by Jack Lee
The news today is excoriating the town of Murfreesboro, Tenn. For rejecting the construction of a Mosque in their community. On the surface it’s a violation of free speech and the freedom to practice one’s faith. We generally hold such things to be untenable and un-American, but this is getting more complicated and it’s worth discussing.
Yesterday Presidential candidate Herm Cain was asked about this incident and he agrees with the people of Murfreesboro.
Cain insisted that Islam is different from other religions because “fact Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Sharia law.”
CAIN: They could say that. Chris, lets go back to the fundamental issue that the people are basically saying they’re objecting to. They’re objecting to the fact Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Sharia law. That’s the difference between any one of our other traditional religions where it’s just about religious purposes. The people in the community know best, and I happen to side with the people in Murfreesboro.
WALLACE: You’re saying any community, if they want to ban a mosque?
CAIN: Yes. They have a right to do that. That’s not discriminating based upon religion.
The majority of people of Murfreesboro don’t want a Mosque to be built in their town. They object to it because they reasoned that by Islam’s own stated proclamation, that it is not just a religion, it is also an aggressive expansionist government. When we examine their principles we see they are incompatible with our founding principles on human rights. Sharia law is integral to the practice of the Islamic religion. We have also been witness to frequent cases of child rape, torture and murder of women justified under Sharia Law. Most of the brutal penalties in Sharia Law carry no criminal penalty in our laws, which demonstrates how far apart we are in understanding civilized human evolution.
In Britain a recent poll showed 36% of all Muslims living there believe that leaving Islam should be punished by death. This is the crime of apostasy and that percentage of young Muslim men that are taking a hard line on Sharia Law is increasing. This is going to lead a clash of values and British society may never be quite the same again. Muslim women will inevitably be coerced into accepting Sharia judgments which discriminate against them. Muslim women already suffer a terrible loss of rights within their communities and now within British society that placed no restriction on what sort of religious cult they allowed into their country. Brits are forced to re-examine just who and what they are letting into their country.
To allow the expansion of the Islamic religion is to sanction by default their authority and enforcement of many things incompatible with a free and open society.
For example under Sharia Law:
* Men can divorce simply by repudiation.
* Men have no obligations to support their former wife or her children after divorce.
* Women cannot be divorced without the consent of their husband.
* Abuse is not valid grounds for a woman to end a marriage.
Inheritance:
* Sons will inherit twice as much as daughters.
* Women who remarry lose custody of their children, so a divorced woman is forced to remain single or give up being a mother.
* Child custody often reverts to the father at a preset age, even if the father is abusive.
Islam is already used to justify and excuse the sufferings of women subjected to domestic violence, forced marriage, “honor” killings, forced child-bearing and endless drudgery.
Iran’s Supreme religious leader, the late Ayatollah Komeini proclaimed, and this is based on his deep understanding of Islam, “A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he should not penetrate, sodomizing the child is OK. If the man penetrates and damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girls sister.
– It is better for a girl to marry in such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband’s house rather than her father’s home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven.
– A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on. However he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, however selling the meat to the next door village should be fine.
– “If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine
and their excrement become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed.
The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned.”
Would you want this guy as a neighbor? How about people who believe in his brand of religion?
If we deny Muslims their rights under Sharia Law or the dictates of their Supreme Leader, we denying them the right to practice their religion. If that is true then we are we are saying there are limits on practicing one’s religion and there are limits on freedom of speech. Do you think there should there be limits on these things? The people of Murfreesboro do.
Their community want to draw the line and say no and it is not without good reasons – many of those reasons coming straight from the daily news on global Islamic terrorism and civil rights offenses in Muslim countries. But, mostly its because of illegal practices that manifest themselves in the Nation of Islam and that this proposed Mosque either embraces, espouses, encourages and/or represents.
Question: Should they (Murfeesboro) be forced into accepting these criminal and civil rights offenses under the guise of freedom of religion or should Muslims be required to accept our interpretation of inalienable rights and our system of justice?
It should be noted the people of Murfreesboro have no objection to a Seik Temple, a Synagogue, a Buddhist Church or any other church or religion and goes a long way to deflating the bigotry theory the media touts. However, they do choose to resist what they see is a dangerous encroachment on their community standards and on national principles, principles also written in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They see it as defending those rights, not abridging them.
