Liberals, your chickens have come home to roost, now what

[Texashiker]

The "Islam is fundamentally evil" camp seems to be missing the point here. .

Islam is not evil.

Islam and the western world, especially liberal ideology are not compatible.

 

[Texashiker]

The problem you and others that think like you is that you are placing the acts of a few on all Muslims. We need to go after the people perpetrating the acts, not people that look like the people that perpetrated the acts.

Islam does not teach tolerance. Exactly "how" are liberal progressives supposed to live in peace with islam?

I have a high level of respect for islam. But islam is not compatible with western civilization.

 

[ivwshane]

Islam does not teach tolerance. Exactly "how" are liberal progressives supposed to live in peace with islam?

I have a high level of respect for islam. But islam is not compatible with western civilization.

You aren't teaching tolerance either, can we ban you from this country?

 

[retrospooty]

Islam does not teach tolerance. Exactly "how" are liberal progressives supposed to live in peace with islam?

I have a high level of respect for islam. But islam is not compatible with western civilization.

Way to not understand anything that you read. Islam is not the issue. Radical Islam is the issue. You could just as easily say that Nazism is not compatible with western civilization... Radical Islam is to Islam as Nazism and the KKK is to Christianity. Again, separate the acts of a few from the majority.

 

[kage69]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence
Nice try to push your agenda but the facts just don't back you up.
Even with your handful of lunatic-fringe examples, the amount of "Christian violence" doesn't measure a blip on the radar compared to the storm of islam.

So what do you accomplish by maximizing the actions of a few radicals and minimizing the actions of a much, much larger percentile?
Other than thumping your chest in vain lookatmelookatmeI'mSoWonderful 'virtue-signalling', you only allow the guilty parties to gain strength at the expense of those you're falsely condemning (among others.)

lol, a backpeddle with just a hint of douche, nice.

Asking you to support your claim is not pushing an agenda at all. Have they not covered 'the claimants burden of proof' in whatever school you're still in? Next time just fess up to misspeaking out of emotion, it makes you sound a lot more mature and a lot less stupid. You should probably avoid using your "facts," as it's clear you are ignorant of the term to begin with.

From your own link: "...committed against abortion providers have included 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats," (since 1977)

So I'll take your reply as a "Yes. I am lazy, stupid, and went with whatever google spit up." Thanks for playing.

 

[Zaap]

From your own link: "...committed against abortion providers have included 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats," (since 1977)

While all of those suck...

41 bombings in nearly 40 years...( and the other numbers....)

You really think that puts anti-abortion nuts on anything CLOSE to the same scale and level as Jihadists?

Those numbers are probably a good couple of months for Islamic nutjobs, let alone 40 years.

 

[glenn1]

Way to not understand anything that you read. Islam is not the issue. Radical Islam is the issue. You could just as easily say that Nazism is not compatible with western civilization... Radical Islam is to Islam as Nazism and the KKK is to Christianity. Again, separate the acts of a few from the majority.

Let's flip the script then and leave Islam out of it. Let's say the Westboro Baptist Church (yes, the "God hates f___s" people) somehow gained a whole bunch of converts in some other country and wants to bring them here. Or folks who engage in human sacrifice like what happened in Liberia with self-proclaimed "Evangelicals" want to come? Would the U.S. be morally wrong in attempting to exclude such people from immigrating here, or is there literally no factor of belief or behavior which warrants exclusion?

 

[Jhhnn]

Way to not understand anything that you read. Islam is not the issue. Radical Islam is the issue. You could just as easily say that Nazism is not compatible with western civilization... Radical Islam is to Islam as Nazism and the KKK is to Christianity. Again, separate the acts of a few from the majority.

Well, yeh, but the haters, you know? It's not like they go on the same way about Joseph Kony & the LRA. But they gotta hate somebody, just like the people they vilify.

They also don't understand history, either. Jews & Muslims stood together in defense of Jerusalem from the Crusaders. When the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492 they found new homes in the Islamic Ottoman Empire. When Muslims conquered most of India they didn't lay waste the Hindu population.

