Posted on 08/02/2010 9:56:04 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
Okay then, why don’t you propose a constitutional revision stating that everyone has first amendment and property rights “except for Muslims or people the government has decided as dangerous?” That’s the honest way. Better that, than trusting the New York City Council, Governor Patterson, or some other politician to decide. Deal?
I’m glad you realize how important the life issue is.
But when it comes to Rudy, he is liberal in other ways like our 2nd amendment rights, is pro ILLEGAL immigration, etc..
But yes, the life issue is the most important.
Bloomers and Obama only want free-speech for the left and terrorists.
Hey, I think you might enjoy this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2562406/posts?q=1&;page=1
You might have a lot in common with the Daily Kos.
Overall, Paul Ryan is the best choice. He’s articulate, a fresh face, has good ideas and doesn’t have a ton of negatives built up against him.
If my memory serves me corect, when the Christians took Spain back, it built a cathredral on the site of the mosque.
Who wouldn't???? Oh, wait! Silly me, how could I forget? The majority of Freepers wouldn't.
I don’t know what you are trying to prove, but what if we had given Naziism 1st Amendment rights in WWII and communism during the cold war?
Read up what we did with nazi spies caught in the US in the 40s and the Rosenbergs in the 50s — we hanged the nazis and electrocuted the Rosenbergs. Again, rights are to be enjoyed by people but not by an ideology, Islam, that aims to destroy the very rights that currently protect them.
Perhaps we should have given them 1st Amendment rights. Go at it and see what happens to your kids (and those rights).
Let me get this right. You would deny both Nazis and Communists the first amendment and property rights? Is that what you are saying? If so, why not stop there and extend the ban to socialists, supporters of Obamacare, Confederate nationalists, and others who reject our constituitonal system. If you don’t pursue the logic of this argument, you don’t have a leg to stand on.
It became majority for sure after anyone that supported him was banned.
Rights aren’t absolute. However the 1st is fairly clear. I’d have it ammended to exclude mohamadism of any kind.
Thanks for your honesty. How would "exclude" them? The death penalty?
Stripped citizens and 1-way ticket to anywhere they choose is fine by me they didn’t convert or drop it.
Absolute deportation of any non-citizens.
I’d then personally nuke their homelands after sending them there as well.
Aye nominating a pro-choice (and formerly pro-partial birth and formerly and or currently socially liberal on other issues) nominee could be a recipe for disaster with GOP turnout.
I resent Rudy for not helping us out and running for an office he could win. NY Governor, he may have been the only guy who could’ve beat Cuomo Jr. Mayor, could have ousted Gloomberg. Or Senator against the vulnerable G(J)illibrand.
I hope Ryan has a bright future. He should be Speaker instead of John Boehner. (Boner)
Ghost of Coolidge and Zombie Reagan would do better than 90% of the likely candidates. I'd suggest feeding Zombie Reagan some democrats but Zombies eat brains so....
I heard a talk show host on NYC’s WABC radio say that Cuomo’s chances to win would probably be reduced because of his position on building the mosque, and more importantly, because he won’t even investigate where the money to fund the mosque is coming from.
btw, I’ll be voting for Paladino in the NYS primaries, prolife and fiscally conservative, as well as against building the mosque.
See you in September (when the NY primaries will take place).
Only if his GOP opponent - to be determined in the September primary - (1) keeps up the attack and (2) has enough money to do advertising to get that message out.
BTW, I've heard a good analogy: building the Islamic cultural center at Ground Zero would be like building a Japanese cultural center at Pearl Harbor!
Maybe in 18th Century Philadelphia, or 19th Century Kansas...but it doesn't work that way in 21st Century Manhattan.
Thanks for the update.
Not quite. The Japanese are no longer an enemy.
ML/NJ
Yes, but any facility there which glorifies Japanese anything would be a slap in the face to the memory of those who died at Pearl Harbor from the Japanese attack on Dec. 7, 1941. It's not so much that the building shouldn't be on American soil, it's that the location would be completely inappropriate.
Same can be said for an Islamic cultural center at Ground Zero. Let them put it just about anywhere else. Of course, the group who is sponsoring this project wouldn't be pleased by that suggestion at all, because they want to symbolically claim victory in the 9/11 attack.
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.