I believe that this nation was founded on the basis of total religious freedom. There is no National religion.....Christian or otherwise.

After several days...I must now agree with you. :ohdear:

Wrong, but even if you were right, I for one will not except Sharia Law as some on here seem to want protection for. The formulation of our Constitution and judicial system certainly were guided by Christian beliefs and not some quirky religion that would kill you if you did not follow it to the letter. The Point is, if you have a faith different from Christianity, FINE, but it will not provide you with any benefits nor exceptions from US laws and customs. Worship whom you wish, but do not attempt to bring it into my life in any form. If you stone my wife because she wears a dress too short for your beliefs, I will not like that. If you stone your wife because she wears a dress too short and I find out about it, I will not like that either. I am confused why anyone would.

To COLOGAL and BUGGYONE

I do not understand anything you two are preaching. NOBODY, not one person on there that I can find has found any fault with anyone practicing the rites of their religion in any way shape or form.

Everybody has been pretty clear that the promoting of death, killing, dismemberment, etc is the objection. The fact that there are segments of that religion, and it IS the majority and those who really practice it, DO, in fact condone it is the argument. The entire premise of the thread was a religion getting intertwined with our constitution.

I can only assume from what you two are saying is that it would be just fine if a mosque was nearby that promoted and advanced killings, etc. and it would be just fine because they have freedom of religion. I know others have pointed out the fact that we have laws in this country.

Thus I am not sure why you continue to call people on here names. IGNORANCE and BIGOTRY....I think not and I have not seen any justification for you to call people by those adjectives.

Let me say one last thing about this thread. I don't care what religion you practice or how you practice it as long as it don't interfer with my right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and my right to practice my religion without having to worry about you wanting to kill me for not believing the way YOU think I should. That will be when our two worlds collide and neither of us will be happy with the out come.

Bucco, my friend, I would not have objections to a mosque being built nearby The Villages. It is NOT the object of Muslims - except for radical sects - to advocate killings. Of course, I would not stand for a mosque in the US that preached violence toward others. However, you would be hard pressed to find a mosque in the US like that. Of course, no one wants Sharia law in the US and US law takes precedence over that in all cases. You might find someone who does a crime under that guise, but they will be tried under US law for the crime - and rightfully so.

Just like you would be hard pressed to find a Christian sect that preaches violence - and they do exist in the US - I would steer clear of those, also.

I do agree with Richie and a few others who said they would feel uncomfortable if their favorite eateries would become filled with Muslims in their Near Eastern style clothing. I would not be afraid but am acclaimated to those who dress like me. It is human nature.

You do not see any ignorance or bigotry mentioned in the posts? The phrase used by one of the posters of "getting out Mr Colt" and not allowing Muslims to overpopulate the country' sure seems to be religious and cultural ignorance and bigotry - if not downright dangerously close to a threat to Muslims.

I don't need protection from Sharia Law...this is a made up Fox Noise issue. I trust the Supreme Court of the United States.

They may have been somewhat guided by Christian beliefs but this country was founded on religous freedom. I will follow my beliefs as you have the right to do also.

I HAVE NOT CALLED ANYONE A NAME....IN THIS THREAD. I am NOT afraid of Sharia law, I am afraid of terrorists however that does not make me afraid of all Muslims. It is fine to build a mosque however, you take this statement to another level.

So show me where I called anyone a bigot in this thread? If you can't then remove the post.

:agree:

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggyone View Post
Cologal,

Try as one might, you cannot reason with bigotry - and that is exactly what most of this is - just plain ignorance and bigotry. FROM BUGGYONE



After several days...I must now agree with you. FROM COLOGAL

ps....I might add that the only thing folks have done is express their fear and concern for what appears to be a tenet of parts of this religion...a KNOWN AND STATED tenant, not like some of the assumed that have been posted. That fear and concern seems legitimate to me and because they feel that way should not be lumped into what BUGGYONE said and you agreed to. To me that is not bigotry !!!

Bucco....I was addressing only Buggyone in this post. As I stated none of my responses to anyone included anything about being a BIGOT and that is what you accussed me of.

Yes these people are expressing fear and it maybe real to them....but to lump every Muslim into the same box is wrong.

I refuse to live my life in fear.. All my life some people have told me someone was coming to get me...The commies, the black panthers, the Jews. the gays....I could go on but the "They are going to me dejour" now are the Muslims. What do you say to George Tiller's wife a Christian" walked into a church on Sunday and shot him in the head. Should I fear Christian’s? Would it be a rational fear. Did the Germans fear the Jews... yes. Was what they did do that fear justifiable? No. Any group should not be targeted due to the actions of a few.

djp, from your #158:

"Just as I will not lump all Christians in with the senior Catholic heirarchy who, by their actions, condone child rape, I will not do the same of all Muslims."