From the beginning, Muslims carved out a special place for other Abrahamic religions, referring to adherents as "People of the Book", meaning the old testament, a sacred text to all Muslims.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Let's flip the script then and leave Islam out of it. Let's say the Westboro Baptist Church (yes, the "God hates f___s" people) somehow gained a whole bunch of converts in some other country and wants to bring them here. Or folks who engage in human sacrifice like what happened in Liberia with self-proclaimed "Evangelicals" want to come? Would the U.S. be morally wrong in attempting to exclude such people from immigrating here, or is there literally no factor of belief or behavior which warrants exclusion?

What makes you say that we don't exclude them?

 

[retrospooty]

Let's flip the script then and leave Islam out of it. Let's say the Westboro Baptist Church (yes, the "God hates f___s" people) somehow gained a whole bunch of converts in some other country and wants to bring them here. Or folks who engage in human sacrifice like what happened in Liberia with self-proclaimed "Evangelicals" want to come? Would the U.S. be morally wrong in attempting to exclude such people from immigrating here, or is there literally no factor of belief or behavior which warrants exclusion?

All good points... But who would be excluded? There arent any distinguishing factors other than "white" . The issue stems from taking the acts of a few and placing it on the many. Why do we do that in this case? As a country (well, half of it) gets completely and utterly out of control when an Islamic nutjob sets off a pressure cooker bomb... So much that they want to throw away our core values and blame a whole massive chunk of the population of the planet (I think well over 1 Billion Muslims ) ... Yet, when Sandy Hook happens, the OKC bombing, the Colorado movie theater, Dahmer, or any of the many other similar things committed by White Male Americans there is nothing... No outrage at all. All of the above are the acts of extremist nutjob/mentally unhinged individuals and/or groups. Not a country, not a religion, not a skin color. The acts of a few... Crazy is crazy, and ignorant is ignorant... It isnt limited to limited to any race or religion.

 

[Commodus]

Islam is not evil.

Islam and the western world, especially liberal ideology are not compatible.

Then Christianity is also not compatible with the western world. Even in the New Testament, it's homophobic, misogynist and otherwise promotes behavior that runs contrary to American principles of freedom and tolerance. Are you going to be consistent with your principles, then, and declare yourself an atheist (if you aren't already)? Or are you caught up in the heat of the moment and only reacting to the religious intolerance you saw in the news last night?

And funny, but I've seen plenty of Muslims who've integrated well into the "western world." (I could go into a whole spiel about Edward Said's Orientalism and the arbitrary notion of East versus West, but that's another story.) The odds are that there's a famous person you respect and didn't even realize was Muslim, simply because they don't fit stereotypes. You're reacting to what you imagine all Muslims to be, not what they are.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Islam does not teach tolerance. Exactly "how" are liberal progressives supposed to live in peace with islam?

I have a high level of respect for islam. But islam is not compatible with western civilization.

Millions of American Muslims are doing their best to tolerate the thousands of followers of your ideology, while you guys are doing their best to exterminate them
You guys and Daesh are really no different at all

 

[glenn1]

All good points... But who would be excluded? There arent any distinguishing factors other than "white" . The issue stems from taking the acts of a few and placing it on the many. Why do we do that in this case? As a country (well, half of it) gets completely and utterly out of control when an Islamic nutjob sets off a pressure cooker bomb... So much that they want to throw away our core values and blame a whole massive chunk of the population of the planet (I think well over 1 Billion Muslims ) ... Yet, when Sandy Hook happens, the OKC bombing, the Colorado movie theater, Dahmer, or any of the many other similar things committed by White Male Americans there is nothing... No outrage at all. All of the above are the acts of extremist nutjob/mentally unhinged individuals and/or groups. Not a country, not a religion, not a skin color. The acts of a few... Crazy is crazy, and ignorant is ignorant... It isnt limited to limited to any race or religion.