We know that Islam takes on many forms, some sects are quite benign and some are not. Some are so radical they could be labeled a criminal enterprise. What separates the benign from the radical is often paper thin, but always present is the underlying tenants or principles of Islam/Sharia Law linked to aggressive expansionism. We know that the often stated objective is global domination to the exclusion of all other competing religions. This is a deadly serious goal and for them to accomplish their mission they must use many means from the benign to the violent.
The people of Murfreesboro are wary, and for reasonable, logical reasons. They have legitimate concerns rooted in human rights and as a result, they say to Muslims who want to build a Mosque in their town, no thank you. Are they wrong? For any thoughtful, intelligent person, this question is not as simple to answer as the knee jerk liberal responses we see in today’s mainstream media.
The vast majority of Muslims are law-abiding people. Many of the tenets of Sharia you list, as well as certain things that are considered acceptable, are illegal in this country, and the vast majority of Muslims do not practice them. I assure you that if you were to ask most Muslims if they think it’s OK to rape a child or an animal, they would shudder. (Keep in mind that the Old Testament also condones numerous sexual indecencies, including a story of two women who trick their father into sex. But most Christians don’t believe that’s OK.)
There are limits to freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Those limits do not allow people to violate the law because of their religion. Building a place of worship is not against the law.
Herman Cain does not understand the Constitution or the religion of Islam. And apparently, Jack, neither do you, because you seem to think that Islam and the Nation of Islam are the same thing. They are not. You also continue to insist that Sharia law is one universally accepted body of rules under Islam, which you have been repeatedly shown is not the case.
Chris, once again you deny history and take the shallow view. You also express a naivety that almost defies description. I’m very disappointed – I expected better.
You take the (inane) liberal position that a few lines of scripture (“Old Testament also condones numerous sexual indecencies”) is equally objectionable as these modern day practices by tens of thousands, perhaps many hundreds of thousands of devout Muslims around the world. And we’re talking about many Muslims that do this objectionable and indecent activity while living in modern countries where such things are strictly prohibited, but they are rarely held accountable . Gee… we’re all trying so hard to get in touch with their culture, cause it’s politically correct, and so they get cut a lot of slack by your liberal pals who don’t mind turning a blind eye…when it suits them.
Anyone with half a brain would have to admit, there’s not a whole lot of liberals denouncing Muslims depriving women of their civil rights or engaging in sexual acts with little children. You hardly hear them utter a peep over the court ordered stoning to death a gay person. When have you seen protest marches over sex with a minor child or the murdering of females accused of infidelity? These things are not abstract passages in a book, these are real events right here and right now! These evil things happen every day somewhere in the Muslim world and sometimes in our world too – where we have LAWS to against such things. Yet it happens…and every now and then some poor wife gets her head chopped off because she offended her husband and we are so shocked, oh how could this happen here? Ah, but wait, there’s a liberal ready to rush to the microphone and decry something about a so-call Christian shooting an abortion doctor and all the liberals heads nod and say, yep, same thing. No difference between Christians and Muslims…now lets all sing cumbya.
Where’s your moral outrage Chris?
We’re not talking about taking a stand against building a place of worship – we’re concerned about what the worship might encourage and who it might hurt and we’re concerned for good reasons. You seem to want to deny these reasons and I don’t get it?
I’m trying to defend our culture and our inalienable rights. I am trying to defend and respect women. I want social justice and equality for them and for everyone. I am, in the strongest possible terms, standing AGAINST anyone seeking to violate the rights children! So why criticize me and find fault with the Bible when the real injustices are right in front of your face?
Chris, I don’t get it? Then again I don’t get liberal thinking at all, I find it so flawed and hypocritical.
There is NO moral equivalency between abstract Bible passages and real life Muslims actually DOING something that morally reprehensible. That’s naive and foolish thinking and you are capable of so much better. This isn’t about a building permit – its about real concerns over human rights issues.
Jack you should post the email I sent you this morning, would seem to be right on point.
Re: “Many of the tenets of Sharia you list, as well as certain things that are considered acceptable, are illegal in this country, and the vast majority of Muslims do not practice them.”
The vast majority do not follow and practice Sharia? Baloney. From where do you get the enumeration to make such a bold statement, eh? Did you pull it from a hat?
Oh, never mind. How on earth would Chris know anyway, he has his head buried in the sand (to be charitable).
