Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..

Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:36 pm

Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..

Islam and Mohamed’s main power comes from freedom from blasphemy and criticism of a disrespectful nature. That freedom takes away the freedom of all men to question and give a man’s unencumbered judgement on Mohamed as to his policies being good or evil. That is pyre tyranny.

Therefore, since being subject to that Muslim rule, means that a man cannot exercise a free judgement on Mohamed and Islam. This goes completely against democracies’ cornerstone of freedom of speech. Islam is thus anti-freedom.

Trump seems to recognize Islam as the satanic and anti-democratic religion that it demonstrably is.

This election is about the freedom of Americans to think for themselves without the threat of death stifling them. Please vote for Trump as he seems to be the only one ready to protect the cornerstone of the U.S.A. and democracy, freedom of speech.

Other than this one issue, American’s would be quite foolish to not elect Bernie Sanders. A moral man. Something rare in politics.

Regards

DL

P.S

Yes I recognize that the left wing of Islam is worthy of us in the West, but there is no way to weed out the left from the tyrannical right and so the whole religion should be banned in the U.S., the same way some other countries are beginning to do.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:14 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490524 wrote: Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..

Islam and Mohameds main power comes from freedom from blasphemy and criticism of a disrespectful nature. That freedom takes away the freedom of all men to question and give a mans unencumbered judgement on Mohamed as to his policies being good or evil. That is pyre tyranny.

Therefore, since being subject to that Muslim rule, means that a man cannot exercise a free judgement on Mohamed and Islam. This goes completely against democracies cornerstone of freedom of speech. Islam is thus anti-freedom.

Trump seems to recognize Islam as the satanic and anti-democratic religion that it demonstrably is.

This election is about the freedom of Americans to think for themselves without the threat of death stifling them. Please vote for Trump as he seems to be the only one ready to protect the cornerstone of the U.S.A. and democracy, freedom of speech.

Other than this one issue, Americans would be quite foolish to not elect Bernie Sanders. A moral man. Something rare in politics.

Regards

DL

P.S

Yes I recognize that the left wing of Islam is worthy of us in the West, but there is no way to weed out the left from the tyrannical right and so the whole religion should be banned in the U.S., the same way some other countries are beginning to do.

Rubbish, Islam's main power comes from the faith of its adherents just the same as Christianity's.

Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:26 pm

Bryn Mawr;1490529 wrote: Rubbish, Islam's main power comes from the faith of its adherents just the same as Christianity's.

Of course. But only as powerful as the faith tools that their religion gives them.

Like their ant-blasphemy rules.

If they did not have their no-criticism of Mohamed rules, the Western press would have published the Hebdo cartoons without fear.

That intimidation of our freedom of speech is what makes the West incompatible with Islam.

Regards

DL

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:38 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490524 wrote: Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..

Islam and Mohameds main power comes from freedom from blasphemy and criticism of a disrespectful nature. That freedom takes away the freedom of all men to question and give a mans unencumbered judgement on Mohamed as to his policies being good or evil. That is pyre tyranny.

Therefore, since being subject to that Muslim rule, means that a man cannot exercise a free judgement on Mohamed and Islam. This goes completely against democracies cornerstone of freedom of speech. Islam is thus anti-freedom.

Trump seems to recognize Islam as the satanic and anti-democratic religion that it demonstrably is.

This election is about the freedom of Americans to think for themselves without the threat of death stifling them. Please vote for Trump as he seems to be the only one ready to protect the cornerstone of the U.S.A. and democracy, freedom of speech.

Other than this one issue, Americans would be quite foolish to not elect Bernie Sanders. A moral man. Something rare in politics.

Regards

DL

P.S

Yes I recognize that the left wing of Islam is worthy of us in the West, but there is no way to weed out the left from the tyrannical right and so the whole religion should be banned in the U.S., the same way some other countries are beginning to do.

Well, the day we start letting religious fanatics from other countries tell us who we should allow into, or restrict from our country is the day that we should just roll up the carpets and go home.

Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:45 pm

LarsMac;1490533 wrote: Well, the day we start letting religious fanatics from other countries tell us who we should allow into, or restrict from our country is the day that we should just roll up the carpets and go home.

