Herman Cain: Communities should be able to ban mosques

Volt said:
Your statement puzzles me. When did a Christian bomb a shack with a family in it? Can you name a specific incident?

Tell me, what kind of country would you feel safer living in: a Christian country like the US, Canada, Switzerland, etc., or an Islamic country like Pakistan or Iran?
Click to expand...
What about a Christian nation like Mexico or a Islamic country like Kuwait?
 
Sterling Archer said:
What about a Christian nation like Mexico or a Islamic country like Kuwait?
Click to expand...

Even "moderate" Islamic countries such as Kuwait, Qatar, and UAE do not have the level of individual freedom guaranteed in Christian, western nations. The only Islamic country that comes close is Turkey. My point is that by and large, Christian nations are much better places to live, partly because Christians are more tolerant people.
 
Volt said:
Even "moderate" Islamic countries such as Kuwait, Qatar, and UAE do not have the level of individual freedom guaranteed in Christian, western nations. The only Islamic country that comes close is Turkey. My point is that by and large, Christian nations are much better places to live, partly because Christians are more tolerant people.
Click to expand...
Turkey is Secular. It's mandated by the constitution. And Kuwait is fucking awesome. Iraq is another place with few restrictions on freedom, even of a religious nature. The actions of a few should not be used to characterize the many, who are wholly tolerant and respectful.
 
Dixie said:
I like Cain as well, at at first glance, I agree it makes you cringe... but I actually think he makes a valid point. When does something 'cross the line' of being a religion, and being totalitarian rule? If this were Baptists trying to implement Baptist Law, you wouldn't stand for that... oh no, that's a violation of the separation of church and state... but because it's MUSLIMS you think it's acceptable? This religion seeks to impose and implement Sharia Law on every American! Do you comprehend how that is different from any traditional religion in America? They don't just "like" Sharia Law... they don't just think Muslims should adhere to it... they actively seek to have Sharia Law made the law of the land for every American citizen, it is their ambition and stated goal to do so. I think this crosses a line with regard to our Constitutional principles and can't be allowed. The people have every right to reject it, and if you want to call it 'trampling on their religious freedom' then so be it.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could provide us some examples of Muslims in this country are "actively seeking to have Sharia Law made the law of the land for every American citizen".

They can TRY all they like, but according to our CONSTITUTION, the supreme law of the United States of America, they are forever doomed to failure.

You are right in one regard...this does cross the line with regards to our constitutional principles...you want to allow people to selectively trample on other's religious freedoms, and that is wrong.
 
they aren't dixie is a jesus freak tea bagger buying that snake oil like it's a kmart blue light special.
 
WinterBorn said:
You are absolutely right that I wouldn't stand for it, if it were baptists. And I won't stand for it from muslims. Our laws should never be based on religious dogma.

But that does not mean the religion should not be allowed (by the community or the nation) to have a house of worship. The simple solution is to only allow laws that are constitutional. By that test, banning mosques is not an allowable law.

That a community has mosques does not mean Sharia Law is inevitable.
Click to expand...

What about when the "religion" calls for implementation of Sharia Law as its stated objective and purpose? You see, what Cain is saying makes sense if you think about it. Our constitution is being used by a group of fanatics to promote the destruction of western civilization, under the guise of it being "their religion" ...and we are willfully going along with it, so as not to appear bigoted or prejudiced. Cain is pointing out there is a difference between honoring freedom of religion and accepting radical Islam.
 
Dixie said:
What about when the "religion" calls for implementation of Sharia Law as its stated objective and purpose? You see, what Cain is saying makes sense if you think about it. Our constitution is being used by a group of fanatics to promote the destruction of western civilization, under the guise of it being "their religion" ...and we are willfully going along with it, so as not to appear bigoted or prejudiced. Cain is pointing out there is a difference between honoring freedom of religion and accepting radical Islam.
Click to expand...

And that difference would be not allowing laws to be based on religious beliefs but to allow people to worship as they choose and to have their house of worship where ever they can buy land and build it.
 
Dixie said:
What about when the "religion" calls for implementation of Sharia Law as its stated objective and purpose? You see, what Cain is saying makes sense if you think about it. Our constitution is being used by a group of fanatics to promote the destruction of western civilization, under the guise of it being "their religion" ...and we are willfully going along with it, so as not to appear bigoted or prejudiced. Cain is pointing out there is a difference between honoring freedom of religion and accepting radical Islam.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm overlooking something but I am not seeing how building a mosque will cause the U.S. to have Sharia law no matter how much the people at the mosque may want it. If people at that mosque decide that are going to follow Sharia law and it goes against U.S. laws they will get arrested and prosecuted. (I'm assuming) they can't claim they are following Sharia law in court and that it supercedes the Constitution and win. If someone wants to run for political office claiming they support Sharia law I'm going to assume again that they won't get too far.
 
