|
Post by mohs on Nov 25, 2015 9:29:51 GMT -5
I agree. Muslim need to learn how to moderate their religious impulses to join a more democratic modern world. Other religions have seemed able to accomplish that. Its big problem according to ones perspective.
Does a democratic society have the authoritorial rights to limit a person public religious display? The burka question in France is such a testing of that. Does a secular democratic state have the right to regulate what a person can wear in public?
For me, I would say yes-- but with lots of caution. Thorny issue. But if people are going it immigrate then the burden is on them to assimilate to that culture.
As to changing people’s hearts in a generational way? I hope mass extermination is not the only solution.
|
|
|
Post by 1dave on Nov 25, 2015 10:20:53 GMT -5
I agree. Muslim need to learn how to moderate their religious impulses to join a more democratic modern world. Other religions have seemed able to accomplish that. Its big problem according to ones perspective. Does a democratic society have the authoritorial rights to limit a person public religious display? The burka question in France is such a testing of that. Does a secular democratic state have the right to regulate what a person can wear in public? For me, I would say yes-- but with lots of caution. Thorny issue. But if people are going it immigrate then the burden is on them to assimilate to that culture. As to changing people’s hearts in a generational way? I hope mass extermination is not the only solution. For Muslims, immigration is part of jihad. If the new neighbors allow them to 1. bring their relatives, 2. build mosques, and 3. establish sharia law, the neighbors have caved to Islam and that area has become part of the Caliphate.
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Nov 25, 2015 10:30:50 GMT -5
I agree. Muslim need to learn how to moderate their religious impulses to join a more democratic modern world. Other religions have seemed able to accomplish that. Its big problem according to ones perspective. Does a democratic society have the authoritorial rights to limit a person public religious display? The burka question in France is such a testing of that. Does a secular democratic state have the right to regulate what a person can wear in public? For me, I would say yes-- but with lots of caution. Thorny issue. But if people are going it immigrate then the burden is on them to assimilate to that culture. As to changing people’s hearts in a generational way? I hope mass extermination is not the only solution. For Muslims, immigration is part of jihad. If the new neighbors allow them to 1. bring their relatives, 2. build mosques, and 3. establish sharia law, the neighbors have caved to Islam and that area has become part of the Caliphate.
|
|
Intheswamp
Cave Dweller
Member since September 2015
Posts: 1,910
|
Post by Intheswamp on Nov 25, 2015 10:45:20 GMT -5
Lots of good questions there, Ed. First thing, I'm not proposing mass extermination, though I can see how that might have been taken from my post. What I'm getting at is that the seeds of this barbaric ISIS/ISIL mentality must be made infertile. But, can it be? We have festering incubators of "my Islam way or dead today" mentality in our prison systems and no one can tell me that there aren't many mosques in the USA that are incubators for this. Rather than incubators, the middle east has boiling cauldrons of this sickness. At this point, bringing Syrian refugees into our country (or any other country) isn't very prudent in my opinion. Bringing them into the country reminds me of the twisted, evil people who smilingly gave the native Americans stacks of blankets infected with small pox...it's not going to take but one or two infected ones to cause a large and deadly problem. The other night former NY mayor Giuliani tried making a point that a terrorist attack isn't going to kill many people and that the odds are that you won't be one of those people. BUT...what if you *are* one of those people or maybe one of your loved ones? Why take chances? There's plenty of area in the middle east, in Syria and Iraq even, that could be turned into a safe zone for the refugees...it would be much cheaper than bringing them here and supporting them...for the rest of their lives. The rich Arab countries are sitting there with theirs heads stuck in their oil-rich sand...let them take the refugees...much cheaper transportation, a familiar climate, not far to go back home when that time comes, problem even cousins/family. Of course, the idea of refugees being brought into the country is only maybe half of the problem...the security of the southern border and to a lesser extent the northern border are two gorillas in the room that isn't getting much attention right now. As for "a democratic society have the authoritorial rights to limit a person public religious display"... Yes, they do...IF the citizens of that democratic society have agreed upon it in a democratic way, whether by directly voting on a law or by giving that authority to people which they've elected. I would say appointed judges and justices are excluded here. I agree, a thorny issue. As for people coming into the country and assimilating, I agree wholeheartedly....why should we have to press "1" for English? ?
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Nov 25, 2015 18:25:21 GMT -5
Good read & thoughts Ed
I’m afraid I’m the one who started the extreme extermination You clarified it by saying that I was referring to. The thug ISIL tough talk acting barbarian bunch
Personally (and if I read you correctly -you’d agree) I’m not one to want to condemn a whole group of people. For their beliefs ect… I’m not sure what’s in the heart of Muslim people and their beliefs ? I will admit that their main text seem to be less about love & peace and borders on extreme exclusion of others. I’d like to believe this is because of when it was written. Times were tough with wars.