For sure. Every country should make up it's own mind.

Right now, the immigrants and Muslim immigrant are saying that no country can bar them.

Liberals are basically on their page.

I am usually left leaning but not in this case due to what this link shows and the recent history.

Regards

DL

Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:47 pm

Have you guys heard these ?

Regards

DL

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:09 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490524 wrote: Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..

Islam and Mohameds main power comes from freedom from blasphemy and criticism of a disrespectful nature. That freedom takes away the freedom of all men to question and give a mans unencumbered judgement on Mohamed as to his policies being good or evil. That is pyre tyranny.

Therefore, since being subject to that Muslim rule, means that a man cannot exercise a free judgement on Mohamed and Islam. This goes completely against democracies cornerstone of freedom of speech. Islam is thus anti-freedom.

Trump seems to recognize Islam as the satanic and anti-democratic religion that it demonstrably is.

This election is about the freedom of Americans to think for themselves without the threat of death stifling them. Please vote for Trump as he seems to be the only one ready to protect the cornerstone of the U.S.A. and democracy, freedom of speech.

Other than this one issue, Americans would be quite foolish to not elect Bernie Sanders. A moral man. Something rare in politics.

Regards

DL

P.S

Yes I recognize that the left wing of Islam is worthy of us in the West, but there is no way to weed out the left from the tyrannical right and so the whole religion should be banned in the U.S., the same way some other countries are beginning to do.

Millions died so we could be free of the baleful rule by religious authorities. If you extend your logic then you should ban all catholics as to them there the danger that papal authoprity will take precedence over all temporal authority. The pope is on record as justifying the charlie hebdo murders because they insulted islam.

What to do if the pope, or any other religious leader come to that, decides to tell people how to vote in elections?

Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:23 pm

gmc;1490537 wrote: Millions died so we could be free of the baleful rule by religious authorities. If you extend your logic then you should ban all catholics as to them there the danger that papal authoprity will take precedence over all temporal authority. The pope is on record as justifying the charlie hebdo murders because they insulted islam.

What to do if the pope, or any other religious leader come to that, decides to tell people how to vote in elections?

If Christians actually practiced their religion and had not already been brought to heel by secular governments to a more intelligent and civilized theology, you would have a point and I would include them in this O.P..

As is practiced, Christianity is not a threat to freedom of speech but Islam definitely is.

I would like to see an end to all religions that produce homophobic and misogynous men but at present Islam is the worst of the bunch and we should give Muslims a clear message that the West is not interested in their prophet or his barbaric ways.

Regards

DL

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:32 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490531 wrote: Of course. But only as powerful as the faith tools that their religion gives them.

Like their ant-blasphemy rules.

If they did not have their no-criticism of Mohamed rules, the Western press would have published the Hebdo cartoons without fear.

That intimidation of our freedom of speech is what makes the West incompatible with Islam.

Regards

DL

The fundamentalist interpretation of those rules is one of the reasons why the West is incompatible with the fundamentalists - we are all children of the book and there is no basic incompatibility between Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:35 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490535 wrote: For sure. Every country should make up it's own mind.

Right now, the immigrants and Muslim immigrant are saying that no country can bar them.

Liberals are basically on their page.

I am usually left leaning but not in this case due to what this link shows and the recent history.

Regards

DL

OK, put your law into writing so that we can see what you're proposing.

Remember, it has to be practical - it must target the Muslims (all of them) and it must be enforcible as written.

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:46 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490540 wrote: If Christians actually practiced their religion and had not already been brought to heel by secular governments to a more intelligent and civilized theology, you would have a point and I would include them in this O.P..

As is practiced, Christianity is not a threat to freedom of speech but Islam definitely is.

I would like to see an end to all religions that produce homophobic and misogynous men but at present Islam is the worst of the bunch and we should give Muslims a clear message that the West is not interested in their prophet or his barbaric ways.

Regards

DL

You obviously have not been watching the political "debate" going on in the States, lately.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:10 pm

First of all, I know quite a few Muslims. I have even attended Friday Prayers at the Mosque, where I was welcomed, even with their being aware of my views against Religion. True Islam is a religion of peace, and Daesh is no more typical of Islam as the Ku Klux Klan is of Christianity. Every Muslim I know is mortified by what Daesh are doing, supposedly in the name of Islam, as they believe that what they are doing is heresy against the Qu'ran.