I have no idea. Yes it's a fair and accurate statement that people who adhere to Islam commit an oversize amount of terrorist acts per capita, similar to how American blacks commit (and are victims of) homicide at per capita rates far higher than other groups or how white males tend to be serial killers at disproportionate rates. But given that information what do you with it in terms of policy? Sure we could impose "higher scrutiny" on immigrants from the Middle East, etc. But that's basically the same thing as police using racial profiling against blacks; even if you could somehow "prove" it worked (which is doubtful) is it self-defeating to use it given the character of our nation and its values? Or does the possibility of hundreds of dead, perhaps even you or you own children, mean it would be stupid to NOT engage in those practices? Personally I don't know the answer to that question and might honestly give a different answer on different days depending on how the question is phrased. Doesn't make me or the millions of other Americans - most Americans I'd wager - into bad people, just conflicted people trying to figure out the best way to balance competing interests and values.

 

[Blue_Max]

While all of those suck...

41 bombings in nearly 40 years...( and the other numbers....)

You really think that puts anti-abortion nuts on anything CLOSE to the same scale and level as Jihadists?

Those numbers are probably a good couple of months for Islamic nutjobs, let alone 40 years.

...and with all those bombings and arsons over 40 years there were still only eleven deaths.

Bombing 1 empty building a year isn't even close to islamic terror activities in the last month alone.

404: equivalency not found.

 

[kage69]

Gotta love trolls. Asking someone to back up their numbers is now an agenda aimed at establishing equivalency.

404: Brains, integrity not found either.

A population of nutty fundies operating since the 15th century has more crime under it's belt than other fundies who have only been around since 1977? Say it ain't so!

 

[retrospooty]

...and with all those bombings and arsons over 40 years there were still only eleven deaths.

Bombing 1 empty building a year isn't even close to islamic terror activities in the last month alone.

404: equivalency not found.

What is your point? There are more Islamic nutjobs per capita than there are Christian nutjobs? That may be correct, but it does nothing to change the fact that you cant condemn 1 billion people based on the acts of a few.

 

[Mai72]

The Dems are in real trouble and this is exactly what ISIS wants.

 

[retrospooty]

The Dems are in real trouble and this is exactly what ISIS wants.

They absolutely do. They want to create mistrust and hatred. They want us to start being bigoted toward all Muslims. This kind of mentality causes Muslims in the US to feel hated and it helps ISIS recruitment efforts and goal of all out holy war.

 

[Jaskalas]

They absolutely do. They want to create mistrust and hatred. They want us to start being bigoted toward all Muslims. This kind of mentality causes Muslims in the US to feel hated and it helps ISIS recruitment efforts and goal of all out holy war.

Takes two to tango.

In the midst of violence and terrorism, Americans turn to action. Current leadership is seen a weak, fickle, action-less. A man comes along and promises action. That man is going to be mighty popular without a detailed, solid plan of action and outright campaign from calmer voices. You're worried about Muslims being recruited into a holy war, you forgot to ask if the damage done to Americans has already recruited us.

Integration isn't sold to us, it isn't presented as a plan of action for winning a war. It's perceived as weakness that opens our borders and results in our deaths. Where is the leadership, the campaign, the concerted effort to turn that image around?

 

[TheGardener]

Bombing 1 empty building a year isn't even close to islamic terror activities in the last month alone.

Gotta love trolls. Asking someone to back up their numbers is now an agenda aimed at establishing equivalency.

Here are some numbers.

“In the last two months, outside of Iraq and Syria — so outside of the war zone — there’s been a jihadi attack every 83 hours.”

That's every 83 hours across the global. But Obama says that the Western world is safer now. Why? Because of him. At least that's what he is saying. Can he back that up that comment with numbers?

http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...3-hours-obama-clinton-insist-everything-fine/

 

[retrospooty]

Takes two to tango.

