Posted on 04/26/2005 7:55:09 AM PDT by jan in Colorado
Sorry...should have said, "SaltyJoe" instead of "you"...
But I'm curious about what you think about it. The point is, the comments made against Muslims now were made against Catholics in our past. Should we have booted Catholics then?
If you realized my comment was not serious, then why did you feel the need to respond with clarification and insult? Save the bandwidth next time.
You made a good point, and maybe someone will respond with something like, "this just shows that Islam is not the problem--these thugs were just looking for an excuse to kill, so they didn't follow the teaching"... But I don't care to speculate...
Forgot to ping ya...sorry.
Gondring, I'm an aussie, I have no idea what kind of comments were made against catholics in the US in the past. There might be a few FReepers who have no idea either, perhaps you could enlighten all of us? (Mind you, what this has to do with 'planes flying into buildings, cyclists being bashed with baseball bats and different 'brands' of clerics, beats me.)
These thugs that were just looking for an excuse to kill, who were not following the teaching, were the son (and his friends) of the imam who preached that homosexuals should be killed by being thrown off tall buildings...
GONDRING, HAVE YOU GONE DEAF?
SEE # 96.
Your site does not represent MOST Muslims.
.Here is a better explanation of the Hadith and how MOST MUSLIMS use it
Go to any Mosque in America, they use the Hadith.
But that is not my point - there are over a billion Muslims, most of them who are NOT trying to kill you
They are not DIRECTLY trying to kill YOU. But they are through other methods. Look at Europe and how the Muslim population are growing and taking over. Soon they will be the majority and destroy Europe.
Here in America, Muslims are up to the same thing. Their Mosques support AL-Qaeda, and they are breeding like Rabbits inorder to take over.
Look at the numbers... if a lone nut can blow up the OK Federal building, why are their not hundreds of IEDs going off all over Detroit ?
That lone nut worked with Al-Qaeda, that was a Clinton coverup. That lone nut was a Muslim sypmpathizer who thought the US was abusing the Muslim world.
20 years ago you would be saying why arent planes being hijacked and crashed into buildings. Dont worry the IEDs and the bus bombings will happen here, if people listen to you and allow the monster of Islam to continue to grow in America.
Look at Isreal it is only 52% Jewish, the Muslims have a strong hold and are attacking. In many European Countries Muslims are 25% of the Population and growing, they are already rioting in the street, and attacking Europeans.
Once the Muslims have a comfortable number they will reach out and spread their peaceful faith through bombings, beatings, and other Islamic ways.
http://timblair.spleenville.com/archives/005279.php
"Last year, Imam Idrizi's son was jailed for four years and eight months, with a minimum of 15 months, for bashing gays.
Muhamed Idrizi, 20, and four others attacked a cyclist with a machete and bashed and robbed two other men. The court heard that the group had gone on what he called a "p--fter bashing" mission."
Nope. The real quote says "religion" not "God"...in other words, your whole point about it having to be the same God as Judeo-Christian is wrong.
I'm glad you don't spout those made up MAdison quotes that were circulating. They are easily shown false when you look at the writings of Madison, and legislation he wrote, containing such lines as: "...all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion..."
But let's go right to the heart of the matter:
"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?"
--James Madison, "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments," June 20, 1785
With an ocean between them, it likely did not strike them as necessary, but rather as a forgone conclusion that readers would understand if it ever became an issue.
Gee...they didn't seem to be so blasé about other entities across the ocean!
...both distant and recent precedent to suggest we should NOT TRUST them.
For Islamists in general, it seems very prudent not to trust them. But of all the American citizens who are Islamist, how many have demonstrated this..and how many Muslims will you lump in with them?
...wherever Islam is practiced without enforced limits or strictures, it becomes the predominant religion, to the detriment and destruction of all other religions.
I can appreciate your pragmatic, no-faith-in-Christianity's-supremacy approach, but I would suggest a second step...let's examine how such a twisted religion can gain ground. How is it able to spread if it's so vile?
When ALL of Islam (and I mean ALL) begins to...
I invite you to substitute "Christianity" in there and look at many cases where a few nuts are far from the mainstream. Should all churches be judged based on the Identity movement, for example?
The U.S. is not now, nor has it ever been, a democracy. We have always been a representative Republic.
It's insulting that you twist this around and make it seem like I don't know that, when I am the one bringing up Federalist X and pointing out that protection of the majority is not the question.
...this time we can take their word for things...
I'm not saying we should take their word for things. I'm saying we should simply keep our own Constitution strong and treat citizenship like the precious thing is should be...not pass it out to anyone who waltzes in across our too-porous border. I'm saying we shouldn't be harassing our own citizens...we should be addressing the problem for what it is.
...request to cite any misquoted lines which I had presented as accurate full quotes
So that's how you do it...you make claims that misrepresent the person you're "not exactly quoting"...and then claim it wasn't presented as an accurate full quote. Well, bottom line is that your Adams comment misrepresented Adams' quote.
"Strengthening our concept of citizenship" is bull-hockey, however. That sounds to me like a euphemistic way of suggesting that we do not already offer immigrants enough opportunity, or that US citizenship does not have enough benefits already.
I think you're misunderstanding my point. I'm NOT saying we should offer more opportunity to immigrants...but am saying we must respect citizenship more and protect it more.
...to stringently, aggressively pressure their own to assimilate into our language, customs, and culture in America. Thus far they simply have not done so - not in America, nor in any other non-muslim host country that I can name. Their chief distinction is actually that they do not do that.