As far as Christianity not getting in the way of Free Speech - what about their trying to ban the teaching of Evolution in schools & attempts to have all such books removed from school libraries? That doesn't sound too much like Free Speech to me. When Christians spout about the UK being a Christian country, that's immediately infringing my rights of Free Speech, as it is bracketing me in that claim.

The main difference between Islam & Christianity is that those who claim to be Muslim tend to be actively Muslim, whilst the majority of those who claim to be Christian simply think of it as simply being another term for White British, with no concept of the religious aspect of things whatsoever. Christianity calls for Baptism & Confirmation. We don't generally have much choice as to Baptism, as that's usually done at birth, but how many actually go through Confirmation? How many regularly go to church? How many even know where the local church for their denomination is?

Thu Dec 17, 2015 10:35 am

Bryn Mawr;1490544 wrote: The fundamentalist interpretation of those rules is one of the reasons why the West is incompatible with the fundamentalists - we are all children of the book and there is no basic incompatibility between Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

Sure. That is why Muslims are killing Christians and have schools preaching anti-Semitism.

Christianity and Jewry now have freedom of speech as a part of their ideology.

When Islam has that, then your statement will make sense.

Christians and Jews are not in favor of public beheadings or stoning of rape victims either.

Regards

DL

Thu Dec 17, 2015 10:37 am

LarsMac;1490547 wrote: You obviously have not been watching the political "debate" going on in the States, lately.

Thanks for the sample.

Regards

DL

Thu Dec 17, 2015 10:44 am

FourPart;1490564 wrote: First of all, I know quite a few Muslims. I have even attended Friday Prayers at the Mosque, where I was welcomed, even with their being aware of my views against Religion. True Islam is a religion of peace, and Daesh is no more typical of Islam as the Ku Klux Klan is of Christianity. Every Muslim I know is mortified by what Daesh are doing, supposedly in the name of Islam, as they believe that what they are doing is heresy against the Qu'ran.

As far as Christianity not getting in the way of Free Speech - what about their trying to ban the teaching of Evolution in schools & attempts to have all such books removed from school libraries? That doesn't sound too much like Free Speech to me. When Christians spout about the UK being a Christian country, that's immediately infringing my rights of Free Speech, as it is bracketing me in that claim.

The main difference between Islam & Christianity is that those who claim to be Muslim tend to be actively Muslim, whilst the majority of those who claim to be Christian simply think of it as simply being another term for White British, with no concept of the religious aspect of things whatsoever. Christianity calls for Baptism & Confirmation. We don't generally have much choice as to Baptism, as that's usually done at birth, but how many actually go through Confirmation? How many regularly go to church? How many even know where the local church for their denomination is?

I agree. Most Christians are Christian in name only.

I also agree that the Christian right wing would stifle free speech if they could. They are the left over Christians that have yet to be brought to heel.

They exist only because there is a stronger left wing. They have circled the wagons, so to speak. As to their attempts to de-civilise us. There is no way the West will revert to such idiocy and anti-democratic values.

All right wing religions are dying and these episodes of violence are their dying kneejerk reactions.

Regards

DL

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 11:08 am

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490573 wrote: Sure. That is why Muslims are killing Christians and have schools preaching anti-Semitism.

Christianity and Jewry now have freedom of speech as a part of their ideology.

When Islam has that, then your statement will make sense.

Christians and Jews are not in favor of public beheadings or stoning of rape victims either.

Regards

DL

How long is it since Christians were killing blacks and preaching racism in schools?

Freedom of speech is not part of Christianity, it is part of the American constitution and not universal outside the US.

Again, you take the work of fundamentalist Islam and try to tar all Muslims with that brush - try looking at the chasm between fundamentalist Christians and the rest of the Christian world and you'll see that such an approach does not work.

Thu Dec 17, 2015 12:06 pm

Bryn Mawr;1490578 wrote: How long is it since Christians were killing blacks and preaching racism in schools?