To be consistent with the other examples in your post you should amend the very first line (quoted above) to reflect reality by inserting the words 'some of' then your statement will be qualified as you did all the others. Hence restated with qualifiers:

Just as I will not lump all Christians in with 'some of' the senior Catholic heirarchy who, by their actions, condone child rape, I will not do the same of all Muslims.

That makes it more consistent with the others and so much more accurate!

btk

I guess I know the people around me at work enough to know exactlly what it is that they are all celebrating. Not labelling, just caring enough to actually know them...that is the brand of sensitivity that we practice in my neck of the woods.

"Bucco....I was addressing only Buggyone in this post. As I stated none of my responses to anyone included anything about being a BIGOT and that is what you accussed me of."

First, this is a public forum. You cannot address ONLY one person except in a PM.

I accused you of nothing except agreeing that most of the posts or comments were bigotry...period..thats it.

"Yes these people are expressing fear and it maybe real to them....but to lump every Muslim into the same box is wrong."

In my opinion and I suppose only my opinion, folks on here had no problem with anyone practicing their religion, UNLESS it interfered with they was THEY lived their life, which includes fear for your life. Sure, much of it, and I sure am guilty I am sure is ignorance of the religion, but it DOES IN FACT preach what folks on here have mentioned as something they fear. Those radical groups you seem to just shrug off have said publicly they will kill us...they have said they will infiltrate us from within (how long did the 9/11 bombers spend here living quietly) I hear VERY VERY little in the way of folks who live here of the Muslim faith saying anything to rebutt it.
This is NOW....REAL LIFE...not historical debate items.

"I refuse to live my life in fear.. All my life some people have told me someone was coming to get me...The commies, the black panthers, the Jews. the gays....I could go on but the "They are going to me dejour" now are the Muslims. What do you say to George Tiller's wife a Christian" walked into a church on Sunday and shot him in the head. Should I fear Christian’s? Would it be a rational fear. Did the Germans fear the Jews... yes. Was what they did do that fear justifiable? No. Any group should not be targeted due to the actions of a few."

This is nothing but political correctness rambling. WHO ever said you should live your life in fear...the subject of the thread was allowing a religious belief interfere with our constitution.

The "commies" are nothing but a political party and any strength they may have had is historical....you should fear the Black Panthers where they are strong, but at this point their threat is a very local one...never heard of the Jews or Gays openly threatening our county AS MANY...AND remember it IS MANY...of the muslim religion has done.

The individual stuff you mention is simply trash talk. My point was and still is.......this group...a very large and most probably a majority of this religion has vowed to kill you, your children and your grandchildren and bring your country to its knees. Being cautious and aware is not bigotry unless there is no basis for that, and in this case there is strong and clear threats, etc to establish a very good basis for that caution and fear.

and by the way, you refer to "you conservatives" as if it were a condition. Let me tell you, get out more...if you think this fear is a conservative trait, you are really out of touch.

If I thought this post deserved an answer I would answer it..but a rant? NAH!

..."You do not see any ignorance or bigotry mentioned in the posts? The phrase used by one of the posters of "getting out Mr Colt" and not allowing Muslims to overpopulate the country" sure seems to be religious and cultural ignorance and bigotry - if not downright dangerously close to a threat to the lives of Muslims. I have repeated this posting by one of the regular posters and it has drawn not a single reply. Are you agreeing with the idea of this?

Thank you, Bucco for your latest post.

And regarding this mockery/quote by "cologal".....

The following two links are enlightening:

Sharia's Encroachment into American Courts

Read more:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/...an_courts.html

And here:

Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases

.....

Read more:
http://shariahinamericancourts.com/

So to prove the point you use only ultra conservative links....Right!

View the actual cases here. They speak for themselves.

http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?page_id=305

You're correct, I should have said it that way. I didn't because I keep thinking of how the very top of the heirarchy, the Pope himself, aided in the conspiracy - and the sheltering of Cardinal Law just as he was about to be subpoenaed by the Boston Police Department. Sometimes that red button of mine is a little more visible. There are many people, especially some of the priests I knew, who ARE examples of what I think of as the best of Christianity.

That the Congress has a chaplain means nothing more than the fact that there's a chaplain on the air base where I work.

Here's a few quotes for you:

Starting with the Constitution

The Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11:
Now, if you were to say that many of our founding principles were Judeo-Christian in nature, I could agree with that.

Yes, our founding principles were Judeo-Christian in nature.....which is why I mentioned the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.....and not Ishmael or others.

