Posted on 08/23/2010 3:28:07 PM PDT by mnehring
What you said.
Ron Paul is the best at being theoretically right for all the wrong reasons. If Islam was a religion and not a political ideology like Nazism, he may have a point, but Ron misreads religion as the cause, as have many others. He also does have serious issues with Jews. His religion is a classic REPLACEMENT Theology. This combination is what colors his view.
He is correct that these issues are distracting us from the terrible and horrific and imminent collapse of the economy. He is dead wrong that these issues can be ignored or are intentionally distracting us by some sort of cabal.
The real issue is this: America will be destroyed much sooner by our debt, than we will be by the demographics of Muslims. His is the focus on the very very short term at the expense of the long term. We MUST address the economic truths he espouses. Or we will not have to worry about Islam. But, we MUST address ... no, address is not strong enough... we must ERADICATE the threat of Islam worldwide or all our economic prosperity will not matter.
Ron Paul is 50% perfect. And 50% DISASTER. Let’s not allow our reactions to his abject failure on Islam to poison us against his nearly flawless economic positions.
The local Paulians seem to have gone into hiding.
I don’t blame them.
Poor Paul, he’s so far right, he’s left.
Bye Bye Ron
There’s no “ding” here. I don’t care if RP gets hit by a bus tonight but educate yourself on the law.(RLUIPA).
I see his point as a critical reader of the law. He’s just too dumb to keep his mouth shut.
Yeah, you’re right, but it won’t. I still say that Paul is a fruitcake, 1st degree, or is self-medicating or both.
OK, what part of the RLUIPA is being violated? Where is the substantial burden?
I don’t like either, but as for now, Paul can at least speak in semi-coherent sentences although his anti-Semitism is starting to become overt. I think Roberts stopped speaking even semi-coherently a long time ago.
I agree. PCR is to the point of drooling.
“(1) EQUAL TERMS- No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that treats a religious assembly or institution on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly or institution. (2) NONDISCRIMINATION- No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation that discriminates against any assembly or institution on the basis of religion or religious denomination.”
Don’t get me wrong, I emotionally oppose this mosque to the fullest. But we conservatives can’t play both sides of the fence. Thats what liberals do. If I apply conservative values of property rights, I have to be conservative based on the letter of the law. I hope the place burns down.
My intent is to support RP’s interpretation of what’s true. And he’s spot on.
Except you left out the part about the state department funding the fundraising trip for this mosque. How does that square with Reverend Ron and his Church of Constitutional Purity?
Don’t freaking BS, ok? It’s not a mosque, it’s not religion... it’s a victory flag planted right where they smacked us all down.
I don’t disagree. Scientology isn’t a religion either. But this great country of ours has repeatedly upheld their right to build. It sucks. I hope one brick doesn’t get make it there. If it does, I hope it doesn’t make it a foot tall.
How are they violating that section? Were religious buildings at that site before? Are other churches being built there, but not the mosque?
Ron Paul will be as much to blame for the coming storm as obama.
I’m not sure how to answer your question and whether or not that is a prerequisite under that section. I’m not a Mark Levin. I’m just some jerk with a blackberry phone.
Ron PAul has it wrong. I don’t hate muslims. I hate their religion just as I hate bolshevism, fascism and whatever ism you like that destroys freedom. I have no wish to deprive anyone of the right to worship as they choose but the right to worship does include the right to threaten our way of life. It’s a hard choice but I would defer to the survival of our way of life even it if means a minority that would remove our freedoms no longer has the opportunity to impose their will on us.
“How are they violating that section? Were religious buildings at that site before? Are other churches being built there, but not the mosque?”
If that’s your interpretation could be propose the building of a christian place of worship to at least tie this up in court to at least prolong this building of the mosque? On your side guy..
Uh.. Ron my man I must respectfully part ways with you on this.
Appreciate your stand on the Fed but I believe you are mistaken
on this.
This should make every Ron Paul supporter in FR hang his/her head in shame.
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.