Freedom of speech is not part of Christianity, it is part of the American constitution and not universal outside the US.

Again, you take the work of fundamentalist Islam and try to tar all Muslims with that brush - try looking at the chasm between fundamentalist Christians and the rest of the Christian world and you'll see that such an approach does not work.

I agree that Christianity has never walked it's talk.

Neither has Islam.

Let me give this link again and you can tell me how one is to differentiate the 1/4 or so moderate left wing Muslim from the 3/4 of the right wing Muslims.

Islam has to reform to be compatible with Western values.

We can either suffer their murderous ways in the West till we can civilize them, or we can ask them to develop a civilized ideology in their homelands before immigrating to the West.

I have just come down on the latter. You can choose the former if you like but do not complain when some terrorist act happens in your country. You asked for it.

Regards

DL

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:23 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490579 wrote: I agree that Christianity has never walked it's talk.

Neither has Islam.

Let me give this link again and you can tell me how one is to differentiate the 1/4 or so moderate left wing Muslim from the 3/4 of the right wing Muslims.

Islam has to reform to be compatible with Western values.

We can either suffer their murderous ways in the West till we can civilize them, or we can ask them to develop a civilized ideology in their homelands before immigrating to the West.

I have just come down on the latter. You can choose the former if you like but do not complain when some terrorist act happens in your country. You asked for it.

Regards

DL

Which link is that? Forget it, the only possible way to get figures as skewed as that is to apply the bias born of bigotry.

And if you think that Islam is not and cannot be civilised then read the history of Moorish Spain and see who showed civilised values and who were the barbarians.

Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:35 pm

Bryn Mawr;1490580 wrote: Which link is that? Forget it, the only possible way to get figures as skewed as that is to apply the bias born of bigotry.

And if you think that Islam is not and cannot be civilised then read the history of Moorish Spain and see who showed civilised values and who were the barbarians.

So a survey of Muslim women would show bigotry. Ok.

As to your last. Compare then and now.

Regards

DL

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 4:49 am

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1490581 wrote: So a survey of Muslim women would show bigotry. Ok.

As to your last. Compare then and now.

Regards

DL

I don't know, you said "Let me give this link again" but there was no link included.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:13 pm

Where do you get your proportions of 1/4 moderates & 3/4 right wings? In my experience not only has the opposite been true, but the ratio is MUCH wider - more like 1/4 % Right Wings to 99 3/4 % Moderates.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:11 pm

Trump I personally feel is an arrogant, bombastic buffoon. If Americans elect him they get what they ask for. I have no respect for this man.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:19 pm

Ted;1490814 wrote: Trump I personally feel is an arrogant, bombastic buffoon. If Americans elect him they get what they ask for. I have no respect for this man.

If that happens, I am going to be knocking on your door, looking for asylum

Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:32 am

FourPart;1490619 wrote: Where do you get your proportions of 1/4 moderates & 3/4 right wings? In my experience not only has the opposite been true, but the ratio is MUCH wider - more like 1/4 % Right Wings to 99 3/4 % Moderates.

From a Muslim source.

Regards

DL

Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:33 am

Ted;1490814 wrote: Trump I personally feel is an arrogant, bombastic buffoon. If Americans elect him they get what they ask for. I have no respect for this man.

That is the way for those who do not like truth and reality.

Regards

DL

superhorn · Post by **superhorn** » Mon Jan 04, 2016 2:39 pm

Has Donald Chump even read the constitution ? It guarantees religious freedom to followers of any and every religion, as well as to atheists and agnostics .

Muslims have every right to come to and live in America , as long as they are peaceful and law-abiding, which the overwhelming majority of those in America are .

America can't bar all Muslims from settling in America just because of the barbaric acts of a tiny minority of them . And in fact, most of the terrorist acts in this country have been by right-wing extremist white AMERICAN hate groups in recent years .

An American has a greater chance of being struck by lightning or killed in a car accident than being murdered by Muslim terrorists . Yet that cynical, ruthless, power-hungry and unscrupulous son of a bitch has been fanning the flames of mindless xenophobic fear among Hoi Polloi in order to win votes from low information voters who vote Republican .

