Islam, The Religion of Peace, will stone you DEAD!

[fastingforlife]

There have been nearly 17,000 instances of non-combat related muslim initiated acts of terror since 9/11. During that same period of time I do not believe there was even one instance of Christian terrorism.

If Christians were behind 9/11, all Christians would band together to root out this evil. In stark contrast to the over 1 billion muslims who remain silent, never daring to criticize one of their own.

[scroller]

There have been nearly 17,000 instances of non-combat related muslim initiated acts of terror since 9/11. During that same period of time I do not believe there was even one instance of Christian terrorism.

Total counterfactual bullshit. Here's a short list of recent Christian-on-Muslim terrorist acts:

A Mosque Shooting in Australia
English White Youth's Beat Muslim Father to Death
Christian Mobs Murder Muslims
Eric Rudolph - The Christian bomber
Christian Terrorists Massacre Eight Hindu Civilians in India
Christian Terrorists Kill 44, Wound 118 in Attacks in Northeast India
Baptist Church Backs Terrorism in North-East India
Terrorists in North-East India get American Support
Christian Terrorist Cells in the USA
Good Old Christian Terrorism

And of course, you ignored the most recent one Saturday in Detroit:

Man Arrested for Alleged Plot to Attack a Detroit Mosque

[catherinefan]

There have been nearly 17,000 instances of non-combat related muslim initiated acts of terror since 9/11.

We (the so-called free west) occupied two large moslim nations since then and have caused many to die in these countries.

Could that perhaps have anything to do with it?

Wake up! We are very clearly inviting these acts of terror.

[muhmuh]

During that same period of time I do not believe there was even one instance of Christian terrorism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence

[onmyknees]

Ah yes, that mosque at ground zero! To my knowledge, it wasn't actually a mosque that was being proposed. And secondly, the proposed site was several blocks away from ground zero. So, how far away from ground zero would it have to be?

Let me ask you a question. If christians would have been responsible for 9/11, would there have the same opposition to the building of a church on that very same site?

I think we all know the answer to that.

Dumb question really....with all due respect. It's hard to imagine any situation similar to 911. It stands on it's own, so therefore I can't answer a complete wild hypothetical.

With respect to how far it should be...there are mosques all over Manhattan . So mosques are not the issue...this mosque is. If the Muslims backing this took the time to sit down with the survivors of this horror , I'm sure they would come away with an understanding of just how far is far enough, but thier ignorance and arrogrance prevented them from doing that. That was inconceivably disrespectful and insensitive, and simply served to harden opinions.

[thombergeron]

But what about Leviticus....?

[onmyknees]

No, you simply hear what you wish to hear, as you always do. You don't speak for me, I do. If you want to address my points fine. My points were very general, so that they will cover the specific. If you read my post you will find it makes no exceptions for those who would stand against Churches and Synagogues as well.

No one you know. Yet the establishment clause is most apt in this regard. Do you actually want to claim the law is allowed to distinguish between religions when handing out zoning privileges?

So not mentioning the first trade center bombing, 911 etc. is pretending they never happened? There you go again, making deductions about my pretense. Forget pretense. I mean what I post and nothing else. If you think those events are relevant and justify a general hatred of Islam, then make your case. I'll listen. I remember those events and I will know them when you refer to them. Indeed it would be rather awkward to "pretend" not to know they happened.

Be afraid. Be very afraid. OOOOOoooooOOOooooooo. Look, I don't much care to see any religion spread. But I would've thought someone of a more spiritual nature would be happy to see the growth of spirituality in any guise.

But I think we've gone conveniently astray from the questions I put to you back in post #95. Did you forget, or were you avoiding them on purpose? I referred to a few of God's instructions in Leviticus to remind us that God sanctions stoning. You of course reminded me that Christians no longer obey all of God's commands, like many of those found in the Old Testament. This leaves us non-religious folk in a quandary. Every time I have a discussion with a Christian who's against homosexuality, or masturbation, or against birth control they inevitably quote Leviticus and Deuteronomy at me. Now obviously some of what God said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy is no longer thought by Christians to be worthy of anything but historical attention. But some other things He said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy are of the utmost relevance today. How are we to know which is which? Could you guys publish a Bible that highlights the commands of God that we're supposed to obey, and maybe just leaves out or diminishes the typeface of those of God's commands we're not supposed to follow?

So not mentioning the first trade center bombing, 911 etc. is pretending they never happened? There you go again, making deductions about my pretense. Forget pretense. I mean what I post and nothing else. If you think those events are relevant and justify a general hatred of Islam, then make your case. I'll listen. I remember those events and I will know them when you refer to them. Indeed it would be rather awkward to "pretend" not to know they happened.

There you go again...it's a habit of yours...you weave together assumptions, actions, thoughts and sprinkle in some facts then pose a quetion to me as if it's assumed I hate Muslims. It's disengenuious, and more than that.......annoying. It's a common tactic similar to what those on the left do when they toss out the race card, assuming that someone has to stall his argument and defend himself against the charge, and dedicates so much time and energy doing that, his larger point is never made. I read rules for radicals too Trish !! So I won't make my case about how those events are reason to hate Islam because I never made that case...Play word games on someone else !

