When was the last time that a Catholic strapped on a bomb and blew up a shopping market?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Obama appeals for tolerance on 9/11
- Thread starter Jedi Knight
- Start date
When was the last time that a Catholic strapped on a bomb and blew up a shopping market?
America does support freedom of religion. The problem is, the Muslims do not believe in freedom of religion and will impose Islam when they can. Don't say they won't do this, they are doing it in Europe today and it is a growing problem.
It is like freedom of speech. Our constitution guarantees freedom of speech. However, it is assumed you cannot speak to overthrow the very constitution that grants you that freedom of speech. If you do that you are not living under and supporting the constitution.
Another example. When you vote, by assumption you support the winner of the election even if that person is not the one you voted for. When I voted for McCain (who I wasn't all that keen on), by casting that vote in a free election I agreed that I would support Obama if he won.
You have to understand this concept. If the Muslims were willing to let all people worship as they please, then they agree to freedom of religion. But they do not. They do not honor our constitution or agree to it, therefore they are not entitled to it's protection. You cannot seek to overthrow the constitution and seek it's protection as well.
This is legal theory and has a name, I will try to find it. But basically put, you cannot claim the protection of a right and seek to overthrow that very right. This is what the Muslims are trying to do. They seek to impose their religious beliefs on America under the protection of freedom of religion, all the while seeking to take away this very right.
This is what I am talking about:
You cannot use freedom of speech to overthrow freedom of speech. You cannot claim a right and seek to destroy that very right. The communists could not claim the protection of the government to advocate the very overthrowing of that same government.
This is the difference between the Muslims and all other religions. All other religions allow freedom of religion, but the Muslims do not. Therefore they cannot claim the protection of freedom of religion because they seek to overthrow it.
I am surprised no one has ever brought up this important legal theory.
You cannot use freedom of speech to overthrow freedom of speech. You cannot claim a right and seek to destroy that very right. The communists could not claim the protection of the government to advocate the very overthrowing of that same government.
This is the difference between the Muslims and all other religions. All other religions allow freedom of religion, but the Muslims do not. Therefore they cannot claim the protection of freedom of religion because they seek to overthrow it.
I am surprised no one has ever brought up this important legal theory.
Last edited by a moderator:
I haven't advocated enacting a federal law to prohibit Islam!
Our right to worship, however, is already being taken away bit by bit and the very laws designed to protect it are what's being used to justify it. The same corruption of freedom of speech is being used for freedom of religion.
If we keep encouraging Islam, joining hands with them, etc. do you think the Lord will be pleased with us?
How about we start by cutting out Obama's baloney of reaching out to Muslims? What kind of outcry would there be if we reached out to Christians?
We don't need our government to be reaching out to Muslims, sending representatives of the Muslim faith under the auspices of the US State Department, engaging NASA to uplift Muslims, encourage the building of Muslim mosques, speaking out against the burning of a Koran by a Christian church regardless the merits or demerits of it, or encouraging diversity and tolerance which in this case means endorsing Islam. Are we afraid of Muslims to the point we have to pander to them now?
The President is free to express his opinions about religion - the Constitution bans Congress for enacting laws but it doesn't ban the President from speaking his mind. How about we have a President that speaks his mind for Christianity - like so many once did - instead of Islam even though it carries no force of law? Would that be okay?
How about we limit the Constitution's limits to those that were intended and stop applying it to everything down to your local school board, or parks & recreation department, or private businesses, or perhaps soon private individulas which was never the intent?
Last edited by a moderator:
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
The First Amendment applies to the States through selective incorporation because of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The law is a tricky thing and even though it only says Congress it really applies to State and tribal governments as well.
But what do I know, I'm an evil liberal and you think I'm an atheist. :laugh:
Fred's Wife
Member
:thumbsup:
Why is there an outcry for "tolerance" for everything EXCEPT Christianity?
Yeah, that sounds like a good law school explanation! It's what we've let some judge tell us but it's not what the Congress said nor intended. People just keep repeating enough times and then we all believe it. It was never the intent that we be ruled by a small body of men who once selected are empowered until death to decide what the law means or does not mean by their own standards. We need a Congress and an Executive that puts the Court in check! We need citizens that demand it.
The more "tolerant" of islam we become, the more like Saudi Arabia. The more loud calls for prayers 5 times daily, of which the the first and foremost of chants is about the one allah and the one prophet. The more the furtherance of that one allah and one prophet justifies anything and everything for for those belive it-- torture and death for the infidels, that is, and that holy book, for which so much 'tolerance' has been pled for, demands.
Face it: America and our freedoms are are a great anomoly in world history. Such will not last, not by reason or by biblical prophecy. People are inherantly evil, per scripture. As much as we wish it were not so, living free is an illusion.
You have professed to be a liberal so I'll take your word on that. I generally don't like liberals - no point hiding it! That doesn't mean we can't be friends and brothers in Christ - it does mean we're going to be at odds a lot and seriously so!
I do think liberalism is an evil ideology. I don't think you're an atheist but I do think you're in danger of adopting more liberal ideology which I do think atheists wholeheartedly embrace.
I'd love to see you become a conservative because I know you're an intelligent young man that could do some real good in the world as a conservative Christian by and through our Lord. You've got to start by discounting 90% of what those law professors are filling your head with!
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
When did President Obama become the leader of Indonesia?
Do we really want an America as intolerant as these states?
What do the advocates of intolerance think should be done about Muslims in America?
You obviously didn't live in Northern Ireland during the Troubles...
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Touche. Excellent point.
Except that in that case Catholics were suspect because of their religious beliefs weren't they?
After at it wasn't the local Druids that were blowing up the Protestants in Ireland was it?
So if the terrorists of today are Muslim - why is it unreasonable to think that Muslim beliefs are largely behind the terrorism?
Some Catholic extremists were behind the terrorism, as were some Protestant extremists. That doesn't make either Catholic or Protestant beliefs suspect; rather, it makes an extreme interpretation of those beliefs suspect.
Some Muslim extremists are terrorists. That doesn't make Muslim beliefs suspect; rather, it makes an extreme interpretation of those beliefs suspect. Some Christian fundamentalists blow up abortion clinics and murder abortion doctors. Does that make Christian fundamentalist beliefs suspect?
Christians are followers of Christ. They're still sinners but they're following Christ if they're true Christians and they are no longer slaves to sin. Everyone else is following a lie and are still die-hard slaves to sin. Islam is not "suspect" - it preaches a lie and advocates violence against non-Muslims. The terrorists we're dealing with are all Muslims and are following the teachings of their religion. There's no reason to believe they want to "live in peace" with non-Muslims. We can see that clearly from the history of the Middle-East and other parts of the world with large numbers of Muslims. The majority of Muslims may not be active terrorists but the majority of them are either supportive or passive about terrorism towards non-Muslims. Some are working against terrorism but only because it is disruptive to their own society. Islam is one of the greatest dangers America faces today.
But all non-Christians are the prisoners of deception and sin, not just Muslims - should we therefore suspect Hindus, Jews, Sikhs, cult members,etc?
When and if they start advocating and exhibiting similar behavior we should add them to the list of prime suspects. So far the list seems to be focused on Muslims because of their demonstrated behavior. That seems fair to me.
...which brings us full circle back to my original point: some Muslims are terrorists.