Bush Takes on Christian Right Over Anti-Islam Words

ABC News ^ | November 13, 2002 | By Randall Mikkelsen

[TLBSHOW]

We plan to send the liberal left democrats to the stone age

[A2J]

That being said, those who are not terrorists should rise up with fervor and denounce loudly and repeatedly the terrorist actions that bring shame to them all.

Then why hasn't there been a concerted effort by "peace-loving" Islamists to expose those on U.S. soil who have links to terrorist organizations?

Until I see footage of Islamists in the U.S. testifying against other Islamists, I will hold to my beliefs that Islam is not a "religion of peace."

[Prodigal Son]

You never asked my first questions.

I'm just asking people to break it down to specifics. What exactly are we calling for here?

One fellow wants all Muslims- American or otherwise deported. So, if I convert to Islam- even if I don't break any laws- I should be deported to some unspecified place.

Ok, let's just go with that for a minute. How do we determine who's a Muslim and who not? Do we bug their homes? Listen in on their prayers? Have gov't agents tail them? What about if they simply own a copy of the Koran? How do we know if someone is really a Muslim or not? The things we'd have to do to make that determination would basically amount to a State Sponsored Religious Inquisition. Is that really what we want?

The Lefties never think about the consequences of what they want- that's what makes them lefties. They can't (or won't) speculate more than 10 minutes down the road. But we need to put the brakes on a minute here and act like Conservatives and people who call for less Government intrusion into our lives. You give the gov't the power to do it to Muslims- what's to protect the Hindus, Jews and Christians?

It's just a simple question.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

Look at their history.

I am sorry, but can you name an prostelitizing religion that hasn't grown through conquering other people and used passages in the religious text to justify what were ultimately political decisions?

Moreover, other than the last 50 years of "relative" peace, man has been in a constant state of war almost everywhere in the world. Religion always came into to play when the people fighting had different ones.

[Prodigal Son]

And how would you determine who's a Muslim and who is not?

[Revolting cat!]

...a nation founded on religious freedom.

And so, we stumble upon yet another seed of self-destruction carried by the Western nations. Absolute freedom for those who want to and will destroy us after destroying first our lofty ideas about freedom. (See under 'political correctness'.) Another fine mess...

[Gurn]

But we need to put the brakes on a minute here and act like Conservatives and people who call for less Government intrusion into our lives.

I'd say you need to "put the brakes on" and realize we're at war.

[Jael]

I believe McVeigh was a Catholic.

[Prodigal Son]

I realize fully we are war. So- that entire line of argument now comes to an end. You realize we are at war- I realize we are at war. End of discussion.

Now, answer the questions.

How would you go about determining who is a Muslim and who not?

[Gurn]

I am sorry, but can you name an prostelitizing religion that hasn't grown through conquering other people and used passages in the religious text to justify what were ultimately political decisions?

Yeah. Evangelical Christianity.

And before you even start with the "Constantine" or "Crusades" B.S., that wasn't evangelical Christianity.

The Southern Baptist Convention is the largest protestant denomination in the U.S. And I don't think Baptists grew by forcibly converting people. What's your next question?

[stuartcr]

You must be like a lot of freepers that believe that if a Muslim doesn't follow the Koran exactly as you interpret it, then they are not Muslims. Aren't there a lot of Christians that do not follow your interpretation of the bible, or jews with the their holy book? Are they not still Christians or Jews? Just because something is in a book, doesn't mean everyone goes by it. Do you really believe that every single Muslim in the world is committing violent acts? As an exercise, why don't you just substitute the words 'middle-eastern terrorists and their cohorts' for Muslims, you'll be talking about the same people, but you won't be including the millions of non-terrorist Muslims in the world.

[Gurn]

I would start with the mosques. Bulldoze them. When people show up and say "Why did the Zionist conspirators and infidels and enemies of Islam destroy our peaceful mosque, allah be praised?" I'd ship them off.

How's that for a start?

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Yup, so was Starkweather, so was Bundy, Gacy, etc.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

So you agree with him that Islam is a religion of peace?

In short, yes.

I believe that Islam is being perverted by those who are focusing on the most extreme messages of the religion. This can and has been done with almost every religion, Christianity included.

Most Muslims for most of history have focoused, practiced and believed in the Islam that stresses faith, obedience to God, charity and humbleness.

If Arab nations were not led by oppressive, oil rich dictators than the poilitics would not have been forced to the mosque and Islam would not have been perverted into an excuse to kill innocent human beings.

Before I am beraged with quotes from the Koran telling Muslims to kill infidels, I can supply similar ones from the Bible. It is a matter of emphasis and there is a reason that imams are choosing to emphasize the violence instead of the peace. The hate instead of the love.

Mr. Bush recognizes that it is contrary to everything that is American to punish an entire group for the actions of an extreme few. I know that the analogy is lacking, but blaming all Muslims for the actions of the few somehow wreaks of blaming Jews for crucifying Jesus. But, I rest assured that Christianity would never be perverted to include such a thought.

[Gurn]

Do you really believe that every single Muslim in the world is committing violent acts?

No. I also believe that's completely irrelevnt.

I'll ask it again: If the "vast majority" of Muslims are not committing violent acts, and if, as you suggest, they're opposed to it, why are the vast majority of Muslims doing nothing about it?

[Prodigal Son]

I would start with the mosques.

How would you determine what a mosque was? What if the Muslims took to meeting in the basements of their homes? Please answer.

When people show up and say "Why did the Zionist conspirators and infidels and enemies of Islam destroy our peaceful mosque, allah be praised?" I'd ship them off.

What if they simply asked "Why was our mosque destroyed?" Would you still load 'em up? What if the people asking and concerned about it were simply Christians who didn't agree with that action? Would you load them up as well? What about protestors who protested such action- would they get shipped off too? And what if no country would take them? Come on now, these are simple questions.

[TLBSHOW]

BUMP

[Gurn]

I can supply similar ones from the Bible.

Good. Let's hear where Christians are instructed by Christ or the apostles to murder non-Christians.

If Arab nations were not led by oppressive, oil rich dictators than the poilitics would not have been forced to the mosque and Islam would not have been perverted into an excuse to kill innocent human beings.

And if your aunt had a beard, she'd be your uncle.

I don't care. I don't care, I don't care.

We're dealing with the here and now, not "what would have been" if a bunch of rag-heads hand't done such-and-such.

Muslims are murdering Americans, and they're targeting babies in the West Bank.

They must be destroyed.

[TLBSHOW]

A real problem we have here don't we because of the liberals and the commies and the left and the muslims and the black muslims and the hate cult islam, what is a country to do?

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

Sorry Gurn all Christianity is Evangelical.

I it would seem your notion of "History" is much shorter than my own. I would look at Christianity as a religion and not its specific sects. At best I would divide it between the Orthodox East, Catholics and Protestants. Any further is to confuse matters.

Or should we start talking about Sunnis and Shiites and Wahabism. Oh, or didn't you know that there are different types of Muslims? Or should we just lump them all together and put them on a ship to somewhere else?

Actually Mormons, who are far more different from other Protestants than any other might be a good example of a non-violent prosteltyzing religion. But, ultimately, they are too small to count at this point.