Maybe the Hispanic Catholic immigrants can help them out with some pointers on how to assimilate.
In WWII, against the Axis powers - Germany and Italy - more than 40% (yes that number is correct) of all enlisted men in the US Army WERE ITALIAN.
Okay, I'm going to have to call you on that. First of all, the Axis contained Japan, also (not exactly a minor combatant). Secondly, there were 1/2-million Italian-Americans in the service, which is less than the total number of Italians we interned in this country during the war (about 600,000, including Joe DiMaggio's father)! You'd have to claim an awfully large officer corps to claim 40% of the enlisted were Italian-American, with our forces numbering several million.
Note, Catholics were also mistrusted in the 19th Century, since "they put the Pope above the President".
The Muslim contribution to American cultural life, is in fact, rather negligible to this point, and too much, it could be argued is detrimental.
Would you like their contribution to increase?
(Armour on, Lances high, Swords out, Bows drawn, Shields front ... Eagles UP!)
You forgot "Hands full!" ;-)
SENIOR MUSLIM CLERIC GIVES ISLAM A BAD NAME; (my headline)
"Melbourne, Australia) Police in Victoria state are investing one of Australia's most senior Islamic clerics after receiving complaints he incited his followers to attack gays.
The complaint alleges that Rexhep Idrizi was reading from the Koran when he made derogatory comments about gays saying they should have "their heads chopped off".
Idrizi is chairman of the Board of Imams. The outburst occurred before 1000 worshippers at a prayer service.
"It's just spite from idiots," the Iman said. "All I said was that homosexuality is prohibited in Islam.
"I wouldn't encourage anyone to attack my enemy," Idrizi told the Herald Sun newspaper. "And if you put this in the paper, it's discrimination against Islam and we will defend ourselves."
But worshipper Asip Demiri, who was at the service, told the paper that Idrizi had verbally attacked gays.
"I couldn't believe it. I was sitting there with my son and he comes out with comments as if the Koran says it's OK to attack homosexuals," Demiri told the Herald Sun. "He told us they should have their heads chopped off.
"My son asked me if what the Imam said was true and I said 'No, it's not'. Then, he wanted to know if the Imam was lying and I couldn't give him an answer that would make any sense.
"We go there to pray, not to listen to that kind of rubbish. There were a lot of intelligent people there who were offended by it. He (Imam Idrizi) needs to be taken to task for it, because it gives Muslims a bad name," Demiri said.
Inciting violence is illegal under state law, which was recently expanded to include gays.
Last year, Imam Idrizi's son was jailed for four years and eight months, with a minimum of 15 months, for bashing gays.
Muhamed Idrizi, 20, and four others attacked a cyclist with a machete and bashed and robbed two other men. The court heard that the group had gone on what he called a "puffter bashing" mission.
One victim was repeatedly kicked, punched and struck over the head with a machete in a park.
The gang then robbed the man, stripped him and taunted him with homophobic epithets."
http://www.365gay.com/newscontent/120703ozIman.htm
Well, not just Catholic...you can also include Catholic Lite. I'm a direct descendant of the last person to be burned for heresy in England, Edward Wightman. His brother brought Edward's kids over to America, forming some of the heretical (Baptist) roots from which I spring.
Don't worry...I don't hold any grudge...but it's interesting how such acts were carried out, and are still hinted at today.
I also don't think a numbers game is relevant at all. So what if Muslims are now where Catholics/Christians were in the past--does that mean Catholics/Christians should have been wiped out back then?
And please don't reference English Protestant historians for what happened during the Spanish Inquisition; otherwise, we'd have to consider Act Up's numbers for how many homosexuals exist in society.
Don't worry...I'll go by Thomas F. Madden, hero of the Inquisition :-) He confirms that "[t]orture was rare and only about 1 percent of those brought before the Spanish Inquisition were actually executed." Fair enough?
Still...would hate to be that rare victim, or in the 1 percent.
I also acknowledge that the Inquisitions turned their victims over to "secular" authorities rather than bloody themselves. Funny thing is, the reasons the "secular" authorities considered heresy a crime was because their positions were supposedly sanctioned by God. So...they weren't really independent of the Church, and since the executions were carried out in the name of Christianity, what different does it make?
How long did Demiri live after this?
I see that filibustering is now allowed in Australia, eh?
I don't understand the question, sorry.
"...viewed with distrust the strong allegiance of Roman Catholics to the Pope; many Protestants saw this allegiance to the Pope as an allegiance to a foreign prince (especially since the Pope was also head of state of the Papal States), and thus dangerous to American independence and possibly even treasonous.The kind of anti-Catholic hysteria of then is pretty similar to the anti-Muslim hysteria of today. I'm not saying that caution is unwarranted with some Muslims--it IS. But it's important to note that accusations that a group (now "Muslims") is more tied to their religion than our country is not a new complaint.
"These concerns spawned widely-held conspiracy theories regarding the Pope's purported plans to subjugate the United States through a continuing influx of his followers. The fact that Popes in the past had in fact wielded significant power and entangled themselves in wars and political disputes was frequently pointed to as evidence that the Pope was simply waiting for the right time to regain his lost temporal power, and served to further cement this notion in the minds of many Americans."
The question can be taken a few ways.
How can there be a "moderate" Muslim?
Why was he not immediately killed?
The ENTER key can help, or put <p> or <br><br> where you want to put in paragraph breaks.
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.