In the midst of violence and terrorism, Americans turn to action. Current leadership is seen a weak, fickle, action-less. A man comes along and promises action. That man is going to be mighty popular without a detailed, solid plan of action and outright campaign from calmer voices. You're worried about Muslims being recruited into a holy war, you forgot to ask if the damage done to Americans has already recruited us.

Integration isn't sold to us, it isn't presented as a plan of action for winning a war. It's perceived as weakness that opens our borders and results in our deaths. Where is the leadership, the campaign, the concerted effort to turn that image around?

Where is the leadership? I cannot say, because we have none. We had none under Bush, or Obama, and we will continue to have none under Clinton or Trump. /shrugs. There really isnt a good answer, but blaming the many for the acts of a few is never going to do anything positive. That is what mankind has done throughout history... America sort of bucked that trend for a while and allowed all and we were better than that... Now we seem to be backtracking and flirting with letting religion and ignorance dictate policy.

 

[Blue_Max]

What is your point? There are more Islamic nutjobs per capita than there are Christian nutjobs? That may be correct, but it does nothing to change the fact that you cant condemn 1 billion people based on the acts of a few.

The thousands upon thousands of "misbehaving" (AKA raping) muslims on new years' eve is a bit more than "the acts of a few". Waves of them screaming in the streets is now a daily occurrence all over Europe. It's called terrorism for a reason -- the citizens of European cities occupied by migrants are, indeed, terrified from the violence and thuggery done to them daily.

...and 'progressives' just smile and say, "Everything would be just fine if it weren't for straight white men being the intolerant ones!"

Bonkers.

...and Christianity does NOT teach its followers to forcibly convert others with threats of violence.

 

[Texashiker]

Way to not understand anything that you read. Islam is not the issue. Radical Islam is the issue. You could just as easily say that Nazism is not compatible with western civilization... Radical Islam is to Islam as Nazism and the KKK is to Christianity. Again, separate the acts of a few from the majority.

Where is this radical islam quran?

Mainline muslim nations all have laws where gays can be executed.

Iran, Kuwait, Saudi,,,,, all believe pretty much the same thing. No womens rights, execute gays,,,, etc.

Then Christianity is also not compatible with the western world. Even in the New Testament, it's homophobic, misogynist and otherwise promotes behavior that runs contrary to American principles of freedom and tolerance. Are you going to be consistent with your principles, then, and declare yourself an atheist (if you aren't already)? Or are you caught up in the heat of the moment and only reacting to the religious intolerance you saw in the news last night?

Jesus taught to obey the law.

Remember when Jesus was asked about taxes? He said render unto Caesars which is Caesars. Jesus never taught to disobey the law.

Please explain in detail how Jesus taught civil disobedience, because he didn't.

Jesus never said anything about gays, that came later. He taught love and acceptance.

Muhammad on the other hand,,,,,. According to the quran marrying a 9 year old girl is fine. How are liberals going to justify a 50 year old man marrying a 9 year old girl.

 

[shady28]

From Wikipedia (Cologne attacks) :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year's_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany

All of the incidents involved women being surrounded and assaulted by groups of men on the street.[26][27] Police estimate that 1,200 women were sexually assaulted and that at least 2,000 men were involved, acting in groups.[28] Police reported that the perpetrators were men of "Arab or North African appearance" and said that Germany had never experienced such mass sexual assaults before.

The Cologne assaults were not reported by the national media for days, and The Local says many news outlets started reporting it only after a wave of anger on social media made covering the story unavoidable.[45] Although Cologne MayorHenriette Reker condemned the assaults, she was strongly criticized for some of her comments and was accused ofblaming the victims.​

 

[kage69]

What is your point? There are more Islamic nutjobs per capita than there are Christian nutjobs? That may be correct, but it does nothing to change the fact that you cant condemn 1 billion people based on the acts of a few.

You're only going to confuse them with helpful points of order or context I'm afraid. Look how many people in this thread can't follow a single damn point. Too busy giving themselves 1st person shooters over Breitbart.

It's what we get for entering another fetid TH thread though I suppose, and I knew better. Ugh.