And as for the chaplaincy of the House, it's not just that there is one. It's that God has always been acknowledged from the beginning in the formation of our nation and its lawmaking, while today, more and more people insist that there be no mention of Him at all "because of separation of church and state". The earliest prayers (and current ones) by the chaplains at the opening of the House and Senate sessions indicate no such separation.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/office/chaplain.htm

So now I am even more confused....in the first case I looked at in Florida the court clearly stated the marriage agreement entered into by both parties in Iran would have no bearing in the US. From your link:

“Q. And what were the terms of this marriage contract?

“The Court: That is wholly without my consideration, this antenuptial agreement that was entered into under the laws of another country. That is not going to have one bit of bearing whatever on what I intend to do.

In the second case, again in Florida, the laws of Virginia were applied as the couple never obtained a marriage license before being married.

Virginia statutory and case law is contrary to Betemariam’s position. Section 20-13 of the Code of Virginia, entitled “License and solemnization required,” provides as follows: “Every marriage in this Commonwealth shall be under a license and solemnized in the manner herein provided.” (emphasis supplied). Additionally, Virginia’s statutory scheme provides that the validity of a marriage is not affected by certain defects:

Did you even take the time to look any of these cases over?

Yes, there is ignorance by those that fail to show intent to protect their loved ones and this country. Might even classify as treason. Try not to take posts out of context and twist them for your own desires. This thread has large majority that see the future threat so it just may be possible the majority are not ignorant and bigoted.

I SAID: Give peace a chance is a great thing, but when that does not work, its time to bring out Mr Colt and settle the problem once and for all. How did you read downright dangerously close to a threat to the lives of Muslims
I ALSO SAID: not allowing Muslims to overpopulate the country I stand by that statement as under the laws of this country, Majority rules: IF MUSLIMS OVERPOPULATE THIS COUNTRY, SHARIA LAW WILL BECOME LAW OF THE US. Now if you want Sharia Law to become the new US law, then keep on posting as you do and that is your right under freedom of speech and press, but allow me the same courtesy and if you quote me, use the entire quote so no misunderstanding will happen. Thank you.

As their has been some bending of the lines of this Thread: THIS IS HOW IT STARTED: Maybe this will clear up some of the missquotes and interpritations.

The Constitution and Religion

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not sure I could post directly on the forum with a faith concern, but in this case, it is as much a constitutional question. Last night Bill O gave a very interesting opinion or fact, I am not sure which, of the difference between Religion and Christianity in relation to the US Constitution. In brief, we have freedom from Religion like Catholic, Methodist etc. etc., but that the constitution was based on the biblical teachings of Jesus Christ; therefore, the way I understood his intent: THE UNITED STATES IS A CHRISTIAN NATION. Assuming that is a FACT, why do we even entertain issues that pertain to laws and rights that are not within the realm of Christianity? Sharia Law for example.

MY OPINION: As important as it is for Muslim countries to stamp out any Infidel beliefs, we better wake up and stop any non-Christian laws or customs from overriding our constitution. I firmly believe that freedom from or of religion does not mean freedom to change this countries laws and customs to better fit any faith, religion or belief that does not follow a strict compliance with Christian philosophy..

Religon & politics always makes for such cordial conversation. My old high school buddies who get together once a year to golf have a rule: no talk of religion, politics, ed, other medical conditions. Needless to say it is a quiet, distraction-free round of golf. :cus: :cus:

1) Is anyone in the Senate force to say the pray along? I'm guessing not.

2) Being founded on Judeo-Christian principles and being a Christian Nation (note the capitalization) are two very different things. In the former, the Bible may be inspiration - especially the better parts. In the latter, the Bible is the lawbook and that can be very dangerous.

As far as the whole "Christian Nation" thing goes... well, we are a nation made up, largely, of Christians. Again, big difference.

Are you put in prison for pre-marital sex?

If a woman, are you force to stay in a marriage even if your husband beats you?

Are you arrested for conducting business on a Sunday? (Blue Laws)

These were all Christian things in our colonial days.

One of the great things about our nation was that we did NOT ban members of other religions from holding public office or other positions. (Like how Catholics were banned from being lawyers from time to time in England)

Going back even further, the "Christian" thing to do would be to purify your neighbors sins by burning him or her if they were an infidel.

all these key strokes that present the past as justification for the here and now are for what purpose?

The here and now shows most civilized people have evolved to our modern level of beliefs. That would be the MAJORITY of the population here and now.

Yes there are some groups/individuals in the world that have not evolved and still live by the days of old.

They have that right....until or unless they embark upon efforts to impress what they believe upon me or my family....or change the way we live or what we believe in the here in now. And there are those that are committed to that end. And yes, SOME are Muslims. And thank GOD they are in the minority.