But for people who are so highly devoted to their concept-- I’m not sure what it its going to take to open their hearts? Because my heart is closed to their main writings. I just don’t see anything very appealing in them. Maybe they like it that way?
Yep it really torque me that Spanish language is on polling forms. English should be the official language! and if your voting you should have enough remedial knowledge of that language to cast a vote. Be nice to ---if you were a citizen
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Nov 26, 2015 16:52:27 GMT -5
This guy says it the way it really is. The scene from the mosque is shockingly true. The poll numbers and the minute of silence from the football games real. 60.000+ chanting allua snackbar is sick.
|
|
Mark K
Cave Dweller
Member since April 2012
Posts: 2,600
|
Post by Mark K on Nov 26, 2015 21:07:33 GMT -5
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Nov 27, 2015 13:13:10 GMT -5
A woman goes undercover for a year.
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Nov 27, 2015 14:06:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Nov 27, 2015 14:38:32 GMT -5
Yo Lee! I really enjoyed Andre Neil statement of doom to the caliphate punks although he did forget something in his French list don't forget Dijon
|
|
|
Post by captbob on Nov 30, 2015 17:32:13 GMT -5
Greg Gutfeld, from The Five (Fox News) just had an interesting analogy regarding "immigrants" from over there.
paraphrasing -
Say there is a baby food company from which one in a thousand of their jars of baby food could kill your child. Would you still buy that brand of baby food because those are acceptable odds?
What if only one in ten thousand jars was potentially deadly - would you buy it then?
|
|
Intheswamp
Cave Dweller
Member since September 2015
Posts: 1,910
|
Post by Intheswamp on Dec 5, 2015 11:39:43 GMT -5
I first heard that analogy from Mike Huckabee in regards to buying a large bag of peanuts with ten poison peanuts in the bag...would you let your family eat out of that bag?
|
|
Intheswamp
Cave Dweller
Member since September 2015
Posts: 1,910
|
Post by Intheswamp on Dec 5, 2015 11:40:07 GMT -5
|
|
Intheswamp
Cave Dweller
Member since September 2015
Posts: 1,910
|
Post by Intheswamp on Dec 5, 2015 11:46:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Dec 5, 2015 18:24:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by captbob on Dec 8, 2015 1:03:18 GMT -5
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Dec 8, 2015 8:26:30 GMT -5
Ah the hypocrisy of the left huh? I'm still waiting for Obama to declare all NRA members to be on the terror watch/no fly list. The problem with using lists is no due process is involved and who the Hell would trust the Obama government to make any kind of list? Hell, him and the Hildobeast think all Republicans are terrorists *L*......Mel
|
|
Fossilman
Cave Dweller
Member since January 2009
Posts: 20,685
|
Post by Fossilman on Dec 8, 2015 10:54:49 GMT -5
To put it in a nut shell! Islam is not a religion,its a political movement,spreading it's disease throughout the world!!!
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Dec 9, 2015 15:25:42 GMT -5
The whole world is freaking out about Trumps latest statements. This little bit of history should put a stain in the shorts of the left. During the Iran hostage crisis in 1980, liberal Democrat President Jimmy Carter put a ban on Shiite Islamists immigrating from Iran. During that terrible time in U.S. history, Carter said that his administration “will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.” Carter also ordered the deportation of 50,000 Iranian students already here. The intention was to prevent enemies from immigrating and to deport enemies already in our midst. And as Daniel Greenfield reported, Carter used a statute from 1952 as justification to justify his actions. “Carter did this,” Greenfield said, “by invoking the Nationality Act of 1952. A law originally opposed by Democrats for its attempt to restrict Communist immigration to the United States.” Greenfield went on to make the point that the old statutes may fit Trump’s policy ideas even better than they fit Carter’s. www.westernjournalism.com/people-freaking-out-about-trumps-muslim-plan-are-forgetting-to-mention-one-big-thing/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=WesternJournalism&utm_content=2015-12-09&utm_campaign=manualpost
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Dec 9, 2015 16:03:01 GMT -5
Thanks bushman you help make my case America many times have made what history may records as mistakes
Alien & Sedition Act during the Adams administration Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, Lincoln administration Japanese internment during WW2
They may or may not be mistakes But a good case can be made that they were the right mistakes for the right reasons double double speak ha ha
Obviously I'm not one to sacrifice my liberty for security But I am the wrong person to ask! I'm alone, old, and no family So you could say --I'm as free as as can be mostly
|
|