Trump is beneath contempt .

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Jan 09, 2016 6:47 pm

It seems to me that Trump is simply a new version of Hitler.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:29 am

Ted;1491295 wrote: It seems to me that Trump is simply a new version of Hitler.

Oh, no. Hitler was much smarter

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Jan 10, 2016 11:31 am

LarsMac;1491307 wrote: Oh, no. Hitler was much smarter

Donald is smart. You (& I) may not like him, but he is smart.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:33 pm

AnneBoleyn;1491315 wrote: Donald is smart. You (& I) may not like him, but he is smart.

Which is why I can't help but wonder what his real game is. He does not really want to be President.

He is stirring up the hornet nest for his own purposes.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:49 pm

LarsMac;1491320 wrote: Which is why I can't help but wonder what his real game is. He does not really want to be President.

He is stirring up the hornet nest for his own purposes.

I absolutely agree with that. I have said here all along he is some sort of Democratic operative. He certainly is not a Republican. When he speaks to the crowd, rambles & rants, I believe he knows what he is doing. Can't prove it, of course, but something else is up.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:59 am

he's a narcissist that's it's own justification and end in itself.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/co ... narcissist

I've seen him talk about himself in the third person is that something he often does?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Mon Jan 11, 2016 3:48 pm

gmc;1491334 wrote: he's a narcissist that's it's own justification and end in itself.

I've seen him talk about himself in the third person is that something he often does?

Since I've spent most of my life trying not to listen to him, I'm the wrong one to ask. However...........he has done many wonderful things in NYC, particularly in Central Park restorations, like the Carousel, the Skating Rink, that type of thing. It's done for his own ego, too, as his name is on everything, but he has shown a loyalty to NYC, in his own way, natch.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 7:50 am

gmc;1490537 wrote: 1. The pope is on record as justifying the charlie hebdo murders because they insulted islam.

2. What to do if the pope, or any other religious leader come to that, decides to tell people how to vote in elections?1. Care to document that from a RELIABLE source, not anti-Catholic garbage material? I would have asked earlier, but I just now discovered the thread.

2. The only instances I know of that happening within modern Catholicism involved certain South American countries where atheistic communists were attempting to take power. And as I recall, the prohibition came from various bishops within those countries, not from the pope. But that was a long time ago.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:23 pm

Mark Aspam;1491363 wrote: 1. Care to document that from a RELIABLE source, not anti-Catholic garbage material? I would have asked earlier, but I just now discovered the thread.

2. The only instances I know of that happening within modern Catholicism involved certain South American countries where atheistic communists were attempting to take power. And as I recall, the prohibition came from various bishops within those countries, not from the pope. But that was a long time ago.

Rather than assume I was making it up it would have taken you all of thirty seconds to check what I said the key phrase being the pope is on record. But since you couldn't be bothered you can listen to the man himself.

After Charlie Hebdo, pope says free speech has its limits | Crux

Even in the case of a dear friend, Francis said, “If he says a swear word against my mother, he’s going to get a punch in the nose. That’s normal.

“People who make fun of, who toy with other people’s religions, he said, risk running into “what would happen to if he said something against my mother.

No it's not normal to react violently to someone who says something you disagree with it's a choice you make. You don't blame the victim of a violent act for the action taken against them, claiming they were asking for it or taking offence is not a justification for rape, murder or anything else.

One cannot make war [or] kill in the name of one’s own religion, that is, in the name of God, Francis said. “To kill in the name of God is an aberration.

One cannot provoke, one cannot insult other people’s faith, one cannot make fun of faith, the pope said, speaking in Italian.

“Every religion has its dignity ¦ and I cannot make fun of it, the pope said. “In freedom of expression there are limits, like in regard to my mom.

Religion can and should be challenged and ridiculed when justified for it's stupidities. Were it not for people prepared to stand up to religious authority in the past we wpould not have freedom of speech, the concept of human rights and people having the freedom to live their life as they choose women would still be chattels to be disposed of by the dominant male and kings wpuld still rule by divine right. To suggest that religion be sacrosanct is an obscenity we should not allow in the 21st century. The pope has his own agende he would undo all the achievements of secular society if he could and put religion back at the centre of political life.

