Can a good Muslim be a good American?

Cardinal Sfeir, Patriarch of the Maronites, has expressed his "understanding" of Palestinian suicide bombings.

Are we to understand from him that terrorism is justified? Of course not. And, yet, he is a "Catholic source."

You can save your postings. American Muslims seem to have rejected the rantings and ravings of imams and their fanatic confreres.

It is simply wrong to condemn people who have not demonstrated any rationale for condemnation.

"The answer is we could do it. We just would not be America anyore. I thought we were conservatives and feared excessive governent power."

BULL! Come on people, just because somebody claims their stupid belief is a religion we should not be required to surrender our safety to hate cults bent upon killing or converting all of us. Why is that concept so hard to understand?

We need to define what can be classified and protected as a valid religion. I suggest a few simple litmus tests that any group seeking 1st amendment protection must pass. If your belief fails any of the litmus tests below you belong to a hate group and must be expelled from the country.

#1: If your belief commands you to kill or enslave those who are not of your religion then you fail the litmus test. .

#2: If your belief commands you to kill anyone who leaves your organization then you fail the litmus test.

#3: If your belief demands you kill or enslave anyone who writes, draws, speaks negatively about your belief you fail the litmus test.

If you're talking about the Muslims

deport 'em and be done with the situation!

What about the millions of Muslims who are natural-born American citizens?

-sorry; but that's absolute BS.
Fact is: Arabs and all Muslims can be citizens of Israel, and even have the right to vote. Here are the FACTS on that:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/arabs2.html
"Arab Israelis are citizens of the Israel with equal rights."

Show me a Muslim state where the opposite is true.

"I don't know what that church would be ... but I certainly don't belong to it. I don't want to, either."

Sounds like you and the Islamofacists have more in common than you'd like to admit.

Show me a Muslim state where the opposite is true.

Turkey.

If people can find MoHAMmed in prisons, and convert to Islam, why couldn't Muslims convert to Christianity in camps?

Maybe it helps to belong to a church that says the U.S. Constitution was inspired by God. I don't believe in the U.s. Congress, but I do believe, very strongly, in the Constitution.

Any examples you care to share?

I don't think slavery has been outright banned. Could be wrong or maybe it's semantics, but it was described as a 7 year obligation after which they must be set free. Someone with some background on the subject should comment before dismissing out of hand as BS.

Perhaps we do need an Armageddon of sorts, whereby a few million muslims get vaporized...bringing in the 12th iman.

Then maybe that iman can speak 'ex cathedra' as a pope. He can speak as the absolute authority to change the interpretation of the Koran that too many think seems to call for beheadings and bloody jihad against infidels.

To me, that's the only thing that will work if you want to see your children and grandchildren have the opportunity to die of natural causes...and the United States celebrate a TRI-Centennial birthday.

I agree that
"Raw power and a willingness to use it, generates respect and relative peace in the Moslem world. Any overtures of peace/appeasement are view as signs of weakness and decadence. That is the simple fact of the matter"

But I also must agree with Invisible Hand, Agent Smith.

Muslims do not believe themselves to be giving their allegiance to the moon god of Arabia--- they are insulted when people claim Allah=Hubal. In Islamic belief, Allah created the universe, not just the moon. Perhaps the religion originated as worship of a moon god, although the case for that seems inconclusive at best, but even if one assumed that was the case, it would be an instance of the genetic fallacy to claim that their belief in Allah equated to belief in a moon god. Historically, Christian scholars such as F.E. Peters and G.K. Chesterton have looked at Islam as a Christian heresy--- Arianism in a different form, not as faith in a moon god i.e. Hubal.

Religiously and philosophically, many Muslims such as Amir Taheri hold to the sura from the Koran that "there should be no compulsion within religion". The fact that Muslims believe that there are no other gods besides who they take to be God is not an exceptional belief in and of itself. Christians take this to be the case about God as well.

Scripturally, the "Five Pillars" are practices that don't interfere with one being a good American: (In order of priority):

1)Testifying that Allah is the only god and Muhammad is Allah's prophet
2)Prayer- Saying a prayer five times a day
3)The paying of poor (charity)
4)Fasting during Ramadan
5)The Pilgrimage to Mecca

Geographically, turning to Mecca doesn't mean one's allegiance is to Saudi Arabia--- the Shiites in Saudi Arabia could attest to that.

The social and political aspects go with one another. It's not the mullah America has to worry about imo, so long as we stop letting radical Islamic "teachers" come so easily to America. And Islamic people seem to have little problem being friends with non-Muslims; after all, in Islam a Muslim man can marry an unconverted Christian or Jew who presumably he would have been friendly to beforehand.

But politically, many Muslims seem to believe that their allegiance to Islam forbids them not to make friends with, but to be ALLIES with, Christians or Jews. That IS a huge problem that will be tough to overcome, but a traditional Muslim like Taheri would say (I'm guessing)that the United States is actually more Islamic than Saudi Arabia or any Islamic nation, because the United States upholds principles of justice and so on.

Domestically, the United States has largely stopped the practices of honor killings and with enforcement and punishment that includes ethnic/racial/religious profiling, can likewise stamp out Islamic wife beating in America.

Intellectually, the Muslim can accept the American Constitution-- it is indirectly, not directly based upon Biblical principles and atheists (at least those who are not leftist) seem to have no trouble giving their assent to it.

Spiritually, the fact that the the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names, shouldn't keep a Muslim from being able to accept the premises of the Declaration of Independence.