All one need do is read the papers in major cities in the US and Canada which have large Muslim populations to know what is going on in those communities.
All one need do is pay just a little attention to what is going on on the UK and the rest of Europe. It is easy enough to educate yourself. Foreign news organs in English are just an internet link away.
Re: “Where’s your moral outrage Chris?”
Good question. I think he keeps it under his ***hat and reserves it for selective issues, like teaching grade school children about gay sexuality and such.
Again, Chris would do well to educate himself about Islam and the courageous Muslims who risk death trying to bring about change, but he won’t.
Nevertheless, I’ll give it another shot …
American Islamic Forum for Democracy
http://www.aifdemocracy.org/
The American Islamic Forum for Democracy’s (AIFD) mission is to advocate for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state.
AIFD is the most prominent American Muslim organization directly confronting the ideologies of political Islam and openly countering the common belief that the Muslim faith is inextricably rooted to the concept of the Islamic State (Islamism). Founded by Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, AIFD looks to build the future of Islam through the concepts of liberty and freedom.
Center For The Study Of Political Islam
http://www.cspipublishing.com/
What then is the ultimate authority that will give us a firm foundation for reasoning and judgment about Islam? Is it possible to use critical thought or must we just accept the authority of experts?
Up until now, the answers have been unsatisfactory. We cant understand Islamic doctrine without understanding its sacred foundations — the three texts that inform and direct virtually every thought and act in the Muslim world.
Political Islam
http://www.politicalislam.com/
Islam is a cultural, religious and political system. Only the political system is of interest to kafirs (non-Muslims) since it determines how we are defined and treated. The Islamic political system is contained in the Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira.
Our mission is to educate the world about political Islam, its founder Mohammed, his political doctrine and his god, Allah.
Chris would do well to do a even just little reading and get a freaking clue.
Re Jack Lee’s: “The people of Murfreesboro are wary, and for reasonable, logical reasons. They have legitimate concerns rooted in human rights and as a result, they say to Muslims who want to build a Mosque in their town, no thank you. Are they wrong? For any thoughtful, intelligent person, this question is not as simple to answer as the knee jerk liberal responses we see in today’s mainstream media.”
Not to mention the knee jerk responses from liberals who dog this forum.
For the record, I respect, support and deeply admire Muslim religious reformers, especially those who are in synch with basic human rights.
I look upon them as champions of their faith and in the same same spirit as I would for our founding fathers – they are true heroes. I kid you not, words can’t express my most sincere and deep feelings for these brave souls who would dare to stand up to the fundamentalists that are causing so much trouble in the world.
These great men and women have put their lives on the line and they have risked it all for no other reason than to do what is morally right. They measure right not by what some Imam says is right, but according to humanity. Unfortunately right now there seems to be too few of them and their voices are barely heard against the backdrop of hate by the radicals.
If those good folks wanted to build a Mosque in my neighborhood – I would support them 100% – heck I would help them build it. My only stipulation for supporting any Muslims wishing to build Mosques anywhere would be for me to know where they stand on Sharia law, women’s rights, children’s rights, and how they feel about world conquest by force and fear from any religion. Until I know that, I’m sorry, but I would have to reserve my support because of all the evil I see committed in the name of Allah.
Jack: “You take the (inane) liberal position that a few lines of scripture (“Old Testament also condones numerous sexual indecencies”) is equally objectionable as these modern day practices by tens of thousands, perhaps many hundreds of thousands of devout Muslims around the world.”
Jack, you brought up certain arcane tenets of Sharia law that are found in Islamic scripture but are practiced by virtually no actual Muslims. You could be right that hundreds of thousands of devout Muslims are out there sodomizing cows and marrying their daughters, but I haven’t seen evidence that this is true even in the most repressive Islamic countries.
That said, other repressive tenets you mentioned are practiced in many Islamic countries. The treatment of women and “infidels” is repugnant in many of these countries, and I have never denied that. I think that this is a huge issue that needs to be solved. I just don’t approve of your methods, which often equate to trying to shoot a bee with a rocket launcher, if you’ll forgive the metaphor. For instance, in this article you express a willingness to potentially deprive all Muslims of their right to freedom of religion in order to deal with the extremists. Even as you do so, you admit that there are many reformers within the religion who you admire greatly. I believe your admiration is genuine and I respect you for that, but do you really think these reformers would agree with Herman Cain, or the people of Murfresboro who are trying to put a stop to this mosque? I don’t think so.