The only instances I know of that happening within modern Catholicism involved certain South American countries where atheistic communists were attempting to take power. And as I recall, the prohibition came from various bishops within those countries, not from the pope. But that was a long time ago.

It was a hypothetical question. How about the church ( not just the catholic one) telling people how to vote on issues like abortion, divorce or gay rights, gay mattiage? Have you not been paying attention? What if bishops start telling their congregation who to vote for in the upcoming presidential elections ( I'm assuming you;re american) what would you do about it?

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:18 pm

gmc;1490537 wrote: The pope is on record as justifying the charlie hebdo murders because they insulted islam.

Not really. He recognized the desire to strike back at any insult.

Calling freedom of expression a “fundamental human right, the pope outlined why he believes there are limits to that right. If someone “says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch, he joked, according to an Associated Press translation. “It’s normal. It’s normal. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others.

Despite joking about his mother, Francis also condemned violent retaliation. “One cannot offend, make war, kill in the name of one’s own religion — that is, in the name of God, the pope said. “To kill in the name of God is an aberration.

Washington Post

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:50 pm

Not really. He recognized the desire to strike back at any insult.

He also said it was justified to use violence against someone who challenged religiouis belief. It's not, to stop criticism of religion gives religious intolerance and hatred legitimacy. Basically he's saying what happened was a bad thing but the journalists were at fault for provoking people they knew were violent.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 5:26 pm

I don't see "Free Speech has its limits", assuming that the pope said that, being a justification of the murders in question. At all. Even remotely.

gmc;1491368 wrote: 1. It was a hypothetical question. How about the church ( not just the catholic one) telling people how to vote on issues like abortion, divorce or gay rights, gay ma[rr]iage? Have you not been paying attention?

2. What if bishops start telling their congregation who[m] to vote for in the upcoming presidential elections ( I'm assuming you;re american) what would you do about it?1. I've been a Catholic for over three-quarters of a century. I have never been told to vote for or not to vote for a PERSON by anyone in the Church hierarchy. I can't even recall a priest stating his own preference in a civil election. Neither privately nor from the pulpit.

The Catholic Church, like many others, opposes abortion and gay marriage, and that is obviously well-known to its members.

2. Not going to happen, and I think we covered that in the previous exchange. I remember that having occurred with regard to some foreign elections where it was feared that election of certain candidates might produce suppression of religion, Catholic and/or otherwise.

But answering your question directly, it would have no effect, that is beyond their authority.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 5:31 pm

I read that as being understandable - not as justifiable.

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:09 pm

superhorn;1491184 wrote: Has Donald Chump even read the constitution ? It guarantees religious freedom to followers of any and every religion, as well as to atheists and agnostics .

Muslims have every right to come to and live in America , as long as they are peaceful and law-abiding, which the overwhelming majority of those in America are .

America can't bar all Muslims from settling in America just because of the barbaric acts of a tiny minority of them . And in fact, most of the terrorist acts in this country have been by right-wing extremist white AMERICAN hate groups in recent years .

An American has a greater chance of being struck by lightning or killed in a car accident than being murdered by Muslim terrorists . Yet that cynical, ruthless, power-hungry and unscrupulous son of a bitch has been fanning the flames of mindless xenophobic fear among Hoi Polloi in order to win votes from low information voters who vote Republican .

Trump is beneath contempt .

The numbers and theology say that Islam is what is beneath contempt.

There is not religious guarantee. Remember Whacko?

Religions exist or not by the will of the government.

Here is a clip showing what Islam would do to freedom of religion.

The question is, is the West stupid and immoral enough to allow such legislation.

So far so good but the left wing are being quite stupid of late.

Regards

DL

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:10 pm

Ted;1491295 wrote: It seems to me that Trump is simply a new version of Hitler.

A good and idiotic way for you to ignore the evils of Islam.

Regards

DL

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:17 pm

Mark Aspam;1491382 wrote: I don't see "Free Speech has its limits", assuming that the pope said that, being a justification of the murders in question. At all. Even remotely.

