This Country May Have Become the First in the World to Ban Islam

while the tenets of Islam do suggest a distrust of outsiders, even a hate of them. Islam, like christianity was a significant historical force in the forming of civilization. Most European society and its derivatives have an Islamic influence. just look at the numerical system, those numbers are slightly modified versions of their original Arabic counterparts. And even so, Islamic faith preaches hate in a similar amount to that of christianity

- - - Updated - - -

 

HA HA. Still trying to defeat the messenger, when you can't defeat the message. Yup! Well sorry to spoil your fun but an indepth investigation of this forum would show that security guard is only one of a number of occupations I've had in life. I also was a college teacher of Microeconomics and Geography in 4 colleges of the City University of New York, was a city planner with the City of New York, and owned my own business for 12 years. Shot yourself in the foot.

As for "scholars", they really are anyone who has done a lot of research. I'd include myself in that category having read 25 books on Islamization over the past 12 years + thousands of their footnoted source reports. I'd include all these too.

http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2012/...d-as-a-religion-denied-religious-tax-status-2

http://www.islam-watch.org/IW/aboutus.htm

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/27211

http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/islam-and-the-definition-of-religion.html

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/100100/sec_id/100100

http://loganswarning.com/2011/02/19/“allah-is-dead-–-why-islam-is-not-a-religion”/

http://beforeitsnews.com/internatio...eligion-but-a-dangerous-ideology-2451630.html

http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2010/07/28/islam-not-a-religion/

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2010/08/14/former-muslim-wafa-sultan-says-islam-is-not-a-religion/

http://avideditor.wordpress.com/200...ion-nor-is-it-a-cult-it-is-a-complete-system/

http://www.halfsigma.com/2011/01/islam-not-a-religion.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Italy

http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Comments_from_Former_Muslims

http://thepatriotfactor.blogspot.com/p/islkam-is-not-religion.html

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina21228.htm

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/...s-a-religion-denied-religious-tax-status.html

http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2011/03/islam-is-not-religion.html

http://www.knightscrusaders.com/Knights_Crusaders/The_Islamic_Honor_Killings_In_America.html

http://www.awsg.us/islam-is-not-a-religion/

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/archives/3062

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FH10Aa01.html

http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/09/19/islam-is-a-political-system-not-a-religion/

http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/...n-but-a-death-cult-of-misogynistic-pedophiles

 

Sure. I'd be happy to inform you from the Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th ed. We get > Religion - a system of beliefs, with a code of ethics. Problem is, Islam is loaded with Unethics (genocide, severe misogyny, wife-beating, rape, pedophilia, torture/mutilation, slavery, etc

And :
It's obvious how Islam came to be purported as a "religion". When the founders of it were espousing imperialist genocidal mass murder, extreme misogyny, rape, pedophilia, kidnapping/slavery, torture/mutilation, racial and sexist discrimination, animal cruelty/killing, and other vile things, and were looking for troops to join them in their conquests throughout Asia Minor, they needed something very powerful and extreme to offset and shield them from the severe condemnation they were sure to get.
The answer was religion. By pretending that the Koran, and all of its hatred and immorality was the word of God, they forced the people to accept it. After all, nobody wants to go against God do they ? As this grandiose con job spread, over time, it became deeper and deeper entrenched as a religion, and more and more difficult to abolish or reform.
And it spread only because the murderous Muslim marauders who spread it, killed 270 million people around the world to do that. Many, if not most, Muslims living today, trace their ancestry back to people who were non-Muslims and were forced to become Muslims. Hell of a way for someone to call himself a Muslim.

And >> click the links in Post # 127.

As for your statement > "misuse of the Supremacy Clause", upon what can you justify that ?

 

Security guards aren't religious authorities on anything. OK. And neither are college teachers, city planners and business owners. None of which has anything to do with this thread, does it ?

 

So there's no biblical law that contradicts the laws of the United States of America? If there is, should Christianity be banned?

 

Would you like to take my Islamization Quiz ?

 

Actually, preventing people from the practice of religious expression has no place in America. It's called the constitution, try reading it one of these days.

 

I've been talking about supremacism, not just contradiction.

 

Here's part of it for YOU to read >>

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." (Article 6, Section 2, the Supremacy Clause)

And yes, I AGREE > "preventing people from the practice of religious expression has no place in America" which is precisely why Islam has no place in America, because that's exactly one of the vile things that it does.

 

What religion would do this?

Muslim terrorism against the U.S.

http://www.watson37.com/-Misunderstanders--Roster.html

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/AmericanAttacks.htm

[

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/AmericanAttacks.htm

 

Or so you claim. But even within the militant Islamist movement, there is disagreement about how to properly implement Islamic rule.

INTERNAL ISLAMIST TENSIONS

In addition to the frayed relationships between Islamist and non-Islamist rebel groups, some fighters say there have also been rising tensions among Islamist fighters.

Sources said most of the Islamist clashes were down to localized power disputes, but some added there was also a larger conflict over how to impose Islamist rule.

Earlier this week, a group of ISIL fighters killed the head of a humanitarian branch for Ahrar Asham, the largest Islamist rebel group in Syria, and briefly kidnapped some of his aid workers.

The reason for the attack was unclear, and Ahrar Asham and ISIL leaders were quick to post statements online announcing they would work together to try the assailants.

But some Ahrar Asham supporters as well as other Islamist groups used the opportunity to make swipes at ISIL on their Facebook and Twitter pages, calling the killing an act of treachery.

"There has been tension and treachery, this was not the first incident. It's a sad and unfortunate truth," one fighter said, asking not to be named.

"Now there are a lot of meetings going on between ISIL and Nusra Front and with Ahrar Asham to solve these disagreements. We hope they will turn their words into action," the fighter added.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/13/us-syria-crisis-islamists-rebels-idUSBRE98C0PL20130913

I didn't say it was benign. It depends on the individual reading it and how they decide to interpret and apply the theology in their life. You cannot grasp this simple truth because at heart you are a collectivist.

And oftentimes those groupings oversimplify reality and cause confusion and discord for no good reason.

The US government is responsible for a great deal of violence and aggression in the Middle East. You are just too dishonest or clueless to admit it I guess.

Yes, the operative word being "pirates". Stealing treasure from merchant vessels who don't pay tribute is kind of what they do. And the attacks all occurred in the Mediterranean, thousands of miles away from the American homeland. Still, Jefferson was justified in sending the navy and the marines to secure concessions, as was Madison. One of the few and last times our military was used to protect vital American interests from Islamic aggression.

But even earlier in his political life—as an ambassador, secretary of state, and vice president—Jefferson had never perceived a predominantly religious dimension to the conflict with North African Muslim powers, whose pirates threatened American shipping in the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic. As this book demonstrates, Jefferson as president would insist to the rulers of Tripoli and Tunis that his nation harbored no anti-Islamic bias, even going so far as to express the extraordinary claim of believing in the same God as those men.

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/05/our_founding_fathers_included_islam/

 

Not very accurate stuff, but clearly OFF TOPIC for this thread. Better suited to a thread about imperialism, like perhaps this one > http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=257146

 

A. All I need to do is read the 1st amendment which completely destroys any argument in favor of banning religious practice.

B. Next, Islam can't be imposed on people in this country, umm because the constitution .

wow look at that, by pointing towards the constitution both your silly arguments have gone down in flames all at once. Talk about killing two birds with one stone.

 

Ethics vary from person to person. Just because you don't choose to follow Islam doesn't mean the ones that do find what they believe ethical or correct. It's your right as an American to believe in whatever you like as long as you do it peacefully.

Seeing as the Supremacy Clause has nothing to do with religious matters. It is more of the matter of State law vs Federal law.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say homeboy has no clue what he's talking about.

 

FALSE! Ethics do NOT vary from person to person as they are codified into law. The many practices of Islam that I mentioned (which you quoted) are CRIMES, based on their unethics. And if Muslims don't find those things ( genocide, severe misogyny, wife-beating, rape, pedophilia, torture/mutilation, slavery, etc) unethical, that's irrelevent. As long as they are here in the USA, they are subject to American standards of law, and the standards of ethics that created them. If they break those laws (ex. wife-beating), they go to jail.

In that case, your statement > "misuse of the Supremacy Clause" is wrong. I never said the Supremacy Clause had anything to do with religious matters (those are YOUR words), nor have I ever said that Islam has anytinfgo do with religion either. And your statement > "It is more of the matter of State law vs Federal law" is also wrong. Sure it is that, but not "more" than it's proclamation of supremacy, thereby overruling anything (like Islam), that would proclaim to be supreme over it.

 

[video=youtube;Y9olE21wikE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9olE21wikE[/video]

 

Yes, except that no one in Washington DC has followed the Constitution for decades, which leaves open the option for a group of radical Islamists, just like the group that is now deciding our future in Washington DC to do whatever they want and they have been.

 

the only way to prevent a religious group from taking over the government is strong laws to prevent ANY religion from doing such

just replace the work 'Muslim' with 'Any Religion' and it's still constitutional, otherwise it violates the constitution

course the religious right doesn't really want a separation, they actually want to take over the government

sadly this is what some republicans want, they want a theocracy

"The Palin Principle – Bible trumps Constitution"

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/201...nt-to-base-law-on-bible-and-ten-commandments/

"Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant — they’re quite clear — that we would create law based on the God of the bible and the ten commandments." - Palin

.

 

Except you don't understand the Constitution is dead! There is no working Constitution anymore, hasn't been for decades. It's been usurped to death.

 

Ethics and law are not often synonymous. Some people feel torture and execution are unethical, despite it being practiced by our government.

Right, and if they do any of those mentioned crimes in America they will be tried under a court of law for them. You can't arrest someone for being Islamic.

It is entirely relevant. The fact you don't seem to even care how other people think or feel on other matters is your folly on this matter.

I agree with this, but I don't know how banning Islam would solve this.

These are your words.

Unless you tell me otherwise, you believe that the Supremacy Clause actually affects religious practices in America. (which would be incorrect)

You believe Islam isn't a religion, which is also wrong.

I'm starting to think you are a compulsive liar. Because I know you read the Clause, because you have posted it before. Because if you did, you would understand that the Clause assures that State Law can never enact laws that nullify the Constitution.

No. No it does not. The Constitution itself doesn't allow religious rule or religious persecution. It is legal to believe your religion or faith to take precedence over your life, however it is still illegal to beat your wife regardless of faith. The Clause has absolutely nothing to do with Religious freedoms or persecutions. Despite how much you wish it did.

 

Lol, ok? Islam remains a religion in the meantime.

 

just cause the right doesn't like freedom of religion for everyone's beliefs... doesn't mean the Constitution is dead

 

Dave, how can you stand living in such a horrible country that would do such things to the poor, poor innocent peoples of the world?

Posts like these really show what progressives think of the West, and how they should never be allowed to hold positions of power. Their policies are intended to damage the West.

 

What lands were persecuting Muslims, exactly, that would cause them to come here? The Middle East? North Africa? What diabolical Christian nation was persecuting these poor souls?

You do realize that living in lands where Sharia is not in practice is seen as persecution to them, right?

Islam as a religion is very hostile towards Jews. I can't see any real benefit in pushing for more Islam aside from the fact that it shares the same enemy as progressives - Christianity and Western culture.