“And we’re talking about many Muslims that do this objectionable and indecent activity while living in modern countries where such things are strictly prohibited, but they are rarely held accountable .”
Do you have evidence that Muslims are getting away with breaking the law more often than other groups? I have heard some examples of Muslims not being held accountable for certain crimes (I read more than you think) but I haven’t seen evidence that this is more a problem for Muslims than anyone else.
“Anyone with half a brain would have to admit, there’s not a whole lot of liberals denouncing Muslims depriving women of their civil rights or engaging in sexual acts with little children.”
This is just not true, Jack. Many progressive organizations are devoted to securing freedom for women and democracy in the Muslim world.
“You hardly hear them utter a peep over the court ordered stoning to death a gay person. When have you seen protest marches over sex with a minor child or the murdering of females accused of infidelity?”
Jack, have you heard of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani? I have, and I learned about her story from liberal blogs. I don’t know if there were any protest marches in the U.S., but there were in the Ukraine and Paris.
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/847028-topless-feminists-protest-against-iranian-stoning-sentence
http://www.breitbart.com/image.php?id=iafpCNG.2ed0801c7a83ed76b6d4fc3f23c9c7a5.a11p0&show_article=1
Here are a couple of influential feminist blogs that dealt with her story:
http://www.genderacrossborders.com/2010/08/16/sakineh-mohammadi-ashtiani/
http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2010/08/update_on_sakin
Salon and the Huffington Post also gave Sakineh a lot of coverage, and she is hardly the only stoning victim that American liberals have spoken out for. I don’t agree with your charge that progressives are silent in the face of the evils of Muslim extremism.
Pie: “The vast majority do not follow and practice Sharia? Baloney. From where do you get the enumeration to make such a bold statement, eh? Did you pull it from a hat?”
That’s not at all what I said, Pie. It’s really frustrating when you twist my words around like that. I said that the vast majority of Muslims do not follow all of the tenets of Sharia Jack listed in the article. Most of them interpret Sharia differently. I have said this over and over again, so please don’t pretend you still don’t get what I’m saying.
“Again, Chris would do well to educate himself about Islam and the courageous Muslims who risk death trying to bring about change, but he won’t.
Nevertheless, I’ll give it another shot …
American Islamic Forum for Democracy
http://www.aifdemocracy.org/”
Pie, did you miss my comment in the last thread you posted that link to, where I THANKED you for posting it? I haven’t gotten a chance to give it a good looking over yet, but I told you that I was glad to see you acknowledge
that there are courageous Muslims who are seeking reform. What I’m not so glad to see if you constantly ignoring my comments, twisting them around, and making disingenuous jabs at my character.
Chris: “I said that the vast majority of Muslims do not follow all of the tenets of Sharia Jack listed in the article.”
I’m not clear whether you are describing the vast majority of Muslims in America or the vast majority of Muslims everywhere.
The vast majority of Muslims around the world are now living under laws that are vastly different from our own, either by agreement or oppression. These laws oppress and enslave citizens and subject certain groups to extreme or violent forms of oppression.
There is also a large movement of committed extremist Muslims that is determined to create a worldwide caliphate. Many are committed to the soft form of jihad that includes undermining societies from within, subjugating their citizens and “transforming” their governmental and societal systems to be “sharia compliant”.
These realities create a problem for Americans who wish to preserve and protect the American system of government, laws, and societal mores. It is not an easy problem because those who would do us harm are willing to lie and otherwise covertly undermine our system over time. At the same time our inclusive and tolerant system makes us vulnerable to these tactics and they will use this as a weapon against us.
Chris we are casually talking about this problem on a blog. The people in this town, and people in other towns across the U.S., are facing a real problem. How do you protect against what might be an inauthentic group or person? How do you prevent your town from being subjected to some of the things we see happening in European towns becasue of their blind-eye tolerance and acceptance? How do you determine when and where to draw the line?
This problem is real for those of us who want to preserve our founding principles. What we don’t want to do is be complacent and then suddenly wake to a situation that will require violence to resolve the issue.
Like Jack and Pie I would appreciate language from American Muslims that is more straightforward about a seperation of mosque and state. I would appreciate language that clearly states a desire to adopt, as their own, the tennets of our Constitution and the laws of the United States. This is what I expect of anyone wishing to come to this country to live as a permanent citizen. Until now it has never been a problem.
Tina: “I’m not clear whether you are describing the vast majority of Muslims in America or the vast majority of Muslims everywhere.”
Everywhere, although my statement is true either way: “the vast majority of Muslims do not follow all of the tenets of Sharia Jack listed in the article.”
“The vast majority of Muslims around the world are now living under laws that are vastly different from our own, either by agreement or oppression. These laws oppress and enslave citizens and subject certain groups to extreme or violent forms of oppression.”
Agreed, and as I said this is a pressing problem and I support efforts to spread change throughout these countries. Forbidding a mosque from being built will not help with that goal. If anything, it will subvert it.
“At the same time our inclusive and tolerant system makes us vulnerable to these tactics and they will use this as a weapon against us.”
Our inclusive and tolerant system makes oppressive forms of Sharia law harder to spread, not easier. This country is founded on equal rights for all and anyone who violates those rights, no matter what their religious belief, should be held accountable. However, that does not mean we can lay collective guilt on all members of the world’s third largest religion.
“Chris we are casually talking about this problem on a blog. The people in this town, and people in other towns across the U.S., are facing a real problem.”
What is the problem? That Muslims want to build a mosque? As far as I’ve read there is no evidence that their intent is anything more nefarious than that…where do these people get off treating their neighbors as a “problem?” Keep in mind that some opponents have turned to vandalism in order to stop this mosque from being built.
“How do you protect against what might be an inauthentic group or person? How do you prevent your town from being subjected to some of the things we see happening in European towns becasue of their blind-eye tolerance and acceptance? How do you determine when and where to draw the line?”
The law determines where to draw the line. Mr. Cain doesn’t understand the law; he thinks that this community has the right to prohibit this mosque from being built. He is 100% wrong, as usual.
“Like Jack and Pie I would appreciate language from American Muslims that is more straightforward about a seperation of mosque and state.”
It’s out there if you look for it. Here’s one statement from a moderate imam:
“Religious freedom is at the core of Islam. The Quran expressly and unambiguously prohibits the coercion of faith because that violates a fundamental human right — the right to a free conscience. The Quran says in one place “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” And in another it says, “To you your beliefs and to me, mine.”
Can you guess who said this?
“I would appreciate language that clearly states a desire to adopt, as their own, the tennets of our Constitution and the laws of the United States. This is what I expect of anyone wishing to come to this country to live as a permanent citizen. Until now it has never been a problem.”
You honestly believe that this has never been considered a problem until now? If so, you know absolutely nothing about the history of immigration in this country. Every time there has been a wave of new immigrants, whether they are a racial or religious minority, Americans have expressed concern (and often paranoid xenophobia) over whether or not they would accept our values and assimilate…what we are seeing now is nothing new. The only question is whether we will learn from our history.
Chris: “the vast majority of Muslims do not follow all of the tenets of Sharia Jack listed in the article.”
Is this something you decided or something you’ve been told because it certainly doesn’t reflect what I’ve read and learned and in truth I don’t know how you could possibly know it for sure.
“Our inclusive and tolerant system makes oppressive forms of Sharia law harder to spread, not easier.”
Naive of you to think so. How do you think we ended up with a welfare state and almost 50% of population paying no income taxes? How did we elect a man that wants to fundamentally transform our government and who skips the traditional National Day of Prayer Breakfast but celebrates Rhamadan with a special dinner? These things don’t happen in one fell swoop but gradually, as complacency surrenders our heritage and freedoms. I believe Rauf when he says the Constitution is already Sharia compliant. He delivers the news with a big ol smile like he’s a friend but I don’t buy it but I know a lot of americans do…and will yield precious ground in friendship and before long we will have the problems they are experiencing in France, England, Austrailia…
“…that does not mean we can lay collective guilt on all members of the world’s third largest religion”
Tell me Chris what is the differenc for you between not laying guilt on all Muslims and laying all kinds of guilt on white men? More importantly, why do you always assume that guilt is what this discussion is about? This discussion, if you would set aside your issues of race and bigotry, has to do with a difficult problem and how we deal with it. I don’t live in this town. I don’t know anything about the history of the local Muslims. Is there a history of behavior or materials associated with the local Muslim group? This is why I was careful with my comments…it may be that this town has greater concerns than others might because of the way the Muslims that live there behave. You immediately cry bigot, accuse people of coming from a position of hatred or phobia. I think that’s unreasonable.