1. I've been a Catholic for over three-quarters of a century. I have never been told to vote for or not to vote for a PERSON by anyone in the Church hierarchy. I can't even recall a priest stating his own preference in a civil election. Neither privately nor from the pulpit.

The Catholic Church, like many others, opposes abortion and gay marriage, and that is obviously well-known to its members.

2. Not going to happen, and I think we covered that in the previous exchange. I remember that having occurred with regard to some foreign elections where it was feared that election of certain candidates might produce suppression of religion, Catholic and/or otherwise.

But answering your question directly, it would have no effect, that is beyond their authority.

This link shows that you are wrong on both involvement and effect.

Catholics split over church's campaign against same-sex marriage - CNN.com

Regards

DL

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:20 pm

FourPart;1491383 wrote: I read that as being understandable - not as justifiable.

You like a religion that makes slaves of it's women, has forced child brides, and supports honor killing and stoning for sex crimes. Ok.

All great and justifiable concepts eh?

Regards

DL

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:31 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1491389 wrote: You like a religion that makes slaves of it's women, has forced child brides, and supports honor killing and stoning for sex crimes. Ok.

All great and justifiable concepts eh?

Regards

DL

I am pretty much fed up with all religions, and with all religious nutjobs who constantly try to tell us how ignorant we are for not seeing thing their way.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:33 pm

Gnostic Christian Bishop;1491388 wrote: This link shows that you are wrong on both involvement and effect.

Catholics split over church's campaign against same-sex marriage - CNN.com

Regards

DLOn the contrary, I think it reinforces just what I wrote.

Maybe you should go back and read your link again.

Tue Jan 12, 2016 7:13 pm

LarsMac;1491390 wrote: I am pretty much fed up with all religions, and with all religious nutjobs who constantly try to tell us how ignorant we are for not seeing thing their way.

Add me to that list.

Jesus was right when he was made to say that we are to follow our religions in private.

One of the few bits of wisdom not edited out of the bible.

Regards

DL

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 1:45 am

Mark Aspam;1491382 wrote: I don't see "Free Speech has its limits", assuming that the pope said that, being a justification of the murders in question. At all. Even remotely.

1. I've been a Catholic for over three-quarters of a century. I have never been told to vote for or not to vote for a PERSON by anyone in the Church hierarchy. I can't even recall a priest stating his own preference in a civil election. Neither privately nor from the pulpit.

The Catholic Church, like many others, opposes abortion and gay marriage, and that is obviously well-known to its members.

2. Not going to happen, and I think we covered that in the previous exchange. I remember that having occurred with regard to some foreign elections where it was feared that election of certain candidates might produce suppression of religion, Catholic and/or otherwise.

But answering your question directly, it would have no effect, that is beyond their authority.

I wasn't claiming they are doing so it was a hypothetical question raised for discussion.

But answering your question directly, it would have no effect, that is beyond their authority

In the past the church (and I don't mean just the catholic one) interfered in affairs of the state - for want of a better way to put it. The temporal and moral authority that once held sway no longer exists so in essence I would agree with you. Although I suspect religious leaders of any stamp could they would. I'm not religious but I would admit my attitude to religion is a kind of hostile tolerance.

I don't see "Free Speech has its limits", assuming that the pope said that, being a justification of the murders in question. At all. Even remotely.

Then we disagree. Free speech where it is taken as you can say what you like so long as you accept someone killing you because they don't like what you say is justifying the action of murdering someomne who has given offence. It's the same demented logic that justifies rape because the woman tempted the man so was partly to blame because she happened to be attractive to him. If someone insults you it's you who decides how to react - killing them is an overreaction in most circumstances. He is saying that the offence taken is understandable what he is not saying is that blowing someone up in the name of religion is not understandable and/or justifiable in any circumstamnces. Instead he's blaming the journalists for giving offence in the first place they should have known better and that no one should be able to criticise, satirise or make fun of religion. He is not defending the right in a free society of people to speak out against something they do not approve of but reserves that right for himself and religion in general.

Don't make jokes about religion someone might understabndably beat the **** out of you. Billy connolly is in deep trouble as are monty python.