My conclusion is that if a Deist can be a good American, so can a Muslim.

I think the mainstream media romanticizes Hezbollah, Osama Bin Ladin and other terrorists as being "devout" Muslims while denigrating any Muslims who speak out against them as "moderate".

Leftism has been the West's enabler of Islamism, whether in the form of Nazism, Communism, socialism or multiculturalism. The fact that Osama Bin Ladin parrots the talking points of Michael Moore is a reflection of this. Muslim immigrants who come to school here, either secondary or college, come expecting to have to fit their own beliefs into those of America, if only not to offend anyone--- only to find their teachers agree with every terrible thing they "learned" in their native schools about Israel and America. Instead of learning how to fit in, they learn how America is not worthy of survival-- that, as Michael Moore said, we had 9/11 coming (although, according to him, the terrorists may have hit the wrong state).

If the West can't defeat its urge to hate itself, whether one calls that urge Leftism, transnational progressivism or post-colonialism, we won't need help committing cultural and national suicide.

"Of course they can. And millions are."

Oh brother, "millions of good mudslimes"? Prove there are millions of good ones. You cannot as their utter silence tells the resting of thinking America they support the terrorists. In fact every time some of the maggot, cesspool infested subhumans commit come sort of terrorist act the first thing you hear out of your nonexistent good mudslimes is their fear they will be looked at in a bad light. Well I hope the bad light is mounted on a shot gun.

Thinking like this is going to get us all killed or converted to this hate cult. It is not a religion regardless of the number of hate crazed idiots who believe in the rantings of the koran.

We need to define what can be classified and protected as a valid religion. I suggest a few simple litmus tests that any group seeking 1st amendment protection must pass. If your belief fails any of the litmus tests below you belong to a hate group and must be expelled from the country.

#1: If your belief commands you to kill or enslave those who are not of your religion then you fail the litmus test. .

#2: If your belief commands you to kill anyone who leaves your organization then you fail the litmus test.

#3: If your belief demands you kill or enslave anyone who writes, draws, speaks negatively about your belief you fail the litmus test.

If by your standards, my God is Ceasar

I didn't say that. I offered a means of identifying whether or not you are worshipping "Caesar". Try reading for comprehension. Post #256 contains two conditional statements. read them. Comprehend them. Clearly, you do not comprehend them at this time.

One other thing. You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

Hold up the cartoon of Mohammed and see how they react.

That's nice.

When did freedome of speech become a license to lie?

Politicians do it every day.

Yes. I'm sure there are sources which will tell you jihad is an obligation for Muslims. Just as there are Catholic sources which will tell you that no person who is not a Catholic can be saved.

You're putting the scholars who wrote that entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia in the same category as the Feeneyites. I'm not surprised.

From Islam Online:

Jihad and Shari`ah in the Life of the Average Muslim*
By Salem Al-Hasi
April 27, 2005
Jihad implies a sincere struggle on both the personal and social levels.
An understanding of the concept of jihad is essential in order to comprehend the Muslim worldview. In Islam, jihad is a comprehensive process, which takes in the striving of an individual or a group of Muslims, to adhere to the divine teachings and values.
In this sense, jihad means a serious, continuous, and sincere struggle, on both the personal, as well as on the social level. It is a struggle to perform and maintain goodness, abolishing injustice, oppression, and evil from within oneself, as well as from the whole society. Thus, jihad takes many forms; spiritual, social, economic, as well as political.
Such striving (jihad) should go along with all actions. This is to assure the noble and positive outcome of any of these actions. Jihad, when meaning to fight, is only one form of this striving, in its comprehensive meaning. This, in fact, is a point that is not known.
[How is it that this is not known?]
The genuine purpose of fighting in Islam is to assure the freedom of religion and the safety of people; their lives and their belongings. Jihad (striving), on this particular level, is not only striving to fight the enemy. In order to maintain that the fighting is in the cause of God, the target of this fighting should be limited to those who fight you only. At the very end, the striving should never transgress limits. One can easily find these meanings in the verse of the Qur’an, which governs all verses of jihad:
[Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgression] (Al-Baqarah 2:190)
Jihad is prescribed in the Qur’an to protect one’s faith and one’s human rights. Although protecting these two entities requires—at times—the necessity of war, yet, it is not limited to it. On the contrary, Islam always promotes peaceful means to bring changes and reform in the society. [Namely? Historical examples?]
Therefore, qitaal (fighting), according to the Islamic teachings, is the last resort. Muslims should not fight until it is not possible for them to eliminate oppression and assure their freedom of faith by peaceful means. Only then, it becomes permissible for Muslims to fight.
It is an obligation for every Muslim to protect his faith. Muslims believe that God revealed the Shari`ah (Islamic Law) to serve the interests of people (masalih al-`ibad). According to Muslim scholars, among these interests is deen (religion). Thus, the rules and teachings of Shari`ah aim to protect one’s faith and even command every Muslim to protect his own.

So, if , hypothetically of course, if the church spoke out against or even called for attacks against the United States where would peoples priorities stand?

That's an unprofitable hypothetical at best. America would have to kill itself to rid itself of its Christian heritage, but your question is more interesting, say, in the context of modern China. In that "republic," Christians are routinely asked to declare their loyalty to the state first, then their faith--a question they must answer at great personal risk of torture and imprisonment. This is also a question asked of Muslims in Muslim majority countries. The question itself is decidedly unAmerican, since anyone who would put Christian principls against American principles doesn't really know the faith or the country.