpose is the subjugation of all unbelievers, all religions, and all governments under a very totalitarian legal system called Sharia, it violates the rights of others (unbelievers) by definition. Indeed, Islam seeks to replace the constitution with the Koran.
Click to expand...

No, certain wackos seek to replace the Constitution with the Koran.

That doesn't give us leave to persecute all Muslims.
 
Kroanon said:
You are thinking that the evil and immoral laws of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, perhaps you should read where Jesus makes it perfectly clear

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)
Click to expand...


You judge a religion by it's source documents and beliefs. Compare what is done vs. what they are told to do. If you read the entire New Testament, you won't find a single example of a Christian killing someone, ordering others to kill anyone, killing someone because they don't believe or forcing someone to believe. Not one.

Please show it, if I'm wrong
 
Christianity at it's most extreme is just as disgusting as Islam as it's most extreme. They can also both be moderate, it depends on how passionate you are about your religion.
icon_rolleyes.gif
 
ric27 said:
You judge a religion by it's source documents and beliefs. Compare what is done vs. what they are told to do. If you read the entire New Testament, you won't find a single example of a Christian killing someone, ordering others to kill anyone, killing someone because they don't believe or forcing someone to believe. Not one.

Please show it, if I'm wrong
Click to expand...

In the United States, a nation of law, you judge individuals and groups of individuals by their own actions. Ergo, some Muslims are peaceful and that's fine, and some aren't and that's not fine.

If someone were to judge the United States according to it's founding documents, they'd have a hell of a time matching the reality to the theory. :lol:
 
Kroanon said:
Christianity at it's most extreme is just as disgusting as Islam as it's most extreme. They can also both be moderate, it depends on how passionate you are about your religion.
icon_rolleyes.gif
Click to expand...

Read the New Testament and see if you can find any commands, inferential or explicit, to harm unbelievers. There is a single instance of a follower employing a deadly weapon. Peter cut off the ear of a servant with a sword when Jesus was arrested. He was rebuked and Jesus healed the servant.

Have you read the entire New Testament to look for commands by God or Jesus to believers to commit acts of violence on non-believers?
 
Kroanon said:
You are thinking that the evil and immoral laws of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, perhaps you should read where Jesus makes it perfectly clear
Click to expand...

Actually, I said that the violent passages of the Old Testament were referring to a specific time, at a specific place, and against a specific people and were not similar to open-ended Koranic verses that are valid for all time or until all religion belongs to Allah. I mean where in the Old Testament does it command all Jews to slay all unbelievers until they say there is only one God and Muhammad is his messenger? Give me a break, can’t you read and understand English?
 
ObamaYoMoma said:
Actually, I said that the violent passages of the Old Testament were referring to a specific time, at a specific place, and against a specific people and were not similar to open-ended Koranic verses that are valid for all time or until all religion belongs to Allah. I mean where in the Old Testament does it command all Jews to slay all unbelievers until they say there is only one God and Muhammad is his messenger? Give me a break, can’t you read and understand English?
Click to expand...

So genocide is only ok when your God says it is huh?
 
ric27 said:
Read the New Testament and see if you can find any commands, inferential or explicit, to harm unbelievers. There is a single instance of a follower employing a deadly weapon. Peter cut off the ear of a servant with a sword when Jesus was arrested. He was rebuked and Jesus healed the servant.

Have you read the entire New Testament to look for commands by God or Jesus to believers to commit acts of violence on non-believers?
Click to expand...

You still can't ignore the Old Testament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom