• 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!

Ground zero mosque wins key vote

ric27 said:
Regretfully though, I have to say that our founders never contemplated the problem of Islamic expansion. Immigration by Muslims to Europe was unheard of.
Click to expand...

I guess you missed out on the original Caliphate, right? :roll:
 
ric27 said:
The New Testament does not support forced conversions and fails to offer any Old Testament justification.

This is an essential difference between Judaism and Christianity, and Islam. A Jew or a Christian can get all uppity and say he's doing it for God. But there is no scriptural basis for doing it and the argument has always failed when confronted with the source documents. Not so for Islam.
Click to expand...

Do you think the Koran might count as an Islamic source document? “There is no compulsion in religion, the path of guidance stands out clear from error” [2:256]
 
Manc Skipper said:
Do you think the Koran might count as an Islamic source document? “There is no compulsion in religion, the path of guidance stands out clear from error” [2:256]
Click to expand...


Ok, This might be interesting....On killing Infidels...


Qur'an (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

Qur'an (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
Click to expand...

On lying to infidels.

"Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness (vain) in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing." Surah 2:225
Click to expand...

On the treatment of Women...

The Quran in Sura 4:34 says: If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great.

The Quran in Sura 4:24 says:

And forbidden to you are wedded wives of other people except those who have fallen in your hands (as prisoners of war) . . .
Click to expand...

The Islamic punishments have encouraged a culture of violence against women, especially within the family and has spilled into violence against children. This has been commented upon by many within the country . . . The fact that men receive a lighter punishment if they commit a violence against women undoubtedly encourages such violence. We saw how women could be killed with impunity during alleged adultery. Stoning to death for adultery, although technically admissible for both sexes, has also been carried out mainly against women.

So yeah, let's do compare religious verses....

But better yet, let's get back on topic. The board may have well voted to authorize this direct insult by Islamic terrorists, but I can only hope that not one crew from this country agrees to build it.


j-mac
 
Back on topic...the New York Times notes that opposition to the Mosque increases based upon distance from it.

Park51, the proposed mosque near Ground Zero : The New Yorker

Where the “Ground Zero mosque” is concerned, opposition is roughly proportional to distance, even in New York. According to a recent poll, Manhattanites are mostly for it, Staten Islanders mostly against. Community Board No. 1 endorsed it, twenty-nine to one. That’s the council that represents a corner of Manhattan that includes both Park51 and the 9/11 site—and us, too, in the not too distant future. The New Yorker is set to move from 4 Times Square to 1 World Trade Center, once it gets built. Opinion here is divided, depending on whether one’s subway ride will be longer or shorter. No one has a problem with Park51.

...
That should have been the end of it, but it isn’t. The midterm elections loom. Locally, partisanship—Republican partisanship, to be specific—trumps propinquity. The two leading Republican candidates for governor of New York have made the “Ground Zero mosque” an issue, urged on by Rudy Giuliani, the ex-mayor, and by George Pataki, the ex-governor. Nationally, opposition to Park51 is rapidly becoming a matter of Republican discipline and conservative orthodoxy. By the end of last week, John McCain had joined his former running mate’s chorus. (“Obviously my opinion is that I’m opposed to it.”)
Click to expand...
 
Degreez said:
How is the New Testament a "source" document? It wasn't compiled into what it is today until the First Council. A large portion of its work is to credited to a man who never even met Jesus. It is so far from a source document.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that all Christianity, from Catholocism to Eastern Orthodox to ALL Protestant denominations, affirm that the Bible is the source document for all doctrine and that all beliefs and doctrine must be measured against the Bible.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Except for those pagan indians that we slaughtered by the thousands. Forgot about them, didn't you?
Click to expand...

Indians weren't killed because they wouldn't convert, they were killed because we wanted their land and resources. Pure and simple. Same motivation that was behind land grabs for 10,000 years.
 
danarhea said:
Nice straw man, but that was not in anyway the mindset of our forefathers, who came to America to escape religious persecution, not to create it. Take Thomas Jefferson, for instance:
Click to expand...

Slightly OT

What is down played is that for the most part, for most of America's history it has embraced religion and for most of it, religion moderated a lot of our baser tendencies and was the source for all social charity prior to FDR. If you didn't have a place to sleep or something to eat,... YOU went to the church. When people ran into hard times and needed a little help, they usually got it from their church and fellow parishioners.

19th and 20th Century missionaries were responsible for a fair amount of crap, but they were also the ones responsible for bringing medicine, schools, scientific agriculture, water projects etc. to most of the 3rd world. That frequently gets overlooked in the balance sheet.
 
ric27 said:
Indians weren't killed because they wouldn't convert, they were killed because we wanted their land and resources. Pure and simple. Same motivation that was behind land grabs for 10,000 years.
Click to expand...

