Posted on 09/13/2012 4:08:56 PM PDT by Morgana
Let’s face it friends. What is being done by non-Muslims in this war is not even coming close to saving our future generations from Islamic rule. Muslims have successfully turned our freedoms into a tool of Islam, nation building didn’t work out the way President Bush thought it would, and “moderate” Muslims are not coming to the rescue. The way I see it is that we will eventually lose this war if there are no major changes in our laws and actions. The first changes should be for America to become energy independent and then end all Muslim immigration. For it is a Trojan Horse. Even after those actions we would still be left with IslamoBLOB slowly devouring America.
Great leaders such as Geert Wilders see this, and that is why he is calling for an end to Mosque Construction. He sees that the West has had more than enough Islam. So has a friend of ours who has been warning America to the threat of Islam for 40 years! That friend is Mr. Martel Sobieskey, a true patriot. Here is his latest…
(Excerpt) Read more at loganswarning.com ...
It's constitutional if it can be shown that islam is not a religion in the meaning or spirit or intent of the 1st Amendment.
That should take, gee, about all of 30 seconds to prove beyond a shadow of doubt - complete with evidence of actual Muslims screaming for murder and agreeing that the purpose of Islam is the complete and utter destruction of America and the ensalving or murder of its population.
Actually, I think I can do it in ten seconds.
Or less.
I would posit that your attitude is anatema to our traditions and dangerous to our republic. Yes, we need to deal with the threat of Islamic extremism. But doing so by prohibiting Islam as a whole is not the way to do it, and is un-American.
That's a direct threat. My point is that simply advocating violence generally, without being a direct threat/assault and without inciting imminent lawless action, is protected speech according to 40-plus year old SCOTUS precedent.
That is why The Pig Kennedy (D-Hell) and his rat cohorts worked so hard to allow open borders. Muslims are just another divisive group allowed unlimited access. The intent it to destroy our society and drive us toward despotic rule.
For a smart guy you should know this.
Well you could just ask the IRS. After all, they determine religious authenticity all the time. Just try telling them you should be exsmpt because of your religion, and watch how fast they make an administrative ruling on the interpretation of the application of the definition of the 1st Amendment in your case.
The entire purpose of government is to make decision and draw lines. Is it bad if I shoot you dead because I don't like you, but okay if I shout Allahu Akbar first, and claim I'm following my religion?
Grow the hell up, or go play with the morons in the DU sandbox and stop wasting people's time here. If you haven't noticed, our country is under attack, and adults are having a conversation.
Oh, and Congress should use its Article III powers to neuter the commie blackrobes. I kind of like Newt's idea of disestablishing the Ninth Circus, send the tyrants home and start over. No messy impeachments.
But Islam isn’t a religion. It is a political organization of murder, rape, and conquest that pretends to be a religion.
“The entire purpose of government is to make decision and draw lines.”
Sorry, but I don’t want the government to have that kind of power.
Islam is a recognized religion, not one I agree with but the threat of Muslim terrorists isn’t nearly so scary to me as a Federal Government with the power to declare wich established religions are legit.
The IRS determination on this issue is largely a subjective analysis - e.g., they verify whether you genuinely hold religious beliefs or whether you are merely purporting to hold such beliefs in order to gain tax advantages. They do not conduct any substantive analysis of the purported religious beliefs themselves.
The entire purpose of government is to make decision and draw lines. Is it bad if I shoot you dead because I don't like you, but okay if I shout Allahu Akbar first, and claim I'm following my religion?
Of course not. Laws against murder (and other crimes) are laws of general applicability that apply regardless of whether the conduct is purportedly done for religious reasons. There is actually Supreme Court caselaw on this issue - not concerning murder, but concerning drug laws. You can't take drugs and then claim that you were doing so because your religion required it, even if such drug use is a real part of your religious beliefs. So, in your example, if Islam "required" you to shoot me dead, your 'right' to shoot me would not be protected by the First Amendment, but your right to believe in Islam would.
Grow the hell up, or go play with the morons in the DU sandbox and stop wasting people's time here. If you haven't noticed, our country is under attack, and adults are having a conversation.
I understand that we are under attack, and I am trying to be part of the conversation. Just because I happen to believe that outright banning Islam is not the solution, and is unconstitutional, does not mean that I need to "[g]row the hell up," nor does it mean I belong on DU.
The IRS determination on this issue is largely a subjective analysis - e.g., they verify whether you genuinely hold religious beliefs or whether you are merely purporting to hold such beliefs in order to gain tax advantages. They do not conduct any substantive analysis of the purported religious beliefs themselves.
The entire purpose of government is to make decision and draw lines. Is it bad if I shoot you dead because I don't like you, but okay if I shout Allahu Akbar first, and claim I'm following my religion?
Of course not. Laws against murder (and other crimes) are laws of general applicability that apply regardless of whether the conduct is purportedly done for religious reasons. There is actually Supreme Court caselaw on this issue - not concerning murder, but concerning drug laws. You can't take drugs and then claim that you were doing so because your religion required it, even if such drug use is a real part of your religious beliefs. So, in your example, if Islam "required" you to shoot me dead, your 'right' to shoot me would not be protected by the First Amendment, but your right to believe in Islam would.
Grow the hell up, or go play with the morons in the DU sandbox and stop wasting people's time here. If you haven't noticed, our country is under attack, and adults are having a conversation.
I understand that we are under attack, and I am trying to be part of the conversation. Just because I happen to believe that outright banning Islam is not the solution, and is unconstitutional, does not mean that I need to "[g]row the hell up," nor does it mean I belong on DU.
Again, that is conduct directed at your neighbor. Harassment. If, on the other hand, you said to another friend, "someone should really kick my neighbor's butt," that would be protected speech, unless your words were intended to incite (or you believed your words would incite) your friend to kick his butt. But merely advocating violence, as opposed to inciting it or threatening it, is protected speech.
To recognize it better, take a holiday in Dearborn, Michigan.
Dearborn and adjacent Detroit are what we have to look forward to if the rat and muzzie jihad against our civil society are not stopped.
No more mosques! No repairs to existing mosques!
No muslims allowed in the USA. Only muslims are allowed in Meccacca, they can allah go there!
“To recognize it better, take a holiday in Dearborn, Michigan.
Dearborn and adjacent Detroit are what we have to look forward to if the rat and muzzie jihad against our civil society are not stopped.”
Didn’t Boston once feel that same way about Irish Catholics?
Do you consider Islam to be a threat to our republic, our enemy?
I’ve never seen a Catholic or Protestant church with concertina wire around it keeping people out.
Those citizens who would defend America, would do well to consider them enemy armories.
That’s how they’ve been used in the Mid-East!
We are not talking about a religion here. What religion would be so violent? We are talking about an ideology masquerading as a religion. Keep them out of America
Instead of closing Mosques...we need to be more honest about Islam, and, we need the media to stop covering up the truth about Islam
Sad is that we have a number posting on here who blame this “film”, Pastor Terry Jones, anyone else accurately describing Islam...as the cause of the recent wave of Islamic Terrorism.
Being honest about Islam will do more than anything.
I consider Islamic terrorism a threat to our republic and our enemy. I don’t consider banning Mosques to be an effective or Constitutional solution to the threat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.