Dixie said:
What about when the "religion" calls for implementation of Sharia Law as its stated objective and purpose? You see, what Cain is saying makes sense if you think about it. Our constitution is being used by a group of fanatics to promote the destruction of western civilization, under the guise of it being "their religion" ...and we are willfully going along with it, so as not to appear bigoted or prejudiced. Cain is pointing out there is a difference between honoring freedom of religion and accepting radical Islam.
Click to expand...

what does the 1st amendment say about that?
 
WinterBorn said:
And that difference would be not allowing laws to be based on religious beliefs but to allow people to worship as they choose and to have their house of worship where ever they can buy land and build it.
Click to expand...

But that's the rub... their religion is to seek implementation of Sharia Law. In other words, their "religious belief" contradicts our Constitutional principles, and there is no way to rectify that. If the Muslim faith didn't subscribe to this belief that Sharia should be adhered to as law of the land, and it was their mission to accomplish the destruction of western civilization, then we could discuss their right to "worship" their religion. As it is, we should question it, we have the right to question it, and denounce it.. .and that's what Cain said.


cawacko said:
Maybe I'm overlooking something but I am not seeing how building a mosque will cause the U.S. to have Sharia law no matter how much the people at the mosque may want it. If people at that mosque decide that are going to follow Sharia law and it goes against U.S. laws they will get arrested and prosecuted. (I'm assuming) they can't claim they are following Sharia law in court and that it supercedes the Constitution and win. If someone wants to run for political office claiming they support Sharia law I'm going to assume again that they won't get too far.
Click to expand...

If the KKK wanted to construct a "church" in your town, would you, as a citizen, have the right to protest that? Can ANY fanatical extremist group form a "religion" or a "church" and advance their agenda in contradiction to the US Constitution? I think Cain makes a brilliant point, and I admire him for having the courage to stand up there and say it, regardless of the idiots who want to make it out to be racist or religious persecution. Radical Islam is NOT a religion as we traditionally understand religion. It's goal and objective are the destruction of western civilization and implementation/adherence to Sharia Law.
 
Dixie said:
But that's the rub... their religion is to seek implementation of Sharia Law. In other words, their "religious belief" contradicts our Constitutional principles, and there is no way to rectify that. If the Muslim faith didn't subscribe to this belief that Sharia should be adhered to as law of the land, and it was their mission to accomplish the destruction of western civilization, then we could discuss their right to "worship" their religion. As it is, we should question it, we have the right to question it, and denounce it.. .and that's what Cain said. .
Click to expand...

Making laws based on Sharia Law goes against the US Constitution. So you think we should go against the US Constitution to prevent it? Isn't that just making the constitution a matter of law when it is convenient?

The idea that a religion should be prevented because they want to institute religious based laws is ridiculous. They cannot make laws from the mosque. And anyone who acts in a manner that is against our laws can be arrested and imprisoned. There have been mosques in this country for a very long time. I don't see Sharia Law in force. In fact, there have probably been ten times as many attempts to base laws on biblical laws than on islamic laws.



Dixie said:
If the KKK wanted to construct a "church" in your town, would you, as a citizen, have the right to protest that? Can ANY fanatical extremist group form a "religion" or a "church" and advance their agenda in contradiction to the US Constitution? I think Cain makes a brilliant point, and I admire him for having the courage to stand up there and say it, regardless of the idiots who want to make it out to be racist or religious persecution. Radical Islam is NOT a religion as we traditionally understand religion. It's goal and objective are the destruction of western civilization and implementation/adherence to Sharia Law.
Click to expand...

If the KKK were a religion, then yes they can construct a church, just like they can legally march in cities. The US Constitution doesn't just protect religions that are all sweetness and light. It protects all religions. Radical Islam will not convert this nation to Sharia law. But breaking the fundamental concepts of the basis of our entire nation to try and prevent something that may or may not happen is insanity.


Mosques are where muslims worship. Let them have that. But do not pass Sharia Law into our laws. Just like we don't allow only the 10 Commandments to be on display in a state supreme courthouse.
 
zkeetsm.gif
HermanCain_448.jpg
zkeetsm.gif





Dix is still spermin' over Herman.​
 
Dixie said:
But that's the rub... their religion is to seek implementation of Sharia Law. In other words, their "religious belief" contradicts our Constitutional principles, and there is no way to rectify that. If the Muslim faith didn't subscribe to this belief that Sharia should be adhered to as law of the land, and it was their mission to accomplish the destruction of western civilization, then we could discuss their right to "worship" their religion. As it is, we should question it, we have the right to question it, and denounce it.. .and that's what Cain said.