That's not the point. The original residents of this country weren't Christian.
 
ric27 said:
My understanding is that all Christianity, from Catholocism to Eastern Orthodox to ALL Protestant denominations, affirm that the Bible is the source document for all doctrine and that all beliefs and doctrine must be measured against the Bible.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The problem is that there aren't any versions of the books in the new testament that date to earlier than 120 years after the death of Jesus Christ. So, what happened to the source versions of THOSE BOOKS? in other words, we don't have the original versions of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, not to mention the rest. In fact, we don't even have a copy of an original. We have a copy of a copy of a copy of something we don't have.

http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/manuscripts.html

And what we do have looks something like this:

797r-at150.gif


Shards of disintegrating paper, not whole documents.
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
Yeah. The problem is that there aren't any versions of the books in the new testament that date to earlier than 120 years after the death of Jesus Christ. So, what happened to the source versions of THOSE BOOKS? in other words, we don't have the original versions of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, not to mention the rest. In fact, we don't even have a copy of an original. We have a copy of a copy of a copy of something we don't have.

Dating the Oldest New Testament Manuscripts

And what we do have looks something like this:

797r-at150.gif


Shards of disintegrating paper, not whole documents.
Click to expand...


Do not assume inspiration or infallibility of the documents, with the intent of attempting to prove the inspiration or infallibility of the documents. Do not say the bible is inspired or infallible simply because it claims to be. This is circular reasoning.


j-mac
 
SE102 said:
You do realize there are several schools of Sharia, some more liberal than others,
Click to expand...

Meh meh, there are five main schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Hanbali, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi`i, and Jafari). and in all 5 major schools of Islamic Fiqh the Ijma of the Ulama is that apostasy, homosexuality, adultery, and/or premarital sex are capital and/or corporal punishment. So go spread your wears to someone less informed because no one's buying them here.

Oh and FYI sport, a legal system based on theocratic dogma and liberal are two mutually exclusive concepts.

that sharia has been used for feminist purposes.
Click to expand...

Sharia for feminist purpuses. Give me a freaking break. Do you expect people to take you seriously after assertions like that?

You do realize a grand portion of the muslim world supports sharia for its LIMITS ON GOVERNMENT POWER and other useful aspects.
Click to expand...

Ya they support theocracy because it puts limits on government power. :roll: Seriously??? I mean can you possibly be serious when you assert that jurisprudence which is asserted to be the direct word of god can be more limited than jurisprudence that is recognized as made by fallible men? Wow you people are just to much.
 
ric27 said:
Indians weren't killed because they wouldn't convert, they were killed because we wanted their land and resources. Pure and simple. Same motivation that was behind land grabs for 10,000 years.
Click to expand...

And the same motivation behind the money grabs that the banksters have been making. Some things change, but greed will always be greed.
 
Half-baked mosque - NYPOST.com

Not so fast.

The developers of the controversial mosque proposed near Ground Zero own only half the site where they want to construct the $100 million building, The Post has learned.

One of the two buildings on Park Place is owned by Con Edison, even though Soho Properties told officials and the public that it owns the entire parcel. And any potential sale by Con Ed faces a review by the state Public Service Commission.

.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lets just get rid of all religion, this stuff really slows and dumbs humanity down.
 
The Germans seem to get it.

Why Germany closed mosque where 9/11 plotters met - CSMonitor.com

German authorities say the mosque, which is where the 9/11 plotters met and reportedly was host to Muslims from many nations, was still a 'central attraction' for militants. European officials are concerned about the growing transnational nature of Islamist groups.
Click to expand...


German authorities today closed a Hamburg mosque once frequented by Mohammad Atta, a Sept. 11 pilot and planner – saying the mosque, located behind Hamburg’s main rail station and next to a fitness center, remained a “central attraction for the jihadist scene.”
Click to expand...
 
danarhea said:
Nice straw man, but that was not in anyway the mindset of our forefathers, who came to America to escape religious persecution, not to create it. Take Thomas Jefferson, for instance:



From this article, which complete debunks the straw man that you are attempting to build.

On the other hand, fairy tales are very nice. I like the one where Chewbacca rides a squirrel into battle, and defeats the Nazis during WWII.

7GC27.jpg
Click to expand...

Hey man it's useless to quote our founding fathers with this guy. I did it at least THREE OTHER TIMES in this thread and some others towards ric, and he just totally ignores it.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Do not assume inspiration or infallibility of the documents, with the intent of attempting to prove the inspiration or infallibility of the documents. Do not say the bible is inspired or infallible simply because it claims to be. This is circular reasoning.

j-mac
Click to expand...

This actually drives me crazy. There's a commercial that comes on internet radio that I listen to during the days that is talking about how the Bible proves that christianity is the true religion because it says that jesus rose from the dead and no other religions saviors rose from the dead, that they're still dead and in the ground, and thus that proves that christianity is true.

And I just sit there every time boggled at the notion of "proving" that your faith is true by quoting a story that is told in the book of said faith as the "proof" of the legitimacy of said book.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
A unanimous vote, too, we might add. Where next will Sarah Palin choose to demonstrate her irrelevance? (snicker chortle guffaw)
Click to expand...

Why are liberals always starting Palin threads?
 
Look. I think its time this topic was put to rest, as ive said 1000 times before, this is not about Islam vs. Christianity, or anything else except these 2 things.

Freedom of Religion
Private property rights

If you want to amend these 2 things to include an Anti-Islam clause, then by all means go ahead.

But as a matter of law, there is nothing you can do to stop it.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
1. Do you actually consider me a liberal?

2. When do you think Palin will shut her ****ing yap?
Click to expand...

I feel you are a liberal in many ways, but if you want to understand that question....ask Redress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom