Posted on 04/19/2004 2:30:37 PM PDT by LurkedLongEnough
When a neighborhood goes to hell, it literally goes to hell.....
Betaille; CatoRenasci; TonyRo76; Papatom; chuckwalla
I would like to ask you folks a question: how do you reconcile you're proposed actions regarding Muslims with the principles our country was founded on?
It angers me when people such as yourselves are willing to throw away all the sacrifice and noble effort that has made our nation the best in the history of the world. We are better than the Taliban, we are better than the Saudi royals, and we are better than Hamas because we are DIFFERENT than them. The things you are proposing would change that.
When you fantasize about gun owners "going after" Muslims, propose kicking them out of the U.S., or advocate starting a new crusade, you are betraying the ideals of our country. Not to mention the rule of law. (BTW, the whole Crusade thing? What the hell century do you think this is?)
I am eager to hear how you reconcile your positions with the spirit of our country.
My reply:
I don't fantasize about gun owners going after Moslems.
I do think that unless Moslems living in the United States and the Western democracies are willing to assimilate and truly give their allegience to the classical liberal premises of our polity: separation of church and state, religous tolerance (and I don't mean Moslem notions of dhimmitude), capitalism and individual liberty, they should not be here. The sort of medieval customs of forced marriage, honor killings and the murder of apostates must be expressly eschewed. Moslem citizens of the Western countries and the United States must become ACTIVE in assisting the federal and state police authorities against Islamist terrorists. They haven't to date.
In a war, and I believe we are in a war, sometimes civil liberties are infringed. Even Lincoln suspended habeus corpus during the Civil War. I regret it, but I do believe that Moslems in America (and Europe) must make a choice whether their primary loyalty is to the Constitution of the United States or to some pan-Arab Islamist dream of a world dominated by Islam in its current form: which means mistreatment of Christians and Jews -- there is no religious freedom in Moslem countries -- the murder of apostates, medieval laws and an intellectual backwardness that astonishes anyone who truly understands it.
If Moslems here cannot in deed, not just word, be firm supporters of our secular democracy, they cannot object it society, in order to defend the liberty of all, removes them from the society until the war is won.
The record to date, both here and in Europe, suggests that many Moslems here and there actually support Islamism, and that the vast majority is unwilling to do anything to aid the government in the prevention of terror here and abroad.
Cheers,
Cato
Expressing resentment and negativity during a debate is something that most of us feel is part of the democratic process. Of course, many of us feel that western government and eastern religions will never coexist.The country was founded on the rejection of the absolute power held by kings and popes, and needless to say that would be extended to imans as well.
If they want to call the cattle to the house of hate let them do it without reminding others who's name was invoked when they killed 3,000 Americans. Or who's name was invoked when they killed the Spanish. Or who's name was invoked when they have killed Jews. Or who's name has been invoked when they have been killing American soldiers, soldiers from other countries and contractors. Or who's name has been invoked when they bombed the night club in Bali. Etc,etc,etc.
When are they going to do a "call to prayers" then have the Imam tell them to stop violence? To repudiate the killings I mention above? When will the Muslims come out of their Mosques and say murdering innocent people in the name of Allah is wrong?
According to Ask the Imam it's OK for a non-muslim to go into a Mosque as long as the person comes in peace. When are the handlers of Islam going to demand that things go the other way? That when Muslims leave a Mosque they are told not to murder?
"I don't fantasize about gun owners going after Moslems"
Someone on this thread said just that, and you didn't chide him. If I use your logic, you are responsible for his proposal unless you actively speak out against it. Why do you hold your fellow FR's to such a low standard?
"the murder of apostates, medieval laws and an intellectual backwardness that astonishes anyone who truly understands it"
If you truly understand the horrors of religious fundamentalism, why are you supportive of a course of action that would put us on the same path. What do you think happens when law-abiding citizens are treated differently based on their religion? Bad things, that's what.
"In a war, and I believe we are in a war, sometimes civil liberties are infringed."
That is true. What is also true that we would have long ago lost all our freedoms if we went along with those who would take them away every time they are frightened of people worshiping God differently than themselves.
It seems that you want to establish a orthodoxy instead of the orthopraxy that is the foundation of our country. I don't give a damn if you are loyal in your heart to Allah, Yahweh, or Bob Dobbs; if you follow the laws of our nation, you're fine by me. That's the way our system works.
Are you suggesting something like loyalty oaths? Who has to prove their bona fides? Just Muslims? Or do we throw Catholics, Mormons, and Greek Orthodox in as well?
I don't think you answered my question either. Why do you support unconstitutional measures when you are ostensibly a conservative?
And, my reply:
I'm not sure why you've singled me out.
I'm not in favor of unconstitutional measures. The removal of enemy aliens in time of war is clearly consititutional and the removal of the Japanese from the West Coast was expressly approved by the Supreme Court. Apologies aside, Korematsu is still good law.
I am not suggesting any religious orthodoxy, but I do require those who would live here to act consistently with our principles of classical liberalism. If one's religious beliefs conflict, one must choose to act contrary to those beliefs or live elsewhere.
It is only Islamic terrorism that seeks to harm the US, not Christians or Jews. When the Mormons were a threat, the US dealt with them appropriately in the 19th century. Utah did not become a state until the Mormons agreed to play by normal American rules. As long as it is just Moslems who are causing the problems, then, I guess we need to focus on Moslems and their behavior. If Moslems don't inform on each other and give aid and comfort to terrorists rather than aid the country against the threat of Islamist terrorism, then they are breaching the social contract and placing themselves BY THEIR BEHAVIOR outside the law. Every society has the right to defend itself against those who would destroy it. Those who would turn America into an Islamic state are indeed enemies of America.
Koran Surah 8:12:
Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: 'I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!'
... one Hamtramck at at time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.