If the KKK wanted to construct a "church" in your town, would you, as a citizen, have the right to protest that? Can ANY fanatical extremist group form a "religion" or a "church" and advance their agenda in contradiction to the US Constitution? I think Cain makes a brilliant point, and I admire him for having the courage to stand up there and say it, regardless of the idiots who want to make it out to be racist or religious persecution. Radical Islam is NOT a religion as we traditionally understand religion. It's goal and objective are the destruction of western civilization and implementation/adherence to Sharia Law.
Click to expand...

So is that to say all Islam equals radical Islam?

And yes I believe people can protest. I live in San Francisco where people will protest anything at any time. I don't support the KKK or their beliefs but it a building owner wants to lease space to them to gather then I support that right. My city is full of crazy anarchists who have very little respect for the rule of law or the Constitution yet they have the right to live here and do their thing unless they are caught breaking the law.
 
Volt said:
I like Cain and I agree the spread of Islam is a bad thing, but he's 100% dead wrong on this issue. It would be an obvious violation of the 1st and 14th amendments. Furthermore, once the "community" has the power to stop the building of mosques, they can just as easily stop the building of any other house of worship.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmmmmmm. :megusta:
 
Volt said:
When was the last time a Christian walked into a pizzeria, club, or wedding reception and blew themselves up, killing dozens of innocent people?

Things like that happen (e.g. militant anti-abortionists), but it's extremely rare. That's because Christians, by and large, are tolerant of other beliefs, whereas a significant portion of Muslims are not. Jesus didn't teach His followers to kill unbelievers. Muhammad did.
Click to expand...
When was the last time Muslims invaded another nation and murdered 20 to 30 million of it's inhabitants?
 
WinterBorn said:
"[Holding the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch]
King Arthur: How does it... um... how does it work?
Sir Lancelot: I know not, my liege.
King Arthur: Consult the Book of Armaments.
Brother Maynard: Armaments, chapter two, verses nine through twenty-one.
Cleric: [reading] And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, "O Lord, bless this thy hand grenade, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy." And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths, and carp and anchovies, and orangutans and breakfast cereals, and fruit-bats and large chu...
Brother Maynard: Skip a bit, Brother...
Cleric: And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.
Brother Maynard: Amen.
All: Amen"
Click to expand...

:burn:
 
Volt said:
Your statement puzzles me. When did a Christian bomb a shack with a family in it? Can you name a specific incident?

Tell me, what kind of country would you feel safer living in: a Christian country like the US, Canada, Switzerland, etc., or an Islamic country like Pakistan or Iran?
Click to expand...
or Serbia?
 
WinterBorn said:
Making laws based on Sharia Law goes against the US Constitution. So you think we should go against the US Constitution to prevent it? Isn't that just making the constitution a matter of law when it is convenient?
Click to expand...

I don't believe it is going against the Constitution to oppose ideology which seeks to destroy the Constitution. Sorry!

The idea that a religion should be prevented because they want to institute religious based laws is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It's not that they "want" to implement Sharia, it's that they state as their goal and objective to do so. It is the purpose of their existence as a religion, just as a Christian's purpose is to teach the Word of Christ. While our Constitution is intended to protect the religious expression found in Christianity, it doesn't apply to Sharia, which is in direct conflict with the Constitution.

They cannot make laws from the mosque. And anyone who acts in a manner that is against our laws can be arrested and imprisoned. There have been mosques in this country for a very long time. I don't see Sharia Law in force. In fact, there have probably been ten times as many attempts to base laws on biblical laws than on islamic laws.
Click to expand...

But that is their goal, that is what they hope to accomplish, that is the purpose and objective of their religious belief. How can you deny them the right to exercise their religious beliefs? Building a mosque doesn't impose Sharia, true... but it legitimizes the objectives of radical Islam, and endorses their efforts to destroy western civilization.

If the KKK were a religion, then yes they can construct a church, just like they can legally march in cities. The US Constitution doesn't just protect religions that are all sweetness and light. It protects all religions. Radical Islam will not convert this nation to Sharia law. But breaking the fundamental concepts of the basis of our entire nation to try and prevent something that may or may not happen is insanity.
Click to expand...

So basically, any radical extremist group can cloak their warped and twisted ideology in "RELIGION" and we must accept it and welcome it, because they said it was their "religion?" How fucked in the head is that???

Mosques are where muslims worship. Let them have that. But do not pass Sharia Law into our laws. Just like we don't allow only the 10 Commandments to be on display in a state supreme courthouse.
Click to expand...

No, Mosques are where radical Islamists teach hate for Jews and Infidels and seek to destroy western culture and civilization by advocating, implementing, and enforcing adherence to Sharia Law. Because they realize you have this thing about "religious freedom" they are claiming this is their "religion" when it's more of an ideology... one that directly conflicts with our own Constitutional ideology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top