As to assuming the pope said that, it was not an assumption he did actually say it pretending otherwise is disengenuous and ignoring reality. I would suggest you look at that link I gave you a link to the man actually saying the words in a taped interview. he's in essence claiming religious belief should be respected and never criticised no matter what.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:34 am

gmc;1491394 wrote: 1. In the past the church (and I don't mean just the catholic one) interfered in affairs of the state - for want of a better way to put it.

2. As to assuming the pope said that, it was not an assumption he did actually say it pretending otherwise is disengenuous and ignoring reality. I would suggest you look at that link I gave you a link to the man actually saying the words in a taped interview.

3. ...he's in essence claiming religious belief should be respected and never criticised no matter what.

1. I don't know why you're restricting it to the past; on the contrary, using the term "church" in the broad sense of organized religion, the interference still exists, particularly in Muslim countries.

2. I'll take your word that he said it although I have not found your source. I'll keep looking - BUT -

3. ...now you're putting your own "spin" on it, I don't read that into the statement at all.

Wed Jan 13, 2016 7:04 am

gmc;1491394 wrote: I wasn't claiming they are doing so it was a hypothetical question raised for discussion.

In the past the church (and I don't mean just the catholic one) interfered in affairs of the state - for want of a better way to put it. The temporal and moral authority that once held sway no longer exists so in essence I would agree with you. Although I suspect religious leaders of any stamp could they would. I'm not religious but I would admit my attitude to religion is a kind of hostile tolerance.

Then we disagree. Free speech where it is taken as you can say what you like so long as you accept someone killing you because they don't like what you say is justifying the action of murdering someomne who has given offence. It's the same demented logic that justifies rape because the woman tempted the man so was partly to blame because she happened to be attractive to him. If someone insults you it's you who decides how to react - killing them is an overreaction in most circumstances. He is saying that the offence taken is understandable what he is not saying is that blowing someone up in the name of religion is not understandable and/or justifiable in any circumstamnces. Instead he's blaming the journalists for giving offence in the first place they should have known better and that no one should be able to criticise, satirise or make fun of religion. He is not defending the right in a free society of people to speak out against something they do not approve of but reserves that right for himself and religion in general.

Don't make jokes about religion someone might understabndably beat the **** out of you. Billy connolly is in deep trouble as are monty python.

As to assuming the pope said that, it was not an assumption he did actually say it pretending otherwise is disengenuous and ignoring reality. I would suggest you look at that link I gave you a link to the man actually saying the words in a taped interview. he's in essence claiming religious belief should be respected and never criticised no matter what.

Well put.

Strange that even the Pope cannot follow the Golden Rule and return insult for insult and would turn to violence for a remedy.

Ain't Christianity great.

Regards

DL

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 7:52 am

Mark Aspam;1491397 wrote: 1. I don't know why you're restricting it to the past; on the contrary, using the term "church" in the broad sense of organized religion, the interference still exists, particularly in Muslim countries.

2. I'll take your word that he said it although I have not found your source. I'll keep looking - BUT -

3. ...now you're putting your own "spin" on it, I don't read that into the statement at all.

I was trying to take accounts of your sensibilities usually when you talk about the church people assume you mean the catholic one and the usual response is along the lines of you're just picking on us and ignoring any factual content or defending the right of the church to talke the "moral high ground". But since you bring it up their intereference has done a great deal of harm in south america and africa especially when it comes to matters like family planning and human rights and the christian right in america would become like the taliban in tyhe right circumstances.

I'll give you the link again

After Charlie Hebdo, pope says free speech has its limits | Crux

It's the catholic news agancy is that unbiased enough for you? try searching for that agency of the link does nopt work.

Vatican paper blasts Charlie Hebdo cover as 'insulting' to all faiths :: Catholic News Agency (CNA)

CatholicHerald.co.uk » Debate: Is Pope Francis right to say there is a limit to freedom of speech?

posted by gnostic christian bishop

Well put.

Strange that even the Pope cannot follow the Golden Rule and return insult for insult and would turn to violence for a remedy.

Ain't Christianity great.

Regards

DL

There are some would say th catholoc church is not truly christian But I'm just not going there let the christianbs argue amongst themselves..