Posted on 05/26/2010 7:33:01 AM PDT by jazminerose
Brandishing his libertarianism, Glenn Beck told listeners this morning that the government shouldn’t interfere with the plans to build a giant mosque at Ground Zero.
His argument is that the government shouldn’t be allowed to tell churches what to do.
His flawed logic reflects a profound misunderstanding of Islam. It’s not a religion, it’s a dangerous ideology using religion as cover. The radicals are not the Muslims who behead infidels–the radicals are the ones who don’t.
Those Muslims who reject the bloodthirsty ideology found in the Koran are the radicals. Those who live peaceful and productive lives are the extremists.
Slaying all the infidels is not some misinterpretation of the Koran–it’s a literal reading of it. The Koran and Hadith–the writings of the psychotic prophet Mohammed– are rife with orders to smite, slaughter, behead, enslave, mutilate and otherwise practice the Religion of Peace.
We expect the nutty community board to embrace this occupation by our sworn enemies. Beck should know better.
He's WEIRD, and perhaps all Mormons fear anything negative towards any religion, whatsoever????
It surprises me, however, that evidentally CNN was able to "contain" this weirdo, because he certainly didn't launch his TV career behaving like a madman.
Duh."
I take your point, but the official Japanese state religion was Shinto, not Buddhism.
I am a constitutional conservative, not a nanny-stater.
I fear the government, and sometimes permitting a bad decision (e.g., a mosque) is best to deny the government power that it will ultimately abuse.
While I am totally against this, it is legal though. I would think it impossible to change this law by making a decision that what is recognised by one party as a religion, isn’t by another. How would that work and still keep religion and state seperate?
Yeah, and we should deny Jews the right to build temples because their religion is incomplete and they killed Jesus.
And no more Catholic churches, too. They worship Mary and vote 56% for Obama and are loyal to the Pope.
And no Episcopals because of the queer bishop!
And no Methodists because of . . .
And no Baptists because . .
(Or maybe we just stay out of it.)
Disagree with Beck on this. Islam by it’s very nature seeks to replace our government with an Islamic theocracy. In other words, it is a direct threat to our Constitution, therefore innately seditious.
Islam can only exist in America if they, corporately and individually, renounce Sharia law and theocratic goals. They do not mix culturally, socially or politically in our country and ALL Islamic immigration should be stopped in its tracks - period.
Good luck with that.
Islam will never replace our government.
Another good argument against allowing Islam to use our own goodness against us.
He’s right. This is America, my friend.
So what religions do you approve of being permitted in this country to build places of worship?
You know, what are to be the new offical state relgions of America, with all others forbidden?
How the hell is Islam a “religion”?
Are you ok with a Churh of Satan at Ground Zero as well?
Beck does a phenomenal job at exposing the ‘progressive ‘ movement along with their leadership roles.
He serves a purpose in the conservative movement but is not in a leadership role but rather in a commentary one.
We are not going to agree on everything in this country and people are entitled to their OPINIONS.
I’d ‘agree to disagree’ with Beck and leave it at that.
And America was never going to elect a communist President either.
Maybe not, but Islam will eventually have to be put down in this country, and it won’t be with a whimper. The violence and upheaval will be enormous. Better done sooner than later.
Well, the key is in the tax codes. The point of calling yourself a church is to get tax exempt status.
Any changes should come via the tax code. Why shouldn’t their be some rational basis for allowing an organization to claim tax exempt status? We do it with non profits all the time.
Churches have special privileges but even that is not absolute. How much money did “Reverend” Wright rake in tax free? Or Jesse Jackson? Farrakhan?
Do I approve of this mosque? NO! It is a thumb in the eye of all Americans and especially New Yorkers. And...There is plenty that we as citizens can do privately and legally to prevent its construction.
But,.....
Please remember that any government powerful enough to give you what you want ( in this case banning a mosque) is also powerful enough to take from you what you want ( a future church zoning permit).
I suggest a vigorous boycott of any businesses related to its construction. I would also remind these businesses that citizens can think up a **lot** of creative ( and legal) ways to delay construction and make it highly unprofitable for these businesses to finish the building in a timely manner. And...As citizens, if it does manage to get finished, we could think up many interesting ( and legal) ways to see that no one was able to use the building.
The First Amendment protects the Mosque from the Federal government.
It’s the same clause that protects Christians’ right to pray.
However, there is perhaps something the city of New York could do as far as building permits, or in the interest of public safety. Don’t count on Bloomberg to do anything of the like, though.
What religions do you propose being protected by the First Amendment?
Let’s see your list of offical state religions that can have houses of worship built there.
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.