All the word smithing being presented is not going to change that one bit...nor is it going to change the notion that most of us want it to remain that way!!

It is really pretty simple. Some subject matter just does not need too much intellectualizing...in my humble opinion!

btk

I hope all can understand this post. Well said. This is one of the very few issues that I say: YOU WILL NOT CHANGE MY MIND ON THIS ONE.

Digging back in history to dredge up antiquated doings of some Christians to create the idea of some sort of moral equivalence to the violent teaching of mainstream modern day Islam with modern day Christianity is rather scurrilous and of extremely suspect purpose.

I know you won't see it that way and that is rather sad, in my view.

I see it that way, just could never say it so purrttyy.

My purpose was to demonstrate what "Christianity" meant when the Founders were writing our founding documents.

Modern day Christianity (by and large) is FAR more 'civilized' than it used to be. I mean, come on, I married one! :) ...and I'm insanely happy in said marriage.

The only part of your statement that I'll dispute is that modern mainstream AMERICAN Muslims are not, by and large, of that ilk. I honestly don't know what the ratio is in other countries of Islamo-fascists to more moderate Muslims.

I do not believe there is a moderate Muslim. That would be the same as a Sunday morning only Christian. If they do not wish to kill infidels, they are being disingenuous to their brotherhood of Muslims. If they are as you say, moderate, then they would not need Sharia Law in the first place. They would be happy to assimilate into the American culture. They would not kill their daughters if they dated a Jew, they would take their drivers license photo without a burqua on etc. etc. etc. Back to my OP, I have no problem with any faith or religion as long as they follow American law and CUSTOMS while residing in this country.

Most of "them" (again, I stress in THIS country) *don't* need Sharia law.

What part of this aren't you getting? Did you look at the numbers from the recent Gallup poll I linked to? It clearly states that American Muslims reject violence EVEN MORE THAN CHRISTIANS DO.

In case you missed it, I'll quote it for you.

Question: "Some people think that for the military to kill civilians is sometimes justified while other think that it is never justified. Which is your opinion?"

Protestant: 38% Never, 58% Sometimes.
Catholic: 39% Never, 58% Sometimes.
Jewish: 43% Never, 53% Sometimes.
Atheist/Agnostic/None: 56% Never 43% Sometimes.
Muslim: 78% Never, 21% Sometimes.

Take a good hard look at that and tell me how that cognitive dissonance feels.

Try this one...

Question: "Some people think that for an individual person or small group of persons to target and kill civilians is sometimes justified while other think that kind of violence is never justified. Which is your opinion?"

Protestant: 71% Never, 26% Sometimes.
Catholic: 71% Never, 27% Sometimes.
Jewish: 75% Never, 22% Sometimes.
Atheist/Agnostic/None: 76% Never 23% Sometimes.
Muslim: 89% Never, 11% Sometimes.

This reality is clashing with your pre-conceived notions.

Again, I'll re-stress this was a poll done of AMERICAN Muslims.

Oh, and that "Sunday morning only Christian" you mention? Took me about 10 seconds to find a 2005 poll showing that only 45% of Protestants and Catholics attended mass every week. (For comparison, in 1955, 75% of Catholics and 42% of Protestants did)

You state that the poll clearly states that American Muslims reject violence EVEN MORE THAN CHRISTIANS DO...BUT the question posed by the poll is Question: "Some people think that for the military to kill civilians is sometimes justified while other think that it is never justified. Which is your opinion?"

Your conclusion and the poll results do not fit together...

Just wondering how those muslims who were the main players of the 9/11 attacks would have responded to that poll while they were living here and "casing the joint" ???

Do you think Tim McVeigh would have answered honestly when he was plotting to blow up a building that had a day care on the ground floor?

...which is why I included the other question. In both cases, Muslims said violence was "Never" justified in higher numbers than Christians.

...and to make my point even clearer, *ATHEISTS* (albeit a liberal definition that included agnostics and 'none') rejected violence more than Christians.

Another point that I'm trying to make is - what is it that we have here in the U.S. that seems to be an antidote against Islamofascists? My theory is that it's the same thing that keeps Communists (and people like that odd self-proclaimed Anarchist-Communist) and others from gaining too many adherents. ...and we seem to have more of "it" than they do in Europe. My *guess* is it's economic success. Even our LOUSY economy is orders of magnitude better than others. Other democratic economic success stories aren't having the issues with Islamofascists - countries like South Korea and Japan.

Do you think that Muslims will answer honetly what they believe about violence? Especially when you know that a main doctrine of their religion is to deceive the enemy/infidels/unbelievers...?

You make my point. The polls you mention are meaningless !