“What is the problem? That Muslims want to build a mosque?”
I know that there have been mosques that have training materials for violent jihad, that have sent young men to be trained in the ME, and that teach about a worldwide caliphate being the inevitable end to jihad. I know that sonetimnes these things are done secretly while putting a peaceful pretentious face out to the public. I think it would be stupid and naive to automatically assume that this is not a possibility.
“The Quran says in one place “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” And in another it says, “To you your beliefs and to me, mine.”
The Quran says a lot of things that conflict greatly with those statements. Are you saying we should dismiss the parts of the Quran that are in deep conflict with these two? I think you should read this article before you decide:
http://www.danielpipes.org/2110/the-issue-of-compulsion-in-religion-islam-is-what-its
“Every time there has been a wave of new immigrants, whether they are a racial or religious minority, Americans have expressed concern (and often paranoid xenophobia) over whether or not they would accept our values and assimilate…”
To my knowledge it has never happened during a period of time when a particular segment, difficult to identify, was threatening our country and other countries around the world. Issues of loyalty faced the Japanese and Germans during WWII and certainly bwe were concerned about spies but the countries we faced wore uniforms. they waged war conventionally. This enemy is not easy to identify and has a stealth strategy.
People have the right to be uncomfortable, to be cautious and to express their concerns. I don’t have the benefit of having read much about this particular town, the concerns of the citizens or the decision so I haven’t commented on the decision.
I do have to laugh about one thing, however. A lot of you guys on the left don’t seem to mind when local governments refuse to let Wall Mart build a new store for some lame a**ed reason. You also apparently don’t have a problem using imminent domain laws to confiscate private property so that a building that will bring in more tax revenue can be built. I guess as long as its not the Muslim religion…(
Oh yeah…I’m also reminded about that Greek Orthodox Church at ground zero was denied a permit to rebuild…no problem there)
Oh…and Chris it might be awhile before I get to your other comment…I’m going to be busy tomorrow till late but I’ll get to it.
Tina: “Is this something you decided or something you’ve been told because it certainly doesn’t reflect what I’ve read and learned and in truth I don’t know how you could possibly know it for sure.”
Tina, do you honestly believe that the majority of Muslims have sex with animals and children? Those were two of the tenets of Sharia Jack mentioned.
“Naive of you to think so. How do you think we ended up with a welfare state and almost 50% of population paying no income taxes?”
Through stealth jihad, of course!
“How did we elect a man that wants to fundamentally transform our government and who skips the traditional National Day of Prayer Breakfast but celebrates Rhamadan with a special dinner?”
There is no such thing as the “traditional National Day of Prayer Breakfast.”
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/prayerday.asp
“Tell me Chris what is the differenc for you between not laying guilt on all Muslims and laying all kinds of guilt on white men?”
I have NEVER suggested laying guilt on white men! In fact I have said numerous times on this blog that “white guilt” is a stupid and unconstructive emotion.
“I don’t live in this town. I don’t know anything about the history of the local Muslims. Is there a history of behavior or materials associated with the local Muslim group?”
As far as I have read, no.
“The Quran says a lot of things that conflict greatly with those statements. Are you saying we should dismiss the parts of the Quran that are in deep conflict with these two?”
No, I’m saying that lots of Muslims already do dismiss these parts, just as lots of Christians dismiss parts of the Bible that are in deep conflict with it’s overall message of love.
“I do have to laugh about one thing, however. A lot of you guys on the left don’t seem to mind when local governments refuse to let Wall Mart build a new store for some lame a**ed reason. You also apparently don’t have a problem using imminent domain laws to confiscate private property so that a building that will bring in more tax revenue can be built. I guess as long as its not the Muslim religion…(Oh yeah…I’m also reminded about that Greek Orthodox Church at ground zero was denied a permit to rebuild…no problem there)”
Tina, I’m not that familiar with any such incidents but as far as I know they were not made on grounds that violated religious freedom. I’m not sure why that church was not rebuilt, but I am sure it wasn’t because the community decided they didn’t want any more Greek Othodox people around.
I would not want a mosque in my town either.
I would make sure my friends and I spread bacon
over all the land they were interested in. Or
if they got the building started all over the
building.
Making the land un or building unclean and
they wouldn’t use it.