Posted on 10/25/2001 11:45:14 AM PDT by Jean S
And add your own religion as well. The Koran and the Islamic tradition spawned out of religious and political rage from its inception are completely inconsistent with principles of toleration, peace, and coexistence. It is nothing less than the expression of totalitarianism cloaked in the garb of religious superiority.
The Chinese written language, for example, was purposefully difficult and not taught commonly, until the last two centuries, in an attempt by the previous centuries' dynasties, to maintain control over the populace, by keeping them ignorant.
On another topic, are any Middle-Eastern products - besides carpets and cotton - competitive on world markets?
The Turks would disagree with you.
I'd like to add to your remark, that in addition, there is no lawful concept of the separation of church and state in the United States.
There is a "legal concept," but the enforcement is not lawful; that is, it is not Constitutional.
The First Amendment prohibits the government from establishing any religion as THE religion of the country and our government.
But the First Amendment does not prohibit our being a nation under God, nor does the First Amendment excoriate God from our country and our government.
The actual "separation" is with respect to power. Which is to say that the government is without any power to order what will be a person's religion under God. It is government that is "walled off" and limited.
Please note, that I said "under God." Because the definition of religion within the context of our Constitution, is with respect to God, in contrast to "belief systems" not about God.
Continuing, the government does not have the authority to separate God from our lives, nor does the government have the power to separate we and our religious beliefs from state property.
But therein lays one of the rubs, while exemplifying why we have the First Amendment "protection."
To commune and socialize without risk of religious "wars," to be frank, while on state property, i.e., the commons.
The First Amendment is instructive: Respect one another's religious inclination and maintain understanding and peace.
All these points were our framers' wisdom, calculated upon they and their forebearer's failure analysis over the centuries of previous governments which burdened and over-burdened men and women's lives and souls.
Welcome to America, where the country and government and Constitution respect your religion and your religious differences.
You might say that the First Amendment is the first civil rights act of the Constitution, long ago respecting peoples' differences. Indeed, the First Amendment gives notice, that you have the right to think and be different.
Within reason.
But most importantly, we should emphasize that the First Amendment, as is true for all the Bill of Rights, is primarily concerned with furthering the limits upon government, fencing in government, restricting again, what government can do, to what is on the list: enumeration of its authority.
The Constitution is a list of what government can do, binding it to only what is on the list, by reserving all other power to the people and to the states. It actually says that, right there in the Bill of Rights.
Would it be too much to ask, that high-school graduates and people applying to become legal immigrants, ought to be able to write out the Bill of Rights and explain their foundations?
Next time a "liberal" gives you grief, ask them what are the historical foundations for the First, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments.
And if said socialist is so upset at the "intolerance" of "diversity," and they cannot "get closure" about the "old dead white guys" who nearly all were the "Christian Right" who also made up the "vast right-wing conspiracy" against government tyranny ... then you'll hear that one is suppose to "embrace multi-culturalism" while eschewing individualism: Being an individual and owning property are bad.
Tell it on the mount.
Remember that I'll always be around.
Then Khomeini came along and decisively toppled Shah's regime. The unwavering fanaticism of Iranian Shi'ites and their apparent success to intimidating Americans and Soviets showed Muslim that there is much better way for their struggle. Pan-Arabism has been always there. All Arab countries get united and stand up against infidels as another big power, if not superpower. Now, radical Islam replaced socialism as the leading ideology of Arabs for driving out "Western powers", controling their governments, the powers which are blamed for all of their problems, which may not be true.
The popularity of Jihad comes from the fact that Jihad produced many tangible results. The defeat of Soviet Union in Afghanistan, the defeat of U.S. in Iran. Short break after the Gulf War, there is a string of high profile terrorist attacks. WTC bombing, Saudi American barracks' bombing, East African Embassy bombing, the bombing of U.S.S. cole, and now the destruction of WTC. To Arabs, Jihad is on a roll, it is working. No wonder it is popular. Only the complete defeat like '67 War or Gulf War can stop it by making Arabs lose their faith in Jihad.
Very naive I say.
During those dark ages, there was a deadly symbiosis between the church and the state which the Muslim states have never outgrown. Human sacrifices, disembowelments, burnings at the stake, imprisonments, banishments...
People who have never learned their history don't understand how grateful they should be that the U.S. First Amendment guarantees that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
People should read their history and shudder. It could happen again.
They killed Armenians, who happened to be Christian. And it happened before Attaturk. Certainly they're not proud of it, any more than we are proud of how we treated the aboriginal people in the Americas. How does that prove that they today have an Islamic State?
The Turks who play a phony game playing off the West and their Islamic brothers against each other. Boy do they have Americans hoodwinked.
Examples?
So you're saying that Turkey is an Islamic State? I think that most residents of Turkey would be surprised to hear that. What is your evidence for that?
Very naive I say.
Physician, heal thyself.
Very naive I say.
Hashish, opium/heroin and the Iranians sell a lot of pistachio nuts
The Turks are not only proud of themselves but they actually deny anything ever happened. They twist, distort, and rewrite their history blaming the victims of their holocaust.
The American expansion in the new world has nothing in common with what happened in Turkey in the 20th century! The American expansion came about through a series of wars, treaties, and yes, terror on both sides of the aisle. The Turks obliterated innocents by the millions and the terror was committed by them alone. The Cold War is over and I wish the US would send the Turks to hell! They allied themselves with the Nazis and the Germans in both wars and Turkey was the first nation to recognize the Bolshevik regime.
The evidence is all there and I will be happy to enlighten you by sending you websites and titles if you wish. But I am sure you can find the information yourself.
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.