"No one you know. Yet the establishment clause is most apt in this regard. Do you actually want to claim the law is allowed to distinguish between religions when handing out zoning privileges? "

Again...perhaps it's the internet, but you your asking questions totally unrelated to the positions I've explained. It may be nice to share your knowledge of the establishment clause, but my position was made with the full awareness of what the law is. It's not a legal argument, but surely you knew that.

"Look, I don't much care to see any religion spread. But I would've thought someone of a more spiritual nature would be happy to see the growth of spirituality in any guise."

I'd be fine with any expansion of spiritually, but I'm actually agnostic about it.....although I would certainly ask more questions if a mosque was proposed in my neighboorhood than a chapel or synagogue....espicially if the spokespeople and backers had dubious pasts. Do I need to explain the reasons why? I swear Trish...you act like the Brits and French don't have a huge problem on thier hands because like you...they turned a blind eye to the expansion of radical Islam. Look...this is a different world than it was 20 years ago, and Juan Williams had it right...so stone us for being apprehensive about the fact some Muslims want to kill us ! Forgive me if that doesn't fit into your purest view of the establishment clause, but I'm a realist. Not too many Methodists are stapping explosives on themselves or preaching Jihad out of thier churches. Trish , arguing with you reminds me of being in a courtroom and listening to a defense attorney make
brillient constitutional arguments that have little to do with the case before the jury. He soon tries to convince the eye witness he really didn't see his client shoot the store clerk, he actually just thought he saw it, or that he saw something else.... It's all perfectly legal, but not practical or nearly believable.

Maybe the reason you have difficulty understanding where I'm coming from with respect to some of these issues is because I view the Untied States at war and our homeland under constant threat of attack and believe the government must take certain temporary steps to fight that war. Perhaps you don't believe that.

[trish]

There you go again...it's a habit of yours...you weave together assumptions, actions, thoughts and sprinkle in some facts then pose a quetion to me as if it's assumed I hate Muslims.

Note: a question is not an assumption. So as not to be mistaken for making an accusation, I emphasized the "If" with boldface. There's a lot of hatred for Muslims displayed in this thread which I've been speaking against. You complained that I'm not taking into consideration 9/11 etc. etc. So are you using those considerations to justify the poison in this thread or are you not? Just what case are you making?

It's not a legal argument, but surely you knew that.

I take it then that you concede no government body can Constitutionally intervene with the building of the specific Mosque in NYC which you oppose. I also take it that you merely wish to persuade the Muslims themselves from building the Mosque. The above two statements are more questions than declarative assertions.

I'd be fine with any expansion of spiritually,...

So what was your point in noting [the] general increase in devotees to the Islamic tradition?

Not too many Methodists are stapping explosives on themselves or preaching Jihad out of thier churches.

No, but there are fundamentalist Christians who are assassinating family planning doctors, threatening their families and bombing their clinics...to the point where there are very few doctors left in the nation willing to provide abortion and family planning services. We also have white supremacists who drag people behinds trucks until dead and blow up black baptist churches. We have terrorists who blow up government buildings as in Oklahoma, we have ideologues who fly small planes into IRS buildings, lunatics who shoot Congress women and people who [enable] them.

Yet if someone wants to build a Church down the road from me, or a Synagogue or a Mosque it's fine by me. This is America. We're not about abstract high falutin' lawyerly arguments or some purist form of the First Amendment. But if we're about anything, we're about the freedom to worship.

I view the Untied States at war

Yes, we're in two undeclared wars. Oh and also a metaphorical war against drugs, a metaphorical war against terrorism and a host of other metaphorical wars.

our homeland under constant threat of attack and believe the government must take certain temporary steps to fight that war.

Agreed [as long as you put "war" in quotes and mean it metaphorically]. But we probably disagree about which liberties we're free to sacrifice. Even though I'm an atheist, I will not give up your freedom to worship...nor will I yield the government the power to directly or effectively establish one religion over another.

But again, I think we've gone conveniently astray from the questions I put to you back in post #95. Did you forget, or were you avoiding them on purpose? I referred to a few of God's instructions in Leviticus to remind us that God Himself sanctions stoning. You of course reminded me that Christians no longer obey all of God's commands, like many of those found in the Old Testament. This leaves us non-religious folk in a quandary. Every time I have a discussion with a Christian who's against homosexuality, or masturbation, or against birth control they inevitably quote Leviticus and Deuteronomy at me. Now obviously some of what God said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy is no longer thought by Christians to be worthy of anything but historical attention. But some other things He said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy are of the utmost relevance today. How are we to know which is which? Could you guys publish a Bible that highlights the commands of God that we're supposed to obey, and maybe just leaves out or diminishes the typeface of those of God's commands we're not supposed to follow?

[muhmuh]

I view the Untied States at war and our homeland under constant threat of attack

well youre not
im not at all surprised you believe that seeing as i was being blasted with threat level warnings evers 5 seconds while i was in us airports but its simply not true

[yosi]

[QUOTE=PomonaCA;870806]

We are called CHRISTIANS because we worship Christ and it was Jesus Christ who refuted and dispelled all that barbaric, eye for an eye bullshit.

QUOTE]